Minting is necessary for every shareholders?

[cryptog]

After having accumulated 7 share days (online or offline, it does not matter), I can start to mint by unlocking my wallet for minting only.
The question (might be silly) that I have is: do i need to be online while minting?
I guess so unless there is a way for the network to be aware of the fact that I am minting…

[cryptog]

@Sabreiib I heard the same about peercoin. I am wondering if it s about accumulating coinage or actually unlocking one s wallet for minting in the case of peercoin.

[Yurizhai]

Yes, as of this moment you would need to be online.

[cryptog]

@Yurizhai I see. But with cold minting offline will be enough ? I suppose that “offline” means having the software be running without being connected to the internet. “Online” means having the software be running and being connected to the internet.

[Yurizhai]

Yes. If NSR does get a cold minting feature, as I understand it would work something like that.

[cryptog]

@Yurizhai I see. Tks.

[sigmike]

But with cold minting offline will be enough ?

No, with cold minting you still need to be online. Otherwise the network can’t see your blocks and you can’t see other’s blocks, so you’d build your own chain that can’t compete with the network chain and all your blocks would be orphaned.

But with cold minting you can mint with a key that cannot spend your coins. Your spending key can be kept safely in cold storage. So you can’t lose your coins if your minting-only computer is compromised.

Indeed Jordan doesn’t want cold minting in Nu. But for my part I’m in favor of including it.

[Yurizhai]

Thanks for the clarification sigmike.

[cryptog]

@sigmike.

Tks for clarifying.

By the way, do you think that nushares hot minting is secure enough?

[sigmike]

It depends on so many things it’s hard to say (your OS, your network, other softwares installed, inherited bitcoin and peercoin code, the libraries we use, Nu specific code, etc.).

[cryptog]

@sigmike. I see. By the way why not proposing a motion that calls for implementing the cold minting feature since the motion for protocol voting has passed?
I am assuming that implementing a cold minting feature is 1 example of protocol change.

[masterOfDisaster]

[…]proposing a motion that calls for implementing the cold minting feature[…]

…would be great!
I bet there would be some discussion needed as well, but I think this is the way to proceed if there are different opinions.

[cryptog]

I am also wondering about the following. If your connection gets interrupted, what happens to the minting that was being executed?

[masterOfDisaster]

Cold-minting doesn’t eliminate the need to be online when minting.
Maybe I understand something wrong, but I understand cold-minting as an approach that supports minting with keys that can’t be used for executing transactions (transferring coins; possible security issue when having trouble with malware…).
But you still need to be online and part of the Nu network; the minting device needs to be aware of transactions to include them in blocks as well it needs to be able to distribute found blocks…

[seki]

exaclty. PoS pays the user for “risking” his coins to be online. All we can do is find ways to secure our online coins
as much as possible

[cryptog]

@masterOfDisaster This is also my understanding. But my question was if you interrupt the minting at a point and you resume it later on, would you have to restart the whole process from scratch?
I guess if you stop minting just before finding a block, and you resume it 1h later, you will need to refind a block from scratch. But there is 1 block per minute so in the worst case you would lose 1mn?

[masterOfDisaster]

As both mining and minting deal with randomness and luck that is needed for finding the solution to a block there’s no “restart the whole process from scratch”; it’s rather continuing the process of trying to be lucky.
You lose nothing if you interrupt the process except for the chance for being successful as long as the interruption continues.

[cryptog]

@masterOfDisaster i see. tks for the clarification.

[woodstockmerkle]

Perhaps we can have a motion and client change that has an ‘abstain’ vote or flag during minting. Users minting with ‘abstain’ would neither contribute nor detract from the rates, motions, and votes.

The utopian dream would be for everyone who has NSR to be contributing and active and updating the client.

The reality is, the infrastructure for feeds and user education is not there, and a ‘no vote’ is still a vote. Especially as NSR are beginning to leak out and more people boot up the client into default mode

With such a flag active in the client, it could decorate the UI with warnings, and direct the shareholder to a “how to be a good shareholder” FAQ.

Already there has been a drop off in the NSR difficulty. At some point it may be impossible to get a 50% vote/motion passed if more clients are deployed and left on an unhelpful default configuration.

[Chronos]

Already there has been a drop off in the NSR difficulty. At some point it may be impossible to get a 50% vote/motion passed if more clients are deployed and left on an unhelpful default configuration.

A drop off in difficulty reflects fewer minters, not fewer configured votes. However, I agree with your conclusion.