Topic: Bitmark - page 149. (Read 622228 times)

I'm mining with ~2.5MH. Like anyone, I'd like a bigger piece of the pie, but with the new Asics, there's a lot of hash power out there without a profitable target to point it at.

I do plan on mining Bitmark long term. I tend to get distracted, and jump around to different coins, but I just ordered 2 Zeus Blizzards (1.3MH each) to point at Bitmark, while I use my 4x7950 rig to flit around to whatever shiny coin I'm looking at that day.

Just sent 200 BTM to the foundation address

What do you suggest can be done about that? Most of us here are all small miners too you know. Even coinsolidation who created this whole thing himself. I can see him on the mining pool right now at only ~11mhs.

It's still probably worth it to mine even with just a few mh. I am doing it. I'd like to make sure I can have at least a few BTM for the long run.

I am a small miner also, you and I mined the first 16 blocks between us I think.
The pool had 90mh/s from the start, but it would not work until block 16 had passed due to a bug in stratum-mining.


Some people who wanted some Bitmarks hired some mining rigs to get some early.

It is fair, we get out an amount which corresponds to the hashing we put in. I only have 270 BTM so far.

In the future if any percentage gain in value is earned, it will apply to every bitmark.

You are a small miner, you will have a small share but the same ROI, the same stands for me.

If any of us would like more Bitmarks all we can do is mine them or ask a miner if we can buy some off them.

The best network we can have is where people mine because they want to support the network and get some BTM for themselves. If you are doing it for short term profit then this is not the coin for you. It has no value yet. To get a large amount for nothing, then to cash in on other people's hard work, now that would be unfair.

The more long term small miners we have, the harder it will be for anybody to gain an unfair advantage by diverting resources. If you want a strong distributed network then you should stay and mine through all hashrates and difficulties.

The word launch is maybe wrong, I think of it more as showing people the foundations on which we will create something along with the idea of what we will make.
If you like what you see then come and help us build something which has value, and if you feel it will and would like a stake, then contribute some hashing power to the network to claim some of it for yourself.

top of page links
1. Analysis of how the Bitmark release went
2. Create a network of thin clients
3. Establishing priorities

You forgot the small miners.
I was the one who mined the first block (thank you for the honor and I mean it   ).
The next second I saw 2Gh/s and guys with 600 Mh/s mine it.
I said to my self, another failed launch.
You know, small miners like to earn some coins too, and they are the basis of a community.
This is not gonna be happen with me, with 0.001 coins per round.
Make your community with the 20 guys who mine with 30-500 Mh/s and earn all the coins.
When they gone maybe I will return.

Website is ready, but is a temporary version. (one page, only home with usefull links)

By the way is better than an empty page.

I think the order you listed them is a good order of priority. Although I would put the block explorer in fourth position and move the API and website up to second and third respectively. Since we already have a working block explorer for now we can afford to wait a little before adding another one I think.

Which resources do you feel are missing from the project?

We should prioritise which work to do this week.

Some I would prioritise are:

• the IPM pool
• block explorer?
• begin API design and architecture discussions (above post)
• website?
• identify potential adopters, good pools, existing crypto currency services which add value to users

Thank you for pointing this out. I have been looking at electrum and electrum server. If we are to do this, we should address two issues:

1. Electrum-Server knowing which addresses are controlled by which users
2. Electrum-Server reliance on IRC to find other nodes.

A solution to 2 will likely solve 1.

Consider that we could replace electrum server with a network of bitmark nodes which also store transactions, and which have certain api methods exposed to the public.

If we do this, we can bootstrap thin clients like electrum on to the existing p2p bitmark network.

This will allow for a number of thin clients to compete with innovation and usefulness, which would be good for our users. Many different people working on thin clients can provide a much better user experience than we can possibly hope to ourselves.

That would be better, to allow thin clients to work on established public bitmark nodes instead of custom servers.

subSTRATA. Don't leave so soon!  Your coingen theory blown out of the water: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7485632  Seriously, your trolling skills need work

Developer Analysis

I am very pleased with the launch of Bitmark. No bugs have been reported.

Mining has been interesting, the opposite of what normally happens when an alternative coin is launched.

Normally alt coins are hash-raped by people with mining hardware, ready to be dumped on 'investors' at an exchange. Mine a coin to dump for BTC.
Instead with Bitmark we find investors hiring mining rigs, with no exchange planned. Burn BTC to mine and keep Bitmarks.

0.1% of all bitmarks are now distributed fairly between early adopters.

The network has strengthened so that when the difficulty next changes, which we project to be Wednesday, 3 days will have past, 3 days of block rewards will have been mined, and the network will settle at a projected difficulty of 26 and a hash speed of 1GH/s.

The block reward does not half for 3 years, with an interim drop in 18 months. We can conclude that 3 days of coins will be fairly mined by both miners and investors over the first 3 days.
We could not hope for anything fairer.

