Changed layout a bit, added nist5 form + prepared for 2 new algos.

I really doubt that. Wallet calculations are very precise, as they take last "N" number of solved blocks, compare their generation intervals and get a mean value from that.
It means that they are free from any error factors - they truly represent hashrate power being target at a certain blockchain(still in the past).

It is far more plausible for me that liteshack devs are aware of the issue and tried to compensate(but got it wrong and are decreasing nethash). I mean there is no real way of calculating current net_hash.
Absolutely none. You can only compare difficulty of a past block with its time_since_last_block and go from there.

EDIT: Or they have a formula for each coin to lower nethash by the amount of "current_block_time / target_block_time" - It would make sense, as it would make their nethash calculations more precise.
Unfortunately in this case its working in their disadvantage, as the diff_retarget is faulty and they(as I do) assume it works perfectly.

By that argument I conclude that the real nethash for naut is in fact around 8,82 and the diff should be 7,65 times smaller to allow 1 minute block_time.

EDIT2: I think my explanation may not seem right at the first sight so here is an example:
Everything goes back to normal and naut has 1 minute block_time blocks. To achieve that either diff goes x7,65 smaller or hashrate x7,65 higher. Lets take first case.

Diff goes x7,65 smaller -> Coinwarz stays the same, as their calculations reflect the true state of blockchain. WTM now gives you x7,65 smaller hash rate, cause diff is smaller. Liteshack does not lower their nethash by x7,65 cause block time is right on target ( current_block_time / target_block_time = 1 ). Every site reports the same nethash.


EDIT3: HR did give me this link to Digibyte's post, where he acknowledges the issues and explains factors that made it possible(in general only):
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=591114.msg7731756#msg7731756

Hello ninhld

I am glad that you got the same results for all the main stats, like difficulty and block reward. Now about nethash.
I got asked about that in the past - my explanation should be somewhere in the thread.

Basically coinwarz and every other coin site that relies on wallet data will give you nethash straight from the wallet(should be most precise).
WTM and alike that rely on blockchains and pools to get the data, will extrapolate it directly from difficulty.

In theory both numbers should be the same, but sometimes they arent.
I have looked around and I think why its wrong in this case. While ago we had a conversation here about block_time generations.

If you look at http://naut.v2.dedicatedpool.com/index.php?page=statistics&action=pool or http://nau.bitember.com/index.php?page=statistics&action=pool you will see that
block time generation for the network is 7 minutes 39 seconds. Should be 1 minute. Thats 7,65 times more than it should be.

Now if you get true hashrate of 8,82 and multiply it by our error factor: 8,82 x 7,65 = 67,47. Pretty close aye?

I cannot explain why naut blockchain is generating blocks slower than it should be - basically diff is too high for current nethash. I see that naut has digishield - former speaker about block_time generations pinpointed the issue to this retarget algorithm.

tldr: Naut retarget isint working properly, while WTM assumes the diff is correct to maintain target block_time.

Fix block explorer. Check your block generation times.

Thank you for the reply. Some time ago I heard that 740(I think) with hilarious 4GB of RAM, can do miracles on chacha.
Actually I am thinking about selling all my radeons and replacing them with 750tis

Edit: Guess I could use a model with PCI-E power connector, so all the power is not going through MB. Not a fan of powered risers.

I am thinking about switching my gfx to nvidia. Can you recommend any specific model(750ti I guess)?

Thank you, I will implement it asap.

Getdifficulty and blockcount mainly. Block reward would be great too.

Thank you. I could use any other API out there but there are none.

Switch to full PoS has been dropped?

Please fix block explorer.

Any API(diff,blockcount,totalcoins) I could use?

@FallingKnife  Thank you for info, I will update it in a sec. Edit: I was already using cryptexplorer, no harm done

@henryjames1003 Lately I am only adding coins on demand or when I see something with big volume like URO.
I will be very occupied till the end of august, until then please do not hesitate to request any coins that are on supported exchanges.

Edit: I will switch all chacha13 coins to chacha14 tomorrow morning, as I will be going away for the weekend.
Not sure, at which hour the coins are going to switch for real tbh.

I sent to cryptsy from my wallet. I can send to mintpal just fine. Something wrong on cryptsy end.

I tried sending coins to cryptsy today. They show in the deposits but confirmation counter stays at 0. Opened support ticket, waiting.

Good to know you are still here. Read something about you stepping back, hence my question.
Why didnt buy asics from someone trusted like KNC? I am afraid it will bite you in the ass

Please fix block explorer.

Dude dont start to be agressive, I was in utc way before(at least I dont remember you back from february). Notice the question mark at the end of the statement?

If the asics are not here mining utc or multipool or helping the coin in any way then he took off in my eyes.
Also where are the new devs, no communication from them since friday?

Hey,

My wallet and ultracoinpool at 458749,
blockchain and nitro at 458593.

How is this not a fork?

From what I understnd bumface took off with ipo money and now everything is in disarray?

@digitalindustry Sorry that I do not have cpu coins like quark. Maybe will add them after cryptonight

@Corsaro Fixed. I will try to do an audit of all the schedules next week.

Em is everything ok with blockchain? Please fix block explorer.