Quote from: kaene on October 15, 2015, 08:53:36 AM

Quote from: AdamWhite on October 14, 2015, 12:19:00 PM

Quote

clearly a mistake...

With all the damning evidence released clearly showing the instamine was obviously intentional........

"evidence"? I'll try to reply to a troll Grin

I was there during the "instamine", go check the first pages of this thread and you will see me complaining and discussing.

Evan updated the code many times during the first hours/days because various mistakes. I had some talks in IRC with him during the first days/weeks, and my conclusion was that the instamine happened because he just wasn't very familiarized with Bitcoin codebase and he didn't test his coin properly before launch, plus, at that time most coins were launched without a proper difficulty adjustment algorithm (Kimoto's Gravity Well was fresh new at that time and most coins didn't include it at launch).

I also saw his nickname mining in pools, he didn't even ranking top 10 of the miners (and pools had most of network's hashrate), at that time people didn't hide their nicknames in pools and you were used to see always the same names.

Moreover, if you spend some minutes analyzing the blockchain and you follow the first 1-10 mined blocks (those that are clearly mined by the dev) you will see that eventually they all go to the same addresses, with many other blocks and coins coming from pool-mining, and finally these after weeks don't account for more than 80k XCoins (about 2BTC at the time). I guess that's why he tried to buy some more, and he made it publicly (of course people like you would had thought he was hyping it to then dump his coins at higher price). https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg4961359#msg4961359

But the most important, the instamine didn't matter, if anything, it helped with the distribution, and the reason is because during the first weeks of life of XCoin you could buy 100k XCoin for just 2.5BTC - 5BTC, so everyone had his chance for weeks to decide to risk and buy or just sell (I myself sold more than 50k XCoin for less than 2BTC, and decided to buy some back later more expensive):

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg4889177#msg4889177
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg4872871#msg4872871
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg4867363#msg4867363

Next time you talk about the instamine, understand that those of us who don't care about it is because we understand what happened (can't say the same about you or others just repeating the same over and over without proper knowledge or analysis). We judge XCoin-Darkcoin-DASH (and Evan) for 20 months of upgrades, delivering promises and innovation, and we invest in it because we know it will continue delivering.

*thumbsup*

i'm in the same boat.

To throw some more evidence, that it's like you said - "he just wasn't very familiarized with Bitcoin codebase" - i quoted an old post from me below!

It totally fits to his story, in the beginning it was just a project for fun, and the error with the instamine did not matter. There was no plan to "restart" the coin, because it was just pure fun, with not much value! Some trolls are telling us that if it was an error, he should have just "reset" the blockchain, but why? There was no reason to, the value was peanuts!
Who would think that xcoin would get this big someday? Surley not we, the miners from the beginning, that's why many of us dumped the "instamined" xcoins for cents! And anybody had equally chances to buy big loads of coins for cents. And that's what i think happened, we have formed a big user base, because of the instamine and the ridiculous prices and huge supply in the beginning and that's the most important point for a working currency, a huge user base!!

If someone should cry about the instamine, it should probably be me - because i was one of these "instaminers" who sold 100k coins for cents instead of millions Shocked

Quote from: megges on January 19, 2014, 04:04:04 PM

Quote from: ig0tik3d on January 19, 2014, 08:49:49 AM

Quote from: kaene on January 19, 2014, 08:45:34 AM

Quote from: eduffield on January 18, 2014, 05:50:23 PM

- Block reward controlled by moores law ( 1111 / (diff+1 ^ 2))

This is not working, right? I'm getting 500 coins as reward

see all function in source )))

Code:

int64 static GetBlockValue(int nBits, int64 nFees)
{
   double dDiff =
   (double)0x0000ffff / (double)(nBits & 0x00ffffff);

   int64 nSubsidy = (1111 / (pow((dDiff+1),2)));
   if (nSubsidy > 500) nSubsidy = 500;
   if (nSubsidy < 1) nSubsidy = 1;
   nSubsidy *= COIN;

   return nSubsidy + nFees;
}

so i guess we have unlimited coins, dind't find your 84 mio max coins there !!!!!!!

Code:

static const int64 MAX_MONEY = 84000000 * COIN;

--> COINS that can be max in wallet/transaction - this has almost nothing to do with the cap, because the COIN cap is calculated from the blockvalue!!

Code:

if (txout.nValue > MAX_MONEY)
return state.DoS(100, error("CTransaction::CheckTransaction() : txout.nValue too high"));

that checks transactions for MAX_MONEY but there isn't any check that prevents us from mining more than 84 mio coins !!