https://www.coinpayments.net/vote-results
Go vote!
Topic: [ANN][XMY] Myriad | Multi-Algo, Fair, Secure - page 176. (Read 849993 times)
4 hours 17 minutes remain until coinpayments.net voting ends and we are only 3 votes ahead of Asiacoin. If they overtake us, we lose.
Coinpayments.net is necessary to get merchants to adopt this coin. What does it say about the future of this coin if we don't win the vote? For fuck's sake any of you bludgers out there who haven't voted, VOTE! If you are invested in this coin more than a few bucks and you don't vote, you are officially an idiot for not protecting your investment. Unless you are invested in Asiacoin, in which case you are still officially an idiot.
Thank you to all those who have already voted.
Coinpayments.net is necessary to get merchants to adopt this coin. What does it say about the future of this coin if we don't win the vote? For fuck's sake any of you bludgers out there who haven't voted, VOTE! If you are invested in this coin more than a few bucks and you don't vote, you are officially an idiot for not protecting your investment. Unless you are invested in Asiacoin, in which case you are still officially an idiot.
Thank you to all those who have already voted.
Where is the list with current MYR position?
4 hours 17 minutes remain until coinpayments.net voting ends and we are only 3 votes ahead of Asiacoin. If they overtake us, we lose.
Coinpayments.net is necessary to get merchants to adopt this coin. What does it say about the future of this coin if we don't win the vote? For fuck's sake any of you bludgers out there who haven't voted, VOTE! If you are invested in this coin more than a few bucks and you don't vote, you are officially an idiot for not protecting your investment. Unless you are invested in Asiacoin, in which case you are still officially an idiot.
Thank you to all those who have already voted.
Coinpayments.net is necessary to get merchants to adopt this coin. What does it say about the future of this coin if we don't win the vote? For fuck's sake any of you bludgers out there who haven't voted, VOTE! If you are invested in this coin more than a few bucks and you don't vote, you are officially an idiot for not protecting your investment. Unless you are invested in Asiacoin, in which case you are still officially an idiot.
Thank you to all those who have already voted.
foodies i think youl be happy with this:
Proposal: Alternative solution to the multi-pool abuse and a check&balance to the fairness of coin distribution per Algorithm. Without changing difficulty re-targeting
This way we do not have to worry about the legitimate concern held fast by Foodies; in that changing the difficulty re-targeting structure currently in place.
(Each Algo = Difficulty re-targeting Per Block + 10 Block Lookback)
Simple:
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) is not > than the X%.
IF previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) IS > than the X%.THEN Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 - [absolute value of] X% change in change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback).
----
This will allow the market to handle the multi-pool problem because a multi-pool which targets MYR for profitability will have to also have to take into account that insta-mining 9+ blocks will not be profitable. Instead the multi-pool becomes our best friend in that if an algo is more profitable than bitcoin it will just mine 1 or 2 blocks because if it targets an algo with 1000+X the average difficulty of the last 10 blocks the % of coins will decrease proportional to the resulting massive increase in difficulty it will cause by doing so.
Also the 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% will be supported because instantly mining blocks will not occur as often.
This will also help but not entirely solve with the problem of a POSSIBLE (i dont know if that can happen) fork of the entire coin due to 9+ blocks of the same algo in a row rather than each algo solving blocks regularly.
...........................................
If you dont want to use average % of difficulty change over previous 10 blocks we c We can substitute it with the variable of TIME per block.
...........................................
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks (average TIME used in the 10 block lookback) is not > or < X% change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks - 2.5minutes. ... ... ... ..
..........................................
We all know there is a problem with a multi-pool mining 10 blocks of the same algo in a row near instantly. This way the difficulty retargets as usual so we dont run the risk of a frozen algo (as the 10block lookback intended).
Foodies it took me a while but i now see how important the 10block lookback is and the risk of changing it resulting in an impossibly high difficulty. thank you.
