Topic: [ANN][VRC] VeriCoin Proof of Stake-Time Currency | New Roadmap Released - page 329. (Read 1356147 times)

it will rebound, don't you worry

why? because

-summertime  
-because TA voodoo tells so  
-altcryptos are serious business and not about catching the next pump  
-because "insert name of coin you baghold" will be the next crypto messiah  
-other stupid arguments to keep them bagholders bagholding. or buying more (how evil)

I FEEL SO BAD FOR THE DEVS HERE...

Patrick, not ALL Vericoin investors are complete idiots who feel the need to become a victim because they are now bagholding.  Some people here probably can't even see their own dick beneath their belly, let alone 6 months from now and the hard work that will be done.

Zach

What...the...fuck?
The amount of times I've seen "how can the stake amount possibly be above the coin amount" along with the thorough answers to the question, yet people still don't understand? I realize why I never get involved with this forum, too many vacuous people.

That is exactly how I picture Barabbass typing behind his computer monitor!

lol

No no no Patrick, you simply refuse to acknowledge the reality here. There's no "silliness" in claiming that maybe as much as DOUBLE the real amount of coins staking is actually staking. Thank you for your attempt at explaining this but no, sorry, you are WRONG. The 28+ million figure is the weighted amount staking, right? My claim -far from silly- is that probably only HALF of that amount ion REAL coins is actually sitting in open wallets, while the rest is either in pre-staking situation or, in most major amount, simply sitting in the exchanges, NOT staking at all. So we are not talking a "10% higher". We are talking much, much, MUUUUUCH higher than 10%.

Now, if EVEN 10% is higher indeed, how does that additional staking not influence the inflation level? how is "no interest is being earned beyond the ~1.5-2.5% per year" possible if the staking "coins", in HUGELY BIGGER NUMBERS than the real coins, are staking and therefore producing new coins? Let's provide an scenario where the average number of phantom coins during the year is 30 million, while the real amount of coins is 27 million. If the interest produced is 2.5% we will end up the year with 750k more new VRCs, right? That would be 2.77777% of the TOTAL real coins (those that staked and those that did not). Now, assuming the REAL amount of coins that staked, averaged let's say 18 million, we will find that those coins got 4.17% instead of the maximum of 2.5%. And that is, obviously, not even counting the staking of those coins staked along the way themselves... where's my math wrong in this scenario?

I'll tell you what, right now, you know, positively, the exact number of coins that are in the exchanges, NOT staking. You should have them all at the top of the rich list -very easy to know which ones are bittrex, cryptsy and mintpal, the most significant. How many millions are now there. Those are NOT staking at all. Deduct them from the 28 million and you will see immediately that the figure is far from 10% and most definitely can't be called "not too much bigger". And that doesn't include, of course, those coins waiting to stake in the different wallets that have not reached the 8 hours threshold maturity. What exactly is the "silliness"??

About the "phenomenon" I will investigate if it does happen in other coins. It is not difficult when there are so many coins with much less than 27 million coins total so I'll make sure to bring back some preliminary results of my investigation asap.

I'm not sure how many times we can say this, but no, there's no "hugely bigger number" of staked coins vs coins. There can never be more than the coin count staked at once. The weight of some of the coins can be slightly higher, say 10% higher, for example. But in no way is this hugely bigger and it's simply how staking works. Every PoS coin has this. I'm not sure where you get your 10M-250k vs 20M number, but that's not possible. The interest rate is the interest rate is the interest rate. There's no fake coins or pseudo coins hovering around. The rate is slightly higher than the real coin count right now because some of those coins weren't staking before and now are so they are gaining the interest from when they were last spent, resetting their coin age.

Imagine this scenario:

You have 1000 VRC, continuously staking. They stake 1095 times a year roughly (365*8 hrs compounded) and earn 1/1095*0.023 (2.3% interest) or 0.0109785203 VRC per stake.
Your friend has 1000 VRC, staking for the first time in 1 month. That means they earn 30*8/1095*0.023 (30 days * 8 hr cycles at 2.3% interest) or 5.04109589 VRC per stake.

For that time when the 1000 VRC staked for the first time in a month is staking, they are earning that month's worth of interest and making the net stake weight slightly higher until their stake is complete.

This is how staking works. This is why the network stake weight is inflated beyond the coin count right now because some coins are staking often due to not having a large coin age. No other PoS coin has ever gone above the total coin count in my memory so nobody has ever noticed this phenomenon before.

But either way, no interest is being earned beyond the ~1.5-2.5% per year. You are full of silliness claiming that there's a "hugely bigger number" of coins staking.

[...]And pretending that this is making a mountain out of a mole hill is NOT, definitely, the proper perspective.

Whatever this is, is something neither Patrick nor Doug quite understand, which in itself is very worrysome.

To me if 10 million coins stake for a year, the maximum number of new coins produced would be 250k. Now if those same 10 million are indeed REALLY staking, but the phantom figure is 20 million instead, the resulting amount of coin s produced at the end of the year would be 500k instead, thus resulting in a 5% inflation instead of the 2.5%.

Well it is not an easy thing to understand... especially if if it not put bin the proper perspective, so there's no beating any dead horse, it is, in fact, a very alive horse no matter how you choose to look at it. And pretending that this is making a mountain out of a mole hill is NOT, definitely, the proper perspective. Whatever this is, is something neither Patrick nor Doug quite understand, which in itself is very worrysome. I think we all agree that it is an immediate need to have a wallet that tells us how many REAL coins are staking at any and all times, that doesn't need repeating and should be implemented as a very top, top priority.

