Topic: [HYP] HyperStake | Generous Reward Staking | Advanced Staking Controls & Wallet - page 121. (Read 679332 times)
July 31, 2015, 04:08:32 PM
Awwww, what a dump. Somebody really wanted out fast. Which is a stupid decision cause I really like HYP.
July 30, 2015, 10:26:54 PM
Thanks everybody for all the tips in this thread, I bought a few coins to start the stake process 
July 30, 2015, 09:46:26 AM
The complete lack of urgency for any changes is a wonderful thing
Exactly my thoughts. It never hurts to go through the brain storming process when there is no urgency, so that if an urgent fork did appear in the future we will have already prepared a few ideas beforehand
July 30, 2015, 03:27:57 AM
if you want to do something different, then I would suggest just a new coin. HYP is perfect beyond compare with its current parameters and your lacklustre list of tweaks hardly add to enough for a fork.
I love hyp and would always vote against changing it short of a security exploit or something of that nature.
[edit] if anything, you should lower max coinage... that would make things interesting.
I love hyp and would always vote against changing it short of a security exploit or something of that nature.
[edit] if anything, you should lower max coinage... that would make things interesting.
We can file away max coinage for the next time we have a fork that needs to be done for some reason. Its not enough to justify a fork itself imo.
Been thinking this over the past couple days and came to this exact conclusion^
I think the parameters are all great the way they are. I can see an argument for increasing max coinage to 45-90 days (up for debate what this value should exactly be, though anything in this range I think would be fine) and then implemented alongside any future fork.
Regarding #3 there's something there to be considered certainly, but I'd need to put more thought in to it. The complete lack of urgency for any changes is a wonderful thing
July 29, 2015, 06:59:01 PM
if you want to do something different, then I would suggest just a new coin. HYP is perfect beyond compare with its current parameters and your lacklustre list of tweaks hardly add to enough for a fork.
I love hyp and would always vote against changing it short of a security exploit or something of that nature.
[edit] if anything, you should lower max coinage... that would make things interesting.
I love hyp and would always vote against changing it short of a security exploit or something of that nature.
[edit] if anything, you should lower max coinage... that would make things interesting.
We can file away max coinage for the next time we have a fork that needs to be done for some reason. Its not enough to justify a fork itself imo.
July 29, 2015, 06:20:56 PM
if you want to do something different, then I would suggest just a new coin. HYP is perfect beyond compare with its current parameters and your lacklustre list of tweaks hardly add to enough for a fork.
I love hyp and would always vote against changing it short of a security exploit or something of that nature.
[edit] if anything, you should lower max coinage... that would make things interesting.
I love hyp and would always vote against changing it short of a security exploit or something of that nature.
[edit] if anything, you should lower max coinage... that would make things interesting.
July 29, 2015, 06:07:28 PM
I am thinking about filing away my recent suggestions, perhaps to be revisited in the future if needs be. I saw some support here, but most of the people I talked to on IRC and trollboxes love HYP exactly how it is. That is pretty awesome when you think about it. How many one year old + coins have people that love it exactly how it is? Not very many.
I do think that if a fork situation arises in the future that the max stake weight days should be raised, but this in itself is not worth the trouble of a fork.
I do think that if a fork situation arises in the future that the max stake weight days should be raised, but this in itself is not worth the trouble of a fork.
I think the coin has been hugely successful for being an 'experimental' coin, however the changes proposed are interesting to say the least.
on the first point, I would agree with the general consensus on here that bloat isn't a huge issue for HYP
#2 - is a great idea and would as stated, allow smaller blocks to keep gaining some weight and having more chance to stake, but an extra 15 days seems like a good compromise for added time vs too much time
#3 - In the spirit of experiments, one of the core ideas behind HYP, this would be great to have implemented also and promote holding and staking.
July 29, 2015, 05:04:33 PM
I am thinking about filing away my recent suggestions, perhaps to be revisited in the future if needs be. I saw some support here, but most of the people I talked to on IRC and trollboxes love HYP exactly how it is. That is pretty awesome when you think about it. How many one year old + coins have people that love it exactly how it is? Not very many.
