Topic: NA - page 322. (Read 893613 times)

Trust isn't necessarily the issue here.  I trust him completely.  I just want to see things move along and not sit stagnant.

I've spoken in the past with /GJ about development in PM, and he expressed his dedication to NLG development, but lack of time and funds to make it a dedicated job.  Let's face it... in most cases, devs do this in their free time because they need to pay the bills with a full-time job.  I'm not entirely sure what /GJ does for a living outside of crypto, but if using dev premine to pay him to allow him to dedicate more time to development helps, I'm all for it.  This is all up to /GJ though... we can't tell him to quit his job and only work on NLG.

As far as GO skills go, that's not my bag.  I just don't have the time to put into learning it right now.  I'm sure I could, but I've got enough on my plate.  However, if the dev team and community decide to push forward with DIGI, then I'm ready to create the code git pull if needed.  No dev time is needed on the dev team's end, minus the windows compile.  At least that could take a little pressure of the team.

Like others have said though, I'd like to hear from /GJ and see what he has to say.  I'm ready to act on any decision, I just need direction.




Love the story, and the analogy!

-Fuse

Just a real life metaphor from me....

My best friend and I bought a boat 10 years ago. It needed finishing on the interior. I am a hands on guy (measure once, cut many times), the opposite of my friend who likes to make models and lists endlessly before he actually starts to do anything. Needless to say this created some challenges.

One weekend our wives decided it was time to end discussions and encouraged us to start doing the job. I decided to go along with the ideas we came up with together and drove by the stores to pick up the materials and started on the job. My friend started preparing a list and spend the entire weekend finding out where to best buy the materials.

On Sunday he arrived at the shipyard with the list and found me with a beer on the boat. It was finished, almost exactly the way he described on his list....

I don't want to say here this is the best way to go, but it might help you to understand why I'm with Fuse's last remarks...

Throwing money at GJ from the premine isn't going to get anything done faster and could be used in a better way.

Besides, don't you all trust him? 

I'll start looking on Odesk and Elance.  Anyone with C++ and GO experience would be able to do the port.  I'd rather let /GJ decide on whether he wants to dev the rest.  It's his baby after all.  Has any post been made to announce the simulator to the crypto community?  There is a dev section of the forums that is filled with very competent devs who eat up this kind of development.  I would guess that announcing it there would lead to an "outsourcing" of community development.  Might just be easier to go that route.

What I say next might seem argumentative, but it's really just for my clarification.  Don't take it the wrong way.

With respect to the testing, how is real world mining not actual maths?  It is how the algorithm is going to behave on a chain, rather than how a simulator says it will behave.  I would think if you wanted true test data you would truly test it, would you not?  Like I said, I'm for testing against the simulator, but we need to know that the simulator(which simulates actual mining, not actually mining) is giving us substantiated results.  We can't say the simulator is the key to testing algorithms without testing the simulator against an actual testnet first.

For example, you would need to mine on a testnet.  You would simulate large wave, small wave, etc. and record all the data.  Then you would need to replicate that chain with the simulator, and compare the results.  If the simulator was off by a predetermined margin, you wouldn't be able to say the simulator was accurate.  After all the testnet chain would be the definitive data... it's the actual mining.

So to say that testnet data is an educated guess is a little off base.  It is the actual, substantiated data collected from mining.

-Fuse

Yeah. In the meanwhile we can approach Golang developers anyway. It's handy to have one or two that we can call in anyway. Can you give me assistence with this Fuse? Send me a list of requirements/ code that the Golang devs needs to implement and where? Preferably via PM so I can type up a job-post on several freelance boards.

Thanks.

And to calm everyone down. Please take a moment to breathe, testing thoroughly is very very important. Don't rush to pushing for DIGI just because it seems the right thing to do. We need to know it is the best play, based on maths and not an educated guess on tests on the testnet. Sure. It goes a long way and a lot better than no testing at all. But having multiple numbers and tests just gives everyone more bang for their buck.

Not to worry. Buerra's pushing things now. LOL MONEY MONEY LOL

I'd love to see the simulator results as well, but like /GJ said himself, there is still work to be done to properly test large wave simulations, and of course there's the matter of porting DIGI.  I'm all for testing with the simulator if those features can be implemented in a timely fashion.  Whether that's with outside, paid help, or through /GJ, paid via dev premine, or unpaid... I don't care.  Let's just get roadmap, action plan, whatever figured out and in the works.

-Fuse

you're right...I spoke before my turn

Maybe wait for a reply from /GeertJohan

Like the idea but testing is not possible yet and maybe it takes too much time right now.
So I suggest, voting is the best we can do right now. And a 2nd round of votes later on is possible too...  

Also, I thought we all were waiting for an algo change and we should be patience. But reading back now I think we should take action as a community a long time back allready?

I suggest we test fuse's digishield with the simulator as well before putting it to a vote. More results to make up our minds.

