 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »
|
|
Working on v17 this weekend. Got some help finally! Don't want to give an exact deadline - learned that the hard way - will be soon though. Almost all features of Bitcoin core v0.17.0.1- BIP 9 and a few other minor things left out. Donate to and view mining fund through cli. Got a use case in the hopper too - more to come....
|
|
|
|
Got a new miner or two recently - hashing finally went up. Looks like the rewards from the spike in blocks went up for sale right away on Cryptopia - selling should abate soon.
Good news! Hey @ArchimedesIX do you think it will be possible to deliver the latest version of the wallet by the end of December? Can you tell us what are the characteristics of this new wallet? I'll be watching your github work...  Have a clean build on 16.1 branch for linux but still fails some of the tests. I have not had a lot of time in the last couple weeks but will have some updates in the next day or two. Anyone who wants to help can run the build and tests and send me the proposed fix. I think most errors are a line or few and just artifacts of the merge process. Next wallet will add segwit and catch up most of the bips - this is a softfork update so current client will not need to be updated if you want to wait. Follow on release will have support for donations to mining pool and safe atomic transfers. Donation is an update to qt client and is pretty minimal/unobtrusive and safe atomic transfers are a softefork addition to segwit which allows atomic transfers to be confirmed by only merge mined blocks. |
|
|
|
|
Got a new miner or two recently - hashing finally went up. Looks like the rewards from the spike in blocks went up for sale right away on Cryptopia - selling should abate soon.
|
|
|
|
Does this project required KYC?
Eventually there’s no way without KFC.  practically spit out my coffee - needed a laugh.... |
|
|
|
|
you can try clearing the peers.dat file also.
|
|
|
|
thanks for the help, I now get the message Method not found (code -32601) in the debug console - I am currently away from home and using a different wifi internet network perhaps this is the problem?
Some Wifi networks will block IP ports used. Also, if updating from an older version of the client, you may have to download the full blockchain - should not take more than a couple/few hours with a fast connection. |
|
|
|
The number of nodes has increased in the last days! I've been watching this a few weeks ago when someone who has DVC had written something in IXC! I'm glad to hear that I still got to the party! When will the next wallet be released?
Weeks not months - update in-process can be viewed on github at https://github.com/ixcore/ixcoinNew version will match bitcoin core 0.16.1 features with a few additions - merge mining with bitcoin, a mining fund that can be donated to, and capability of supporting higher number of transactions. |
|
|
|
using 14.1 wallet and getting no block source--went to debug window and is blank- any help will be appreciated
put the following addnodes into ixcoin.conf addnode=52.15.150.105 addnode=18.216.35.168 addnode=18.217.178.46 You can also use the addnode command in debug console for windows ixcoin.conf can usually be found/created in c:\users\'username'\appdata\roaming\ixcoin\ Appdata is a hidden directory. For linux it can be found in .ixcoin under user's home - also a hidden directory |
|
|
|
Hi, any bootstrap file for ixc windows wallet? My wallet is syncing and it's 7 years 7 months behind...
Make sure you are on v 0.14.x. We had a recent fork - go into help/debug and remove any peers that are not v 14. You should sync quickly after that. No need for a bootstrap with latest optimizations and size of chain you would only gain a few minutes.... |
|
|
|
blablablabla
Jin, no use you try to spread FUD, as you can see, who is buying and selling these coins are now bots! There are no sellers and no buyers, however, you will no longer see the 400 sat level! haha Lost the train. This behavior is interesting! There are no interests in selling these coins, as I suspected, for some reason, they are holding IXC and I0C bags and bags for some purpose! But you have a Neblio bag, do not be sad, rat Jim, maybe there's a pair of NEBL_XIC... But it's worrying your situation! Neblio will not be in the ETF and now?  Bought 2500 eBTC dirt cheap yesterday. I think a lot of noobs will fuck up when BTC forks and then think this is the new BTC gold, and thus it will pump. HAHAHAHAH Do not you get involved with tokens? Your rat! Jim, looking at your history, you show up, buy the coinsTOKENS, dump and start talking badly so that they fall, then you repurchase and start saying you were wrong! This tactic will not work, have you sold your ICO? Get out of here scammer! It's good to know that you're in this Neblio: Wealth Distribution Amount (NEBL)% Top 1-25 4465426.28881194 31.83Top 26-50 1054199.66471498 7.51 Top 51-75 576396.82220601 4.11 Top 76-100 406363.43203528 2.90 Total 46.35 haha It's super decentralized, right Jim rat? This junk was born last year and wants to tell who? Respect the story, why not go buy more eBTC tokens? haha Rat, I lived for a guy asked for a whitepaper for PoW! hahahahahaha No more cryptocurrencies! You should support your NP something and not be here, guy! This your trash will drop soon, 1/3 of all of supply in the hand of 25 address! haha MARKETING? WHITEPAPER? Amateur, you're