I do think that if a fork situation arises in the future that the max stake weight days should be raised, but this in itself is not worth the trouble of a fork.
I do think that if a fork situation arises in the future that the max stake weight days should be raised, but this in itself is not worth the trouble of a fork.
July 29, 2015, 02:24:18 PM
MOONBOUND!! Number 1 dev in crypto and whales like kushed!!! GET IN WHILE YOU CAN! And add some XRA and CON to it too!! STAKE OR DIE!
July 28, 2015, 02:03:15 PM
I agree with KUSHED if it aint broke don't fix it. 
July 28, 2015, 01:19:14 PM
Good discussion here. Getting a lot of good feedback. Lots of people that love HYP exactly how it is, and lots of people that are interested in a few changes.
Kushed makes a good point (on irc), "don't fix it if it ain't broke". In this regard I think it will be best to only make a change if we have very clear consensus and support to do so.
Kushed makes a good point (on irc), "don't fix it if it ain't broke". In this regard I think it will be best to only make a change if we have very clear consensus and support to do so.
July 28, 2015, 12:35:19 PM
#3. This idea sounds good but it may encourage hoarding versus commerce. The reward needs to be minimal but worth it. PoS already has a knock against it from the hoarding (staking) side of things historically... this may make it even worse.
July 28, 2015, 04:20:52 AM
Idea on Option 1:
Problem: BlockChain Bloat
Blockchain becomes too massive and takes too long to sync even with a bootstrap.
Solution: Genesis Block
No matter , 30 seconds or 10 minutes for block time, eventually they all are going to be too big.
The only real solution to blockchain bloat, that I can currently see is what is called a Genesis Block.
Once every 1 or 3 or 7 years, depending on how fast the blockchain grows,
a new Genesis Block is created that holds every address & updated balance, and from that point on the Genesis block becomes block 0 of a new blockchain removing the bloat from all future syncs.
Questions are how workable would this idea be , and what possible issues may arise from it?
Problem: BlockChain Bloat
Blockchain becomes too massive and takes too long to sync even with a bootstrap.
Solution: Genesis Block
No matter , 30 seconds or 10 minutes for block time, eventually they all are going to be too big.
The only real solution to blockchain bloat, that I can currently see is what is called a Genesis Block.
Once every 1 or 3 or 7 years, depending on how fast the blockchain grows,
a new Genesis Block is created that holds every address & updated balance, and from that point on the Genesis block becomes block 0 of a new blockchain removing the bloat from all future syncs.
Questions are how workable would this idea be , and what possible issues may arise from it?
July 28, 2015, 03:37:14 AM
I would like to steer the conversation towards fork talk if I could. I want to first off make it absolutely clear that in my opinion, HyperStake could stay in the same state forever and be a perfectly fine coin that works well and stakes well as it does now. But it might also be a bit of fun to add something new, and also put it on a more sustainable long term path.
I would like to propose 3 things for consideration of the community, and ask for well reasoned feedback.
1 - Increase block time. My primary reasoning for this is the growth of the blockchain size over time and the resources it takes to run the chain and to sync it from scratch. The smaller the chain the better. As you all know I have taken over RateCoin and forked it to be something I found to be sustainable and attractive long term. I forked the block target from the very ugly 30 second target to 3 minute. This puts XRA at 480 blocks per day. But that also means only 480 stakes per day network wide. I could see something like this working for HYP, but I would lean towards perhaps 2-2:30 minute blocks, which would yield 575-720 blocks per day instead of the current 960 per day. One thing to keep in mind is that although we want high difficulty, we want new comers to have a reasonable experience staking HYP.
2 - Increase the maximum stake age (really the max age that weight grows larger) to allow smaller inputs to have greater opportunity to stake. I don't have a hard number in my head for what is the best max age, but I do think we need a max age. I think there is room to double the current maximum from 32 up to 64, and maybe even up to 100. Lots of old outputs laying around wanting to stake. This also lets a patient small holder have a greater opportunity to stake without buying a large sum.
