Topic: error - page 122. (Read 360507 times)

Is anyone going to buy this shit? I mean what's going on? This is PATHETIC amounts of RPC up for sale right now. One little atom of a whale could take away all this low value.

ebay maybe.   Or a private exchange here or on ronpaulcoin.com.  be careful though.   Or do some work for somebody holding ronpaulcoin. 

Diff retarget in 36 hours. Yesterday the diff retarget was in 36 hours. Every day there are 36 hours remaining to diff retarget 

ATTN MAC USERS

Go here (total version 1, so try to cope with it. We'll be pushing out windows and mac updates next week)

http://ronpaulcoin.cryptotycoons.com/RPCForum/index.php?topic=46.0

I just discovered Ron Paul coin but i'm having a hard time getting the wallet is there some mirror where I can get the wallet. Also how can I buy some RP coin without bitcion since I have none yet? (for fiat dollars dare I say?)

RNLtm3yWTbAbpfE2xjg9RuN2v6KgzCHNXK
thanks

I voted no. Here's why.

The problem that has been described here becomes less of a problem as the coin gain more inherent value.

What do I mean by this? Well, cryptocurrencies have no physical value. RPC has used the gold analogy, but in reality it does not mimic the gold standard in any way. One day RPC didn't exist, the next day it did. Short-term rises and fall in the coin price due to mining have absolutely nothing to do with the inherent value of the coin. People use the analogy of "supply and demand" but it's meaningless for currencies. Inherent value comes from what people believe the coin is worth.

Therefore, the greater the inherent value of the coin, the less the coin will be affected by a long difficulty retarget. Because if the coin has an inherent value, then people care less when the price crashes, because they have higher confidence in the price recovering.

But what if RPC doesn't have an inherent value? Well, in that case, it's game over anyway, and anything you do is a short-term fix. We might as well not bother.

But if it does and/or will have an inherent value, then the long difficulty retarget will not affect it any significant way. Of course it's affecting it at this early stage, because people are unsure of what it's value really is. Most miners are just interested in what it sells for now, not what its true value is.

But why not shorten the retarget anyway if it doesn't affect whether the coin has an inherent value or not? Because once the coin comes out of its infancy, there are advantages to a longer retarget. It adds stability and leaves the market less open to manipulation in the medium term.

Secondly, I do not believe that other options have been explored to the extent that they should have. Coins in their early stages have to cope with the fact their market cap increases by a significant percentage every day. If the market cap doesn't go up rapidly, then the coin stalls and dies. But to make it go up rapidly, with the coins going up each day significantly early on (as a percentage), then you have to drive additional streams of miners and investors to the coin, otherwise the price will drop, then the market cap falters.

This is where options have been exploited fully. There hasn't been enough of a media and marketing effort. I'm not talking Coinye level - indeed, that would be a bad thing. But what this coin needs is a consistent campaign to very slowly and steadily increase the amount of long-term miners and investors.

Thirdly, regarding multipools, there's really no advantage to reducing the retarget, because the multipools are becoming more sophisticated. Let's say at the moment they mine heavily for three hours, then the coin recovers over three days, rinse and repeat. Compare that to an hourly retarget, where they mine heavily for a few minutes and then the coin recovers over an hour. The ratio of times there is basically the same. And as the multipools become more sophisticated in their switching, the markets will respond more quickly too.

Lastly, regarding limiting the difficulty change to a %, it's an interesting idea, but it absolutely could not be implemented in such a simplified manor as suggested. The most obvious reason why (and there are many) is that multipools would then cause much longer effects. This vote shouldn't be about that. It's too complicated. It would be akin to having a political vote on "how much money should we spend on healthcare?" and expecting the public to be well-versed enough in economics to suggest the numbers themselves.

Found 1/8 of the blocks in the last hour with only 8% of the hash!
Thats double the expected return!!!

Really? How is that constructive? Why don't you point out how my logic of those who mine should help drive this decision is faulty and maybe quit throwing around insults? I'm willing to listen but not to someone who is just looking to be a big man behind a keyboard.

Also, way to go about the domain of the forum. Since this coin wasn't premined maybe nobody has extra $2,000 servers laying around to host it. 0_o

And for the record my only goal here is for RPC to succeed, you failed at mind reading. If my goal was to make money I wouldn't be mining RPC when it's at 12+ minutes per block. Which you would realize if you thought about it for a minute....

If your client doesn't sync you need to add the nodes as described. Client fully synced and connected here.

Working on the next version of the client which is going to have the working nodes included out of the box. Please have a little patience.

Meh, no block source available...0 connections to network.

Good.  You go and mine in the kitty litter box and I will keep mining in the gold mines unless a fork occurs.

The concern is not the implementation of a fork.  The concern is the fork itself.  And of course you enjoy the lean on the write up because the write up is because of a direct lean from onaboat

After mining almost 9 hours, I give up. No blocks are found. I'm going back and mine more dogecoin.

Very encouraged to see colin's detailed post and poll on the other forum.  Great writeup!  I was beginning to get worried for the future of this coin.  People (dedicated miners and supporters) are only willing to sacrifice for the common good for so long.

I understand that many here are concerned about hard-forking and the possible damage that could do.  I think however that with proper planning, most of the pain can be averted.  I suggest to review how bitcoin and other altcoin devs have managed such changes in the past.

I am not an expert, but I believe that in general, they modify the code so that the change will not take effect until a given block index, well in the future.   They then publicize the change as widely as possible, and urge everyone to upgrade before the given block.  And they send an alert message over the system alert channel built into the client.

This system, with a long enough lead time should enable most users of the coin to begin using the new codebase well in advance of the fork block.  So when the switchover happens, most people just keep trucking along.  And any with the old client would only be affected if they are just mining away and not paying any attention whatsoever to the RPC client or community.  And even still, they will still have their pre-existing holdings once they finally upgrade the software.

Given how new this coin is, I think that a 1 week lead time should suffice.    Many of the affected parties are reading these forums and/or actively mining the coin, so should see the alert and upgrade rather quickly.

So in a nutshell, this is a process that has been done succesfully in the past.  We do not need to fear it, and should instead just view it as a sign of the coin and community maturing.

I warned of the negative media spin within the first few hours of "release".  There are very easy ways to mitigate this and use media interviews to the coin's advantage in regards to long term investors and miners, but a hardfork in not one of them.

Edit: "I mean this lady obviously knows her stuff" I really hope that was sarcasm. 
I just watched the interview in which she regurgitates a simple idea of bitcoin wiki while relating it to bittorrent.
And the in regard to RonPaulCoin she downs it because it is not as "popular" as btc or ltc.
Mind you this is a super left leaning obamacare lover that relates value to popularity.
I no longer have to guess who was "popular" with their whole high school football team and eats boogers when they think know one is looking.

Yeah, maybe "disses" ?  LOL. Anyways - watch the Barbara Streissand effect kick in. The gal interviewed probably doesn't know how that works!

Bullish!

Then your pool should join another pool

All good points I agree with!

Don't fork the coin. It'll die.