Anybody mining at http://5.45.105.66:9664 pool? I mined there for a while, I even saw my MOON address on "Payout P2Pool-network" with expected reward and still after a week haven't received a penny. The problem is the low hashrate of the miners, currently there. See the first page, and you'll know, when to expect the next block: 2030 hrs, thats in ~84 days. So as long as there is no bigger miner with serious hashrate to find another block soon, you'll have to wait that long for a block to be found and get paid - and that's only an estimated average and based on luck, so could even last longer - or shorter. That's why I told several times in this thread, that it is not profitable to mine with CPU or even GPU solo. You'll probably never find a block. Even if 20 or more CPU's are mining on a pool without additional higher hashrate miners. |
|
|
|
They both, gormadoc and dogemoon8888 told they received coins (that disappeared on June, 6)
about 2 years ago from multipool.us.
2 cases and the same source of coins, what could it be?
If you are a miner and mined at multipool.us, maybe some credentials or private keys were compromised?
Then if anyone mined at multipool.us before, you'd better immediately transfer your coins to the new Mooncoin address,
better to several paper wallets, generated on an oflline machine.
Another thing which came to mind: consensus issues with multipool.us?
That does not have to do anything with this issue. If you mine at multipool.us, you receive the coins automatically in intervals (based on the number of accumulated coins, as set by you) or you can initiate that on your own. In any case the coins go - as with any pool - from the pool's address to another address in your wallet or at an exchange. Cryptsy, for example, had an auto-sell-feature; so as soon, as the coins arrived there from the pool, they were sold at the set price. So it is completely irrelevant, whether someone bad had access to an account at a pool or someone is "not in consensus" with the pool's operator. As soon as the coins left the pool, all of these risks are non-existent anymore, if the miners already received their coins to their own wallets. The problem is somewhere else. I've never mined even 1 Mooncoin, so your experience is appreciated. I've just received a PM from the 3rd member who had the same case, and again coins earned a couple of years ago and again from the pool. Maybe he will post here. He told he only lost 1200 MOON in the same way. What could it be? Why only mined coins disappeared (other coins remain in the wallet according to gormadoc)? Obviously it had something to do with mining and pools, maybe with cgminer? If it was the fault of a mining software, then most probably it would make more sense to use any possible vulnerability for BTC or other very high volume coin. At least we cannot blame cgminer or any other software, until we know exactly. Do you know of any vulnerabilities of cgminer? At least this needs serious investigation. |
|
|
|
They both, gormadoc and dogemoon8888 told they received coins (that disappeared on June, 6)
about 2 years ago from multipool.us.
2 cases and the same source of coins, what could it be?
If you are a miner and mined at multipool.us, maybe some credentials or private keys were compromised?
Then if anyone mined at multipool.us before, you'd better immediately transfer your coins to the new Mooncoin address,
better to several paper wallets, generated on an oflline machine.
Another thing which came to mind: consensus issues with multipool.us?
That does not have to do anything with this issue. If you mine at multipool.us, you receive the coins automatically in intervals (based on the number of accumulated coins, as set by you) or you can initiate that on your own. In any case the coins go - as with any pool - from the pool's address to another address in your wallet or at an exchange. Cryptsy, for example, had an auto-sell-feature; so as soon, as the coins arrived there from the pool, they were sold at the set price. So it is completely irrelevant, whether someone bad had access to an account at a pool or someone is "not in consensus" with the pool's operator. As soon as the coins left the pool, all of these risks are non-existent anymore, if the miners already received their coins to their own wallets. The problem is somewhere else. |
|
|
|
@ coinflow: Sounds like a good idea.
I don't know how to go ahead correctly...so it would be nice if agswinner can do that?
Thanks a lot.
It seems all right, because the coins come from the second cryptsy address, which then vernon has moved, maybe the coins have disappeared for the protection implemented? Where or from whom germandoc bought the coins? If he bought them on Cryptsy and transferred them to his own wallet before Cryptsy went down, they can also originate from the same address as the now blocked one (if that is/was Cryptsy's). Gormadoc, could you explain further? Dogemoon8888, when and where did you acquire your coins? |
|
|
|
Hi, you've got PM!
My coins aren't there... but it's the same thing like at me - how you can see!
I am working with mooncoin_foundation and barryst1le to look, what has happened.
And I think, there are more people who have lost their coins....
84000000 are sent very often to the one in the richlist on place 3! (about 15 000 000 000 coins!)
I try to find out, whats going on, but I'm only a user/newbie...so I am take my hope to mooncoin_foundation and barryst1le !
The 7.6.2017 was ab bad day for me (i updated my blockchain since 13 weeks there cause of the rising of moon).... hope my and your coins will come back!
