|
Hopefully Evan will decide that 77% is close enough, and bring the hammer down on cheating shitbag XhBLSR1HhoaWrdGgrjCHxJkCWWiFFhveHs
|
|
|
|
We have to spend a lot more money Of course you do. Not your own money though, eh? The fact that he pretends to take Dark Wallet seriously is actually pretty good news. (I say pretends to because this whole thing is just another circus act to raise taxes. That's how government works.) By the time they have wasted countless millions of taxpayer money trying to police Bitcoin, and failed, Darkcoin will be well and truly established, having been helped along in its adoption by this clown and his thieving comrades.  |
|
|
|
What is the difference, either conceptually or practically, between a side chain and a separate currency? And pegging two chains price-wise is equally pointless because then it basically *is* one currency. It seems the BTC crowd want to experiment with innovation without 'harming' their sacred cow, but they can't have it both ways - you throw your ideas to the wolves and if it survives the wolves you have a winner. Tying the wolves up and slapping muzzles on them first doesn't help the evolution of your idea, it hinders it and you learn nothing of value from the experiment. Plus, it will take years for any of this to happen anyway, if it ever does. |
|
|
|
|
Mintpal's volume was largely Mintpal bots.
|
|
|
|
I haven't updated my MN to the latest version yet, but I have to manually (re)start my MN at least once every day. Could this be caused because I'm running an older (v10.14.x) version? Anyone?
Why are you wasting your time restarting old versions? Update to 10.15.16 and have done with it. |
|
|
|
Can someone help me please?
I get this error
"inbound port is not open. Please open it and try again. (19999 for testnet and 9999 for mainnet)"
when i use masternode start PASSPHRASE
You have to open PORT 9999 on the server what command do I have to input? Depends on your firewall setup. I like ufw, here's how easy it is: sudo ufw allow ssh/tcp
sudo ufw allow 9999/tcp
sudo ufw logging on
sudo ufw enable
sudo ufw status
Tried those commands, all i got was... USERNAME is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported" I followed taos guide perfectly, and have already had one running no problem. Can i not just add the :9999 in the .conf file somewhere? How do you normally switch to root? Do that, then run the commands I posted without the sudo bit. You need to be root to modify your server firewall. |
|
|
|
Can someone help me please?
I get this error
"inbound port is not open. Please open it and try again. (19999 for testnet and 9999 for mainnet)"
when i use masternode start PASSPHRASE
You have to open PORT 9999 on the server what command do I have to input? Depends on your firewall setup. I like ufw, here's how easy it is: sudo ufw allow ssh/tcp
sudo ufw allow 9999/tcp
sudo ufw logging on
sudo ufw enable
sudo ufw status
|
|
|
|
Darkcoin holders are literally raped by the market . Every Darkcoin investor is frustrated with the price . We are starting to lose hope.
Do you get paid when you make newbie accounts too? I think the whole of BCT had him on ignore, so he made a new account. Sadly his new user name was not the most cunning choice, as it provides a subtle clue to his previous identity.  |
|
|
|
Can someone tell me at what price Mining DRK is still interesting ( based on average Mining speed )
MN rewards are going up so mining gets less interesting
Should DRK be at a Minimum Price for mining ?
Thanks
DRK has rarely been profitable to mine if your intention was to immediately sell it for BTC/fiat. Nothing is currently |
|
|
|
Normally if a darkweb drug market accept your coin that would be a big deal and should have affected the price positively. We have adoption by not only one but two darkweb markets but price market doesn't give a shit about the news. Probably masternode operators are sick of seeing "tx_0_vout_1" and "not_detected" and they are dumping 1000drk at a time.
Everyone knows that we will not get 90% of pools switching to ONYX, yet we prefer to be in denial and stare at the charts like idiots hoping magically 90% will appear. There must be a better solution than being at the mercy of pools.
Unfortunately pools don't understand that their stubbornness hurting them as well. Darkcoin price should be around 20$ now but we are crawling around 2$ because of the damn struggle between MNs operators and pools. At 20$/DRK pools would still make more money even if the profit is split 50/50 with Masternodes.
If we cannot get pools to cooperate and upgrade fast every-time there is an update then this is gonna be a race to the bottom: price will continue to drop and we will see more and more masternode owners dumping their coins to cut their losses. Outcome: lose-lose!
