Are the fees hard coded to 0.0001? [txid] => 4706bff6e8c540727554005a3a72623a7f4fb0aacfdd4cb596880ecb629633f8
[category] => send
[amount] => -0.0307975
[fee] => -0.0001
|
|
|
|
Nice to know there is still interest in this currency. The Kittehcoin pool is always has some miners and the difficulty is very reasonable at it's current price.  Note, I'll be moving the pool over to some new hardware in the next few weeks. Also there will be a new control panel being deployed that will allow you to set a custom difficulty. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I don't know how that PoS stuff works exactly. I personally find it odd that the PoS block was accepted as the longest chain over a PoW block. And it was a nice 80+ PPC block too.. bummer.
|
|
|
|
hello. block 164724 . my rig shows found, but site says orphan. block explorer shows pools public address as finder. will i get credit for this/  Hmm, not sure what happened there. I'll reset that block so it re-checks it. |
|
|
|
I am having trouble locating where this byte prefix "0x18" is used and defined in the Bitcoin sorce code. This is what I found so far: src/main.cpp#L80const string strMessageMagic = "Bitcoin Signed Message:\n"; And where that gets used when signing/verifying a message: src/rpcmisc.cpp#L367 and src/wallet/rpcwallet.cpp#L496CHashWriter ss(SER_GETHASH, 0);
ss << strMessageMagic;
ss << strMessage;
But I do not see anything indicating that that byte prefix is being utilized. Okay, figured it out with the help of this source code comment: bitcoinj/core/Utils.java#L510. It's the message length for the line. 0x18 being decimal value 24, for 24 characters in this "Bitcoin Signed Message:\n". 0x19 being decimal value 25, for 25 characters in this "Zetacoin Signed Message:\n". Where is this officially documented? |
|
|
|
I am having trouble locating where this byte prefix "0x18" is used and defined in the Bitcoin sorce code. This is what I found so far: src/main.cpp#L80const string strMessageMagic = "Bitcoin Signed Message:\n"; And where that gets used when signing/verifying a message: src/rpcmisc.cpp#L367 and src/wallet/rpcwallet.cpp#L496CHashWriter ss(SER_GETHASH, 0);
ss << strMessageMagic;
ss << strMessage;
But I do not see anything indicating that that byte prefix is being utilized. |
|
|
|
This look interesting and it's in Java  The code seems well written and easy to follow. I'll study see if I can contribute to it in anyway. Perhaps I'll start by adding in a new coin. Thank you for making it open source. |
|
|
|
Solo mining pool concept is perfect for xaucoin as from block 42000 approx xaucoin miners will only be mining for transaction fees PoW SHA-256 | Bitcoin Based Economic Model | Rare Commodity | Gold Asset | Store of Value 2.1 Million Total Coin Base (Approx) | 10 x More Rare than Bitcoin xaucoin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=974426.0have sent you a personal message tuaris as we also have some bounties for faucets Thanks will be adding it soon. |
|
|
|
I've put together some PHP code that is able to sign and verify signed message. It is available on GitHub https://github.com/tuaris/CryptoCurrencyPHP. The code is pretty simple to follow and it works fine for Bitcoin. I just can't understand why it fails to generate a valid signature for Altcoins and also fails to verify a signed message from an Altcoin client. I've made sure to set the correct address version when hashing/encoding the public key. Besides that, it there anything different that is done when signing and verifying messages for other "address versions"? There are an address version and a private key version. Did you change both or just the address? Nice tool! I'm checking it now. I could be wrong, but I think for signing and verifying the private key prefix does not come into effect. Also, I just found this page: https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib/blob/master/src/networks.js It looks like there are indeed some more items that need to be adjusted. I just can't wrap my head around the difference in the "messagePrefix", why bitcoin uses x18 and the others use x19. I'll continue to research this but any tips would be helpful. Thanks. |
|
|
|
I've put together some PHP code that is able to sign and verify signed message. It is available on GitHub https://github.com/tuaris/CryptoCurrencyPHP. The code is pretty simple to follow and it works fine for Bitcoin. I just can't understand why it fails to generate a valid signature for Altcoins and also fails to verify a signed message from an Altcoin client. I've made sure to set the correct address version when hashing/encoding the public key. Besides that, is there anything different that is done when signing and verifying messages for other "address versions"? Edit: Problem solved. This now works properly for any crypto currency |
|
|
|
So dead for a long time!
it seems that way. a little odd, the coin never really caught on and was not a pump and dump coin...no premine. seems a little weird how it has gotten abandoned or orphaned. Odd isn't it? The premined coins catch on and the fair ones don't. Yet miners start bitching and calling out death threats when a coin launches with premine. |
|
|
|
Teacoin.net is down. The domain name expired. I suspect support or use of this coin is in dire straits. Does anyone know anything more? If it is dead/dying, I think creating a very specific eco-system devoted to this coin will help revive it. But interest must be there to help keep it afloat.
I think creating a game that generates Teacoin would be a good idea. Not a faucet... an actual game. Tea Farmer. This game generates TEA based on how well you perform your tasks, how fast you complete them, how much tea you grow, process, and sell, etc. The more time and effort you put into the game and the better you do, the more TEA you earn. Real reward for virtual work!
If we can find tea vendors, sellers, buyers, shops, etc. willing to accept TEA based on it's own intrinsic monetary value (which would have to be decided), that is the eco-system we are attempting to create. Why else have a coin named after a beverage, when it can't be used to buy that very thing it's named after? Seems kinda silly to me. And why monetize Teacoin based on another coin, such as Bitcoin/Litecoin/Doge, etc.? People only hold onto it, in hopes it will be worth more in another currency, than actually trade it to buy it's namesake!
And, finally, I think another value incentive is to change the coin from PoW to PoS. Keep the stake value reasonable... like 5 TEA reward per 100 TEA held in the wallet, every 10-15 days. I'm really enjoying holding 6900 Hobonickels (HBN), because I get rewarded more HBN just for holding them! Like a bank account.
But having TEA is meaningless if they have no value to anyone or anywhere. We must be able to USE Teacoin, not just HAVE them. I'm assuming it's speculative value is pretty much non-existent, if it can only be traded for Doge now. Let's give TEA a new lease on life, shall we?
To our health!
Not sure what to do about the pool for TeaCoin. Is the block reward bug fix going to get merged from the latest Zetacoin? |
|
|
|
Is it possible to submit a block without using an JSON-RPC call to bitcoind? Is that what bitcoin/node.py is for? Reason I ask is because I constantly experience an issue that is similar to this: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/2889 |
|
|
|
Block looks good, it hasn't matured yet. The UNB block chain appears to be moving rather slowly so it could be a while. 09/03/2015 10:16:06 Checking: 1B9crKJxBR6S71MCqw52Tarh3jUgjsQQnW
09/03/2015 10:16:06 Valid address: 1B9crKJxBR6S71MCqw52Tarh3jUgjsQQnW
09/03/2015 10:16:06 Getting Pending Blocks...
09/03/2015 10:16:06 Checking Block: 0000000000000056d84591b785d675bb69a0c8f2e90a116eae603f41937e07a7
09/03/2015 10:16:06 Block 0000000000000056d84591b785d675bb69a0c8f2e90a116eae603f41937e07a7 (#44513): 14 Conformations, Block #44513 Is Not Mature Yet. 117 Conformations remain.
09/03/2015 10:16:06
|
|
|
|
The statistics are still severely behind by about 24 hours. I expect that it will take a least the rest of the day for things to catch up. If not, then a dump/restore is in my future. The specific issue is that there was a miner who kept submitting shares with diff 1. It's taking a long time to clean that up. DELETE FROM shares WHERE upstream_result = 0;
Query OK, 35349253 rows affected (21 hours 39 min 30.95 sec)
The code update was successfully deployed this morning. It will bring increased stability, performance, and lays the ground work for preventing issues like the one above. The main event is the introduction of the new "custom difficulty" feature. Custom DifficultyAllows the option of using the default VARDIFF setting or a STATIC difficulty of your choosing for each of your workers to maximize your luck. You can adjust this setting on the fly and the new difficulty will automatically get pushed out to your miner within a few seconds. In most cases, you don't even need to restart your client. This feature is currently active and the control panel to manage it will be made available sometime today. |
|
|
|
The pools aren't updating? I've been mining on the unbreakable pool for over 30 minutes and it's still saying there's no miners?
The front end database replication is lagging. This won't effect your rewards. I have some code updates being pushed out in the next 24 hours that will help with the recent database performance issues and add some new custom difficulty control features. |
|
|
|
believe it to be Block #161963 shows securepayment peercoin pool found on blockchain, my rig shows found, but not displayed
Okay, found it. Array
(
[amount] => 0
[confirmations] => 137
[blockhash] => 000000000000000734b55ad1ea2c99af30dba315ac7042a5807968a3449bf208
[blockindex] => 0
[txid] => ec38d7ca904d1af8678d439b93661e4f95212bbc748596b90a9fb1bbc3fa36e7
[time] => 1425493604
[details] => Array
(
[0] => Array
(
[account] =>
[category] => immature
[amount] => 79.83
)
)
) Also see why it didn't get logged. I'm in the process of fixing that issue. (the pools are getting popular and the MySQL database is having trouble keeping up) I'll manually update the database so you get properly credited for the block. |
|
|
|
rig shows a block found 7-8 hours ago, but not listed on secure solo site. total shows, but not in list. stats ?
Interesting, which pool? |
|
|
|
Hi Everyone! My account was hacked, but I have full controll over it now. Fortunately, it did not involved GoldReserve in any way, but that spineless hacker posted some virus in my name at other forums. 8(
 I have seen this https://archive.today/Q9FJMI hope this does not affect the reliability and durability XGR. Yeah, lots of scum out there. Password only protection is a flawed form of security. Everything now needs 2 factor authentications. It's really sad. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
