as i am aware a new wallet will be needed & block chain restart yes
Thanks! |
|
|
|
Launching in 23 min!
Same wallet & conf file? Has the blockchain been started over too? |
|
|
|
Does anyone here know how to force a certain user and worker to a certain share difficulty on a stratum server?
Wish to leave vardiff intact - but have a single user connecting with a whopping 78 megahash hashrate - Initial stratum share difficulty of 16 is killing us.
Battling this single user's behaviour ever since the restart 20 minutes ago.
Why not set it for min 64 and make the 1 low hasher suffer instead of the whole pool? Perhaps I should. Though I'd rather have this guy at a higher difficulty - or at least be able to contact him or her. Found out we have _FOUR_ users over 50MH, all constantly reconnecting, getting initial share diff of 16, and thus, at that insane rate of submitting shares, bogging down the whole thing. What was intentionally a simple restart to increase the rate at which the blockchain was distributed, turned out to be a big disaster this way. FWIW I've seen DOGE pools setup separate ports for high/low hash rate users. Perhaps that is why? |
|
|
|
leafcoin@s1:~/sources/src$ make -f makefile.unix
Building LevelDB ...
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/leafcoin/sources/src/leveldb'
make[1]: *** No rule to make target `libleveldb.a'. Stop.
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/leafcoin/sources/src/leveldb'
make: *** [leveldb/libleveldb.a] Error 2 hahahahahaha  cd src make -f makefile.unix cd.. qmake "USE_UPNP=-" *.pro make -f Makefile I tried this and it didn't work. Searching around, it appears the Makefile is missing from src/leveldb/ *used git clone ... to download the source on ubuntu. Comparing to other wallets this Makefile appears to be pretty standard so I'm trying to compile with a borrowed makefile, so far it seems to be working. Probably not a good solution though  |
|
|
|
|
no solarcoin-qt.pro in the source download = can't compile
|
|
|
|
Compiling from source, seems like the locale files are a little jacked? me@jerkface:~/coins/Klondikecoin$ qmake
Project MESSAGE: Building with UPNP support
lrelease error: Unexpected tag <defaukdcodec> at src/qt/locale/bitcoin_af_ZA.ts:2:14
i got it to compile, but wanted to mention it in case you care :-) Edit: just to add, i removed all the locale files except for the _en.ts one, fixed it to be <defaultcodec> instead of defaukd, then removed all mention of the other .ts files in whichever Makefiles mentioned them. In case someone else is having the same issue. |
|
|
|
I just had a thought... If all miners get are TXfees, then we would have to do some transactions. If there is no platform for doing these transactions besides initial distribution, how would miners benefit? This would work great with a fully mined and traded coin with lots of volume (or any at all), but I'm not so sure how it would work with one like this. Anyone want to chime in?
I see what you're thinking but maybe this adds another element to alt coin trading and mining? As the miners want something to mine and therefore get something to trade or dump for btc (as is true for many people here), then the miners would need to get fully invested in the success of a coin such as this one so that they can have both something to mine and something with a value to trade once they mine (which then gives them more to mine, right, as this is mining for the tx fee?) I guess we won't really know until we start. Every thought experiment I come up with takes me back to the TXfee amount problem. What if it's really high, like 10? Sure the guy with the big ASIC would get it, but trade volume would be low due to the high fee, so he wouldn't get much and might even lose interest and allow a better spread (does it even spread, or does it always go to the fastest hash?) to the smaller miners. What if it's really low? Increased trade volume would invite the big fish and the little guys wouldn't get much, if anything. If you really think about it, it's a whole different beast altogether but I could just be totally missing the point. Obviously, I'm still learning about the crypto world.  Maybe make the tx fees start high and halve over time, so in the beginning when there are few transactions the fee is 1 coin, and every 6 months it halves as the transactions theoretically increase. If there was a way to tie the fee % to average number of observed transactions this could work nicely. Edit: in the beginning when the coins value is low the fee of 1 coin isn't much, but as the value increases the avg transaction size would drop so it would make sense that, say a .1 PMC fee makes more sense and might have a similar real world value to the 1 PMC fee today. Thinking about this some more, like you said a page or two back there's little incentive to throw massive hashes at this, lots of people mining from their wallet with proc=1 would be plenty to keep the blockchain moving. You would need fast diff adjustment though to avoid some yahoo throwing 10 MH/s at it for a few hrs then leaving with the diff sky high and multi hour block times till the next adjustment comes. You could also consider making it a 95% premine with a small block reward over a few months just to get it off the ground. This really is an interesting idea. |
|
|
|
I just had a thought... If all miners get are TXfees, then we would have to do some transactions. If there is no platform for doing these transactions besides initial distribution, how would miners benefit? This would work great with a fully mined and traded coin with lots of volume (or any at all), but I'm not so sure how it would work with one like this. Anyone want to chime in?