Gormadoc
Thank you for your reply... l' m only a user too，So very upset... I see your coins and my coins send to this address: 2LmKKEkHfT3tatPJwbSUxJ9e3YFw7TamHU Why is it so strange? Is the latest (Mooncoin-qt.exe v 0.10.5.0.) loopholes? Dogemoon8888 Has anyone informed the exchanges, to block, freeze or even verify the user of the address(es) where the funds went? agswinner? Edit: Could it have to do with the strange small spam-transactions that went to many addresses in the past days and some here wondering about? |
|
|
|
Don't forget that some top addresses with a lot of coins belong to 5 exchanges where MOON is listed currently (C-cex, Bleutrade, Nova, Coingather, Coinexchange),
top 2 addresses are unspendable, also 2 other smaller addresses with stolen coins,
if you hear rumours that any other address is unspendable, don't believe them, you can ask any independent expert who is able to read a Mooncoin code.
re: agswinner,
private keys are safe if they were generated in a safe way and if you keep them in a safe place and don't disclosure to anyone.
That's the fundamental thing behind crypto at all.
No matter how many coins someone sends to any of addresses.
Only for the readers education to get the full picture, not to necessarily speak against you: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Address_reuseagswinner, could you elaborate on your theory? barrysty1e? One of those addresses where stolen coins went, is the one mentioned here: Not a large volume. The market will now buy much more. If you do some little research, you'll see there is no activity except someone sent 2450 Mooncoins to each of top addresses, that's why now in the Rich list all top addresses (even with coins which were not touched since 2014) indicate that last activity was today. And because it is monitored, every activity, even only sending micro-amounts to it, should be closely watched and investigated, that's why agswinner's previous post is interesting. Maybe a hint to something ...? |
|
|
|
Mooncoin is an open source project, exchange read the code, analyze the source before listing MOON just like any coin to use it with no worry.
So even a dev who codes a wallet doesn't control decentralized things.
It's a community that decides. With no consensus, there is no network.
Make sure you understand the nature of decentralized open source projects before posting.
In a ponzi scheme the price is only rising, while newcomers pay to founders.
In a decentralized Mooncoin project a founder probably has less coins than you.
There was no premine and no crowdsale.
People have equal opportunities, but the market price varies, like a Bitcoin or Dogecoin, or a Digibyte price.
Someone who bought at 1 Sat sells at 5 Sat, someone who sold at 2 Sat, rebuys at 5 Sat (fomo as coinflow said),
someone sold at 6 Sat hoping to rebuy at 4-5 etc etc etc.
With a free market the price is a balance of supply and demand and there are lots of players currently at the Mooncoin market. The $1 million volume yesterday indicated that very well. The price can be very volatile, MOON is still an emerging market and no one is able to predict it, a price can go to 1 Sat and then to 30, or to 30 Sat and then to 1 Sat, or to 30 Sat and then to 50 Sat, now the price varies between 4 and 7.
What is MOON's dev target per coin? Since you mentioned Digibyte, i know they have a target of $1-$10 , anything above that is bonus. What would a logical target be for MOON ? I look Dogecoin Dogecoin comunity said this http://www.muchdogenews.com/not-being-a-marketer-but-mooncoin-is-like-what-dogecoin-was-3-years-back-can-someone-take-a-look-at-this-coin-and-tell-if-its-worth-it/MOON 5 sat vs Dogecoin 128 sat  Plenty of room for growth.  Just see RDD. Was 1-3 satoshi. Now over 100 satoshi. |
|
|
|
Of course, the new difficulty readjustment algo is priority, it goes without saying. As said, then it should have been added already. I have mentioned this for years already, as you know. As nice as web-wallet and the such are, I'll repeat: the heart of any crypto is its algo and it needs to work flawlessly as advertised (in case of Mooncoin: 90 sec. block-time). But as also said, good, that James has now set it on top of his list. You did suggest DigiShield as a new algo in the past and it was implemented by barrysty1e in the current wallet and works since March, 2017. However, the idea was not great. Current pauses between blocks happen due to DigiShield. We definitely need another algo, you will agree with it. But it's not so easy to change the algo each time, because it requires a fork and a mandatory update of wallet. Anyway it's true that it's better to do a mandatory update than to leave a current algo which doesn't match a 90 sec block time. Only to make everything clearer for the gentle reader: Long ago I suggested using DigiShield, because the original dev deaconboogie talked about it, when he realized that the newly implemented KGW did not work well under all conditions. Back then DigiShield (invented by DigiByte-devs, btw., for those who don't know it, see https://www.reddit.com/r/Digibyte/comments/1yn6t1/digibyte_v_20_code_name_digishield/) seemed to be a better solution, but it is only to a small extent, as we all know now. With PoS surfacing more and more (RDD etc.) I suggested to switch over to it several times and we had serious discussions about that, as you know (which most probably led to the text about PoS vs. PoW in the first posting of this thread). Now - literally years later - we have the outdated DigiShield and we realize again, that PoS is most probably the better solution, because it is much easier to get a decentralized critical mass of users together, than with mining. It has drawbacks, for sure, but so has PoW, as we all can see. And we could also develop an improved PoS-algorithm, as I said before. Why would one try to explain how to mine over and over again? It is not that easy to set up a miner correctly, as one could think, especially if you are a newbie. Moreover mining a Scrypt-coin like Mooncoin without specialized ASIC will most probably never get you a coin, except you are extremely lucky, at least it is extremely unprofitable to waste GPU- or even CPU-energy on that, whereas with PoS everybody and their neighbor can contribute to the network stability easily, and you don't pull that much energy which always comes along with the pollution of the environment, if the electricity isn't produced from renewables). If coins like Stratis and RDD exist well with PoS (and for Ethereum PoS is planned too, after the Ice Age, let's see what happens, it's all a big experiment), then Moon could also do very well with it. We definitely need another algo, you will agree with it. But it's not so easy to change the algo each time, because it requires a fork and a mandatory update of wallet. That's why it would have been good to have PoS implemented already, instead of dealing with DigiShield when developing an updated wallet not in 2014, but in 2016. Times change and if there are better options, then one can use those, too. DigiShield was a better thing back in the days and deaconboogie thought about implementing it, but the time moved on. |
|
|
|
Of course, the new difficulty readjustment algo is priority, it goes without saying.