I agree, others agree, please post here: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v10-15-onyx-release.2683/Solutions have been proposed... Miners need to be under direct Masternode control one way or another. Right now they are a security liability and a giant ball and chain development-wise. Go ahead and re-post in in DCT if you want  I don't have an account there yet. But if you do, make sure you post the chart as well. Looks like we have been in a deep sleep and don't realize what is going on. Edit: We have put ourselves in a ridiculous situation and this is only gonna get worst. In order to switch enforcement we put a goal of 90% compliance BUT because of the lack of enforcement we have now rogue pools (like this one: XhBLSR1HhoaWrdGgrjCHxJkCWWiFFhveHs) who has more than 10.40% of the mining share. This is like a paradox. Thanks, crossposted. Centralised pools are a complete perversion of Satoshi's intent. The sooner they are eradicated the better. And if Darkcoin comes up with a viable means of doing so (we could have have one - decentralised mining via Masternodes) we'll be a hell of a lot better off in all ways. |
|
|
|
Normally if a darkweb drug market accept your coin that would be a big deal and should have affected the price positively. We have adoption by not only one but two darkweb markets but price market doesn't give a shit about the news. Probably masternode operators are sick of seeing "tx_0_vout_1" and "not_detected" and they are dumping 1000drk at a time.
Everyone knows that we will not get 90% of pools switching to ONYX, yet we prefer to be in denial and stare at the charts like idiots hoping magically 90% will appear. There must be a better solution than being at the mercy of pools.
Unfortunately pools don't understand that their stubbornness hurting them as well. Darkcoin price should be around 20$ now but we are crawling around 2$ because of the damn struggle between MNs operators and pools. At 20$/DRK pools would still make more money even if the profit is split 50/50 with Masternodes.
If we cannot get pools to cooperate and upgrade fast every-time there is an update then this is gonna be a race to the bottom: price will continue to drop and we will see more and more masternode owners dumping their coins to cut their losses. Outcome: lose-lose!
I agree, others agree, please post here: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/v10-15-onyx-release.2683/Solutions have been proposed... Miners need to be under direct Masternode control one way or another. Right now they are a security liability and a giant ball and chain development-wise. |
|
|
|
Well hopefully Silk Road will add a DRK payment option so those users don't have to jump through hoops and pay exchange fees just to be able to purchase anonymously.  The whole notion of the marketplace processing payments is idiotic. The marketplace should just put buyers and sellers in touch with each other, they can sort out the rest themselves. It's not a bank and if you treat it as one you're going to eventually get screwed, just like fools who treat exchanges as banks. Scewing you over is what banks do. Lazy fucking potheads who want everything done for them... |
|
|
|
What if Darkcoin and XC teamed up, with DRK being part of Blocknet?
Just dump your shitcoins and buy DRK. Your blockhead scam will screw a few idiots out of some BTC then vanish. You know it, I know it. |
|
|
|
Ugh, someone needs to point out to these technically illiterate clowns that Darkcoin does multisig escrow exactly the same as Bitcoin does. Any processing system that works for Bitcoin is trivial to adapt for Darkcoin. |
|
|
|
Hell yes! |
|
|
|
Ehmagerd been away on holiday without internet. Now I have so much reading to do.. so much has happened! Mintpal what!? Onyx! etcetcetc exciting times.
How are we looking?
Well there have been complaints that setting up and administering Masternodes has become just too easy, so after much deep thought I have decided to fork Darkcoin. My new coin will be called Nurse!Nurse! and will maintain the Masternode architecture, but creating one will involve putting a super hot redhead on a plane to me and having her 'medicate' me thoroughly, after which I will send you instructions in obfuscated machine code. For machines which no longer or do not yet exist, obviously. Since I am getting on a bit, even with my special pills I can only receive redhead administered medication once a day, so it will take nearly three years for the network to achieve 3000 Masternodes, even assuming a unique super hot redhead can be 'mined' for me each day. (I am doing away with GPU mining, we're switching to hot redheads on exercise bicycles, treadmills and shiny chrome poles) Other people have complained that setting up and administering a Masternode is just too damn hard, for these folk I recommend Dogecoin. So I think we're looking great, all things considered. |
|
|
|
I just feel like we are in a hurry here.. we are implementing so many different changes with each update .. most of them are great and truly innovative but then comes something like this and it is bundled into a large update and we really don't have a say ... I like everything with Onyx except this multi thing... so I cant vote by not updating? ... I could be wrong here but I thought people could reject (by majority) any updates .. Is that only bitcoin?
