Topic: Bottlecaps 2.1 UPDATE REQUIRED - HARDFORK JULY 4 2014 to 200% Annual PoS - page 156. (Read 388610 times)

Multi, can you turn-on CAP again, on multi-port... or are you doing that to help stop the coin from flooding-out?

The orphan issue, due to POS, has long been resolved, by itself.

Ok, back to my corner of the world... it's dark here... and damp...

That is only because banks "loan out your money", once you deposit it... they only keep 10% (or more), so that the majority of individuals can instantly "withdraw". In the event of "declared bankruptcy", if a bank has had that much in funds held (or whatever FDIC states), they will "back a majority of those funds", until the bank can collect and return "the remaining majority".

Pools don't lend out your dollars, nor do exchanges... (Well, not the ones only trading in coins. The ones trading in dollars may spend your money as personal loans to themselves, paying back with the expected trade-volume as you cash-out and as others add funds.)

Besides, exchanges are not banks/lenders, they are exchanges. Though a bank can be an exchange, exchanges are not banks.

Just saying... (Not that I don't like the idea of them having an "additional" 10%, to cover fraud-losses, gained from the income they make through the volume of exchanges... but they surely cash-out their interests above ours, first.)

From 'Modern Money Mechanics':

A 'Bank' must: "maintain legally required reserves equal to a prescribed percentage of its deposits." This is usually no more than 10%

This theory could and should be employed by institutions and exchanges for PoS generation on 'hot' wallets etc.

Ofc at least 10% of total customer deposits held and a reservebalance= %

PoS generation can be more interesting this way on personal balances too i.e. 10% , 20% , 30% to 90%, although perhaps not literally  

As I described before a: 'Frequency of proof-of-stake', prescribed by a % of eligible stake balance.

You don't need to generate all eligible stake at once, in terms of the network, it's in fact better if you don't, as we have seen recently.

This can help to avoid PoS clustering and smooth difficulty ?

Because it's required by design, PoW is not a security provider here. PoS should replace PoW to provide enough trust score into chain. Otherwise such chain can't be used in production, it will be insecure without checkpoints.

Is this going to be completely accurate? If so, why?

Good news for CAP 

^^^ About POS returns...

Gotcha, it is functioning normally...

But why "split" the reward across two POS blocks. Why not just give the 0.05% on each block. That, I don't understand.

This will be fun when it hits my purchases of 10,000 coins as a solid POS block! That will be 5 instant coins. (I thought it was always going to just strip 10 coins out, for POS.)

Now I see how it "secures" the coin... Though, that is not "security". A better phrase would be, "Secures that transactions continue to be processed". That has nothing to do with the way it is being implied, "Secure/Security: To protect something of value.", it is "Secure/Security: To ensure function or stability." (The implied security, in the mention of 51% attacks and "theft" and "abuse", is not the same.)

To reduce confusion, stop saying that POS "adds security" to the coin which is vague, instead say that POS "helps to keep the transactions moving, after POW is dead." Since an attacker can generate POS and POW, there is no "security" from POS. However, if the coins that were staked, stayed staked for 90 days, that would add little "security" to the wallets. That is money that can't be stolen and spent or traded, at least not until they expire and return to the wallet. But these POS don't last 90 days, like the "documentation of how POS works", which you keep directing us to, as the example. (Which is why we are all getting confused.)

Personally, any currency that has a "limit", is bad... (Or one that does not grow with demand, except in value.)

Worst case, lots of coins get lost in wallets that never get used or unlocked, or destroyed by hard-drive failures. Then transactions fees eat-up faster than POS generation. Or worse... people just don't leave the wallets OPEN and UNLOCKED, due to security reasons, and there just isn't enough coins left to buy, because everyone is holding, and no-one uses wallets, they just use paper-wallets or use web-hosted-wallets which don't give returns. Since, after all, pools will be dead once POW stops and exchanges drop coins that people are not trading. (Which is just dumb, but not unexpected.)

POS at this low return, will help to ensure it lasts longer than not having POS... That I agree with.

Buy your Crypto Miners & HashCat Password Cracking Clusters Supplies
http://coincable.com

this is concerning....

should be interesting.

More stores accepting Bottlecaps every day!

Want to buy Itunes, Playstation, Steam, Ultimate Game Card, Zynga, Spring PCS, Boost Mobile Cards for Bottlecaps?
http://cryptopcs.com

• iTunes Gift Card (USA)
• Playstation Network Card(USA)
• Steam Gift Card
• Ultimate Game Card
• Zygna eCard
• Pay Sprint PCS bill
• Boost Mobile Refill

It's hard to predict the exact deadline. Anyway, it will happen smoothly. PoW mining profitability will go down due to difficulty and orphans.

Okay I think I understand. Your saying as the quantity of those staked coins increases POS takes over the network. Is the end of POW cycle unpredictable then? Based on the unknown amount staked across the network by various individuals? Or does the POW cycle just become to expensive (because blocks created by POS cause difficulty to increase) to continue and miners stop hashing?

Stake inputs shouldn't be merged while maximum age isn't reached. This is required due to security reasons.

And again, PoW cycle will be forced to end much sooner. Just like any other clone-coin maintainers, original developer has no idea about dynamics of such systems.

I've kept my reserve balance higher than my wallet contents during this round of POS blocks. I will gradually lower that reserve as the month goes on slowly releasing my high aged coinage to be available for stake. I think if others do that as well the time span to reduce large creation of POS blocks as we've seen recently will be reduced and we'll see smaller peaks every 30 days in the upcoming months and the network will return to it's intended design.

Yep thats what I meant. If tx's are kept small more blocks will be generated therefore being more usefull

Just worded wrong

Network secured by inputs, not by coins as is. I.e. 100 coins input less useful for network, in comparison with 10x10 inputs. Because this input is able to generate only one block instead of 10 blocks.

