I have problem withdrawing MRO from poloniex.
In simplewallet I wrote the address command to get my MRO address. This address I used to withdraw my MRO to. 12hours later I still haven't received my MRO.
[wallet XXXXX]: refresh
Starting refresh...
Refresh done, blocks received: 185
balance: 0.000000000000, unlocked balance: 0.000000000000
[wallet XXXXX]: balance
balance: 0.000000000000, unlocked balance: 0.000000000000
Whats wrong?
Check the withdraw history on your poloniex balance page. Whether or not you see it there, open a ticket with them at poloniex.freshdesk.com/support |
|
|
|
Stupid question, but how do I solo mine on linux?
If I start the ./bitmonerod daemon, does it solo mine automatically?
When I exit it, it says mining has completed or something like that, does it mean it is mining while running?
You should start simplewallet and give mine command to it. The wallet command is start_mining [number of threads] You can also go right into the daemon window and do: start_mining [address] [number of threads] |
|
|
|
I've mined hundreds on a test net. If that qualifies. I could even set up a temporary test pool up just demonstrate that it works as expected.
At this point I think it'd be prudent to give you 48h to try to get an actual pool off the ground and demonstrate payouts and block mining, so we can at least give you some small fraction of the reward. A small fraction, doesn't sound so good but, okay. Look, you were much later, and your pool hasn't even been demonstrated to work at all. If you are able to do so, your demonstration will be much, much later. Asking for something like an even split at this point is fairly absurd. I'm all in favor of having multiple open source pool implementations available for pool operators to choose from. But without some sort of evidence that this is actually a working and workable pool implementation we have nothing to go on in terms of fair judging of the pool award. Any contended awards will be voted on by the donors. So we are not making a final decision here, but I think our reasoning is sound and will likely be adopted by the donors/voters. (Of course tacotime and myself are major donors, so we have an actual vote as well as our leadership in sorting out the situation.) |
|
|
|
Hi, how do i make a transaction? Is address 1 my address or the destination address? what is with the mixin_count? And where do i put the transaction id from poloniex? Please give me an example. Thanks in advance.
The address is the address to which you are sending, not yours. The mixin count determines the sender anonymity of the transaction (if you don't want the transaction traced back to link with your other transactions). If you aren't concerned with that you can use 0, although 1 is generally better. The payment ID goes at the very end, after the amount: [wallet] transfer mixin destination-address amount payment-ID
|
|
|
|
- Raised minimum fee to 5 * (10^9)
I'm not positive but I think this means that if you use an old wallet to send a transaction it will not confirm once the mining nodes are upgraded. Users should upgrade or patch promptly. |
|
|
|
Edit: I'm only talking about the emission curve here, not the block time. I haven't yet formed enough of an opinion to throw total support at it. I would hope that the reward would scale with the block time, though .. in order to maintain the same emission .. regardless of the time that is settled on.
Yes that is exactly right, any change to the block time target would change the reward proportionately. It is even possible the block time could be dynamic, with rewards also scaled dynamically. I don't know that any coin has done that so it probably won't happen here any time soon, as we are really not that bold with new risky experiments, but it is certainly possible to do. |
|
|
|
I posted a couple of days ago about whether anyone has thoughts on changing the block reward. There were quite a few replies of which the majority agreed with me in some sense. I only recall 2 people being against it, one being smooth.
If I was in a minority I wouldn't have posted about it again.
I believe I said at the time, my question is for selfish reasons as it's benefits early holders. Clarification at to whether there's any flexibility in changing the coin reward allows me to better decide how to manage my investment.
I explained to you that there is zero flexibility on this, aside from the long term changes that have already been discussed and disclosed from the start. Manage your investment accordingly. |
|
|
|
It has been said from the start that this is explicitly not a pump and dump coin. The devs frankly don't spend a lot of time thinking about the short term price action. The market will find an equilibrium and whatever that equilibrium price happens to be, "price times quantity" wlll allow you to hold and/or spend this coin in the desired amount. Whether that is 10 coins at 0.001 or 1 coin at 0.01 makes little real difference.
