Forum Home
    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular

    A Proof-of-Stake Protocol v 2.0

    Suggestion Box
    11
    33
    21738
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • lizhi
      lizhi last edited by

      My primary job is to stop the price decline.But unfortunately, those exchange create a huge number of new currency,They sell the FTC, get high returns .So, I think PoS and DAC.

      33% holder is not a problem,It is not one holder,POS will collapse his account.

      look.jpg

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • ?
        A Former User last edited by

        We could have a standard fee put into all transactions which would be for the communities bounty pool?

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • P
          Penguin last edited by

          Personally, I don’t think we should make decision base on the price / try to stop the price fall. What we do should be good for the coin not good for the price.

          We are not Fed or Goldman Sachs.

          As I know FTC is a high inflation coin. (at least in the first 4 years) . It does not surprise me if the price fall to 1 cents (I hope it will not happen but it could)

          I thinks some of the coins is already mining with negative income, but i don’t see great drop in hash rate… so .I don’t think miner income is our concern.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • kris_davison
            kris_davison last edited by

            If we made a transaction fee mandatory and a fixed amount may this help tackle the double spend issue? As in send one transaction in a shop walk out send another to themselves containing the same coins but with a transaction fee. Default by miners is to accept the one with the highest fee so the shop loses out. But with a fixed tx fee would that still be an issue?

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • T
              Tuck Fheman last edited by

              Not only an interesting, This is our roadmap for future development. We will get rid of bitcoin and exceed bitcoin. This is the meaning of our existence. Feathercoin does not exist as a single copy . Happily, we are one step ahead, time is the key. Time is money.

              vqGeMsr.gif

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • T
                Tuck Fheman last edited by

                No , It is not a decision, only discuss.

                But I think the miners will not bear the loss,so We need to make early preparations.

                Bushstar haz opinion?

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • M
                  mirrax last edited by

                  Bushstar haz opinion?

                  As far as I know, FTC code will be prepared for POS (as PXC code already is prepared for future POS addition).

                  However if so it will be POW+POS not POS only, POW+POS is good decision IMO.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • lizhi
                    lizhi last edited by

                    Personally, I don’t think we should make decision base on the price / try to stop the price fall. What we do should be good for the coin not good for the price.

                    We are not Fed or Goldman Sachs.

                    As I know FTC is a high inflation coin. (at least in the first 4 years) . It does not surprise me if the price fall to 1 cents (I hope it will not happen but it could)

                    I thinks some of the coins is already mining with negative income, but i don’t see great drop in hash rate… so .I don’t think miner income is our concern.

                    We are not Fed or Goldman Sachs. yet !!

                    But We have to maintain a healthy market.Otherwise, investors will say, “They are dead.” We must ensure that, FTC does not become waste paper.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • ?
                      A Former User last edited by

                      I want to see something truly unique and special if we implement part PoS.

                      Under no circumstances are we to copy and paste another coins PoS.

                      We need to really think this one through and come up with something that re-writes PoS the same way NeoScrypt has re-written PoW.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • kris_davison
                        kris_davison last edited by

                        I agree and if it could tackle the issue of unconfirmed transactions at the same time that would be awesome. :)

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • ?
                          A Former User last edited by

                          What?

                          PoS has an unconfirmed tx issue?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • kris_davison
                            kris_davison last edited by

                            no all coins have one as fas as I can see.

                            Its just the issue of a double spend attack before the transaction has been confirmed in a block.

                            Which is only really an issue for face to face “near instant” transactions but its a harder sell if like in bitcoin that could be >40 mins. and even we have blocks that are >20 mins.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • First post
                              Last post