Yes, yes. BBC POV.

BBC? Wow, really great ticker name choice OP

I thought Znodes adds new money to total supply but reducing the miners cut by %33 was discouraging.

15 XZC goes to znodes?

Localbitcoins vs any other exchange comparison is not a healthy one, in my opinion. They are totally different.

Even though I dislike their deposit fee a lot, currently they got the most liquid platform for BTC to Fiat.

This. Much needed!

Currently all topics are filled with nonsense comments coming from sig spammers. Too many of them right now.

Banning account sales wouldn't bring a solution to problem, I believe. People would still sell accounts to each other in different platforms.

Signurate campaigns itself is the biggest problem. Their working model. I mean, "add our signature and spam other threads, maybe one or two clicks to your signurate" what kind of a model is that?

Indeed, it's quite absurd.

Any miner with a little mind would know that mining at other pools is going to kill the profit. Why would you wanna mine at a different pool?

This is bullshit. %7 deposit fee?

I laughed to this more than I supposed to 

Good luck with ICO hahahhahaha 

You mean Katy Perry Dark Horse or dark horse dark horse?

I couldn't find one so I decided to start one.

We should all discuss news, development, price movement and other topics related ADA under this thread.

My first hypothesis would be;

If the wallet has been in under maintenance for 3 straight days, that means no new coin can come in and traders have to trade with that very limited supply.

Second;

Delisting might be coming. It's known that after bittrex announces delisting of a coin, it gets pumped for one last time. Of course there is no such a thing that 1ST will be delisted but if someone got the news before anyone else, this pump might be a goodbye to 1ST.

Third;

If you look at closely to Bittrex chart, you will see the flash crash. Someone dumped from 5K sat to 111 sat. That's a crash. Someone might have picked up coins from dead cheap prices, pump it more to get more Bitcoin.

Another perspective would be one desperate 1ST holder, saw that wallet in maintenance mode for 3 days and decided to dump it.

I would go with the third option.

 

bu....b.b......but when Bittrex?

Couple times this happened, it seems like they charge about %7 off what you deposit. Why tf there is a deposit fee?

When Bithumb?

That already implemented I believe(since MTP was the first step of roadmap for 2017). Correct me if I'm wrong tho.

I don't know about the exchange but P2P dev model, no premine, proof-of-burn all interesting concepts for an altcoin. Truly interesting.

Yet, I would argue on exchanges because what's important now is;

1. Building a solid community
2. Creating a desire point
3. Creating a demand

Solid community full of developers, thinkers will lead to spark good ideas all the time, which it's the crucial part of Slimcoin because it's P2P developing nature. Desire point means giving incentives to traders, miners basically something to attract buyers/sellers and miners.

Soon as community grows, problems will find it's way to surface. Which problems here should not be seen as "bad things" because problems what makes coins, humans, basically everything to take a step forward.

Thank you, I did the way you said. It's currently running but I don't expect it to submit any shares. I think the problem is more related to ccminer or the card itself, it does this only for Lyra algorithm.

I supposed to get 1000 Kh/s(1 Mh/s) or even much much less but miner shows me 69-70 Mh/s, that's where the problem is.

I added back-tick and I thought it worked but this time I get this;

Makefile:2665: recipe for target 'Algo256/cuda_groestl256.o' failed
make[2]: *** [Algo256/cuda_groestl256.o] Error 137
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
mv -f equi/blake2/.deps/ccminer-blake2bx.Tpo equi/blake2/.deps/ccminer-blake2bx.Po
mv -f .deps/ccminer-scrypt.Tpo .deps/ccminer-scrypt.Po
ptxas info    : Overriding global maxrregcount 128 with entry-specific value 255 computed using thread count
ptxas info    : Overriding global maxrregcount 128 with entry-specific value 255 computed using thread count
ptxas info    : 0 bytes gmem, 17952 bytes cmem[3]
ptxas info    : Compiling entry function '_Z26streebog_gpu_hash_64_finalPmPj' for 'sm_37'
ptxas info    : Function properties for _Z26streebog_gpu_hash_64_finalPmPj
    120 bytes stack frame, 120 bytes spill stores, 132 bytes spill loads
ptxas info    : Used 255 registers, 16384 bytes smem, 336 bytes cmem[0]
ptxas info    : Compiling entry function '_Z20streebog_gpu_hash_64Pm' for 'sm_37'
ptxas info    : Function properties for _Z20streebog_gpu_hash_64Pm
    136 bytes stack frame, 192 bytes spill stores, 248 bytes spill loads
ptxas info    : Used 255 registers, 16384 bytes smem, 328 bytes cmem[0]
make[2]: Leaving directory '/home/maxo/ccminer'
Makefile:2197: recipe for target 'all-recursive' failed
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/maxo/ccminer'
Makefile:652: recipe for target 'all' failed
make: *** [all] Error 2

I did it like this;

nvcc_ARCH = -gencode=arch=compute_35,code=\"sm_37,compute_35\"

#nvcc_ARCH += -gencode=arch=compute_52,code=\"sm_52,compute_52\"
#nvcc_ARCH += -gencode=arch=compute_35,code=\"sm_35,compute_35\"
#nvcc_ARCH += -gencode=arch=compute_30,code=\"sm_30,compute_30\"
#nvcc_ARCH += -gencode=arch=compute_20,code=\"sm_21,compute_20\"

Ubuntu 16.04
Cuda 8.0

------

Update;

Seems like using ccminer-2.2.2 worked. ./build.sh finished without any problem.

But this time I'm not getting any "yes" or share submitted thing. I mine for hours and hours and no share gets submitted. Where I might be doing wrong this time?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=826901.msg11654778#msg11654778 > This guy had the same problem I have right now and seems like he solved it. On the other hand I get 70 Mh/s for Lyra, where I supposed to get XXX-XXXX Kh/s.