amazing success,  GL Iconomi looking forward to exchanges. |
|
|
|
Any recent developments on this? I like the concept!
Why is market in maintenance on Bittrex? I got 3.5 btc sat here to invest!
you will have to wait until transition from eth to lisk codebase is tested and reviewed. testing is ongoing and can be followed thru shift slack, you are free to join us. it has been going pretty well. http://www.shiftnrg.org/slack-auto-invitation |
|
|
|
what is the chance of success for elastic?
It is somewhat hard to say, at this point. As I see it, the biggest stumbling block is what to do about difficulty calculation for PoW, particularly given the "pseudo-FAA" problem(s). Right now, if you follow the implications of this combination of problems, the end result plays out (assuming all actors as rational) such that the only ones who could feasibly contribute to work shares are those with both significant general cpu resources, and significant sha hash-rate capabilities. (As they would have incentive to saturate the embedded PoW chain and keep difficulty maxed out by pushing through "hashing only trapdoor work" for themselves, to push other, smaller miners out of the competition.) This is a problem for a couple of reasons: First, it will consolidate and centralize work resources around those with specialized hashing hardware. Second, it will drive the cost of computation up significantly (both due to the smaller pool of contributors leading to decreased supply of work, and due to the cost added by the energy consumption in the hashing required to contribute) such that it will not be able to be nearly cost effective relative to things like AWS/Goog. Considering the "developer contortion" hoops that you have to jump through to even compute a job on XEL, relative to the ease of pushing work out to traditional cloud providers, and with the combined "extra costs," the relative difference becomes immense. The value proposition of XEL then becomes highly questionable. (…) From a non-technical standpoint, I think a very important question is what we believe Elastics workload is going to look like. Do we expect a few jobs a day, or one per week? I think this is crucial to the qustion whether or not Elastic is going to be able to survive long term and how to fill voids in the workload. I guess there is a significant difference between filling small voids lasting for a few minutes, or filling days worth of nothingness. What I thought about was basically creating some kind of Elastic mining pool. If there are no jobs to be done, the power of those mining XEL will be used to mine other currencies via Elastic; this way, the miners are incentivised to keep mining on Elastic, but they still get rewarded. I realize that this idea has a lot of flaws, especially if the voids that need to be filled get too big/lomg, because at some point, miners won't bother to mine through Elastic. Additionally, if Elastic gets big enough, this could have serious impact on the currencies mined that way(I.e. the the difficulty fluctuations could be fowarded to those currencies). There may be tons of other flaws in that idea as well. I feel like this is a problem that can only partially solved technically and needs a "social" solution, i.e. Elastic being popular could possibly lessen the implications. Ok, now, this is me thinking even waaaaaaaaay outside the box: What if there are not one, but two seperate blockchains? One is dedicated to moving XEL around, so that people can send and receive XEL. This blockchain has a normal difficulty retarget rhythm, to keep a steady blocktime. All in all, it works like a traditional Blockchain. When it comes to solving jobs, you wouldn't really need a steady blocktime, would you? And even if you would, you'd have it by the first blockchain, keeping the system alive, giving it a "pulse". This would allow that the second blockchain has no set blocktime, thus wouldn't need constant difficulty retargeting, and in case of no jobs incoming, the second blockchain could go in "hibernation mode" until a job gets in… Feel free to tell me to shut up. Seriously, if I'm bothering you guys, say the word and I'll stop posting in this thread. as non technical as I am, I understand some of your suggestions. Please keep posting. EK, any comments on this please ! interesting points, how does for expl. nicehash handles it? is there algorithm that can be integrated into xel to handle this kind of scenarios? @ttookk keep posting |
|
|
|
This Xaurum is one of the best coins beside bitcoin, eth and maybe one or two more. The only coin with real value. I see it - its potential, every step is hard, but the team is still here, the coin is just breaking thru, really slow. Best project, it's like a monetary system from the begining, only better. I can't wait to see hundreds of kgs of goldbars...