Proposal: Alternative solution to the multi-pool abuse and a check&balance to the fairness of coin distribution per Algorithm. Without changing difficulty re-targeting
This way we do not have to worry about the legitimate concern held fast by Foodies; in that changing the difficulty re-targeting structure currently in place.
(Each Algo = Difficulty re-targeting Per Block + 10 Block Lookback)
Simple:
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) is not > than the X%.
IF previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) IS > than the X%.THEN Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 - [absolute value of] X% change in change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback).
----
This will allow the market to handle the multi-pool problem because a multi-pool which targets MYR for profitability will have to also have to take into account that insta-mining 9+ blocks will not be profitable. Instead the multi-pool becomes our best friend in that if an algo is more profitable than bitcoin it will just mine 1 or 2 blocks because if it targets an algo with 1000+X the average difficulty of the last 10 blocks the % of coins will decrease proportional to the resulting massive increase in difficulty it will cause by doing so.
Also the 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% will be supported because instantly mining blocks will not occur as often.
This will also help but not entirely solve with the problem of a POSSIBLE (i dont know if that can happen) fork of the entire coin due to 9+ blocks of the same algo in a row rather than each algo solving blocks regularly.
...........................................
If you dont want to use average % of difficulty change over previous 10 blocks we c We can substitute it with the variable of TIME per block.
...........................................
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks (average TIME used in the 10 block lookback) is not > or < X% change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks - 2.5minutes. ... ... ... ..
..........................................
We all know there is a problem with a multi-pool mining 10 blocks of the same algo in a row near instantly. This way the difficulty retargets as usual so we dont run the risk of a frozen algo (as the 10block lookback intended).
Foodies it took me a while but i now see how important the 10block lookback is and the risk of changing it resulting in an impossibly high difficulty. thank you.
So what threshold would you recommend for the percentage change of difficulty that determines if a block gets less coin reward?
Feel free to ask for clarification or why this or that from the above.
I have some ideas but the threshhold is a very important variable.. other than the simple 0 to keep everything consistent for example:
If X =
X% then coins = 1000 - (X% of 1000)
(obviously The 1000 is the current # of coins block reward ..)
0% then coins = 1000 - (0% of 1000) = 1000
-X (X is less than 0) then coins = 1000
Any other threshhold idea than 0 may be complicated or contravercial so it may be best to let our Dev to decide unless otherwise stated by dev.
I'm getting 15 MYR/Day from a quad core i5 that only mines on a qubit pool while I'm not using the laptop for work. You may want to try to tweak your settings for better performance.
Mining doesn't guarantee profits. At least not if you sell immediately. That's valid in real life and in cryptos.
I know that. I'm long enough in this business. But 10 MYR per day is far too little. Either the algo is crap or my command line is wrong. Here it is:
I'm using QubitCoin-cpuminer.
at most considering cost and electricity.
On this list my AMD-A8 is not listed. Thank you anyway.
Thank you! I tried some different arguments but no improvement. Is Myriad really a coin for everyone? I'm trying Qubit right now on a 8-core 16 GB RAM machine and I get 0.4 MYR per hour. That's a joke!
Mining doesn't guarantee profits. At least not if you sell immediately. That's valid in real life and in cryptos.
Code:
./minerd -a qubit -o stratum+tcp://myr-qubit.cpu-pool.net:3590 -u xxx_1 -p x
at most considering cost and electricity.
foodies i think youl be happy with this:
Proposal: Alternative solution to the multi-pool abuse and a check&balance to the fairness of coin distribution per Algorithm. Without changing difficulty re-targeting
This way we do not have to worry about the legitimate concern held fast by Foodies; in that changing the difficulty re-targeting structure currently in place.
(Each Algo = Difficulty re-targeting Per Block + 10 Block Lookback)
Simple:
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) is not > than the X%.
IF previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) IS > than the X%.THEN Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 - [absolute value of] X% change in change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback).
