Topic: New Ixcoin fork -> I0coin - page 21. (Read 217143 times)

Maybe make a existing amount in the network like 100K, and everyone can mine it, at a set rate of lets say 20 per block, and as soon as 100K is distributed out to everyone; it will never ever create anymore.

And once this is fully distributed, then create a fee for per transaction, and
the miners mine off the fees of transactions, so miners can still pull some from others.

This would be a interesting idea to work around.

Call these goldcoins (GC), or something idk

Just an idea.

How is the exchange going for i0coin? is it still be developed?
There is some miners on i0coin, so looks like some life.

And it will hit 150K in a couple days or a week or so.

Keep it going.

Add a icon to client, add some designs, and perhaps ideas.

And lets promote this thing!

If I had the option.  I wish 100% of the coins were pre-mined and the future mine rate was 0 per block.  Suppose someone created a coin with 100,000,000 pre-mined.  The owner of those 100,000,000 want to see the economy grow to make his coins worth more.  That coin would be worth nothing.   Then suppose he put some up for auction maybe 1,000,000 for $1.  A couple nerds buy.  Then a couple nerds set-up a business to do some programming for some coin.  Before you know it it gets on an exchange and it starts to have value.  maybe 0.0034 per BTC.  Suppose it seems to be traded FBX or TBX.   Each of these coins still trades 20 times a day at btc-e.  At this point all new mining hurts the price of the coin.  Without the mining the price would only be dependent on the number of users and trades.  Owners of coin like to see their coin go up.  If they don't think it will go up, they will sell it, only using the coin fiand when they need to.  I think I read an article where a Howard Johnson hotel accepted bitcoin as payment, but when they got the payment they immediately sold the bitcoin for usd.   They had no faith in the currency.   A dropping currency is sold and a rising currency is bought.  Suppose after a couple years the coin is now worth 2.3 BTC per coin.  Since the price rose, the people will want to hold it to delay gratification or to pool money to buy a larger ticket item.   

This is what happen to bitcoin.  The price hit $2 and since the price was rising people wanted it.  it rose to $20 due to supply and demand.  At that point the miners were making as much as the new money coming in.  When the hype money slowed the price of bitcoin dropped.  transactions per day slowed.  As it dropped, it dropped more and more as people sold due to the dropping price and the new mined coins added to the supply.  When it hit $2, new and old buyers came in and started buying again to equal the new mined supply.

You forget the second reason for currency issuance.  Your currency has no value if people can't acquire it to pay you.  The nominal value of currency is immaterial.  Bitcoin could have been designed on the concept of entire monetary supply = 1 BTC. and each of the block rewards being 0.0000025 BTC each.  Today the price of the single BTC would be ~$18 million.

Bitcoin would still have the same rate of monetary inflation.  If you want to change the growth in the money supply you need to change the slope of the curve not the nominal value.

Cutting a block reward from 48 to 1 certainly does change the curve but there is no free lunch.  You are simply stealing buying power from future miners to increase the buying power of you pre-mined coins.

Even at 7 block reward, the inflation is still working on the SC price.  It was once 0.018 now it is 0.0095.  The economy can't really flourish, until you can save.  The owners of existing coins owe nothing to future miners, other than minimum fee to maintain the network.  Suppose you buy 1000 BTC for $1000 or sell a programming service for 100 BTC.  You don't want any future mining because it will dilute the value of the coins you worked or paid for.  If you go around the world and consider history, you will find the strongest economies and gdp growth always occur in countries with lowest inflation or deflation.   

Does the timetravel thing let people undo historically archived before the last checkpoint or even before last umpteen checkpoints blocks?

I figured on only issuing Digi*coin tokens backed by coins that are in historic blocks that predate last checkpoint of their chain.

So if anyone screws with blockchains, an archived chain up to a checkpoint later than where the coins backing the tokens are can be redeployed once whatever their exploit was has been fixed.

Thus maybe allowing the tokens to be in some sense potentially safer than the coins that back them.

(SInce time travel might undo whole chain back to block one, but, once exploit is fixed, and for any newly set up clients that actually check the chain from scratch making sure all checkpoints are correct, the coins backing the tokens will be in the correct/valid blockchain as they always were.)

I only had maybe 7000 or so I0coins a few months ago, so will only issue up to 7000 DIgiI0C, until I am sure any coins I mined or received more recently have been checkpointed in the latest client releases.

-MarkM-

Can anyone merged mine using windows now?

How are you protecting against double spend attacks given the low hash rate and the fact that i0coin hasn't yet reached the block where the timetravel fix is enabled yet?

I just now added I0Coin to the exchange I am doing initial alpha testing of. This is the third coin type added, so far it thus offers exchanges between BTC, DVC, and I0C. YOu get to specify the granularity too, like buying/selling 1 at a time, 10 at a time, or whatever number you choose. Each granularity is treated as basically another market. Thus the market for buying 100 coins at a time might have a different price per coin than the market for buying only 1 at a time.

