nice

I am mining with 2 MHS  w/ AMD 1090T (only 150 W power consumption, but boxes heat up regardless) will try to push to 1,000 maybe more and wait for GPU and perform plan as above , we have plenty of time 10 years!

In my estimation if CPU botnets, there is approx 300 to 500 machines infected which is not a lot actually, my humor is getting less and less, but there is some decent innovation behind this coin, but can not have CPU only or this happens, people will mine mostly for fun (not profit) when GPU miner comes up prices will come up automatically, that's all

next time something like this is launched a link to GPU miner should be made available at the same time, if this would happen here exchanges would devour this coin like no tomorrow and miners would rejoyce

The latest test release - http://downloads.xc-official.com/testing/setup.exe -


Provides additional privacy for your IP address, so when using XChat your ip address isn't revealed.


Dan

Huh, that would have saved me some time. Oh, well.

Making a GPU miner for this is not that easy because of the exotic algo's used (i.e. ripemd / tiger). You need knowledge how to port the algo's to opencl... It is definitely possible but hard to do

Dev said he had opencl experience! and the testnet ran for months! and he didn't write a gpu miner just for fair ? wowowowow~~~~

Agreed. This post from the dev also is indicative of not having one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=167229.msg8113615#msg8113615

What is with all these accusations based on no evidence? It's like this place has become a bad drama. Shame on you.

I just hope ocminer will soon add a pool on suprnova...

As for GPU miners, I'm pretty sure there is at least one, maybe even 2 private ones available

If this were the case CPU mining with EC2 would not be remotely profitable. It's clearly not the case...

no ,you need gpu     @djm34 where r u , we need u !

Those addresses could be exchanges, i dunno. The few large miners I know of seem to have 30k or so.

Minerd/getwork appears to have an issue. It works fine if your mining 1 instance of minerd per wallet. With more, aka private pool, it doesn't work right because getwork is only generating new work 1/sec or so. I changed getwork to always generate new work when called. This will however create very large load on the daemon. Not sure what the best way to use it is. New builds will be up shortly. 904/905

why xcn can launth btc38 and bter as same time

What do you mean too fast?

Currently we are

    "blocks" : 982,
    "headers" : 982,
    "timeoffset" : 0,
    "connections" : 7,
    "proxy" : "",
    "difficulty" : 13371.59862808,

Block time is a little short because difficulty is still increasing.

Yeah just run the new exe. No delete/upgrade or anything required.

New binaries http://gpile.it/mbc/  800/801 vintage

The windows chain is not viable. The difficulty adjustment had no effect, so all those coins were mined with minimum difficulty. Part of the problem is people thinking they lost some huge amount of coin when in fact those coins represent 1/1000 or less the work of coins done on the working chain.

So even if you have 200k XCN on that fork, it's probably not even a single blocks worth of work on the other chain. So moral of the story is that it's not practical to move the network to the windows chain and it's also not sane as the total work done in that chain is marginal at best. It seems to be a case of, well I lost mine, so everybody should lose theirs. One of these chains is correct, and the other is decidedly not. It sucks that you mined a weird chain, and I apologize for writing that code. But I am not the distributor of whatever justice you seek and am not going to tell people that the valid proof of works that they found don't count anymore because your miner was broke.

All of this was caused by a single uninitialized variable, and presumably some compiler difference caused this to not be a critical error on linux.

For those of you that think we don't want to restart to keep coins. Let me give you the lowdown. Between bitfreak and I, we have a total of 4 blocks. I'm pretty sure that in any kind of relaunch the results will be the same simply because we are pushing out the code and pushing go at the same time.