Topic: [ANN][SKULL] ☠ SkullCoin | in-Game Treasure Hunt | PoQ - page 9. (Read 61402 times)

sound good.

The IPO price has turned out to be a bit too high so I'm going to be sending 10-20%(still calculating) subsidy coins to all early "PRESALE" IPO holders. All early "PRESALE" holders and new purchasers will also get a Vote-Token to hold for future votes we may decide to have. For every "1000 SKUL" you have you will get "1 VOTE-TOKEN".

This will also help speed up distribution. I would like to have all 10,000,000 distributed in the next 3 months so that the free market can then take over setting the price. We only need to do this because the PreSale was not large enough to fully finish distribution.

I will need to do this when I get some free time.

Ya, I was wondering if you were going to make it.

Maybe I will stop doing ninja until we get more people.

aww just woke up, looks like I missed this one

I checked and all address have already been claimed

20 new addresses funded and placed in the (SC SkullCraft Game) 5000 SKUL each
Once these are found 200k will be distributed this week.

1EJNxGdANQQtT4iwmXSii9w5Wikd1Qx2Hc
1KVfCjW7kH6qRKm9oLdmQGyNvALpZRzAwZ
1NwBaVJD941KVBgXTfPuc1tvEZ5HYRxwJW
1JATojVALoBmVseXJrVZuuzFEZBrogrq8X
1GEcqpmxRoJNf1kgQunYnQBqxiZ725jm8W

1JFsB5bCuUqrrqanvRkv6zu8jWQefEu8F4
1JdzJUN2P47284ufTiErjQGD6x91ZtPB8o
1FABwMbpatSr1WHVM8ZTR3fBxppPQKLzW6
1Pqf5y6WrtGqNbcvEsp1U1raWpXwfGKLCn
1ELQbEBE5asrWgLYd7nr71BfL47KBJZYEo

14VC2SNn8aABjTr7Nn6bXG9tH9dsDkGK16
1LViFYsrD2ySSeTAWF3Mcc6VoWM1TbvwYw
1KR9kL7RQXv1oAJgSQekHMnsqyNH7k18zQ
1BGPAECwp3yvsDptm6nTF5cCzvtWfjx56z
1MkRjUy6eYYi66VL6VRGuWmLZTgxtMLXPD

18cgiF3GQae6sZJgAP3VuXE3UwfT8mp5vY
18z6TEGhcEEd7JtPRN9dkMUNbcwXmexMLT
1BXzKhygCL2fst5LPuXE1J8uNuw34z2Y4U
121e4tQXCkU2dWERv2MUxQhVjUFkD9gi6m
1CV18oRbAqnpFpwuJLE2ARcy3WcpmNRyTZ

http://www.reddit.com/r/SkullCoin/comments/2fkhem/report_empty_skullcoin_addresses/

http://www.roblox.com/SC-SkullCraft-s4-fix04-round2-place?id=177056807

My rigs use far less electricity and produce far less heat than when scrypt mining.

I leave it on medium and it never slows down my computer while working.

Team Ranking (incl. aggregate)   11,618 out of 220,651 in the first few days.

That's not bad at all!

Source: http://fah-web2.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=teampage&teamnum=227054

all found except for these two:

1NhChou2s9m6heLxpFZsY4U9PBXQ6x3Fiq - update: found
18LwTvgpbAiVXW5NgSEmfjDZxcwryKrDQg -update: found

Make sure you are in the right server. Click the top PLAY link on the front page.

10 minutes left. let the hunt begin.

Nothing is final but here is what I have inline for collective distribution.

    200,000 SKULL each week from in-game treasure hunts
+  200,000 SKULL each week from mining (divided based on amount of work)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     400,000 per week total


This will go on until the remaining coins are distributed (Total 10,000,000).

Once these coins are distributed we will create the rest of the coins for the remaining two years of PoQ in-game (200k a week) distribution and lock the "SkullCoin" account so that no more can be created.

