Topic: [ANN][MOTO] Motocoin - page 46. (Read 178256 times)

Today the chain stalled because of the existing work credit calculation.  Because log2_work hit the maximum the network will not presently accept further work.  I'll have a fix together within 12-24 hours.  Hopefully that will mean launching the new work curve entirely, but I have a simple fallback plan for a short term solution if not.

Sorry, but i closed moto-explorer. I am no more interesting in motocoin (because it is dominated by bots) and don't want spend my time to maintain vds & fix current bugs.

Moto-explorer's code is still available on github(https://github.com/BobRobH/MotocoinExplorer), so anyone can raise it up on any another server/vds.

He means it appears that someone or someones bought about a quarter-million coins earlier this week.



They are only rarer for a time, and then they "end up" only a bit more common than bitcoin for a very very long time.


Sure!

Right now there are just over 3btc for every one moto. (About 13m and 4m.)  Next year we'll reach an even 1:1 count, and the year after that we'll pass btc production.  However, once the block halving kicks in (around the same time) it affects the ratio pretty significantly! It should take until just after 2025 or so for us to reach a point where there are 2 moto for every 1btc, which is also approximately where the diminish curve flattens.  From there our mining pretty much "stalls", and btc coin-bases stop entirely as well within a few years.  Beyond that, it would take decades to go from 2:1 to 3:1 likely followed by centuries to go from 3:1 to 4:1 and beyond.  On a log scale of production btc and moto might as well ultimately be 1:1 since it will take longer than anyone could possibly care about before it comes near 10:1, or 210million.  It will be an absurdly long time (thousands of years) to make it to 100:1.

This is all, of course, assuming that the network operates correctly and there isn't a cap introduced somewhere down the road.

what do you mean garbo?
and a question, HunterMinterCrafter...


How is motocoin rarer than bitcoin?
Can we compare the blockchains and list relevant similarities and differences and their implications?
Thanks, pls
 

suddenly someone is pumped it and again 0.01btc)))

As WilliamLie2 pointed out a few times, the fix is not trivial.  I've been pretty open about expected timelines and progress.

If you think that you can implement an appropriately fixed "work+play" function and the corresponding scale factor curve to credit work in a shorter time frame than we have been able to, please feel encouraged to try.  I'll look forward to seeing your patch proposal.

I can add a lot of time is passed. Developers simply don't want to change something

Devs said it on the OP
The first Proof-of-Play cryptocurrency.
Unfortunately, now it is dominated by bots.

I think that this sentence is the best summary of everything.

the coin is almost dead - c-cex shows quantity ~0.01-0.03 BTC

You're a little off on the numbers, I would guess.  You don't account for the premine having been redistributed and minim1ner's dumping most of his coins early on.  Around 30% of all coins in existence were redistributed into circulation by these two events.  In the past few weeks, we saw (what appears to be approximately) 10-15% of the coins in existence dumped by miners.  I'd say all of the bot miners collectively probably hold at most around 30-40% now.  That is still quite a lot, by some measures.

Problem?

This was brought up earlier in the thread by WilliamLie2 who said he had some PMing him and complaining that is was unfair that so many coins were distributed to bot miners so early.  My thoughts on this haven't changed and I'll say the same again in response.  Everyone has had fair and equal opportunity to choose to participate.  Barriers to entry were even greatly lowered when Mini released his bot example.  We're roughly 10-12 weeks in and in that time anyone could have even take some programming classes and built their own bot.  You could have certainly contracted it out easily and cheaply in this time-frame.  You might have even been able to convince someone to sell you their bot "off the shelf" or something.  If you didn't take some action to include yourself in this set of people getting this set of early coins, you have nobody to blame or complain to.

I think our early distribution was far more fair and inclusive than the vast majority of coins launched in the same time period, with their premine shenanigans, IPO shenanigans, POS shenanigans, "totally fair" stakeholder list plan shenanigans, token redemption shenanigans, burn-other-coins shenanigans, "market stabilization fund" shenanigans, multi-pool hopping shenanigans, etc etc.  There are soooooooooo many "totally unfair while claiming to be the most fairest possible" distribution/incentive models now that I can't even enumerate them all here.  Most of these end up being drastically less "fair" than what has transpired with MOTO.


I do agree that this is a problem, but we have to take certain problems in a certain order.  All that having vendors/services adopting the coin would really do, right now, is create more targets for warp attack and increase the probability that some unscrupulous person sees more to be gained from attacking participants to steal BTC than is to be gained by mining altruistically.

As WilliamLie2 pointed out, the network is secure only by virtue of the fact that nobody is doing the attacks.  If enough incentive were dangling out there for it, someone probably would.

That being said, as soon as we do pass the fork this will become pretty much a top priority for the coin's "marketing."


