If you don't know how it's probably a terrible idea to do so.

Or if you really want to do it for some reason the least you can do is google it and ask when you're stuck.

I'm just guessing here, but...

Because the main miner's system clock was ahead of everyone else and I guess because there's only one node, so it doesn't care.

It baffles me that this coin uses timestamps like that to allow or prevent mining.


Anyway, I added +2 minutes to my system clock and I quickly found 2 blocks while before that my cards were only really mining for like 6 seconds total in 85 blocks or so because otherwise I was behind in time about a minute.

Hopefully, if we had a handful of nodes they'd have a clear consensus of the precise time so a miner who has the time set the farthest couldn't take all the blocks.

Anyway, I'm done with Pascal and all of its forks.

TID:00000F64 [Error] <TJSONRPCTcpIpClient> Sending Error JSON RPC id () : Error: Invalid timestamp (New timestamp:1485983014 last timestamp (26):1485983023)
TID:000012C4 [Error] <TPCOperationsComp> Invalid new block 27: Invalid timestamp (New timestamp:1485983020 last timestamp (26):1485983023)
x 999


Seems like it's a terrible mess with only 1 node.

Such is the case with like 98% of algos/coins.

CPU mining almost always swiftly dies to GPU miners private or otherwise.


Even if a coin is CPU only, CPU farms (https://gpushack.com/collections/gpushack/products/gpushack-128-core-pro) and botnets take all the profit.

Same algo as the original which already has GPU miners.

What will be the initial difficulty, 26XXXXXX?



Except for botnets. And 99% of CPU only coins are also mined with GPUs privately or otherwise.

You're taking a very polarized view.

I'm a hobby miner, so naturally profits are important but I avoid scams and I have never launched or even partake in the launch of any coin whatsoever - let alone ICOs.


Exchanges profit from scams, coinmarketcap and other services not (or very very little) so they're completely different.

And I think crypto being the wild west as it is is a thousand times better than one that would be heavily censored.


But... let's say CMC deletes scams and start only adding coins that meet their set of arbitrary rules. Let's say exchanges start doing the same, naturally each with a different set of arbitrary rules (some refuses ICOs, some don't, etc).

Then let's say this forum also heavily changes the rules on what coin threads to allow or delete based on yet another set of arbitrary rules. So now we have a set of rules so coins that doesn't break the rules must be legit, right?

For a bonus, let's say you attack a coin for whatever reason that isn't considered a scam and in return you get banned.

See how great censorship is?


It's safe to say there will always be scams and instead of censoring stuff, people should be educated on what to avoid - which you excel at more often than not.

So far I mined 31% of the coins and I'd much rather see a fork that has less coins and more importantly fewer addresses.

Each block gives 25 addresses for no reason so there won't be any scarcity at all.

The other coin gives 1k coins and 25 addresses per blocks and it's already at block 918.

If anything, I'd much rather see a fork with fewer addresses (maybe 2 or 3 instead of 5) to actually have address scarcity and smaller blockrewards then the original Pascalcoin.

I keep getting banned from both nodes (alone in the world) for some reason.



Point your miner to the RPC port you selected (instead of 4009 for regular Pascalcoin).

No, it's in sp_'s thread.

Yours, I can't compile pallas' version with VS2013. It has some linux only stuff I can get behind.

Thank you!

Mined 55 blocks with no issues whatsoever.

Meh, they're not there for gatekeeping which coins are scams or not - nor should they be. They're just running a simple service without politics of what is considered a scam, just like exchanges or even this forum.

If anything, they help identifying scams by showing things like supply and volume.

1 TB a month will very roughly get you:
 - $0.043 with SIA because only 4% usage (40MB) is expected (100% usage would get you $1.09) based on a calculator (http://siapulse.com/page/tools)
 - $1 with Storj based on some comments on reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/storj/comments/5kzmxw/got_paid)
 - $1.36 with Burst based on a calculator (http://burstcoin.biz/calculator)

I couldn't find info how big the Storj network is but Sia's network is 883 TB and Burst's is 13269 TB (but that's just POW, not rentable).

I prefer Storj but you would have to run it for a very long time to collect contacts.
In 2 days I only got 355 MB (333 contracts) rented out (out of 2TB).

None of these are money machines and certainly not worth investing in a farm, well maybe for Burst but for the other two it's a bad idea because of bandwidth scaling but if you have some free space, why not.

Yeah, it took a few hours but it's synced now and I have about 10 nodes connected and the log is clear of errors.

My wallet used to get corrupted quite frequently in the past, when it happens again I'll share the log.

I see no reason to launch a clone but it is going to happen eventually.

So, what I would like to see is for the coin to use an established algorithm* that's fair for both AMD and Nvidia card owners instead of the shitfest that comes with having to develop new miners (private miners, scams, lack of pools for Nvidia, etc).

Quick and incomplete list of GPU friendly algos (excluding ASICs): Blake 256, Blake 256 (8 rounds), Blake2B, Blake2-S, BMW 256, C11/flax, Dagger-Hashimoto, Deep, Diamond-Groestl, Fugue256, Groestl, Heavy, Jackpot, Keccak-256, LBRY (Sha/Ripemd), Luffa, Lyra2, Lyra2v2, Mjollnir, Myriad-Groestl, Neoscrypt, Nist5, Pentablake (5x Blake 512), Sib (X11+Streebog), Scrypt-jane (Chacha), Skein (SHA2), Skein2 (Double Skein), S3, Shavite 80, Veltor (Thorsriddle streebog), Whirlpool, x11evo, x13, x14, x15, x17, ZR5.



There's no such thing.

Of course it's scrypt or sha265 or x11.

Wait, Mrai's back?