Topic: NA - page 378. (Read 893613 times)

Quickfix could be adding a check for low blocktime and increase the banscore with 10. That way clients would disconnect from clever after 10 fast blocks for 1 day because the default ban limit is 100. Easy to implement, dynamic and not centralized.

I fully understand how important it is to be well distributed.That's why I say, emphasize on that.
Teach the dutch peoplewhta NLG is and how to use, this is as important as atttracting the Merchants.
Somple explanation like this'
1. Down wallet.
2. Make account at bittrex.
3. Buy btc at bitronic, send them to your btc wallet on bittrex.
4. Buy NLG.
5. Send them to wallet or mobile device to use.

But probably this kind of info is available already, I guess.

My aim is not to sell to dutch people by the way ( I just sell when things go bad imo). I just hope, that I never feel the need to sell any NLG and just use them to buy things.
I am a crypto idealist, who thinks bitcoin ( altcoins) will make this world more fare and will finally make us independent from those criminal banks.

Well then it's just war lol

Seriously though, that's a possibility.  But I honestly don't think Terk would risk the reputation of his profitable pool to go that extra step.  It would put him in a bad light with the whole crypto community, not just Gulden's.  Besides, he would need to take focus off of the profitability of his pool to do so.  He would most likely need to mine in to the difficulties that would be totally unprofitable.  I don't think his more conscientious miners would approve of that.


Whitelisting, IMO, is the abuse of power.  That is centralizing the coin, and it's something I just can't get behind.

To be effective, you don't ban the IP... you ban the IP block.  In terms of pools and hosted server solutions, it would restrict him to using a VPN or stratum proxy off premise.  Either would probably introduce enough latency into the mix to make it not worth the effort.  Again though, would he seriously go through the effort to do this when he could just pick another coin to rape?

I know algorithm changes will fix this later, but I'm just tired of seeing 50% of the blocks pass by the legitimate pools, and get insta-sold.  It's the only reason I brought up this whole discussion again.

-Fuse

Sorry Fuse, but banning does not work, They'll change IP or proxy it the speed you change socks. If you want to do some selection whitelisting is the way, just allow anyone with a good reputation and give others a hard time(i.e. raise the diff fast, block them xx seconds if they mine three fast blocks, whatever)  till the moment they build a reputation, No IP needed just public keys. But whatever solution is taken the missing key is communication and coordination.

Or IP banning provokes them to harm us even more...

This.


The problem is that when Terk was told he's killing the coin, he responded that it was his obligation to his miners to make them money and that the devs would have to fix it.  Basically a "fuck you, I'm going to do it until you stop me".  I don't like that.  He makes a good sum of money with his pool at the expense of coins like Gulden.

Gulden isn't willing to be abused.  When clever was identified as the guilty party, a lot of effort was made to try to get them to stop.  Now we're working on changing the coin to combat the threat of multi-pools like clever raping the chain like clever does.

In all honesty, IP banning them sends a clear message.  If they go out of their way to get around it, it shows their true intentions... which I'm sure we all know is to profit at our expense.

-Fuse

Not on purpose, they just want to satisfy the miners by getting as much profit as they can, even if it means dragging other coins down. The problem is that they are evil because they consciously know that it is wrong, but put their interest above those of the coins they mine. An IP ban is an ethical question, Geert knows what is best for NLG, so let him decide what's best.

Guldencoin is apparently 'willing to be abused' by not protecting themselves. Difficult situation..

The protecting is the problem, you can't just 'fix' something like this, it takes time, 1 mistake can be fatal in this business. With technological innovation comes more risks and more things can go wrong, that's why airplanes use outdated technology instead of state of the art tech.

So they are raping the current flaws in the Guldencoin algorithm on purpose? Then is a temporarily ip ban totally justified till the problems are fixed.

On the other hand, can you blame clevermining when Guldencoin is apparently 'willing to be abused' by not protecting themselves. Difficult situation..

They are not only abusing, but also raping the network

dat zet geen zoden aan de dijk

In my opinion you can only justify an ip ban if clevermining is abusing (do they?) the Guldencoin network.

Problem with this is that it is not pooled mining, but solo CPU mining. Chances of getting NLG through this way are very slim.

ontopicplease,
 That depends if you sell them right away like cleverminig or not. The coins will be more evenly distributed with a cloud-mining solution, than you selling coins for a huge profit to dutch people. All i am trying to say is that we should be careful not to lose to many coins to foreign investors which can play with the price when the block size becomes smaller. The same has happened with Bitcoin, only a small group of people have allot of the coins. Clevermining is giving these sharks the opportunity to stack in for selling them when the price increases, with clevermining out of the pictures this is less the case. A guaranteed question of the media will be, from who do you buy the coins?, the answer, from some guy who bought them early. will not make people very happy.

I've been following the discussion the past 24 hours and have some mixed feelings. My effort to push back clever below the 50% failed with the rise of the market price and following clever's hash rate (I assumed they put all their hashing power on NLG in that short time frame).

