Just for the record. I'm not into the whole drugs thing.
I just want the privacy to order a Russian rubber dolly that will satisfy my craving for plastic love, and not have that broadcast to the world on the blockchain - the makers of my petite plastic Thai brides might get offended if they ever found out.
Quoted to preserve it forevermore  |
|
|
|
I'm sorry that you don't see the benefit of allowing devs to code apps right into the wallet.
The LAST thing I would ever like to see in a wallet is an app or plugin. Security nightmare... |
|
|
|
the SDC developers would join the darkcoin team or would they require additional payment?
No additional payment. Does Evan still have the project lead or would it be democratic, means the more SDC developers join, the more power in future decisions they would have? |
|
|
|
Why is it when news is released about the unique innovations the Devs are creating the price of DARK falls? Makes no damn sense. Clearly, Darkcoin is undervalued. I hope you guys don't send out too many press releases back to back. Great work, tho.
no you are wrong ! it is my buying and after the price drops ! I swear to god , every time i buy any amount of DRK the next day the price goes way down ! WTF just got another MN online and boom the price drops again my karma ! (sorry you guys are part of that) We both should team-up: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg9400147#msg9400147 |
|
|
|
masternodes getting paid "equal times" a month or we are talking about masternodes getting paid "equal amounts" of darkcoins per month?
Times! |
|
|
|
Please, don't get me wrong, I'm glad the price of DRK is rising, but I can't help but wonder why?
I can tell you, and it's actually quite easy: whenever I buy some DRK for, lets say, another Masternode, the price goes down. On the other side, whenever I sell some DRK, the price goes down also. The last days I did nothing....voila! |
|
|
|
Now, On a more serious note... I've had my wallet denominating for the last 7 or 8 hours and it is not mixing my plethora of p2pool payouts from mining even though they are in the same address... Why isn't the wallet smart enough to combine the little inputs and mix them properly?
Move the zillions of inputs to another input (or even a completely different wallet) via coincontrol and start again. P2Ppool payments, especially when there are tenths of thousands of them, are not easy to handle for a wallet. This is currency independent. |
|
|
|
Darkcoin doesn't use TOR so that doesn't apply to Darkcoin directly. However, the principles _could_ theoretically be used against Darkcoin Masternodes as well, but in practice it's almost impossible to do . You would need IP-spoofing to pretend to be a Masternode and DOS other Masternodes with that to get temporarily banned as Masternode. And you would have to do this for the majority of Masternodes, and you would need physical access to the network of that Masternode to successfully spoof its IP. With > 1000 Masternodes spread all over the world this is NOT doable, even for NSA and friends. Additionally, the theoretic weakness of having any IP being visible in public was already foreseen by eduffield and addressed in his development update from 01. October 2014, see https://darkcointalk.org/threads/development-update-oct-1-2014.2561/, chapter "Masternode Security", diagram "multi-path routing". tc;du: the answer is NO  |
|
|
|
coin might be more developed. price may increase. all this might be true.
but still doesnt change this fact:
darkcoin is NOT profitable to mine.
I guess you're doing something wrong, because I mine it and still get profits. |
|
|
|
I've disabled enforcement for the time being. There are a couple daemons that have forked randomly throughout the day, this needs to be looked into in depth to figure out what's going on, then it will be re-enabled.
darkcoind getcheckpoint: {
"synccheckpoint" : "00000000003a2be2024a4ce8589c8dc229c6dc0205e9af9c118e0b1a12caad76",
"height" : 160436,
"timestamp" : 1414545317,
"subscribemode" : "enforce",
"enforcing" : "on"
}
Not workee? Edit: works now {
"synccheckpoint" : "0000000000396d4a5a17ef07d21d116468f35947ff31f9ed28503c30d7fdfd10",
"height" : 160440,
"timestamp" : 1414545437,
"subscribemode" : "enforce",
"enforcing" : "off"
}
|
|
|
|
We are all in Crypto to make money. Say whatever you want, but that is a core fact.
I'm here for the girls. |
|
|
|
1 MN, zero drk in 5.5 days. I thought there was supposed to be more even distribution. :/ wtf.
Not yet. I'm pretty sure there will be an announcement when it's switched on... |
|
|
|
Something can't possibly be right with my MN.
