Another post based on hard data. The issue began after Feb. 22. and has PROGRESSIVELY gotten worse. Since you haven't had time to read all these posts, I thought I'd repost this since it is quite important. And you might want to go back and read the last few pages.  Check the data for the whole network. Not just one mining pool.
This is whole network data. current block: 132,795 DGB released days 142 * 1440(24*60) = 204480 I haven't checked the data myself but you have to factor in the multipools attacks from a while ago. They caused a lot of blocks to be mined very slowly and would've totally thrown the total coins minted out of balance. Also, remember that the minting of coins isn't actually balanced by the system, only the difficulty factor. You need to check the data yourself. If you look at the blockchain, you'll see that the issue began with the implementation of DigiShield, and has nothing to do with the multipool attacks. Block discovery was perfectly in line with DGB coding until Feb. 22, 2014. Take a look at the blockchain up to that date and divide by the number of days that DGB had been in existence. http://explorer.cryptopoolmining.com/chain/DigiByteThe issue began back then and has progressively gotten worse. |
|
|
|
From day one we have not deleted a single post nor will we. The initial post someone made was taking data from a pool not the block chain. We are booting up a laptop to look at the blockchain. Not sure why you are trolling so hard. We are doing are best to make something happen for DigiByte here. And we are well on are way to making that happen right now. Will reply shortly with more blockchain info.
The first time I mentioned it was here (check out the time stamp) - with no response.
I'm curious. With DBG stuck on block 131993 for over an hour and a half now, I started looking at the block chain and I noticed that it's been taking progressively longer to find blocks, with only an average of 10.66 blocks found per hour over the last 24 hours.
Only an average of 19.25 blocks found per hour over the last 5 days?
I've quickly searched a bit, but I haven't found anything on this. Forgive me if I've missed it.
Add: 131994 was just found - just under 2 hours between blocks!
The second time was here - again, no response. Reasonable expectations are an extremely important part of, if not perhaps even the most important aspect of, any endeavor, but equally so is the window of opportunity for its implementation. Fear of making a mistake can paralyze projects, leading to over cautiousness and missed opportunities, while unconscious brazenness can lead to almost certain short term disaster. It's a balancing act that normally plays out over a considerable amount of time, and even then it's tough to get right. Accelerate things by a factor of 10, and we might begin to just begin to get an idea as to how much more difficult that balancing act will be within the present context. I think I understand both sides of this highly charged issue. An algo change is not an overnight venture (unless it is stop-gap, cut and paste, and, as we know, that Digibyte is not), but the urgency felt by many is also well worth noting – the rate at which cryptocurrencies are evolving is increasing exponentially and I too share the worry that it will come too late. There's nothing like a great idea ahead of its time that gets beaten out by someone else who is quicker to bring it to market. Nothing like a good product that's too late! I mentioned earlier how an average of only 10.66 blocks were being found per hour over the last 24 hours, and 19.25 per hour over the last 5 days, and I'm not exactly sure what that is due to, but if it has anything to do with a dwindling of the widely distributed user base and an increase in ASIC mining, that would not be a good sign for time being on DGB's side (either way, there's obviously something wrong with that output for a 60 second coin, and very disconcerting considering that mining is the foundation that everything else rests on at this time . . . perhaps it's another completely unrelated issue to further complicate things . . .). In any event, along with 'getting it right', I think we can probably also all agree that time is of the essence and there's no time to waste! We've got a supersonic balancing act on our hands and all eyes are on the Dev team. If English bookmakers were to place bets on this, I'd bet that the bet would be: “can they do it in time?” (Just to add a bit of "big game" pressure to the mix while we're at it. ) I want to wish the Dev team the best of luck with this very stressful 24/7 project you have on your hands, and to also thank you for keeping us up-to-date and in-the-loop. Rest assured that you can count on my/our help with testing and whatever else I/we might be able to do. Here's to getting a great job done in time! As of 2014-06-02 21:03:42 Last 24 hours: only 410 blocks found of a supposed 1440 theoretical programed 60 second blocks.
Previous 24 hours: only 280 blocks found
Previous 24 hours: only 166 blocks foundWhat would be the explanation for this? In order to be competitive with ASIS resistant coins (and the few still competitive scrypt coins), on a relative profitability basis, actually mining the coin, DGB would have to be valued at around 120 satoshi, and that, of course, is based on a 60 second block find basic assumption. With blocks being found at only around 1/4 of the rate of what should be the case . . . well, I'll let you all do the math. Blockchain Explorer: http://explorer.cryptopoolmining.com/chain/DigiByteSomething is very wrong with this picture. This information is coming from 1 mining pool. Not the entire DigiByte network. Add: And what I said here still stands:
...and other obvious issues like the nagging question as to how the Dev team could possibly be unaware of the blocks solved issue . . . and if they were, well, I don't know if that's not even worse ...
