Topic: [ANN][XMY] Myriad | Multi-Algo, Fair, Secure - page 368. (Read 849919 times)

an improvement to the logo is needed badly.
the coin sounds great btw, very innovative.

some questions:
each algo has a diffrent diff?
so u choose an algo by the lowest diff?
wouldnt asics kill it with sha256?

confusing..

tnx

ave moi !

time = difficulty * 2**32 / hashrate

for all algos. time is 2.5 min and diff you may get from foodies123 signature / block explorer.

Thanks man, good info Do you know how to calculate net hashrate from difficulty?

that, the diff is hooked to 2 minutes 30 seconds per block. algos don't give a shit about eachother. they don't even know they exist
also what is up with the 3x price )) ?

real equivalence between algos is driven solely by time to a solve a block.

Network Hashrate per algo is computed. You should care solely about diff : 1) derive network hash from difficulty then 2) use your actual hashrate to compute theoretical earnings per mh / algo.

this is how i would do it.

I've asked it twice, can't think how to rephrase it any further


Each algorithm as a whole gets equal payouts. I'm asking about payouts for a single miner within that. I'm asking if the difficulty for each algorithm is relative to each other in scale, per MH of net hashrate.

what are you asking?

Sorry, I don't think you understand what I'm asking. I know that each algorithm gets equal payout because they have the same chance to solve each block.

as said above, each algo targets 2.5 min per block with the same payout. diff is adjusted each block to meet the 2.5 min requirement.

all miners start on equal footing for whatever algo.

I wasn't implying any dependency. I think I phrased it badly. What I meant was, if the difficulty on algorithm A is 10x higher than on algorithm B, does that mean the net hashrate on algorithm A is 10x higher than on algorithm B? And, therefore, based on my first assumption, that using 10x the hashrate on algorithm A will bring equal payouts to algorithm B.

I know they're independent, but I'm wondering if the difficulty is calibrated to the same difficulty per MH for each algorithm.

something like that you just over complicate things it's simple
within 2.5 minutes each algo will solve one block, obviously the algo withe the highest hashrate will give out the lowest payout per miner while the algo with the lowest hashrate will be more profitable, that's the genius of it, no one can rule the coin if someone dominates sha fuck`em we go scrypt if they dominate scrypt fuck`em we go skein and so on and so forth. it's miner's heaven )

algos are independent.

Am I correct in thinking that difficulty has a linear relationship with hashrate? So, if the net hashrate doubles on one algorithm, then the difficulty doubles, and the payouts halven for a given hashrate (on average)?

If so, does this relationship extend between the different algorithms? E.g. if skein difficulty is 1200, qubit difficulty is 60, then should a given hashrate of "x MH/s" be receiving about 4x the payout on qubit as on skein (because the difficulty is 20 times lower, whereas the hashrate on qubit is only about 5x lower)?

coin is highly profitable and fair, for now.

if multipools would be dumping their scrypt-mined coin, small miners can move to qubit / skein and provide balance, while diff for scrypt would skyrocket.

Now I am feeling a bit sorry I sold 50,000 MYR @ 450.

I wasn't bragging. I was merely pointing out that CPU mining was possible AFTER the whining about CPU mining not being profitable started.

I'm not one of these miners who flashmobs every new coin and tries to hoard it, then dumps them on some dodgy exchange that will probably just keep my coins...

** I like this coin and I'm here to praise it FOR THE WAY IT IS.

Let's remember that Quark is hardly worth mining at all, because the block reward is too low. If you're saying a GPU miner has taken that over as well, then it's completely out as "algo6". So XPM, RIC, and MMC are the only algos you would even consider adding?



Upgrading the wallet for everyone is hundreds of hours of error-prone work.  Also, when you make changes to software, you have to code, compile, test, find bugs, debug , fix , rewrite, and release them. This is C++ code for MONEY - not some PHP website. Do you want to do this work so a handful of holdout CPU miners will be happy?  You could start a bounty thread if you're not up to the work...


Honestly, if we could fast forward to a bug-free future MYR with a CPU-only algo and everybody hardforked I would like that.

However, I believe this coin is the "fairest of them all" already...

...and I just don't think it's worth the work and that it could kill the coin too easily.

400MYR? yahooooo! Meanwhile ask someone with GPU how many did they get...

First, quark is not CPU only coin, it's more profitable with GPU. Second, many people asked for Primecoin, but it doesn't have to be Primecoin algo, could be anything that is only minable (or only profitable) with CPU (currently only Primecoin, RIC and MMC are more profitable with CPU than with GPU)





A hard fork doesn't have more implications than a upgrade of the wallet from everyone, nothing else, it's not "bad enough", nothing wrong about it.




It's not about having a GPU miner, it's about being more profitable, MMC is more profitable with CPU than with GPU. There are also private XPM GPU miners, but they are just not profitable because they are slow.

I have "a few" ati video cards as well. But many people, like me, also have computer(s) with good cpu to mine.
With the abillity to have a difficulty per algo, this coin is very good.

It has SHA256 for asic, algo for GPU.. Adding CPU only will attract other miners, and the more interest on the coin the better it is.

Str8 pimpin'

People have probably seen the website and realized this is not a scam coin
I just solved a block