4d17h48m16s active duration, zero payments. All green on both MN sites. wtf.
Do I need a new key/address??
One of mine has already 6 days without payment (actually this one has already gotten quite a lot of payments). That's called variance, and you can't do anything about it. It evens out with time. |
|
|
|
I thought enforcement went through on oct 6th? I havent had a lot of time lately to keep up with what's going on.
My understanding is that a date is never really set in stone and has more to do with the way the system is running. I'm sure that if I am in error here - somebody will chime in :-P - Increase Masternode payout from from 20% to 25% is hard-coded to happen at block 158000, so it already happened.
- Pools/Solominers can still use an older version, thus pay 20% or even less or nothing at all
- When enforcement is activated blocks mined via those older versions are not excepted in the blockchain anymore and get orphaned
- enforcement will be switched on (and back off if there are errors) by Evan using the checkpoint functions, which were originally designed by the Bitcoin developers to name a block height and blocks BEFORE that one cannot be forked, the clients will just ignore that fork.
Of course what Evan does is more an ab-use of checkpoints, but in a quite clever way. - I think it's a good idea as long as so much developing going on, and it's much better than having to offer an emergency-repair version which everyone would have to install.
- In the long run I would like see this to be removed, because I don't trust Evan.
- For those who wonder, I trust no-one, so it's nothing personal.
That's all you have to know. |
|
|
|
No use of backup when you send funds to new wallet which is corrupted!
That's why I ALWAYS make a backup of the NEW wallet beforehand, check that backup and only send the funds when everything is correct. And, checking includes trying out the password! |
|
|
|
I guess chaeplin did not yet update to the latest version. |
|
|
|
You can have masternode=0 on both wallets' / daemons' configs when you're syncing them, transferring the 1000 DRK, or just generally setting them up - because they are not a masternode yet!
But when you're finally ready to start up the MN (i.e. masternode start yourpassphrasehere), then you'll need to set masternode=1 on both of them (and relaunch the wallets / dameons so the .conf gets read, duh).
Maybe that's something that isn't mentioned clearly enough in the tutorials?
It's not specifically mentioned in the tutorials because it's wrong. The wallet which holds the 1000DRK (no matter whether it's the local 'cold' wallet or a hot wallet) needs to have masternode=1 in its darkcoin.conf. The other one (means in a hot/cold setup) does not need it. |
|
|
|
Crowning mentioned that sometimes the new version will go inactive? Bug I assume? What's the fix just to stop then start again from console? Hoping someone can save me the time of looking though forum as I'm sure this discussed already...
A "masternode start" from the (cold-) wallet does the magic, there's no need to stop and start the Masternode's darkcoind itself. Edit: What's the best way to monitor MN activity? drk.mn?
"masternode list" from any darkcoind with the same version. drk.mn and poolhash are basically doing the same. I have always one darkcoind running locally and use it for monitoring and restarting in case one Masternode goes inactive. |
|
|
|
So is the 504 count the number of MN running 10.15.13? If I was still running 10.14.1 would the same command give me a count for that version? One last question on drk.mn page the total MN's shows 773...Is this a bug or did we lose a bunch of MN's? Thanks...
"masternode count" with 0.10.15.13 gives you the current number of 10.15.13 Masternodes, but the number isn't reliable right know because some of them (ALL of mine  ) have the issue to temporarily go inactive and you have to give them a loving kick in the nuts from time to time. 0.10.14.1 (which I also monitor) is COMPLETELY confused, some 0.10.15.13 Masternodes show up there, some not, some temporarily, and of course the 0.10.14.1 Masternodes. This will become better when more Masternodes and pools have updated, I hope it will not last TOO long... BTW, drk.mn still uses the old version, therefore the numbers are wrong. |
|
|
|
MN is still running, grep my ip gives me a one.
I had this in the past and did wait 7 days without payment before i deceided to set up a new IP.
"masternode list" with YOUR Masternode version (hopefully 0.10.15.13) is what the pools and other Masternodes with THIS version also see, so it's the most reliable way to find out what's going on. Unfortunately pools with older versions will still pay Masternodes with older versions, but since more and more pools update that will have lesser impact in the near future. And, as soon as enforcement to 0.10.15.13 kicks in they will completely disappear anyway... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