If you are looking a coin to be pumped up the for short term gains it may well be that DRK or XC are better for you. That won't work long term anyway. Pick any parameters you want, tweak them to game out an advantage as many times you want, but if the coin is not useful it will sooner or later still be worth exactly zero. Likewise if the coin is or becomes useful it will maintain and gain value regardless of the exact parameters, as explained above.
100% support this. Virtually every other altcoin has some kind of scam element that leads to it being criticized. One of the strongest differentiating traits of Monero is its clean launch. Changing the emission now would remove that strength. (That said I do support changing to two minute block times with the emission per block adjusted to maintain the same curve in order to reduce orphans.) As eizh said upthread, the fast emission now will actually result in a slower emission and the presumed increased valuation that folks are craving a year from now. In the mean time, Monero is taking good steps to build on its base, including the partnership with i2p, pool development, GUI wallet development, and possibly an android wallet. All of these will help to draw in new users and presumably support the price. You may want to wait and see on the block time issue - my changes should make bitmonerod verify blocks around 2x faster, meaning less orphans. 2+ minute blocks would make sense even if verification were as fast as scrypt or sha256, which it won't be, likely ever. I have actually been thinking that a longer time would be better, like maybe 5 minutes, but as hashing has become more optimized the gap has shrunk a bit. Two minutes might still be okay. One minute will not. |
|
|
|
Am i the only one who sees no problem with the current block reward?
No and every one of the devs agree with you. It won't be changed. The way to make the coin go up in value is to make it more useful, not tinkering with parameters. Create services using it. This is key. Adoption + time will create community and value in Monero. If you're looking for a quick pump/dump coin, this probably isn't it. The smart folks see the potential in Monero long term - I would say over many years, not a few days or weeks. Monero offers real technological advances, and massively improve the anonymous spending model in popular coins like DRK. The difference, is that Monero isn't being artificially pumped in price so a small group can dump on everyone else. And, unlike DRK, it doesn't rely on a sketchy/unproven centralized system or closed source code. Monero - buy, hold, wait... You know it is interesting. We have this anonymous coin here and there are the huge opportunites to build things like gambling sites -- even fairly simple ones that are often popular -- yet people are more interested in coming here and wanting to make a few quick bucks with a supply cut pump than actually doing the things that could make them truly rich. A bit of a head scratcher. |
|
|
|
|
It has been said from the start that this is explicitly not a pump and dump coin. The devs frankly don't spend a lot of time thinking about the short term price action. The market will find an equilibrium and whatever that equilibrium price happens to be, "price times quantity" wlll allow you to hold and/or spend this coin in the desired amount. Whether that is 10 coins at 0.001 or 1 coin at 0.01 makes little real difference.
If you are looking a coin to be pumped up the for short term gains it may well be that DRK or XC are better for you. That won't work long term anyway. Pick any parameters you want, tweak them to game out an advantage as many times you want, but if the coin is not useful it will sooner or later still be worth exactly zero. Likewise if the coin is or becomes useful it will maintain and gain value regardless of the exact parameters, as explained above.
|
|
|
|
Am i the only one who sees no problem with the current block reward?
No and every one of the devs agree with you. It won't be changed. The way to make the coin go up in value is to make it more useful, not tinkering with parameters. Create services using it. |
|
|
|
And the NSFW pictures make it all worth it. Nice work Wolf0 lol, the pics aren't exactly the point of the post  I'm easily distracted. |
|
|
|
moneropool.com has well over 51% of the network hashrate.  There's an ongoing cloud mining hashrate war between whales. Although I don't know why they wouldn't just solo mine. Mostly laziness I suspect. A one liner to set up a private pool would probably help. |
|
|
|
And the NSFW pictures make it all worth it. Nice work Wolf0 |
|
|
|
A monero wallet includes only one address ?, so if I want to generate a second address do I have to give a different file name or there is a command to generate more addresses with the same keys ?.
Also I would like to check the size of my inputs, how do I do that ? is there an equivalent of listtransactions ?.
Cheers!.