I would like to thank you dev for the great idea, thanks to the Bittrex exchange, too, for adding Xaurum. Good Luck.
i love xaurum  guys retweet @poloniex --> https://twitter.com/dandidanillo/status/780312413698723840 |
|
|
|
Bittrex listing As you have seen, we've been listed on the Bittrex exchange . The process of review took quite a lot of time, however Xaurum is now one of the rare coins, that has successfully completed the Bittrex Compliance Review, which marks an imporant milestone in Xaurum's online verification process. Of course this does not mean that our team will stop trying to get Xaurum listed on other exchanges. i saw that, congrats on successful addition. great job. Legit project! |
|
|
|
Paypal Processing and Jewels Shop ONLINE  We've finished integrating the paypal jewels processor as well as the items shop to purchase cosmetics, boosts and more! We will of course be releasing new items in the jewels shop in the coming weeks. These items can then be claimed inside the game and used as needed. sweet  party time. Cannabanana are you ready?  good job |
|
|
|
any information when jwl will be traded on bittrex?
If you want them to list something you gotta tweet em to let them know. Then drop a link here so the rest of us can retweet it. https://twitter.com/richielaIf there's enough demand they'll respond. Or they could use some of the ICO funds to pay for a Bittrex listing if they think it's worthwhile. Either way, it definitely deserves a better home than YoBit. sure, here you go retweet: https://twitter.com/dandidanillo/status/779403283207258112 |
|
|
|
|
any information when jwl will be traded on bittrex?
|
|
|
|
hagie, starting with that now!
great, i have the same error. one more thing EK, i have bunch of strange lines on my logs. Retargetting: Had POW 1 should be 30, scaling by factor 1.25
old diff was: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
new diff is : ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
Cleaning up unconfirmed tx, that got invalid ...
Retargetting: Had POW 1 should be 30, scaling by factor 1.25
old diff was: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
new diff is : ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
Cleaning up unconfirmed tx, that got invalid ...
Retargetting: Had POW 1 should be 30, scaling by factor 1.25
old diff was: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
new diff is : ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
Cleaning up unconfirmed tx, that got invalid ...
Retargetting: Had POW 1 should be 30, scaling by factor 1.25
old diff was: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
new diff is : ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
Cleaning up unconfirmed tx, that got invalid ...
Retargetting: Had POW 1 should be 30, scaling by factor 1.25
old diff was: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
new diff is : ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
Cleaning up unconfirmed tx, that got invalid ...
Retargetting: Had POW 1 should be 30, scaling by factor 1.25
old diff was: ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
new diff is : ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
Cleaning up unconfirmed tx, that got invalid ...
im pretty noobish but shouldnt there be diff POW hash posted instead of one character "f"? |
|
|
|
i just logged in at XEL-9HQ9-BXCV-TARZ-BRDNA and checked. forging seems OK.
well i think me or you forked, and are forging in own chain. try moving some coins around pls. I think that you're on the forked chain because I started up my node about hour ago (with testnet peers from config) and my node downloaded blockchain from testnet peers. So we assume that if we downloaded blockchain from @EK testnet peers we are on a right fork. Please try to stop your node, delete blockchain and start it again (since blockchain is young you should download it in two minutes) and see if you are on @EK fork again. If not, I'm on the wrong chain and node which forging right now also. Give me a result. Thanks. .  one interesting error i saw before rebuilding:
2016-09-16 20:43:39 FINE: Did not accept peer's blocks, back to our own fork
2016-09-16 20:55:37 FINE: Blacklisting 52.57.31.137 because of: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Invalid transaction signature for transaction {"senderPublicKey":"d9d5c57971eefb085e3abaf7a5a4a6cdb8185f30105583cdb09ad8f61886ec65","attachment":{"xel_per_pow":1000000000,"percentage_pow_fund":60,"bountyLimit":10,"title":"Test work","deadline":250,"version.WorkCreation":1},"subtype":0,"amountNQT":22200000000,"signature":"e068f6133f9a49b253e7a21f120981c2146957f84415daa374d29b3191b9cf06663c5b48fa3b3ec00a5e36e45f88097bc18f7ad1a3a43e6d3a1db4bcba897423","feeNQT":100000000,"ecBlockHeight":786,"type":3,"deadline":1440,"version":1,"timestamp":88742073,"ecBlockId":"12297225825676462765"}
nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Invalid transaction signature for transaction {"senderPublicKey":"d9d5c57971eefb085e3abaf7a5a4a6cdb8185f30105583cdb09ad8f61886ec65","attachment":{"xel_per_pow":1000000000,"percentage_pow_fund":60,"bountyLimit":10,"title":"Test work","deadline":250,"version.WorkCreation":1},"subtype":0,"amountNQT":22200000000,"signature":"e068f6133f9a49b253e7a21f120981c2146957f84415daa374d29b3191b9cf06663c5b48fa3b3ec00a5e36e45f88097bc18f7ad1a3a43e6d3a1db4bcba897423","feeNQT":100000000,"ecBlockHeight":786,"type":3,"deadline":1440,"version":1,"timestamp":88742073,"ecBlockId":"12297225825676462765"}
at nxt.TransactionImpl.parseTransaction(TransactionImpl.java:816)
at nxt.BlockImpl.parseBlock(BlockImpl.java:288)
at nxt.BlockchainProcessorImpl$GetNextBlocks.call(BlockchainProcessorImpl.java:707)
at nxt.BlockchainProcessorImpl$GetNextBlocks.call(BlockchainProcessorImpl.java:628)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:266)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745) |
|
|
|
i just logged in at XEL-9HQ9-BXCV-TARZ-BRDNA and checked. forging seems OK.
well i think me or you forked, and are forging in own chain. try moving some coins around pls. |
|
|
|
Long diff retargeting times? Did you see this @EK? At new version when XEL-9HQ9-BXCV-TARZ-BRDNA was forging with his big stack he was forging couple blocks per min. When XEL-9HQ9-BXCV-TARZ-BRDNA disappeared XEL-K3TA-MQNB-4NHD-5GE8U is the only one forging and he have trouble to get block in 5 min. Anything changes in that matter with new versions of NXT?
thats me forging, i believe ImI stopped forging blocks after he submitted work to network.. this is what my logs are showing. 2016-09-16 17:36:45 FINE: Failed to parse block: {"totalFeeNQT":100000000,"previousBlockHash":"8eacf387575ba59f4208bb56cd8d60466cf1c26d9847c59a67043a0a1ab3b9bb","payloadLength":570,"previousBlock":"11503701254688976014","totalAmountNQT":22200000000,"generationSignature":"8547a8ad19f4bac3e3f4ec3a9ba9d26ea9f0711d01e50d1a95ce2018823384cc","generatorPublicKey":"15d039ed644401856cf294e475cc9b9ed1d8abbf8393435f89f4ab484faa0e2e","payloadHash":"eabb9817fee110eaf52b145c147ce3c089f961a6afded643a6acb188001bc19c","blockSignature":"01982fcf547532eb8aa897e88d2e297bd5dd9a2fb436fcc2002f37fe445afe0bfb28bb498a9a5f41fcbb841f6292a8e7f6a01cea4fb19bb3556f2504d52ff42e","transactions":[{"senderPublicKey":"d9d5c57971eefb085e3abaf7a5a4a6cdb8185f30105583cdb09ad8f61886ec65","attachment":{"xel_per_pow":1000000000,"percentage_pow_fund":60,"bountyLimit":10,"title":"Test work","deadline":250,"version.WorkCreation":1},"subtype":0,"amountNQT":22200000000,"signature":"e068f6133f9a49b253e7a21f120981c2146957f84415daa374d29b3191b9cf06663c5b48fa3b3ec00a5e36e45f88097bc18f7ad1a3a43e6d3a1db4bcba897423","feeNQT":100000000,"ecBlockHeight":786,"type":3,"deadline":1440,"version":1,"timestamp":88742073,"ecBlockId":"12297225825676462765"}],"version":1,"timestamp":88742090}
2016-09-16 17:36:45 FINE: Failed to parse block: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Invalid transaction signature for transaction {"senderPublicKey":"d9d5c57971eefb085e3abaf7a5a4a6cdb8185f30105583cdb09ad8f61886ec65","attachment":{"xel_per_pow":1000000000,"percentage_pow_fund":60,"bountyLimit":10,"title":"Test work","deadline":250,"version.WorkCreation":1},"subtype":0,"amountNQT":22200000000,"signature":"e068f6133f9a49b253e7a21f120981c2146957f84415daa374d29b3191b9cf06663c5b48fa3b3ec00a5e36e45f88097bc18f7ad1a3a43e6d3a1db4bcba897423","feeNQT":100000000,"ecBlockHeight":786,"type":3,"deadline":1440,"version":1,"timestamp":88742073,"ecBlockId":"12297225825676462765"}
nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Invalid transaction signature for transaction {"senderPublicKey":"d9d5c57971eefb085e3abaf7a5a4a6cdb8185f30105583cdb09ad8f61886ec65","attachment":{"xel_per_pow":1000000000,"percentage_pow_fund":60,"bountyLimit":10,"title":"Test work","deadline":250,"version.WorkCreation":1},"subtype":0,"amountNQT":22200000000,"signature":"e068f6133f9a49b253e7a21f120981c2146957f84415daa374d29b3191b9cf06663c5b48fa3b3ec00a5e36e45f88097bc18f7ad1a3a43e6d3a1db4bcba897423","feeNQT":100000000,"ecBlockHeight":786,"type":3,"deadline":1440,"version":1,"timestamp":88742073,"ecBlockId":"12297225825676462765"}
at nxt.TransactionImpl.parseTransaction(TransactionImpl.java:816)
at nxt.BlockImpl.parseBlock(BlockImpl.java:288)
at nxt.BlockchainProcessorImpl$GetNextBlocks.call(BlockchainProcessorImpl.java:707)
at nxt.BlockchainProcessorImpl$GetNextBlocks.call(BlockchainProcessorImpl.java:628)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:266)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
