Quote from: Goldshredder on September 21, 2018, 01:07:01 AM

Another method is to somehow tether (excuse the unintended pun) it to a larger organisation, e.g. symbiotic, or parasitic.

Don't need either. One other insight I can bring: people don't scale, they form clumps. There's plenty of compositional material (people online) and so there's more than one collective intelligence around, (even if it's only oddballs like me that categorise them as such). So they form groups of collective intelligences with shared meta-collective models.Sound a bit esoteric? Not at all, here's an example: "What do Deepcoiners think about the Shibes?" Same thing, just without the meta-level jargon. But it's at the meta-level where the insights start to pay off. Ascend a level of abstraction or two and you get to view an "altcoin community" as yet another fancy label for "online special interest group" and suddenly, theres a whole raft of practical advice gained from long experience, a hefty corpus of empirical work on the topic and an entertaining set of fanciful theories about the interrelationship between the individual and the group with a catalytic dose of awkard questions surrounding identity and its construction in the modern "post-truth" abstraction that we call "the world". And, the killer is ... YMMV.

I'm brown-bagging again with even more earnest pleas for forgiveness if you don't find the first section relevant to Deepcoin (although that may not be entirely my fault).

Quote from: gjhiggins on August 30, 2018, 05:18:12 PM

Quote from: desynct on August 30, 2018, 09:11:26 AM

looks like this baby has forked lately, at least once,
cryptoid on one branch, prohashing on another

?? Where are you seeing that? Do you have a pointer - and are you sure you have the right altcoin?

The original VCoin release and immediate abandonment: https://github.com/vcoindev/vcoin

The rescue (courtesy of @chrisvl) is here: https://github.com/vcoin-project/vcoin

Some time ago I reconnected the VCoin clone back to its Zetacoin cloneparent, recovering the entire Zetacoin and (importantly) Bitcoin commit history: https://github.com/vcoin-project/vcoin0.8zeta-dev and used that to leverage some extensive merging from Bitcoin, to bring the coin up through the various successive versions. Anyone still using the client atm is likely to to be using the interim Core 0.9 version but in the relative quietude of this unimportant spiral arm of the altcoin galaxy, I've working on the Core 0.16 version, taking a radically different approach.

One problematic issue is that as a name, "VCoin" was a complete non-starter in the first place. Rumour has it that the OP was JP and must have failed to do basic desk research on the name because a SE Asian company called VCoin were already operating in the fintech/cryptocurrency space - which is probably why the coin was so quickly abandoned. VCoin remains a non-starter as a name because the namespace is so crowded (e.g. https://app.vcoinexchange.com/).

Contempating this issue, I noted that the prevalence of the naming scheme (*)coin was becoming a fairly reliable defining characteristic of vapid "meetoo" clones (incl. VCoin, tbh). I also noted the fact that over 4000 altcoins had been launched and as far as I could see, none had much of a distinctive collective "persona", let alone one with a persona solidly grounded in the online SIG that animates the blockchain. As far as I could make out, it's wall-to-wall pretend SV startups, complete with scale model CTO/dev or a pretend C-Suite "core team" (or other such absurd imports from tightly-centralised organisational models) and scale model ambitions to match.

As VCoin remained just one more "meeeetoooo" altcoin extra in a cast of thousands, then its undisturbed trajectory has been an eminently predictable high-value-start-followed-by-gradual-decline-into-obscurity hockey stick typical of the vast majority of alts - such Ziftrcoin https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ziftrcoin/ and Quotient https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/quotient/ - to pick out two examples at random. although the latter is currently in Yobit zombiecoin mode by which I mean that, according to the takeover ANN, its continued existence is apparently justified solely by the fact it can be traded on Yobit: We have Officially taken over XQN, it can be traded on Yobit. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1766310.0)

Yes, VCoin is listed on Yobit https://yobit.net/en/trade/VCOIN/BTC so in the context of the trading of electronic tokens, it too is a Yobit zombiecoin, the coininfo section references the original abandoned GH repos and yes, coinmarketcap lists it as "inactive" - probably correctly according to their limited criteria.

I'm very comfortable with this situation. VCoin as a name is unviable for an alt and Yobit is widely reputed to be unresponsive (but I haven't checked), so that's their problem if they miss the upcoming hard fork.

So, if not "VCoin" then what?

I'm a pragmatist and decided to just drop the problematic bit: "Coin" ... welcome to V.

Admittedly, the down side could be argued that online search will be an absolute bitch but on the up side: it confers immunity from index engine bullying, eliminates domain name squabbles and renders imposter domains pointless.

Right now, no peer-to-peer networked cryptocurrency can be a legally-recognised entity, i.e. it is constitutionally unable to own IP. In consequence, it would be futile to choose a name that could have IP value because as far as IP is concerned, decentralised communities are defenceless against even casual appropriation of IP by a legally-recognised entity. Contrariwise, V is easy to remember, works across cultures and occupies a namespace that is legislatively forbidden to all effective legally-recognised entities.

Without going into reams of tedious detail, the rest of V's approach is similarly iconoclastic. V recognises the social profundity of TANSTAFFL, borrows heavily from E. E. van Vogt's auctorial evocation of Nexialism, leans hard in the direction of Harry Harrison's wirr and, as a peer-to-peer networked cryptocurrency, is a pure Teal organisation, free of the crippling centralising distortions introduced into Holacracy, for example. V is an instance of Wooley's c, the collective version of Spearman's g (c.f. Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups http://science.sciencemag.org/content/330/6004/686) and one of the current reseach topics is the elicitation of user task requirements where the user is an empowered collective intelligence.

For a flavour of the group ethos, see A different perspective on cryptocurrency. BTW, that is a temporary home, pending the construction and inscription of a TrustyURI (spec: https://github.com/trustyuri/trustyuri-spec, Python implementation using RDFLib: https://github.com/trustyuri/trustyuri-python) on the V blockchain.

I apologise to those in the loop who have been patiently waiting for some actual progress. The preparatory work is very nearly complete (see branches various in https://github.com/gjhiggins/vcoincore) and, after an overly-long period of auto-didactisim, I am now more confident that the groundwork is sufficiently comprehensive and detailed to enable V to follow a very different trajectory.

tl;dr no lucrative "investment" opportunities, no lucrative centralised mining consortia because the emission schedule is complete and block reward is 1 now VCN (algo is bog-standard Bitcoin SHA2-256D). In essence, there's nothing to interest the usual altcoiner here - and we sort of keep it that way by design because different requirements apply in order to be free of the distorting influence of such agencies during the establishment of a strongly pro-social group identity, a necessary but not sufficient condition for the development of more powerful expressions of c ... (Hint: Finally, c was significantly correlated with the proportion of females in the group, with groups having more females being more collectively intelligent.)

I haven't yet solved the problem of getting the updated Core 0.16 Deepcoin client to successfully neogtiate the algo changeover and re-set the difficulty modifier but it's "just" a matter of me improving my understanding of the problem. atm, I'm forced to conclude that I'm holding it wrong.

Cheers

Graham