Hello fellows, We are a team of cryptocoin enthusiasts with experience in software development and business management. Today we are launching a new exchange, initially dedicated to Ixcoin and Bitcoin, with plans of adding more cryptocurrencies and possibly FIAT, in the future. You can reach the exchange at https://ixco.in, the platform is secure and we employed best industry practices, such as cold storage for IXC and BTC, and default SSL encryption. Ixcoin is one of the first cryptocurrencies launched after Bitcoin. One of the peculiarities of Ixcoin was a block mining reward of 96 IXC, which would have shortened its maturation time and would have lead to Ixcoin supply ending much before Bitcoin. Ixcoin survived and today the mining reward reached 0, the coin continues to thrive and there's growing interest in it. Important companies in the cryptocurrency industry are already showing support to Ixcoin and we think the trend will continue. On the business perspective, we are registered and located in Hong Kong as Ixcoin L.t.d. with regular business license. We raised enough funds to keep us running for a while, also we acquired a significant amount of Ixcoin during the last year. We are also planning to contribute with releasing a version of Electrum wallet specially tailored for IXC, development is ongoing and we will make an announcement soon. We aren't charging trading fees for the time being, the only site fees at the moment are charged on withdrawal. We invite everyone to try the platform and submit feedback through this forum or our email. Thank you Ixco.in Team Awesome! May I suggest you use IXC as a base currency for trading pairs to expand it's use. No other exchange has IXC markets. As examples the IXC markets would be like so, LTC/IXC, DRK/IXC, NMC/IXC, QRK/IXC ... |
|
|
|
And I will just note the fact that no-one has considered the technicals of this by replying to my question of "can the software handle empty blocks?".
You don't think Satoshi considered empty blocks? Ixcoin is pretty much a copy of bitcoin. Exactly, and empty blocks is just one way iXcoin is breaking new ground and proving the bitcoin algorithms work even before bitcoin does. |
|
|
|
Now that we dodged a bullet time to buy some more ixcoin :-)
The hash rate has gone down today though....  Several of the merge mined coins are down in hash rate. It's not an iXcoin issue. I still think one of the pools is doing maintenance. Been going on for over a week now. |
|
|
|
I've not made any accusations. I may have a made a prediction that it's the end, and I do believe that any straight-thinking person must see that. This coin is stunningly insecure, because once any one of the 2 or 3 big miners supporting it no longer see a reason to continue (quite understandable when their income is zero) the hashrate will drop so much that blocks confirmation time will become high / infinite. See ATC for example.
There are many reasons for pools to keep mining. - Pool owners are sitting on large caches of iXcoin. - Zero income for pools is not correct. It's just lower than before. Granted it's about 1,000-10,000 times lower at the moment. - Looking toward future transaction growth. (We need to work harder to ensure this.) - Minimal resources needed to keep mining since iXcoin is merge mined. |
|
|
|
@publicjud - Ya that is how I see it too, looks to me like the blockchain is holding up really well!
Was wanting to ask anyone running the ixcoin client, please go to your console and do 'getblockhash 227500', then 'getblock <hash>', if it shows a 25.something coin spend tx in there, shut down the node and let me know. Not sure if this was widespread or a targeted attack, I would have been the only one showing up on the network with a client version of 090300 last night...
I see a 25.16255556 vout at block 227500. But the mining is still chugging along. Why is that a problem? { "hash" : "647e0cc70ccc05e85a6ac76bb2eb8f5faba8fc1b575419d1207097cf70aa9c33", "confirmations" : 21, "size" : 992, "height" : 227500, "version" : 196865, "merkleroot" : "46d1f841b971a48cc93e1979ab441183540930077d4df912bb2a57e2c0e0e0be", "auxpow" : { "size" : 771, "coinbasetx" : { "txid" : "e1efe5d4ac01dcbabaca5ab7a20c96216c284128f023e8fbced6a493ec11e27b", "version" : 1, "locktime" : 0, "vin" : [ { "coinbase" : "032cf604e4b883e5bda9e7a59ee4bb99e9b1bcfabe6d6d8a5534b8264cfeea05f1253f95785a942 a991efe78688f09f574321f2f10a5fd10000000000000005162300bda5555954d696e6564206279 2061766862", "sequence" : 4294967295 } ], "vout" : [ { "value" : 25.16255556, "n" : 0, "scriptPubKey" : { "asm" : "OP_DUP OP_HASH160 c825a1ecf2a6830c4401620c3a16f1995057c2ab OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG", "hex" : "76a914c825a1ecf2a6830c4401620c3a16f1995057c2ab88ac", "reqSigs" : 1, "type" : "pubkeyhash", "addresses" : [ "xqtX774tAbX9Dz7uKkwZivAnSiPnVjsRci" ] : : |
|
|
|
I downloaded the iXcoin core v0.9.2.1 pre-release from GroundRod. I ran it with both a 3.24.3 and 0.8.6 block chains and both re-indexed and synched with the network just fine. Looks like we are on the right track. |
|
|
|
Lowering the Block time would give IX a competitive advantage imo. Waiting and hour or two sure gets old with BTC. Especially when you have other coins getting verified in 5 min.