3 - A bonus weight advantage and stake reward for compounded blocks. If the block was created via coinstake not via transaction, then I propose to give an additional stake weight to it (maybe 5-10% extra) and an increased reward (maybe 1100 HYP instead of 1000 max). This would encourage compound staking, but would also discourage resizing your outputs ("blocks") too often. I would need to do quite a bit of testnetting with this feature, but I think it could prove unique and fun.
Any thoughts?
I would like to propose 3 things for consideration of the community, and ask for well reasoned feedback.
1 - Increase block time. My primary reasoning for this is the growth of the blockchain size over time and the resources it takes to run the chain and to sync it from scratch. The smaller the chain the better. As you all know I have taken over RateCoin and forked it to be something I found to be sustainable and attractive long term. I forked the block target from the very ugly 30 second target to 3 minute. This puts XRA at 480 blocks per day. But that also means only 480 stakes per day network wide. I could see something like this working for HYP, but I would lean towards perhaps 2-2:30 minute blocks, which would yield 575-720 blocks per day instead of the current 960 per day. One thing to keep in mind is that although we want high difficulty, we want new comers to have a reasonable experience staking HYP.
2 - Increase the maximum stake age (really the max age that weight grows larger) to allow smaller inputs to have greater opportunity to stake. I don't have a hard number in my head for what is the best max age, but I do think we need a max age. I think there is room to double the current maximum from 32 up to 64, and maybe even up to 100. Lots of old outputs laying around wanting to stake. This also lets a patient small holder have a greater opportunity to stake without buying a large sum.
3 - A bonus weight advantage and stake reward for compounded blocks. If the block was created via coinstake not via transaction, then I propose to give an additional stake weight to it (maybe 5-10% extra) and an increased reward (maybe 1100 HYP instead of 1000 max). This would encourage compound staking, but would also discourage resizing your outputs ("blocks") too often. I would need to do quite a bit of testnetting with this feature, but I think it could prove unique and fun.
Any thoughts?
I think that a coin shouldn't adapt to changing conditions by changing its code, i.e. by extending or cutting some parameters. Because it's only temporary solution, you will need to do it again and again. Instead conditions should be modeled initially and coin design should be made adaptable by itself. Moreover, crypto currencies do not only transmit value, they also store value, and the cutting of a parameter can be seen by a user as the cutting of his gold bars in a bank safe deposit box to save some space. A great approach in this case would be to implement some incentive features on top of the basic functionality layer.
1. I'm against block time tweaking. The chain size isn't a problem ATM, imho, and I have a strong belief it won't be in the future due to an exponential growth of a technology level, but even if we reduce its bloating by, for example, 25%, we will get the same size, just a little bit later. One of the workarounds of this problem to simplify the life of newcomers could be a thin client. As to sustainability, I think that the supply level in our case is not an issue as it keeps shrinking (relatively). I have made a page that calculates the yearly supply gain starting from this moment, and it can be seen with the naked eye how it's permanently dropping down. Adding an incentive for a long term holding can boost the psychological effect, making people tend to be hoarders rather than dumpers.
Here are also some disadvantages of this tweak. 90 seconds is a comfortable block time that makes this coin super fast, which is a part of our positioning. A lot of people rely on their return estimates, some of them could have taken out loans to buy HYP, some of them can have family budgets based on HYP returns, or just simply some special strategy. It wouldn't be fair to cut down the supply abruptly. Instead it makes a lot of sense to work on the demand as not only supply (that is already shrinking) is responsible for sustainability.
2. This feature definitely should be adaptive, otherwise it is subjected to a permanent manual tweaking as the diff keeps growing. Which, in addition, can be a security threat. I have some ideas, but they should be elaborated first.
3. Great idea
July 28, 2015, 12:31:35 AM
Fork it Baby, I like it all 2 to 3 minute block time definitely +1, increased stake age +1+1+1, Bonus weight advantage +1+1+1+1+1+1
July 27, 2015, 10:54:58 PM
If I entered the HYPERSTAKE market again now to hold and stake is it a good time to buy in now and just hold over the long term? I really like the long term vision of the DEVS with their coins so am thinking to slowly grow this coin in a wallet again. Just hope I am not too late that is to enter again here.
