Pages:
Author

Topic: I will create a forked bitcoin chain - page 3. (Read 6922 times)

Red
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 115
April 22, 2013, 07:01:06 PM
#45
Yes you understood me right, I dont have to create any genesis block. All oldcoins get included by beeing there.

Hi wingding! Thanks for introducing yourself in my thread. I read both of your threads and agree with your "why" logic. I have to admit this is one of the more interesting approaches so far. Specifically forking off the existing chain.

How far along are you? I might like to help out.

Technically, it doesn't seem particularly hard. Are you going to set it up to use merged mining? That seems logical since you are giving the people already mining bitcoin free coins.

I think the word "forked" in the topic is confusing people. It makes it seem like you are trying to create duplicate BitCoins. I'm pretty confident that is not your goal. It might be useful to adjust your description to one that parallels what other AltCoins have done.

I will create a forked chain new coin "LinearCoin" to accommodate broad adaptation.

The only major change from BitCoin is:

Reward of 200 BTC per block for each new block - (never changed)

  • "LinearCoin" will have an 11 million+ pre-mine with all coins pre-distributed to existing BitCoin owners.
  • The chain will produce 10.5 million coins/year (which is far from enough to cause inflation)
  • The clients (incl source) running the new fork will be made available well ahead of the fork

You should also make it clear that LinearCoins are not BitCoins and will never operate as interchangeable (value equivalents) with merchants or existing exchanges. Might also make it clear that BTC to LnC trading will have its own market determined exchange rate.

Just a suggestion.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
Bytecoin: 8VofSsbQvTd8YwAcxiCcxrqZ9MnGPjaAQm
April 22, 2013, 11:13:50 AM
#44
Remember that word inflation refers to value of the asset, not the amount.

I hate to tell you this, but no, it doesn't.
full member
Activity: 168
Merit: 100
April 22, 2013, 11:09:23 AM
#43
Random thought; probably nonsense...

Couldn't someone fork one of these AltCoins while it's still early, leave everything the same, but adjust the difficult to a something stupid low, and solo mine it?  Wouldn't that fork the chain at the genesis block, essentially?
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 504
April 22, 2013, 04:36:10 AM
#42
Seriously dude?  Thats mondo easy.  take all the adjust values for unspent outputs and write them into the genesis block to the address they belong as coinbase txs.

I was interpreting wingding's statement as describing how coins issued prior to the fork would still be spendable on the inflatacoin side of the fork ... that they wouldn't be touched (i.e., "harmed").    But my assertion is that any spending of a "pure" coin issued pre-fork is a valid transaction on both sides thus any spending on the inflatacoin side is harmful to the holder of the coin.

A pure coin is one that has no taint from the coins issues after the fork, and thus would be a valid spend transaction on the Bitcoin blockchain side as well.

Now I suppose you could ensure that the inflatacoin client included in every spend transaction some taint in the INPUTs so that the transactions would only be valid on the inflatacoin side.  I still personally wouldn't use any coins with that client until they've been fully spent on the Bitcoin blockchain side, but after that I might milk the inflatacoin fork for whatever I could get from it, sure.

Yes you understood me right, I dont have to create any genesis block. All oldcoins get included by beeing there. How in the world do you think I could influence the transaction in the old chain? Thats not possible. Appearantly your term inflatacoin suggest that this new coins would be subject to inflation. In that part you are wrong, and I believe you know it. Bitcoin had even larger rate of increase in its beginning. Remember that word inflation refers to value of the asset, not the amount.
legendary
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1010
April 21, 2013, 04:30:39 PM
#41
Seriously dude?  Thats mondo easy.  take all the adjust values for unspent outputs and write them into the genesis block to the address they belong as coinbase txs.

I was interpreting wingding's statement as describing how coins issued prior to the fork would still be spendable on the inflatacoin side of the fork ... that they wouldn't be touched (i.e., "harmed").    But my assertion is that any spending of a "pure" coin issued pre-fork is a valid transaction on both sides thus any spending on the inflatacoin side is harmful to the holder of the coin.

