It seems for some reason, HBN stake diff. is getting lower again to levels not seen for quite some weeks. Anyone an idea why this could be?
Or some other thing that I don't understand: HBN stake diff was a lot higher than CAP stake diff but there are more CAP out there than HBN and on top of that, HBN-block time is half that of CAP, so twice as much HBN should be able to stake before it's stake diff should rise faster than CAP.
Or some other thing that I don't understand: HBN stake diff was a lot higher than CAP stake diff but there are more CAP out there than HBN and on top of that, HBN-block time is half that of CAP, so twice as much HBN should be able to stake before it's stake diff should rise faster than CAP.
It is a bit lower, but based on my calculations this should be right about where it should be. To me the .008 was pretty high, at least for the number of coins and the maturity. It could be a few things that causes the fluctuation. Perhaps a big wallet or 2 went off line for a bit, or did some combining.
All true on what you say between CAP and HBN. Basically it all boils down to how many coins are actively staking and how big the average block size of those coins are. Look the the network weight between HBN and CAP. CAP is around 300,000 and HBN is around 1MM. This simply means there are more coins in the HBN network that are actively staking, and/or the average block size of HBN is smaller.
This is also one of the reasons I am hesitant to release a wallet that will allow and keep HBN and CAP blocks to big. As the blocks are combined and the average of them is bigger, the number of coins participating in staking diminishes and the difficulty goes down. But I also know there are user reason to keep them from staking and splitting down to dust, so it is a fine line.
Thanks for elaborating! I had the same feeling, that 0.008 was a little high. I guess because it built up to that level rather fast.
What you say about your hesitation towards releasing a wallet that enables the possibility of keeping blocks too big I do understand.
Only a few big blocks in stead of many small would fuel inflation and diminish network security. Is what I make of it. But almost every wallet, CAP/HBN in the top ten range manually recombines at the moment so their blocks would only diminish in size. Since the default split level will stay rather low (5 HBN, 10 CAP commit) I wouldn't expect much of a change in average staking-blocksize. In fact, like before, I think you found a sound balance.
Only the difference between HBN and CAP: the user allowable max start up split level, HBN at 4 times default (20) and CAP at 20 times default (200). That I don't quite get.
