Topic: [ANN][XC] >> Mandatory Update to new Wallet - The first POS X11 anonymous wallet - page 223. (Read 268553 times)
May 24, 2014, 10:35:40 AM
I feel X11coin DEV actively, so I like this coin, support XC. Come on, Everybody
May 24, 2014, 10:30:52 AM
I wanted to provide some details on the original design and code in regards to POW and POS. The original intent was that POS would provide a reduction in POW blocks, reducing the total POW mined coins.. as stake weight increases - POW blocks decrease thus reducing daily POW coins..... the concept was that by staking, your protecting your investment and also making POW less profitable by up to 50%... none of the "profit" calculators take this into consideration...
so for everybody who wants less POW coins - start staking NOW.. coins on exchanges don't stake...but I specifically chose an 8hour stake time so you could pull coins into wallet nightly for staking
BUMP
This is pointless. Cinni has a higher PoS of 3.5% and they have only minted 12,965 PoS coins in the last 6 weeks (since creation). So, we are going to rush to staking so we can reduce the supply by around 100,000 coins max at the end of 2 months PoW (rough estimate)? That won't solve any of the distribution issues.
reward is so huge and dumping come quickly.
we are at crucial stage!
if succeed, we will among top 10; if we get dumped like this, other coins with "ANON" will replace us.
Battbot, please convince dev to work out a constructive plan.
i see a bright future in vision of security/cloud computing/mobility.
but at this stage, we have to make sure deliver X-MODE on time and make decision on supply mode!
+2.. please don't let the major hashing supply kill the coin. They have done it to so many other coins. Don't let it happen to our XCoin!
May 24, 2014, 10:30:15 AM
In order to stake we just need to unlock the wallet and leave it open correct?
I know it has to be unlocked, I am not sure about it being open. I never got a clear answer on that one, or I just missed the response.yes to stake you need to have wallet opened, unlocked and make sure "stake" only is checked (for security) -if your wallet isn't encrypted then you don't need to unlock, however I wouldn't advise that - everybody should their encrypt wallet's
where is the stake only option at?
if your wallet is encrypted, when you hit "unlock" wallet, there is a check box (auto-checked by default) that says stake only - this prevents RPC calls from being able to send coins and keeps your wallet secure while staking
also another thing to review is your X11Coin.conf file for your RPC user name and password, if you are using the defaults you should change to a secure passworrd
also where is the X11coin.conf file? I tried searching in the windows wallet downloaded folder and I cant find it.
under %appdata%/roaming/X11Coin - your wallet is in there, back it up to USB while your taking a look :-)
May 24, 2014, 10:29:49 AM
In order to stake we just need to unlock the wallet and leave it open correct?
I know it has to be unlocked, I am not sure about it being open. I never got a clear answer on that one, or I just missed the response.yes to stake you need to have wallet opened, unlocked and make sure "stake" only is checked (for security) -if your wallet isn't encrypted then you don't need to unlock, however I wouldn't advise that - everybody should their encrypt wallet's
where is the stake only option at?
if your wallet is encrypted, when you hit "unlock" wallet, there is a check box (auto-checked by default) that says stake only - this prevents RPC calls from being able to send coins and keeps your wallet secure while staking
also another thing to review is your X11Coin.conf file for your RPC user name and password, if you are using the defaults you should change to a secure passworrd
also where is the X11coin.conf file? I tried searching in the windows wallet downloaded folder and I cant find it.
May 24, 2014, 10:29:31 AM
I wanted to provide some details on the original design and code in regards to POW and POS. The original intent was that POS would provide a reduction in POW blocks, reducing the total POW mined coins.. as stake weight increases - POW blocks decrease thus reducing daily POW coins..... the concept was that by staking, your protecting your investment and also making POW less profitable by up to 50%... none of the "profit" calculators take this into consideration...
so for everybody who wants less POW coins - start staking NOW.. coins on exchanges don't stake...but I specifically chose an 8hour stake time so you could pull coins into wallet nightly for staking
BUMP
This is pointless. Cinni has a higher PoS of 3.5% and they have only minted 12,965 PoS coins in the last 6 weeks (since creation). And let's remember that Cinni has had 15m coins staking since day 3. XC has a far less number of coins staking. So, we are going to rush to staking so we can reduce the supply by around 100,000 coins max at the end of 2 months PoW (generous estimate)? That won't solve any of the distribution issues.