July 27, 2015, 10:33:10 PM
I would like to steer the conversation towards fork talk if I could. I want to first off make it absolutely clear that in my opinion, HyperStake could stay in the same state forever and be a perfectly fine coin that works well and stakes well as it does now. But it might also be a bit of fun to add something new, and also put it on a more sustainable long term path.
I would like to propose 3 things for consideration of the community, and ask for well reasoned feedback.
1 - Increase block time. My primary reasoning for this is the growth of the blockchain size over time and the resources it takes to run the chain and to sync it from scratch. The smaller the chain the better. As you all know I have taken over RateCoin and forked it to be something I found to be sustainable and attractive long term. I forked the block target from the very ugly 30 second target to 3 minute. This puts XRA at 480 blocks per day. But that also means only 480 stakes per day network wide. I could see something like this working for HYP, but I would lean towards perhaps 2-2:30 minute blocks, which would yield 575-720 blocks per day instead of the current 960 per day. One thing to keep in mind is that although we want high difficulty, we want new comers to have a reasonable experience staking HYP.
2 - Increase the maximum stake age (really the max age that weight grows larger) to allow smaller inputs to have greater opportunity to stake. I don't have a hard number in my head for what is the best max age, but I do think we need a max age. I think there is room to double the current maximum from 32 up to 64, and maybe even up to 100. Lots of old outputs laying around wanting to stake. This also lets a patient small holder have a greater opportunity to stake without buying a large sum.
3 - A bonus weight advantage and stake reward for compounded blocks. If the block was created via coinstake not via transaction, then I propose to give an additional stake weight to it (maybe 5-10% extra) and an increased reward (maybe 1100 HYP instead of 1000 max). This would encourage compound staking, but would also discourage resizing your outputs ("blocks") too often. I would need to do quite a bit of testnetting with this feature, but I think it could prove unique and fun.
Any thoughts?
1- noI would like to propose 3 things for consideration of the community, and ask for well reasoned feedback.
1 - Increase block time. My primary reasoning for this is the growth of the blockchain size over time and the resources it takes to run the chain and to sync it from scratch. The smaller the chain the better. As you all know I have taken over RateCoin and forked it to be something I found to be sustainable and attractive long term. I forked the block target from the very ugly 30 second target to 3 minute. This puts XRA at 480 blocks per day. But that also means only 480 stakes per day network wide. I could see something like this working for HYP, but I would lean towards perhaps 2-2:30 minute blocks, which would yield 575-720 blocks per day instead of the current 960 per day. One thing to keep in mind is that although we want high difficulty, we want new comers to have a reasonable experience staking HYP.
2 - Increase the maximum stake age (really the max age that weight grows larger) to allow smaller inputs to have greater opportunity to stake. I don't have a hard number in my head for what is the best max age, but I do think we need a max age. I think there is room to double the current maximum from 32 up to 64, and maybe even up to 100. Lots of old outputs laying around wanting to stake. This also lets a patient small holder have a greater opportunity to stake without buying a large sum.
3 - A bonus weight advantage and stake reward for compounded blocks. If the block was created via coinstake not via transaction, then I propose to give an additional stake weight to it (maybe 5-10% extra) and an increased reward (maybe 1100 HYP instead of 1000 max). This would encourage compound staking, but would also discourage resizing your outputs ("blocks") too often. I would need to do quite a bit of testnetting with this feature, but I think it could prove unique and fun.
Any thoughts?
2- 45 days max. If you make the it bigger than that, 60-90+ people will just make 1000 blocks and wait 1-2 months and they will double their coins.
extra 15 days should be more than enough. I have been staking for 3-4 months and I have never had a block older than 50 days. The extra 15 days will make sure you get enough weight to stake faster. You do not want spammers in the network with small blocks. There would be no reason to make bigger blocks anymore and optimize your blocks if maximum stake age is increased too much.
