Namecoin Forum

I don't like the looks of those poll results :S

Due to the update at block 24k (faster decreasing fees), i guess lost coins my stay there forever...

khal,

Thank you for the patches. I incorporated most of them, except for the block 150000 network fee fix. For validation, it is better to use fixed-point arithmetic to make sure there are no differences on different hardware.

There is a new version on github, and I followed your example by doing a PGP signed tag.

My current effort is merged mining for bitcoin and namecoin.

vinced wrote:Thank you for the patches.

You are welcome :p

vinced wrote:I incorporated most of them, except for the block 150000 network fee fix. For validation, it is better to use fixed-point arithmetic to make sure there are no differences on different hardware.

Good, i let you manage the c++ specializations (i'm a beginner c++ coder)

vinced wrote:There is a new version on github, and I followed your example by doing a PGP signed tag.

Cool, this will allow both cloning and security for people.

vinced wrote:My current effort is merged mining for bitcoin and namecoin.

Courage

khal wrote:Waiting will not change that problem. You pay 5, you get back your 5 in next block => still free. Squatter's paradise ! (see below :p)

It would be more difficult to do that... And worst, you can just reserve any name you can with your namecoins (just spend 1000$ ?) and sell some of them at high price (because people want them), you are assured not to lose your money for other names :p. Squatter's paradise !

So, is there a real solution to this problem ?

Hi. I do i2p implementation of namecoin. I must say I very disapointed with daily destroyed coins, and namecoin suicidal algo.

khal, let me ask. Are you fighting with squaters or developing distributed key/value storage?

Even you are set the lost coins algo, namecoin database is full of "for sale" domains now. And all of associated coins are destroyed for nothing. Currently 81k (out of 21M - 0.3%). And this is while namecoin even didn't get popularity compared to OpenNIC.

Did it changed situation? And what will happen when NMC will become popular? Popularity will destroy namecoin.

khal, please, turn off coins destruction, return them to miners. Miners are processed the blocks, they need a reward for that. Number of squaters is unlimited, but number of MNC is limited. This is the mathematical collapsing function.

The domains (and squaters) are only one aspect of this wonderfull system. It can store any key-values. It can be used as global information storage in a future. It can be more than just DNS. Why are you limited system to destroy itself by fighting squaters evil?

Fighting with squaters is like fighting with Bitcoin speculants. You think they do evil, I think they bring popularity to system. Bitcoin possibly never rised without speculants. And so may be true for NMC and squaters.

Let the squaters to be, let the NMC to circulate. They will rise the circuation volume. Circuation is life.

Otherwise you invented a dead body.

Thanks.

pent wrote: khal, please, turn off coins destruction, return them to miners. Miners are processed the blocks, they need a reward for that. Number of squaters is unlimited, but number of MNC is limited. This is the mathematical collapsing function.

If miners get the fee it means miners can register names for free. So any miner mining blocks will just fill them up with their own names and get the fees back.

doublec wrote:If miners get the fee it means miners can register names for free. So any miner mining blocks will just fill them up with their own names and get the fees back.

Well, then turn off mining to do not let them earn and buy domains... I confused, where is the logic?

They mine - they are able to spend mined MNC like they want. And not a fact that spended coin will go to the same miner, it is very low chance.

doublec, squater-miners will not earn less NMC from mining with this limitation, but the whole network looses its blood.

There is an evil squater which has 1Ghash/s mining power.

With a difficulty 518525.94130231 he will get 1.94 NMC per day.

Day left, he mined 1.94 NMC and bought 194 domains.

If you pass that 1.94 NMC as reward for block solving, his total daily revenue will be increased by 1.94*(his_power/network_power).

Well, yes, he will get some % income.

Okay, can this amount just be holded until domain expiration and realesed then (as reward for miners)?

pent,

take a deep breath and run the numbers a few more times. I'm liking your i2p integration project.

You've got it wrong, destroying a few coins to stop miner-squatters will NOT destroy namecoin ....

The algo is working and will work in the future. Think it through some more before you trash the place.

Run the numbers again, it works.

I am disagree. Reposting my message here:


Okay. Let my chaotic mind continue to travel from critic station to the solution proposal station.

How bitcoin deals with increasing bounty hunters? It has a positive feedback between network power and work difficulty. I.e. number of people (actually their cummulative power) grows => difficulty grows. Lets see



And what is namecoin in current stage? It is a addition to bitcoin, which charges fees and issues a TLDs. But where to put that charged fees? If we return them to miners, then there will be parasite positive feedback between number of ordered TLDs and bounty increasement. It will let miners to order TLDs only with purpose of their bounty increase. Free Money. Like beer.

So devs decided to destroy that fee. If we destroy that fee, the miners (and all others) will become bit reacher also. But this will also increase fees in their value. So this is some sort of positive feedback between number of ordered TLDs and fee increase.

But with bad implementation and negative effects:
1) System changes fees descrease according to dummy algo without feedback of its growing
2) The 1) effects are that devs should regulate this algo by hands doing network intrusion
3) If they will not properly guess fees, system will be full of spam or collapse
4) By destroying fees, system destroys itself and forces NMC value to have unpredicted behavior



The proposal
1) Registration fee must be constant (this needs some mathematics check)
2) Registration fee should return to turnover as miners' bounty
3) To avoid described parasite feedback, we need to put another feedback between number of TLDs registered for a certain time period and difficulty.

So if the registration activity will grow, the bounty will grow, but difficulty will also grow.
Benefits:
1) System do not destroy coins
2) devs do not do system intrusion
3) System regulate itself