Well there a few things to consider, the intent of POS was to reduce POW blocks once it kicked in, Cinni has a 3day minimum stake time, while XC is 8hours, so it is slightly different, but I understand your viewpoint and until I have the hard #'s from the data analytic's, I won't have exact answers, but I can see from the block explorer that we not getting 50% POS blocks currently so that needs to fully vetted and the code adjusted to work as originally designed
I will circle back around to this issue tonight after I review all the data from the blockchain. I think we can put this issue to rest for now as I have gone through everybody's input on the issue at hand
May 24, 2014, 10:27:47 AM
I wanted to provide some details on the original design and code in regards to POW and POS. The original intent was that POS would provide a reduction in POW blocks, reducing the total POW mined coins.. as stake weight increases - POW blocks decrease thus reducing daily POW coins..... the concept was that by staking, your protecting your investment and also making POW less profitable by up to 50%... none of the "profit" calculators take this into consideration...
so for everybody who wants less POW coins - start staking NOW.. coins on exchanges don't stake...but I specifically chose an 8hour stake time so you could pull coins into wallet nightly for staking
BUMP
This is pointless. Cinni has a higher PoS of 3.5% and they have only minted 12,965 PoS coins in the last 6 weeks (since creation). So, we are going to rush to staking so we can reduce the supply by around 100,000 coins max at the end of 2 months PoW (rough estimate)? That won't solve any of the distribution issues.
reward is so huge and dumping come quickly.
we are at crucial stage!
if succeed, we will among top 10; if we get dumped like this, other coins with "ANON" will replace us.
Battbot, please convince dev to work out a constructive plan.
i see a bright future in vision of security/cloud computing/mobility.
but at this stage, we have to make sure deliver X-MODE on time and make decision on supply mode!
May 24, 2014, 10:20:31 AM
I wanted to provide some details on the original design and code in regards to POW and POS. The original intent was that POS would provide a reduction in POW blocks, reducing the total POW mined coins.. as stake weight increases - POW blocks decrease thus reducing daily POW coins..... the concept was that by staking, your protecting your investment and also making POW less profitable by up to 50%... none of the "profit" calculators take this into consideration...
so for everybody who wants less POW coins - start staking NOW.. coins on exchanges don't stake...but I specifically chose an 8hour stake time so you could pull coins into wallet nightly for staking
BUMP
This is pointless. Cinni has a higher PoS of 3.5% and they have only minted 12,965 PoS coins in the last 6 weeks (since creation). So, we are going to rush to staking so we can reduce the supply by around 100,000 coins max at the end of 2 months PoW (rough estimate)? That won't solve any of the distribution issues.
reward is so huge and dumping come quickly.
we are at crucial stage!
if succeed, we will among top 10; if we get dumped like this, other coins with "ANON" will replace us.
Battbot, please convince dev to work out a constructive plan.
i see a bright future in vision of security/cloud computing/mobility.
but at this stage, we have to make sure deliver X-MODE on time and make decision on supply mode!
May 24, 2014, 10:14:30 AM
I wanted to provide some details on the original design and code in regards to POW and POS. The original intent was that POS would provide a reduction in POW blocks, reducing the total POW mined coins.. as stake weight increases - POW blocks decrease thus reducing daily POW coins..... the concept was that by staking, your protecting your investment and also making POW less profitable by up to 50%... none of the "profit" calculators take this into consideration...
so for everybody who wants less POW coins - start staking NOW.. coins on exchanges don't stake...but I specifically chose an 8hour stake time so you could pull coins into wallet nightly for staking
BUMP
This is pointless. Cinni has a higher PoS of 3.5% and they have only minted 12,965 PoS coins in the last 6 weeks (since creation). And let's remember that Cinni has had 15m coins staking since day 3. XC has a far less number of coins staking. So, we are going to rush to staking so we can reduce the supply by around 100,000 coins max at the end of 2 months PoW (generous estimate)? That won't solve any of the distribution issues.
