Topic: Ixcoin TODO - page 150. (Read 631736 times)

So Ixcoin has over 90% of it's hash from one miner?  How is that secure?

Litecoin right now is a problematic investment in that its main feature, 'democratic mining' is gone with the advent of ASIC based technology. 

iXcoin continues to be a viable due to its high hash rate.  That hash rate is secured by the participation of GHash.IO in the IXC foundation.   So there is a high level of assurance that iXcoin can't be compromised. 

Look GHash.IO already has 51% of BTC mining but we trust them to secure BTC.  GHash.IO has like maybe 90% of IXC mining.  So trusting GHash.IO is a given for not only IXC but also BTC.

Correct. If we can execute on the proper updates while also getting the right partners [abd raising awareness] then Litecoin will look like cheap left-overs in a very short timespan.

given its 2nd/third gen fatures iXCoin is a serious threat to Litecoin.  i wouldnt be bathing in shock if it were to exceed Litecoin marketcap within 3-6 months.

~CfA~

Anybody notice the hashrate on iXcoin right now?  68 PETA to devcoin's 50 and Namecoin's 65.

Killing Devcoin and even ahead of Namecoin which I have NEVER seen happen before.


Could iXcoin become the most secure alt coin in the world very soon?


Well, that would be a nice selling point, eh?

Amidst this market low  , Im steady holding my "stash".  Cheers...

It seems like IXcoin will never get onto Mintpal, for just .5 btc using the below service we will finally get on imo, aren't you tired of just watching other coins overtake us all the time. The OP even mentions IXcoin, if we can't beat them lets join them.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/want-to-get-on-top-of-the-mintpal-voting-list-639308

CEX.IO now has the majority of trading volume for IXC.  We've got good volume for the past couple of weeks.

This is a *very* good sign.  Don't look at the price... look at the fundamentals of the coin improving.

"premine" is also a coin:

 https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-pmc-premine-coin-rare-mining-transaction-fee-proof-of-concept-427519

"...Will Bitcoin be able to survive once the minting of new coins has ended? Nobody knows. ...."



I think that´s what dadingsda meant with:

"What´s up with premine? I thought it was a bitcoinclone, too?  I heard it was a test what will happen with bitcoin after distribution.
btw:"


ps: And it looks really interesting now. I just read some of the last posts and don´t get it at all. But it looks like a similar problem:

Quote from: kbroadfoot on June 05, 2014, 04:07:19 PM
PMC stops existing as soon as Maardien stops mining the empty blocks...  we need this new coin NOW...

Thanks for chiming in Mark.

Well, if getting tx fees is the same as coin subsidies then there is no advantage for a coin with all the coins mined.

Unless of course you change the protocol to allow for an algorithm which automatically queues all the transactions in order of cheapest fees to highest fees.

This would eliminate the need of working in a pool and then consumers would also ALWAYS get the cheapest transaction fees for their orders every-time.

I really can't believe something like this hasn't been done already - it's as democratic and free markets as you can get, although, in the long run the powerful rich miners would win once again.  There's just no way to stop that outside of confiscation and over-regulation which would lead to too many other severe problems.

On a different note, I totally agree about merge mining all the coins.  I'm really shocked that no major pool offers to merge mine all 8 coins.  Like you said, the additional cost is next to nothing.

A) The premine is being used to pay for bounties, albeit, very slowly.

B) iXcoin is an exact Bitcoin clone, meaning it's Identical Twin.

C) iXcoin is a test to see what happens when Bitcoin runs out of coins to mine.

D) Satoshi doesn't have a plan cause Satoshi is not real, but I am, and I say iXcoin is the  F U T U R E.


So the logical questions is, if iXcoin can do anything Bitcoin can do [right now] then why would anyone wait decades more to finally use a fully mature Bitcoin, when a fully mature Bitcoin is here now and it is called iXcoin.

 

Fees are only collected by solving blocks. Basically the black reward in total is not just the plain reward but also all the fees for that block.

So variance is exactly the same for fees as for blocks, if you mean variance in how long getween the times when you get lucky and actually get something.

So as someone wrote above. fees are the block reward once the "subsidy" part of the reward falls to zero.

Merging a coin s damn near free, you merely have to run the coin's daemon along with the other daemons, so it is dirt cheap, just basically costs a little bit of RAM and a little bit of disk space and a tiny amount of processing power. Each time you solve a block of any chain though, your miners need to be told to start work on a new block, so some miners didn't like the ten second or fifteen second or twelve second or whatever fast blocks of GeistGeld because that meant every few seconds al their mining rigs needed to be told to start fresh on a new block, whereas with ten minute block time chains such interuptions were only needed each ten minutes or so. Thus basically the faster the blocks the more of a tiny little fractional dent a chain makes in your overall mining efficiency.

