Why the fuck are you complaining for a GUI wallet. There is an online wallet which is available. You can't wait 10 minutes to dump your coins or wtf?
Are you really that thick? I don't care for dumping, I just wanted to solomine but haven't had time to figure out how to set it up. It's 2016 and this is a long time project yet it's missing a basic feature; ease of use. Now everyone's mining on nova and will probably transfer to exchanges as soon as possible without ever bothering with the wallet. |
|
|
|
|
Another new gen coin launched without even a proper user friendly wallet. I mean would that be that hard to delay launch until there's at least a proper GUI wallet?
|
|
|
|
|
I still don't fully understand masternode requirements. Yesterday I managed to move 5 masternodes that were running locally on different machines to one machine and they all received rewards from 8-10 blocks each in the last 1000 blocks.
But, I can't for the life of me start new masternodes. And the only difference between the config files are the masternodeprivkeys.
|
|
|
|
read the OP, there are 20+ addnodes at the top. we are setting up a dnsseed, so at some point in the future, they will not be necessary
Do I put these addnodes in ~/Darknet/darknet.conf ? Yes. At first I also disliked the theme but it grew on me. An in-wallet option for more themes would be nice though. |
|
|
|
at least not free, no
I donated for the nicehash optimized miner even though it doesn't worth it to me at all (I thought it had keccak optimizations but it didn't) because I don't have such a huge farm that a few percentages here and there would make a difference and I'll be quite disappointed if we won't even get Decred support. Tpruvot already posted decred support on a fork of his miner. I looked everywhere but I can't find it. |
|
|
|
at least not free, no
I donated for the nicehash optimized miner even though it doesn't worth it to me at all (I thought it had keccak optimizations but it didn't) because I don't have such a huge farm that a few percentages here and there would make a difference and I'll be quite disappointed if we won't even get Decred support. |
|
|
|
|
It seems the block explorer got stuck.
|
|
|
|
|
So, I take it there won't be Decred support by tomorrow then sp_?
|
|
|
|
OK, I'm reading the discussion here about how to balance the rewards between masternodes and staking, and I think I might be able to help by taking a step back and injecting some game theory into the equation.
Parking coins in a masternode or in a staking wallet is essentially exactly the same cost. With the exception of MN setup, you are "paying" the right to move/spend coins in order for a reward. So from an economic perspective, if a holder of DNET is going to pay the same procedural cost and get a larger reward from one method or the other, the network will move quickly towards being overweight on that method.
In formulating a balanced proposal, then, we need to remove this as a factor: because the *direct* cost of parking coins is exactly the same, staking should (in the long run) yield exactly the same reward as running a masternode.
This is only half of the equation though. Masternodes do deserve additional rewards over staking, but this can't come from an overt greater percentage; it has to come commensurate with the additional costs a MN incurs:
- MNs have to park coins with 10k DNET while stakers can earn stake on any amount of granularity
- MNs (not technically, but practically) have higher hosting and setup costs for the sake of security
Those costs are negligible now when the DNET network is young. As/if it grows, they will increase. So rewards/benefits for these additional costs should be criteria that are negligible now, but would grow to significance along with the network, as opposed to a static staking reward whose attractiveness is wholly dependent on the external marketplace value of DNET. This makes it so that there's an in-built, long-term incentive on the horizon.
With all this, I suggest the following additional benefits for DNET masternodes, over simple staking nodes:
- the receipt of all transaction fees (tx fees appearing in a staked block could simply be burned)
- voting rights, including proposals on increasing tx fee assessment at regular long-term intervals (every 100k blocks depending on network growth?)
The important part of this solution is that it puts to rest the attempt to predictively pull a ratio out of our asses that balance masternodes and staking. Economists try to do this all the time and fail hard. So cut it out of the equation.
I'll figure out how to formulate a formal network proposal from this depending on feedback in this thread.
I agree with pretty much everything. I'm not sure about the significance of transaction fees though and while I'm biased as I don't particularily like staking and have a few masternodes myself, I think masternodes should be rewarded noticeably more than stakers. Unless of course you can set up as many masternodes on one computer as you please (which is not a good idea). |
|
|
|
mnbudget show
Doesn't seem to work anymore, it returns nothing. |
|
|
|
Lots of alts on their way up, unfortunately not UTC... What a waste of a good opportunity to be a contender...could have so easily been you, with a bit more management and guidance...  yeah - UTC used to be about the same as VTC - now VTC is 100 times one UTC in price. Incidentally - I transferred a few coins around yesterday and speed of 6 confs was interesting. UTC was approx 60 seconds - as was ETH (1-2 mins) DOGE was 6-10 mins PPC was about 20-25 mins DEM - 2-3 mins BTC was about 50 - 90 mins So our poor old UTC is still functional and competitive on speed at least. You probably just happen to send coins during a flash mining period, but the vast majority of times it takes hours to get 6 confirmations (see my previous post). And as much as I dislike Eth, it's pretty fast with its ~17 second block time. Also, if it takes 50-90 mins for a bitcoin transaction to comfirm (3 transactions) you're either unlucky or you're not paying enough in fees (which is your fault) which is again, not representative. It's a shame that this coin is slowly decaying due to such a stupid mistake that is the broken difficulty retarget. What's more stupid is that there isn't even a plan on fixing it - even though it should be somewhat easy to fix for people even remotely familiar with coin development - or so I heard. If you hold any meaningful amount of UTC, I'd suggest spamming the devs to wake them up or organizing a takeover. Full disclosure, I don't hold any meaningful amount even though I got a fair amount by only mining in flash mining periods but once I really loved this coin so I find it a shame to watch it slowly die. |
|
|
|
|
It's very quiet in here.
I was just wondering, why is PoS (+PoW) deemed impossible to implement for this coin?
|
|
|
|
Success breeds jealousy.
And jealousy breeds caps lock spam. |
|
|
|
While you where trolling my thread I added another 0.4% in the decred algo.
I will try to do 5% and include it in my donation miner.
How are things going, will we get decred support before launch? Hi bathrobehero.......what coin is that for plz? Thx Hey, it's Decred which will launch on Monday 12 PM CST. It uses 14 rounds of blake256 but it has a different block header. There probably won't even be stratum support right away for it but there are getwork pools already on the testnet. R9 280x and GTX 970 does 1.3 Ghs both at stock (as per cryptomining-blog) with cgminer but it would be nice to have ccminer support. |
|
|
|
While you where trolling my thread I added another 0.4% in the decred algo.
I will try to do 5% and include it in my donation miner.
How are things going, will we get decred support before launch? |
|
|
|
Is there any news on another exchange? I can't register to btcpoolexchange.
why what problem you having ? Can't register because I'm not receiving confirmation emails. Tried with multiple emails. |
|
|
|
|
Is there any news on another exchange? I can't register to btcpoolexchange.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
