[ANN][XC] >> Mandatory Update to new Wallet - The first POS X11 anonymous wallet - page 138.

Quote from: battbot on May 27, 2014, 01:45:03 AM

I've been watching this coin with interest and I have to say, I don't understand the great rush with things. Why the need to transition to POS right away? If the coin isn't well distributed there's a risk of a 51% attack by a big holder having coins on minting. Is there even a distribution list/chart for the POW coins?

Because there are FPGA's accounting for about 60-70% of the net hash. That is why.

FPGA x11 code: http://cryptography.gmu.edu/athena/index.php?id=source_codes

Okay but isn't that jumping from one security problem to another? Isn't anyone concerned about uneven distribution of staking wallets, considering a large number of coins will be bound up on exchanges?

Exchange wallets do not stake. They disable stake. This can be confirmed by bittrex-richie (bittrex) and tf2honeybadger (poloniex).

That's what I mean. Coins on exchanges won't be staking thereby reducing the number of coins you would need to have 51% of minting coins. Am I wrong?

You think there is a bagholder so big that they own 51% of XC now...?

I'm saying they wouldn't need all 51% of coins, just 51% of the ones currently staking, if I figure it correctly. There could be a big holder who could do that. There's reports of lots of centralised hash and the coin hasn't been on POW or distributing on exchanges very long to even it out. There's a question around it, is what I'm saying.

Thrash

sr. member

Activity: 519

Merit: 253

Quote from: Pizpie on May 27, 2014, 01:52:19 AM

I've been watching this coin with interest and I have to say, I don't understand the great rush with things. Why the need to transition to POS right away? If the coin isn't well distributed there's a risk of a 51% attack by a big holder having coins on minting. Is there even a distribution list/chart for the POW coins?

Because there are FPGA's accounting for about 60-70% of the net hash. That is why.

FPGA x11 code: http://cryptography.gmu.edu/athena/index.php?id=source_codes

Okay but isn't that jumping from one security problem to another? Isn't anyone concerned about uneven distribution of staking wallets, considering a large number of coins will be bound up on exchanges?

Exchange wallets do not stake. They disable stake. This can be confirmed by bittrex-richie (bittrex) and tf2honeybadger (poloniex).

That's what I mean. Coins on exchanges won't be staking thereby reducing the number of coins you would need to have 51% of minting coins. Am I wrong?

atcsecure would have to answer that one -- I'm not quite sure how it all works to be honest.

I do not want to answer for the dev but here is my take on it.

Let's say we end up at 5.6 million coins at the end of POW. (Using a low number as this is worse case scenario.) If 1/2 of the coins are on the exchanges that leaves 2.8 million in wallets for staking. If only 1/2 of the people keep there wallets unlocked and staking then that leaves 1.4 million coins staking. So a successful 51% would require 700,000 XC, about $500,000 US at current prices, which could happen but even if someone has that many I believe they would need to have knowledge and bad intentions to do damage. I doubt 1/2 of the coins will be on exchanges and I think as long as the coin is doing well it is likely more than 1/2 of them that are in wallets will be staking. Therefore not sure if it is something to be to concerned about at this time.

Please correct me if I am misunderstanding or have misrepresented anything.

CryptoGretzky

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Quote from: CryptoGretzky on May 27, 2014, 01:48:44 AM

Quote from: CryptoGretzky on May 27, 2014, 01:48:44 AM

I've been watching this coin with interest and I have to say, I don't understand the great rush with things. Why the need to transition to POS right away? If the coin isn't well distributed there's a risk of a 51% attack by a big holder having coins on minting. Is there even a distribution list/chart for the POW coins?

Because there are FPGA's accounting for about 60-70% of the net hash. That is why.

FPGA x11 code: http://cryptography.gmu.edu/athena/index.php?id=source_codes

Okay but isn't that jumping from one security problem to another? Isn't anyone concerned about uneven distribution of staking wallets, considering a large number of coins will be bound up on exchanges?

Exchange wallets do not stake. They disable stake. This can be confirmed by bittrex-richie (bittrex) and tf2honeybadger (poloniex).

That's what I mean. Coins on exchanges won't be staking thereby reducing the number of coins you would need to have 51% of minting coins. Am I wrong?