May 24, 2014, 10:11:02 AM
I wanted to provide some details on the original design and code in regards to POW and POS. The original intent was that POS would provide a reduction in POW blocks, reducing the total POW mined coins.. as stake weight increases - POW blocks decrease thus reducing daily POW coins..... the concept was that by staking, your protecting your investment and also making POW less profitable by up to 50%... none of the "profit" calculators take this into consideration...
so for everybody who wants less POW coins - start staking NOW.. coins on exchanges don't stake...but I specifically chose an 8hour stake time so you could pull coins into wallet nightly for staking
BUMP
May 24, 2014, 10:07:07 AM
I have yet to hear one solid argument or reasoning from the camp that proposes nothing be changed to XC's code. All I hear from this camp are personal insults -- how can they be taken seriously then? I for one do not take anything they have to say seriously.
Besides insults, they make the argument that "This is the dev's original plan" -- Are you serious? This is an argument? Businesses in the real world adapt to meet the demands of competitive markets all the time. If a potential superior business plan is proposed by one of the team, it would only be ignorance and poor management to not give it serious consideration. And good businesses listen to the ideas and innovations of their employees. All of this is the same for any alt coin.
Other than this, they make the argument that "The coin will be successful no matter what" -- The argument was never that XC would NOT be successful. I have repeatedly stated that they will be successful if they deliver anon tech. The argument however, is that XC's success and longevity will be optimized if they change the mining phase to either reduce total supply (by reducing PoW mining phase/rewards) or if they extend PoW mining for years (by greatly reducing block rewards).
Again: The main problem with XC is that 75% of the total coin supply will be minted in a 2 month period AFTER it's biggest selling point has already been delivered. This is what I am proposing needs to be addressed by either of the options above.
Either the 75% supply # needs to be reduced with a shorter PoW phase, or it can stay the same but have a PoW phase that is extended to years with reduce block rewards. One of these should happen if you want to protect and ensure the highest chance of longevity for this coin.
Besides insults, they make the argument that "This is the dev's original plan" -- Are you serious? This is an argument? Businesses in the real world adapt to meet the demands of competitive markets all the time. If a potential superior business plan is proposed by one of the team, it would only be ignorance and poor management to not give it serious consideration. And good businesses listen to the ideas and innovations of their employees. All of this is the same for any alt coin.
Other than this, they make the argument that "The coin will be successful no matter what" -- The argument was never that XC would NOT be successful. I have repeatedly stated that they will be successful if they deliver anon tech. The argument however, is that XC's success and longevity will be optimized if they change the mining phase to either reduce total supply (by reducing PoW mining phase/rewards) or if they extend PoW mining for years (by greatly reducing block rewards).
Again: The main problem with XC is that 75% of the total coin supply will be minted in a 2 month period AFTER it's biggest selling point has already been delivered. This is what I am proposing needs to be addressed by either of the options above.
Either the 75% supply # needs to be reduced with a shorter PoW phase, or it can stay the same but have a PoW phase that is extended to years with reduce block rewards. One of these should happen if you want to protect and ensure the highest chance of longevity for this coin.
We need more data analytic's on the blockchain and current POS/POW blocks... but I would be interested in getting some details on people who are staking, and their current stake weight stats...
Probably around 50% of coins will always be tied up in markets. And there is no way stakes at 3.33% annually will be reducing the total supply of 33.3M more than 1 million coins in two months. I would be surprised if PoS blocks counted for more than 1 million XC.
Cinni is PoS 3.5% and they have only minted 12,965 PoS coins in the last 6 weeks (since creation). So, yea, that should give you an estimate.
Because the 3~10% year interest never make coins stay in the wallet
That's very very simple
The price up and down over 20~50% in one day. Then it's more good to cell upper price than keep the coin in the wallet
Interests can't keep people's mind. The plan and dev's move keep people's mind
May 24, 2014, 10:06:40 AM
In order to stake we just need to unlock the wallet and leave it open correct?
