Topic: [ANNOUNCE] Ixcoin - a new Bitcoin fork - page 41. (Read 128443 times)

OK, you win.Thanks for the Lesson.
Too bad there is nothing profitable left to mine for me. 

Woah, so there's your double spend....  You're saying this guy could have been mining for the last 6 months, be up to block 50000.  Then he "releases" block 6000 (or whatever it was), and people start mining, trading etc.  Then one day in the future he drops block 50000 into the wild and all of a sudden everyone's coins go to him.

Interesting idea.  And while it may work, it would kill ixcoin dead.  Nobody would ever use it again.  So that eliminates the "get rich quick" aspect and turns it into a "sew mayhem and disaster" type scenario.

DO NOT USE THIS
There is a more serious issue than that he already mined some blocks.  There is no way of knowing he hasn't mined EVEN MORE and is holding them to himself.

The genesis block is NOT properly timestamped.  The bitcoin genesis block contains the following quote:
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"

The reason for this is so you can be sure Satoshi hadn't been mining a chain for the past 10 years.  That quote PROVES that noone started mining before Jan 03 2009.

In IXcoin the genesis block has the quote:
"To see the farm is to leave it"
https://github.com/ixcoin/ixcoin/blob/Branch_v0.3.24/src/main.cpp

That is totally meaningless and proves nothing.

Either the dude who made this didn't understand the reason for timestamping the genesis block, or deliberately left it out.  Either way, there is no way you can know that he or someone else hasn't been mining an alternate chain for the past 2 years being kept hidden and that will be released eventually later..

Either way, this is not worth using.  Epic fail...

how fast does the difficulty change in terms of blocks? 2016?

That's a great point.... except for the fact that there is nothing you can use ixcoin for....  So what, exactly, would you be double-spending on?

Same argument could have been made against bitcoin in its early early days.  Still, this strikes me as a fairly transparent "boo hoo I missed out so I'm gonna make my own" get-rich-quick attempt.

If he'd made some attempt at creating a novel fork of bitcoin I'd have a different opinion.  If he'd not mined over 500k coins himself before going public I'd have a different opinion.

For the next "me too"er, I suggest the following:
- Pre-announce your project with a set "go-live" date
- Make a meaningful change to existing bitcoin (and it wouldn't hurt to put some thought and explanation into _why_ your change is worth our time)

ill give you guys a hint...the chain with the highest difficulty is the most secure. why would you use ixcoin when you could probably do a 51% attack with like 50 ghash/s for real.

I wonder how bitcoins begun to be worth something.
Someone must have been willing to sell something for the first time... how did that happen ?
The same must happen with Ixcoin, or it will be just numbers.

I'm not mad.      This is an internet forum...  It takes a lot more than text on a screen typed by a stranger to anger me.

Somebody just needs to tell it how it is.  These people making bitcoin clones trying to get rich are at best, lazy.

C'mon, son, gimme a Baaaaaaaaaaam! Green eggs and haaaaaaaaaaaam!






This has already been addressed in this thread...like GPU miners aren't just going to roll in, rape the difficulty, and leave four months of slogging along for the chumps who stick with it. Taking a page from Phinnaeus Gage's book; Namecoin: It sort of sucks for those who really believe in it.

Everyone will just keep mining until the difficulty skyrockets, after which everyone will stop mining Ixcoins and no one will be able to even transfer them... not that you'd need to transfer them, since no one will want to buy them, as they provide nothing the bitcoins do not. It doesn't matter if you mine thousands of Ixcoins, you won't be able to use them for anything.

The creator of bitcoin really is some sleezebag, he also wants to rely on everybody else to do the dirty work, ie. create software, like a bitcoin <> fiat exchange for instance, and how does he want to pay for this work? Drumroll... with bitcoins that he mined himself for virtually no cost.

Interesting post this. I'd give you a karma point for this post, as it was valuable to this discussion and gave (at least for me) some new light to it. However, there's no karma vote button on this forum. It's true that software developed for ixcoin or any other variant probably would be beneficial for bitcoin, but I don't see how it can be attractive to collect ixcoin bounties as they're worth nothing at the moment. It must only be if they'd recieve value in the future, only then would it make sense to collect ixcoins at the moment.

I did a quick calculation of the bounties given at the moment:

First Gambling service to support IXC payments    500 IXC
First shared hosting service to support IXC payments    500 IXC
First Gift Card service to support IXC payments    500 IXC
First VPN service to support IXC payments    500 IXC
First VPS service to support IXC payments    500 IXC
Getting shops/organisations to accept Ixcoin    25,000 IXC
Volunteers: Code contributors    10,000 IXC
Ixcoin Stats Page    2,000 IXC
Ixcoin Logos    2,000 IXC
Volunteer: Bounty Manager    2,000 IXC
Volunteers: Github/Sourceforge Admins    10,000 IXC
Volunteer: Mac distro maintainer    2,000 IXC
Volunteer: Wiki Contributors    10,000 IXC
Volunteer: Wiki admin    2,000 IXC
Volunteers: IRC admins - 5,000 IXC    2,000 IXC
Volunteer: Forum admins    10,000 IXC
Volunteer: Twitter admin    1,000 IXC
Volunteer: Facebook admin    2,000 IXC
First IXC/USD exchange service with $100,000 30d volume    20,000 IXC
First BTC/USD exchange service    5,000 IXC
First BTC/IXC exchange service with 10,000 BTC 30d volume    20,000 IXC
First BTC/IXC exchange service    5,000 IXC
First web-based Ixcoin block explorer    5,000 IXC
First Ixcoin wallet service    2,000 IXC
First Ixcoin escrow service    2,000 IXC
First pool to reach 500GH/s on Ixcoin blockchain    20,000 IXC
First pool to reach 1,000GH/s on Ixcoin blockchain    50,000 IXC
First tier-3 mining pool to support Ixcoin    2,000 IXC
First tier-2 mining pool to support Ixcoin    5,000 IXC
First tier-1 mining pool to support Ixcoin    10,000 IXC