Eh, I'm not so concerned with this as a significant risk for two reasons:

First, I suspect that anyone smart enough to be dominant in bot mining production is also smart enough to use an execution strategy that reduces market impact, and presumably already equipped with the trading bots to do so.  In other words, if the bot miner is smart enough to not dump his MOTO immediately when mined, he's also probably smart enough to dump it slowly and carefully when he does switch from the accumulation side to distribution.

Second, such a black-swan sell off impacting the price so significantly is only really a problem if the price doesn't subsequently recover.  Unlike pretty much every other alt, MOTO actually has (relatively "extreme") buoyancy in the market.  With most coins when a massive sell clears out the buy side of the books that's it, it is "game over," the alt never recovers, the sell side pushes down toward 1sat, no new buyers appear, and the exchanges de-list.  We've all seen it over and over again.  With MOTO it seems that no matter how much gets dumped, the buy side consistently (and usually almost immediately) returns to 0.3 to 0.9 btc of depth on the books and a price roughly around 300-500.  (This is what I've been referring to when I've previously pointed out that MOTO is curiously one of the only alts with a persistent "institutional block."  There are very very very few coins that exhibit this behavior effect in the markets.)  If the market players continue to show this "we'll buy any amount that you're willing to dump into our bids" mentality then let the miners dump away, it will be their loss in the end.

In other words, smart money is smart.  Further, this is true on both sides of the market equation.   


Again, you're not wrong.  Again, I have to say that we shouldn't rush the growth.  It will happen in due time, pressing the issue only introduces other risks for the moment.


I can run replays in a browser, but currently without graphics.  (Or, well, tbh with really messed up graphics, heh.)  If anyone is interested I can push that code somewhere.  (It is basically just an Emscripten build of the core engine parts.)  I had started on wiring up graphics to canvas with SDL, but never finished as just having "headless" replays was sufficient for my purposes in the end.  I'd probably revisit such things eventually, but other stuff keeps making it higher onto the priority list.


I'd be hesitant to do this, but open to the idea if there is sufficient support for it and a good plan put together.  I'd (personally) much rather take a "holistic" approach to those matters and adjust the TT re-target formula, diminish curve, and possibly coin cap all at the same time.  I'd also prefer to consider these concerns separately from the more immediate issues, in a future fork, just to reduce the amount of surprises that might occur all at once.


Not at all backwards, just a little pessimistic and based on some questionable assumptions.  I agree with all of it in theory, but I think there is very little pragmatic reason for concern, particularly at this juncture.  Hey, I could be wrong. 

I feel the release approaching but there are some immediate concerns regarding the coin distribution and the state of the market it results in.

Regardless of what the richlist shows, I look at the amount of coins mined over the last months and the miniscule amounts that have been sold, so am I wrong to assume that a single dominant miner holds 20%-30% of the coin supply? And then, I'd guess the handful of other miners make up for at least 50% cumulatively. I may be off quite a bit but I think the point would still stand... With that information at hand, how is anyone motivated to enter the market when there are currently zero uses for the coins one could purchase, and overwhelming danger of massive dumps at any point above any miner's electricity spend, resulting in a very likely immediate reduction in value of anyone's theoretical investment. No matter how much I'm attracted to the idea of MOTO, I feel there's crucial parts missing of an ecosystem needed for sustaining the growth of both the coin's future prospects and its economy.

Whatever happened to the online replay viewer development? Are that kind of features gonna get any attention after the first patch is released?

Also, I just got the weirdest idea. Since we gotta fork anyway, as it's a significant change, what if block rewards were boosted to 100 or so for a few hundred blocks to stimulate human mining and interest, while bot operators are busy adjusting their algorithms? It could then quickly return to normal. Just an idea, perhaps it can be changed into a better one.

If my logic is all backwards anywhere, feel free to correct me

The solvers were incrementally specialized and tweaked toward straight-line solutions.  If you took the dominant bot of the day and ran it as is without the map filtering it would never find a block, because it is trying to optimize traversal onto a straight line.

Bot operators will have to at least revert to the bot implementations from 6-8 weeks ago and re-specialize from there. However, even those bots were designed around filtered maps, so they will under-produce until at least "re-tuned" for the new rules.  Really the entire bot architecture will likely be changed to specialize further to these new rules, probably using some global training instead of the current per-map optimizer approach.


We don't even know that the bot operators all observe this thread.  We can't exactly coordinate with people that we can't reliably contact.


Arguably any miner behavior after the patch will not be able to result in less network security than we have now, so you're right that nobody should care about this aspect, as it is actually a non-issue.


Speculation on a higher future price.  (EDIT: This answer might seem strange to some newer members of the alt scene, who are only familiar with miners who mine to immediately sell.  I know it might seem backwards to these people, but on a good coin miners will gladly (and rationally) even mine at a net present value loss.)


