It is kind of weird that once we made GRouPcoin and DeVCoin the constant complaints about bitcoin NOT constantly creating coins seems to have died out.

Maybe all the people who claimed that it is economically vital to keep creating coins forever were just bullshitting?

It would be useful to have them around to re-interate all their arguments, explaining that coins such as GRouPcoin and DeVCoin that keep creating coins forever are far superior to the intrinsically flawed "limited number ever" model exemplified by bitcoin...

-MarkM-

It is not a cap, it is a limit on the total any one 64 bit integer variable is allowed to have, so that we do not blow out the limits of what can be stored in 64 bits. That is all.

-MarkM-

90% of the coins pumped out go to support development of free open source stuff.

As long as that stuff ends up worth something, surely value is being created?

-MarkM-

dvcstable01.dvcnode.org and dvcstable02.dvcnode.org

But that old software might not take hostnames, only raw IP addresses: 198.154.60.183 and 198.154.60.61

-MarkM-

The link given earlier for registering at bitparking's merged mine pool looks fine to me now maybe it just was down before or something.

I merged mine using p2pool too but same thing, no way to divide up all the altcoins, so normal folk using it only see it as in effect a zero fee bitcoin pool.

So bitparking's merged mining pool is still the best option for people who don't want to or lack the skills to set up a full merged mining panoply of their own.

-MarkM-

Thanks. I listed all three addresses in the email, plus anyway the ship-to address is the same one WHOIS shows for my domains knotwork.com and knotwork.net and anyone trying to change the shipping address would need the keys to one of those addresses so it should be safe enough.

-MarkM-

I sent 22.016 bitcoin, 256 * 0.086, for 256 chips. I do not know how to force them to come from any one address though, I thought in general the daemon just picks random coins from the wallet, regardless of what address those coins happen to be "in" ?

{
        "account" : "",
        "address" : "1JWBFSmxeAMxK8W2GdpBPMKgc3z71yVkFa",
        "category" : "send",
        "amount" : -22.01600000,
        "fee" : 0.00000000,
        "confirmations" : 2,
        "blockhash" : "00000000000000abe85a7cda4a278e62a9b501950266e22297c7005d1720e335",
        "blockindex" : 8,
        "blocktime" : 1369370477,
        "txid" : "6af8b013c06a552b453156d0dbe61475de5f7405dd8c7708bea650a1a96a5942",
        "time" : 1369370438,
        "timereceived" : 1369370438
}

EDIT: Using blockchain.info, it looks as if maybe the three addresses it sent from were 18zQ3hh2HakeBCbmW7SRPYD1ScURycpx3a, 1GumnfaYT9bn7EmFodZqg4f5JVF8UB3D4e and 1L5P6D8hNuXmdmgx6s6u39phT2sMMNArfZ

-MarkM-

I'll kick in the 143,713 Unthinkingbit's proposal would have you sending to me in my capacity as a file administrator. (That is, don't bother sending me the 143,713.)

-MarkM-

No, the source code indicates no individual variable containing a count of coins can count up to more than 21 billion.

Nowhere does the code add up all coins ever minted, it only adds up wallet, "account" and address totals. So as long as no individual wallet, "account" or address has more than 21 billion there could be billions of times that many coins total. It would just eventually need larger integers at some point if someone did try to add up all the coins in the entire blockchain.

Search for "subsidy" in main.cpp, it just does 50,000 coins per block forever, there is no halving and there is no block at which it stops minting.

-MarkM-

Weird, but what indicates it has anything to do with Ubuntu?

Surely others are running it on Ubuntu, it is the most popular Linux lately isn't it?

Could it be that the guy has not got his receiver files in place so it is trying forever to get files or something?

I hadn't heard that Ubuntu had any libraries that use notably more CPU than their equivalents on other distros or anything like that.

So it could be something about the particular guy's setup not really an Ubuntu problem at all?

-MarkM-

I even tried going back over previous whole page of posts be see nothing about Ubuntu at all.

I use Fedora, I understood that the normal makefile.unix that coins all come with was one that works as is in Ubunto without needing customising like I have to do in Fedora. So I thought they all work easier on Ubuntu than they do for me.

But without explicit version and error message and all that even an Ubuntu expert isn't likely be be able to do much. Unless somehow they come across a problem themselves, whereupon hopefully they'd fix it themselves and submit a pull request with the fix.

-MarkM-

The maximum number of coins in any on e wallet or address or in general any arithmetic/total, but coins will keep gettign created, 50,000 per block, forever. So some century or other maybe larger than 64 bit integers will have to start being use if more than 21 billion ever need to be added up in any one arithmetic operation.

-MarkM-

GeistGeld has been humming along on 15 second blocks for what, years now?

So far the biggest problem was been the huge amount of RAM needed, more even than I0Coin.

I guess in a couple of years we will find out whether the RAM usage is due to the sheer number of blocks.

Or, we could update GeistGeld's code in case maybe it has a memory leak, as I0Coin is thought to have.

-MarkM-

Chugging along for years with no exchange seemed to work really well for bitcoin.