You think there is a bagholder so big that they own 51% of XC now...?

My goal is to own 51% and protect the price.

Me too.

Pizpie

legendary

Activity: 971

Merit: 1000

Quote from: fedmahnkassad on May 27, 2014, 01:45:13 AM

I've been watching this coin with interest and I have to say, I don't understand the great rush with things. Why the need to transition to POS right away? If the coin isn't well distributed there's a risk of a 51% attack by a big holder having coins on minting. Is there even a distribution list/chart for the POW coins?

Because there are FPGA's accounting for about 60-70% of the net hash. That is why.

FPGA x11 code: http://cryptography.gmu.edu/athena/index.php?id=source_codes

Okay but isn't that jumping from one security problem to another? Isn't anyone concerned about uneven distribution of staking wallets, considering a large number of coins will be bound up on exchanges?

Exchange wallets do not stake. They disable stake. This can be confirmed by bittrex-richie (bittrex) and tf2honeybadger (poloniex).

That's what I mean. Coins on exchanges won't be staking thereby reducing the number of coins you would need to have 51% of minting coins. Am I wrong?

You think there is a bagholder so big that they own 51% of XC now...?

My goal is to own 51% and protect the price.

zmhaha

sr. member

Activity: 260

Merit: 250

Quote from: cyberhacker on May 27, 2014, 01:40:00 AM

some one is preparing the multipool, which will push us upwards right after pow.

of course i think dev knows exactly what this coin nee and where it will be.

xnodes mean you don't really NEED multipool, but I guess it will still be good to have one

Why? Because xnodes create buy support?

CryptoGretzky

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Quote from: cyberhacker on May 27, 2014, 01:40:00 AM

I've been watching this coin with interest and I have to say, I don't understand the great rush with things. Why the need to transition to POS right away? If the coin isn't well distributed there's a risk of a 51% attack by a big holder having coins on minting. Is there even a distribution list/chart for the POW coins?

Because there are FPGA's accounting for about 60-70% of the net hash. That is why.

FPGA x11 code: http://cryptography.gmu.edu/athena/index.php?id=source_codes

Okay but isn't that jumping from one security problem to another? Isn't anyone concerned about uneven distribution of staking wallets, considering a large number of coins will be bound up on exchanges?

Exchange wallets do not stake. They disable stake. This can be confirmed by bittrex-richie (bittrex) and tf2honeybadger (poloniex).

That's what I mean. Coins on exchanges won't be staking thereby reducing the number of coins you would need to have 51% of minting coins. Am I wrong?

You think there is a bagholder so big that they own 51% of XC now...?

fedmahnkassad

hero member

Activity: 840

Merit: 500

Twitter: @FedKassad

some one is preparing the multipool, which will push us upwards right after pow.

of course i think dev knows exactly what this coin nee and where it will be.

xnodes mean you don't really NEED multipool, but I guess it will still be good to have one

zmhaha

sr. member

Activity: 260

Merit: 250

Quote from: fedmahnkassad on May 27, 2014, 01:27:31 AM

Quote from: atcsecure on May 26, 2014, 10:10:14 PM

I wanted to provide some more answers about the decentralized anonymous solution and how it will work

- 100XC to 1000XC's Required (#'s still being vetted)

- Any client having the required XC's can enable xnode option (windows, mac & linux wallets)

- xnodes will charge a fee which will be deducted from the transaction and kept in the local wallet << incentive based >>

- no masternode or supernode required to communicate xnodes to clients

- fully decentralized

Hope that answers all the questions, the majority of the code is already in the wallet and I expect a release supporting these features as outlined above to be available for testing in 3 weeks or less

This is really awesome. I am not sure if people realize how big this is. I guess it is possible to allow android phones to act as xnodes as well at a later stage?

Not until AT&T, Sprint, or T-Mobile update their network to 7G or 8G. A masternode is no longer master while on 4G.

battbot

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Quote from: battbot on May 27, 2014, 01:42:57 AM

I've been watching this coin with interest and I have to say, I don't understand the great rush with things. Why the need to transition to POS right away? If the coin isn't well distributed there's a risk of a 51% attack by a big holder having coins on minting. Is there even a distribution list/chart for the POW coins?