----
This will allow the market to handle the multi-pool problem because a multi-pool which targets MYR for profitability will have to also have to take into account that insta-mining 9+ blocks will not be profitable. Instead the multi-pool becomes our best friend in that if an algo is more profitable than bitcoin it will just mine 1 or 2 blocks because if it targets an algo with 1000+X the average difficulty of the last 10 blocks the % of coins will decrease proportional to the resulting massive increase in difficulty it will cause by doing so.
Also the 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% will be supported because instantly mining blocks will not occur as often.
This will also help but not entirely solve with the problem of a POSSIBLE (i dont know if that can happen) fork of the entire coin due to 9+ blocks of the same algo in a row rather than each algo solving blocks regularly.
...........................................
If you dont want to use average % of difficulty change over previous 10 blocks we c We can substitute it with the variable of TIME per block.
...........................................
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks (average TIME used in the 10 block lookback) is not > or < X% change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks - 2.5minutes. ... ... ... ..
..........................................
We all know there is a problem with a multi-pool mining 10 blocks of the same algo in a row near instantly. This way the difficulty retargets as usual so we dont run the risk of a frozen algo (as the 10block lookback intended).
Foodies it took me a while but i now see how important the 10block lookback is and the risk of changing it resulting in an impossibly high difficulty. thank you.
Proposal: Alternative solution to the multi-pool abuse and a check&balance to the fairness of coin distribution per Algorithm. Without changing difficulty re-targeting
This way we do not have to worry about the legitimate concern held fast by Foodies; in that changing the difficulty re-targeting structure currently in place.
(Each Algo = Difficulty re-targeting Per Block + 10 Block Lookback)
Simple:
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) is not > than the X%.
IF previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) IS > than the X%.THEN Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 - [absolute value of] X% change in change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback).
----
This will allow the market to handle the multi-pool problem because a multi-pool which targets MYR for profitability will have to also have to take into account that insta-mining 9+ blocks will not be profitable. Instead the multi-pool becomes our best friend in that if an algo is more profitable than bitcoin it will just mine 1 or 2 blocks because if it targets an algo with 1000+X the average difficulty of the last 10 blocks the % of coins will decrease proportional to the resulting massive increase in difficulty it will cause by doing so.
Also the 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% will be supported because instantly mining blocks will not occur as often.
This will also help but not entirely solve with the problem of a POSSIBLE (i dont know if that can happen) fork of the entire coin due to 9+ blocks of the same algo in a row rather than each algo solving blocks regularly.
...........................................
If you dont want to use average % of difficulty change over previous 10 blocks we c We can substitute it with the variable of TIME per block.
...........................................
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks (average TIME used in the 10 block lookback) is not > or < X% change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks - 2.5minutes. ... ... ... ..
..........................................
We all know there is a problem with a multi-pool mining 10 blocks of the same algo in a row near instantly. This way the difficulty retargets as usual so we dont run the risk of a frozen algo (as the 10block lookback intended).
Foodies it took me a while but i now see how important the 10block lookback is and the risk of changing it resulting in an impossibly high difficulty. thank you.
So what threshold would you recommend for the percentage change of difficulty that determines if a block gets less coin reward?
I'm getting 15 MYR/Day from a quad core i5 that only mines on a qubit pool while I'm not using the laptop for work. You may want to try to tweak your settings for better performance.
Mining doesn't guarantee profits. At least not if you sell immediately. That's valid in real life and in cryptos.
I know that. I'm long enough in this business. But 10 MYR per day is far too little. Either the algo is crap or my command line is wrong. Here it is:
I'm using QubitCoin-cpuminer.
at most considering cost and electricity.
On this list my AMD-A8 is not listed. Thank you anyway.
Is Myriad really a coin for everyone? I'm trying Qubit right now on a 8-core 16 GB RAM machine and I get 0.4 MYR per hour. That's a joke!
Mining doesn't guarantee profits. At least not if you sell immediately. That's valid in real life and in cryptos.
Code:
./minerd -a qubit -o stratum+tcp://myr-qubit.cpu-pool.net:3590 -u xxx_1 -p x
at most considering cost and electricity.
VOTE FOR MYRIAD
please donate for dev.