Another huge advantage besides speed is transactions per second. If IXC lowers the block time to say 2 minutes, then iXCoin would instantly be able to handle 5 times the transaction volume as Bitcoin without any other changes to the code. And because IXC is done mining - I think it can handle the faster block-time without the issues Bitcoin would face if they tried to follow. iXCoin can be so much better [than Bitcoin] on so many levels yet nobody sees it. Well...maybe CEX.io sees it. We should soon find out. I still think it's premature to increase the block speed until we increase volume. I was think more about getting legitimate vendors to start using iXcoin. Do we even have a faucet? |
|
|
|
|
Here is a tally of the number of iXcoin transaction over the last two weeks.
184 tx per day including the block reward
47 tx per day not including the block reward
By comparison, Bitcoin has 50,000-80,000 transactions per day.
We need to work on ways to increase iXcoin transactions.
|
|
|
|
30K IXC left to mine.
You can now see the finish line.
Even now, this coin looks completely unpredictable.
One of a kind.
Difficulty really dropped. Not liking that.... It has for several merge mined coins, Devcoin, Namecoin, I0coin. So I think it's just a pool doing some maintenance. Temporary shutdown. But we still can't be too complacent about getting our user base up. |
|
|
|
Not to play devils advocate....
but the medici project has to be approved by the regulators. As I see it Overstock Ceo is understandably trying to combat practices like naked short selling so he is attempting to create his own stock market. It will be interesting to see if he is allowed to proceed. I'd be curious to read what Vlad has to say about this.
Also this technology will make trades VERY slow if it uses the blockchain while waiting for confirmations unlike the "regulated" stock market that favors high frequency trading.
We don't necessarily need to get medici, just something that is ambitious and has the promise to attract many users. I have mixed thoughts about it being approved by regulators. I prefer platforms which aren't controlled and constrained by established institutions built for centralization. But the opposite isn't necessarily good either. I'm already hearing complaints about Counterparty like platforms having too many people starting scams and just cluttering the block chain. So what is the best middle ground? Regulation may be too much. Do we need a rating system to rank each start-up so users know which ones are trust worthy? |
|
|
|
I agree, keeping our code base current is priority over counterparty. @JohnnyBTCSeed - Some good points to consider, from my viewpoint counterparty may be a nice idea, don't know how much work would be involved in adding it, just doing that will take some time I haven't had. We've got other priorities right now, like getting the best possible merged-mining code into GitHub, fully tested and then built into binary releases for all of you.
While Ahmed is @ the hashers united convention, I'm focused on making the changes required to upgrade ixcoin to the latest bitcoin core code 0.9.3. About 1/2 way through the /src directory and still have all the files in the src/qt directory to-do. So far the list of issues that need additional time to make sure it's correct is very small, other stuff like the language files will have to be regenerated etc. etc... Bitcoin core is in a state of rapid flux, with lots of new code being pulled into its base now, its hard to keep up. Yet that is what I've agreed to work on. Think we all can agree this is an important aspect to IXC, that we stay current with Bitcoin Core code from here onward. See the counterparty stuff constantly being brought up as a 'got to have', that maybe true, but I don't think it should be the main focus, at least for right now.