The remaining 19.2 million coins will be put into a MutiSig wallet(counterwallet should have this functionality by then) held by the "SkullCoin" association members. 200,000 SKULL will be accessed weekly for in-game treasure hunt distributions.

Addresses are funded. Putting them into the game now.

http://www.reddit.com/r/SkullCoin/comments/2fkhem/report_empty_skullcoin_addresses/ckheki9

1Fb11FGMwgQZdm2Zk7kmECUGmFoNUpYsE3
1GMQCTDF7ASp3djneUBSVAiPMsqQXDEtwd
1G4E8AdEYoQWgq8MFLUYR8yHA3s5qJa979
1DevZTDosyoHAKm4MYnhjSBWxBptcMcFmH
1362z6pGxZ491hACMPtMjVu4PbSofyZkRB

1NbphRyVYubHZJBw6twSZYGf4gaxD6wayr
15u3AxmzjeFjvAv3qfm7ccwiuJTGpp5pFs
14M1kDhwcPqBBRM3s3Dfqvcci4Y97zEWBY
1CiS1eV1cZdPgLeEV5nQLJrCDCU8LpMKwC
1PiZZ57ebu7cHrir7sxTg1CSHAKe2WJeun

1Q3pPy13TqwmLzBExMbqWPYim78xYoav5Q
1FJfXmEZ1Gn8wf12X7L2SmcUCugKUxRcHF
1AFBtkqDkqujS6a1fpgrY91PoEtgGAEENX
12LPzy7evW851Gtyd13BmVahFBThmVBSbT
1Cuuu5E4NnpiUrgcBVonkErtmeijmVB6mQ

12yaDUnY2vCuqgwSagGGpY6eBKjcub1U56
1NhChou2s9m6heLxpFZsY4U9PBXQ6x3Fiq
18LwTvgpbAiVXW5NgSEmfjDZxcwryKrDQg
1QBDB5AfmvMePhyDnhEFNgv6K6dTh6qRLy
1CurHtT5H4nVGxMsaNjiwp4k4tH96wZCL2

12R99PehvAsujcagmo1KRSpHYrqVN4nj2y - btc

2 hours left. get ready for the hunt.

This is true, but this is a separate proof-of-work mining from what you are proposing as a proof-of-work mining.  The hash collisions being computed by the BTC network certainly do constitute proofs.  This has nothing to do with the context at hand, however.


This might be where you are confused.  A proof, in the formal sense used in the notion of "proof of work," must be able to be independently verified as satisfied.  One wishing to confirm the validity of the proof must be able to re-trace all of the steps from the assumptions made to the conclusion drawn.  If one cannot resolve an assertion stack for it, it is not a proof.  If one cannot construct an SMT solver for it, it is not a proof.


I am not saying that one proof of work system is better than another.  I am saying that what you have been calling a proof of work system is not a proof of work system.  Whether or not a proof holds is not a matter of opinion, either the proof holds and is factual or else the proof was not a proof to begin with.  Further, once a proof is shown to hold then either no external influence can change it's validity or else it was never really true that the proof held to begin with.

The problem is that you've taken proof-of-work and removed some of the initial assumptions/axioms by re-centralizing an authority on verification!

I'll give you an example.  Let's hypothesize that the Stanford servers get hit by a meteor tomorrow.  Does the "proof" offered over the work done still hold, then?  Can it be independently validated?

There is an unreasonably large set of (fatal) assumptions that get re-introduced into the "proof" when you put the onus of authentication back onto a single entity like this.

What if hackers and griefers control the team stats just like they controlled your Roblox servers?

What if the operator of those Stanford servers, or even some night staff kid in the data-center NOC, sees an opportunity for "free money" and just changes some numbers in their database to make fake work?

What if someone just hacks you and your networks and fakes the team stats for you so you see different numbers from the rest of the world, and send out coins based on incorrect data?  Then you'd have an intended proof which does not hold prima facie but coins already distributed based upon it! (Something that cannot ever happen with a coin base claim in a correct proof-of-work implementation.)  Similarly, what if you just make a mistake (you're only human) and fat finger in an additional zero or two on a distribution?  The subsidy relation breaks down in a heartbeat and again the intended proof falls over at the axioms.