an amateur. You lose the reason when you call the guy a liar being that he is the dev of Ixcoin and not of I0coin, you lose your reason when suggest Neblio, a trash created last year, centralized and even you're all in! I assure you I've done x10! What if I bought up 400 sat, you know? What if I sold some in 5000 to 6000 sat ?? This game is not for you, I think you'd better lose money in Neblio, not here. eBTC was ages ago though, made a bit of money from it and dumped it. That was it. I don't like ETH and I don't hold any ERC-20 tokens. And I don't hold any NEBL - only one of its NTP1 tokens. And FYI, I've made tons of money on NEBL. But let's see a distribution chart of I0C or IXC then.. You can't even find one. Not even a fucking white paper. Vlad2Vlad probably owns 50% all by himself. And even if he doesn't, I don't care. And I don't care about Neblio not being that decentralized. It doesn't mean anything. True decentralization doesn't even exist. It's a pipe dream that you have been brainwashed with, just like you probably think inflation is only a bad thing - which it isn't. Something might be decentralized for a while, but it will always go back to being centralized - or mostly centralized, since smart people will outsmart less smart people and end up owning most of (insert coin) again. It's the 80/20 rule of life. The 1% will always own 80% of everything, while the rest, the 99% get to share the remaining 20%. Just like pussy.. That's why basement troglodytes like you never get laid. Cause guys like me fuck 80% of all the girls for you, and leave you with the trash. But funny how none of you can and will address the points I've made, haha. You KNOW that this coin is pure bullshit and that there's ZERO meat on the conspiracy theories surrounding it. I tore it apart with my long comment yesterday. NONE of you have been able to debunk what I've pointed out. And listen to yourself.. I missed the train? haha. IF I0C is truly what Vlad2Vlad and/or Daniel Treccia claims, have I really missed the train when it's currently trading at 16 cents? ... IXC Distribution - https://chainz.cryptoid.info/ltc/#!rich Conflating the Pareto Principle with centralization is wrong. It is a reflection of the accuracy of power law models in nature - not a cause. Same as saying the size or sand particles or number of stars in galaxies is centralized. |
|
|
|
What is the purpose of having an identical bitcoin copy? It would be nice if the price was also identical, but I would like to know the main purpose of this coin ?
IXC is not an exact copy of Bitcoin - there are some modest changes that make for a different purpose and use cases. Originally IXC was an exact clone with a much faster mining - mined out before 2014. This was intended to test the idea that fees could carry a coin. Became obvious the fees would be too small - so merge mining was added to drastically reduce the payout needed to be viable - and to claim a green label. Ok we know how that worked out but the coin stayed alive with a modest dev team. Recent changes include a donated mining fund - each block now pays 1 IXC as long as there are donated funds available to mining fund - so far about 500K donated/committed. Additionally, block size has been increased to 64MB which should also lead to a fee payout per block which should attract miners with use cases having fees of a fraction of a $.01. The current idea is to leverage merge mining to provide atomic transactions and micro/mini transactions in a software package nearly the same as bitcoin. |
|
|
|
I have emailed all the top exchanges on coinmarketcap with full specs of IXC and its recent developments.Hoping one or two of these take notice of recent develpments. On another note I talked about IXC a while back with peeps about how good IXC was and it being merge mined and suitable as sidechain and one had interesting response but maybe somewhat negative  Sidechains and merge mining have their own intractable problems, and in particular they do not mix together very well (merge mining makes the sidechain problems worse, and vice versa). If freicoin were to be sidechain to another chain, it would have to either (1) be a separate proof of work, or (2) have all full nodes of both chains validate each other, an idea more commonly known as extension blocks. Setting freicoin up as a separately mined chain with a different proof of work (and therefore different hardware distribution) prepares for the first possibility while not excluding the second. But in reality I expect that freicoin will remain different from bitcoin and other coins, and not an active sidechain, except perhaps via strong federations or higher level protocols using cross-chain payment channels.
There is at least one person I know who has made a recent ASIC purchase for freicoin mining, and I would hate to invalidate that investment. But the transition period also serves the purpose of having incentive for securing the sha256 portion of the network for some time to come, which helps protect other full nodes. In fact, current full nodes will be able to sync indefinitely into the future, even after the transition is complete, as the difficulty will have transitioned back down to diff-1, and all cuckoo cycle blocks will require a follow-up diff-1 sha256 block in order for the cuckoo cycle miners to actually collect their payment -- the trick which makes the soft-fork deployment possible.
I would not describe the issues with merge mining and sidechains intractable - however, they do have tradeoffs. Going by the definition of sidechains/merge mining described in this post - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=313347.0 - both are mechanisms to leverage the hashing power of Bitcoin proof of work. Merge mining allows a coin such as IXC, which is mined out, to attract much more hashing based on fees than it could otherwise. There is an increased risk of centralization as indicated by this recent research - https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/791.pdf - I would argue that this will diminish over time due to increasing compute power and demand for higher volumes and lower fees - see my earlier posts on this thread for more details. Further there may be one instance where a sort of combined approach would be warranted. For a merge mined coin, waiting for a block where consensus is met on both chains would be a way to implement very low risk atomic transfers between chains. This would not require any changes to Bitcoin but would require an additional soft fork on the merge mined coin to support. The problem with mined sidechains is that the segwit "anyone-can-spend" issue is a reality, not FUD, and miners can steal sidechain funds; the reason why segwit doesn't have that problem is because full nodes prevent the theft, but sidechains have only miner-trusting SPV.A sidechain that has been soft-forked in is no longer a sidechain, it's a blocksize increase, just like segwit.If you can have a trustless sidechain, you've also solved decentralized scaling; none of the sidechains proposed to date solve decentralized scaling. Agree with your statement - there is a significant tradeoff with sidechains. Sidechains will have some form of centralization - e.g., some greater level of trust in a third party than the main chain. My argument is merge mining can be a solution where some scale can be achieved with modest risk of more centralization - For smaller and higher volume transactions it is a viable solution to what sidechains attempt to solve. There are similarities between sidechains and merge mining but they are not the same thing. Merge mining has been in the wild for years in many different alts and is a proven solution even if the potential has not been realized. Term is a little abused - calling IXC the Original Sidechain is more of a term of marketing as the correct and not so sexy translation is something along the lines of "First Merge Mined Alt Coin intended to work along side Bitcoin and test a fee only reward structure". |
|
|
|
I have emailed all the top exchanges on coinmarketcap with full specs of IXC and its recent developments.Hoping one or two of these take notice of recent develpments. On another note I talked about IXC a while back with peeps about how good IXC was and it being merge mined and suitable as sidechain and one had interesting response but maybe somewhat negative Sidechains and merge mining have their own intractable problems, and in particular they do not mix together very well (merge mining makes the sidechain problems worse, and vice versa). If freicoin were to be sidechain to another chain, it would have to either (1) be a separate proof of work, or (2) have all full nodes of both chains validate each other, an idea more commonly known as extension blocks. Setting freicoin up as a separately mined chain with a different proof of work (and therefore different hardware distribution) prepares for the first possibility while not excluding the second. But in reality I expect that freicoin will remain different from bitcoin and other coins, and not an active sidechain, except perhaps via strong federations or higher level protocols using cross-chain payment channels.
There is at least one person I know who has made a recent ASIC purchase for freicoin mining, and I would hate to invalidate that investment. But the transition period also serves the purpose of having incentive for securing the sha256 portion of the network for some time to come, which helps protect other full nodes. In fact, current full nodes will be able to sync indefinitely into the future, even after the transition is complete, as the difficulty will have transitioned back down to diff-1, and all cuckoo cycle blocks will require a follow-up diff-1 sha256 block in order for the cuckoo cycle miners to actually collect their payment -- the trick which makes the soft-fork deployment possible.
I would not describe the issues with merge mining and sidechains intractable - however, they do have tradeoffs. Going by the definition of sidechains/merge mining described in this post - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=313347.0 - both are mechanisms to leverage the hashing power of Bitcoin proof of work. Merge mining allows a coin such as IXC, which is mined out, to attract much more hashing based on fees than it could otherwise. There is an increased risk of centralization as indicated by this recent research - https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/791.pdf - I would argue that this will diminish over time due to increasing compute power and demand for higher volumes and lower fees - see my earlier posts on this thread for more details. Further there may be one instance where a sort of combined approach would be warranted. For a merge mined coin, waiting for a block where consensus is met on both chains would be a way to implement very low risk atomic transfers between chains. This would not require any changes to Bitcoin but would require an additional soft fork on the merge mined coin to support. |
|
|
|
You call on the miners to cooperate, but there are no working pools. No solo or pplns. PPPs pools are nothing, but they are not even there. Make an official pool from the developer. And the miners will stretch, if there is a profit of course. You know in otsutstvie profit nothing will. And the first month profit should be high, which will attract their attention with other coins.
What do you recommend? solo is super easy and an efficient miner will make money now. There is a p2pool merge mining config which includes IXC and is PPLNS. Although not PPLNS for the merge mined coins - only BTC. |
|
|
|
|
Most of the DEXs are still really low volume - BISQ and BarterDex only trade in the $1000 to few $10000 in volume total. Cryptobridge trades $1M or so but is still in development and charges 1 BTC for a listing. There are a few others but not all really decentralized. We do plan to list on at least a couple of DEXs.
|
|
|
|
|
