Quote from: Hazard on May 16, 2013, 09:03:31 PM

Quote from: thekidcoin on May 16, 2013, 08:01:46 PM

Quote from: c4n10 on May 16, 2013, 06:19:41 AM

Quote from: thekidcoin on May 16, 2013, 06:01:09 AM

While this is probably true, if they started at a difficulty of 1, or .25, and the coin became popular, very quickly, it would be impossible to get coins, and if it was traded, the coin would be unprofitable to mine. So that means basically anyone without 10 - 30 MH's rigs (for litecoin variants) would get scraps, where as currently with some of the new coins, anyone who sees a release quick enough,m even with minimal hashing power, can scoop up a few thousand coins and possible a nice profit if its traded. I say something like .025 would be a better start than .25 or 1.

What was Bitcoin's original starting difficulty, anyone know?

What are you talking about...? At difficulty 0.25 with 350 KH/s you should find a block roughly every hour, that is hardly scraps. Coins shouldn't be made with the intention of everyone getting thousands of coins in the first few days so they can hoard them until the coin reaches an exchange and then dump their thousands of coins on the market decreasing the value of the coin instantaneously. Any coin designed to be intentionally pumped and dumped shouldn't bother being released.

Bitcoin's starting difficulty was technically higher than 0.25

Code:

static CBigNum bnProofOfWorkLimit(~uint256(0) >> 30)

that generates a starting scrypt difficulty of ~0.25, every incremental increase doubles the difficulty.

Bitcoin started with:

Code:

static CBigNum bnProofOfWorkLimit(~uint256(0) >> 32)

Please explain how that line of code raises the starting difficulty?

It doesn't.

Exactly