Topic: [ANN][BURST] Burst | Efficient HDD Mining | New 1.2.3 Fork block 92000 - page 608. (Read 2171065 times)

2 Major pools are down still the Network Difficulty is over 6k 

Must be cheap host's fault

uray,
knock once if you are there !!!

2 pool are down...

first SG
now EU too!!!

EU pool also down

I sent some Burst to Bittrex and it seems Bittrex account has about 28kk burst. So everyone is keeping Burst on Bittrex?

I confirm it too. Down since one hour. I'm talking about SG uray's pool.

Uray's SG pool is down for more than an hour 

Progressing well and Market look good. Back to MINING more Burst.

Hello,
I try to optimize my plots with dcct
Try to use ./optimize plots/*
But i have a message  "wrong file name"
any idea ?

I've just released info on the (honestly quite ambitious) BLTPS project.
Other projects, from other members, are likely to be available. No exclusive here
The coin is young, has quite some time to grow in support and be spread out.

What stagger size do you use?

Been following this coin for a bit now, and am still very fascinated by it.

I'm going to read into the buy support that is happening, but what else is there to increase upwards pressure or the demand to buy this coin?

I am having difficulty woth speed even with SATA3 drives, lots of things that seens "could work" simply don't.
By my experience I would stay away of USB 2.0 drives.

I can't read plots of 32Tb in less than 2 minutes. All on Sata3.

That simply isn't true. USB 2.0 is theoretical 35MiB/s, but more  realistically 30MiB/s. How fast is that i terms of Burst? We need to read 1/4096 of the plotfile, so with 1TB (~954000MiB) it takes ~7,76 seconds to read a plot. So if you want to stay below 30 seconds to play it safe, you can have 3.86TB, or just round up to 4TB in 31 seconds. Note  that some ports share bandwidth,  so you can only have 4TB  on those ports in total. In other words, USB 2.0 is fine as long as you make sure you aren't using ports that share bandwidth.

Destroying is something I've thought of. But I don't like that idea too much because you are artificially raising the value. The exactly same effect could be achieved by diminishing the total amount of Bursts or increasing/quicken the mining-reward reduction over time. And this can be achieved in a way more easier method: hard fork. Which... cm'on is really easier than convincing people in "burning" their own money!

Said so, let's get to the other 3 points:
#1 BLTPS has to collect as much BTC as possible but the best way to do it is providing something in return, and a reward is possible, I'll get a little bit deeper in the schema at the end of this post.
#2 Exactly, but still REDACTED
#3 Partially, with BLTPS a buy-wall strategy should be the most effective, but this isn't the only one to be adopted. Strategic "quick-buys" and multiple walls can also be adopted to increase the effectiveness. It all depends on point #1.

I understand why you "don't know if it is a good or bad idea". It is really tough to predict but take this into account:
The investor is investing BTC in a Burst asset. Not BTC for BTC or Burst for Burst. And this should already give a nice idea on the true interest of the investor.
If they want to get BTC back from Burst, they dump, it's true. And they can, nobody will stop them. But the gain, if all of them dump their Bursts (extremely unlike to happen), will be 0 up to one specific moment: when mining hardware actually ROIs. When this happens, no matter which currency they choose to keep, they will be getting some profit. The rest is up to the market, sure. Nobody can create a super-whale eating everything else, especially because the currency itself would be totally useless.
BLTPS cannot go negative because of your point #2. It can go 0 with extremely low probability. With high probability thou it will increase burst value not only thanks to its own buy walls but also by creating volume movement on exchanges which in turns creates interest in those who aren't even aware of the existence of this coin.

the investor who join ur project will want profit at the end (thats why it called investor not supporter), lets say we collected funds of 10 btc, we buy mining hardware, and earning bitcoin, then we use these bitcoins as buy wall, if the wall got eaten, we got burst, and then we distributed these burst to investors, and then investor will dump the burst so they get their btc back.

i don't know if this is good idea or bad idea

if you want buy support scheme like this, here is my suggestion :

1. we collect BTC as much as possible
2. we buy cloud bitcoin mining automatically, lets say CEX.IO's GHS
3. BTC earned from those GHS will be auto deposited to exchange and buy the burst at whatever the price will be
4. the Burst we received, automatically withdrawn to BURST-2222-2222-2222-22222 (it got destroyed)

this scheme will work without human intervention, and all data should be available for public to monitor, so no funds were stolen.
and it will work only if we can get #1 (we talk about this later)

• about #2, why we need this? its because we need to consistent bitcoin earning and it should last forever, thats why we need bitcoin mining, and it should be cloud mining so no one will hold the physical burst community hardware on his garage, all data on this cloud mining should be open to public for every btc deposit, transaction and withdrawal and those operations should be done without human
• about #3, i dont know which one is better, buy at whatever price or setup the buy wall, but i prefer immediate buy, because there are no guarantee that the bitcoin amount is enough to create a wall
• about #4, why we destroy the burst? because no one owned it and also our target is to increase the price
• lets talk about #1. to get supporter, we need volunteer, so anyone who want burst price rise, can spend their bitcoin to these address, any amount, any time.
  
  another idea is to take "tax" from miner and burst user, every burst transaction we pay at least 1 burst, and it goes to miners, somehow we need to recollect those funds, this could be carried out via pool, pool operator can voluntary send their pool profit to this project. the problem is the funds is still in burst, we need to dump it into BTC before we can buy GHS, but it doesn't matter because the burst we got back from bitcoin mining will ended up being destroyed
  
  this way the funds to destroy the burst is come from burst users itself
  

In these terms, probably never existed.

But think of BLTPS as this:
1. an agent made of more people (funders, holders, whatever you want to call them) with the interest in supporting that exact currency manipulating those who dump just for quick (and low) profit. Like an anti-whale or market controller.
2. a different mining method that currently works, even if in a slightly different way, for Bitcoin. Specifically all scrypt-x11-whatever miners that focus their hashing power on BTC multipools are actually doing the same as BLTPS proposes to do, but they are doing it for Bitcoin. Multipools dump their mined coins into Bitcoin. And it is quite known that one of the strongest bitcoin buyers are multipools. BLTPS would be doing something extremely similar, the other way around. Bitcoin is "dumped" in Burst. The difference is that Bitcoin is rather stable and way stronger than Burst so its economy wouldn't be affected by BLTPS operations on the market.

hamuki don't worry....
the difficulty is fluctuating a lot!!!
it is not a problem!!!

What''s an example where an agent has effectively maintained a price support without controlling the currency or the commodity?

Fixed, sorry about that!