3- no
July 27, 2015, 10:31:58 PM
I would like to steer the conversation towards fork talk if I could. I want to first off make it absolutely clear that in my opinion, HyperStake could stay in the same state forever and be a perfectly fine coin that works well and stakes well as it does now. But it might also be a bit of fun to add something new, and also put it on a more sustainable long term path.
I would like to propose 3 things for consideration of the community, and ask for well reasoned feedback.
1 - Increase block time. My primary reasoning for this is the growth of the blockchain size over time and the resources it takes to run the chain and to sync it from scratch. The smaller the chain the better. As you all know I have taken over RateCoin and forked it to be something I found to be sustainable and attractive long term. I forked the block target from the very ugly 30 second target to 3 minute. This puts XRA at 480 blocks per day. But that also means only 480 stakes per day network wide. I could see something like this working for HYP, but I would lean towards perhaps 2-2:30 minute blocks, which would yield 575-720 blocks per day instead of the current 960 per day. One thing to keep in mind is that although we want high difficulty, we want new comers to have a reasonable experience staking HYP.
2 - Increase the maximum stake age (really the max age that weight grows larger) to allow smaller inputs to have greater opportunity to stake. I don't have a hard number in my head for what is the best max age, but I do think we need a max age. I think there is room to double the current maximum from 32 up to 64, and maybe even up to 100. Lots of old outputs laying around wanting to stake. This also lets a patient small holder have a greater opportunity to stake without buying a large sum.
3 - A bonus weight advantage and stake reward for compounded blocks. If the block was created via coinstake not via transaction, then I propose to give an additional stake weight to it (maybe 5-10% extra) and an increased reward (maybe 1100 HYP instead of 1000 max). This would encourage compound staking, but would also discourage resizing your outputs ("blocks") too often. I would need to do quite a bit of testnetting with this feature, but I think it could prove unique and fun.
Any thoughts?
I would like to propose 3 things for consideration of the community, and ask for well reasoned feedback.
1 - Increase block time. My primary reasoning for this is the growth of the blockchain size over time and the resources it takes to run the chain and to sync it from scratch. The smaller the chain the better. As you all know I have taken over RateCoin and forked it to be something I found to be sustainable and attractive long term. I forked the block target from the very ugly 30 second target to 3 minute. This puts XRA at 480 blocks per day. But that also means only 480 stakes per day network wide. I could see something like this working for HYP, but I would lean towards perhaps 2-2:30 minute blocks, which would yield 575-720 blocks per day instead of the current 960 per day. One thing to keep in mind is that although we want high difficulty, we want new comers to have a reasonable experience staking HYP.
2 - Increase the maximum stake age (really the max age that weight grows larger) to allow smaller inputs to have greater opportunity to stake. I don't have a hard number in my head for what is the best max age, but I do think we need a max age. I think there is room to double the current maximum from 32 up to 64, and maybe even up to 100. Lots of old outputs laying around wanting to stake. This also lets a patient small holder have a greater opportunity to stake without buying a large sum.
3 - A bonus weight advantage and stake reward for compounded blocks. If the block was created via coinstake not via transaction, then I propose to give an additional stake weight to it (maybe 5-10% extra) and an increased reward (maybe 1100 HYP instead of 1000 max). This would encourage compound staking, but would also discourage resizing your outputs ("blocks") too often. I would need to do quite a bit of testnetting with this feature, but I think it could prove unique and fun.
Any thoughts?
These are preliminary thoughts, so don't treat them with too much weight yet
My kneejerk reaction to number one is pretty strongly opposed. Can't articulate why at the moment, other than problems I had with GMC when we changed the block time. But that was a miscoded piece of discarded rat turds, and your code is always tight. So for now I am just going to say it's a reaction that I need to think out before I have any sort of opinion that makes sense.
Number two, I'm fully in favor of that. Double it, I think, and a lot of smaller holders will love you. That is a well thought out opinion, actually. I've thought (and said) that it should be longer almost since the beginning of the project. It would encourage smaller blocks.