2016-09-16 17:36:45 FINE: Blacklisting 52.57.31.137 because of: nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Invalid transaction signature for transaction {"senderPublicKey":"d9d5c57971eefb085e3abaf7a5a4a6cdb8185f30105583cdb09ad8f61886ec65","attachment":{"xel_per_pow":1000000000,"percentage_pow_fund":60,"bountyLimit":10,"title":"Test work","deadline":250,"version.WorkCreation":1},"subtype":0,"amountNQT":22200000000,"signature":"e068f6133f9a49b253e7a21f120981c2146957f84415daa374d29b3191b9cf06663c5b48fa3b3ec00a5e36e45f88097bc18f7ad1a3a43e6d3a1db4bcba897423","feeNQT":100000000,"ecBlockHeight":786,"type":3,"deadline":1440,"version":1,"timestamp":88742073,"ecBlockId":"12297225825676462765"}
nxt.NxtException$NotValidException: Invalid transaction signature for transaction {"senderPublicKey":"d9d5c57971eefb085e3abaf7a5a4a6cdb8185f30105583cdb09ad8f61886ec65","attachment":{"xel_per_pow":1000000000,"percentage_pow_fund":60,"bountyLimit":10,"title":"Test work","deadline":250,"version.WorkCreation":1},"subtype":0,"amountNQT":22200000000,"signature":"e068f6133f9a49b253e7a21f120981c2146957f84415daa374d29b3191b9cf06663c5b48fa3b3ec00a5e36e45f88097bc18f7ad1a3a43e6d3a1db4bcba897423","feeNQT":100000000,"ecBlockHeight":786,"type":3,"deadline":1440,"version":1,"timestamp":88742073,"ecBlockId":"12297225825676462765"}
|
|
|
|
@EK i am rolling with new 0.3.1 update, sweet saw that many still didn't update.. so if you guys can upgrade asap would be cool! now one bug from last time, i still cant register account name or submit work process.. i am getting error: Could not validate unsigned bytes returned by the server.
tried to sign it manually and getting another error: Not more than one of [transactionBytes, transactionJSON] can be specified
any idea what could be wrong? @ImI can i have some coins so i can forge, thanks. |
|
|
|
yes, i have to wait  I'll come up with something for you shortly. hi @EK, i was looking at latest build and i am getting bunch of errors when compiling, if you can link me to missing deps i can make autoinstall script.. for lazy ppl like me  https://github.com/OrdinaryDude/elastic-new-portYeah, the latest build (new port repository) will not work properly right now ... its work in progress and will likely be finished not before tomorrow evening or the day after. But you can scroll through the code, to see how work is managed differently ( chain fork proof  ). I have tried adding two batch scripts for windows in the old repository.
They successfully detect the java JRE and JDK, but while the run.bat works fine, the compile.bat is still struggling to work. I am not a windows user, so this is sort of a trial and error ... I'll try again soon! But if you see whats wrong, feel free to correct me.Edit: Windows scripts (in old repo) work now!cool thanks, sry for rushing to install new port.. was being super excited about this project keep up the good work @EK |
|
|
|
yes, i have to wait I'll come up with something for you shortly. hi @EK, i was looking at latest build and i am getting bunch of errors when compiling, if you can link me to missing deps i can make autoinstall script.. for lazy ppl like me https://github.com/OrdinaryDude/elastic-new-port |
|
|
|
|
great news, development is moving fast on this one. i like it.
|
|
|
|
great news for lisk, market reacting. nice |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
