New York City, New York Aug 30, 2021 (Issuewire.com) - A new Achi blockchain (achicoin.org) was launched by Sten Achiho 15 days ago. Achi blockchain is growing very fast and today has reached 1024TB network space. Achi is a new and the first truly decentralised cryptocurrency based on a Proof of Space (PoSp) and Proof of Time (PoT) consensus algorithm with independent Timelords and unique "plots". Sten Achiho is planning to gain widespread digital exchange listing of Achi in the near future.
We interviewed Sten Achiho:
- My congratulations, Sten! Excellent start!
- Thank you!
- Sten, Achi and Chia are using the same Proof of Space and Time consensus algorithm, but many experts say that today Chia brings income only to the creators. Why? Do you expect the same issue with Achi?
- First, let's start with the project creation stage. How to attract new users? Of course, a lot depends on decentralization. But the bottom line is that the Chia project team has already made 50% of prefarming since the launch - now 95% of the issued coins to the developers. There can be no question of any decentralization, with 5% of free coins it's simply impossible. Achi has zero prefarming, I do not expect the same issue.
- Well, let's just imagine that somebody still decided to try Chia farming. Who will be able to make money on this and is it possible?
- In order to make money on farming, you don't need special equipment with special characteristics. Even the most average PC can cope with this task, it all depends on the coin that the miner wants to "grow". Chia has a low energy consumption, positioning itself as the most environmentally friendly project, in comparison with the leader of the market - Bitcoin. But even under these conditions, without having the scale of the "enterprise", and with the constant fall of the price of XCH, it is almost impossible to get some serious income by having a home farm. For ordinary guys who haven't the opportunity to purchase expensive equipment, it is not easy to earn - the farming speed is so low that some have to wait for a win-block for months, and this is at the cost of Chia about $250. Using pools comes with its own set of risks and costs. Also, the amount of disk space required for Chia farming is still growing. It's time to admit that without serious investments, it's too late to mine Chia, and it's much more expedient to choose another fork for yourself.
- Sten, Chia has a lot of forks, now experts count more than 40. How do you assess the possibility of earning money with their help? Does it make sense to use them?
- In fact, the question sounds a little wrong, but this is only for those who have studied the platform "inside and out". Most of the Chia forks, in a sense, are clones - they are almost complete copies of Chia, with the exception of only the logo and name. Forks have identical source codes, as a result - when farming on the basis of such forks, an additional, but absolutely useless load is formed - the plots on which users farm Chia are compatible for each copied fork. So, users farm any other forks with identical source code for free. Farming in such a way does not spend additional resources. This is due to the fact that all forks including ChainGreen, and popular SpareCoin, and almost all others, use plots that are fully compatible with Chia. This farming occurs in parallel with Chia, the unprofitability of which we discussed above. Therefore, the meaning of these forks for users is lost -- the format of the plot must be unique. Anyway, you can try to earn money by choosing the fork you mine more intelligently.
- Sten, objectively, what should be the ideal cryptocurrency for farming? Maybe there are certain criteria by which you can distinguish a coin with great potential from one that will inevitably fail?
- Indeed, high-quality marketing is the key to initial demand, but, unfortunately, it does not speak about reliability and profitability. There are certain criteria for choosing the optimal fork:
The ideal cryptocurrency, or fork, is primarily distinguished by its independence. So, the coin should not depend on its developers in any way. Taking into account the fact that the creators of Chia, taking advantage of a huge amount of prefarming, appropriated almost the entire coin issuance to themselves. If something unexpected suddenly happens or for any other reason, they start a massive sale of the currency, the demand for the currency will fall sharply, and the price will drop to minimal values. Then all those who have been farming coins for a long time will be left with nothing and their costs will never be recovered. The same story is with timelords. Chia has them controlled by the developers, and there is a huge risk for the blockchain that they suddenly stop supporting them. Effectively, Chia owners, and this would be a more correct term to describe them compared to "developers", have installed themselves as rent-seekers. At the same time, no one else is interested in launching and maintaining timelords. After all, Timelords in Chia do not bring any profit while requiring very expensive processors.
Decentralization. The fork, first of all, should be aimed at the interests of users, otherwise, the presence of rent-seeking intermediaries and the assignment of the majority of the issued currency by the project to itself will sooner or later lead to the inexpediency of use. Even novice farmers will one day realize that farming such a coin now in the presence of a single party controlling the currency is a proposition that comes with rather excessive risks.
This implies one of the main criteria - there should be no premining. Premining initially says that most of the issued coins will not go to users, and also, it significantly reduces the value of the currency.
Plots must be unique - we have already mentioned above what errors with identical plots lead to.
Security - by the way, many Chia forks have zero hashing power, this makes them vulnerable to any more or less well-thought-out attack. Any large chia farmer can assign his plots to farm such a for and perform a variety of attacks at effectively zero costs. Moreover, almost all the forks of Chia did not bother to at least rewrite their code and use their own libraries. If Chia decides to change something in those libraries, such forks likely will just stop working.
Technical reliability of the fork operation. It's the same story here as with libraries and source code - the same SSL certificates and port numbers cause conflicts between a lot of fork clones, which leads to their unstable operation.
So, decentralization, no prefarming, and independence - are these the properties of an ideal cryptocurrency?
Perhaps, speaking of independence, I would add that the currency should be able to live independently. It doesn't matter how the development team acts - in an ideal scenario, a new cryptocurrency is created and released into free-floating. It should be able to live without the support of original developers, here it's not just independence from the developer, it is full-fledged independence. Besides, of course, security and stability, but these are criteria that depend primarily on good initial design and support by a diverse set of farmers.
Remember this old maxim. Corporate and Central Bank Cryptocurrencies are only good for buying Bitcoin. My goal is to ensure that with time this changes to "... buying Achi and Bitcoin".
Media Contact
Achicoin
Source :AchiCoin
This article was originally published by IssueWire. Read the original article here.
