So people must first mine coins via PoW to obtain coins. Then these coins can be burned via PoB to obtain more coins than if they were just mining through PoW. If there comes a time when they would get less coins from Proof of Burn than they spent burning them, obviously they should stop burning them.
This is true, it is like PoW, if the incentive for mining becomes small, people won't buy as much hardware as they did when the incentive is larger. The network/users will self-regulate on the amount of coins being burned.
This has nothing to do with the max amount of coins. It would be exactly the same scenario if there were 200,000 coins rather than 2,000,000,000.
I was not too clear in my last post. By setting the total amount of coins to be that high, it will allow people to burn coins without the fear that there will be no coins left for the actual transactions.
Regardless of how many max coins you have, there will come a time when you run out of PoW coins or when the multiplier will require so many PoW coins to be burned that it becomes uneconomical to burn PoW coins for PoB coins.
Yes, there will come a time, it would be best if that time was not 1 year from release, but more time from release allowing the spread of Slimcoin's idea.
Also, can we get a use-case example for the reduction formula?
I will update the whitepaper on that note, but here is the general formula: The strength of the burnt coins mining halves every 350000 proof of work blocks, that halving is continuous and smooth.
Burn hash calculation directly from the source code documentation:
*slimcoin: a burn hash is calculated by:
* hash = (c b) * 2 ** ((nPoWBlocks - M) E) * [Hash]
*
* Where: c = BURN_CONSTANT (0.01 * CENT)
* b = amount of coins burned
* nPoWBlocks = the number of proof of work blocks between (not including)
* the blocks with heights last_BlkNHeight and burned_BlkNHeight
* where
* last_BlkNHeight = the height of the last block in the chain
* burned_BlkNHeight = the height of the block at the time of the burning
* M = BURN_MIN_CONFIRMS (6), the required amount of proof of work blocks between (not including)
* the block at the time of burning and the last block in the chain
* The offset by M allows for the first burn block the burnt coins
* can hash to be at 100% strength and decay from there, instead of having
* the coins slightly decayed from the beginning
* E = BURN_HASH_DOUBLE (350000.0), an exponential constant which causes
* burnt coins to produce slightly larger hashes as time passes
*
* [Hash] = Hash(burntBlockHash ++ burnWTx.GetHash() ++ hashBestBlock)
* Where: burntBlockHash = the hash of the block the transaction is found ing
* burnTx.GetHash() = the hash of this transaction
* hashBestBlock = the hash of the best proof-of-work block in the chain at the time of hashing
*/
What is the relationship between number of coins burned and reward or reward schedule?
Larger burn amounts are more likely to generate a proof of burn block because their multiplier is smaller, thus making the final burn hash smaller. It is, again, like PoW, one could mine PoW with a small computer, and if they get lucky, they get awarded. If one mines with a bigger computer, they would get awarded the same amount, but are more likely to find a valid block hash.