See the exchange / Open Transactions server's own thread at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/open-transactions-server-assetbondcommoditycryptocoindeedsharestock-exch-53329

-MarkM-

Now who was it who used that excuse for increasing the value of his coins before? ... ah that's right RealSolid ...

1) I appreciate the disclosure.  "True deflationary" still needs a mechanism for dispersing the currency into the hands of people.  So just wait a few years, and the "inflation" problem of coins will go away.  No real way to launch us into that situation prematurely.  Otherwise, we're all sitting around with a ton of worthless coins.  There needs to be that balance to allow the project to develop in a more natural way.  I think bitcoin can be praised for that.

2) agreed, good point.

1. Disclosure I have about 30K ioc and 50K ixc, to come up with the idea I would like a little bounty.  In the "ixcoin merged mining thread", it is up to nasakioto to keep his baby the way he wants it.  However, I suggest something different than bitcoin.  Otherwise I may ask fcisashita to make goldcoin.  I want to create a true deflationary currency.

2. yes and no because they are probably pools mining bitcoin already.

1) I agree that the person who wants 1 i0coin / block simply wants to make his coins scarce (worth more).

2) It's sounding like it may be possible to have both namecoin and i0coin merged with bitcoin?  Clearly that gives any new chain new hope to be much more secure in the event new chains are created with merged mining right off the bat.

And I think it would also increase bitcoin security, b/c everyone would be mining the "parent chain" (bitcoin)?

Yes but a client for a coin someone somewhere tried to merged-mine using some arbitrary parent could not verify that the parent chain actually accepted the work if they did not know how to connect to the parent chain and get from it the required evidence.

Someone said earlier you can use pretty much any chains, but I do not think that seems likely. I suspect the clients would have to know how to work with the specific parent chain that any merged miners use, otherwise they cannot validate the blocks that were merge-mined.

-MarkM-

In merged mining, you mine on the master chain.
It's the slave chain that must support merged mining - so BTC cannot be a slave chain
BTC does not directly support merged mining as I stated above:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.635148
only indirectly.

Your pool is the software that sorts out how to convert your getwork answer into a second block for the slave chain, but your getwork answer is already a block for the master chain.

Surely if merged mining happens, all clients have to know how to verify the work that was purportedly done, so all clients have to know how to get in touch with the parent chain to get the "proof of work".

So I do not get how everyone can choose some totally different chain to use as parent when they merged mine?

Surely they would at least be limited to choosing a parent chain that the majority of hash power worth of clients know how to look up the proofs on?

Otherwise I could claim I used some fictional chain of my own as parent, and not have it online to connect to anywhere. A client would not accept that would they? They would want to check the pparent blockchain to make sure it is itself a valid chain, that the purported proof happened on a part of it that has not been orphaned, and so on?

-MarkM-

Simple he thinks that changing block reward from 48 to 1 will drive the price of existing coins up (artificial scarcity).  New miners will subsidize (via lower mining yields) those w/ large pre-existing holdings of older coins.  It is simply a wealth transfer scheme.

It's already different.  50 coins per block vs. 48.  I'm not sure why you think changing the block reward would fix your problem, and I'm even further confused why you'd want a change that would affect all i0coin miners just to address an issue you're having.

I found out in http://i0coin.bitparking.com/

2011-11-26
Source and windows binaries are available for version 32504 of i0coin. See the 'changes' selection below for full details. The main new thing is support for merged mining based on the namecoin implementation. Currently there is support for i0coin to be used as a 'parent' chain as this doesn't require a block chain fork. This will allow mining i0coin and namecoin at the same time (namecoin being the auxiliary chain). On i0coin testnet you can test using i0coin as an auxiliary chain. Once I'm happy with the stability of this I'll set a 'switch on' block for this to occur on the main blockchain, giving time for users to upgrade. Once auxiliary capability is turned on it will be possible to mine bitcoins and i0coins at the same time. See this forum post for details on using merged mining.

I think you typed bitcoin instead of bitcoin. Is it?


Edited

happy to hear I0coin can be merged & mined with any other coin.

i0coin can be merge mined with any other coin. It can be namecoin, bitcoin, or anything using the same hash algorithm. Each individual miner (or pool) can merge mine with whatever they want. it's not limited to one specific coin type. I gave namecoin as an example in the post you reference, not as 'this is the only coin you can merge mine with'. I hope that answers your question.

Good to hear I0coin is going for merged mining.

But to which other coin I0coin is going to be merged?
Already Namecoin is merged with Bitcoin.
Now another blockchain going to be created , so that I0coin be merged to bitcoin or name coin & bitcoin or to any other coin?

EDITED
oops, find out in OP https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.630355 that I0coin is going to merged with namecoin.