I see what you're thinking but maybe this adds another element to alt coin trading and mining? As the miners want something to mine and therefore get something to trade or dump for btc (as is true for many people here), then the miners would need to get fully invested in the success of a coin such as this one so that they can have both something to mine and something with a value to trade once they mine (which then gives them more to mine, right, as this is mining for the tx fee?) I guess we won't really know until we start. Every thought experiment I come up with takes me back to the TXfee amount problem. What if it's really high, like 10? Sure the guy with the big ASIC would get it, but trade volume would be low due to the high fee, so he wouldn't get much and might even lose interest and allow a better spread (does it even spread, or does it always go to the fastest hash?) to the smaller miners. What if it's really low? Increased trade volume would invite the big fish and the little guys wouldn't get much, if anything. If you really think about it, it's a whole different beast altogether but I could just be totally missing the point. Obviously, I'm still learning about the crypto world. Maybe make the tx fees start high and halve over time, so in the beginning when there are few transactions the fee is 1 coin, and every 6 months it halves as the transactions theoretically increase. If there was a way to tie the fee % to average number of observed transactions this could work nicely. Edit: in the beginning when the coins value is low the fee of 1 coin isn't much, but as the value increases the avg transaction size would drop so it would make sense that, say a .1 PMC fee makes more sense and might have a similar real world value to the 1 PMC fee today. |
|
|
|
|
Devs, we really need to get this wallet update asap! Potcoin launched yesterday with some issues but a strong hashrate, now I see dopecoin launch pre announced, and that one looks like it may have its act together. Kushcoin is pretty much un-harvestable at this point due to the high diff and low (no?) hash rate.
If you are still waiting for pool operators to respond I'd suggest cutting them loose and instead of trying to setup your own pool find a p2p operator who can add KHC. It would really be a shame to just let this die at this point but I fear that's where we're heading.
|
|
|
|
|
Not compiling for me,
g++: error: /home/myname/coins/Netcoin2/src/leveldb/libleveldb.a: No such file or directory
g++: error: /home/myname/coins/Netcoin2/src/leveldb/libmemenv.a: No such file or directory
make: *** [netcoin2-qt] Error 1
this isn't one I'm sure how to fix, any ideas?
|
|
|
|
Anyone know of a calculator to determine how long it will take to find a block at a given hash rate? All the ones I can find are only for LTC and don't specifically mention block discovery...just how many coins you'd earn.
the getnetworkhashps function was left out of the original wallet but will hopefully be added to the update. Bitmonkey did explain how to figure it out a couple pages back, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=411457.msg4515261#msg4515261 |
|
|
|
Is this coin dead?
A little couch locked I think. We'll see if the wallet update helps matters, hopefully it's not much longer. I really like this coin and think it can slowly grow into something. We have to wake up the stoner community. Someone should advertise this on reddit and 4chan. I started /r/kushcoin/ but it's mostly just me at the moment. If you have an account please sub & add some comments or posts on there, I think it needs some more traffic before we try to spread it around to other subs. |
|
|
|
Is this coin dead?
A little couch locked I think. We'll see if the wallet update helps matters, hopefully it's not much longer. I really like this coin and think it can slowly grow into something. |
|
|
|
Is this the best launch ever or what?