I know it has to be unlocked, I am not sure about it being open. I never got a clear answer on that one, or I just missed the response.yes to stake you need to have wallet opened, unlocked and make sure "stake" only is checked (for security) -if your wallet isn't encrypted then you don't need to unlock, however I wouldn't advise that - everybody should their encrypt wallet's
where is the stake only option at?
if your wallet is encrypted, when you hit "unlock" wallet, there is a check box (auto-checked by default) that says stake only - this prevents RPC calls from being able to send coins and keeps your wallet secure while staking
also another thing to review is your X11Coin.conf file for your RPC user name and password, if you are using the defaults you should change to a secure passworrd
May 24, 2014, 10:03:32 AM
can somebody put together a top 100 wallet link?
I am deploying the mainnet infrastructure today for the x-mode feature so I don't have the time at the moment
May 24, 2014, 10:02:51 AM
In order to stake we just need to unlock the wallet and leave it open correct?
I know it has to be unlocked, I am not sure about it being open. I never got a clear answer on that one, or I just missed the response.yes to stake you need to have wallet opened, unlocked and make sure "stake" only is checked (for security) -if your wallet isn't encrypted then you don't need to unlock, however I wouldn't advise that - everybody should their encrypt wallet's
where is the stake only option at?
May 24, 2014, 10:02:18 AM
On the renaming topic - I've narrowed it down to either just "X" or "XC" - thoughts?
While I am a fan of either -- just X or XC may make it hard to find in things like search engines -- just something to be aware of. I am sure there are ways to get around this though.
Darkcoin was originally called xcoin. So ya, that is not an option.
May 24, 2014, 10:01:38 AM
On the renaming topic - I've narrowed it down to either just "X" or "XC" - thoughts?
Xcoin!
but wallet is priority. i am so excited, feeling buying 0.1 usd ltc.
May 24, 2014, 10:00:00 AM
XCoin is a pretty sexy name, there's no denying it.
May 24, 2014, 09:54:09 AM
On the renaming topic - I've narrowed it down to either just "X" or "XC" - thoughts?
May 24, 2014, 09:46:33 AM
Probably around 50% of coins will always be tied up in markets. And there is no way stakes at 3.33% annually will be reducing the total supply of 33.3M more than 1 million coins in two months. I would be surprised if PoS blocks counted for more than 1 million XC.
Cinni is PoS 3.5% and they have only minted 12,965 PoS coins in the last 6 weeks (since creation). So, yea, that should give you an estimate.
Cinni is PoS 3.5% and they have only minted 12,965 PoS coins in the last 6 weeks (since creation). So, yea, that should give you an estimate.
I'll need to gather the blockchain data since POS kicked to see the exact numbers - if anybody has some free time and can dump the blockchain stats into a CSV (since POS started) file I would appreciate it
May 24, 2014, 09:46:21 AM
I have yet to hear one solid argument or reasoning from the camp that proposes nothing be changed to XC's code. All I hear from this camp are personal insults -- how can they be taken seriously then? I for one do not take anything they have to say seriously.
Besides insults, they make the argument that "This is the dev's original plan" -- Are you serious? This is an argument? Businesses in the real world adapt to meet the demands of competitive markets all the time. If a potential superior business plan is proposed by one of the team, it would only be ignorance and poor management to not give it serious consideration. And good businesses listen to the ideas and innovations of their employees. All of this is the same for any alt coin.
Other than this, they make the argument that "The coin will be successful no matter what" -- The argument was never that XC would NOT be successful. I have repeatedly stated that they will be successful if they deliver anon tech. The argument however, is that XC's success and longevity will be optimized if they change the mining phase to either reduce total supply (by reducing PoW mining phase/rewards) or if they extend PoW mining for years (by greatly reducing block rewards).
Again: The main problem with XC is that 75% of the total coin supply will be minted in a 2 month period AFTER it's biggest selling point has already been delivered. This is what I am proposing needs to be addressed by either of the options above.
Either the 75% supply # needs to be reduced with a shorter PoW phase, or it can stay the same but have a PoW phase that is extended to years with reduce block rewards. One of these should happen if you want to protect and ensure the highest chance of longevity for this coin.