GR
I totally agree the core iXcoin client updates come first. In fact, the 0.9.x update is required for Counterparty to work anyway. But my concern is that we still need more users. More transactions. So my point was we need to start on Counterparty, or something like it, in a month or so once the core client is working. If we can get it deployed before too many other coins do then iXcoin could take the lead for this second generation financial platform. Otherwise we'll be playing catch up again. |
|
|
|
This is the kind of project that the iXcoin Foundation should lobby for on the grounds that iXcoin would have much cheaper commissions for users than Bitcoin. We need Counterparty soon. Overstock.com Seeks To Build New Stock Market using Counterparty http://bitcoinmagazine.com/17110/overstock-com-seeks-build-new-stock-market/"Using Counterparty’s decentralized exchange code, Byrne’s project, code-named “Medici” will allow large retailers to issue their corporate stock over the Internet using “cryptosecurity” software." "Byrne took to the stage at Inside Bitcoins to bring attendees through the process of the incredibly centralized and, what he considers to be highly fraudulent, world of stock market trading and settlement." "[Medici's] promise is to allow people to transfer value directly between each other, without going through 3rd party financial institutions." |
|
|
|
Forgot to add, ...had a couple pm's asking about what contributions I've made to the project. Sorry that it wasn't made clear in my previous posts, now that I'm starting to feel comfortable on GitHub and doing shared development work for open source, it seemed obvious, still only 2 months ago I wouldn't have had a clue either. Instead of a long typed out summary, here is a shortcut to those details: GitHub GroundRod commits to Ixcoin DevelopmentEven if your not a programmer, you should be able to get the jest of it by clicking on the last 5 commits made since Sept 9th. Those changed source code files have been sent upstream & merged into Ahmed's Ixcoin-Dev repository (if you want to look at that, be sure and select the Ixcoin branch, not the master) Where there was major work done, I tried to comment the source directly. Assuming there isn't allot of code work to do in the months ahead, there are a # of documentation files that need to be brought current and correct within the Ixcoin context, just scratched the surface on that aspect of development. Have worn those different hats in a past life, so will take a stab at it, as time allows... Feel free to ask about anything you care too... As we don't really have a website master to send Ixcoin treasures too just yet, I've decided (at least for right now) to use GitHub for posting the latest release: https://github.com/GroundRod/IXCoin/releasesYou'll find the Ixcoin BootStrap.dat (3+years of bockchain) I made on Sept 28th, and the Win32-Setup executable, latest build there. Thank to GitHub for providing the bandwidth. GR Just curious who sidhujag is? He made a lot of changes in July 2014. What was the final decision on a mandatory transaction fee? 0 IXC, .001 IXC, .0001 IXC? I noticed your screen shots show a .001 IXC fee. |
|
|
|
Having lived with the new version of your coins code for more than the last month, I'm less concerned with WHY you've chosen to involve yourself in the development tasks required on a personal level the way you have, now I see that it's allot of work! ...and requires a considerable amount of ones personal time to be involved with this stuff at the code level. For me though it's been a great joy to be able to contribute and work with Ahmed on this project. Knock on wood for continued good health, I should be able to continue that effort for another 10yrs or more, keeping Ixcoin up to the latest Bitcoin codebase level, its something I want to do, beyond that though, if the coin functionality is changed allot, I'm not sure if my intent will remain, we'll just have to see what consensus is found between miners interest, traders desire and developers efforts.
@GroundRod - Thanks for your effort. It's greatly appreciated! iXcoin is finally building a respectable dev team. It's a great change from the year of no devs. Good times ahead. iXcoin Devs: ahmed bodi GroundRod cinnamon_carter FrictionlessCoin (still active?) |
|
|
|
Question: what about a plan to use empty blocks to increase the amount of data through the decentralized network up to 1000 bytes like in the case of NXT?
Reduction to 1-2 minutes per block with a increase of the number of confirmations at the same time, increase of the possible amount of data, even a partial (o total) rebranding/relaunch (see what is happening with fair-coin: they changed from FAC to FAIR and will have a relaunch within days)
I think a coin should not aim to have just one nice feature, but, as far as possible, all the ones users are asking for. We can build them inside the blockchain or on top of it. The important thing: the user must feel comfortable and secure in using the coin.
For reversible transactions, we should build a service on top of it. There is counterparty, now even Dogeparty. How could we call it? RevParty? Where a Reversible tx is possible.
Or Rev-iX, maybe.
Reducing the block time isn't a bad idea, but we should be careful not to do it too soon. Otherwise, the block chain is going to balloon in size for no good reason. It can always be changed later. Since we have low transaction volume at this time I don't think it's a big rush. Having said that, here is a suggestion for when we do change the block times. Changing from 10 minute to 2.5 minute blocks, AND increasing the number of blocks to fully confirm means we don't sacrifice any security, but still increase our transaction volume ceiling. 6 blocks @ 10 minutes each = 60 minutes to fully confirm 24 blocks @ 2.5 minutes each = 60 minutes to fully confirm |
|
|
|
Regarding nullifying Thomas' premine, I don't understand why anyone would do such a thing.
A premine or stealth mine was done. Promises were made to pay out bounties with it and for future development.
