Yes that is a typo... May 12, 2014 - Source: www.Clamcoin.orgAlso, I just wanted to chip in my two cents in regards to forcing people to wait after digging their CLAMS. I am strongly against this. It sounds Dooglus was at one point as well. I believe CLAM should remain how it is or else it will be viewed by everyone as a scamcoin with developers/dooglus who are only interested in their own profits/protecting their profits by using code. The rules are fair... I vote leave them. I do think the 1CLAM stakes may need to be rolled back, but that is a conversation for another day. (perhaps peg it to the CPI or something along those lines) Is dooglus the developer of clam? I know he uses it on his website for gambling but didnt know he was the inventoe of clam. I don't think he is going for profit, he has always been fair and will stay it! He did not invent clams. Me and creativecuroisty were the original creators. He is however a CLAM dev, a constant contributor and a valued member of the CLAM community. |
|
|
|
Unfortunately the implication is "anyone with 100,000 BTC addresses gets 460,000 CLAM", which seems a little less fair.
I don't think anyone would get me or creative to suggest the distribution was perfectly fair which is why we always worded it "the fairest distribution" which I continue to agree with.. that doesn't mean it doesn't have its problems. Its impossible to be 100% fair, there are always tradeoffs. No matter which distribution method you use you are going to end up with situation where some users have a larger percentage of stake then others. The goal was to limit that as much as possible while including as many crypto users as possible instantly into the fold. While it is very frustrating for me to see someone potentially have 460, 000 CLAM (using your example), in my mind its still fair. |
|
|
|
why does CLAM tank?
dooglus answered above.. As of right now around 22k clams have been dug up in the last week. (Another 1k were dug up overnight). It seems the person who dug these clams decided to sell. |
|
|
|
Are CLAMs sent to every BTC/LTC/DOGE address that had some minimum coins? Or some get some don't.
What's the rule?
It was around a certain date only but I still cant get mine from my Multibit wallet I know about the date and they were already distributed. What I meant was were CLAMs sent to each and every wallet? Or only to 30-50% or whatever the distribution rule is. My personal wallet is Multibit too and I cannot recover them. I encounter an error. Will post back once I replicate it. They were sent to any address that had a balance above dust (.1 for doge, .0001 for btc and ltc) on may 12, 2014 |
|
|
|
|
LLTGC
aka I endorse said use of CLAM imagery!!
Sexy CLAM shirts FTW
|
|
|
|
@Clam experts: What's the leading byte for clam p2sh addresses supposed to be? x05 or x0d?
x0d is the correct one to use now. It was originally x05 but there was a situation where an old just-dice user sent clams to a multisig btc address, so to avoid any future conflicts it was changed so the leading identifier was 6 when converted to base58. I will look into the other multisig question for you tomorrow, just on my way to sleep. |
|
|
|
I think this is an important facet of the conversation.
If it doesn't make economic sense - the idea is DOA.
I seem to remember some conversation some time ago about making p2pool mandatory, or at least de-facto standard, for BTC.
CLAM is in a unique position where the number of stakeholders is relatively small in comparison.
If p2pool was built-in to the client and the mandatory process of staking, everyone would be on an even playing field - regardless of potential economic issues.