BTC: 13MVMftimCmpQEsryo47pTs97ubmwkT31Y
LTC: Lh9ChfS1X3YWXmapr66nQjj3qZmys3qkNw
DOGE: DJMxzVrURhmsWFZHCjK5kDVHEqP5FcfGvy
BTC: 13MVMftimCmpQEsryo47pTs97ubmwkT31Y
LTC: Lh9ChfS1X3YWXmapr66nQjj3qZmys3qkNw
DOGE: DJMxzVrURhmsWFZHCjK5kDVHEqP5FcfGvy
foodies i think youl be happy with this:
Proposal: Alternative solution to the multi-pool abuse and a check&balance to the fairness of coin distribution per Algorithm. Without changing difficulty re-targeting
This way we do not have to worry about the legitimate concern held fast by Foodies; in that changing the difficulty re-targeting structure currently in place.
(Each Algo = Difficulty re-targeting Per Block + 10 Block Lookback)
Simple:
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) is not > than the X%.
IF previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) IS > than the X%.THEN Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 - [absolute value of] X% change in change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback).
----
This will allow the market to handle the multi-pool problem because a multi-pool which targets MYR for profitability will have to also have to take into account that insta-mining 9+ blocks will not be profitable. Instead the multi-pool becomes our best friend in that if an algo is more profitable than bitcoin it will just mine 1 or 2 blocks because if it targets an algo with 1000+X the average difficulty of the last 10 blocks the % of coins will decrease proportional to the resulting massive increase in difficulty it will cause by doing so.
Also the 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% will be supported because instantly mining blocks will not occur as often.
This will also help but not entirely solve with the problem of a POSSIBLE (i dont know if that can happen) fork of the entire coin due to 9+ blocks of the same algo in a row rather than each algo solving blocks regularly.
...........................................
If you dont want to use average % of difficulty change over previous 10 blocks we c We can substitute it with the variable of TIME per block.
...........................................
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks (average TIME used in the 10 block lookback) is not > or < X% change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks - 2.5minutes. ... ... ... ..
..........................................
We all know there is a problem with a multi-pool mining 10 blocks of the same algo in a row near instantly. This way the difficulty retargets as usual so we dont run the risk of a frozen algo (as the 10block lookback intended).
Foodies it took me a while but i now see how important the 10block lookback is and the risk of changing it resulting in an impossibly high difficulty. thank you.
Proposal: Alternative solution to the multi-pool abuse and a check&balance to the fairness of coin distribution per Algorithm. Without changing difficulty re-targeting
This way we do not have to worry about the legitimate concern held fast by Foodies; in that changing the difficulty re-targeting structure currently in place.
(Each Algo = Difficulty re-targeting Per Block + 10 Block Lookback)
Simple:
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) is not > than the X%.
IF previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) IS > than the X%.THEN Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 - [absolute value of] X% change in change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback).
----
This will allow the market to handle the multi-pool problem because a multi-pool which targets MYR for profitability will have to also have to take into account that insta-mining 9+ blocks will not be profitable. Instead the multi-pool becomes our best friend in that if an algo is more profitable than bitcoin it will just mine 1 or 2 blocks because if it targets an algo with 1000+X the average difficulty of the last 10 blocks the % of coins will decrease proportional to the resulting massive increase in difficulty it will cause by doing so.
Also the 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% will be supported because instantly mining blocks will not occur as often.
This will also help but not entirely solve with the problem of a POSSIBLE (i dont know if that can happen) fork of the entire coin due to 9+ blocks of the same algo in a row rather than each algo solving blocks regularly.
...........................................
If you dont want to use average % of difficulty change over previous 10 blocks we c We can substitute it with the variable of TIME per block.
...........................................
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks (average TIME used in the 10 block lookback) is not > or < X% change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks - 2.5minutes. ... ... ... ..
..........................................
We all know there is a problem with a multi-pool mining 10 blocks of the same algo in a row near instantly. This way the difficulty retargets as usual so we dont run the risk of a frozen algo (as the 10block lookback intended).
