Thanks for that. Adding “#L34” to the vnl URI nails it for me: int EC_KEY_regenerate_key(EC_KEY * eckey, BIGNUM * priv_key)
{
int ok = 0;
BN_CTX * ctx = 0;
EC_POINT * pub_key = 0;
if (eckey == 0)
{
return 0;
}
const EC_GROUP * group = EC_KEY_get0_group(eckey);
if ((ctx = BN_CTX_new()) == 0)
{
goto err;
}
pub_key = EC_POINT_new(group);
if (pub_key == 0)
{
goto err;
}
int EC_KEY_regenerate_key(EC_KEY *eckey, BIGNUM *priv_key)
{
int ok = 0;
BN_CTX *ctx = NULL;
EC_POINT *pub_key = NULL;
if (!eckey) return 0;
const EC_GROUP *group = EC_KEY_get0_group(eckey);
if ((ctx = BN_CTX_new()) == NULL)
goto err;
pub_key = EC_POINT_new(group);
if (pub_key == NULL)
goto err;
That's a lot more than just a structural similarity. It’s hard for me to see this as anything other than incontrovertible evidence of the author having a naively self-centred perspective on intellectual property rights, broadly translatable as “what’s yours is mine and what’s mine’s my own”. More tellingly, it's also hard to reconcile this evident difficulty in critical thinking with any kind of work in the area of cryptography, notorious for its relentlessly stern demands of cognitive sophistication in its proponents. Stand back a few yards and the picture becomes somewhat clearer. I've not even bothered looking at vnl, being confident that it’s just another variant of the “misunderstood but brilliant maverick outsider, wronged by a complacent community” media narrative and all the posturing is entirely consistent, even the expedient arrogation of others’ work. Given the evidence in the codebase, I'm reassured that my confidence is not misplaced, although I do have to admit that his choice of pseudonym is a bit of a give-away in and of itself. Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
@Graham, @notsofast. I now know that I am wrong and you where right. Sorry about the fud remark and thanks for providing thanks proof.
Now everyone, please don't be mad and still have fun mining.
Fair enough, that's a mature response to a critique. People round here are likely to be quite tolerant if all the facts are laid out on the table. My original post was prefaced “traps for the unwary” and indeed, the incorrect statement about limits and rewards arises not from malice but from inexperience, which is forgiveable. Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
@Graham: thank you for your repeated insights and helpful posts, I learn a lot from them!
Thanks for the kind words. Your post is spot on as answer. I'd have left it to do its job had the OP not directly invited me to clarify the issue, an invitation which it would have been churlish of me to decline. Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
But about the max supply, I must admit gjhiggins and notsofast had me doubting for a while, so I checked with other devs just to make sure and you know what ? The max money is well... the max money.
@Graham : Wrong. You're just full of fud!
Uh-huh, you checked with “other devs”. And then decided that an insulting tone would be appropriate. Not the best of calls. Can I recommend that you develop a little more maturity and extend your skillset, then you will more readily avoid making a public spectacle of yourself. In case your ill-founded and incorrect claim confuses others, I'll make it clear ... Try inspecting the source code - as a self-styled “dev”, you should at least be capable of reading C++ for meaning ... I recursively grepped the code for case-sensitive instances of the character string MAX_MONEY. Results showed two (2) header declarations and three (3) instances of use in the main codebase ... $ grep -r -n MAX_MONEY horsepowercoin
horsepowercoin/src/main.h:55:static const int64 MAX_MONEY = 2900000 * COIN;
horsepowercoin/src/main.h:56:inline bool MoneyRange(int64 nValue) { return (nValue >= 0 && nValue <= MAX_MONEY); }
horsepowercoin/src/main.cpp:573: if (txout.nValue > MAX_MONEY)
horsepowercoin/src/main.cpp:636: return MAX_MONEY;
horsepowercoin/src/main.cpp:641: nMinFee = MAX_MONEY;
horsepowercoin/src/test/data/tx_valid.json:54:["MAX_MONEY output"],
horsepowercoin/src/test/data/tx_valid.json:58:["MAX_MONEY output + 0 output"],
horsepowercoin/src/test/data/tx_invalid.json:39:["MAX_MONEY + 1 output"],
horsepowercoin/src/test/data/tx_invalid.json:43:["MAX_MONEY output + 1 output"],
I've edited the results into URLs so that you (and everyone else) can easily verify that MAX _MONEY is only used to limit the amount of coins in any single transaction/fee https://github.com/HorsePowerCoin/HorsePowerCoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L573: if (txout.nValue > MAX_MONEY) https://github.com/HorsePowerCoin/HorsePowerCoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L636: return MAX_MONEY; https://github.com/HorsePowerCoin/HorsePowerCoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L641: nMinFee = MAX_MONEY; These “other devs” of whom you write --- are they perhaps school classmates of yours? The reason I ask is, like yourself, they also appear to be refreshingly uncontaminated by knowledge. Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