Also mining from wallets with one click will drive more common users, not only professional miners.
And then, the last in this order - a new codebase, derived from Litecoin, which already contains Segwit,
that's why it goes without saying, too, or is it needed to be removed? Obviously not.
Never underestimate the exponential growth of adoption. If you have a chance to include this feature, with the future in mind, better just do it.
DK3 has certainly caught my attention:  mining at 2.7mh until timestamp ~ 1496480645; where a second gridseed is brought online (5.4mh). please note the figures above are with DK3 largely untuned. propz to metamorphin for the suggestion, once fully tweaked i think this is what we will go with  my particular interest is in the 'timeout' function, if a particular timeout has been exceeded with no new blocks found; the retargetting algorithm will actually start lowering the difficulty dynamically. james @James: Keep us updated about how this goes. Sounds very interesting. @ Mooncoin_Foundation: Basically it is right to be prepared for the future. If something is already implemented into code that another coins adapts, there is nothing wrong with it - basically ... But one needs to keep in mind, that every new feature adds a possible point for problems. SegWit has not been proved and time tested. It was only activated in Litecoin and - correct me, if I'm wrong - has not seen any real usage regarding its intended purpose, let alone running at full steam. The saying "don't fix it, if it ain't broken" is there for a reason for everyone developing something (not only in IT-development, but more so in engineering), but I'm sure, barrysty1e is very well aware of this. Also mining from wallets with one click will drive more common users, not only professional miners. Right, that's why I suggested this initially (as an alternative to or in combination with PoW (hybrid)). More miners = better decentralization. Be it via PoW or PoS or both. Edit: Of course, the new difficulty readjustment algo is priority, it goes without saying. As said, then it should have been added already. I have mentioned this for years already, as you know. As nice as web-wallet and the such are, I'll repeat: the heart of any crypto is its algo and it needs to work flawlessly as advertised (in case of Mooncoin: 90 sec. block-time). But as also said, good, that James has now set it on top of his list. Btw, congratulations to Bleutrade for breaking 1 mln USD volume with MOON ( http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/mooncoin/#markets ) and also congrats to everyone here for the nice increase of the price in the last days. |
|
|
|
Even if a coin doesn't need Segwit currently,
impementing of that feature indicates that a coin is going to stay over long term,
that there is the future in mind. It's really better to implement Segwit before a coin gets a wide adoption.
That's why LTC implemented it, it was not about marketing only.
It was marketing, because LTC has much more capacity in its blockchain than BTC and did and will not need it for a long time to solve the problems BTC has now. For MOON SegWit is even more unnecessary, because MOON can carry even more transactions, because of its even faster block-times. That's why the the most urgent thing is the diff-retargeting. And we should all be glad, that Barry set it on top of the list now finally. Implementing SegWit and not solving the problem with the stuck blockchain for such a long time first, is - to make a long story short - a joke! Edit: For those who want to learn more about SegWit: https://cointelegraph.com/explained/segwit-explainedhttp://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/segwit-segregated-witness.asp |
|
|
|
Dude what do you mean you have no one to talk to?? We have an entire discord dedicated to fellow moonmen! Come join us! https://discord.gg/agnV4rThank you for that! I'm not kidding you, I didn't even know what a bitcoin actually was a month ago, let alone a satoshi or a subreddit or a ..... discord. Im learning as fast as I can, see you there :-) Hi VegasMoon, you're very welcome here. And if you'd like to purchase Mooncoin again, it is still cheap at 2 Satoshi. Maybe you're lucky and someone will sell at 1 Sat, too. Edit: If you have any questions left, feel free to post them. |
|
|
|
|
What's nice: the buy-support at 1 Satoshi seems to continuously build up and sellers only sell moderately at 1 Satoshi (rather constantly filling up to 25 BTC of sell orders at 2 Satoshi again, if it went below 20 at bleutrade). If that goes on MOON is distributed more and more evenly to more hands and consequently has a great base for future growth (price- and coinmarketcap-wise).