Foodies it took me a while but i now see how important the 10block lookback is and the risk of changing it resulting in an impossibly high difficulty. thank you.
+1
foodies, you know that this is the result of a lot of contributions, please consider it as a solution worth testing
Is Myriad really a coin for everyone? I'm trying Qubit right now on a 8-core 16 GB RAM machine and I get 0.4 MYR per hour. That's a joke!
Mining doesn't guarantee profits. At least not if you sell immediately. That's valid in real life and in cryptos.
Code:
./minerd -a qubit -o stratum+tcp://myr-qubit.cpu-pool.net:3590 -u xxx_1 -p x
at most considering cost and electricity.
Is Myriad really a coin for everyone? I'm trying Qubit right now on a 8-core 16 GB RAM machine and I get 0.4 MYR per hour. That's a joke!
Mining doesn't guarantee profits. At least not if you sell immediately. That's valid in real life and in cryptos.
Code:
./minerd -a qubit -o stratum+tcp://myr-qubit.cpu-pool.net:3590 -u xxx_1 -p x
You are mining qubit with cpu, what do you expect. A single GPU outperforms the CPU by 10x at least.
at most considering cost and electricity.
Is Myriad really a coin for everyone? I'm trying Qubit right now on a 8-core 16 GB RAM machine and I get 0.4 MYR per hour. That's a joke!
Mining doesn't guarantee profits. At least not if you sell immediately. That's valid in real life and in cryptos.
Code:
./minerd -a qubit -o stratum+tcp://myr-qubit.cpu-pool.net:3590 -u xxx_1 -p x
You are mining qubit with cpu, what do you expect. A single GPU outperforms the CPU by 10x at least.
Is Myriad really a coin for everyone? I'm trying Qubit right now on a 8-core 16 GB RAM machine and I get 0.4 MYR per hour. That's a joke!
Mining doesn't guarantee profits. At least not if you sell immediately. That's valid in real life and in cryptos.
Code:
./minerd -a qubit -o stratum+tcp://myr-qubit.cpu-pool.net:3590 -u xxx_1 -p x
have you checked the list out ?
http://myriad.theblockexplorer.com/help.php
Is Myriad really a coin for everyone? I'm trying Qubit right now on a 8-core 16 GB RAM machine and I get 0.4 MYR per hour. That's a joke!
Mining doesn't guarantee profits. At least not if you sell immediately. That's valid in real life and in cryptos.
Code:
./minerd -a qubit -o stratum+tcp://myr-qubit.cpu-pool.net:3590 -u xxx_1 -p x
Is Myriad really a coin for everyone? I'm trying Qubit right now on a 8-core 16 GB RAM machine and I get 0.4 MYR per hour. That's a joke!
Mining doesn't guarantee profits. At least not if you sell immediately. That's valid in real life and in cryptos.
Is Myriad really a coin for everyone? I'm trying Qubit right now on a 8-core 16 GB RAM machine and I get 0.4 MYR per hour. That's a joke!
foodies i think youl be happy with this:
Proposal: Alternative solution to the multi-pool abuse and a check&balance to the fairness of coin distribution per Algorithm. Without changing difficulty re-targeting
This way we do not have to worry about the legitimate concern held fast by Foodies; in that changing the difficulty re-targeting structure currently in place.
(Each Algo = Difficulty re-targeting Per Block + 10 Block Lookback)
Simple:
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) is not > than the X%.
IF previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) IS > than the X%.THEN Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 - [absolute value of] X% change in change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback).
----
This will allow the market to handle the multi-pool problem because a multi-pool which targets MYR for profitability will have to also have to take into account that insta-mining 9+ blocks will not be profitable. Instead the multi-pool becomes our best friend in that if an algo is more profitable than bitcoin it will just mine 1 or 2 blocks because if it targets an algo with 1000+X the average difficulty of the last 10 blocks the % of coins will decrease proportional to the resulting massive increase in difficulty it will cause by doing so.