None of the proposed solutions are ideal, and I change my opinion on the IP banning. While I don't like it, I like all the other suggested solutions less. The pro of this solution is that it is only temporarily, until the new difficulty changing algorithm is in place. Then clever can, IMHO, be unblocked again. The problem is how to get that implemented, IP addresses are not in the block chain, right?

The thing that has been on my mind today is if I should continue buying the hashing power. I can sustain the current level for some time, but if clever increases their hashing power at higher market rate, I can't really follow much (assuming that the renting prise goes down due to higher bitcoin price). Which makes me thing if all this buying hashing power is really worth it. Do others think I should continue, or just stop it (and accept 3 hour block times).

You guys know we can manipulate the MP's? Drive the price of NLG up, attract the MP, figure when they sell their NLGs, drop the price right before and let them sell into our low prices. This will persuade all MP's to stop mining NLG as they all have a "responsibility to their miners". Works if they sell in lump sums. IF MP's want to play dirty, we can too....

Maybe a couple of times, but not often did I post here.
I am dutch, a crypto idealist and support/invest in altcoins. I did invest in about 10 different altcoins, where I expect good results. NLG is one of them.
But this whole discussion about banning clevermining makes no sense to meat all. Every coins that can be mined (isn't POS) is victim to these big multipools. But that's no problem. It's logical, the more succesfull coins are attact harder, but somewhere there will be an equilibrium.
I guess, the only protection is to stop POW and go POS. If NLG doesn't like and that wants to stay POW, that's fine. BTC is just like NLG going to be mined in 40 years and BTC is surviving as well.
The main reason I support NLG is because, I really like the vision from the devs. The keypoint is getting acceptance by merchants. Imagine a future where one or more coins will be accepted, do you really think that the average man in the street knows if the coin is POW or POS?
The irritation here about companies abroad picking up( mining) coins meant to be for the dutch citizens is also not really valid.
The marketprice is the real price imo. Every dutch citizen can buy a few bitcoin very easily on bitonic ( no I am not connected to bitonic, but I like their business and every country should have one), van send them to bittrex and buy NLG for this low price. Actually I am really happy NLG is still cheap, I bought over 1M NLG already and still have many buying orders between 430 and 470 sat. So, what will be the difference when the dutch people eventually buy the NLG from me instead clevermining. Not much, I think. The only difference is that I only start selling when the the devs and community don't function, like I would like to see.
The future success of this coin will be the result of the devs and communities attempts to proceed. As long as they go on doing what they do, the demand for NLG will go up and groups like clevermining can not deliver all these coins demanded, so the price wil rise.
What I mean to say is concentrate on developing the coin and don't spend your energy on irrelavant issues like multipools.

My exact sentiments.  I'm not bashing the act of buying hashes.  In fact, I praised Biomike and others for helping the network by doing.  I'm bashing the fact that we have to do it just to keep the network healthy.  I agree that too much power in deciding who mines and who doesn't is concerning.  But I'm pretty sure the community here can agree that clever is not good for NLG in any way, shape, or form.  I would guess that 99% of the people here wish clever was gone.


Buerra, I agree that this is the answer, but if people could just do this on a whim, any coin would succeed.  The fact that Gulden is as successful as it has been speaks volumes to where it will go in the future.  But XYZcoin is coming out next week, and XYZ2coin comes out the week after.  Miners typically don't stick to a coin unless they truly believe in it.  I suspect our miners are already in this thread.  You want to gain more miners, we need to start spreading the word in this forum about NLG.  We have plenty of people spreading the word in the streets.  We need to do that here.

If cloud mining is the solution, it needs to be a fiat to hashpower solution in the Netherlands, targeted at people who don't know about mining.  Cloud mining would bring in virgin miners who would probably stick to the coin long term.  If you target already established community members, you're looking at people that won't stick around very long.  They'll rent hashpower from other cloud mining services that allow them to jump around.  I know I would, and I'm 100% behind Gulden.

One possible solution, and something that would afford us the benefit of additional hashpower, without the possibility of 100% sellout, and it would be a positive selling point for Gulden, and it would add network security... and a bunch of other great stuff, would be merge-mining.  I've been seeing coins do this lately.  They get picked up by LTC pools that merge mine and the miners get paid in the coin.  I have pointed my miners to a LTC pool recently that merge-mines just to test it out.  Mining 4-5 coins at one time is really slick, and it would really bring a lot of recognition to Gulden.  Just a thought.

-Fuse

Yes, I think it's an easy way to get the normal users more involved. Especially when they receive a small reward for only leaving a wallet open.

You mean like this? http://www.projectgulden.nl/92/rekenkracht-bijdragen-aan-het-guldencoin-netwerk/ but standard and with an easy UI or something?

The normal users are already familiar with using the Guldencoin wallet. Why not using those wallets to provide some more steady hashing power to the network. Users can choose in their wallets how much power they want to contribute (this option is already there), and for every full day that they leave their wallet open and contribute to the network they receive a little NLG reward. In this way they don't have to do technical stuff and it feels like they receiving NLG for free.

In my surroundings most of the people are interested in NLG (specially free NLG) but don't want to learn about the technical mining part.