|
|
|
|
bleutrade is scam, sent them my eth and never received it
Have you tried sending them a message to their support? They have sporadically changed the deposit-addresses in the accounts in the past, so the old ones aren't valid anymore for the account. But contacting the support should solve this problem and you would afterwards receive the coins to your account. |
|
|
|
As for innovations: There are many coins that keep it simple and work very well. LTC is the best example. Simply works.
If there were no new developments, such as SegWit and Lightning (so far only expectations), then the price would be $ 2-4. Without these changes, everyone considered LTС a dead coin. An insignificant amount of trading in the amount of $ 1-2 million. The same approach to Mooncoin? Dont need it, thanks. LTC was only hyped by SegWit. Does not need it technologically, at least not at this time, as the network simply works, as said. So it can be seen as mere marketing. Not really needed, if it brings no technological benefit for the coin. As they did not invent SegWit, it cannot be attributed to LTC and will not help MOON either, other than maybe a little pump (but no substantial growth, because of real beneficial and own development). LTC would have also gone up in the latest rallye without SegWit, though not as high, maybe. Just read the investors forums and you'll understand, that they only went onto the train, because it went up and the buzzword SegWit was there (which was a catalyst in the rallye). |
|
|
|
C-cex.com is a trustable and time tested exchange and be sure they care about security.
Thanks to all people who participated, especially to nico12321!
Mooncoin is proving again that the community, common people matter,
not only centralized projects with a couple of investors behind can win.
Mooncoin is not a company, it's backed by common people all over the world who write its history.
Join MOON today, you are welcome.
Edit: the Mooncoin developer barrysty1e reported that he completed Segwit implementation.
Now working on a difficulty readjustment algo.
That's really great news. Thanks James for putting the diff-readjustment-algo on top of the priority list. Congratulations on making it to C-CEX. |
|
|
|
Sorry, you are misinformed or didn't remember things correct.
MOON never was listed at Poloniex, and never was removed from Cryptsy,
when Cryptsy stopped withdrawals and trading, MOON was present at Cryptsy with good trading volume,
that's why a lot of people in this thread reported their Mooncoins left forever at Cryptsy.
It's true that an original dev mentioned health issues before his sudden disappearing.
You're right, it's been a long ass time. Mooncoin was however completely dead on cryptsy and was listed on the other largest altcoin exchange at the time, I just can't remember what it was. Poloniex wasn't that big at the time, but that huge exchange it was on, which also had tons of volume, got hacked as well and shut down. I lost a ton there. All my damn alt coins Again, this is wrong. Mooncoin was never dead on Cryptsy. Quite the contrary, it even was one of the coins with the largest volume there often, until Cryptsy died. It was not listed in the BTC-market anymore, yes. But imagine a coin making the largest volume of ALL Cryptsy markets (incl. BTC) only on the LTC-markets. That was/is Mooncoin. Mooncoin was never listed on Poloniex, as Mooncoin_Foundation already said. Please do your due diligence, before posting. Thanks. Edit 1: Maybe you mean CoinEx? It was one of the first exchanges, where MOON was traded back in the day and it was heavy trading there for MOON, reaching over 30 sat. Then the exchange went down ... BTW: MOON only ~18% retracement in this correction phase. Check the list: Most other coins have gone down much more: http://coinmarketcap.com/Edit 2: Now it's ~34 % minus. But still perfectly in sync with all other coins. Mooncoin will get stronger with every correction. Coinex sounds right. hard to remember with the amount of exchanges that got destroyed. It 100% did die on cryptsy though, it WAS highest volume, pulling in a 1400 litoshi count, then pummeled back down to 10 lithosi (less than 1 satoshi) that's dead. ... but still with some of the highest volumes on Cryptsy, until the end (edit: of Cryptsy, not Mooncoin ... ). |
|
|
|
2 sat wall falling fast on bleutrade.
Is this related to any news?
Where have you seen it falling? Still ~25 BTC at 2 sat. Just about the same as yesterday. Edit: @Barry: The web-wallet looks nice. That's the kind of development, a coin needs. Regarding the blockchain-problems, that should be the next topic, to be solved as soon as possible. Have you thought about developing an own algo for MOON, in order to solve the problems with PoW and PoS? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