Also the 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% will be supported because instantly mining blocks will not occur as often.
This will also help but not entirely solve with the problem of a POSSIBLE (i dont know if that can happen) fork of the entire coin due to 9+ blocks of the same algo in a row rather than each algo solving blocks regularly.
...........................................
If you dont want to use average % of difficulty change over previous 10 blocks we c We can substitute it with the variable of TIME per block.
...........................................
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks (average TIME used in the 10 block lookback) is not > or < X% change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks - 2.5minutes. ... ... ... ..
..........................................
We all know there is a problem with a multi-pool mining 10 blocks of the same algo in a row near instantly. This way the difficulty retargets as usual so we dont run the risk of a frozen algo (as the 10block lookback intended).
Foodies it took me a while but i now see how important the 10block lookback is and the risk of changing it resulting in an impossibly high difficulty. thank you.
Proposal: Alternative solution to the multi-pool abuse and a check&balance to the fairness of coin distribution per Algorithm. Without changing difficulty re-targeting
This way we do not have to worry about the legitimate concern held fast by Foodies; in that changing the difficulty re-targeting structure currently in place.
(Each Algo = Difficulty re-targeting Per Block + 10 Block Lookback)
Simple:
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) is not > than the X%.
IF previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback) IS > than the X%.THEN Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 - [absolute value of] X% change in change in average difficulty previous 10 blocks (average difficulty used in the 10 block lookback).
----
This will allow the market to handle the multi-pool problem because a multi-pool which targets MYR for profitability will have to also have to take into account that insta-mining 9+ blocks will not be profitable. Instead the multi-pool becomes our best friend in that if an algo is more profitable than bitcoin it will just mine 1 or 2 blocks because if it targets an algo with 1000+X the average difficulty of the last 10 blocks the % of coins will decrease proportional to the resulting massive increase in difficulty it will cause by doing so.
Also the 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% will be supported because instantly mining blocks will not occur as often.
This will also help but not entirely solve with the problem of a POSSIBLE (i dont know if that can happen) fork of the entire coin due to 9+ blocks of the same algo in a row rather than each algo solving blocks regularly.
...........................................
If you dont want to use average % of difficulty change over previous 10 blocks we c We can substitute it with the variable of TIME per block.
...........................................
Coins per block for AlgoX = 1000 if change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks (average TIME used in the 10 block lookback) is not > or < X% change in average TIME per block for the previous 10 blocks - 2.5minutes. ... ... ... ..
..........................................
We all know there is a problem with a multi-pool mining 10 blocks of the same algo in a row near instantly. This way the difficulty retargets as usual so we dont run the risk of a frozen algo (as the 10block lookback intended).
Foodies it took me a while but i now see how important the 10block lookback is and the risk of changing it resulting in an impossibly high difficulty. thank you.
If Myriad would add blake algo, that would be great.
@Beave162
You are a miserable, winning, complaining and blood sucking troll on other serious treads and only want to hurt and make damage....
Please stop trolling and sucking blood on other treads, except how everything goes and go on whit your life !
===>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ak7J3AOElXk
I want the future to be fair
We all love Bitcoin and Litecoin, but they're not fair. Having to pay $5,000 for a machine that will break you even, if your shipment arrives on time, is not fair. The fact that the operator of a pool can get so close to 51% of the nethash is not fair. In fact it's dangerous. We shouldn't be trusting people with power, we should be trusting cryptography. I like what Vertcoin, Groestlcoin, Darkcoin, Execoin, and Groestlcoin stand for: trying to keep GPU mining alive and fending off the ASICs as long as they can. Certainly, it's cheaper, easier, and a less risky investment to get a GPU rig up and running than it is to jump on the ASIC train, but I think we can do better than that. GPUs are everywhere, but you constantly need to upgrade to the next model and who do you buy from? ATI and Nvidia, these are the only makers of profitable cards. Not exactly decentralised. Not to mention the wastefulness of resources being poured into all the redundant hardware components of a GPU mining rig that aren't necessary for hashing, but they do make entry into mining more expensive.
