FTC's future
-
So you called me a liar for stating that coins are locked out during the stake generation process. Let me reiterate that again below.
In Peercoin for example when PoS block is generated the coins used to generate that block cannot be spent until 520 confirmations.
Kevlar, it occurs to me that you have the wrong view of me and Feathercoin. You put me on a pedestal so you can knock me off it. The thing is, I am not the God of Feathercoin. I launched it and was pretty much the only person contributing to development for a long time, this is not the position I wanted to be in but people generally left it up to me. I was disappointed but I got on with it and made tough decisions when I had to. I did ask others to help including yourself but when I asked you to do some work but you took personal offence by that and went on a long rant.
It is easy to criticise is it not?
Feathercoin now has an excellent team of enthusiasts like myself who enjoy spending time on this project.
-
@Kevlar: just for your Info: It was Bushstar who unlocked the thread…
You mentioned your researches several times. Do you have some facts and resulty you are willing to share with us?
It would help to make the right decision where to go.
All and I mean ALL people here are willing to make feathercoin the best existing crypto, and the more proven facts we have, the better the outcome will be.
Speculations and personal opionions are of minor help to make decisions.
Also when discussing past decisions we should try to discuss also when and why a decision was made in which situation.
This could take a lot of heat out of this discussion, leading to faster results
-
Looking at a peercoin guide, you can create a .conf file and set a reserve value.
#The reserve balance field is the minimum amount of coins you want to have available and NOT put up as stake. #The reason for this is that if you are generating proof of stake you cannot spend those coins for 520 blocks. #reservebalance=10000 -
Many thumbs up for @Bushstar! :)I will dump ftc if Bushstar leave.
-
Guys drop this nonsense. Please.
-
I don’t agree that Ghostlander did a fantastic job with Orb, and the market has an entirely different opinion from you. Just because it didn’t work for him doesn’t make it NOT a practical solution. That’s easily demonstrably false, which makes you a liar And just because you misrepresented the idea to Sunny King doesn’t mean that it’s an unworkable idea. Nothing about what you just said offers any new insight into the topic.
ORB was 0% PoS with fees destroyed and failed. There is nothing to debate because it did fail. When I took over, I implemented fixed block rewards and gave all fees to the miners. Finite coin supply, very predictable inflation. It works well so far.
-
tx fees should never be destroyed in my opinion.
We are keeping the current inflation rate.
How can we set up PoS with current inflation rate and prevent the chances of an any percent attack. Or preferably as secure as possible?
Is it possible to even prevent 100% attack? or How close can we get?
-
I’m not sure why Sunny destroys the fees in PPC, would be interesting to hear the reason behind such a design decision. Perhaps to compensate somewhat for its inflationary effect. There are times in PPC PoS blocks when more coins are destroyed than created.
0% PoS with miner fees is as big an incentive as we can make without touching the inflation model. Not sure that it is incentive enough.
-
At least we could run some community mint nodes and support FTC’s hashrate without risking my home in energy bills :)
-
-
So you called me a liar for stating that coins are locked out during the stake generation process. Let me reiterate that again below.
In Peercoin for example when PoS block is generated the coins used to generate that block cannot be spent until 520 confirmations.
Kevlar, it occurs to me that you have the wrong view of me and Feathercoin. You put me on a pedestal so you can knock me off it. The thing is, I am not the God of Feathercoin. I launched it and was pretty much the only person contributing to development for a long time, this is not the position I wanted to be in but people generally left it up to me. I was disappointed but I got on with it and made tough decisions when I had to. I did ask others to help including yourself but when I asked you to do some work but you took personal offence by that and went on a long rant.
It is easy to criticise is it not?
Feathercoin now has an excellent team of enthusiasts like myself who enjoy spending time on this project.
I would never ever suggest using Peerconis PoS Model. There’s MUCH better models for doing PoS.
And that’s the problem: You continue to be wrong, yet you continue to defend your position.
Yes, it’s very easy to criticize decisions that were wrong to begin with, were pointed out to be wrong at the time, alternatives were offered and ignored, and the market continues to move against those decisions. They were the wrong decisions then, it was misinformation then, and it becomes lies when you continue to spread them when you’ve been repeatedly corrected.
-
Many thumbs up for @Bushstar! :)I will dump ftc if Bushstar leave.
Do you really think this helps the discussion any?
-
ORB was 0% PoS with fees destroyed and failed. There is nothing to debate because it did fail. When I took over, I implemented fixed block rewards and gave all fees to the miners. Finite coin supply, very predictable inflation. It works well so far.
It’s failure would be relevant if I was suggesting a similar model.
I’m not. Why don’t people get that?
-
We need to move to PoS still but 0% wont help anything anymore it seems.
I’m launching my own coin soon that will test a number of theories and I hope to set up the right conditions in which 0%PoS w/ TX fees could be viable. But until then, no one will ever know.
Feathercoin on the other hand. With all things considered. We need to go down a different road.
If we are to remain an “original coin” survivor in the next decade, we need to stay true to at least one aspect.
I’d hate to say it, but it’s the inflation model. PoS can keep that but avoid the shortcomings of PoW
As mentioned though. There is always that idea Etherum talked about.