And you say you're booting up a laptop? And you really want to consider my postings "trolling"? It's late over here, and I'm headed to bed. Again, I've got to respect you for dealing with my comments and opinions head on. Best regards |
|
|
|
So many people don't understand this, it blows my mind. Gpus can only go so far, even with x11/qrk and the like.
Think of GPUs as though they are people. That's your user base. The argument behind ASIC resistant is not to fight efficiency, rather it is to support a widely distributed user base. Everyone has a computer (well, not everyone, but you get the idea) and they are multitasking (that's why "everyone" has one). ASICs are specialized, and, by definition, your average man on the street will never have one (they can't do other practical things that the average man wants), and that means that you say goodbye to universal adoption, as in KYSGB. Efficiency is good, but not at the cost of your widely distributed user base, that is if you want to survive. Why do you think so much emphasis is being given to CPU mining by those energy efficient algos out there? Would it be that they're looking to be even more inclusive still? And the anonymity bit, I mean, get off it. That will never fly long term. What regulator is going to allow that? And why wouldn't you want your name stamped on your money anyway? It's mine, and I want it to say so - especially if it's robbed so I can get it back (but that's another issue, for another day - we've got to take baby steps, one at a time ). |
|
|
|
Brick & mortar refers to a physical retail store not a specific company or chain. We are in LA working on a deal to get DigiByte accepted in 1000+ physical retail stores.
Holy Moly! This is a game changer. 1000+ physical retail stores? Many people have said this before on this thread: with what? With a $583,662 market cap? (Based on theoretical coin supply and not the real coin supply after factoring in the block discovery issue.) http://coinmarketcap.com/ Who's going to fund those purchases and with what? And that's not to mention a totally erratic confirm that can last up to more than an hour. Does that sound like something read to go primetime? Give me a break. Got to get the coin right first. What do you think drives adoption? There is not a block discovery issue. You are only pulling data from one mining pool. It blows my mind that you continue to insist upon saying the same thing in the face of the facts, and those facts come from your own blockchain posted on your own web. http://explorer.cryptopoolmining.com/chain/DigiByte The numbers are the numbers, and the math is the math, but to insist on the same lame response is nothing short of idiotic. Block discovery is WAY OFF from what it should be, and that's based on very elementary comparative calculations using the DGB blockchain data, time, and coin specs. I'm really starting to wonder about you. Think about it this way: I’ve got a relatively new apartment building whose construction was faulty and now has a leaky roof and cracking walls and I’m telling you that it can easily be converted into a luxury hotel. Are you selling that? That's what it's increasingly looking like. In the crypto biz, if you don’t have a widely distributed user base, you ain’t got diddly squat, and anything else you want to talk about is pie in the sky (i.e. a sham). But let’s say, for argument’s sake, that there is someone who either dearly needs a huge tax write-off or has his/her head up you know what, and you get the money from those supposed investors. What do think we should really expect from people who don’t know how to make their coin work correctly, much less keep their website up-to-date? When Daddy Warbucks runs out of pump money, look out below (IMVHO). So far today, there has been an approximate $124,000 of USD equivalent volume on MintPal and $40,000 on Cryptsy and it's showing all the signs of a parabolic pattern with a volume spike that’s more often than not associated with a blow off top. The pattern is currently in a “second/last chance to sell phase”. The pattern targets well below 30, and quickly. However, that’s not to say that is a guaranteed outcome. There’s still a chance, however small it might be, that DGB could just as quickly run to 400 turning that volume spike into one of the most powerful breakout patterns imaginable, eventually targeting 2000 satoshi within a month. That's what Daddy Warbucks is hoping for, but he's going to need a lot of suckers (again IMVHO). That’s the technical side of things. Everyone must make their own decision, regarding both the technicals AND the fundamentals. BTW, the only thing I will commend you on is leaving my posts intact and allowing plurality of opinion so people can inform themselves as best they can and then make the best decision they can on their own and for themselves. |
|
|
|
Brick & mortar refers to a physical retail store not a specific company or chain. We are in LA working on a deal to get DigiByte accepted in 1000+ physical retail stores.
Holy Moly! This is a game changer. 1000+ physical retail stores? Many people have said this before on this thread: with what? With a $583,662 market cap? (Based on theoretical coin supply and not the real coin supply after factoring in the block discovery issue.) http://coinmarketcap.com/ Who's going to fund those purchases and with what? And that's not to mention a totally erratic confirm that can last up to more than an hour. Does that sound like something read to go primetime? Give me a break. Got to get the coin right first. |
|
|
|
By the way, confirmations now with increased network activity take ridiculous amount of time.
It's not network activity that's causing that. It's the blockchain freezes. If you don't find a new block, there's no activity and nothing to confirm with.
. . . what is this "brick and mortar" deal that Jared said was bigger than anything bitcoin has.
Or, is it "pie in the sky"? |
|
|
|
It's interesting to see the price rise in the last couple of hours here.
Now, the team put out a message yesterday morning about good news coming - price hardly moved (+-5 SAT)
Come today, when the issue of blocks solved per hour is lower than expected, and there's 100% price rise......
Maybe I can't see the tree for the woods here, but when there's good news (yesterday), no-one pays attention, but when there's some bad news, people are flooding in to buy!
This was all a MintPal operation. Cryptsy lagged substantially, all the way, and was obviously a sympathy play, or arbitrage as they call it. This has all the characteristics of an intentional pump and I would be very careful. The base I described held after the breakout above descending resistance and a backtest. From a technical standpoint, this is very textbook, but the single exchange gunning OVERNIGHT creating a setup for an awakening US market has me very suspicious. With the algo change from scrypt to scrypt+ ( scrypt plus a couple of other algos meaning that it's still scrypt in essence) and other obvious issues like the nagging question as to how the Dev team could possibly be unaware of the blocks solved issue . . . and if they were, well, I don't know if that's not even worse - both are horrible indications long term. I'm 100% out. Sorry, I was looking for something ex-scrypt to begin with, and now with serious doubts about the long term prospects, I can't justify holding DGB. Good luck to everyone who stays. |
|
|
|
|
They say they don't want just another pump and dump coin.
|
|
|
|
Looks like the same thing is happening to:GDN 60 blocks per hour * 24 hours * 40 days since release = 57,600 theoretical blocks Actual blocks found to date = 49,402 http://cryptotrends.info/GDN/DOGEOnly 8735 blocks were actually found during the 7 day period from block 237640 found on 2014-05-27 10:50:50 to block 246375 found on 2014-06-03 10:50:58. https://dogechain.info/blocks A total of 10,080 should have been found.NAUTThis one is easy to calculate, all the necessary data is here: http://explorer.nautiluscoin.comAs of this writing: 36.3659 Age (days) * 60 * 24 = 52,366.896 blocks that should have been found by now. That's way off from the actual 20,100 figure.These coins all use DigiShield. I saw on DigiByte's thread where appbox suggested that a lower hashrate could aggravate the issue, and DOGE's being relatively less affected could corraborate that. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=408268.msg7099456#msg7099456
Whether the issue is due solely to DigiShield or some sort of DigiShield incompatibility with ASIC remains to be seen (the advent of ASIC mining occurred right in the same time frame that the issue first appeared on DGB, and given that the progressive worsening of the issue over time is in line with the correlative rise in ASIC miners during that same time, this is a probable thesis that should not be ruled out).
It would be interesting to take this analsys to other coins using DigiShield, and, for obvious reasons, to scrypt coins NOT using DigiShield, and, eventually, to non-scrypt coins (there's always the possibility that this is DigiShield independent and completely due to ASIC miners).
|
|
|
|
I had already mentioned it twice on the DigiByte thread, each time with no response from either the Devs or anyone else for that matter. Thinking that maybe I hadn't been direct enough, I posted the issue again last night in no uncertain terms, and it looks like this time it's getting a serious response, if only at least from the community - the DigiByte response from what is called an "Official DigiByte Account" in its signature line was: " This information is coming from 1 mining pool. Not the entire DigiByte network." What's even more disturbing is that when you go back in time on the DGB Blockchain, you find that this began with the implementation of DigiShield back in Februrary. Not good. All the details (other contributor's contributions as well) can be found in recent posts on their thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=408268.9620BTW, thanks for the quick explanation regarding profitability estimating using diff vs. wallet based calculations. Your logical assumptions seem very solid to me. |
|
|
|
Less inflation - me like.  Yeah, but it was this way for months? When the issue will get fixed the inflation will skyrocket. I'm checking now and it takes sometimes 5 minutes to confirm transaction from exchange to my wallet? That's wrong..
I'm curious. With DBG stuck on block 131993 for over an hour and a half now, I started looking at the block chain and I noticed that it's been taking progressively longer to find blocks, with only an average of 10.66 blocks found per hour over the last 24 hours.
Only an average of 19.25 blocks found per hour over the last 5 days?
I've quickly searched a bit, but I haven't found anything on this. Forgive me if I've missed it.
Add: 131994 was just found - just under 2 hours between blocks!
And it's not like it has anything to do with high diff values: I went back into the blockchain looking for similar "freezes" and you can find them all over the place with low, average and high diff values. It looks completely random.http://explorer.cryptopoolmining.com/chain/DigiByte |
|
|
|
Check the data for the whole network. Not just one mining pool.
This is whole network data. current block: 132,795 DGB released days 142 * 1440(24*60) = 204480 I haven't checked the data myself but you have to factor in the multipools attacks from a while ago. They caused a lot of blocks to be mined very slowly and would've totally thrown the total coins minted out of balance. Also, remember that the minting of coins isn't actually balanced by the system, only the difficulty factor. You need to check the data yourself. If you look at the blockchain, you'll see that the issue began with the implementation of DigiShield, and has nothing to do with the multipool attacks. Block discovery was perfectly in line with DGB coding until Feb. 22, 2014. Take a look at the blockchain up to that date and divide by the number of days that DGB had been in existence. http://explorer.cryptopoolmining.com/chain/DigiByteThe issue began back then and has progressively gotten worse. |
|
|
|
Check the data for the whole network. Not just one mining pool.
This is whole network data. current block: 132,795 DGB released days 142 * 1440(24*60) = 204480 Wow! Another nice way of looking at it. Only a half a billion coins' difference!  Or just under half of what's actually been mined. ASIC will solve that. LOL |
|
|
|
As of 2014-06-02 21:03:42 Last 24 hours: only 410 blocks found of a supposed 1440 theoretical programed 60 second blocks.
Previous 24 hours: only 280 blocks found
Previous 24 hours: only 166 blocks foundWhat would be the explanation for this? In order to be competitive with ASIS resistant coins (and the few still competitive scrypt coins), on a relative profitability basis, actually mining the coin, DGB would have to be valued at around 120 satoshi, and that, of course, is based on a 60 second block find basic assumption. With blocks being found at only around 1/4 of the rate of what should be the case . . . well, I'll let you all do the math. Blockchain Explorer: http://explorer.cryptopoolmining.com/chain/DigiByteSomething is very wrong with this picture. This information is coming from 1 mining pool. Not the entire DigiByte network. DigiSheild in low hashrate have some issues. http://digibyte.dgbpool.com/?page=statistics&action=blocks132732 Confirmed MC 03/06 06:45:02 132351 Confirmed abclpr 02/06 06:39:45 Previous 24 hours: ONLY 400 Blocks. Hope the next version fix that. Check the data for the whole network. Not just one mining pool. . . . unless there'e only one functional mining pool.  The data corresponds perfectly well with the DGB wallet as well. http://explorer.cryptopoolmining.com/chain/DigiByteTaken from DGB's Home Page http://www.digibyte.co/ |
|
|
|
As of 2014-06-02 21:03:42 Last 24 hours: only 410 blocks found of a supposed 1440 theoretical programed 60 second blocks.
Previous 24 hours: only 280 blocks found
Previous 24 hours: only 166 blocks foundWhat would be the explanation for this? In order to be competitive with ASIS resistant coins (and the few still competitive scrypt coins), on a relative profitability basis, actually mining the coin, DGB would have to be valued at around 120 satoshi, and that, of course, is based on a 60 second block find basic assumption. With blocks being found at only around 1/4 of the rate of what should be the case . . . well, I'll let you all do the math. Blockchain Explorer: http://explorer.cryptopoolmining.com/chain/DigiByteSomething is very wrong with this picture. |
|
|
|
@fredeq Took a look at UTC, and like you said, current profitability is way down, and the network hashrate is only about 8 Mh/s (if my rough estimate is correct). Still haven't had time to look at JPC more than take a quick look at its [ANN] page, but it looks intriguing.  Quick question for you. I'm sure you've seen it often since you're into following these things up close. I've only 'noticed' it before (or at least I think this is the same thing) when real payouts have not matched expected payouts - I've chalked it up to other possible factors like inefficiency or outright pool skimming. However, yesterday, on DGB the issue was so obviously a network issue that I delved into it and discovered something very strange. DBG was stuck on block 131993 for over an hour and a half, and I started looking at the block chain and I noticed that it had been taking progressively longer to find blocks, with only an average of 10.66 blocks found per hour over the previous 24 hours and only an average of 19.25 blocks found per hour over the previous 5 days. That's extremely strange for a coin that's designed for 60 second rewards (60 blocks found per hour). As far as I can see, when going back and comparing when slowdowns occur, there is no correlation with difficulty what-so-ever. As far as I can see, the coin seems to get 'stuck' at random intervals. http://explorer.cryptopoolmining.com/chain/DigiByte11,066,400 theoretical total coins per day = 461,100 total coins per hour = ~153.7 coins per hour at 1 MH/s or ~3688 coins a day, exactly what is reported as "Est Rewards" on What To Mine. At 10.66 blocks per hour those totals fall to 1,966,130 coins day = 81,922 hour = ~27.3 per hour at 1 MH/s or ~655 coins a day (~1183 a day at 19.25 blocks per hour). That sure smashes whatever profitability there might have been to begin with! And, as I said to start, I'm not sure this is an isolated case. Do you know or have any ideas about what causes this to happen? Add: Last 24 hours since block 191994 (purposely leaving the 1 hour and 45 minutes from 191993 to 191994 out of the mix): 8.25 blocks found per hour, for a total of 1,521,630 coins at an average of 63,401.25 coins an hour yielding 21.1 coins per each 1 MH/s of hashing power, or 507.16 coins on a daily, 24 hour basis. HORRIBLE.BTW, I'm also wondering why CoinWarz and MiningPool.co both report around 1/6th the network hashrate that What To Mine reports (if those were correct, then a 1 MH/s miner would be getting around 24,600 DGB on a daily basis if the theoretical 60 x 24 x 7685 was actually happening). How are these discrepancies explained? Independent of the actual network hashrate, there's no arguing the fact that only 198 blocks were found in the last 24 hours on a coin that is coded to deliver 1440. What explanation might there be for that? |
|
|
|
Reasonable expectations are an extremely important part of, if not perhaps even the most important aspect of, any endeavor, but equally so is the window of opportunity for its implementation. Fear of making a mistake can paralyze projects, leading to over cautiousness and missed opportunities, while unconscious brazenness can lead to almost certain short term disaster. It's a balancing act that normally plays out over a considerable amount of time, and even then it's tough to get right. Accelerate things by a factor of 10, and we might begin to just begin to get an idea as to how much more difficult that balancing act will be within the present context. I think I understand both sides of this highly charged issue. An algo change is not an overnight venture (unless it is stop-gap, cut and paste, and, as we know, that Digibyte is not), but the urgency felt by many is also well worth noting – the rate at which cryptocurrencies are evolving is increasing exponentially and I too share the worry that it will come too late. There's nothing like a great idea ahead of its time that gets beaten out by someone else who is quicker to bring it to market. Nothing like a good product that's too late! I mentioned earlier how an average of only 10.66 blocks were being found per hour over the last 24 hours, and 19.25 per hour over the last 5 days, and I'm not exactly sure what that is due to, but if it has anything to do with a dwindling of the widely distributed user base and an increase in ASIC mining, that would not be a good sign for time being on DGB's side (either way, there's obviously something wrong with that output for a 60 second coin, and very disconcerting considering that mining is the foundation that everything else rests on at this time . . . perhaps it's another completely unrelated issue to further complicate things . . .). In any event, along with 'getting it right', I think we can probably also all agree that time is of the essence and there's no time to waste! We've got a supersonic balancing act on our hands and all eyes are on the Dev team. If English bookmakers were to place bets on this, I'd bet that the bet would be: “can they do it in time?” (Just to add a bit of "big game" pressure to the mix while we're at it. ) I want to wish the Dev team the best of luck with this very stressful 24/7 project you have on your hands, and to also thank you for keeping us up-to-date and in-the-loop. Rest assured that you can count on my/our help with testing and whatever else I/we might be able to do. Here's to getting a great job done in time! |
|
|
|
34-37 support holding, for now anyway. 34 low on Mintpal and 37 on Cryptsy. 40 is a key short term level to watch on Mintpal. Big battle going on at support (was hoping for the opposite). Let's see if it holds in the face of this selling pressure. A break below would leave us praying for a bear trap. |
|
|
|
|
I'm curious. With DBG stuck on block 131993 for over an hour and a half now, I started looking at the block chain and I noticed that it's been taking progressively longer to find blocks, with only an average of 10.66 blocks found per hour over the last 24 hours.
Only an average of 19.25 blocks found per hour over the last 5 days?
I've quickly searched a bit, but I haven't found anything on this. Forgive me if I've missed it.
Add: 131994 was just found - just under 2 hours between blocks!
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