If your DIGI solution works my suggestion is to implement it, so GJ has more time to get the final solution worked out (if it's still needed then).

And about the communication: if you want to run a community, feed the community.

Any update would essentially require a fork, because you are in fact forking away from the minority(unupdated users) with the majority(updated users).  As long as a majority of people upgrade, the fork isn't noticed.  But BioMike is correct in that a change can happen at a specific block.  That's why I mentioned that if I had a desired "go-live" block number, I could post the git pull if that's what the dev team and community wanted.

Again, I'm 100% behind whatever the dev team wants to do.  I just want to present this plan of action because my team feels it's a smart choice.  If /GJ wants to see other options, I'm all for it.  Keeping DGW3 and shortening the block time is an option, DIGI with a shorter block time is an option, a new weighted average algo is an option.  There's a lot of different ways this can go.

However, 20% DIGI with our current block time works, and it's an easy fix.  If someone has a better solution, I want to hear it because I want this to succeed.

As far as paying /GJ for development, I'm all for using the premine for it.  I also mentioned using a portion of the physical coin profit.  I'm not going to make millions off the coin sales, but maybe I can help with a server bill to offset dev costs for a month or two or something.  Or maybe a case of [insert caffeinated beverage here] to keep the fire stoked lol.  IDK... just tell me how to help.  Give me a plan of action.

-Fuse

Edit:


I would like to hear from /GJ as well, and I stand behind a vote.  However, if /GJ wants to test DIGI against the simulator, I would want to see a roadmap of how we're going to get to that point with all the needed variables(large wave, DIGI code, etc).

Additionally, if a vote is created in the official forums, can you do it in English as well?  I feel lost trying to get info there, as most of the current discussion happens in Dutch.  I know, I know... it's a Dutch coin  .  I just want to keep abreast of what's going on.

I don't think the update would need a coordinated fork. You could put the new algo in effect at a specific future block. Previous updates should give an indication on how quick updates are picked up by the users, based on that you could pick a block on when the algo change hits the network.

Although I am not as impatient as others might have become, I also agree with the majority that we need something to change any time soon now.

Right now my priority lies in creating a solid and growing user base, that is what my project is all about. This also means that Icebear is right in stating that a hard fork after thousands of new users have joined is not really desirable. Fortunately the project will start with a preliminary subscription phase, so it won't be affected that much by algo changes.

If I look at the current user base of NLG though, it won't hurt too much to start with an implementation of Fuse's Digi solution mid January first so we can give GJ the time he deserves in creating the most perfect long term solution. We must not be to scared around an extra temporary change atm, I think more damage comes from stalling things right now than a hard fork would bring.

A voting on the official forum would be best to get this decision from the ground I think...

I also would like to have a bit more news from the dev team (on a weekly basis would be nice). If they can't spend 30 minutes of their time to inform the community, I'm all for the change proposed by Fuse (I thought he could put in a pull request with a fix right now). To be honest, this should be solved anytime soon now. Would mid-January be a reasonable time to have something that puts Clever back? (I have still plenty of funds to keep the hashing baseline up, but the recent price increase hasn't been helpful. So, I'd rather have this solved sooner than later).

Is /GJ still working on the simulator? Are there (still) plans for a complete new algo special for Guldencoin? Is there a roadmap for the algo chance? Think the community wants to have a quick peek in the devs agenda after which we can decide how to move on and if we go for Fuse' DIGI solution. Is this possible? If you want to discuss this in a smaller group I like to hear too. Like to discuss this and to finally move on with the Guldencoin project ;-)

Maybe creating a poll so people can vote on what to do next is a good idea so we get more insight in what we want.
Don't get me wrong I fully back the dev team and GeertJohan but I really think we need the algorithm changes and after seeing the graphs Fuse showed I'm pretty confident this is the best short-term solution to our problems with clevermining .

Isn't it possible to do temporarily a little adjustment in the DWG3 parameters without a mandatory upgrade until the simulator is ready for testing?  Or can't that be done without a mandatory upgrade? That would mean some improvements already, the bigger come later then with the new Guldencoin algo.

There is over 6.6 million left of the premine. Why not use some of the premine to get this sorted out? While the team has a premine the community is looking to them to do the work, when the premine runs out then the community will donate/help with other projects.

https://distribution.guldencoin.com/#/dev-premine

Although the community has been doing a lot of this already in good faith with all these other projects that have been coming out. We really have a special community now the team needs to rise up!

Everyone is enjoying holidays now so we can't expect much work but in January we need to see lots of effort go into this algorithm changes.

The easiest option would be digishield but looks like the team want to make sure by creating the simulator, however I feel the simulator was not worked on enough and from Geerts last msg it's as if the team wants others to do the work now which is making it a bit more difficult since it has to be done in GO. Why not just complete the project early next year, do the algo change and then take a break from guldencoin for a month. This needs to be given more urgency so we don't run out of lubrication for clevermining while he ass rapes the coin.