The real worrysome part, though is the "not too much bigger number". Again, it is a hugely bigger number in fact and, so far, we have no idea how such a huge number staking is not going to produce an inflation way superior to 2.5% annually. That is a MAJOR concern, not a mole hill. And, quite frankly, I don't believe the devs actually know how that network weighted stake is going to en up affecting the actual number of coins produced. We, the average investors, certainly do not. You are probably not an average investor and maybe you do know how 28+ million coins staking are going to produce less than 2.5% interest in half that amount of coins. If you do, I'd appreciate enormously that you explain it to me and to all here in layman's terms more or less. To me if 10 million coins stake for a year, the maximum number of new coins produced would be 250k. Now if those same 10 million are indeed REALLY staking, but the phantom figure is 20 million instead, the resulting amount of coin s produced at the end of the year would be 500k instead, thus resulting in a 5% inflation instead of the 2.5%.

I'm sure I'm making my rudimentary calculations erroneously, but I am equally sure you, the devs and other gifted mathematicians can clear fast and easily my error and set me on the right track within seconds. I'll be waiting.

You're making a mountain out of a mole hill. There are no fake numbers, unless you count the ones that you fabricated in your post while attempting to make some point. The stake weight number, which factors in both the quantity AND age of the coins in a block, is a valid number and it's a crucial part of the PoS system.

The crux of the matter is the fact that, while the sum total of the stake weight for every block that's staking is useful for getting a relative feel for how many coins are staking, it can obviously be a misleading number. It would make more sense to the end user for the wallet to display the actual number of coins staking, but as pnosker stated and effects elaborated upon, there is currently no function in place to display that number.

So what should we do? Should we ignorantly shout, "THIS IS BULLSHIT!!" and allude to suspicious behavior on the part of the devs? Or should we perhaps try to understand what that number actually represents and/or ask the devs if they can provide us with a different number that is a more accurate representation of the number of coins staking? I vote for the later.

It sounds like this feature can be added and that effects actually intends to add it to a future build. Let's not beat a dead horse.

I don't think I am hard at all simply putting out very obvious concerns of everyone that is invested in this coin. I mean, I have been stating many times during the past weeks how strong this community is in support of the coin, based on those staking numbers and now I have discovered they are absolutely meaningless. Not only that, while not-too-sharp choir boy socal and other fan boys put on the tin foil to "explain" the spiral in price, the apparent growth of staking figures made almost impossible for anyone to have any coins at the exchanges. And a lot of people do. And a lot of people, is, obviously, selling. Much more than buying (that's why the price goes down). So I believe I have been actually quite mild in clearing up a bit -still far from being quite clear, by the way-, the mess of the "fake" numbers (for lack of a better word).

Perspective: A max of 28+ "coins" were staking yesterday at some point. Historical maximum. Now, since the total coins in existence were 26.8 mill, we have found there are somewhat "ghost", "fake", whatever "coins" that appear in that tracking tool that don't really exist (I am still struggling with how those appear and, more worrysome, DO stake). Patrick has kindly try his best at explaining that somehow, even though they are staking, the whole interest to be created, yearly, will not increment to more than 2.5% annually. That's reassuring but certainly it doesn't look even remotely that way from what we now know... which is very little.

This divergence between the real coins and the Phantom coins staking, according to Doug, the wallet man, would not be "too much bigger"... I hope I have demonstrated clearly that the difference can be as significant as to actually DOUBLE the number of the real coins: My contention is that while the Phantom number reached over 28 million yesterday, they real number could be, in fact, half of that. Or even less. And I explained why: The amount of coins currently deposited in the exchanges and NOT STAKING, in my opinion would be at least 6-8 million, probably more. Add to that the "in transit" coins or otherwise not live (staking) coins -they need a minimum of 8 hours to begin staking-, and you can end up with a lot of coins that are not staking and therefore are not part of of those record 28+m.

Finally, additionally, 28+ million coins staking stake quite a bit of coins. Those staked coins are not PHANTOM coins, they are real. So real that, after 8 hours, they stake themselves, thus increasing the total number of coins in existence. Again, Patrick insisted that no more than 2.5% will be staked by any coin in any year. That's, again, reassuring, but the reality of the picture I just put, again, in perspective, makes it quite difficult to really believe.

I believe these are matters of great significance and need to be clear out completely so investors know where they have invested and retain their confidence in the project. Much more important that the spiral of the price that I have pointed out many times already is not VRC's affair but every other similar coin out there.

As for the not-so-sharp, bots are not market manipulators, bots are machine traders programmed to buy and sell minimal amounts for minimal profits. They don't manipulate the price at all. If a bot buys 800 sat below the previous price, 20 VRC, that's not manipulating anything, just following a program. The bot will buy just the same if the price is propped up by a big buyer. And will sell it likewise, regardless of the price. Once again: The price is going down for the simplest and always true of reasons: There are more sellers than buyers.

Also clarifying for the not-so-sharp, volume is quite different from inflows. The former indicates there's trading taken place; the later indicates there's investing occurring. If one or more traders take it to VRC and they buy and sell a lot, not only they do it but the bots also do it -that's what their program does-, thus resulting in very high volume... and not necessarily any real movement in price; on the other hand if a lot of people buys VRC but don't sell it, it is called inflow and means people is investing, buying VRC, bringing new money to it. And the price, mathematically, goes higher. In technical terms, it is called hitting the bid (dumping) or hitting the ask (pumping). Clear now Will?

Noob at trading here - but I am looking o invest more in vrc at this price but need some help. Is it better to put buy orders in in many ranges or would it be better to just assist in creating a bigger buy wall at 11k  ?

it has to triple in value to reach what it was before in value..
i bet a LOT of guys have lost a LOT of money so far..