BBQcoin also had a whole year or so in which anyone who wanted to could pick up coins very easily, even with a CPU.

So maybe just the opposite of al lthis pump and dump stuff... Let a coin just quietly chug along month after month year after year, slowly accumulating more and more and more people who have some.

Look at namecoin for example, everyone who wants some can have some free alongside their bitcoins, os over time anyone who was at all interested will have some by now, yet still even now newbies can mine at mmpool (bitcparking's merged mining pool) and pick some up, plus hey they also get some devcoins and ixcoins.

The longer that goes on, the more people there will be who have some ,and eventually a kind of crtical mss might be reached where enough people start saying hmm y'know maybe it would be interesting to actually do something with these...

Halving of block rewards might help too, some coins won't be giving out as many coins per block in a few more years. Maybe interest in some of them will pick up when they go through that, as those people who did bother to collect some will realise other people won't be collecting so many so easily in future...

-MarkM-

There is nothing elegant about shitloads of orphans.

It is trivial to fix, just set starting difficulty reasonable.

But none of them do that because their entire point no matter what they say is proven by their failure to set difficulty appropriately: they are all about premine aka instamine aka pump and dump, that is their entire purpose and once dumped another equally scammy orphan-fest follows.

-MarkM-

The main problem is for securing the blockchain you need something hard to compute but easy for any node to verify you computed it correctly.

So really for folding etc it makes more sense for them simply to be given all the coins in the first block then use them to pay people to fold, or do it like devcoin where they get most of the mined coins and, again, they simply then use the coins to reward folding.

The folding itself is useless for securing blockchains.

Basically the cosest you ould get would be solidcoin type thing where some master node(s) decide if your blocks are okay, so really there is no point relating it to a blockchain at all.

They might as well just issue people folingcoins or whatever in their own central database since only they can tell if someone folded properly so since they are the central authority anyway the insanely expensive overhead of securing a blockchain is simply a total waste of money, waste of enery etc. Blockchains are crazy-expensive, andlook at bitcoin for example everyu single coin ever created is being paid to miners for securing the chain, plus miners also get transaction fees, so basically more than 100% of all the money is the cost of securing the blockchain! It costs more to seucre the blockchain than the total number of coins ever created!

However if you can do like devcoin, use merged mining; or, just even use devcoin IF your folding and its solutions are all free opn source data and programs, I guess you would then have some coins to reward miners with.

You could just as well though create yet another pump and dump coin and give 90% of the coins to the folding authority, and let them use them to pay people who actually insist on being paid (lets remember a lot of volunteers only do it because they are NOT paid so they could even lose volunteers if they paid...)

The important thing to note though is the whole folding stuff is useless for blockchain securing.

All it amounts to is having a central authority that says yes or no to your blocks, and they can do that regardless of folding or no folding. So entangling the two together is kind of pointless, they might as well just give out bitcoins or litecoins or whatevercoins to people instead of folding points, without mucking with the blockchain stuff at all. Or probably much cheaper, pay people with some currency that does not have the massive overhead of a blockchain assocoated with it thus is much much less expensive to run.

-MarkM-

You could also try IRC, channel #devcoin on Freenode IRC

But even on IRC it is people from all over the world on different sleep schedules so typically it is like someone posts a question and 8 or 12 hours or something later when someone wakes up who actually has an answer to the question you get a reply. (Which by then you're maybe asleep so don't even see the reply until you wake up another 8 or 12 hours later...)

Also IRC doesn't like lots of lines of text, as normally one hopes not to have to csroll through pages of backscroll on waking up, one expects to just see a few concise questions and maybe concise answers to them upon waking up and checking the channel.

-MarkM-

Check out http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=cpu_mining

Eventually maybe people will perfect their scripts to a point where they only need human intervention when some other human screws around with them (killing their workers maybe or whatever) but it will take a lot of work on your triggers/scripts to get to that point, so far most people are still finding they need to manually intervene with at least some of their workers each day to get them back "on script", so it pretty much is a kind of "check a human is there".

The fact that the workers can interfere with each other (like you could load up a guy with armour and weapons and go killing "enemy" workers who are within the range of levels in which player versus player combat is allowed, for example) kind of means that players who do bother to manually take part have methods by which they can in effect penalise other players who do rely entirely on scripts and do not check regularly that all their workers are still "on script" working successfully and productively.

So it is a system that pretty much lets players make up their own problems for other players to solve.

Since you could probably run hundreds of workers from just one fairly old single-CPU machine, there is not likely to be much advantage to supercomputers nor even to botnets for a long time; and by the time people get their triggers and scripts to such a highly developed capability chances are other players will also have much better strategies worked out for interfering with scripted workers who are not being monitored and put back on course by a human regularly. So it is looking pretty good so far.

-MarkM-

mmpool.bitparking.com maybe?

-MarkM-

Ahh, you are changing the icons the wx-widgets GUI uses?

I didn't think anyone could even compile the wxwidgets version anymore.

Is that what your new release for windows is based on, the wxwidgets GUI?

Actually I don't see corresponding directories in the old-devcoind-git either.

-MarkM-