Topic: [ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin" - page 303. (Read 1151252 times)

so I have 120 clams in 1 address split to 6 lots of 20... been going around 4 days now... i'm guessing its going to take forever to actually get a stake

I see.  I have to admit I don't know anything about margin trading.  Thanks for the education on this point!

It looks like there is not evidence to support this claim, but I wanted to add that margin trading is the biggest reason that any exchange trading on their own books is potentially a conflict of interest. In margin trading if you can see all the other traders' positions you have an advantage akin to being able to see everyone's hand in a game of poker. You can basically print money by knowing exactly how much it would take to make someone liquidate into your orders, or just direct the price slowly in your favor by taking the least crowded position.

That's right - if you run 20 per input and 5 stake in a day, you get 5 CLAMs. But each of those 20 CLAM pieces is 6 times less likely to stake in any given timeframe than a single 120 CLAM input is. So your expected number of stakes per day is unchanged by splitting.

The only difference, as SuperClam just posted, is that when your outputs are split, less value gets put "out of commission" for 8 hours each time you stake.

An extreme example that may help:

Just-Dice has 700,000 CLAMs trying to stake. It stakes about every 70 seconds or something silly.

If all 700,000 CLAMs were in a single output, we would only be able to stake 3 times per day, because the whole 700,000 CLAM output would take 8 hours to mature each time it staked. By having it split up into thousands of smaller pieces, only between 1% and 2% of the pieces are out of commission at any time.

Checking the warm wallet right now, I see a balance of 664694.30193479 made up of 656393.76362757 actively trying to stake and 8300.53830722 waiting to mature. I aim for roughly 1% of the balance to be maturing, and set the split size accordingly.

Edit: I figure it's OK for 1% of the outputs to be maturing at any point in time, and so I want an average time-to-stake per output of 100*8 hours.

With 800k network weight, an 800k CLAM output would stake once per minute, an 800k/60 CLAM output would stake once per hour, and an 800k/60/800 CLAM output would stake every 800 hours.

800e3 / 60 / 800 = 16.666

so 16.666 CLAMs is currently the kind of size output you need if you want 1% of your outputs to be maturing at any given time.

Here's a histogram showing how many outputs we have of each size:



The 33.33 CLAM outputs are left over from when I wanted to move coins from one wallet to another quickly. They'll be split by the client automatically when they next stake.

I have the wallet set to automatically split outputs into two 13's when they get to 26. Most of these outputs started at size 13.37 and have grown via staking. The most common size is currently 16.37, and I guess that will change to 17.37 with time, as they continue to stake.

Edit2: It took me a while to figure out how to get gnuplot to put data into 'bins' for plotting like this. Here's what I ended up using:

Splitting doesn't increase your chance to stake.
Neither does "age".

Think of each CLAM as a unit of hashing power(kH,gH,etc.), with a catch: after a pile stakes, it must wait 8 hours to mature and have a chance again.
Kind of like a mining rig that goes out-of-commission for 8 hours after it finds a block.

That is why many split their outputs/piles.
The thought is that it is more efficient if less of your total balance is "immature" at a given time.

I thought the point of splitting was each input stakes for a potential reward i.e. 1 clam. So if I run 20 per input and all 5 stake in say 3 days by miracle I get more return than if it was in 1 and happened in 24 hours? Am I thinking wrong?

If the network weight is 800k, and 1 CLAM is staked each minute, that's 60*24 = 1440 stakes per day, and 800k/1440 = 555.555 is the number of CLAMs you need to expect to stake once per day.

Splitting is kind of irrelevant. It only affects your "recovery time" after staking. If your whole 120 CLAMs was in a single output, the whole 121 CLAMs would be frozen for 8 hours after it staked while it matured. If you split it into 6 sets of 20 each, only 21 CLAMs would get frozen for 8 hours and the other 5 sets of 20 would continue trying to stake.

The estimate shouldn't change much. It's not like you make "progress" towards staking. You can expect to stake every 4 or 5 days on average, but it's random. You could stake twice in a single day or you could go 10 days without staking.

Thanks dooglus for your help with the restore access to my Just-Dice.com account. You're a real man!

hey guys/gals I bought 120 clams off cryptsy just to play with (its what I usually do with new stake coins).

