Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 18. (Read 387455 times)

i just went all in

XCurrency and BlockNET seem to be solid investments these days

I thought zynga was dead already.

Here's some info:
http://www.spookycoins.com/tag/zynga-and-viacoin/

And then the charts exploded, 300% growth in two hours:
https://bitcoinwisdom.com/markets/bittrex/viabtc

As somebody said, people are buying the wrong altcoin, XCH will (may)be actually used in Zynga Poker, making it the most massively used cryptocurrency.

I can't find any statement by Zynga or anyone who works there that they are actually planning to use it. Someone have a link?

Why the hell would they use that?

Clearinghouse is a Counterparty clone, code divorced from Bitcoin and married to an altcoin (VIA). If Zynga really adopts them all VIA/XCH bag-holders are going to the moon.

What's viacoin/clearinghouse? Give me the short rundown if you want to.

HUGE news on the Via/Clearinghouse front:

ePeso is in testnet, in an attempt to become the official e-currency of the Philippines!

Zynga has wisely abandoned crappy Counterpary and is building their Poker on VIA/XCH instead.  They are also considering following Overstock's move to issue shares on that blockchain.

Nice post.


Why is XCP subject to total dillution of value for holders?



Are there any others you like?

xcp fills a niche at the current implementation of the protocol, however this niche is small to very small compared to the dominant private decentralized ledger we are all looking for (and probably already found)

It's mostly about monero, because monero is the only alt we've found that is a serious contender for the major liquidity provider niche available after bitcoin takes the transparent liquidity niche.

Other niches besides dark and transparent liquidity are smaller and less clear.  There is more interest in the clearer and larger niches.  XCP, for example, is interesting on many grounds, but it really has no niche at all.  There's nothing preventing total dilution of value for holders.  That's okay, as it does not harm XCP's functionality, but it does make it less interesting as a long-term investment.

I suspect most of the thread participants are primarily interested in long-term investments with order-of-magnitude upsides.  Finding other alts which can creditably claim to be contenders for such a role is....challenging.  I encourage you to try, and to report your findings.  (It will be in your interest, I assume, to inform hoi polloi, at some point, when your accumulation bounds have been approached.)
 

I think I have an idea for a better way to do it.  Let's say an altcoin fixes its sights on some long-term rate of currency supply inflation, say 10%.  

They start bootstrapping by awarding 1 coin to the miner per block, for Proof-of-work, and never stop or reduce this amount.

Additionally, whenever someone actually makes a transaction, the age of the inputs used is applied and 10% compounded annually is added to the block; 1% annual for the coin age, or 1 month's interest, whichever's more, as a tx fee for the miner, and the rest back to the payer in the transaction.  This includes coinbase transactions:  The miner can turn over whatever inputs he likes, and get 10% annual-rate interest for them paid along with his block.

The "score" or basis of competition of blocks for proof-of-work purposes is the actual proof-of-work, plus some factor multiplied by the amount of interest being awarded in that block;  So the miner who includes all transactions, and is also turning over a lot of his own old unspent txouts, needs to meet a lower threshold for proof-of-work to get a block, than a miner who leaves out transactions or who is using no stake to mine.

Over time, the interest awards and tx fees dominate the 1 coin per block award, until eventually the 1 coin per block is negligible relative to the currency supply and the currency inflation converges on 10%.  The amount of resources that it's worth spending per block for mining very slowly converges on being proportional to 1 months' interest (at 10% annual) on the txouts spent per block.

Because everybody is motivated to turn over their currency frequently, and the blocks with larger interest payments are strongly preferred, a version of TAPS or Transactions-As-Proof-Of-Stake, becomes viable.   Preferring chains on the same basis as preferring blocks (proof-of-work plus the same factor times interest awarded) should rapidly converge on blocks representing the greatest fraction of the money supply, with older txouts counting more.  An absolute "lock point" beyond which no reorg could ever go, could occur as little as 24 hours in the past in a healthy economy where the money is moving fairly fast.

Overall, the reward for mining would grow very slowly, with no "extra" to reward early miners.  And the incentive to mine would likely never justify the kind of giant hashing farms we see with Bitcoin.  Conversely, someone who does devote massive hashing power to it, especially in early days when the interest awards aren't very important yet in picking which chain to go with, could make attacks fairly easily, because the justification for investment for honest miners wouldn't be very high.

Qora is indeed New Source!! Confirmed by one of the AT devs --> https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9294813

A new alt-item, Crypto Kingdom gold (CKG) has received a flying start. In a recent auction, 10k gold was sold for 2,600 XMR. The quantity of gold in the game is limited to 1,000,000 gold until 2015-1-18, after which it continues to grow at a rate of $0.025 gold per hour of total online time spent in the game. If the market price of gold at that point is high, the amount of new gold will be lower, because the algorithm is tied on fiat price of gold.

At today's price, the total gold in the game is valued at 260,000 XMR and it can only be purchased with XMR. The proceeds will be used for game development and I will keep the excess.

Notable is that the valuation of the gold is about 5% of valuation of XMR so it will possibly soon boost XMR's value if it continues to appreciate.

Not really, other coins have been discussed here at significant length (XCN comes to mind for example, some discussion of DRK, and others). There is a focus on Monero because the thread starter and others here are supporters, but that need not exclude other coins.

so this is only about monero not other coins?!
sucks a bit

Working on integrating marking to add a decent reputation system to this place. Ideas and input greatly welcomed from people:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/new-reputation-system-integration-on-bitcointalk-questions-for-people-830024

I think that what people miss is the value of buy in.  As more people accept something as a currency or a platform the more valuable it becomes.  Being first is often important - but being the first to have broad buy in is more important.  Ethereum had broad buy in long before Qura.  Also Ethereum's implementation of PoW at the expense of dilluting the original investors means that they will get more buy in from a broad base that isn't already invested post launch.  And Ethereum has been touring complete / programmable for months.  They simply haven't released the genesis block so it's impossible to make money / trade on the exchanges.  Closed sourced helps nothing - but the get rich quick monopolies people try to put on innovations (NXT, Qora, XC, etc) mean that there is a heavy demand to fork and use the same ideas on a larger group of people who are less greedy and more interested in a broad base.   Hence the tug of war between the ideas of bitcoin & NXT. 

The vast majority of people would say that your community chose wrongly. And the price seems to reflect that decision. Sounds like 'Qora'(the dev) himself is doing a good job, but closed source is a pretty big no-no regardless of whether people fork or clone your code base.

Just the idea that Qora has been out for months now as closed source puts a rain cloud over the project. That alone might forever turn a lot of people off who otherwise might have been interested.