I liked the accidental 100% pre-mine aliencoin did myself |
|
|
|
./init.cpp: " -port=<port> " + _("Listen for connections on <port> (default: 25858 or testnet: 25859)") + "\n" +
./init.cpp: " -bind=<addr> " + _("Bind to given address and always listen on it. Use [host]:port notation for IPv6") + "\n" +
./init.cpp: " -upnp " + _("Use UPnP to map the listening port (default: 1 when listening)") + "\n" +
./init.cpp: " -upnp " + _("Use UPnP to map the listening port (default: 0)") + "\n" +
./init.cpp: " -rpcport=<port> " + _("Listen for JSON-RPC connections on <port> (default: 25858 or testnet: 25859)") + "\n" +
Good catch. This was only cosmetic. As you can see in protocol.h the port being used is 25856 which has now been updated in init.cpp. I appreciate the reply, I'll change how I search for ports going forward! |
|
|
|
YEAH, Finally mining some Kush with my laptop, don't think I am going to get many though. And I'm still sitting a zero, so if there is any generous tokers out there with real miners, willing to sent a donation my way, we'll that would just be great! I am probably going to need a new computer once I burn this one out! If so, I will be sure to pack a bowl for you  If not no worries, I pack one for you anyways Donation Address: 1Ph8n6aXTi4Qr3KE8rB1vccLZNvWfQBVH3 Cheers All. By the way cool coin, to who ever created this one, well done  sent a nug |
|
|
|
[quote author=MrDucats link=topic=419943.msg4562652#msg4562652 date=1389961254]
Please open network port 25856 on your router to connect.
Use the following configuration file:
[code]rpcuser=username
rpcpassword=password
rpcport=25858
More information will follow soon and we are ready to take your questions. [/quote] Couple things I noticed, compiling from source on linux. Had to chmod +x the /src/leveldb/build_detect_platform file to get it to compile. Also, it looks to my untrained eye like you are actually using port 25858 for both the PORT and default RPCPORT, ./init.cpp: " -port=<port> " + _("Listen for connections on <port> (default: 25858 or testnet: 25859)") + "\n" +
./init.cpp: " -bind=<addr> " + _("Bind to given address and always listen on it. Use [host]:port notation for IPv6") + "\n" +
./init.cpp: " -upnp " + _("Use UPnP to map the listening port (default: 1 when listening)") + "\n" +
./init.cpp: " -upnp " + _("Use UPnP to map the listening port (default: 0)") + "\n" +
./init.cpp: " -rpcport=<port> " + _("Listen for JSON-RPC connections on <port> (default: 25858 or testnet: 25859)") + "\n" +
[/code] |
|
|
|
Awesome. We still need get more people in our community. The coin is great, we only need promote it.
Some ideas?
That's up to all of us, things are going well. We do not need to rush it, that's how these things fail. But we can definitely keep letting others know about it. I haven't gone overboard with the threads and big caps locks. I encourage you all to bring in others from less favorable altcoin projects. right now coinye is dead, those people need a new home Looks like r/kushcoin is available, I think i'll set that up and work on a couple initial posts pointing here, the kushco.in site, and getting started for crypto beginners. Then maybe we can introduce it in a r/trees & wherever else it makes sense in a low key, non spammy way. If it's well received maybe a tip bot could be created, not sure if that's in my skill set or not but I can take a look. EDIT: ok, it's up. http://www.reddit.com/r/kushcoin/. Hopefully a few folks would like to join & help add to the discussion. It's obviously a ghost town at the moment. Dev's - if you would rather run this let me know & I'll hand it over. |
|
|
|
Awesome. We still need get more people in our community. The coin is great, we only need promote it.
Some ideas?
I think tapping into communities outside bitcointalk is big, that's what really got traction for dogecoin. Maybe r/trees needs to be introduced to kush coin? I'm walking a friend through installing the wallet so I can give him some. Someone who appreciates the theme and has asked about bitcoin in the past. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