-
I would never ever suggest using Peerconis PoS Model. There’s MUCH better models for doing PoS.
And that’s the problem: You continue to be wrong, yet you continue to defend your position.
Yes, it’s very easy to criticize decisions that were wrong to begin with, were pointed out to be wrong at the time, alternatives were offered and ignored, and the market continues to move against those decisions. They were the wrong decisions then, it was misinformation then, and it becomes lies when you continue to spread them when you’ve been repeatedly corrected.
When you make assertions can you please back them up with something like I am trying to on your request. It is not good enough for you to simply call me a “liar” on PoS without explaining how I am incorrect. I am happy to be corrected if you are able to. Please link us to a much better model of PoS than Peercoin’s so we can properly access it.
Was this other model of PoS available when ACP was on the table?
-
When you make assertions can you please back them up with something like I am trying to on your request. It is not good enough for you to simply call me a “liar” on PoS without explaining how I am incorrect. I am happy to be corrected if you are able to. Please link us to a much better model of PoS than Peercoin’s so we can properly access it.
Was this other model of PoS available when ACP was on the table?
It’s very simple: There’s no reason it has to work the way you described. You are just creating obstacles where there are none.
Yes, it was available when I was suggesting it, and you kept repeating the same untrue things then rather than listening. You wanted centralization, and you refused to even consider any other suggestions, learn about their merits, or discuss their implementations. At any time I’ve been available for you to come and ask me, “Hey, how would you implement this?” but you never do. You never reply to my suggestions on the forum, you never listen to my advice and you never learn why I’m pissed off about it all. You just do what you think is best and repeat the same untrue things that I’ve told you over and over are untrue.
-
OK this isn’t really helping!
How would you implement 0% PoS?
Would be great to know details like how long coins would be locked after staking (peercoin has 250blocks) how often the pos blocks would be minted and anything else that’s relevant as I don’t know too much about PoS. I’ve read a few articles since we last chatted but I’m new to the concept. -
OK this isn’t really helping!
How would you implement 0% PoS?
Would be great to know details like how long coins would be locked after staking (peercoin has 250blocks) how often the pos blocks would be minted and anything else that’s relevant as I don’t know too much about PoS. I’ve read a few articles since we last chatted but I’m new to the concept.How would I implement it? Via key signing using the outputs instead of spending them to create the verification hash that was then nonced for difficulty. That means an additional check in the verification step to make sure that the same output hasn’t been used to sign a block more than X blocks back. That way coins aren’t locked. It’s a trivial modification to the way PoS works.
And that’s why I’m so confused as to why everyone keeps ask me this: I’d implement it the way it makes the most sense to do given the requirements. That’s what we do as developers, and since the cryptographic protocols have been established and tested, so long as we don’t deviate from those we’re in fine shape. And if a compromise was needed along the way, we can discuss the ramifications of that compromise.
It’s like everyone thinks that PoS means a specific piece of code. It doesn’t, it means using your coins to generate block verification. Want it to not cause your coins to be unspendable? Fine, make it so you’re coins arn’t unspendable after staking. Want it so it doesn’t destroy mining rewards? Fine, make it so it doesn’t destroy mining rewards. Want it to not be a failure? Fine, find out what’s making it fail and fix it.
Don’t waste any more of my time telling me ways it doesn’t work without providing some damn good justification for WHY it CAN’T work that way. If you tell me why something can’t work a certain way, then I can problem solve around that problem and figure out a way it CAN. Anyone who insists it has to work a certain way without addressing why it has to work that way is just leading you down a bad path and wasting everyone’s time. What’s needed is for us to decide how it SHOULD work, and then we can see if it CAN work that way. We should NEVER waste time battling over how it DOESN’T work.
And that’s why, Bushstar, you have failed miserably at this: because you are too focused on other people’s solutions and you never come up with your own. You only know what other people have done, you have no vision for what can be done, and no understanding of the process when people explain it to you, like I’ve been doing since 2013.
-
Please link us to a much better model of PoS than Peercoin’s so we can properly access it.
Link you to the code you need to write? Or did you expect me to write a whitepaper on the solution for you?
Look, I don’t know why you’re leaning on me to do the job you’re supposed to be doing.
It’s just not that hard to do. I’ve proposed a solution, I’ve problem solved around every single one of the issues you and anyone else has raised, and I’m happy to discuss in more detail. There’s no issue that anyone has brought up that is either a misconception or a specific implementation detail for which I have provided an alternative solution for. I don’t understand why you don’t just start writing code for a PoS solution that works the way it needs to, and see what problems you encounter, and when you get stuck, or encounter a problem you don’t know how to solve, ask questions. As has always been the case, I’m here to answer them, and the community at large has proven very adept at finding many suggestions for solving specific problems. You’re being limited only by your own imagination, and perhaps by your ability to develop a solution using code.
I assure you that these solutions do not just present themselves to people fully formed and flawless. They come about as an iterative development process full of trial and error, and expecting me to just skip that process for you is simply not possible.
-
0% PoS will work just fine xBT when the time comes so there’s no need to debate about it here.
Aren’t we supposed to be sticking to the current inflation/coin production rate?
I’ll finish up my reading on PoS and come back with an idea.