I split the main address into 6 inputs of 20 clams each... its been 3 days now and I have the wallet open for staking. I read initially it was 4 hours maturity then 8 hours should get a stake or something but i'm a little confused... my weight after 3 days for a 20 clam input is only 34 but the network weight is like 800,000 or something. It says estimated 4-5 days but its said that for ages...

I guess my question is... if I want to get a stake per day what sort of input size are we looking at based on current clams out there? I looked at just dice inputs which is what I based my size on but just dice has like a shit load of the available coins like 50 percent and if all their inputs are 20 i'm thinking it'll be a long time before I stake.

Depending on return through stake on this is whether its worth me continuing with more or just selling the 120 back. Seems a bit crazy if just dices input splits can dominate the stake potential due to the sheer amount they hold of customer funds :/.

so tldr

How many clams do I need in 1 input to get a stake in 24 hours... or the shortest possible time?

Hi guys
good to see your keeping up the high standards of you work dooglus
As for the Poloniex question, I've never had a problem withdrawing Clams or any other POS coin. As for Crypsty totally the opposite so much so I don't trade there at all any more

Jon 

The transaction you linked to is spending a bunch of 4.60535574 CLAM outputs.

Digging gets you 4.60545574 CLAM outputs.

The outputs being spent are each 0.0001 CLAM less than the dig amount. The 0.0001 was spent on a transaction fee as the digger moved the outputs from his wallet to his poloniex deposit address(es).

Check the address of the first input:
  http://khashier.com/address/x9Va3QTU2Rtt9MJtv24ZY1ddUGX9tT6ypo

The digger sent 10 separate 4.6 amounts there. Outputs don't merge when they're sent to the same address. The same is true of every other Bitcoin-like coin I'm aware of.

Edit: of course, if you spend multiple outputs in a single transaction then they merge together. But he's sending them individually, in separate transactions, so they don't merge.

Only cost 1000 CLAMS to trade 500,000 CLAMS at poloniex.

I don't think it would be worth it for BTCE or someone like that to list yet (OKcoin ect.)

I guess that kinda makes sense.  But then again, imagine that any exchange owner starts trading on their own exchange, surely they don't have to pay fees to themself, but I can't really see how this hurts other customers in that marketplace.

well, if they are trading they arecompeting with their customers sincethey will not pay fees ...

Just curious if you can say what the conflict is?  As I understand a conflict of interest, it's when someone has two (or more) competing financial interests: for example, say I am hired to regulate the oil industry in the name of the public interest and say I hold massive amounts of stock in that industry---here promoting either of my interests has a direct cost to the other.  Or say, for a smaller scale example that I am paid to police the forums and mark scammers with negative trust and at the same time I sell accounts for a living---clearly neg-repping many accounts bumps the value the accounts I sell.

In your case, poloniex sells clams, so like any other clamholder they have an interest in getting a good price on the clam they sell.  What's the conflict?  What's the other interest?

   I took a quick look, and I'm no expert by a long shot.  I selected one of the 4.6 clam inputs, and that wallet had several 4.6 clam inputs, looking back at one of those, they came from the digger.  So it almost looks like the digger has several accounts on Poloniex.  That's one way around the withdrawal limits...    

   Depending on the system load on Poloniex, your deposit could be used to fund someones withdrawal, with out being merged into another address.  So just because you see a lot of 4.6 input's doesn't mean Poloniex is digging.  it only means Poloniex has a lot of clams broken up into 4.6 clam piles.  Which make sense since the digger is using Poloniex to unload.  


    This is not to say it could not be Poloniex, Just that based on them giving away clams in the beginning (via a dig???) and the fact the digger is using poloniex, makes it more unlikely.  

It actually looks like those didn't stay in their original addresses. They look to have been moved once to Polo, before they got sent to you.

and after the digger send the outputs to poloniex they remain separate in thos addresses?

   Or...   The digger is sending his 4.6 clam outputs to poloniex...  Poloniex was the first exchange to have clams,  They had a large clam giveaway.  I thought it had to do with them digging their clams at that time. 

it looks like poloniex is digging for clams and also it sells it on the market. Imo this is a huge conflict of interests... Maybe they are the misterious digger.