|
PPCoin (1%), Novacoin (some ungodly amount). Anything forked from PPCoin or Novacoin source (e.g. Bitbar, bottlecaps, etc)
|
|
|
|
Hey guys, I've thrown the OP source up at pastebin: http://pastebin.com/6e8kdGNtUnfortunately, I don't have the time to read through all the posts and make any relevant updates. If anyone wants to do this and give me the updated post (via pastebin, etc) then I can update the OP from that, just send me a PM when you do this to make sure I get it. |
|
|
|
|
Hi maxmint, please add a buy order to the order book for me for 1000 MSC @ .0215 (21.5 BTC total).
I will consider buying two lots of 500 MSC, as well, but am not looking to buy smaller lots than 500 MSC.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi guys,
Does anyone have a recent listing of the top 100 richest addresses for PPCoin and litecoin?
I'm trying to find a list of both for some due diligence I am doing on both currencies. I'd be happy to try to compile a list myself, but I'm not sure what blockchain analysis tool would be used to do this.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone know of a bot that can make buys (on btc-e), buying up all coins offered (to a max balance) below a certain value? This differs from trade bots that will buy and sell...I want to accumulate a specific coin or two below a fixed bid price. I could use something like the HaaS simple trade bot (in the buy-low-sell-high mode), but it doesn't seem that is well suited to this purpose.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Well, we're off topic so I'll let people get back to LTC, but I have seen people less and less using PPCoin. They now say Peercoin and PPC. For that reason I'm not concerned at all.
I do wish the PeerCoin branding was made "official" though (via SunnyKing). Even going to ppcointalk.org, I see a mismatch of both terms. I'm a big fan of PPC and see POS becoming increasingly important and valuable. |
|
|
|
I've been working on some proof of concept code for Mastercoin since there is not much around yet. I decided to put my work to some practical purpose and made a quick page that uses the Mastercoin libraries to run through the blockchain and count how much coins were bought by a specific address. A huge disclaimer: This is not the official code and things are often guestimated. For instance the whitepaper does not mention which time to use as basis for the extra coins for early adopters. I've opted in to use the time your transaction got added to a block but the reference spec might change this, although I'm not sure how. You can check how many Mastercoins you bought here. Full transparency; IPs for visits site are currently logged by the webserver software. If you don't want your ip in combination with your bitcoin address logged don't use it. Hey Tachikoma, I just checked this out. SO COOL!! It appears to work correctly with the addresses and transactions I have tested. It appears that blockexplorer timestamps agree with your method. Can you confirm this? I wonder if blockchain.info timestamps are based on when their client first saw the transaction broadcast (i.e. data not stored in the blockchain). If so, then we can't use that timestamp (and my greasemonkey script is slightly wrong!) It appears that some payments were sent in good faith before the deadline, but not included in the block chain until Block 255365 (four minutes after the deadline). If we have to use the timestamps of the block itself, I think it makes sense to include transactions up through that block, and refund ones which came after that. What you have here is already a great entry into our programming contest (thread coming soon), and could earn you thousands of dollars worth of prize money (depending on how much further you develop it and what cool stuff other people come up with) I agree, great tool. FYI, there are still some issues with certain addresses (especially those that have a change address in the transaction). I have reported these to Tachikoma and he's confirmed them and will be fixing the code when he can. Just wanted to put this out there for other's benefit in the meantime. |
|
|
|
Given Mastercoin is an additional layer of functionality that sits on top of Bitcoin, it therefore needs Bitcoin to succeed and as such it would make no sense to make design choices that negatively impact Bitcoin.
Shame to see the hostility (I've always found collaborating to be much more rewarding) but I'm sure with the quarter million plus $ raised the project will be able to engage the right minds to find the best implementation.
+1. This was going to happen sooner or later. There's way too much brainpower on these forums to not have a rational storage implementation come out of this effort. |
|
|
|
You're really going to be pleased if you try to contact them about any of this. 1-2 weeks to respond to attempts to contact, if ever.
I swear it's a one man show.
I also find it strange there is little/no public presence and no one from the company trying to promote the exchange or gain customers. I mean the second Gox cut off Dwolla they had a chance to be a major player.
Yes, I've had several issues with them and went for days and days with no response. I do have a support case in asking for that 30 day limit to be re-evaluated in my case given that I made personal check deposits (no Dwolla)...but I'll probably have to wait 5 days just to get a response, after multiple follow up messages...like last time. I run a business for a living. If we ran like these exchanges, we'd be out of business. It boggles the mind. And, I thought the same thing about the lack of marketing around these guys. They've been around for awhile (in bitcoin terms) and aren't scammers/fly by night...you'd think they'd jump on the opportunity. Or at least get a CSR watching these forums to address complaints/issues before it harms their image (I guess they don't care). |
|
|
|
|
Well, first experience in investing in bitcoin (instead of mining it), and it has been a giant pain in the ass. It's clear to me now one of the major things really holding BTC back at this time.
I sent in personal checks to campbx fedex Back on July 30th. Money was just created to the account today (3 weeks later).
Next I try to buy some bitcoins, and notice how shallow their order book is. I finally buy some bitcoins, and then when I attempt to send them out to BTC-E to buy LTC/PPC, I get the notice that withdrawals are disabled on my account for 31 days. (This was the reason I avoided Dwolla deposits in the first place…I thought being KYC verified and sending in a check would allow me to withdraw immediately!)
So then, fed up with Campbx, I try to initiate an ACH transfer back to my bank account, and see the amounts are limited to 10K at once, and I can only have one active at once. Holy shite.
I know Gox takes the cake, but these guys aren't that far off. I’ll be taking (what’s left of) my money, once I can wrest it back from them, and heading over to Bitstamp or Coinbase.
(As an aside, anyone have any bad experience with bitstamp’s handling of international wire transfers?)
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting thread. Not meaning to go OT, but in the context of solving these issues (or at least having a more refined alternative), what is everyone's opinion on Proof of Stake (as implemented in PPCoin, namely), as well as PPCoin's mint-rate adjustment algorithm as compared to Bitcoin (i.e. where PPC relies on difficulty, not time/block height)?
Seems like PPC would have a lot to gain on both fronts if this difficulty/centralization scenario plays out. It's looking like (at least to me) that Bitcoin POW energy efficiency will progressively become more and more of an issue. On one end you have the move to ASICs (and more efficient ASICs) which have reduced energy demands over GPUs and CPUs at a per-watt level, but on the other, if you are POW-only, like Bitcoin, the only real direction you can move in for increased network security is more hashrate. That hashrate will only stick around if there is profit to be made, either through minting operations (relying on this ASIC armsrace) or transaction fees (which may scare away users in the face of other viable cryptocurrencies).
I have noticed this POW centralization effect lately and it is a bit concerning to me. With PPC, given that it's still SHA256, I don't see how it would become less decentralized from a POW perspective than BTC, but at least your network security wouldn't depend 100% on POW hashpower.
|
|
|
|
It is only the miners who care about 'pre-mine', 'insta-mine' B.S. Actual users don't care.
That doesn't sound like a good thing (the idea that users don't care). I think it sounds like a good thing. Miners bitch and moan about a dev actually getting paid for doing work, and devs have to take their shit. It's good that users don't do that. Except that most often, miners are the coins earliest (and most influential) users. |
|
|
|
Voting is over. #199 wins the contest. Say hello to ppc's new logo! Now on to rebuilding the website!
I like it, green + gold is my fav combination. Gentlemen (and ladies), I have for your the PPCoin mascot:  "Green is for the money, gold is for the honeys" |
|
|
|
Watching the effects of the latest N change I noticed a few things
A. - Even at a normalized hash rate (thanks canoe) - a lot of people bailed on mining YAC
B. - Block time mean quintupled - we went from 55 seconds or so to over 250 - it could still be a few more days before we get back down to 1 minute.
C. - Because of B, the transaction times crawled to a halt to fully validate
D. - The difficulty is still plunging to catch up to the loss of hashpower (both from N change and folks stopping mining)
The following is suggested based on the possibility of a future where this coin is widely accepted and what the end user experience would be like trying to make a transaction shortly after an N increase. That person, would have to wait ~30+ minutes just to get the first 8 confirmations. This is not the type of experience an end user user would likely tolerate without a high level of frustration.
Based on this, I would like to propose a change that adjusts the difficulty downward at the same time as N increases in an effort to keep block times close to their target in the days that follow. In a no-loss scenario, an N increase halves the total hashpower, so I propose it also halves the difficulty at the same time.
totally spot on ! I agree with this proposed change. FYI, my GPU farm is currently 35% of the YaCoin network hashrate (according to yacexplorer.tk graphs). That's never good (well, good for me, but not the coin).... I really like yacoin's concept and technicals and plan on keeping my support, but I was very surprised at the hashrate drop this last N change. Even at the current price, it is a very profitable coin to mine. |
|
|
|
Whoever decided to buy 40K YAC, I salute thee.
Was that the buy wall at .000230? Just for getting info, which exchange you guys talking about, may i ask? Cryptsy, i suppose? Probably bter...it's the largest YAC exchange at the time. |
|
|
|
Ok!!... I think I got it... I think I have to sacrifice a virgin in a pyre meanwhile I performance a tribal dance in order to get more blocks... ok... so... I'll tell you the results in a while (when I can find a f***ing virgin... of course)  No joke, I had 12 servers on this (8 AMD phenom x4 965s and 4 Xeon 5xxx series...12 cores each) and didn't find a single frigging block. |
|
|
|
You guys do realize that any one with a decent sized GPU farm could 51% ARG at this point. I myself have 1.7x the current network hashrate with what I have laying around. Not that I ever would want to do that.
Such a person could also just join the hashing and make much better profits  Currently focused on YAC and DGC myself. Here's hoping that DGC (eventually, at least) ends up on BTC-e. Keep up the good work, it seems to have a bright future ahead of it!  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