Because there are FPGA's accounting for about 60-70% of the net hash. That is why.

FPGA x11 code: http://cryptography.gmu.edu/athena/index.php?id=source_codes

Okay but isn't that jumping from one security problem to another? Isn't anyone concerned about uneven distribution of staking wallets, considering a large number of coins will be bound up on exchanges?

Exchange wallets do not stake. They disable stake. This can be confirmed by bittrex-richie (bittrex) and tf2honeybadger (poloniex).

That's what I mean. Coins on exchanges won't be staking thereby reducing the number of coins you would need to have 51% of minting coins. Am I wrong?

atcsecure would have to answer that one -- I'm not quite sure how it all works to be honest.

Thrash

sr. member

Activity: 519

Merit: 253

Thrash -- where are you finding that value of current money supply = 5,376,539 coins?

Thanks in advance

Use the RPC command getinfo either from the command line or in the debug window if using a Windoze wallet.

mannie

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: battbot on May 27, 2014, 01:32:25 AM

I've been watching this coin with interest and I have to say, I don't understand the great rush with things. Why the need to transition to POS right away? If the coin isn't well distributed there's a risk of a 51% attack by a big holder having coins on minting. Is there even a distribution list/chart for the POW coins?

Because there are FPGA's accounting for about 60-70% of the net hash. That is why.

FPGA x11 code: http://cryptography.gmu.edu/athena/index.php?id=source_codes

Okay but isn't that jumping from one security problem to another? Isn't anyone concerned about uneven distribution of staking wallets, considering a large number of coins will be bound up on exchanges?

Exchange wallets do not stake. They disable stake. This can be confirmed by bittrex-richie (bittrex) and tf2honeybadger (poloniex).

That's what I mean. Coins on exchanges won't be staking thereby reducing the number of coins you would need to have 51% of minting coins. Am I wrong?

battbot

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Thrash -- where are you finding that value of current money supply = 5,376,539 coins?

Thanks in advance

Thrash

sr. member

Activity: 519

Merit: 253

Quote from: Thrash on May 27, 2014, 01:21:52 AM

Ok, I'll try this again.

Last POW block is 21,000 and we are at 19980 as I type this leaving 1,020 blocks. If they are all POW blocks (they will not be) the max number of additional coins to be mined would be 339,660. If you add that to the current coin supply of 5,376,539 you get a max number of coins of 5,716,199.

Looks like about 25 hours of mining left. Get them while you can!

Where are you getting your numbers from? My calculator says 21,000 blocks at 333 coins per block = 6,993,000

From the wallet and a little math:

Current Money supply at the time of previous post was : 5,376,539 coins

Blocks left were 1020 so 1020 time 333 coins per block = 339,660 coins

Take the current supply and add it to the most coins the 1020 blocks could create: 5,376,539 + 339,660 = 5,716,199

This is due ot the POS blocks that have aleady been mined being less than 333. If all blocks had been POW and 333 coins then the current money supply would be 6,653,340 instead of the 5,376,539.

Also keep in mind that out of the last 20 blocks over 50% were POS so my guess would be around 5,611,199 for total money supply at the end of POW. But I could be wrong.

battbot

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

I've been watching this coin with interest and I have to say, I don't understand the great rush with things. Why the need to transition to POS right away? If the coin isn't well distributed there's a risk of a 51% attack by a big holder having coins on minting. Is there even a distribution list/chart for the POW coins?

Because there are FPGA's accounting for about 60-70% of the net hash. That is why.

FPGA x11 code: http://cryptography.gmu.edu/athena/index.php?id=source_codes

Okay but isn't that jumping from one security problem to another? Isn't anyone concerned about uneven distribution of staking wallets, considering a large number of coins will be bound up on exchanges?

Exchange wallets do not stake. They disable stake. This can be confirmed by bittrex-richie (bittrex) and tf2honeybadger (poloniex).

cyberhacker

legendary

Activity: 1330

Merit: 1000

some one is preparing the multipool, which will push us upwards right after pow.

of course i think dev knows exactly what this coin nee and where it will be.

mannie

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100