Besides insults, they make the argument that "This is the dev's original plan" -- Are you serious? This is an argument? Businesses in the real world adapt to meet the demands of competitive markets all the time. If a potential superior business plan is proposed by one of the team, it would only be ignorance and poor management to not give it serious consideration. And good businesses listen to the ideas and innovations of their employees. All of this is the same for any alt coin.
Other than this, they make the argument that "The coin will be successful no matter what" -- The argument was never that XC would NOT be successful. I have repeatedly stated that they will be successful if they deliver anon tech. The argument however, is that XC's success and longevity will be optimized if they change the mining phase to either reduce total supply (by reducing PoW mining phase/rewards) or if they extend PoW mining for years (by greatly reducing block rewards).
Again: The main problem with XC is that 75% of the total coin supply will be minted in a 2 month period AFTER it's biggest selling point has already been delivered. This is what I am proposing needs to be addressed by either of the options above.
Either the 75% supply # needs to be reduced with a shorter PoW phase, or it can stay the same but have a PoW phase that is extended to years with reduce block rewards. One of these should happen if you want to protect and ensure the highest chance of longevity for this coin.
We need more data analytic's on the blockchain and current POS/POW blocks... but I would be interested in getting some details on people who are staking, and their current stake weight stats...
Probably around 50% of coins will always be tied up in markets. And there is no way stakes at 3.33% annually will be reducing the total supply of 33.3M more than 1 million coins in two months. I would be surprised if PoS blocks counted for more than 1 million XC.
Cinni is PoS 3.5% and they have only minted 12,965 PoS coins in the last 6 weeks (since creation). So, yea, that should give you an estimate.
May 24, 2014, 09:44:49 AM
I have yet to hear one solid argument or reasoning from the camp that proposes nothing be changed to XC's code. All I hear from this camp are personal insults -- how can they be taken seriously then? I for one do not take anything they have to say seriously.
Besides insults, they make the argument that "This is the dev's original plan" -- Are you serious? This is an argument? Businesses in the real world adapt to meet the demands of competitive markets all the time. If a potential superior business plan is proposed by one of the team, it would only be ignorance and poor management to not give it serious consideration. And good businesses listen to the ideas and innovations of their employees. All of this is the same for any alt coin.
Other than this, they make the argument that "The coin will be successful no matter what" -- The argument was never that XC would NOT be successful. I have repeatedly stated that they will be successful if they deliver anon tech. The argument however, is that XC's success and longevity will be optimized if they change the mining phase to either reduce total supply (by reducing PoW mining phase/rewards) or if they extend PoW mining for years (by greatly reducing block rewards).
Again: The main problem with XC is that 75% of the total coin supply will be minted in a 2 month period AFTER it's biggest selling point has already been delivered. This is what I am proposing needs to be addressed by either of the options above.
Either the 75% supply # needs to be reduced with a shorter PoW phase, or it can stay the same but have a PoW phase that is extended to years with reduce block rewards. One of these should happen if you want to protect and ensure the highest chance of longevity for this coin.
Besides insults, they make the argument that "This is the dev's original plan" -- Are you serious? This is an argument? Businesses in the real world adapt to meet the demands of competitive markets all the time. If a potential superior business plan is proposed by one of the team, it would only be ignorance and poor management to not give it serious consideration. And good businesses listen to the ideas and innovations of their employees. All of this is the same for any alt coin.
Other than this, they make the argument that "The coin will be successful no matter what" -- The argument was never that XC would NOT be successful. I have repeatedly stated that they will be successful if they deliver anon tech. The argument however, is that XC's success and longevity will be optimized if they change the mining phase to either reduce total supply (by reducing PoW mining phase/rewards) or if they extend PoW mining for years (by greatly reducing block rewards).
Again: The main problem with XC is that 75% of the total coin supply will be minted in a 2 month period AFTER it's biggest selling point has already been delivered. This is what I am proposing needs to be addressed by either of the options above.
Either the 75% supply # needs to be reduced with a shorter PoW phase, or it can stay the same but have a PoW phase that is extended to years with reduce block rewards. One of these should happen if you want to protect and ensure the highest chance of longevity for this coin.
We need more data analytic's on the blockchain and current POS/POW blocks... but I would be interested in getting some details on people who are staking, and their current stake weight stats...
Jump to: