 "DigiSh ield" is spelled wrong in V2.9.1.0 ^ good catch! That is how these types of typos get fixed  |
|
|
|
My main ssd is getting full due to various blockchains being saved on it by default. Is there a way to shift blockchains to a different drive with creating a junction point? Any advice would be most welcome (simply saving a qt to a different drive doesn't work btw, the blockchain will still be saved in the user data on the main drive) If you're using a unix system you can do something like that: mv ~/.digibyte /media/external/
ln -s ~/.digibyte /media/external/.digibyte
Replace /media/external with any path to another harddisk. ln -s creates a symlink to that new path. I believe there is a commandline option to specify where the blockchain is stored. So a windows user could just create a shortcut and add the argument. I believe it would go something like: digibyted.exe -datadir=PATH_TO_DIRECTORY |
|
|
|
|
Wow, this is still trodding along?
Not sure whether I should high-five or spit on you.
So I suppose that is a win then.... maybe?
|
|
|
|
We will have the updated client that fixes the ssl bug out later today. The URI payment protocol in the new client (2.9.0) is affected. I'm unaware of any web services for DigiByte that implements the payment protocol so risk should be very low. Once the new client is released if you were using 2.9.0 it would be best to send your DigiBytes to a completely new wallet and delete the old one. While this step isn't required I always err on the side of caution.
If your still using DigiByte 2.0.0 you should have no issues but coin control in the new client alone makes the update worth it.
Regarding the Open SSL issue. The older client is not at risk like the 0.9 client is / was. The 2.0.0 version of the windows wallet uses OpenSSL 1.0.1e, and you are saying this is safe? Even though on www.heartbleed.com it says:
What versions of the OpenSSL are affected?
Status of different versions:
OpenSSL 1.0.1 through 1.0.1f (inclusive) are vulnerable
I just want to be clear on this. I'm not trying to argue with you, it just seems like conflicting information. its NOT safe. Needs update AS SOON AS POSSIBLE We are working on the update to 2.9.1 that will fix the OpenSSL bug as we speak. good!  I am by no means ultimately-informed -> however, it was my understanding that the heart bleed bug would not affect your average user. If you aren't using SSL for rpc'ing to a server or some such application, and connecting using SSL to an unknown or untrustworthy host, your memory data should not be exposed (at least that was how I understood it). Further, even if some of your memory was exposed, it would take a concerted attack to expose many small chunks of memory to ever get the key and break the security entirely. I might be mistaken, but I have not changed any of my behavior because of the bug, as I do not see it as such an issue concerning general usage. yes but nevertheless it should be fixed. Indeed, a fix is being built as we speak |
|
|
|
We will have the updated client that fixes the ssl bug out later today. The URI payment protocol in the new client (2.9.0) is affected. I'm unaware of any web services for DigiByte that implements the payment protocol so risk should be very low. Once the new client is released if you were using 2.9.0 it would be best to send your DigiBytes to a completely new wallet and delete the old one. While this step isn't required I always err on the side of caution.
If your still using DigiByte 2.0.0 you should have no issues but coin control in the new client alone makes the update worth it.
Regarding the Open SSL issue. The older client is not at risk like the 0.9 client is / was. The 2.0.0 version of the windows wallet uses OpenSSL 1.0.1e, and you are saying this is safe? Even though on www.heartbleed.com it says:
What versions of the OpenSSL are affected?
Status of different versions:
OpenSSL 1.0.1 through 1.0.1f (inclusive) are vulnerable
I just want to be clear on this. I'm not trying to argue with you, it just seems like conflicting information. its NOT safe. Needs update AS SOON AS POSSIBLE We are working on the update to 2.9.1 that will fix the OpenSSL bug as we speak. good! I am by no means ultimately-informed -> however, it was my understanding that the heart bleed bug would not affect your average user. If you aren't using SSL for rpc'ing to a server or some such application, and connecting using SSL to an unknown or untrustworthy host, your memory data should not be exposed (at least that was how I understood it). Further, even if some of your memory was exposed, it would take a concerted attack to expose many small chunks of memory to ever get the key and break the security entirely. I might be mistaken, but I have not changed any of my behavior because of the bug, as I do not see it as such an issue concerning general usage. |
|
|
|
Good morning! It's very interesting all the trouble they are having with KGW coins. Many coins are applying digishield to fix the vulnerability.
Maybe we should take advantage of this opportunity to advertise more digibyte. . The developers could create a thread so that everyone knows that solves the problem digishield KGW.
By the way, good luck in the crypto convention Wednesday!
The DigiShield doesn't solve anything. KGW is/was vulnerable to a timewarp. DigiShield is vulnerable to a timewarp. Ain;t it different? It is different in the methodology that it uses to adjust the difficulty, but it is not different in the fact that both are vulnerable to timewarp attacks. This is made possible by allowing an attacker to jump back in time with limited jumps in difficulty. Relax Both of the primary tech-dev's are sleeping right now. I am quite certain you will get a full explanation when they arise  |
|
|
|
Jared Tate from the Digibyte project finishing his speech at the 1st CryptoCurrency Convention About 30 minutes ago:  Let's see if interest will grow now Great job devs. Any feedbacks ? I hope it went as well as the test-run I watched. Grats Tate Enjoy the after-party |
|
|
|
If the eight places are for two places of cents and the remaining six for millions...
Sorry for resurrecting the dead, I just thought that this comment was incredibly insightful and apt - considering the range of current estimates for world M1 (in USD). Scarcity is relative. |
|
|
|
So, I was reviewing the code...
I appears BlackCoin's 1% stake is set at a static 1,000,000....?
That would mean that subsequent years garner less than 1% PoS wouldn't it?
with 74.5 million coins wouldn't that be 1.25% or abit more Indeed, speaking of which, where did 74M come from? Block explorer says that is right, but..... Op Post says 10,000 blocks at 10,000 block reward == 100,000,000.....? |
|
|
|
|
So, I was reviewing the code...
I appears BlackCoin's 1% stake is set at a static 1,000,000....?
That would mean that subsequent years garner less than 1% PoS wouldn't it?
|
|
|
|
In the long run (think few years out), the network really can't run on gpus... if Digibyte becomes a serious online medium for exchanging goods and services, ASICs will play an important in securing the blockchain and maintaining a high hash rate at a fraction of the power. Even today 10 gridseeds can put out 3.5Mh of hashing power at just under 70 watts. GPUs waste energy. Just my two cents.
With my understanding, this is inaccurate. The actual "hash-rate" is unimportant. Ergo, "pushing down" the hashrate is not a concern. The important thing to understand is that hash is relative. If everyone is hashing at, for arguments sake, 50% of the previous hash - then your reward for hashing remains the same. I haven't looked into x11, but the important different between sCrypt and n-factor sCrypt is the requirement of memory during the hash function. The CPU algorithms force the limiting factor to be memory, as opposed to CPU/GPU/ASIC. Memory, it seems at least, is not poised to experience the exponential growth in price/power. This is what makes it attractive as a limiting factor. Instead of paying any attention at all to "hashing power", the conversation needs to be about DISTRIBUTED "hashing power". A network could have the highest "hashing power" of any coin in existence and at the same time be the least secure chain. Keeping the hashing power distributed and not centralized to a few actors is the ultimate, and only important, goal that should be considered. |
|
|
|
Hey Coinmarket,
I made my btc deposit by mistake after the hack and tried to withdraw on the 7th March when the site was available again, however I don't see it on your list. My personal btc should not
be part of the btc that was hacked...
Username: Viperbass
Deposited
Tue Mar 04 2014 14:47:31 1.861201 BTC credited
Withdrawal without Tx (stuck)
Fri Mar 07 2014 15:18:25 1.861128 BTC IP confirmed
Like I say this would of been after the hack had taken place.
read some post before - he answered to me that ours coins just go to someone else, If there is one person I trust on this website it's Viperbass. Can anyone confirm there btc is on that list, mine isn't either. I can't confirm if my BTC is on the list or not, but I DID withdraw a couple million MINT, some DGB, and also maybe around a half a BTC after this whole mess started. I got lucky and logged in one of the sporadic times the site was up and my withdrawals went through. Not defending - just the truth. |
|
|
|
digibytedev, would you be interested in hosting an AMA on reddit?
what's an AMA? "Ask Me Anything" |
|
|
|
I would counsel a bit of patience on the part of the QubitCoin community. The most important element of a coin's future is the development team. The Dev seems to have warned the community that he will be gone for a week or so to take care of personal affairs. True, it has been a few weeks it seems, but choose your Dev as you would choose your husband/wife.... ...with proper fore-thought and patience. Not my place, but I figured I would offer a bit of caution regardless |
|
|
|
try command setgenerate true -1 in the console
you can use variables 1,2,3,4, or -1 to assign processing power to generation, -1 is 100% cpu usage
Woah. I just did this and I instantly started to mint. I didn't think I was even up for minting yet because I moved coins on the 9th of march... Maybe I don't understand Proof-of-Stake as well as I thought, but to my knowledge all setgenerate does is cause your CPU to mine Proof-of-Work. That is irrespective and unrelated to Proof-of-Stake block mining, is it not? |
|
|
|
from 2 to 3 satoshi is a 50% increase. So it went up 50%!! BUY BUY BUY! HOLD HOLD HOLD! If it goes back down to 2 satoshi it will only be a 33% decrease, ain't that beautiful So we have an a 50-33=17 percent increase per one two-coins-to-three-coins-to-two-again hop? Sounds beatiful. You two aren't serious right? *scared look* Of course we are serious. Doesn't we 2 looking like a not-business people? AS you see, one hop means 17% cost increase. So, if it is N hops per day, with a sum of 50000 zeits at beginning we will have a (50000*(1.17^N)) at daynight; if n ll be 20, wi ll have a 23.106*50000 zeits = 1 155 279.95 zeits! and if one zeit ll be 0.0002 ztc per btc and with 1000 usd per btc, we gain merely a 221 060 $ per day, only for signing ZEITCOIN in a Twitter and a Facebook. Got a legit out loud laugh out of me with that one |
|
|
|
Block reward method: halving Much detail, WOW. Got a legitimate out loud laugh  |
|
|
|
Doubt anyone else will even list it, even with #1 in 'votes'  With a volume measured in dollar bills/LTC, and price of less than a 10th of a satoshi.... Likely cost more to list and maintain a market than it would be worth |
|
|
|
WTB EMO - 1 Litoshi each.
PM for address info, or we can deal through CryptoRush.
nobody is wasting their time selling that low. This coin will be on Mintpal next. keep things in the BTC all you guys placing your sell orders for 1 satoshi and racking up the wall, you are better off holding. price will be at least double or triple in a couple days. This coin isn't even worth 1 satoshi, given the nature of it having 1 trillion coins in total...this coin can only be traded in LTC ^ Surprised anyone is buying at all, though they aren't really  1 trillion coins........ much currency, such dump. |
|
|
|
+10000000.We have to keep supporting the coin and take it to the moon guys!!!!
Frankly, I almost want to hardcore support this coin simply BECAUSE it has been through such hardship. <---- I've seen a few coins perish after hitting road-blocks like this... We have new Dev's and new blood in the dev-team = opportunity. Might be time to get me some more ZEIT before they go up in price |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
