[HYP] HyperStake | Generous Reward Staking | Advanced Staking Controls & Wallet - page 190.

cycoinminer

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Quote from: crypto4jan on January 06, 2015, 02:13:59 PM

Quote from: presstab on January 06, 2015, 02:04:40 PM

Don't forget to look at these charts that jaybeeuk has put online for us

http://212.67.195.38/hyp-charts/

Nice thx for charing.

Great figures there from jaybeeuk!

Is there any way to add another feature showing the average weight of the blocks that stake?

It's interesting to see that we're getting closer and closer to maxing out the rewards. Roughly 50% of all my staking coins now are hitting the 1k limit.

presstab

legendary

Activity: 1330

Merit: 1000

Blockchain Developer

The stake rate is 750% annual in the code, with a ceiling of 1,000 HYP. This 750% does not count compounding, it is a raw percentage that is used to calculate how much reward to give you each time your stake, and this is the rate that we must report because it would be dishonest for a PPC based coin to not state the rate used in the code.

Inflation control (the 1,000 HYP max reward) can make it so you will get less than 750%, because part of your reward gets cut off. 2 out of my last 10 stakes have hit the 1,000 HYP max reward, resulting in a cap of a total of around 350 HYP. This is the way HYP was designed, and it is intentional. Over time, 10/10 blocks will hit the max reward, and HYP will become more comparable to a fixed stake reward.

Part of this inflation control scheme is that this is a high difficulty coin. As such mining (staking) is not easy. Small blocks will have a hard time staking and may quite possibly never stake. I have plenty over 80 days old and might need to take the hit and combine them into larger outputs.

I can try to add some more clarity to the OP to help newcomers understand this system of high reward with max subsidy.

Startide

newbie

Activity: 16

Merit: 0

As I stated previously, I have several wallets. In another wallet I've got blocks over 2000k staking over 30 days. I certainly understand compounded interest, however, the PoS % should not factor compounding. 750% was always lofty and we all new this was a grand experiment. With that said, perhaps some effort should be made to share the decrease in PoS as difficulty increases. By doing so all participating Stakers will have a more reasonable set of expectations going forward. I suspect if it were grafted we would see two lines moving in somewhat opposite directions.

Startide

presstab

legendary

Activity: 1330

Merit: 1000

Blockchain Developer

Make sure you are running the latest version of the wallet for the most accurate weight display and time estimates. Also revisit the first page of the thread and see if you find any red text saying something important.

myagui

legendary

Activity: 1154

Merit: 1001

@Startide: Even if you stake with poor performance, the effective stake percentage over one year, is much higher than 750%, because of compounding (staking the blocks, then also staking the stakes, later staking the staked stakes, and so on).

What you are observing is simply a reflection of high difficulty. These days, it takes much larger blocks in order to stake relatively fast, and really small blocks (say, up to 1K for example) might not ever stake from here onwards, due to limited weight potential. That, and that a couple of blocks is not a large enough sample to draw conclusions, given the implicit variance in the staking process.

Startide

newbie

Activity: 16

Merit: 0

Really? Because I have other wallets, one with 3,666 potential stake over 2k and weight over 68k sitting at 27 days. For the past five days its said it has 15 hours to stake. Perhaps there's a time/language barrier, the developers used 360 minutes in an hour instead of 60. 750% PoS is not even remotely possible at this rate. It's looking more like 300 or less at this rate.

Startide

4x13

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1011

Your block is too small

Startide

newbie

Activity: 16

Merit: 0

550.886 coins now aging over 75 days without staking. Huh

crypto4jan

legendary

Activity: 2453

Merit: 1026

Energy coin master

Quote from: presstab on January 06, 2015, 02:04:40 PM

Don't forget to look at these charts that jaybeeuk has put online for us

http://212.67.195.38/hyp-charts/

Nice thx for charing.

presstab

legendary

Activity: 1330

Merit: 1000

Blockchain Developer

Don't forget to look at these charts that jaybeeuk has put online for us

http://212.67.195.38/hyp-charts/

presstab

legendary

Activity: 1330

Merit: 1000

Blockchain Developer

Done and testing before commit Wink

Also this is based on locale, so you folks that like "." instead of "," won't get too confused Cheesy

David Latapie

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 503

Monero Core Team

Quote from: nioc on January 06, 2015, 07:08:45 AM

One very small request. Commas for the displayed wallet balance

I agree. Thousand separators are more and more necessary!

nioc

legendary

Activity: 1624

Merit: 1008

Quote from: David Latapie on January 06, 2015, 12:39:00 AM

Quote from: Kushedout on January 05, 2015, 04:17:38 PM

Wasn't the name "multisend" picked due to proposed feature to perform multiple s4c ? (More than 2).
David, correct me if I am wrong on this.

Also, I think "reaccuring" is only the nature of the function and should be undertood and expected by user, as it would continue to preform a set function untill changed by user again.

multisend was just a temporary name. Of course, we all know what happens to code name... they stick

multisend is an improvement of the current S4C but from the beginning, I named the whole thing HyperSend, S4C being just a subset.
That being said, both multisend and recurringsend are correct: You can can to several persons at once and you can send in an automated way.

Quote

HyperSend
HyperSend is a generalization of the idea that first came up with Stake for Charity. [...] This can be used for a variety of purposes:

The above-mentioned well-known Stake for Charity.
[other examples]

So, just sticking to the original name HyperSend would make the most sense. multisending is just the latest improvement. Granted, we lose the "immediate understanding" of "recurring send" but we stay on the marque thing with "Hyper-*". as iantunc said, a "Feature name™".

RecurringSend
Multisend
HyperSend - I vote for this one

As the features we are trying to describe cannot be accurately done with a single word, HyperSend with a mouse over explanation seems good. If this function evolves only the mouse over description needs to be changed.

One very small request. Commas for the displayed wallet balance

David Latapie

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 503

Monero Core Team

Request: a way to know the build number. Compare illustations 1 (previous wallet) and 2 (new wallet, compiled today). No easy way to see the difference. Oh, there is one: the build date. And, surprise, surprise, the build date for the newer wallet is older than the build date of the newer wallet! Plus, none of these build date correspond to today, but I assume this is normal, because this is build date and not compilation|/i] date.

I also note that I once again have this issue of the menu bar (with the theme menu) disappearing with new code, so I have to stick with old code (illustration 3 is previous wallet, with menu bar and illustration 4 is new compilation without menu bar)

It is worth nothing that we I tried to upgrade old wallet (with a pull request and a compilation), I had this message:
Hi presstab,

Code:

david@david-laptop:~$ cd ~/cryptos/HyperStake && git pull && qmake HyperStake-qt.pro && make
Already up-to-date.
Project MESSAGE: Building with UPNP support
Project MESSAGE: Building with IPv6 support
Project MESSAGE: SSE2 detected, adding -msse2 flag
Warning: ignoring  element
Warning: ignoring  element
cd /home/david/cryptos/HyperStake; /bin/sh share/genbuild.sh /home/david/cryptos/HyperStake/build/build.h
g++ -c -m64 -pipe -fstack-protector-all --param ssp-buffer-size=1 -msse2 -O2 -fdiagnostics-show-option -Wall -Wextra -Wformat -Wformat-security -Wno-unused-parameter -Wstack-protector -D_REENTRANT -fPIE -DQT_GUI -DBOOST_THREAD_USE_LIB -DBOOST_SPIRIT_THREADSAFE -DBOOST_THREAD_PROVIDES_GENERIC_SHARED_MUTEX_ON_WIN -D__NO_SYSTEM_INCLUDES -DUSE_UPNP=1 -DSTATICLIB -DUSE_IPV6=1 -DHAVE_BUILD_INFO -DLINUX -DQT_NO_DEBUG -DQT_WIDGETS_LIB -DQT_XML_LIB -DQT_GUI_LIB -DQT_CORE_LIB -I/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt5/mkspecs/linux-g++-64 -Isrc -Isrc/json -Isrc/qt -I/usr/include/qt5 -I/usr/include/qt5/QtWidgets -I/usr/include/qt5/QtXml -I/usr/include/qt5/QtGui -I/usr/include/qt5/QtCore -Ibuild -Ibuild -o build/sendcoinsdialog.o src/qt/sendcoinsdialog.cpp
In file included from src/qt/sendcoinsdialog.cpp:2:0:
build/ui_sendcoinsdialog.h:13:25: fatal error: QtGui/QAction: Aucun fichier ou dossier de ce type
 #include 
                         ^
compilation terminated.
make: *** [build/sendcoinsdialog.o] Erreur 1

So in order to get the new code, I had to reinstall from scratch.

Does the new code handles S4C correctly Or do I lose of lot of my stake with this new code too?

David Latapie

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 503

Monero Core Team

Quote from: Kushedout on January 05, 2015, 04:17:38 PM

Wasn't the name "multisend" picked due to proposed feature to perform multiple s4c ? (More than 2).
David, correct me if I am wrong on this.

Also, I think "reaccuring" is only the nature of the function and should be undertood and expected by user, as it would continue to preform a set function untill changed by user again.

multisend was just a temporary name. Of course, we all know what happens to code name... they stick

multisend is an improvement of the current S4C but from the beginning, I named the whole thing HyperSend, S4C being just a subset.
That being said, both multisend and recurringsend are correct: You can can to several persons at once and you can send in an automated way.

Quote

HyperSend
HyperSend is a generalization of the idea that first came up with Stake for Charity. [...] This can be used for a variety of purposes:

The above-mentioned well-known Stake for Charity.
[other examples]

So, just sticking to the original name HyperSend would make the most sense. multisending is just the latest improvement. Granted, we lose the "immediate understanding" of "recurring send" but we stay on the marque thing with "Hyper-*". as iantunc said, a "Feature name™".

RecurringSend
Multisend
HyperSend - I vote for this one

billotronic

legendary

Activity: 1610

Merit: 1000

Crackpot Idealist

Quote from: mtwelve on January 05, 2015, 08:32:11 PM

Any reason why HYp is up today? Or something to do with HYP freezing on Polo?

I woke up on the right side of the bed this morning.

mtwelve

legendary

Activity: 1330

Merit: 1009

Any reason why HYp is up today? Or something to do with HYP freezing on Polo?

Hilux74

legendary

Activity: 912

Merit: 1000

Yeah you are just passing on this info in many threads....

Quote from: 4x13 on January 05, 2015, 04:59:24 PM

By that statement you are saying I am somehow involved and I can assure you I am not. I was just passing on the info and what I have experienced personally myself. Do you have any personal experience with this site?? or anything for that matter??

Quote from: rel-oad on January 05, 2015, 03:48:50 PM

Quote from: 4x13 on January 05, 2015, 02:55:33 PM

Well, I agree that it Probably IS a Ponzi, but at this point it is all speculation. I have heard of no one that has not been paid, and I have gotten everything I have submitted back times 2 (But I am only using coins that have relatively low value) but free is free. So no harm at this point. Only submitting 50% of profits gained until they up and run..

You got paid in the expectation you would make posts telling people how you doubled your money which in turn would encourage others to deposit.
Obvious ponzi is obvious! There is no other explanation.

Quote from: waxo on January 05, 2015, 01:44:23 PM

ponzi ! just the first get rewarded, you all know the end !

4x13

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1011

By that statement you are saying I am somehow involved and I can assure you I am not. I was just passing on the info and what I have experienced personally myself. Do you have any personal experience with this site?? or anything for that matter??

Quote from: rel-oad on January 05, 2015, 03:48:50 PM

Quote from: 4x13 on January 05, 2015, 02:55:33 PM

Well, I agree that it Probably IS a Ponzi, but at this point it is all speculation. I have heard of no one that has not been paid, and I have gotten everything I have submitted back times 2 (But I am only using coins that have relatively low value) but free is free. So no harm at this point. Only submitting 50% of profits gained until they up and run..

You got paid in the expectation you would make posts telling people how you doubled your money which in turn would encourage others to deposit.
Obvious ponzi is obvious! There is no other explanation.

Quote from: waxo on January 05, 2015, 01:44:23 PM

ponzi ! just the first get rewarded, you all know the end !

iantunc

sr. member

Activity: 433

Merit: 250

We are the first to program your future (c)

Quote from: Kushedout on January 05, 2015, 04:17:38 PM

Quote from: iantunc on January 05, 2015, 09:27:19 AM

Quote from: David Latapie on January 05, 2015, 09:15:06 AM

Quote from: iantunc on January 05, 2015, 09:07:22 AM

Quote from: David Latapie on January 05, 2015, 08:46:44 AM

Multisend or recurring payments?

Mintcoin uses the term "recurring payments" instead of S4C. I find "recurring payments" much more appealing than multisend (I can say that, since I am the one who proposed 'multisend'). And you, what do you prefer? 'multisend' or 'recurring payements'?

'Recurring payments' is describing the essence of feature more precisely, but is inconvenient for usage in terms of phonetics and sounds like a generalized description rather then a feature name. Besides that, it's better to implement unique names, if they are not standardized. 'Multisend' is good but quite misleading, as it can be confused with Bitcoin's sendmany RPC call. We can try 'Autosend(s)' or 'Autopayment(s)', or something like this.

Since then, I changed to "recurringsend", shorter and closer to the truth (see las paragraph), like Mint. Still one syllable too long for me. I don't really like recurringsend either, but could not find anything better (recursend would be awful).

What about "Cyclic send"?

Wasn't the name "multisend" picked due to proposed feature to perform multiple s4c ? (More than 2).
David, correct me if I am wrong on this.

Also, I think "reaccuring" is only the nature of the function and should be undertood and expected by user, as it would continue to preform a set function untill changed by user again.

The problem with "recurring" is that a user may expect equal intervals between sends, not tied to irregular stakes. But this word is the most descriptive so far, imho, even if it sounds more like a menu option than a Feature name™

Topic: [HYP] HyperStake | Generous Reward Staking | Advanced Staking Controls & Wallet - page 190. (Read 679332 times)