Traps for the unwary #463► Premine: 6%
► Blocks 6001+ = 250 Coins
Sadly mistaken on both counts, I fear. The reward after block 6000 is 400 HSP forever ( https://github.com/HorsePowerCoin/HorsePowerCoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L1088). int64 static GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64 nFees)
{
int64 nSubsidy = 500 * COIN;
{
nSubsidy = 174000 * COIN;
}
[ ... ]
else if(nHeight >= 6001)
{
nSubsidy = 400 * COIN;
}
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
174000 described as “6%” premine. Implying an expected total of 174000 * (100 / 6) == 2898840.0 https://github.com/HorsePowerCoin/HorsePowerCoin/blob/master/src/main.h#L55: static const int64 MAX_MONEY = 2900000 * COIN;
MAX_MONEY limits the total number of coins allowed in a single transaction/fee NOT the total number of coins. After block 6000, as long as mining continues, the number of coins issued will increase by 400 HSP every 60 seconds. At that rate of production, the total number of coins issued should reach 100000000 in about five months. Of which 174000 is less than 0.2%. Cheers Graham
|
|
|
|
Seems like people srs use some random ideas to make the name for the coin
Yes, some of the names are clearly ill-conceived. e.g. “To be perfectly honest, we underestimated the reservations against the fuck word. Most of the major exchanges are US based and we thought people were more open in 2014. We had it all, the initial lol moment, people were digging fuckcoin, but no exchange, no matter how hard we tried, was willing to add fuckcoin with the FUCK symbol. We even heard of refunded BTC "exchange votes" from the community. This is why there was no update on the fuckcoin wallet.”
For an extensive list, see https://minkiz.co/coin/name/ (self-signed SSL cert, CA cert, DYOR: archive.org) Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
Verification of full node statusIn case y’all ain’t already seen it, last November S.D. Lerner posted Proof of unique blockchain storage, in which he proposes a solution for the issue: “Can a user verify if peers have a distinct copy of the blockchain and that that copy is intact?” Cheers Graham
|
|
|
|
it seems to me like a good coin to baghold  Well, sort of. It's difficult for me to comment either way, 'cos I can’t see the logic of bagholding myself. Except in one circumstance, accumulating a significant share of the coinage with the intention of then ploughing most of it back into creating some heavyweight promotional programmes, on the principle that 10% of something is better than 100% of nothing. I have several coins that I’m “curating” (in that other interest has dropped away to nearly zero) and I run a constant low-level injection of energy (value) into the network, thus allowing the economic parameters to mature without being unduly stressed by a casually uninterested exchange market. Elsewhere, I’ll invest my time rather than my fiat (it’s an injection of value, whichever way you look at it). tl;dr Generally, you’re likely to get more value out of your investments if you put your wealth to work. Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
Ish...
I don't know how you find the time to contribute, what with all the altcoins that you're currently controlling and with being in school all day long, too. What brings you here? And what criteria are you using that allow you to produce such an eloquent summary? Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
i did consider it unlikely , but had to check it out anyway  Had a suspicion that was the case, thanks for indulging my curiosity. I'm obliged to you. Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
Nope, no connection. I'm curious why you thought it might be somehow connected. Did you actually think it was or did you consider it unlikely but thought you'd check anyway? Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
Way to go east! Sadly, the network is in a bit of a mess at the moment. Hiro missed a trick with the hardfork, shoulda changed the pchMessageStart string which was fumbled by the original Karmacoin “dev”. A whole bunch of lacklustre devs have generated alts with that same pchMessageStart string - despite it being documented as supposedly a unique identifier Reddcoin: https://github.com/reddcoin-project/reddcoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L3618 unsigned char pchMessageStart[4] = { 0xfb, 0xc0, 0xb6, 0xdb }; // Reddcoin: increase each by adding 2 to bitcoin's value.
(Reddcoin predates Karma, it's Karma dev's error to use the same string.) Karma - https://github.com/karmateam/karma/blob/master-0.8/src/main.cpp#L3298unsigned char pchMessageStart[4] = { 0xfb, 0xc0, 0xb6, 0xdb }; // Karma: increase each by adding 2 to bitcoin's value.
Worldcoin - https://github.com/coinkeeper/2015-06-22_19-19_worldcoin/blob/dev-0.8/src/main.cpp#L3155unsigned char pchMessageStart[4] = { 0xfb, 0xc0, 0xb6, 0xdb }; // Worldcoin: increase each by adding 2 to worldcoin's value.