You cannot have a proof that starts with "So assume that this large set of random people on the internet are honest and also assume that this large set of routers and servers have not been compromised and then assume this manual process goes correctly every single time."  Your QED quickly become intractable.


Yes, I am "stuck" on not calling something that cannot be independently validated as satisfying it's constraints a proof.  Silly me, wanting things claimed as facts to be evidently factual, particularly when they define a seigniorage on a currency I might use.


If so, then why respond and refute it?  If your proof really did stand on it's own as a proof, I'd agree that you'd have to do little but laugh at me and point to the QED.

This is where I start to worry whether you are really so confused or if the lady dost protest too much.

I am afraid that the uncertainty of the nature of your proofs is creating doubt.  I assure you I am no troll or "FUD"der.  I think anyone who knows my posts would attest.


Yay irony!

"SkullCoin" runs on and is secured by the bitcoin blockchain which is proof-of-work and a crypto-currency. The "SkullCoin" folding@home mining pool provides all the information you need to keep track of payouts and be sure that you are getting what you deserve. This is a proof-of-work system. To say that one proof of work system is better than another is your opinion and has no substantiating proof behind any claims.

It seams to me that you are stuck on doing things only one way and anyone who tries something different is wrong.

To say that this is not a crpto coin and that I may be lying and am confused is all "FUD" and not worth responding or refuting. You can believe anything you want just have proof when bringing up assumption's if you want to be taken seriously.


---


SC Minecraft (srv 1)
Treasures will have "5000 SKUL" each and a total of "20" will be randomly placed on the map at launch.

A treasure with $5-$10 in BTC will also be included.

Well done.

My point (which I've brought up with quite a few other coin devs, now, as well) is that this mechanism cannot rightly be called a proof, and so it cannot predicate a proof of work.  Right now, your coin actually proves very little because the protocols it employs require some "unreasonable" assumptions.  (I've discussed those sorts of assumptions at length elsewhere, so I won't go into detail again here unless it is really necessary.)

A crypto-currency that can't prove much can't be worth much.  A crypto-currency that claims to be using some particular proof mechanic (like proof-of-work) but can't actually demonstrate validity of proof is simply confused at best and lying at worst.

I'm really excited to see these gaming related crypto-currencies, but am very unsettled that many seem to misunderstand what actually comprises a proof, let alone a functioning crypto-currency.  (Which is a network of proof coordination, by definition.)

You crypto coin could be great if only you actually turned it into a crypto coin.  If you don't, then either you are confused about what a crypto coin is and yours will fail because it simply isn't one, or you are trying to part fools from their money.  I really hope neither of these ends up being the case.

The SC Minecraft Game is finished ..



The most opportune time to get coins is @ launch. After the first hour it only gets harder.

I agree that it's different and not exactly like other coin proof-of-work distributions, but the main idea and goals are the same. You provide a service(your computing power) and are rewarded for that service(tokens/coins).

You are provided with points from Folding@Home(pool) to keep track(record as proof-of-work) of how much you currently have. That is then converted to "SkullCoin" or a set amount is divided by amount of work.

We do not giveaway "SkullCoin" for free beyond the "200 free reddit giveaway" and that's to get you familiar with the counterwallet.

--

In my opinion proof-of-work via folding@home is better in many ways than normal/conventional metrics. First of all, the software that they use has been improved on and works great! Anyone can set it up quickly and simply(auto recognizes your gpu's). Secondly, the energy you consume to provide the work(mining) goes toward a good cause(folding proteins).

If all coins were more efficient we could make use of that waste to do something meaningful. Mining just to give rank of coin distribution is wasteful. Current & future technologies will allow coin rank distribution while also making good use of the work that's put-in to provide those results. It's up to us to make use of those technologies. More efficient systems usually always win in the long run(end).

But this isn't really mining at all, is it? There's nothing recorded as proof-of-work and no coin base claim.  It's just a manual giveaway of skull coin based on folding@home metrics.