Some confusion about how stake functions.

When a stake block is hit Its for a transaction. Say you are solo mining They would come in 10's like you described. Those 10 coins are moved to the stake collumn until your POS  block matures ( 25 blocks). When it does you receive them back as 1 transaction or 10.01 coins. You then have to wait at least 30 days for that transaction to be staked again. POS is not a currency generation system. Its to secure the network after the initial mining process with POW is done. True caps will have a higher reward making it more profitably to do but wont be as profitable as POW. Hence the reason I will be working to keep POW active longer

Sorry for the short explanation shoot me any more questions and I will answer in the morning

Also the low difficult was the result of the orphans from POS.

The algorithm looks backwards at block times to determine how it adjusts. Since so many were orphans block times were far apart keeping difficulty low. When it cleared up the difficulty returned

EDIT: You can get larger POS blocks. Just move your coins in a larger transactions. Although you will receive the same % and you are securing the network more by keeping the tx sizes small and generating more blocks

If the reward is going to be constant like that...

You might as well just make every POS block reward 0.005 coins, since that is all it is doing... besides holding 10 of our coins for 25 confirms moving them back so they don't appear "stake ready", (a few minutes), each time. (Which, by the way, is a lot of dust transactions of 0.01 you are going to burden us with. It will cost us more in tx-fees to send what we ever earn.)

Also, if POS is done that fast, and causing trouble by being fast... then why have it fast/easy... Apparently there is plenty of time for POS to be found. Why have it choke the network at all, unless there is TONS due, thus, it needs to be done faster. (Seems backwards now)

BTW, the low orphan rate is better, partially because of the POS rush over, and greatly because the DIFF went over 90K (1.37) That is a sweet spot. Lower (around 0.65) and the orphans will be many again, with or without POS. That is just how fast-coins are, when they don't propagate fast enough. Luck is not linear with DIFF, and time is the major "issue". There needs to be a non-linear curve to match the DIFF target, and a minimum DIFF, to stop the "time" factor from being less than 1 minute. (As opposed to a target of 1 minute.) But again, this works equally as well as the other coins. Which all also have that flaw by design.

(Just adding... I am getting more, as usual, at 1.78 {117K} diff than 1.37 {90K}, and way more than 0.80 {53K}. Thus, my observation mentioned in the above. Which is true of all fast coins... but after 1.78 {117K}, I begin getting less, as expected. {Total blocks accepted, orphans and rejects.})

For those who are still unaware...
Orphan = submitted, because no other block was "found" as far as your wallet knows... but rejected by the network, because a block was found, you just didn't get it fast enough.
Rejected = not submitted, because you were still "working" on your solution in your miner, but your wallet had gotten a new block, and you were just not finished with your "workload size", before you submitted it. EG, you were still busy looking for a solution after your wallet discovered there was already a solution posted. Thus, you had to scrap that work and get the new hash, to build off that new block and start working again on a new solution.

Thus, my reason for using the smallest workload size on fast coins. (Has no impact on slow coins, because the time between coins is longer and solutions are further apart.)

^ appears to be true and correct...but why? It *should* work as laid out in beginning section of above

So this is how POS works in my wallet...

I find a POS block, it removes 10 coins from my wallet(POW) and creates 10 as "Stake"... Stays that way until 25 confirms... Once it hits 26 confirms, it removes itself from "stake", and comes back as 10 deposit as a normal coin.

After the second POS block, it removes 10 coins from my wallet(POW) and creates 10.01 as "Stake"... Stays that way until 25 confirms... Once it hits 26 confirms, it removes itself from "stake", and comes back as 10.01 deposit as a normal coin.

Thus, it removes 20, which comes back as 20.01... All within 25 blocks, or about 25-60 minutes.

This is where I am confused...

I thought the "staked" coins were going to stay "staked" for 90 days... Then, on each new stake-block, it would look at the qty of "stake", and reward 0.02% of the "total staked"...

Thus... It would do this... as described by POS documentation.

10 POS
10 POS (20 total) Reward 0.01 (0.01 total)
10 POS (30 total)
10 POS (40 total) Reward 0.02 (0.03 total)
10 POS (50 total)
10 POS (60 total) Reward 0.03 (0.06 total)
10 POS (70 total)
10 POS (80 total) Reward 0.04 (0.10 total)
10 POS (90 total)
10 POS (100 total) Reward 0.05 (0.15 total)
-10 moved, (90 total) ** 90 day mark... here... so it removes these 10 staked back to wallet
10 POS (100 total) Reward 0.05 (0.20 total)
-10 moved (90 total) **
-10 moved (80 total) **
-10 moved (70 total) **
10 POS (80 total) Reward 0.04 (0.24 total) ... lost 4 expired stake, gained 2 more POS blocks

However, we are getting this... Which would NEVER replace POW, ever. Not at 0.05% reward on only 20 coins, each time.

10
10 reward 0.01 (10 moves back)
10 (10.01 moves back)
10 reward 0.01 (10 moves back)
10 (10.01 moves back)
10 reward 0.01 (10 moves back)
10 (10.01 moves back)
10 reward 0.01 (10 moves back)
(10.01 moves back)

resulting in 0 staked

I have had over 4000 coins move to stake, but they nearly instantly move back, resulting in 2 coins of total reward. Currently 10.01 staked now, but that will be gone in 5 more confirms, moved back to normal coins. I would imagine that I would have 4000 staked for 90 days, since it has not been 90 days since they became staked. (They became staked after the 30 day mark.)

I have had up to 60.06 staked, but reward is always 0.05% of 20, not 0.05% of "total staked coins" which would be 60.06, with an expected reward of 0.03 to add to the 60.06, making it 10.03 + 60.06 = 70.09