I think we can do better than that and I think Myriad can do better than that. We can have a coin with 5 mining algorithms. A coin that already taps into the Bitcoin ASIC market, and the Litecoin ASIC market, while still leaving room for the GPU miners and the CPU miners. Maybe some day there will be ASICs for all of the Myriad algorithms, but whoever comes up with a product will have to be pretty competitive because they're up against the existing ASIC markets and the GPU/CPU miners on an even playing field. I welcome diversity of hardware and competition. Imagine a world some day where anyone can pick up an ASIC for twenty bucks and keep it running in exchange for a few bucks profit a week. A free coke every week. Or maybe a chance to really help out putting food on the table if you are among the world's most poor. That to me sounds like a much safer network, and I don't know of any other coin that's had serious thought put into its design about how we'll get to this world some day.
Long live the Myrtopia.
Taken from: http://www.reddit.com/r/myriadcoin/comments/259xqk/i_want_the_future_to_be_fair/
We all love Bitcoin and Litecoin, but they're not fair. Having to pay $5,000 for a machine that will break you even, if your shipment arrives on time, is not fair. The fact that the operator of a pool can get so close to 51% of the nethash is not fair. In fact it's dangerous. We shouldn't be trusting people with power, we should be trusting cryptography. I like what Vertcoin, Groestlcoin, Darkcoin, Execoin, and Groestlcoin stand for: trying to keep GPU mining alive and fending off the ASICs as long as they can. Certainly, it's cheaper, easier, and a less risky investment to get a GPU rig up and running than it is to jump on the ASIC train, but I think we can do better than that. GPUs are everywhere, but you constantly need to upgrade to the next model and who do you buy from? ATI and Nvidia, these are the only makers of profitable cards. Not exactly decentralised. Not to mention the wastefulness of resources being poured into all the redundant hardware components of a GPU mining rig that aren't necessary for hashing, but they do make entry into mining more expensive.
I think we can do better than that and I think Myriad can do better than that. We can have a coin with 5 mining algorithms. A coin that already taps into the Bitcoin ASIC market, and the Litecoin ASIC market, while still leaving room for the GPU miners and the CPU miners. Maybe some day there will be ASICs for all of the Myriad algorithms, but whoever comes up with a product will have to be pretty competitive because they're up against the existing ASIC markets and the GPU/CPU miners on an even playing field. I welcome diversity of hardware and competition. Imagine a world some day where anyone can pick up an ASIC for twenty bucks and keep it running in exchange for a few bucks profit a week. A free coke every week. Or maybe a chance to really help out putting food on the table if you are among the world's most poor. That to me sounds like a much safer network, and I don't know of any other coin that's had serious thought put into its design about how we'll get to this world some day.
Long live the Myrtopia.
Taken from: http://www.reddit.com/r/myriadcoin/comments/259xqk/i_want_the_future_to_be_fair/
Allegedly, Bitcoin was originally setup to be a lottery, and I think it will return to that point. I believe in the future, bitcoin asics will have 5+ years return on investment if you mine in a pool. What will be appealing will be the chance to find a block, which in the future, will be enough for most people to retire. Also, it will be interesting to see how energy independence will be influenced by future asics.
I believe the biggest problem plaguing asics stems from the horrible companies producing the asics--at least NVidia and AMD have reputations. If current asic companies actually had standards, yea there would really be no difference between buying a bunch of gpus vs buying asics. It still requires initial investment, and it still requires energy to mine.
I wish MyriadCoin incorporated an NFactor scrypt-chacha algo like YACoin. The only thing keeping MyriadCoin asic-resistant in the future is lack of profitability--not really a motivating selling point. I love the innovation of MyriadCoin, but I just imagine a coin coming out in the near future that improves immensely upon the initial idea: a coin which includes all mining algorithms out there.
auto was on myr.theblockexplorer.com
works myr.electr.us
works myr.electr.us
Hi could you switch over to myr.theblockexplorer.com and see if everything is ok now ?
Jump to: