I dont mind the idea of masternodes, I do think that the 500 requirement is a little low though.
For masternodes, Id like to see them qualify at around 1% of the supply. They shouldn't be too easy to get your hands on, make them rare.
If the entire supply is filled with everyone running masternodes, it kind of defeats the purpose.
I actually like the idea of masternodes being a higher priced. 1000FLY?? 2000FLY?? A higher requirement would cause more buy pressure. Vegas The compensation will need to be proportional. A successful network of Masternodes requirements should prefer servers in datacentres with dedicated IP addresses, not home/business single-ended internet connections. If your masternodes are popping off and on the network and changing addresses, this will cause more instability than without masternodes. The bar (on requirements) should be set high enough to attract quality applications for masternodes. In return, masternodes should attain equal or better returns than a regular PoS/PoSP node. The masternodes shall (if the code is written correctly), maintain fair and even distribution of the staking payouts, and blockchain health. Funny you should mention a data center would be best, as I own one , filled with the latest servers, and a private dedicated fiber optic network that can reach speeds past 1Gps upload and download, so that wont be a problem at all. Its looking more and more like this is the way to go. I think 1000 fly is the sweet spot for cost per masternode, unless you guys think it should be higher. Making the cost higher would bring more buy pressure, and make it more exclusive. Vegas But will also limit the number of MN's since there is only 200k FLY available - and not even all of that on the market! The limitation is explained by the total amount itself. 200k fly has place for 100 masternodes by 2k per masternode... I would like it a mn with 500 fly...so we could create 400 mn! but believe me...400 mn would not be the end...because, the total amount will increase with more staking and masternodes!!!!!! Steve The way I look at it, this is a low transaction coin (at the moment). If the value in the coin is Hodling  long term, and the coin is moving to PoSP, then the more staking nodes, the lower the staking rewards. So for a Masternode to be feasible (cost of running/maintaining a Masternode), you are looking at a 100:1 ratio between the number of Masternodes to staking wallets. At the moment that would not attract or suppport too many Masternodes. In the beginning of the Masternode roll out, I foresee 10 - 25 Masternodes being set up to compete for the split on the rewards of possible 200 staking wallets. In about a month or 2, half of the masternodes will realize they would make more just staking in a regular wallet, and the number of Masternodes will drop to about 5-10 in about the 3rd month. As the coin becomes more transaction based (assuming, that this will eventually happen), then we will see less of the total coin staking and the rise in the PoSP and then the network could support a 20:1 (-ish) ratio of masternodes to staking wallets. I would recommend keeping the Masternode activation high enough (1-2K FLY) to ensure a solid commitment to maintaining a reliable network of Masternodes, and enough wallets that will continue to grow the total coin base to help support a more transaction based network. The coin will maintain or increase its value if people can use the coin to trade it for something of value, otherwise, unless it is backed by FIAT or other assets, the value of this coin will dissipate with time and people will lose interest. My opinion... for what it is worth... |
|
|
|
This is an old post, but these nodes are still online and still causing problems. Also this node appears to be on the wrong chain: 99.253.130.167 - near Edmundston, NB Canada Update: I have both my nodes confirmed on the proper chain. ams1.midnightminer.net ams2.midnightminer.net We need the pool operators to please contact Keesdewit or myself ( I am volunteering to help) to confirm you are on the right chain and set up your wallets to limit the spread of orphan blocks on the p2p channel. If you have the following IP*, you are on the fork: Obsolete wallet: 54.88.159.85
176.31.53.252
81.47.172.176
*Note: I will update this post over the next few days with new IPs as they show up in the log file. Last Update: 2016-05-21 |
|
|
|
I dont mind the idea of masternodes, I do think that the 500 requirement is a little low though.
For masternodes, Id like to see them qualify at around 1% of the supply. They shouldn't be too easy to get your hands on, make them rare.
If the entire supply is filled with everyone running masternodes, it kind of defeats the purpose.
I actually like the idea of masternodes being a higher priced. 1000FLY?? 2000FLY?? A higher requirement would cause more buy pressure. Vegas The compensation will need to be proportional. A successful network of Masternodes requirements should prefer servers in datacentres with dedicated IP addresses, not home/business single-ended internet connections. If your masternodes are popping off and on the network and changing addresses, this will cause more instability than without masternodes. The bar (on requirements) should be set high enough to attract quality applications for masternodes. In return, masternodes should attain equal or better returns than a regular PoS/PoSP node. The masternodes shall (if the code is written correctly), maintain fair and even distribution of the staking payouts, and blockchain health. |
|
|
|
I know the ball is already rolling, but it is too bad that the poll had the option of voting for the feature we want through multi-selection or by a weighted order (ie. the more important features get more counts). Or it may be a better option to start a new thread dedicated to discussing the possibilities of new features. We are currently in a mess of possible features, and this is not the only forum I am reading or the only coin I am following, so I am forgetting where things are without going back and rereading 3 pages of posts. Too bad this project does not have a website at your disposal to list out the options and more details to the specifics of the choices...  (sarcasm... I think...) There could be pretty graphs based on models and actual math to show the pro and cons of each choice and their effects on the growth in coin and value. As Mattais noted, he has been asked to create a website. We all can agree, he does quality work! I r looking fwd to this! It would be a positive thing to have more positive and objective technical dialogue and input into the road map to plan(t) the next 12 months. |
|
|
|
OK, I took a look at your debug.log and it looks like your are on a forked chain, that is why your wallet is not sync'ing. receive version message: version 61402, blocks=604736, us=64.71.178.234:57021, them=99.253.130.167:61510, peer=99.253.130.167:61510
SetBestChain: new best=9d1d16864b0f18bad2587a79acbfd77296b106ee3811ba043b6ee45b387f3ac7 height=604644 trust=84358606602758990281 blocktrust=1002471594 date=07/02/16 05:35:21
ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
ResendWalletTransactions()
SetBestChain: new best=c020678abb286a76f6dd0294ba6a0e177d2ccd64f48cb8c0249d01d0836e3a52 height=604645 trust=84358667993271812045 blocktrust=61390512821764 date=07/02/16 05:35:28
ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
SetBestChain: new best=c8df45b9a928bff59f81d8c1160fa1bdc746fc8c321f44ef0dd33dd248642377 height=604646 trust=84358667994094737231 blocktrust=822925186 date=07/02/16 05:35:59
ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED Checking the block explorer the hashes do not match for blocks 604644, 604645, 604646 ... Then later, you restarted your wallet and it connected to one of the seed nodes and when checking the last 500 blocks that is when the exceptions started happening. your hash chain did not match with the seed node blockchain and therefore could not sync. Opened LevelDB successfully
LoadBlockIndex(): hashBestChain=c8df45b9a928bff59f81d8c1160fa1bdc746fc8c321f44ef0dd33dd248642377 height=604646 trust=84358667994094737231 date=07/02/16 05:35:59
LoadBlockIndex(): synchronized checkpoint 00005e5044b1a81bef73dd7fc302fe157a3537ed5188401622f17e04efb16f20
Verifying last 500 blocks at level 1
block index 9530ms
init message: Loading wallet...
nFileVersion = 2040000
Keys: 101 plaintext, 0 encrypted, 101 w/ metadata, 101 total
wallet 330ms
init message: Loading addresses...
Loaded 39 addresses from peers.dat 0ms
Secure messaging starting.
Loaded 1 addresses.
Message store directory does not exist.
smsg thread start
fLiteMode 0
nInstantXDepth 5
Darksend rounds 2
smsg-pow thread start
Anonymize AmsterdamCoin Amount 1000
mapBlockIndex.size() = 626880
nBestHeight = 604646
setKeyPool.size() = 100
mapWallet.size() = 0
mapAddressBook.size() = 1
AddLocal([2405:8a00:4001:228:2d49:a36a:6810:c56f]:61510,1)
AddLocal([2405:8a00:4001:228:48e2:3928:f08:f2ad]:61510,1)
DNS seeding disabled
upnp thread start
net thread start
addcon thread start
msghand thread start
opencon thread start
init message: Done loading
dumpaddr thread start
GUI: QObject::connect: No such signal WalletModel::balanceChanged(qint64, qint64, qint64, qint64)
GUI: QObject::connect: (receiver name: 'SendCoinsDialog')
GUI: QObject::connect: No such slot BitcoinGUI::error(QString,QString,bool)
GUI: QObject::connect: (receiver name: 'amsterdamcoin')
receive version message: version 61402, blocks=660473, us=64.71.178.234:57111, them=68.71.58.226:61510, peer=68.71.58.226:61510
Added time data, samples 2, offset +9 (+0 minutes)
No valid UPnP IGDs found
upnp thread exit
Postponing 15 reconnects
REORGANIZE
REORGANIZE: Disconnect 548 blocks; 3ed050b41f6680c88fe1ba410171230ffb7ad0f23ad3047ebf55375d0d2de079..c8df45b9a928bff59f81d8c1160fa1bdc746fc8c321f44ef0dd33dd248642377
REORGANIZE: Connect 197 blocks; 3ed050b41f6680c88fe1ba410171230ffb7ad0f23ad3047ebf55375d0d2de079..fd58496069b7baa84c79055fa98c7be81c352f26da129d5fc9e6d5d1c6757cb4
************************
EXCEPTION: St9bad_alloc
std::bad_alloc
C:\Users\Jane\Desktop\amsterdamcoin-qt.exe in ProcessMessages()
ProcessMessage(block, 436 bytes) FAILED
ResendWalletTransactions()
Successfully synced, asking for Masternode list and payment list
Postponing 16 reconnects
REORGANIZE
REORGANIZE: Disconnect 548 blocks; 3ed050b41f6680c88fe1ba410171230ffb7ad0f23ad3047ebf55375d0d2de079..c8df45b9a928bff59f81d8c1160fa1bdc746fc8c321f44ef0dd33dd248642377
REORGANIZE: Connect 197 blocks; 3ed050b41f6680c88fe1ba410171230ffb7ad0f23ad3047ebf55375d0d2de079..fd58496069b7baa84c79055fa98c7be81c352f26da129d5fc9e6d5d1c6757cb4
************************
EXCEPTION: St9bad_alloc
std::bad_alloc
C:\Users\Jane\Desktop\amsterdamcoin-qt.exe in ProcessMessages()
ProcessMessage(block, 480 bytes) FAILED
receive version message: version 61402, blocks=660498, us=64.71.178.234:57295, them=68.71.58.226:61510, peer=68.71.58.226:61510
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=a920784f06aa1a82ef57eff93a599b1b6f579d2a910d03ab1640989837c9ad35
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 1, prev=8d9477b54b031d196e3d82a704994a654460c196b5c2c40211020ec390c72e42
Postponing 17 reconnects
REORGANIZE
REORGANIZE: Disconnect 548 blocks; 3ed050b41f6680c88fe1ba410171230ffb7ad0f23ad3047ebf55375d0d2de079..c8df45b9a928bff59f81d8c1160fa1bdc746fc8c321f44ef0dd33dd248642377
REORGANIZE: Connect 197 blocks; 3ed050b41f6680c88fe1ba410171230ffb7ad0f23ad3047ebf55375d0d2de079..fd58496069b7baa84c79055fa98c7be81c352f26da129d5fc9e6d5d1c6757cb4
I will post a link to a fresh bootstrap.dat in the morning, so that you can download and put in your %appdata%/AmsterdamCoin directory (Windows) to bring your node up-to-date on the right blockchain. There are a few nodes out on the net that are persistently on the wrong chain, not sure if it is malicious or not, but I have got caught on the wrong chain twice in the past. The more wallets that are running the more stable the blockchain and the coin becomes, and will eventually negate the rogue wallets on the forked chain. NOTE: @gothikghk - I reviewed your debug.log, you can edit your post and remove the link to the debug file to be on the safe side. No need to keep the file or the link up for any length of time. |
|
|
|
after all the dmd are minted, how is the blockchain going to be secured?
transaction fees, like with bitcoin. someone smarter can add to this, but i believe the transaction fees will be sufficient enough I'm not any smarter, but this is what I know... You will still need 'miners' to create the new block, only difference is that new coins will not be minted, but the miner will collect the Tx fee. That is for PoW coins, I have not researched how a PoS node will handle this, as a PoS node is still technically a 'miner' node also, it will not be able to mint any new coins from staking once max coin is reached. I need to learn how the PoS node will collect the Tx fee, based on if it won the staking block even when there will be no staking reward. There are several different implementations of PoS coins, it will be interesting to see how the different coins will handle their network as Max Coins is reached. Need a DMD dev to explain the way this coin will operate PoW/PoS after max coin is attained. |
|
|
|
What I've noticed on Windows 7 64bit SP1 is that is uses a lot of resources while syncing.
I don't have this problem on Ubuntu 14.04
In both cases I used the QT wallet.
You point out something I noticed with several coin wallets that I use, that they don't run as efficiently in Windows as they do on Linux. I don't think it is particularly a Windows issue, I believe it is linked to the libraries used in the compiling are not Windows optimized. If anyone has some insight on this it would be greatly appreciated, so that new releases could benefit from better performance on Windows. |
|
|
|
|
For those that are having freezing problems with the wallet please post what Operating System you are using.
I am running the full wallet on Linux (Ubuntu 14.04), Windows 7, and Windows 8.1. I will load it on Windows 10 to see how it runs also.
I am also running it on Linux as a daemon.
Please supply a little more info when reporting the problem. The wallet was released back in Aug/Sep 2015. I have been running this wallet since then. The biggest issue I have is when there are large amounts of small transactions or entries in the wallet.
Updated wallet is in the works.
|
|
|
|
where bounty  ? Bounty for what in particular? |
|
|
|
It is an old coin? My wallet 478 765 shows a block
Yes, this coin was started in Aug 2015, and dev left shortly thereafter. Dukester and others are reviving the coin since it had and still has a good following. Original ANN is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1166804Now, only POS? Still PoW/PoS it is in the Title, and mining pools listed in OP. It is a Scrypt Algo. |
|
|
|
It is an old coin? My wallet 478 765 shows a block
Yes, this coin was started in Aug 2015, and dev left shortly thereafter. Dukester and others are reviving the coin since it had and still has a good following. Original ANN is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1166804 |
|
|
|
sync stuck at 604129
any idea??
My wallets still rolling along. What messages do you see in the debug.log file? |
|
|
|
Ah, instead of waiting for a response (going to sleep soon)... Here is a link to a fresh up to date bootstrap.dat: http://crypt.midnightminer.net/bootstraps/space/bootstrap-20160727.zip Quick instruction on how to your a bootstrap.dat for those that do not know: Unzip file into your %appdata%\SpaceCoin directory (Windoze) or ~/.spacecoin (linux) and start (or restart the wallet) the wallet will load the blockchain data from the bootstrap.dat file. |
|
|
|
still trying to sync. (have connections just slow) is there a bootstrap that can be downloaded?
How many connections in your wallet? The blockchain is usually good at updating at a decent pace. I can prepare bootstrap for dukester to put on the website, or I can post one here if your wallet is updating really slow. |
|
|
|
I suspect I ended up on a forked chain. Reloading blockchain from start, will see what happens.
next time just compare you last blockhash with explorer's, you'll immediately see if it forked Thank you Cptn Obvious!  But, Block Explorers do not show you PoS rejection. Only accepted blocks. It requires a little more digging than just the block explorer. well if you want to make simple things harder, i forked hundreds of times, no matter what wallet it was just 3 steps - compare blockhashes, go back along the chain binary searching forking point resync form nearest earlier backup Yep! My bad for jumping on you. Had a short fuse at that particular point in time. We need more nodes to stop the forking. |
|
|
|
I know the ball is already rolling, but it is too bad that the poll had the option of voting for the feature we want through multi-selection or by a weighted order (ie. the more important features get more counts). Or it may be a better option to start a new thread dedicated to discussing the possibilities of new features. We are currently in a mess of possible features, and this is not the only forum I am reading or the only coin I am following, so I am forgetting where things are without going back and rereading 3 pages of posts. Too bad this project does not have a website at your disposal to list out the options and more details to the specifics of the choices... (sarcasm... I think...) There could be pretty graphs based on models and actual math to show the pro and cons of each choice and their effects on the growth in coin and value. |
|
|
|
Space is doing well for the last few weeks.  Still checking with YObit support on the status of their SPACE wallet and when Deposits and Withdrawals will be going again. |
|
|
|
|
YObit for the last few days I am getting this message on Withdrawal:
Withdrawal for such currency is temporary off.
Anyone else experiencing this?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