This is why there is an entertainingly wide variety of sub-versions appearing in the block explorer's listing https://chainz.cryptoid.info/karm/#!network All those 73 “/Satoshi:0.10.2.2/” clients are nothing at all to do with Karma, they're clients for another coin. The “/Satoshi:0.8.6.5/” looks plausible but again, Karma could just be sharing a pchMessageStart and a version string with yet another coin.
/Satoshi:0.10.2.2/
/Satoshi:0.8.6.5/
/Hashtoshi:0.8.6.4/
/Satoshi:0.8.7.5/
/Satoshi:0.8.7.4/
/Satoshi:0.8.6.2/
/Satoshi:0.8.6.1/
Dain 0.0.1
/Satoshi:0.8.5.1/
/Satoshi:0.8.6.2/
/Christiaan Huygens:1.2.0.4/
/DigitalcoinV3.0:3.0.1/
/Reddcoin:1.4.0/
The current state of play --- anything other than a Satoshi 0.8.6.5 subver on protocol version 70006 is almost certainly not a Karma node. | addr | vers'n | subver | height | | 5.101.96.124:33629 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835337 | | 5.196.190.82:9432 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835321 | | 50.192.83.22:61521 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835404 | | 62.221.89.173:54321 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835332 | | 68.35.218.223:54141 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835327 | | 72.42.100.141:58146 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835339 | | 76.95.178.229:39808 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835326 | | 78.206.12.70:57234 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835322 | | 83.104.61.47:50805 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835419 | | 86.190.17.95:61229 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835394 | | 89.11.228.207:56973* | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835354 | | 99.113.26.253:57003 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835328 | | 104.243.34.106:50183 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835328 | | 125.237.57.154:64250 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835323 | | 148.251.126.241:24901 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835326 | | 188.165.2.147:51545 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835327 | | 188.99.40.239:62420 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835324 | | 204.11.237.233:37663 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835356 | | 204.11.237.233:49587 | 70006 | /Satoshi:0.8.6.5/ | 835366 | | 67.225.99.248:9333 | 70003 | /Satoshi:0.10.2.2/ | 599527 | | 94.242.250.58:9333 | 70002 | /Satoshi:0.8.5.1/ | 849615 | | 140.116.82.42:9333 | 70003 | /Satoshi:0.10.2.2/ | 849615 | | 104.236.77.94:9333 | 70003 | /Satoshi:0.10.1.3/ | 849616 | | 198.27.67.137:38627 | 75000 | /WorldcoinFoundation:0.8.6.2/ | 2169061 | | 213.163.74.163:9333 | 70003 | /Satoshi:0.10.2.2/ | 849616 | | 219.113.244.52:9333 | 70003 | /Satoshi:0.10.2.2/ | 849617 | | 212.66.44.43:9333 | 70003 | /Satoshi:0.10.2.2/ | 849618 |
* = syncnode Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
Anyways when clicking on the block explorer link you provide my pc/firefox blocked it as untrusted connection so i guess i'm not gonna click it
I think it's because their SSL certificate not from trusted provider (self-generated cert?) Spot on. @balwind, it's up to you ... it is a self-signed SSL cert, CA cert, DYOR: archive.orgCheers Graham |
|
|
|
Mymonero.com ... as easy to use you could hope for
Is it possible that you are underestimating others’ expectations? This is 100% the wrong approach to it. Thanks for the response and for confirming my conjecture. Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
ever added, i.e. 40% of all the coins ever added --- and those coins don’t appear in the current list. Records of previously-published lists are available courtesy of archive.org. The figure's nearer 30% by my calculations: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1158855.msg12247177#msg12247177A coin’s listing on coinmarketcap tells us only that at least one exchange polled by coinmarketcap lists the coin. If a coin has been removed from the coinmarketcap list, it doesn’t mean that has no listing anywhere, only that none of polled exchanges lists the coin. Gliss' list of exchanges is necessarily informal, so must be the described data. Being dropped from coinmarketcap can’t be interpreted to mean “dead” or anything much other than “no longer listed by coinmarketcap.com”. Although a dynamically-updated list (and recording facility) would be relatively easy to set up, I'm not sure how generally useful it would be. I supposed Minkiz could have a “cap-decap” list, recording arrivals and departures but it would only reflect changes in a single aggregator. Cheers Graham
|
|
|
|
Not trying to nit pick but I just wanted to point out it's actually #44. Interesting find.
Oooh, nice catch. I checked #34 (finding out what he meant by “home-baked versions”) but I didn’t actually scroll down to #44, assuming it was a more recently-launched coin (I did say I ripped through it), so I totally missed the explicit reference to the Spreadcoin white paper. Thanks. Cheers Graham |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
