Vorksholk
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1713
Merit: 1029
|
 |
April 15, 2016, 10:29:42 PM |
|
For all invovled in Reverse-ICO May higher force be with you, when you get Reverse-ICO transaction in.  Honestly must users will probably dump. We will be setting up toilets to catch them all as it'll be a shot in the foot after things stabilize. As with any legitimate startup. Just enrolled.
Looking forward to it.
Saw that! We will update the list today. Is this math correct?
Reverse-ICO reserve is 100,000,000,000 coins (20% of total supply), split on April 18th between everyone on the bitcoingarden thread. If 1000 people participate, that's 100,000,000 coins per person, which is equivalent to mining 2000 blocks.
Sounds legit A lot.1000 BTC worth if 1 ESP is 1 satoshi. must be something about Proof-of-Reliability  everyone will be able to dump for free for one bitcoin, this is sounds retarded, good luck finding those that will pay 1 btc to other that didn't even invest anything Is this math correct?
Reverse-ICO reserve is 100,000,000,000 coins (20% of total supply), split on April 18th between everyone on the bitcoingarden thread. If 1000 people participate, that's 100,000,000 coins per person, which is equivalent to mining 2000 blocks.
Sounds legit Hmm, alright. Well best of luck, but I doubt the coin will get any meaningful amount of mining (and, hence, security) once the market stabilizes, since it'll be flooded. There'll still be hobbyist miners I suppose, but people won't be able to break-even with the cost of electricity. Let's say it takes a miner 3 hours to mine a block on a CPU consuming 140W. Then a block costs a miner $0.063. Assuming 1,000 people participate in the bitcoingarden thread, and they each get the equivalent of 2000 blocks, that would mean they would have to refuse to sell under a valuation of their free coins of $126, or the market would need to support $126,000 (296.47 BTC) in sells. Most new altcoin markets can't support anything near a 300 BTC dump, meaning that the price will fall way below miner breakeven. And a network where a high-end consumer CPU can mine 8 blocks a day with a 20-second block target is pretty cheap to attack. That's 4320 blocks per day, or 540 high-end consumer CPUs that comprise the entire network's hashing power. That's about 220 high-end servers, like a c4.8xlarge on EC2. At the average spot pricing of $0.32 per box per hour, the network will cost $70.40 per hour to fork, plus an extra few dollars to ensure 51% is maintained. If you wanted the network to cost, say, $500/hr to attack, you'd need a 7.10x increase in hashing power, which would mean a miner would need a block to be worth $0.4473, making the per-user-reverse-ICO-payout worth $894.60 per user, or $894,600 in total. That's 2104.94 BTC. The market would need to buy that reverse-ICO at 2104.94 BTC (putting the currency's market cap at $4,472,997.50) to reach $500/hr cost to fork the network.Anyhow, I could be wrong (or missing something major), but you might want to re-think the distribution or coin emission curve before you pay out all those coins. You could do a slow-release over a long period of time (still to the same giveaway users), or something else. If you plan to make Espers very feature-rich and well-supported to justify a $4.5 million market cap, a slower premine distribution would give you time to reach it before people lose faith in the market and the network's security dwindles to pure hobbyist miners. I understand that, but this is a discussion about security. Miners (generally) won't mine below breakeven. I fail to see how that is asecurity concern? The chain will simply be pushed by our miners if no one else wants to. More for us. ... And more giveaways This project is purely for people who want to get in early on something that will like a butterfly go from a ugly caterpillar and transform into something beautiful. OR one can simply wait until this exits the cacoon and flies away. Either way the project will go on. As you know, proof of work is a security mechanism--someone needs to (essentially) match the hashing power of the rest of the network, and then they can freely fork blocks, create double-spends, etc. I know you're planning to implement another security mechanism, "proof of reliability," which I haven't seen explained yet, but understand it as an improvement over proof of stake. But until that's implemented (or even afterwards, depending on your implementation), your network's security only comes from the cost (in servers) of attacking the network. It's not so much about pushing the chain along to process transactions, but to keep those transactions locked in the chain safely. 100milion is like month+- of mining with mid range CPU. So its not that much after all also. Can you code in wallet to have ICO coins locked in for a like 365 days and then only like 10% gets released and so on.
We are considering changing up the tactics, however we must be very considerate about it as to not upset the community either, no one will want to wait a year to get their coins. Here's the kicker though. Once we go PoR, your balance will impact what you earn per block like PoS. Just in different manner Also PoW ends just at over half way of the total count. The rest is PoR. So PoW only takes the chain just over half way People would probably be perfectly fine with the 100 billion coins paid out over a longer period of time, perhaps for as long as you think it'll take to get new security measures in place. |
