You guys needs to fix your Mining Difficulty, i told the dev that he would get exactly this problem and this was a year ago.
If you check your mined coins you already mined 50% of your 2 Billion coins.
Also you need way more advertisement to get more people interest in this project and i mean not who is interested to invest money but to mine coins.
You only have two choices this time, either fix your mining difficulty or change your mining protocol to PoS.
what's wrong with the difficulty. If miners abandon burst the difficutly gets easier and the remaining miners earn more. if miners flock to burst, the difficulty gets harder and the miners earn less. I see no problem there.
if burst gets worth more, miners get paid more in real terms, and that will attract miners and make the blockchain more secure, if burst gets worth less, miners get paid less in real terms, and that will make some miners go away.. but then... if the market cap is 1mln usd, we only need to make sure it's a lot more expensive than 1mln usd to attack the coin.
when all the coins are mined, miners will live off fees. We may or may not have to make some changes to the size of fees when we get to that point, it will depend on the value of 1 BURST. we can just look at the hash size for the chain at that time, and if the hash size is way too small, we could consider a discussion about increasing the minimum fee to more than one, or perhaps make it possible for miners to not add transactions that have the fee under some level. (not sure if we can do that now)
I think you still don't got it aren't you ? Burstcoin was mined out to 50% already in just one year ! This means your mining difficulty is just to low. In this case you would have mined all your coins in just a total 3 years.
I believe you have things mixed up my friend. How about you go and take a look at a term called 'controlled supply'.
Coin emission has nothing to do with mining difficulty. BURST being 'mined out' in 60 months (IIRC) is by design.
Well, looks like his "
design" ain't working.
It is working exactly as designed. You believe that this particular design is not correct/proper/achieving good results and that is perfectly fine
I believe you have things mixed up my friend. How about you go and take a look at a term called 'controlled supply'.
Coin emission has nothing to do with mining difficulty. BURST being 'mined out' in 60 months (IIRC) is by design.
And might be a good reason to release a clone with a different design to possibly attract more miners long-term...
Perhaps, I do not think that there is enough data in crypto to be able to tell what a good emission rate is, or in fact, whether such a deflationary model works at all
.
Sure, but you will get more data by releasing clones with different emission rates
And competition is seldom wrong imho.
We must realize that Burst does have problems with a decreasing network size, making it more vulnerable to 51% attacks and not attracting investors. Experimenting with clones might be a solution. It doesn't mean we don't believe in the basic technology presented in BUST, quite the contrary in fact, I'd say.
we have had a price "crash" from over 100 to below 30. Network size is supposed to start to adjust down towards 30% when the price adjust down to 30%, it's by design. You want the expenses to match the revenue.
I think you are just greedy and want money taken from users, and given to miners.
Jeez... I agree that Burst is a winner
but only technology-wise. It's innovative as no other coin. Great.
But we have had a little price crash...? You're lying if you saying the "crash" is from 100 to 30sat. There is a very steady downward-trend since the pump to +200sat back in February. In that perspective, a majority of miners have stayed extremely loyal. I'm convinced they are loyal due to the basic technological breakthroughs that Burst has, coupled with the low cost of mining, hoping something magical will happen. Like the coin will be magical discovered by the masses after 15 months since launch.
That won't happened, coz Burst is just as big of a failure when it comes the utility, current and coming development, and PR, as it is a winner when it comes to innovation and technology.
Greed..., yup, perhaps, but greed is good. Read Douglas' monologue from the movie and you understand what I mean. Greed drives people like pure technology does not.
That said, I do think that a clone with a different emission rate will be more successful, but I'm quite pessimistic to whether only changing the emission rate is enough as incentive to make a star out of PoC/AT/ACCT/etc. A clone would have a way better chance to be successful if it's backed by some serious investors from the get-go, enabling to pay for developers and PR, or developmental collaboration with a coin as Sia.
But perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps a different emission rate will suffice. I'd say "let's see". And let's see what will happen to Burst with competition out there.
