Sorry mate, I'm not at all driven by greed. I understand why you'd think that is the case, but in this instance, you're dead wrong. I'm here for plenty of reasons, and making money sits very low on that list.
Your coding for the nvidia mining community is much appreciated, and there's no point taking this conversation any further.
Cheers!  

As someone using from both forks at different times, it's been funny to experience that plenty of times, the made in France is actually faster as reported poolside, for the same compilation/execution environment, and as long as launched with the same intensity (I hear that in France, they are more conservative about default intensities)...

Tpruvot has done - a F^#@#%ng lot - more than copy from others.
From extending miner functionality (api stuff, backup pool support, conditional mining) to adding new algorithms (some public, some private), he's done quite a lot for this community. No wonder that it gets hard to have any meaningful collaboration going between developers.  

Edit: There will be no followup from me, I'm done with the pissing contest.

<- That guy volunteered for the PT translation, atm just waiting for the multi-language backend to be ready.

IIRC, Leo is now at nfactor 16, so:
-a scrypt-jane:16

Edit: And you will probably need to tweak those launch parameters, as is customary across nfactor changes.

@Grim, ah, thanks for that. I had only skimmed through the thread on nvidia and the OP there is a bit misleading. I thought this was only affecting Windows users. I see Linux suffers as well, though not as badly.

Or ... you can switch to Linux?

This is a lot of block-talk for a cryptocurrency without blocks.   

As I expressed my thoughts about the collateral sizing, I feel I should do the same for skynodes vs no-skynodes:
Generally speaking, I'm against any significant change to the roadmap, particularly if dropping a feature that was initially advertised.
That said, and as I stated the other day already, I don't think that Skynodes (or lack thereof) is of major importance to Genesys. In my mind, what is of major importance, is the Confront platform and the Arena game. In any case, my vote goes to keeping the Skynodes.

What I ask of you guys, is that you do not jump into making changes without hearing out the community first. Some people are always on notice and will be quick to express an opinion (as I just did), others might not even be aware that Skynodes are now active and that you've asked for community feedback on this. Seeing as there is no particular urgency to change things, I ask that you give it some time for people to think about it and voice their thoughts, perhaps a week or two? You could run a poll during this time.

As far as the FUD claims and the general aggression on the thread recently:
I understand how some things can be brought up to be FUD and simply aim to manipulate the markets. I know the atmosphere in this forum is not particularly positive, as most of the forum community has already been scammed at least once, and there's all sorts of deception going on.

Still, one should keep a clear head when responding to any claims, good or bad. This was a Trojan report by some newbie user, which I personally confirmed with VirusTotal. It's not the usual bitcoin-miner hit, or I would have dismissed it fairly quick. I was/am not aware of the same (false?) report affecting other masternode wallets, but granted, I have not tested many others at all.
In conclusion, I did not have the time to investigate any further, but I believe that it should be the responsibility of all of us here, to take such a claim with proportional severity - if we value Genesys and expect it to attract new/more users.

I remain positive and I hope that the tone here will improve.
Cheers.

GSYTeam: I just ran the standard win wallet against virustotal, and I get a hit for that same trojan mentioned above.
The zip file does not get a hit, only if scanning the executable. Seeing as you posted about this publicly, I have some faith that this is a false alarm. In any case, it obviously hurts community confidence - and rightly so - and you should look into it right away to figure out why this is happening.

I sincerely hope this turns out to be nothing, but in the meantime, use extreme caution folks!

IIRC, all recent forks support the extranonce, and there's nothing that you need to do on the miner settings, it is automatically enabled.
If you're using some older version from this (cudaminer) thread, perhaps you should head over to one of these forks instead:

ccminer by tpruvot <- I recommend this one.
ccminer by sp_ <- Sometimes faster but also less stable.

Cheers!

I was seeing that yesterday as well, for other Skynodes on the list, but my own has remained online all throughout.
I haven't needed to hit "Start" beyond the first time launching the Skynode. Sorry, no clues here as to what could be the issue.

As stated, I just offered to do a small OTC for anyone looking to reach enough balance for a Skynode.
I'm definitely not looking to sell any significant amount with the going market rate. So there you go, we're both unwilling to meet the current order books 

Ah! All fine then, you just wanted millionaire returns 

The way that Skynode returns are displayed, it shows the total input value that is locked in each stake, but in effect your reward as a Skynode is just 0.30 GSY per stake.

If you close the wallet and open it up again, all those big juicy stake transactions will now show the correct value of 0.30 GSY each. That's a minor cosmetic issue that I've also seen in every other wallet with some Masternode feature.

^{[emphasis mine]}

I've been quietly following this thread, but I see that perhaps I missed something very important along the way.
Where can this invention of yours be seen? Was there some whitepaper draft or something posted that I missed?

Edit: Btw, just expressed my vote. I really like the (ion) name.

Following a good few hours running a Skynode, everything looks to be working fine here.
The only issue is a cosmetic one of no importance, which is that there are some leftover branding/terms from the source from where the masternode code was forked. My main addy continues to stake as it normally does, and I also see a bunch of Skynode rewards dripping into the collateral addy.

I noticed that the Skynode network on and off displays a bunch of other nodes without a valid IP or Onion address. These automatically get dropped from the network after a brief while, as is expected since they can't really be reached. Check your configuration folks.

If anyone is missing a small amount to run a Skynode and does not want to deal with Yobit, go ahead and PM me for an OTC deal.
Small amounts only, I'm not looking to trade/part with any noteworthy sum

@cyberspacemonkey:
The payments should be going to a new address, which was created when you were setting up the Skynode. Once a few of these are confirmed, make sure that you have coin control enabled, then hit "send" and "inputs". You should see at least 2 addresses there. One is your original address, the other one is your Skynode address. Check if you have coins on both.

Cheers!

@skidog,

That is really low hashrate, is that for the Xeon i7, or the Xeon x3 1231 v3? This latter one has AES-NI, so it should run much faster. Perhaps that older Xeon i7 does not have AES-NI? That's really the key factor that most influences hashrate, other than cache, which sets the optimal number of threads.

If everything else is ok, you might just need to unlock your wallet (staking mode is sufficient).
The other possibility, is that you did not send the exact 2000 GSY balance to your Skynode address, or the transfer simply did not reach enough confirmations yet. Perhaps wait a while, make sure you have over 10 or 20 confirmations (I think 10 was enough, not sure now), then restart the wallet.

I'm not particularly experienced with Masternode as well, so I'm afraid this is all I can think of. Good Luck.

Following Skynode activation, you'll get 0.2 GSY per stake IIRC. You should have better staking performance if you split the 1000 coins into many inputs of smaller sizes (I estimate you'd have multiple stakes per day like so, after building up some weight). Or, you can get yourself another 1000 GSY, so you reach enough (2K) to run a Skynode...

It's hard to tell what strategy pays out the most, since the Skynodes are just being introduced. If there are eventually a gazillion Skynodes running (and there's certainly enough coins to allow for plenty of them), then the rewards are relatively small for each one.

Given the current GSY value, I suppose that anyone willing to run a Skynode can probably afford one.
Perhaps no longer so once we start reaching out to a wider audience.

I am testing, yes. I'm running a Skynode and staking wallet.
I'm getting 0.50 GSY (regular stake) and 0.30 GSY (Skynode) rewards.
Looking good  

Upgrade time peeps!!!

_{Edit: Some Skynode rewards are 0.29999999 instead of 0.30 GSY. No clue why, perhaps different rounding for clients in different OS platforms, or gaming vs non-gaming wallets, I dunno. Nothing wrong here, just being anal about my reporting above.} 

@GSYTeam:

I'm already seeing some Skynode rewards coming in, so it looks like the Skynodes are enabled slightly ahead of time?
I'm just bringing this up in case this causes any trouble with the current mix of old and new clients on the network. I'm not worried for any forks or anything, as I am not moving coins around, but anyhow, figured it was worth mentioning.

Cheers!