Topic: Nexus - Pure SHA3 + CPU/GPU + nPoS + 15 Active Innovations + More to Come - page 233. (Read 785531 times)

Because now they are going to delist it, dump user's coins on another market and make profit.

Disabled on bittrex. Why?

Still working on the CUDA miner. I hope to have something testable by Monday.

Nexus Ports:
Main Net:    9323
Core LLP:    9324
Mining LLP: 9325
RPC Port:    9336

To be sure port is open, make sure your firewall has nexus added as an exception to allow incoming connections

Thank You,
Viz.

yes ln(x) can be good

What port I have to open for add new node server ?

We are nexus

Alright, ln(x) it is! 

Thanks for the Input,
Viz.

ln(x) is a good idea

Yea that seems good, differentiating that is also the reciprocal of x, so it plays all good.

Sounds good to me

So logarithmic? ln(x)
That would be my favorite, somewhat in between the two, a happy medium. Anyone disagree?

Thank You,
Viz.

Exponential is increasing a bit too fast, not sure if we want that kinda speed.

Linear is better, but exponential can be intersting.

We will start invest more at 1.0.3 and more at 2.0

We are Nexus

Cest Ballot

So a curve weighted towards a certain time, as in growing in value towards a certain point? I'd think a basic ln(x) function could suffice for something like this, but here are some graphs to show some basic shapes we can choose for the ranges between 1% and 3% vPos.

These would be y as a function of time, or in other words, x = time. So as we move along the X-Axis we see how the interest (y) will change based on the coin's age (time). These functions will increase to a ceiling of 3% timed to about 1 years time.

Logarithmic: y = ln(x)


Exponential: y = e^x


Linear: y = x



Let me know,
Viz.

had the same thoughts about it.
In theory I would prefer exponential, but not for those hyperfast crypto market.


wow - reads pretty good!

Game over for them, for us, it has just begun.

game over, dumpers gotta dump selll nao

Awesome, thank you for the feedback

I'll keep it to a linear approach then, that is what is already implemented.

Last phases of PoS v3.0:
a. Remove Stake modifier, move coinstake to be locked in a block, use nNone to calculate the stake hash instead of relying on secondary values in the block index for PoS blocks.
b. Put nNonce / Second lock for PoS blocks to allow fairness and energy efficiency, but also for the blocks to be staked using the algorithms of weight increasing the hash size to overcome rather than incrementing the tx time backwards max search interval
c. Lock stake hash and transaction to previous block to prevent pre computation of PoS blocks, eliminating the need of computational overhead associated with calculating stake modifier
d. Block time will not be dependent on random time from searching for a kernel, which will make the PoS difficulty adjustments "Actual". In current PoS implementations the difficulty is more of a "random increase" rather than an actual increase due to the randomness of finding a kernel that meets the weight by modifying the block/coinstake tx time.

Development Details For those that love em' like I do  
Since I built the Unified Time system, our difficulty adjustments are as accurate as they can be as far as the actual time it took to create the block, so I am enhancing the PoS times in unison with this new technology.

These steps together will make the PoS lighter, requiring less power, more secure, and more versatile for us smaller holders allowing greater probabilities of finding a stake block even if your coin holdings are low.

CoinAge is already taken out, very rudimentary calculation for current PoS implementations, not a true inflation rate, more just a "sham" of smaller numbers that are "close enough" to not raise any eyes. I don't stand for this lack of quality, especially with all the time I invested in the Reserve System, so the PoS interest calculations are exactly calculated with Variable interest per input rather than per PoS block with my new function GetCompoundedInterest.

Removed some other superfluous items such as stake split age, which only adds another output based on a given age for the interest in the coinstake transaction, rudimentary "random tact" security measures.

Removed node locking when searching for PoS blocks, this will prevent PoS nodes from not accepting blocks while they search for a new coinstake, we are no longer having any of the familiar functions CreateCoinStake and so forth as this system uses only the base of searching the wallet for coins and creating a transaction, the rest is being rewritten in regards to PoS.

And don't forget too, the release of PoS will force any 51% attacker to own more than 51% of the coins, have more that 51% of the CPU power, and more than 51% of the GPU power to be able to only write the chain from the last checkpoint, having less than a 1 hour window to tamper with the main chain and transactions, virtually eliminating the threat of such attacks.

Thank You,
Viz.

Linear in my opinion would be better suited to the market, esp with an interest rate of only %3

I do like the sound of exponential, but crypto moves so fast, the masses want/need to see rewards quicker. staking rewards would be a pittance for the average small holder to begin with.

GPU pools are dependent on Bitslapper until I can find the time to do the update for the GPU miners.
The core update is in progress for 1.0.3 including free transactions and VPoS 3.0, rich lists, fast sync.

Features to follow would be core 2.0 with LLP integration, reversible transactions, enhanced syncing, etc.
Pool payout can only be as large as the next block as these are P2P style payouts, this means that you are getting paid out as a coinabase transaction on the next block. This will be ameliorated upon the development of new pool infrastructure which I am building from scratch including the Pool UI, which will allow the user the option of "instant" payouts P2P style, or regular payouts once coins have confirmed in the pool wallet. I usually like to go towards P2P as the pool is not at risk of being hacked and users coins stolen, but since there has been user interest in the delayed payouts feature, I am working to implement this.

Following 2.0 will be 2 way signatures, HTML5 wallet, Node Trust, Syncless wallets, Digital Recyclers.

I work during the weeks for clients, and have custody of my children on the weekends; this does contribute to the delay in development updates. Please Let me know if anyone has any further questions or suggestions, I'll continue to keep everyone posted as development continues.

Thank You,
Viz.


P.S. If I don't get any input here, I'll make the decision myself, so if you think any of these options is the better choice, do speak up

Good questions.  Looks like someone took a dump before getting the answers, down to 300sats!