It has been years since I last looked at p2pool, but from what I remember, it works like this: Centralised pools: Mining is hard. You need to find a block which hashes less than a very low target, T. Traditional mining pools allow people to work together by giving them easier work to do: the members of the pool are asked to find blocks which hash to less than a higher target, 1000*T (say). This is 1000 times easier, and so happens about 1000 times more often than the pool finds blocks. Each time a member solves one of these easier blocks, it reports it to the pool as proof that it is trying. The pool makes sure that the reward is going to the pool's addresses, counts up how many of these easy blocks (called 'shares') each member solves, and when someone does eventually solve a real block the pool splits the reward to the members in some way based on their history. Problem: the centralised pools get big, and end up threatening the network. The pools decide which transactions to include in the blocks which gives the pool operator the power to double spend. The members also have to trust that they actually will distribute the rewards fairly, and so on. All the usual problems with centralisation. p2pool: In the same way that Bitcoin decentalised currency by the use of a blockchain, p2pool does the same for mining pools. Instead of a central mining pool tracking how many shares each miner has accumulated, there is a blockchain which tracks it. It's entirely separate from the Bitcoin blockchain. A new block is added to the chain each time a miner solves a share. Each miner checks the last N blocks in the sharechain, calculates how much of the block reward should go to each miner, and sets the coinbase accordingly. When a miner receives a new share from a peer, he will check the coinbase of the share to make sure that the peer is distributing the coins correctly. If so, the share will be added to the chain. Eventually one of the shares will also be an actual Bitcoin block, and once broadcast all the miners who solved any of the last N shares will be paid. I don't see anything there that couldn't be made to work with CLAM. Some thoughts: 1) p2pool removes the need for a central pool by having the coinbase in each share pay out the block reward to all the contributing miners. CLAM has a rule that staking transactions must pay out to the same address as they come from. But upon further investigation this is only enforced for the first output. It's possible to make this kind of staking transaction which pays to two different addresses. And so it should be possible to pay to as many addresses as we like, so long as each miner pays themselves first. 2) The whole reason p2pool is being discussed with respect to CLAM is that it is thought to be a way of decentralising things, and getting rid of the "orphan" problem. The orphan problem is that JD orphans a lot of other people's staked blocks. JD has 75% of the staking weight, and there are only 4 chances to stake per minute (due to the 16 second granularity). When a non-JD staker finds a block, there's a 1/4 * 75% = 3/16 chance that JD finds a block in the same timeslot. And there's a 75% chance that JD will find the next block too. In the event that two stakers find a block in the same timeslot, each miner considers their own block to be the valid one, and attempts to stake the next block on top of it, so if JD finds the next block it orphans the other miner's block. So that's a 9/64 chance that any non-JD block is orphaned by JD. That's 14%. That's too many, and so can p2pool help fix that? I'm not sure, but it seems to me that instead of orphaning 14% of blocks on the CLAM blockchain, JD will orphan 14% of shares on the sharechain. And the end result will be the same. Is that right? If so, is this even worth pursuing? Thats an excellent explanation of how p2pool works. I'm working hard to find a flaw in your logic as I was hopeful p2pool would help with these problems.. but i dont see any. |
|
|
|
A: Your the one who brought up a fork in our skype conversation that we had. I prepared myself for it and wanted to help make any transition for JD users/players as easy as possible IF EVER it happened (plan for the worse and hope for the best.) B: The Rat blackcoin developer. Didn't CLAM used to have a lotto mining structure rather than this consistent 1 CLAM reward? Anyways lets just let this die. Obviously Clamcoin.org isn't an option. I intend on continuing to promote it. Would appreciate being recognized as the official fan site too  ! Clams have always been experimental.. though due to increased community and associated value we greatly limit the experimental ideas. Some things work out some things don't, the lottery was a case of the latter. To suggest it represents a worrisome history of exploitation is a little misleading coming from you imo. We (the developers) never claimed to be perfect, In fact I'm sure you can find multiple posts we suggest were not and ask for help. We are however all very passionate about technology and cryptocurrency and most especially clams. |
|
|
|
If I download the clam client how to I determine that it is not malware? I don't want to turn on a alien keylogger.
After 156 pages of posts about CLAMs, I think if it were malware someone would have figured it out. Just make sure you download the client from the OP The vote of confidence is appreciated 
As you suggested, the code has likely now been vetted by many people. Of course, you can always review the code yourself - if you are capable of doing so. But how do I know that code that has been vetted is what was compiled? There is no checksum delivered with the binary. Do I need to compile it myself? I didn't post the gitian build hashes when I built it as no one ever asks for them and no one other then me and allejuppa have ever actually compiled the client through gitian to compare hashes (they matched btw). I am more then happy to provide them, and if you use gitian to build the build hashes will match and it will build deterministically right from the git repo. I'll recompile today and post the hashes for you. |
|
|
|
Thank you for pointing this out! I expected there to be little problems that needed to be ironed out but I need to see them as they are often rare occurrences. If you or anyone else notices any oddities with clamsight please let me or Kef know.