The wiki article on the supply and distribution of bitmark reads:

Our next step for network health is to pursue the distribution of hashing power between more pools. We hope for Bitmark to have 8 major pools at a minimum as it the project earns value.

As quoted we suppose that the number of rewards per day has a strong impact on distribution.
Yesterday with a network speed of ~2GH/s I solo mined 6 blocks out of 1440 with only 0.45% of the network hash power. I received ~0.45% of the block rewards for that period.
I pointed the same amount of hashing power at the miningpool.co pool, I received the same amount of bitmarks as reward.

We can conclude that our block configuration is such that however you point your hashing power, you will receive a fair reward. This will do much to ensure a healthy secure and distributed network.

Hashing power was much higher than anticipated, it proved Bitmark's block chain configuration to be good.

Hashing power has halved, and still the average block time is only 4 minutes, which is reasonable for a working network, this bodes well for our future.

I am therefore also happy with the way the coin has been mined over the first days.

On average it is fair and reasonable. That is our goal.

The network will see to itself, our work on ease of use, ease of integration, ease of adoption will not see to itself. We should return to our discussions and work on bitmark.

I will conclude by saying that if I were to be offered a gift of BTC or a gift of BTM, I would choose the BTM. Perhaps many of you reading feel the same.

Thank you all.

Yes, its broken. Its on the list..

Some Shepard have been known to lead sheep to the cliff face when they cant see in the dark  

Shepard job is to take care of sheep but I don't want to rob you off your free will. If you decide to not listen and afterwards end up eatten by wolf, well, it is natural selection.

I won't be posting here anymore, no more free bumps. Have fun!

Also, just remember that no one here is claiming Bitmark has any value yet.

And no one is telling anyone to buy Bitmark.

It's a long term project. This thread is here in the spirit of openness so that the public can track what coinsolidation(Mark Pfennig) and others are doing on here and on GitHub. Also so that we can discuss issues that come up in an open and transparent manner.

At this point the network is very healthy and that's a good thing too.

subSTRATA, what's your angle?  Why the FUD?  Was it just a public service announcement?  If you are so sure it's a scam, why warn us poor simple fools? Isn't the coin drawing hash rate off other "proper" coins making it easier for you to mine them?  Why warn us and then as a consequence make it harder to mine your favourite coin?

As far as the "instamine" goes, I'm yet to see a launch without easy coins at the start.  If you'd taken any time to look, you would have seen that the pool has had the vast majority of hash from block 1.  After all the launch was hardly a secret, people had plenty of time to prepare.  

Actually, I'd appreciate it if you could expand a little on why you think what happened is going to be a critical issue going forward. It wasn't intentional. But it happened. So I'm not really sure what we can do about it. A few people have access to a lot of hashing via ASICs and they pointed them at Bitmark and there was a short period where blocks were being solved much faster than the target.

So, some people who have invested a lot of money in hardware or at least paid to rent a large amount of hardware have more coins than the rest of us for now. Since Bitmark is a long term project unless they keep pointing all that hash at the network people will continue mining and will be able slowly accumulate some more coins over time. There are no plans for Bitmark to be listed on any exchange anytime soon and it wouldn't really matter either way if it were. Someone dumping some coins doesn't really change the goals(long term) of the project.

If you think differently I'd like to hear some specifics on why you think what happened is such a critical issue. I'm not saying your wrong, I don't know if it is or not but at the moment I don't really see it as a huge problem. Maybe I'm wrong though.

Also , if anyone else has any opinions or comments I'd be interested in hearing those too.

A truly narrow sighted post.

The dev has been working on this for weeks.  take a look at his post history.  Dev asked the right questions of the community to produce a coin to his liking and that of the community.

I don't see why the dev would have committed to so much work to "instamine" the coin, when he could have just set an IPO or pre-mine and dumped it like any other scam dev.

From what I can see the coin had a fair and smooth launch.  Yes the diff algo isn't prefect, but I do like the long confirm time to deter multipools.  I think in time though the diff algo may change to something more dynamic.

I know there is nothing new to this coin, but a committed dev is rare thing these days and so that is why is see good potential in this coin.

regarding arguments about scrypt and ASIC.  well mining competition is only relative to who you mine against.  What I mean is I wouldn't expect to see any GPU miners on this coin unless they have free power.  GPU miners have moved on from scrypt and are mining against other GPU mines on other algos.

Anyway, Good luck dev.  Stay true to yourself and this coin.  It will flourish and you will earn the respect of this community.

Right, so that's why Bitmark is using a brand new original implementation of the latest Bitcoin release forked and recoded to use scrypt.

It is 2014 so we start with a full updated stable codebase and go from there. Every other coin has been forking old code.

I'm guessing you haven't read any of what has been going on here.