Total: 228500 IXC

580000 - 228500 = 351500

Which mean the creator sits on ~0,3 million ixcoins. In the case of Sathosi, he actually spent a lot of time writing bitcoin. I can't see what time consuming work has been done by the creator of ixcoin.

Hey now be fair, it is only armchair critics who have been speculating that Ixcoins are only worth 0.0001 of a Bitcoin.

For all we know the holder of the initial 580,000 plans to "back" them with 5800 or 58000 Bitcoins once the exchange opens.

It would be useful though to know ahead of time what exactly the amount is at which he plans to buy early coins, so we can maybe plan to open the exchange with his hoard of Bitcoins already in place ready to buy more Ixcoins than anyone but him actually has, so as to establish a clear floor on the value.

-MarkM-

Oh. I will read all the responses since my last posting, but I just checked out the bounties.

The creator of ixcoin really is some sleezebag, not only did he just do some minor modifications to bitcoins and is keeping a whole lot of the ixcoins to himself, but he also wants to rely on everybody else to do the dirty work, ie. create software, like a ixcoin <> bitcoin exchange for instance, and how does he want to pay for this work? Drumroll... with ixcoins that he mined himself for virtually no cost.

Reminds me a bit about lazy students who has a student assignment and posts on a forum expecting someone else to do all the work for them. If the creator of ixcoin at least had taken the time to sweat over some serious code himself, it would at least from me be given more respect.

But anyone's free to start a new blockchain, so let's see how it develops!

There are several mentions in the Something Awful Bitcoin thread about starting a "Gooncoin" blockchain.  A lot of them believe that Bitcoin has no future because anyone can clone it and (according to them) devalue the original.  I don't buy it, but I'd like to see them take a shot at it.

I'll call my cryptocurrency FailCoin. It'll be even better, because I'll make the mining reward 97 coins.

So give away 1 coin per block and let maxint be your ceiling. Those two factors combined would give you a LONG time before you have to worry about inflation stopping... And by then int64 might seem as quaint as int defaulting to 8 bit is to us today

No need, this is the condition in which GRouPcoin has ended up now that DeVCoin has sprung from the tests done using the GRouPcoin code.

Of course it is still feasible to use GRouPcoin to continue development of some of what DeVCoin no longer bothered trying for once it realised what it actually wanted was possible. But in the meanwhile GRouPcoin just keep chugging along as a blockchain different from Bitcoin only in that the 50 coins per block never changes and never ends.

-MarkM-

Edit: oh wait, no ceiling on number of coins? That would have to be settled. I don't think we messed with ceilings yet, and int64 only goes so high in any event so would itself impose a ceiling...

You would have received a lot more mining power if you had support merged mining from the start:

http://dot-bit.org/Merged_Mining

It doesn't necessarily need new features (a la namecoin) to be meaningful. This is part of the coolness of open source, if you think something else will work better you're free to modify and distribute those changes. In this case we have someone who's decided that a brief introductory period of crazy steep inflation would be better since we get to the much-touted deflationary part of the curve sooner. I've considered creating the opposite: a variant where inflation occurred so slowly and over such a long span of time that it would be highly unlikely for the increase in supply to ever outpace the increase in demand. Someone who believes inflation is the way to go might create a fork in which nSubsidy never halves and there is no enforced ceiling on the number of coins.

Just because it wasn't a massive feature-packed fork doesn't mean it's not worthwhile. If you don't think a steep but brief inflationary period would be a beneficial change, then don't use ixcoin. If you think bitcon's curve has the wrong shape, duration, etc. then it's an easy matter to change a few key numbers and reshape the graph to your design. Saying this fork is worthless, profiteering, gluttonous, etc because the changes made aren't substantial enough is like arguing that bitcoin wasn't a substantial change because it's deflationary. Sometimes changing a single thing is a big deal.

Also, assuming any of the bounties on the wiki site are real and will actually be paid, it seems to add up that the original 580k that were mined before release are being used as rewards to help move ixcoin's infrastructure forward. Since ixcoin and bitcoin use identical RPC, any products developed for one should work for the other with little to no modification. If an ixcoin bounty leads to the development of something that can be useful to bitcoin then it has helped the bitcoin cause (and vice versa).

No one is stealing anything from anyone. Not any more than beertokens, weeds or any of the other miscellaneous feature-identical branches of bitcoin have anyway.

Edit: Oh, and since such forks tend to be lower difficulty (even lower than namecoin usually) they also make mining more accessible. BTC and NMC both have difficulties so high that CPU mining is more than unprofitable, it's flat out impossible. Let the casuals mine the forks and those of us with dedicated rigs will still mine BTC. There's nothing wrong with forks, we just need a good exchange to support them all.