Hardly anyone merges GeistGeld, probably mostly for that reason, but the next-fastest is I0Coin at one point five minutes per block, which is way less impact than GeistGeld and such tiny impact there is really no reason NOT to mine them unless you are some puny amateur at home with a tiny machine that does not have enough RAM and disk to run 6 or 7 or whatever coin daemons along with p2pool (the easiest mining pool system to do your home merge with).

So for professional pools, it really makes little sense NOT to mine at least 7 of the 8 merged coins, even if they decide not to bother with the 8th, GeistGeld, due to its speed.

But consider also how many many many crapcoins go on about how important it is to have fast blocks. If they are right, that fast blocks are a great feature, then it probably also makes no sense not to include GeistGeld in your merge, due to fast blocks being such a great feature and the cost of merged mining being basically trivial.

-MarkM-

Nope. Transaction fees means the fee you pay at pools, exchanges and other places and also from the standard coin QT's when sending transactions. a miner increasing or decreasing their transaction fee only matters when that person is a miner. it means its more likely to get inro a block.

What´s up with premine? I thought it was a bitcoinclone, too?  I heard it was a test what will happen with bitcoin after distribution.
btw:
What´s satoshi´s plan with bitcoin to solve this problem ?

They would be the new block reward [technically] but don't transactions get automatically routed to the lowest Tx fees on the network?

That was my understanding.  Any pool or miner can charge their respective fees, even zero fees so if what you're saying is right then that doesn't matter, the biggest pool would solve the most blocks and so they can charge the biggest fees and it wouldn't matter.

There is no logic in that and no efficiency so unless there will be one single set of static fees then this is not possible.  I'm pretty sure the system was coded for a more democratic and dynamic fees schedule [for the beginning, anyway].

Well, until those with massive hash power and deep pockets put the rest of the miners out of business by offering ZERO fees.  

Then we'll get the exact same ridiculously high, monopoly type fees we have in banking today.  But I'm sure Satoshi saw this, given it's obvious and common sense.  lol.

And if ixcoin beacame the new bitcoin? 

incorrect. transaction fees would be the new block reward on the network

The way I understand it when block rewards are over and fees take over, the fees are routed automatically to the lowest fees on the network.  This is how banks and the elite will put the poor common miner out of business and centralize the whole network all to themselves.  

Another [common sense] Satoshi flaw he coincidentally overlooked?   Haha!

So you could be a solo miner in Alaska and if your fees are the lowest you would get those transaction fees.

The massive hash power will still be needed but the reward structure would change completely, I believe, so that there would be no need to join a massive pool in order to get the lowest variance and thus the most stable Block Rewards.

You could then literally and easily change the protocol to punish or prevent pools from ever accumulating 51% of the hash power, but it wouldn't be necessary as most people would then just solo mine as the incentive to mine with the largest pool would be gone.

I'm trying right now to get some Bitcoin Core expert to chime in on twitter cause this is the way I understand it but I may be wrong.

But if I'm right, in just a few months iXcoin will instantly become more secure and decentralized than Bitcoin can ever hope to be, well, at least until the next century.  


Lol...talk about a big break!



Edit:  Changing to PoS is not even an option.  Only PoW with massive global hash power solves the Byzantine General's Problem.  And this is why ASICS are a must have and why sha256 will kill any and all other coins with different algos.

Medusa,

Correct, I understand that, but here's my thought.

Right now people mine with large pools due to the block reward.  The bigger pools like Ghash get more blocks due to the "luck" factor created by a significantly lower variance.

But when these block rewards are gone there's no real need for mining in large pools as the rewards will be fees and you will get the same fees if you're mining solo or in a massive pool.  Correct?

THEREFORE, this important change in mindset would allow a coin like iXcoin to alter the protocol, if it's even necessary at that point, to make it less desirable for any 1 pool to amass 51%.

Cause right now that's nearly impossible as people will still join the biggest pool in order to get more block rewards with less and less variance.

So where iXcoin will be able to employ such a strategy in just a few more months, Bitcoin will not be able to do so for decades which means that Bitcoin will always be more centralized and a much more risky coin to hold and invest in.

and the transaction fees?
or change the code to pos?

(sry i´m a noob)