Three sounds awesome. I need to think about it, but my kneejerk reaction is as strong in favor as it was against the first one
July 27, 2015, 09:58:18 PM
I would like to steer the conversation towards fork talk if I could. I want to first off make it absolutely clear that in my opinion, HyperStake could stay in the same state forever and be a perfectly fine coin that works well and stakes well as it does now. But it might also be a bit of fun to add something new, and also put it on a more sustainable long term path.
I would like to propose 3 things for consideration of the community, and ask for well reasoned feedback.
1 - Increase block time. My primary reasoning for this is the growth of the blockchain size over time and the resources it takes to run the chain and to sync it from scratch. The smaller the chain the better. As you all know I have taken over RateCoin and forked it to be something I found to be sustainable and attractive long term. I forked the block target from the very ugly 30 second target to 3 minute. This puts XRA at 480 blocks per day. But that also means only 480 stakes per day network wide. I could see something like this working for HYP, but I would lean towards perhaps 2-2:30 minute blocks, which would yield 575-720 blocks per day instead of the current 960 per day. One thing to keep in mind is that although we want high difficulty, we want new comers to have a reasonable experience staking HYP.
2 - Increase the maximum stake age (really the max age that weight grows larger) to allow smaller inputs to have greater opportunity to stake. I don't have a hard number in my head for what is the best max age, but I do think we need a max age. I think there is room to double the current maximum from 32 up to 64, and maybe even up to 100. Lots of old outputs laying around wanting to stake. This also lets a patient small holder have a greater opportunity to stake without buying a large sum.
3 - A bonus weight advantage and stake reward for compounded blocks. If the block was created via coinstake not via transaction, then I propose to give an additional stake weight to it (maybe 5-10% extra) and an increased reward (maybe 1100 HYP instead of 1000 max). This would encourage compound staking, but would also discourage resizing your outputs ("blocks") too often. I would need to do quite a bit of testnetting with this feature, but I think it could prove unique and fun.
Any thoughts?
I would like to propose 3 things for consideration of the community, and ask for well reasoned feedback.
1 - Increase block time. My primary reasoning for this is the growth of the blockchain size over time and the resources it takes to run the chain and to sync it from scratch. The smaller the chain the better. As you all know I have taken over RateCoin and forked it to be something I found to be sustainable and attractive long term. I forked the block target from the very ugly 30 second target to 3 minute. This puts XRA at 480 blocks per day. But that also means only 480 stakes per day network wide. I could see something like this working for HYP, but I would lean towards perhaps 2-2:30 minute blocks, which would yield 575-720 blocks per day instead of the current 960 per day. One thing to keep in mind is that although we want high difficulty, we want new comers to have a reasonable experience staking HYP.
2 - Increase the maximum stake age (really the max age that weight grows larger) to allow smaller inputs to have greater opportunity to stake. I don't have a hard number in my head for what is the best max age, but I do think we need a max age. I think there is room to double the current maximum from 32 up to 64, and maybe even up to 100. Lots of old outputs laying around wanting to stake. This also lets a patient small holder have a greater opportunity to stake without buying a large sum.
3 - A bonus weight advantage and stake reward for compounded blocks. If the block was created via coinstake not via transaction, then I propose to give an additional stake weight to it (maybe 5-10% extra) and an increased reward (maybe 1100 HYP instead of 1000 max). This would encourage compound staking, but would also discourage resizing your outputs ("blocks") too often. I would need to do quite a bit of testnetting with this feature, but I think it could prove unique and fun.
Any thoughts?
1 - I would leave it as is. I think the current 90 seconds (960 stakes/day) is a good balance between transaction speed/usability, stake reward chances, and blockchain bloat. If bloat is going to be a big issue at 90 seconds it will be the same issue but just at the next intersection for 120seconds. There is ample time to discover solution to bloat...think what bandwidth and storage media were like 10 years ago...10 years down the road I'll bet Office2025 uses 8,979,187,987,197,861,897,618,761 GB of Protein Drive space.
2 - My vote is 90 days.
3 - That is a cool and unique idea and adds another interesting layer of strategy. It definitely promotes holding. I like it. I saw on Cryptsy chat by one user that claimed they like to stake > sell to drive price down > and try and buy more lower...while they were probably full of beans like most people on chat with phony boasting to impress the ladies
, I would love a feature like this that gives extra negative reinforcement to that kind of thinking and rewards long term holding. 
July 27, 2015, 09:30:21 PM
I would like to steer the conversation towards fork talk if I could. I want to first off make it absolutely clear that in my opinion, HyperStake could stay in the same state forever and be a perfectly fine coin that works well and stakes well as it does now. But it might also be a bit of fun to add something new, and also put it on a more sustainable long term path.
I would like to propose 3 things for consideration of the community, and ask for well reasoned feedback.
1 - Increase block time. My primary reasoning for this is the growth of the blockchain size over time and the resources it takes to run the chain and to sync it from scratch. The smaller the chain the better. As you all know I have taken over RateCoin and forked it to be something I found to be sustainable and attractive long term. I forked the block target from the very ugly 30 second target to 3 minute. This puts XRA at 480 blocks per day. But that also means only 480 stakes per day network wide. I could see something like this working for HYP, but I would lean towards perhaps 2-2:30 minute blocks, which would yield 575-720 blocks per day instead of the current 960 per day. One thing to keep in mind is that although we want high difficulty, we want new comers to have a reasonable experience staking HYP.
2 - Increase the maximum stake age (really the max age that weight grows larger) to allow smaller inputs to have greater opportunity to stake. I don't have a hard number in my head for what is the best max age, but I do think we need a max age. I think there is room to double the current maximum from 32 up to 64, and maybe even up to 100. Lots of old outputs laying around wanting to stake. This also lets a patient small holder have a greater opportunity to stake without buying a large sum.
3 - A bonus weight advantage and stake reward for compounded blocks. If the block was created via coinstake not via transaction, then I propose to give an additional stake weight to it (maybe 5-10% extra) and an increased reward (maybe 1100 HYP instead of 1000 max). This would encourage compound staking, but would also discourage resizing your outputs ("blocks") too often. I would need to do quite a bit of testnetting with this feature, but I think it could prove unique and fun.
Any thoughts?
I would like to propose 3 things for consideration of the community, and ask for well reasoned feedback.
1 - Increase block time. My primary reasoning for this is the growth of the blockchain size over time and the resources it takes to run the chain and to sync it from scratch. The smaller the chain the better. As you all know I have taken over RateCoin and forked it to be something I found to be sustainable and attractive long term. I forked the block target from the very ugly 30 second target to 3 minute. This puts XRA at 480 blocks per day. But that also means only 480 stakes per day network wide. I could see something like this working for HYP, but I would lean towards perhaps 2-2:30 minute blocks, which would yield 575-720 blocks per day instead of the current 960 per day. One thing to keep in mind is that although we want high difficulty, we want new comers to have a reasonable experience staking HYP.
2 - Increase the maximum stake age (really the max age that weight grows larger) to allow smaller inputs to have greater opportunity to stake. I don't have a hard number in my head for what is the best max age, but I do think we need a max age. I think there is room to double the current maximum from 32 up to 64, and maybe even up to 100. Lots of old outputs laying around wanting to stake. This also lets a patient small holder have a greater opportunity to stake without buying a large sum.
3 - A bonus weight advantage and stake reward for compounded blocks. If the block was created via coinstake not via transaction, then I propose to give an additional stake weight to it (maybe 5-10% extra) and an increased reward (maybe 1100 HYP instead of 1000 max). This would encourage compound staking, but would also discourage resizing your outputs ("blocks") too often. I would need to do quite a bit of testnetting with this feature, but I think it could prove unique and fun.
Any thoughts?
1. 2 minutes
2. 75 days
3. Increased reward depends on block size or make it a straight percentage.
Just my thoughts.
Jump to: