Topic: [UNO] Unobtanium Info & Discussion - Hardfork block 1042000 - Merge Mine w/BTC! - page 754. (Read 1047217 times)

do we need a new coin for merged mining (duo-idea)? I think possibly not, but if there are no good enough 3-minute-coins out there one could launch such a new 3-minute-coin as a test. If it can stand on its own we could merged mine it later. If it fails, no problem and we forget it again. It doesn't need to directly relate to uno. It only needs to be good and fill real demand.

Our problem could be to find a good enough coin to put to the side of uno. Goat, mea, orobit are all dead and abandoned coins. Good idea to bring them back with the merged mining? Who wants those? Ideally we should have another coin that is actively traded and stands on its own to merge it.

to put it short:
-if merged with an existing coin: don't let it be a dead/anbandoned/shitcoin with no community
-if new coin because we can't find a good enough existing coin: let the new coin live on its own for a few months and see if it can stand before merging it. It needs to be good and fill real demand

Another idea could be to hardfork a coin with good perspectives out there with active community to make it fit for merging with uno. How is quark doing these days? I thought i read something they wanted to change a couple of things to get more hashrate. I have no idea about coding though. Is it possible to merge with cpu-coins like qrk?
How's Zetacoin doing?
what about netcoin? maybe they want fork to 3-minutes sha to secure their network? Securecoin possible? Maybe joulecoin wants to change blocktime to 3 minutes?  Tigercoin could be made to fit if dev is still around?  Is that something or will it result in clusterfuck? If i understand right there is no limit for coins to be merged, right? We could invite active coins to adjust themselves to fit uno? Can be more than only one coin?
Merged mining doesn't mean by necessity to have that other coin strongly associated with uno, right?

just some random ideas. Let's not rush things and do the best possible. I am basically on the same page with benefactor and FK.  

if prices for uno rise a lot over next few months and can be sustained we possibly don't even need to care so much about it. Let's see how much money the next altcoin-bullmarket flushes in maybe the topic becomes obsolete if that is a lot. That could also happen.

Anyway: good to be ahead of the curve.

happy miners = strong/secure network = happy longterm investors

probably best just to stop selling it under value
Let's build some more buysupport.
I am personally looking to exit a few other coins over next few weeks/months so there will be some of my btc free to support uno some more later on.

Ok, math has never been my strong suit.  But if I subtract block 50,000 from block 51 million I get roughly 50,950,000 blocks left to mine.
If we return to 3 minute blocks on average, that means we have about 152,850,000 minutes until we reach block 51 million. That is 2,547,500 hours or 106,145 days, or roughly 290.8 years until UNO reaches its 250,000 coin/kg maximum.  Is my math generally correct, or have my fat fingers once again let me down?

If this math is generally correct, UNO will be paying miners for the next 290 years, long, long after Bitcoin is mined out.  Someone embarrass me if I'm wrong here, but UNO will be paying a reward at least until June 7, 2304, at which time my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grand children will still be running my Jalapeno.

 It really doesn't require much hash power to continue moving the network!
That is the answer! How much hash power-mister DEV U can say that. -if is that low then net always  be secure.......why shut be worry!
 IF we cud help uno net to be OK with some jalapenos then fuck everybody -we need nobody WE ARE FREE!  
Of course fuck  this PoS . Hu want this shit for UNO. Fuck the merged mining to!
If that's the case investors in uno never need to worry ..........UNO will grow separately and alone .

I had some Continuumcoin (CTM) on Crypto Rush before it went down.  I am researching suggested merge coin canidates when I have time.  Here's some info I'll highlight about Open Source Coin (OSC) from cryptotalk.com:

"It is a SHA 256 POW/POS cryptocurrency with 1 minute block times, transaction messages and starting diff of 1, and a total of 21 million coins to be minted proof of work and unlimited proof of stake. Coins must remain in your wallet for 1 year to generate stake."

https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/1180-ocoin-osc-information

Sure. When we first launched Un, it was set up to make 6 halvings before hitting minimal reward, however as of version 0.9.1 that was revised to produce a meaningful number of coins until the 15th halving and then a minimal reward of .0001 that would persist for ever (or 51millionish blocks, whichever comes first). The breakdown is as so:



You can see Un will be mineable for a long time to come.

+1. There's so many POS coins now. If want pos, there is a coin du jour that is offering it.  Doge introduced unlimited coins. Now we have unlimited coins on top of unlimited coins with POS.  It's interesting to discuss it, and I understand the concern around mining profitability. Merge mining might provide the answer to that. An interesting idea was put forward to work with other 3min sha coins to merge mine. That seems worth exploring further.  

My hope is that UNO's price will eventually realize it's much-higher fair worth long before the 250k limit is reached, and that fees will provide the incentive to mine.  I think this has always been the one of the most interesting questions of the UNO experiment -- what happens when it's max number of coins is reached?

Blazr2, could you tell us more about when UNO is expected to reach 250k coins?  I don't have the hard facts, but I recall reading something -- I think on unobtanium.io which has now gone down -- that said UNO would reach 250k coins long after Btc had reached its max. I hate to ask you to repeat yourself, but could you tell us more about how UN will mine out, and when that might occur?

I think in a worst case scenario, where price falls low and mining incentive evaporates, a digishield/kgw implementation could keep UNO humming along on low hash power. Although strong hashing is proof of interest in a coin, it really doesn't require much hash power to continue moving the network, should mining incentives fail. Difficulty is a symptom of interest in a coin.  I vow right now to always keep a minimum of 6ghs on UNO until I die.  Seriously, I've been keeping a shitcoin alive called Swansoncoin; finally reduced it to 120 khs. I'm about to pull the plug on RON (because I don't have a commitment to it the way I do UNO), but digishield easily adjusts the difficulty when other miners join in. The network moves along just fine whether there is 100 khs or 100 ghs.

My belief is that the price of UNO will eventually rise meet its higher worth, and that mining interest will continue for a long time. But if I'm wrong, my little Jalapeno miner (35w) is ready to take over.

Good point. The 3d render is just a basic prototype currently, I agree with your suggestion. I'll rustle something up soon.

Don't even think about PoS Un. Seriously, that's bullshit--the point of Un when I released it was to NOT be Stake. Live with it for what it is, make it merge-mineable but too bad to those who missed the boat and want longer halving/more coins/etc.

Looks like a good size. I'd like to see the name "Unobtanium" on it, though.

 
 I know UNO need very low energy for transaction, but how low exactly ?
if WE have blog rewards 0.000something ,then how much min. power we need to secure UNO??
simple question ,but important if we go on our own! 

After we hit inflation mode -how much is the minimum mining power to keep the network strong??
 Any guess.....
 

Can I pick your brains over the size you guys would like for a hard wallet?



I was thinking a good size:
8cmx4cm and 0.5cm thickness.

Or would you like them smaller say:

4cm x 2.5cm x 0.3cm thickness

I'm leaning towards the smaller size as it would lend itself to being more like a medium of exchange. The smaller fits in the palm of my hands comfortably and feels good, the larger may be too bulky.

Here's a bar of the same size for an example:



Thoughts or suggestions?

Voting with crypto can be easy.

1.  FallingKnife or someone else could set up a wallet address
2.  Each person could send 0.0101#### UNO for a 'Yes' vote or 0.0100#### UNO for a 'No' vote, with the #### being a four-digit voter index number.  The voter index number could be assigned per bitcointalk, bitcointalk handle, IP, or whatever.*
3.  Funds raised could go to a stated project.

*Actually, as I've modelled this a little, it works better if the voter sends a unique #### voter index number of their own choosing, then reports it once it is already on a blockchain - Then nobody else is likely to claim it.  (Works even better when claiming payments and donations.)

-

This method is cheap, easy, helps to fund projects in a minor way, (or upgraded, in a significant way,) and would not only be revolutionary, (and should be done a few times for UNO just for that reason,) but would also increase community participation.  Give stakeholders a voice.  We don't want totally centralized control of what we are investing in.  No need for the Abilene Paradox, here.

-

How about the next time UNO holds above 0.005 for two days we try it?  (Remember timing of fundraisers where the UNO raised will be immediately sold should be when pricing is on the upswing.)  (I really want people to wrap their heads around the idea that UNO can be the first non-ManipulateCoin out there.  [With scarcity, continuous investment, and holding or posting sales at much higher prices, the manipulators get bought out, and can't repurchase at a profit.]  ALL participants will benefit.  You need to see and understand this vision.)

A new coin should have feature parameters carefully planned.  What is the purpose of the new coin?  How will it function?  Who has agreed to use it for that purpose?  What investors are already lined up to support it?  What is the commitment and dedication of the developers?  Isn't it challenging enough to keep one quality coin going?  How is it relatively assured that all participants will follow-through?  If this last question is tough to answer, ask again:  Is it really wise to associate UNO with some new coin?

Unless I see a miracle in planning, creating a new coin sounds like a (de-facto at best) scam in the making.

UNO has a pretty good reputation, I don't agree with associating it with a new coin, unless the whole process is carefully planned, and one more thing....

Hey, how about more community participation in starting new things with UNO?

I really don't want to wake up one morning and finding out that UNO is now strongly associated with crapcoin2000, and I wasn't invited to vote on it, or whatever.  You get that developers and FallingKnife?  (...Or is this another situation like Congress, completely detached in decision-making from the laity?)

You mean "DUO"?

-

We want to birth another coin into this world and relate it to UNO?  Talk about diluting interest in UNO.  I get the purpose is to increase MINING participation to assure a quality processing network for UNO transactions, but because this will be closely related to UNO itself, it just seems like value dilution is threatened.

If we stick to the investment principles I discussed in my last post, UNO will retain it's value and then grow.  I really would like to see some PM brokers trading for UNO.  If we as a community could continuously invest in UNO each week, and get others involved in this, and use UNO as a long-term investment, HOLDING it, we could easily post gains over BTC at $650/BTC.  Once we consistently hit enough scarcity and continued buy orders @ say 0.01, not only do we attract other investors, but we could then commence the PM trading, etc.  Like I say, timing is everything.  Then, we have strength all around, and many of us would be willing to pay for electricity to keep the network strong, and with more real transactions, there would be something in it for the miners, too.

...So I believe the key to interesting miners is to have them vested in UNO long-term and to REALIZE the gains over BTC.  Mining network strength will come from consistent UNO valuation strength.  This is the secret to long-term success, IMHO.

-

Nevertheless, if we are to merge mine, and add yet another coin to the market, it should be highly planned and engineered, not another scamcoin.  UNO represents great quality.  I hope that's what Bryce and our team of developers are working on.  (ahem).  If it is associated with another coin, that should also represent great quality.

Merging Benefit it attracts more TH/s aka more miners

Merging with BTC problem is requires FORK to 10min block speed.  Also name, dev, and ix coin already working that niche.

Merging with other SHAs requires no fork?  We just join other 3min block speed coins.  Just update the QT versions?  IMO this is the smartest move.  Candidates GOAT, MEA, Orobit.  We could also just make some new merged coins (just copy new forks of proven good alt SHA coins and clock them to 3min)  I suggest some POS/POW algos like TEK, OSC, and DEM. And some billion coin algos like CTM.  And a UNO 2.0 called DOU (just copy of UNO maybe reduce the reward half life by factor of 2)

So we therefore make the the 3minute block speed an attractive place to mine.  We could have 8-10 coins of various coin schemes all mine-able with UNO and we address the key problem UNO network has low TH/s and this difficult to overcome because the reward is very low.    The other option is to FORK and add POS (which screws with the fundamentals).

Hmmm. I still cant get uno wallet for windows working. Can somebody upload undamaged file? The one from start of this thread is damaged and cant be opened. Even if I attempt to repair archive it will not unpack qt file so I cant use it.

hey guys. prominerone just asked me about merged mining for uno. I was asking Blazr2 about it but didn't get a reply.
I thought about it more and came up with this conclusion:
if uno is merged-mined with btc that would make it secure on the one hand but also it would be kind of a by-product of btc (like nmc or ixc).
But here is the clou: if we could get other good coins to be merged mined with uno, wouldn't that be better? So investors could invest in another blockchain to diversify and uno wouldn't be depending on btc. Look what vertcoin and monocle did. (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-mon-monocle-merge-mined-on-vtc-vertcoin-no-premine-scrypt-n-585817)
So i think an alternative to merged mining with btc could be having other coins merged mined with uno. Maybe it is even possible to give miners all options (i don't know how hard that would be to code or if possible).

was also just sending ticket to crypto-trade.com if they would add uno2fiat-market.

everybody seems to feel btc will rise a lot now (but it actually doesn't so much right now) and fears the water going back before the zunami. I think uno will be one of the coins where the water doesn't go back all that much just because people will hold it strong for that short timeperiod when alts (maybe) fall against btc. If the water draws back you can actually buy more cheap. keep some btc to the side to be ready for it if it happens. it maybe doesn't even happen to uno because we are actually shedueled for a rise which is a little delayed apparently because people anticipate that water-zunami-effect. So maybe uno actually holds much stronger than most other alts during a strong btc-rise (if it happens). What if btc-market plays out different this time and btc rises for a longer period but doesn't get all that crazy like in november? Either way: i am not selling uno below 0.02 and when the zunami for altcoins comes uno will probably see new alltime-high. Maybe much higher. Last rally was during a depressed market so 0.05 should be the minimum we see.  We'll see how btc plays out this time. BTC was frontrun in the price this time and maybe has a harder time to rise quick because of that. It is quite possible alts rise in a different way if btc doesn't go crazy. I personally would expect uno to rise against usd and hold pretty strong against btc coming weeks.

I like the idea of sponsoring OS-projects btw.

For getting uno more accessible without the need for newcomers to buy btc first we should look out for an exchange trading in fiat like btc-e, kraken or cryptsy soon. Or maybe another newcomer-exchange can offer that? If people could deposit money with master/visacard and buy uno directly for fiat that would be great progress.

I enjoyed your post. Didn't kill my enthusiasm for uno at all.

I'm told the Linux wallet is progressing nicely, and may be available next week. No longer will that be a point of frustration for service providers and exchanges who want to offer UNO, but who struggle with the wallet.  That's all we need to get our new rich list & explorer online.

Good things ahead for UNO.