A pure coin is one that has no taint from the coins issues after the fork, and thus would be a valid spend transaction on the Bitcoin blockchain side as well.

Now I suppose you could ensure that the inflatacoin client included in every spend transaction some taint in the INPUTs so that the transactions would only be valid on the inflatacoin side.  I still personally wouldn't use any coins with that client until they've been fully spent on the Bitcoin blockchain side, but after that I might milk the inflatacoin fork for whatever I could get from it, sure.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
April 20, 2013, 09:20:47 PM
#40
No I would never ever touch the earlier coins

How would you do that?

Seriously dude?  Thats mondo easy.  take all the adjust values for unspent outputs and write them into the genesis block to the address they belong as coinbase txs. 
hero member
Activity: 924
Merit: 501
April 20, 2013, 08:25:02 PM
#39
may I suggest your has algo use a combination of PBKDF 2 followed by bcrypt.  Should make it harder to gpu mine (bring back the cpu mining!)

Agreed, any other ASIC HOSTILE crypto currencies out there with a working forum?
legendary
Activity: 1988
Merit: 1012
Beyond Imagination
April 20, 2013, 08:15:28 PM
#38
I think after 75% of coins are mined, these kind of thoughts will become more and more

Just feel strange that people never complain that central banks being the only early adopter of fiat money creation
sr. member
Activity: 271
Merit: 250
April 20, 2013, 07:14:21 PM
#37
This sounds like a good JokeCoin submission to me.
legendary
Activity: 1002
Merit: 1000
Bitcoin
April 20, 2013, 07:08:23 PM
#36
I bet the OP intention are not a fork but an alt-coin !
Bad title, and no future to this !

FAIL
legendary
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1010
April 20, 2013, 02:15:10 PM
#35
No I would never ever touch the earlier coins

How would you do that?

From another thread by winding:

looking at this guys older posts... people have been trying to explain to him how bitcoin works... looks like he is just refusing to understand it... and really want to get his early coins... so sad... (me is still sitting here very happy finding out about it in 2013, instead of 2016, or 2020)

And yet another thread by wingding:

The address is valid in both sides of the fork.  So let's say that somehow you trick me into spending my bitcoins that I received prior to the fork and pay using them to an address in your inflatacoin fork.  But then you can then use that exact same address on the Bitcoin blockchain side as well, broadcast my transaction there and receive the full value of the transaction there as well.

Participating on your side would be seen as the way to watch your bitcoins disappear.

Because there is no way to ensure that all transactions from the Bitcoin blockchain get into your inflatacoin fork, then the only time your chain becomes interesting to me is after my transaction confirms on the Bitcoin blockchain but where I've composed and sent a double spend of the UTXO used to your side of the fork, and then pay you with those funds which are now worthless on the Bitcoin blockchain.  That's a win / win for me!

hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 504
April 20, 2013, 02:11:04 PM
#34
You could also fix the early adopter/bitdust problems.


1)  Any unspent coins generated/transferred but not spent since the first 18 mos of the network are deleted.

2)  Unspent balances less than .01 are gone

3)  Coins older than 12-18 months are divided by 2.  Coins 18-24 months old divided by 4.  Coins 24-36 months old divided by 8, and the rest are older than 18 months and are deleted.

4) to prevent windfalls to mt gox, who hold a bunch of accounts and won't give that money to their customers in the new chain, cap btc address balances at 100 BTC (currently $10k).  

This might reduce that 11 mil number to like 7 or 8 mil.   you then increase the total coins to ever be released to 100 mil, so current users wind up with 7-8% of the total future supply.

You could form a genesis block that has a special coinbase.  All the current unspent addresses would be the coinbase with balances next to them.

Then you could come up with an adoption schedule over the next 10 year:

No I would never ever touch the earlier coins- that would certanily be a disaster. And the early adopters arent a problem. The problem is that there are not supply for tha large masses to enter - who now are completely left to the grace of the early adopters.
hero member
Activity: 607
Merit: 500
April 20, 2013, 02:00:55 PM
#33
the only "fair" way is to implement demurage to BTC and eventually to all other coins out there. FRC has it already! Smiley
hero member
Activity: 490
Merit: 500
April 20, 2013, 01:52:09 PM
#32
Also 200 btc/block forever is kinda weak too, shouldn't it start at 100/block for the this year. move to 125/block next year, 150/block year 3, 200/block year 4, THEN stay there.  Let inflation accelerate to accommodate more noobs.

