Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The Fireside Chat 18 - The Value of Gridcoin

 

https://steemit.com/gridcoin/@jringo/the-fireside-chat-18-the-value-of-gridcoin

 

Summary

 

0-5:00

News

 

5:00-6:30

GPUGrid

 

6:30-18:30
Whitelist Questions

 

18:30+
Main Discussion

 

Main Discussion

 

This week we discuss the value of Gridcoin. We cover the following points:

  • Faith in the network as a whole / Network stability and security
  • Number of network participants
  • Number of network nodes
  • Number of transactions on the network
  • Substance of transactions on the network
  • Ability to use GRC
  • Ability to earn GRC
  • Relationship between participation cost (electricity, depretiation, etc), contribution, and GRC earned

And while we never brought this point up during the discussion, I feel okay mentioning it here (we've discussed it before)

  • Our use of incentive / how GRC is minted and distributed.

We discuss the following possible developments that would add value to the Gridcoin network:

  • Ease of use for transaction (mobile wallets and the like)
  • Ease of use for participation (UX and optimization improvements)
  • More direct relationship between FLOPs and reward

Next Episode

 

Join us for the next episode next Thursday, August 3rd, at 8:00pm EST, midnight UTC, on the Gridcoin discord.

 

The topic will be: BOINC, BOINC projects, and the Gridcoin Whitelist and Greylist process.

 

See you soon!

 

Like what we do at the fireside? We happily accept GRC donations.

GRC: SKEwHBTJ7REcT5AwewpJi6uH9S5TjtJmcR

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/27/2018 at 7:57 PM, Mr. Wood said:

Hi, what causes a "Rejected: 73 stakes" error message displaying in my wallet?  Thanks.

Hello, that is your wallet trying to stake coins and the network is not accepting it. I'm not so sure this is really an error but actually an indication of how many attempts your wallet has been trying to stake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NICE INDEPENDENT MARKETING INITIATIVE FOR GRIDCOIN (BY ONE OF OUR OWN)

 

Please have a look at one of our member's personal attempt to popularize GRC with his own signage and unique rig.

 

Not sure how to link to it from here, but it is post #3046 under Starter Coins for Beginners (by @additude).

 

Since he's new to this realm, I'm certain he would appreciate any recognition, as well as comments, advice and suggestions!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/1/2018 at 5:20 PM, fkinglag said:

Hello, that is your wallet trying to stake coins and the network is not accepting it. I'm not so sure this is really an error but actually an indication of how many attempts your wallet has been trying to stake.

 

Thanks fkinglad for the reply.  Hopefully it's not a real error and I'm not losing multiple stakes.  After I upgraded the wallet, the value cleared, but now it's back up to 9.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sometimes get the same error. Doesn't seem to be a big deal so far. I still stake.


GRC Address SL6cUtyvrRwTRiWcp1YWXHAzntBaBHKNCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly a dumb question, but I'm stumped here, and I'd really appreciate some feedback.

 

A few years back (possibly prior to Gridcoin) BOINC noticed that a significant number of their members were "RAC hounds".  A RAC hound is someone who is indifferent to the nature of the projects they choose, other than to maximize their RAC.  Soon other projects were complaining about project defections due to this phenomena alone.  So BOINC made an special effort to normalize RAC awards across all projects in an attempt to de-incentivize this behavior.

 

For its part, Gridcoin did something similar.  By assigning a constant total magnitude across projects, it attempted to provide a level playing field using what Control Theory calls "negative feedback".  Whenever one project becomes overly popular, the GRC reward per user sinks.  This motivates people to constantly seek the least popular projects, assuming they are only trying to maximize their profit, and don't have an independent sense of loyalty/bias to a particular project (e.g SETI).

 

Yet, having said that, pie charts like the one below suggest that all attempts to keep project participation roughly equal have fallen considerably short of that goal.  And I don't think it's because the majority of users think that the Collatz Conjecture is the most scientifically valuable project!  [I have a separate rant about that, available upon request.]  So what's going on?

 

image.png.88bca824f7e4f2739fc99c818f018ea7.png

 

Here is my best guess, but I'd really like to hear your opinion:

 

In a perfect world, RAC would be based not so much on anyone's particular hardware (e.g. "takes one hour on a Pentium III") but on some more fundamental characteristic of the work unit itself.  This is a huge challenge given the diversity of projects and their respective work units, but bear with me.

 

There is, I suspect, a computable metric for the "intrinsic minimum work" required to perform any calculation.  Attempts have been made to create such a metric by bench-marking whet and dhry-stones, but I'm talking about something even more fundamental.  For example, maybe the minimum number of logical gate operations required.  [I keep saying "minimum" because I don't feel that "bloatage" due to poor design should be counted.]

 

CONCLUSION

 

The Gridcoin data shown above suggests that either (1) An amazing number of Gridcoin members feel that the best science project available is the Collatz Conjecture (which I highly doubt), or (2) An amazing number of Gridcoin members have discovered that the CC simply pays the most on their rigs.

 

If I'm correct that (2) is more likely the case, I don't think Gridcoin is to blame due to it's "self-leveling reward" architecture.  That leaves only BOINC as the suspect for this weird behavior.  All it would take to explain this phenomena is for BOINC to be awarding abnormally high RAC for this one project, relative to the others.  So I wonder how often and how hard BOINC management is trying to manage this.

 

Finally, for those of you who would point out that even insanely high RAC doesn't really give you an "edge" in Gridcoin profits, I realized that also, in the course of writing this article.  Artificially high RAC for a project "shouldn't matter" and yet it appears that it does matter.  Is it possible that some Gridcoin members are simply assuming that "more RAC means more GRC" which isn't really true, but it sounds reasonable at face value.

 

Honestly, I'm back to square one.  Why do you think the Gridcoin project pie remains so lop-sided, despite every effort by Gridcoin to even it out?

 

All suggestions welcomed!

 

-- Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Cryptocurrenytalk Logo

 

News, information, and discussions about cryptocurrencies, blockchains, technology, and events. Blockchaintalk is your source for advice on what to mine, technical details, new launch announcements, and advice from trusted members of the community. Cryptocurrencytalk is your source for everything crypto. We love discussing the world of cryptocurrencies.

 

   
×

Important Information

By using CRYPTOCURRENCYTALK.COM, you agree to our Terms of Use.