Seriously, stop. Dont mean to be a soyjax .. or a concerned troll, Im just having a hard time with comprehending the logic behind this. I just think that I should have a vote.. my investment in this endeavor is quite large, so pardon me for not giving a fuck. Because you're concerned about nothing. IT DOESN'T CHANGE A GOD DAMN THING. It makes it easier for the end user to establish masternodes. If it was structurally changing masternodes, then yes, you would have a valid concern, but it doesn't. Wait till he sees my 1-click Masternode installer. Since my 1-click updater did 90% of it anyway, I added the other 10%. |
|
|
|
EDIT: And even if it's absurd to bring it now, no one answered why it's no big deal if someone owns, for instance, 45% of the MN network in the last pages. This would have solved any and all discussion.
Hello? Why are you not directing the same concern to the horrible centralisation that exists in is mining? There are no more than 3-5 people for most coins who, if they chose or were coerced, could ruin, at least temporarily, that coin. Including DRK - 3 pools make up >51% of the hashrate.
Miners in the form of big pools are several orders of magnitude more of a threat than Masternodes in the hands of a few, because Masternodes are chosen randomly each block from the whole set. Go do the math, or read any one of my many posts explaining it.
edit: If a random subset of miners were chosen each block too, that would do away with the mining centralisation issue... but so would making p2pool mandatory, or integrating pools and Masternodes... but nobody seems very interested apparently in addressing the great big fucking liability that mining in its current form presents.
Masternodes: Chances of successful attack = (rogue nodes/total nodes)^number of masternodes involved, eg if a transaction goes through 8 random nodes, and 51% of the network is compromised, chances of successful attack = 0.457% Miners: Chances of successful attack = 100% if one bloc controls >50% of network. Currently 3 pools control > 52%. 0.457% vs. 100% Yeah, it isn't a strictly apples to apples comparison, but you get the gist. Icebucket's concerns are pointed in the wrong direction. |
|
|
|
It's not that hard to start many masternodes even now (.15.13) - just use bash to implement what start-many does No, no, you don't understand! The world will come to an end if people who can't write their own scripts have just one command to run! Overnight there will be ten thousand Masternodes and I will have to live on dog food and rainwater and it never rains here! There will only be a trillion duffs left, this lack of liquidity will make my legs drop off and the market will collapse! Panic like fuck and shit your pants! |
|
|
|
ok I have voiced my concerns and im not going to spend my night arguing this point.
The reason the top 100 wallets have not setup their nodes is exactly because it is work and technical abilities are required.
Which I think is a good thing because that detorres people from becoming a Mega Mn operator ..
I see that as a good thing for the decentralisation aspect of the coin.
I thought that one person having 50 nodes was bad enough as it is..
Then wait till it is even more profitable to run one. See what happens regardless of this feature. Setting up a masternode isn't technically difficult. There are easy to follow, line by line guides that will get you to the finish line without too much hassle. If you can use the internet, you can setup a masternode. Still you are not addressing the issue im trying to point out to you guys .. This is not a issue of convenience, it is a security issue. How can you trust a network that is run mostly by a small number of people ? .. we need allot of small ops Did anyone ask Atlas what he thought of this ? or any security expert ... you guys must see this Why are you not directing the same concern to the horrible centralisation that exists in is mining? There are no more than 3-5 people for most coins who, if they chose or were coerced, could ruin, at least temporarily, that coin. Including DRK - 3 pools make up >51% of the hashrate. Miners in the form of big pools are several orders of magnitude more of a threat than Masternodes in the hands of a few, because Masternodes are chosen randomly each block from the whole set. Go do the math, or read any one of my many posts explaining it. edit: If a random subset of miners were chosen each block too, that would do away with the mining centralisation issue... but so would making p2pool mandatory, or integrating pools and Masternodes... but nobody seems very interested apparently in addressing the great big fucking liability that mining in its current form presents. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