That's an interesting concept.... perhaps a deflation model where the block reward starts at say 1 coin per block and every 4 years 1 coin is added to the block rewarded.  Someone graph the inflation rate :-)
sr. member
Activity: 363
Merit: 250
April 20, 2013, 01:00:12 PM
#31
I will create a forked chain of bitcoin to accomdate for broad adaptation.

The only major change from the old chain is:

Reward of 200 BTC per block for each new block - (never changed)


  • The chain will produce 10.5 million coins/year (which is far from enough to cause inflation)
  • The clients (incl source) running the new fork will be made available well ahead of the fork
  • All bitcoins created before the fork will by nature be contained in the new chain




I think Litecoins can solve this problem right? Then maybe years later when Litecoins are worth $1000 another coin like PPC can be used for smaller transactions since it has no currency limit.
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
April 20, 2013, 12:52:39 PM
#30
I suggest calling it Splitcoin, since you forked or split it from the original.  Cheesy
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
April 20, 2013, 12:47:23 PM
#29
You could also fix the early adopter/bitdust problems.


1)  Any unspent coins generated/transferred but not spent since the first 18 mos of the network are deleted.

2)  Unspent balances less than .01 are gone

3)  Coins older than 12-18 months are divided by 2.  Coins 18-24 months old divided by 4.  Coins 24-36 months old divided by 8, and the rest are older than 18 months and are deleted.

4) to prevent windfalls to mt gox, who hold a bunch of accounts and won't give that money to their customers in the new chain, cap btc address balances at 100 BTC (currently $10k).  

This might reduce that 11 mil number to like 7 or 8 mil.   you then increase the total coins to ever be released to 100 mil, so current users wind up with 7-8% of the total future supply.

You could form a genesis block that has a special coinbase.  All the current unspent addresses would be the coinbase with balances next to them.

Then you could come up with an adoption schedule over the next 10 year:
Year   % distributed
0:          7 or 8 %  (current base of coins)
1:         +2%
2:         +3%
3:         +5%
5:         +7.5%
....
8:          +15%
9:          +5%
10:        +1%
----------------
Total:    100%


I also suggest changing the protocol to prevent dust.  The minimum unspent output should be established at say 0.001 for txs created in the next 10 years, then 0.0001 (add a decimal place) next 10 years, etc...

Also consider implementing a minimum tx fee, which would kill the need for all this 'how old is yo coin' crap code.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1036
April 20, 2013, 12:38:07 PM
#28

Something something something raise pirates from the dead? Sad
it's: looks like poo, unhappy user, close program, dead altchain. In wingdings for the wingding dingdong.

If the form supported emoji in Unicode 6.1, there's an appropriate character:
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
April 20, 2013, 12:19:56 PM
#27
♨, ☹, ☒, ☠, ✞
Something something something raise pirates from the dead? Sad
full member
Activity: 168
Merit: 100
April 20, 2013, 11:44:59 AM
#26
Are you going to call it forkcoin?

I like the idea of altcoins quite a bit.  I'm not as enthused by this one, since it sounds like very little thought went into it.  You are changing a single variable in main.h, and doing some cross-compiling.

If you're going to fork something, maybe start with one of the recent innovations, like LTC, PPC, or NVC?  Hit up newnetcoins.com, read about other failed coins, and try to learn from how and why they failed?  Then, make your modifications, release the new coin, but have things already in place...  binaries for at least 2 platforms, a couple competing pools, a faucet, and maybe a service where you could spend it?..  a game or something?  Run a closed alpha with a small group on a testnet, and a beta with volunteers (blockchain will be deleted) so you can work out the launch bugs.

You know...  launch a coin?

Or, you could do as you've said you would, create a new coin, post a link in the JokeCoin thread, and see how many days it lasts.
Pages:
Jump to: