Quote from: bstymaster on April 10, 2015, 07:02:07 AM

Quote from: MaxDZ8 on April 10, 2015, 06:01:57 AM

You don't need to explain me how using my computer for other needs amortizes cost. The whole point of my miner is that it's fire and forget. I mined while playing Qbeh-1_{2} but for some more AAA action I'm currently mining and playing Borderlands 2_{3}!

I see things the other way around. Most people buy computers because they have other needs than mining. Most probably don't even consider mining when they buy it.
However if they later find they can earn a few bucks each month mining, while the computer is idle, why not. It may even turn out that mining will amortize the whole computer cost within a year or two, so this would be really sweet. Lots of people will join in to mine. So the mining reward is very important, if you want to get all these users. And you do want to get all of them, to make a coin secure.
Consider a coin with 100 million home-miners. That's pretty tough even for a government to attack. If not impossible. If the incentive is there, they will come eventually.

If you want fire-and-forget miner, most already are, they set priority to IDLE, or even a better way to do it is to set it to PROCESS_MODE_BACKGROUND_BEGIN (win32).
And you can tune it a bit, if it still hinders your performance, so you won't feel it at all when running (other than hearing the vents revving).

Quote from: MaxDZ8 on April 10, 2015, 06:01:57 AM

My current CPU is an AMD 450 X3. It does not seem to have the power consumption characteristics you mention. Besides, being passively cooled, I cannot run it full load for much time and I don't see any good reason for which anyone should buy more powerful stuff.

That in particular won't be too good, but the majority of cpus are decent enough to turn a profit, if the right reward is there. What I'm talking about is bringing mining to the masses.

Quote from: MaxDZ8 on April 10, 2015, 06:01:57 AM

GPUs have become proper turing-complete architectures about a decade ago therefore they can run everything a CPU can whatever they're efficient at this is another matter. Yescrypt is not compute-oriented and therefore won't be accelerated by compute-oriented architectures.

I'm not criticizing GPUs in general. But the fact is that the wide majority of users don't have a GPU that will turn a profit when mining. Once again, my goal would be getting *most* people into mining.

The advantage over purpose built mining rigs is simply security. You can't compete with the kind of computing power that all the average users combined would bring into cryptos.

GPUs are still ok, many users still have them, and they're readily available at your local computer store.
However GPU algorithms can be implemented into ASICs if the incentive is there, that's why they're evil. So it's easy for a government to attack these kinds of coins.

And the worst case scenario is bitcoin. Governments, have the ability to do a 51% percent attack on bitcoin right now at no cost, if they pass a law to seize all the ASIC farms.
You probably already know, but since it's a public thread, let me make the point that ASIC farms exist because of the economics of manufacturing and purchasing ASICs, you'll get them a lot cheaper if you buy this hardware in mass. You can even develop it, at this level.
And I believe (though I might be incorrect) that cex.io alone has enough hashpower to 51% attack bitcoin right now. If they're legitimate they have no incentive to do it, but still they put all the hardware in one place, ready for the government to seize. Hence, the evilness.

The higher rewards at the beginning structure is completely 180 to what it should be. This is what kills coins... Cypher right now...

Rank   Donor   User Name   KH/s    CYPHER/Day   BTC/Day
1        anonymous   9,614,267   154,653.797   6.6501
2       anonymous   775,289   12,471.198   0.5363
3       anonymous   252,787   4,066.303     0.1749
4        Monero30     158,558   2,550.538     0.1097
5        GPdigger    132,088   2,124.745     0.0914

Net hash... 32 Gh/s. One user.. NINE Gh/s??? A QUARTER of the network?!?

Or START...

Rank   Donor   User Name   KH/s    START/Day
1        overxltc    2,266,663     2,929.652
2       overnoob     2,124,156     2,745.463
3        overx11    934,766    1,208.181
4        neptvey    405,496    524.101
5        anonymous   399,217     515.986

Pool rate of 12 Gh/s, with 8,000+ users. Sick! Now combine that MASSIVE level of disparity with that reward structure? Why the hell would anyone want to mine a coin that's already mostly owned by under ten miners, or possibly only ONE! I honestly don't even know why anyone participates in a system like this. This is the last thing you want for network security. It's called a "distributed" network for a reason.

So are we inventing new currency or just another tool for speculative purposes? Currency is meant to be used, and carried around in your pocket... like as in your phone.... so, coin... only mined with Android device, the 'wallet' that you carry around. To prevent virtual node farms, link it to a mobile phone number. Now nobody has much of an advantage, the network has the distribution it needs, and it's actually useful.

Might want to check out MUE. Good dev, good philosophy, launched with no hype and with slow steady growth. Right now the GPU implementation of Quark algo gives GPU's about a 10:1 advantage (on my machine, 7970+R9-290 on an FX-8350). I think that's about the closest we've got right now to a GPU/CPU hybrid.

Edit: Holy crap! Worst case yet! Vanilla:

Rank   Donor   User Name   KH/s     VNL/Day
1        anonymous   99,931,580   13,910.653
2        kuyiuyzj     63,457,932   8,833.457
3        anonymous   9,162,597     1,275.450
4        vnl1234     8,142,145     1,133.401
5        anonymous   7,884,051     1,097.474
6        anonymous   6,751,714 939.851

Net hash of 300 Gh/s. Two users have 51%+

7