Is posting in this thread a good way to let you know? I found another issue: That's on http://clamsight.com/tx/27bc5fd460e8834be3cfd74b75670e6348197d7c37127a6e1052aeab75af6ec8Maybe that happens with all unconfirmed transactions; I'm not sure. Waiting for it to confirm then reloading made the red errors go away. Forum works great. Do you happen to know how quickly after you sent you looked at it in clamsight? I ask because I suspect what you saw was a tx that was unconfirmed due to a reorg and when it was put in a new block the leveldb updated the spent outputs. You happened to look at it in the state where the leveldb entries had been erased. At least thus is my current best guess. I've been looking at unconfirmed tx's and haven't seen one come up with that issue yet. |
|
|
|
I'm having trouble with the new block explorer.
...
It shouldn't be showing "doubleSpentTXId}}" - I imagine that's a bug.
Thank you for pointing this out! I expected there to be little problems that needed to be ironed out but I need to see them as they are often rare occurrences. If you or anyone else notices any oddities with clamsight please let me or Kef know. Also the entire codebase is available and I'm willing to offer bounties for bug fixes like this. Its currently in my personal repo at https://github.com/l0rdicon/clamsight https://github.com/l0rdicon/clamcore and https://github.com/l0rdicon/clamsight-api |
|
|
|
I guess I appreciate the effort, but I'm in a library with no headphones so videos aren't going to cut it Let me know if there's a succinct-textual answer somewhere. FWIW, I can try to watch videos later on at home. Here's a slightly off-topic rant: do you guys ever get annoyed when you're looking for some simple answer to a question and the only thing you can find are videos that you know are going to have a rambly introduction and no way to search on the page for exactly what you're looking for (because it isn't a page!) etc? Ok, end of my rant! Proof-of-Pearl was a cute name for our lottery which was removed long ago. It was basically just random block rewards aka superblocks or whatever you'd like to call it but it didn't work out well. Proof-of-Chain is in reference to how clams were originally distributed, sending out to all the btc / ltc and doge addresses that had a balance last may. Hope that helps |
|
|
|
I just checked in on the site and see that it has been paying out staking rewards like crazy: It turns out we staked a block with a transaction that paid a fee of 50 CLAM. Just-Dice is set to only pay staking rewards out 2 CLAMs at a time if there's more than 5 CLAMs outstanding, else to pay the rest, so that's what it did. So we've split the 50 CLAM fee, which was presumably paid by mistake, between all the Just-Dice investors. So what now? Invoke golden rule of mistaken fees: "losers weepers finders keepers". I concede my 50 clams on account I should have been sleeping.. not creating raw transactions. If it hadn't have went to JD it wouldn't even be a question, someone would be up 50 clams. Lesson learnt! |
|
|
|
if 40k was dumped in dec. then it has to be someone clam knows. devs may know..have a friend....who knew about clam in dec and had 40,000 clam?
We have no idea at all who it is.. someone with a lot of funded litecoin addresses. I've personally been pointing it out since it started happening in December. December was when JD launched so it brought alot of attention to clams from people who were otherwise unaware so it makes since thats when it started. |
|
|
|
I have an old BTC address from KnCMiner wallet which is discontinued, I believe they use the same software as the "Bitcoin Wallet" by a guy named Schildbach or something.
Anyone knows how to get the private key?
I have a file named bitcoin-wallet-keys-yyyy-mm-dd, when I open it with notepad it gives me a long string of like 100-150 characters starting with an U and it also has some +, / and = symbols in it, tried to import in different wallets but so far nothing worked.
Thanks!
You can try throwing it into bitaddress.org and see if its recognized. It supports most formats so if it doesn't recognize it likely a bad sign. |
|
|
|
Edit: while fixing the problem I found this line in the source: printf("Corruption will robinson\n");
In the event that the client discovers that one of my wallets is corrupted do I really want to see a badly punctuated and capitalized unfunny Lost In Space joke? I'm probably sad enough at that point. It was meant to be removed, it was for debugging. I write silly messages to myself. What can I say. |
|
|
|
65 paid however 65 Clams that is  |
|
|
|
65 paid however |
|
|
|
I'll bet 60 clams, can't help myself.
1470 wasn't good enough for you? lol, I love my 1470, but double digit... I've tried not to bid but the urge was too much CreativeCurosity the other clam co creator needs a low id too, shed be gifted one of them ! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
