Topic: The Cypherfunks[FUNK]: a coin for a global band! Talking v2. Join! 80+ songs - page 51. (Read 148726 times)

Automated burn? Yay! Do that mean we can keep the Cypherfunks decentralized, or do the payouts still need to be manually dispersed?  

Also were we really mentioned at Inside Bitcoins conference? I searched for Cypherfunks and all I found was this:

I saw this quote "Painters, scribes, sculptors, designers, musicians and performers are discovering the disruptive techno-muse released to world by the craftings of Satoshi and the earlier cypherpunks"

Maybe that's why you thought we were mentioned?

Hey! Nope. We are moving over to a Dogeparty token instead. Basically, for a project like this, it doesn't make sense anymore to have a full-blown altcoin. The economics don't quite make sense. You'll be able to burn your FUNK to a new token. It's not dead!

I have some potentially great news to share. I've been contact with some guys that will possible mean that we can actually do a completely automated burn (across chains. Yes. Across chains). We are breaking new ground here and setting examples of how these projects will run into the future. Exciting times.

Will share more soon.

Been a while since I've been around, thread is uber long now, seen people talking about merging or parrallelling the coin, what does it all mean? I have a bunch of old FUNK I mined some time back, is it all dead now?

We were apparently mentioned along with other crypto-art projects at Inside Bitcoins Las Vegas! http://insidebitcoins.com/las-vegas/2014/agenda#t2d3at1100

Awesome. There was a video. So looking forward to that. Will post once it is online.

The web interface works in a similar vein to blockchain.info. Or rather, more like Electrum. The wallet hoster can't do anything with your funds. You have a seed/password which simply "activates" your control. This is stored locally. NXT also works like this.

You can roll your own instance of the dogeparty stack and have a local interface to your wallet, but it doesn't really make a difference. You are still only as vulnerable as your local computer.

Does that make sense?

Okay, guys. I'll try and find a more concise date for the launch of the decentralized exchange (they said it would be soon). Then we can start the whole process! I'm both nervous and excited again (like when we started this thing).

 all very good simon. one question, is the web interface the only way to interact with the system? i've a general reserve for trusting online storage, as i've had coins stolen from mining pools and exchanges more than once in the last year...

I read it, I like it, let's do it!

Okay. Here we go.

A more in-depth discussion on moving to a Dogeparty token, using the old style of explaining why it is necessary.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sSYxMB-8iAcYHf6PgPIBfa-K9akZGXLhDgO3-6MJ_2c/edit

Feedback required!

If this is done, I'll write up a more in-depth tutorial on burning (with pics), as well creating a spreadsheet that show all the money, exchange rate, etc.

Hooray! I'm looking forward to it.

Okay, great. I'll move it there. I'll do some final touches on the doc and send it out today for feedback. Cheers guys!

I think we should move the bounties into the artist pool. The Cypherfunks is about nurturing artists so having a larger artist pool will give people an incentive to contribute to the Cypherfunks as artists. It doesn't seem the bounties are really attractive to very many people at this point.

Okay guys.

I've pretty much finished the document. I'm waiting for confirmation about things on 1 or 2 issues, then we can vote on it. Once that's done, we'll pick a date for starting the burn period.

I have a question. There's still bounties left (faucet, separates). I've been thinking of moving the bounties into the artist pool. Is that okay? Or should those bounties be kept as is?

Another thing. Dogeparty's DEX (decentralised exchange) is not online, so I'm finding out when it comes back online.

Agreed. Thanks for your input!

Will write some more today. Weekend got a bit hectic.

Parallel sounds infinitely less complicated so +1 from me on that. The time I think needs to be considered carefully as you rightly state. Too easy to end up in some kind of CypherFUNK gold rush, and I'm not certain of the effect that could have mid/long term.

Given that it's going to be such a simpler system to manage on top of XDP or whatever token issuance tool is chosen, I think it's important that thoughts into the applications which will leverage the token are put in pretty soon - the development of these now becomes far more a core process than the management of the token itself. They *are* the token's success.

Hey guys. So as I'm writing up the specs for the burn (before a final vote on it), I want ask a question about and get feedback.

There are 2 ways we can do this: One is a parallel burn. And the other is a once-off burn.

Once-off burn:

So, the idea is the set a block (say 160000), where after any new Cypherfunks that is mined won't be able to be turned into the new token. So that means, any new rewards from the blocks (from 160001) won't be able to be used to burn. However, this is really difficult to determine. Old FUNK (mined before block 160k) can be merged with new FUNK (post block 160k+), meaning *some* of it can be burned, but others can not. And then it becomes impossible to trace which is new FUNK (post 160k) or old FUNK (pre 160k). So, the only way I see this, is to set a "stop" block. Which means ANY (not just mining rewards) FUNK after 160k can't be burned. So, you would have needed to have ALL the FUNK you want to burn before the burning period starts. This is checked simply on the inputs (are the inputs before block 160k?).

However, this means there is a period where everyone needs to accumulate as much FUNK as they want (from exchanges and so forth) before the "burn block". In other words, it's an extra accumulation land-grab before the burn.

Parallel burn:

The other option is to set the burn block 2 months into the future (say block 200k). Then, a "soft"-burn block is set upon which the burning period starts (it is only a date really). Then ALL FUNK between now and block 200k can be burned. This means you can still mine new blocks and burn them. And you can get FUNK off from exchanges as well to burn them. All this happens over a 2 month period. The old chain is still "running", but the new one is being burned into slowly. It's a parallel run. Then on block 200k, the burn period ends.

What I like about parallel burn is that 1) it has incentive to keep the chain running while we are burning and 2) it is more gradual, allowing people time to buy FUNK and burn them off from exchanges (if they want to).
A gradual burn with a longer "accumulation" period means that the price of FUNK might not spike too much if you want to buy it from exchanges. Additionally, if people missed the accumulation period, they can burn whenever in the 2 months period.

---

What do you think? I'm for a parallel burn. And what time is best? 2 months? 4 months? Up to 1-year anniversary of FUNK?

It's actually good the hash power is going our way, it shows there is definitely an interest from miners at this 11th hour.

  i spend a fair amt of my mining time on low diff p2pools, see big rigs come and go after a short stay very often.

this is my i/o for the last 3 weeks ....  (the long squiggly @<1mh)  (not mining FUNK atm)

              

It is not normal though. I wonder if it is a multipool... KGW trying its best to work with this. . Goes to show actually how easy a 51% can be for a small hashrate coin.

Anyway. Busy writing still on the doc. Will as I said get it out before the end of the week.

At 3:00 AM someone started mining FUNK with 25 MH/s on the 0x0a pool. Isn't this basically a 49% attack? Oh, nevermind. I see that for about one day on the 15th of September they were also mining. Must be a rented rig.

Cheers for the comment. Appreciated!

Basically. I will elaborate more extensively about all the details in the new doc I'm writing up, then we can do a final dissection.