Except that we can't, really.  At least, we cannot come to such an agreement in loose terms on a forum thread - such a social contract would be effectively meaningless.  Even if we got all of the bot operators to agree to such nothing prevents some third party from coming in and capitalizing on the opportunity we'd create by doing so.  The only meaningful way that we can reach such an agreement is via the network consensus, itself, and I just don't see it likely that all miners would agree to simply "leave some margin on the table" like that.  We tried it once, the three "original" dominant bot operators all agreed to throttle their bots for a time and all that happened was more bot operators came online to try to take that margin, leading the rest of us to promptly have to reneg anyway!

You're right in that MOTO bot mining (and really any crypto mining) is an example of an IPD game, you just have the meanings of cooperate and defect a little backwards!  


This would be kind of like convincing everyone to turn off their sha asics from the bitcoin network intermittently. First, "good luck with that" as you'll likely never even get a small fraction of them convinced to do the shutdown.  Second, even if you did it would likely be the demise of bitcoin because in the best of cases the network would fork like crazy at the "turn back on time" but more likely someone would just turn their asic pool back on early to 51% and double spend like crazy.


No, because it is simply not feasible that it could happen at all, let alone happen "smoothly."  It would likely benefit only the first person to go back on the agreement!

I get your sentiments, but this simply doesn't solve anything long-term. And it would deliberately make the network unstable periodically, that's a no-no from me. I believe there's a middle ground solution hiding in plain sight somewhere here, but I think it's certainly not "turn off your bots, pretty please?"

I'm afraid this "natural" period might be too small. What bot owners will probably need to do is disable map filtering and everything else remains the same. It actually can happen so quickly that human players might not even notice it. So what I'm talking about is that bot owners can make an agreement or something and intentionally switch off their bots for some time (a week) cause TT reset is in fact a very rare event and I think we should not waste it. I think it's pretty rational behavior even though it's slightly unsafe for the network (who cares?). I can't understand what's the point to collect coins if you can't sell them at a good price. We have something like prisoner's dilemma here and we (human players and bot operators) definitely should cooperate (even if we can't do it naturally by making humans and bots equal we still can simply make an agreement). It would be even better if we could arrange this event every month or every two weeks but it is impossible without TT reset (network would simply stuck).

So, HunterMinerCrafter, do you agree?

All of my miners have been on testnet, doing work measurements under different scenarios.  I just meant that soon I'll be able to set them back onto the real network


With the upcoming patch the bot operators will need to entirely retool their bots anyway.  There will likely be some time where the network is "naturally" free of heavy bot competition without bot operators explicitly holding back again.  I expect this period of time will only last a few days or 1-2 weeks, at the most.  After bots are adjusted to not rely so heavily on map filtering the game will likely become very challenging again, but not as "impossible" as it is currently.

Sounds suspicious to me... Like you just want to stop other's bots and give yourself an advantage instead of stopping all bots...

Anyway, if I understand correctly, upcoming patch will reset TT, so we will have an opportunity to mine moto by hand again. So I just want to make a suggestion to all bot owners: it will be really cool if you deliberately stop all your bots for a week or two after TT reset. Moto will become human mineable again and price will likely go up, then you will be able to sell your accumulated moto at higher prices and everybody will be happy. Maybe it's our last chance to revive moto.

Mostly this, IMO.


Yes, over the past weeks the most "reassuring" thing to me about this coin is that despite the large potential for abuse, all of the various miners who have "won" network dominance at various times have all continued to mine altruistically.  This indicates that the miners, at least, see more potential in the future of the coin than in the opportunity of stealing a few btc from people and trashing the coin in the process.


Some would certainly disagree with our definition of "fair" here, as has been brought up earlier in the thread...  personally I still consider the distribution to date to have been exceedingly fair, particularly in comparison to most contemporary alts.  (Even though I haven't had opportunity to get a block in weeks, myself! All well, that'll change very soon, heh!)

After considering both sides of the debate, I also believe it is best to stick with Motocoin with all of the new developments and further research. The first mover advantage, the secure blockchain and seemingly fair distribution of coins (with no premine remaining) are all worth keeping.

I'm also interested in learning such things. What coding language would be able to navigate webpages? I know there was a code for scrypt.cc the auto reinvested every 10 minutes for you and I think it was JavaScript. You needed to press ctl+j or something and paste the code in.

o k then. time to tack

just curious , of topic, if I wanted to create an autotrading bot to do autotrades for me on mintpal,
is that possible?
would it be some kind of browser extension?...
Just curious, I can't really program but Ive been thinking about some if and while loops.
you know, if any coin goes up 0.5% buy, if it goes down 0.5%, sell, if it goes up 1%, sell. So of course there's risk of losses but I would just be testing it.
I'm just not sure the contextual parameters and how to implement a bot. Where can I learn how to do something like this?
I'd like to throw a percentage of a bitcoin at my bot and have it autotrade the smaller waves, and see where it gets....
Where to learn how to do this, for something like mintpal via a browser like firefox...