So far all legit and pretty common practice in CryptoLand.
More than 3 years later the entire premine appears to be intact and large bounties are being paid out as promised.
No other alt-coin dev has ever held on to a premine, especially not a premine of a supposedly dead coin, one which was constantly attacked and forked, for so many years and remained faithful to paying out bounties as promised.
As of now, Thomas Nasakioto has done nothing wrong, and yet we want to smash the golden eggs in his basket which have been the biggest contributor to iXcoin's progress? I don't see the fairness and logic in that.
Part of that premine is also earmarked for "future development". What that means to me is Thomas has some plan for when IXC is $10+. That could mean millions of dollars in development money which we won't have to pay out of pocket or beg for investors like Bitcoin/Litecoin.
If Thomas continues to stick to his plan and deliver on his promises then this could actually turn out to be quite a brilliant plan.
Let me make it clear, permanently destroying over 400,000 IXC would give me a bigger piece of the iXCoin pie given I have a lot of IXC so I would be a big winner of such a plan; however, I am trying to do what's right for IXC and for this community, and getting rid of potentially millions of dollars of future development money when no wrong has been committed doesn't sound right to me.
Let's play it by ear and as long as Thomas keeps his promises, as he has thus far, then we treat him with the same trust and integrity that he has shown towards iXCoin and it's community.
That's my two cents...
Cheers!
I couldn't agree more with Vlad, for what it's worth. I also agree with Vlad. Thomas hasn't done anything wrong. We should be focused on getting our transaction volume up by expanding our user base. Counterparty is one way. Getting a payment processor or two to use iXcoin is another, and we really need a good marketing campaign. I think that's more where our focus should be. |
|
|
|
Apparently you (correct me if I'm wrong) and Vlad and many others feel that this is a 'non' issue, the miners are willing to merge-generate ixc blocks for 'free'. What I'm trying to say is nothing lasts at that price in the world of commence, ya for now they can do that and apparently will do that 'for 'free', but what happens when no miner can be found to include your coins for sending at that price? Commence ends until an agreed upon price can be found, in the mean time you'll have potentially hundreds, if not thousands of really pissed off users with stuck coins they can't move, most will not want to learn programming so they can repair a wallet and reverse the send that never went through.
I haven't looked at the code enough to know exactly how the tx fee works, but my guess is that tx's cannot get stuck. It would be a bad design. Either the client shouldn't allow the user to send without a minimum fee, or if it does, the tx should be guaranteed to be sent, only with a time delay added. The time delay is a great compromise because most users are willing to pay a nominal fee if they can send with no delay. Those who just don't want to pay it don't have to, but they must understand there will be a delay. That seems to be the way Bitcoin works. Sometimes I can send a tx with no fee. Sometimes it forces me to pay the minimum. I don't know why it is not consistent, but it may depend on the version of the client I'm using. Does anyone know? But often when it accepts a zero fee, there is up to a 12 hour time delay. I've never had a tx get stuck. |
|
|
|
I'm still concerned over what the default minimum Ixcoin transaction fee should be set @
If Ixcoin goes up to where I think it should be, the current level is fine....actually I haven't a clue. If the price stays low or goes to near zero, we had better plan on having a large transaction fee in place.
Don't think we should be letting anybody send coins with a zero transaction fee though, its soon going to cause us problems and I'm leaning toward a very high minimum. Like one coin.
Is the point of the high transaction fee to keep miners interested? They can set their own fee so I don't see why we need to make a fee mandatory. Plus, CEX.io has already said they won't drop iXcoin after the block reward ends. I'm concerned that making it too high will scare off users. Plus, if we ever get Counterparty working we want to stay competative with Bitcoin and any other altcoins which also implement a financial platform. 1 IXC seems very high to me. I'd put it in the .0001 - .0005 IXC range, or not have a minimum. I think a better strategy is to get transaction quantities up and adding Counterparty sooner rather than later is a great way to accomplish that. |
|
|
|
With Namecoin hash rate declining, iXcoin has been in second place lately.
Bitcoin 225,321,593 Giga H/s
Ixcoin 96,185,205 Giga H/s
Devcoin 83,715,869 Giga H/s
Namecoin 65,745,566 Giga H/s
This is becoming more and more the trend and I wonder why. Thanks Cinnamon, for pointing that out, I never knew it was the difficulty which indicated the true security level of a coin. I'm surprised any miners have dropped Namecoin since it's not even half way through being mined. I believe it is mined at the same rate as Bitcoin so it has a long way to go. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