1. One address per wallet file. However, this address does not appear on the block chain, instead a new address is generated each time. So if you want a new address for privacy purposes, you don't need to do that. If you want different addresses to use for different purposes then a separate wallet file is the way to go. 2. incoming_transfers I want to group my coins to be able to send bigger transactions in case of need, do I need a second address for that or can I send the coins back to the same address ?. Thanks. Best to use a second one unless you can send the full balance of the wallet back to itself in one go. Otherwise you can't keep the remaining small ones from getting mixed up with the new bigger ones. |
|
|
|
A monero wallet includes only one address ?, so if I want to generate a second address do I have to give a different file name or there is a command to generate more addresses with the same keys ?.
Also I would like to check the size of my inputs, how do I do that ? is there an equivalent of listtransactions ?.
Cheers!.
1. One address per wallet file. However, this address does not appear on the block chain, instead a new address is generated each time. So if you want a new address for privacy purposes, you don't need to do that. If you want different addresses to use for different purposes then a separate wallet file is the way to go. 2. incoming_transfers |
|
|
|
I have more and more often issues with the transaction size. Last time the biggest amount I was able to send was 0.15 MRO at a time.
I am using monero.win.x64.experimental.0526.
Is it a known issue? Is there anything I can do about it?
Thank you.
Its due to how many inputs you have, Im guessing your mining to that address? Theres not really a lot you can do as far as Im aware. You have to create a second wallet, then send the coins from the first wallet to the second wallet in bigger chunks than you received them. Keep doing that and you can build up outputs of whatever size you want. Yes, I am mining to that address and my hashrate is not very big, so the inputs are very small. Still, it's extremely frustrating to transfer so small amounts and all the pools I know mine directly to wallet. Am I the only one with this problem?? Probably not. The pools should be making a smaller number of larger payouts. Transferring from one of my wallets to another in small chunks would be tax free or less frustrating? I doubt it. And then it would be no benefit at all in this.
The benefit is that you can make larger payments. Otherwise it would be impossible to do so. There will be transaction fees. Again, get your pool to give you bigger payments to begin with, or switch to one that will. Or gamble on solo mining. You probably get nothing but if you do get something it will at least be big enough to use. I don't know any MRO pool that does that. Do you? Solo mining at my hashrate is waste of time and you know that. I hoped for real/helpful advises, really... I'm just telling you what your realistic options are: 1. Make smaller payments. 2. Combine your inputs in 2+ steps. 3. Get whoever is sending you the tiny inputs to send you bigger ones. That's pretty much it. |
|
|
|
I have more and more often issues with the transaction size. Last time the biggest amount I was able to send was 0.15 MRO at a time.
I am using monero.win.x64.experimental.0526.
Is it a known issue? Is there anything I can do about it?
Thank you.
Its due to how many inputs you have, Im guessing your mining to that address? Theres not really a lot you can do as far as Im aware. You have to create a second wallet, then send the coins from the first wallet to the second wallet in bigger chunks than you received them. Keep doing that and you can build up outputs of whatever size you want. Yes, I am mining to that address and my hashrate is not very big, so the inputs are very small. Still, it's extremely frustrating to transfer so small amounts and all the pools I know mine directly to wallet. Am I the only one with this problem?? Probably not. The pools should be making a smaller number of larger payouts. Transferring from one of my wallets to another in small chunks would be tax free or less frustrating? I doubt it. And then it would be no benefit at all in this.
The benefit is that you can make larger payments. Otherwise it would be impossible to do so. There will be transaction fees. Again, get your pool to give you bigger payments to begin with, or switch to one that will. Or gamble on solo mining. You probably get nothing but if you do get something it will at least be big enough to use. |
|
|
|
I have more and more often issues with the transaction size. Last time the biggest amount I was able to send was 0.15 MRO at a time.
I am using monero.win.x64.experimental.0526.
Is it a known issue? Is there anything I can do about it?
Thank you.
Its due to how many inputs you have, Im guessing your mining to that address? Theres not really a lot you can do as far as Im aware. You have to create a second wallet, then send the coins from the first wallet to the second wallet in bigger chunks than you received them. Keep doing that and you can build up outputs of whatever size you want. |
|
|
|
I have more and more often issues with the transaction size. Last time the biggest amount I was able to send was 0.15 MRO at a time.
I am using monero.win.x64.experimental.0526.
Is it a known issue? Is there anything I can do about it?
Thank you.
Are you receiving very small payments? You will need to combine those into larger chunks first to be able to combine them even more. You can't spend too many previous payments in one go. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
