6.14.1 win64, full resync, modal overlay (i guess): - Progress and Progress increase per hour remain 0.00% all thru the process except the very last kblocks - Estimated time left until synced 3 years and 4 weeks  - same non-linear scale in progress bar below https://i.imgur.com/qrsJCOi.pngP.S. but the biggest disappointment for me is the same superlong start, as if i'm launching a mission to mars instead of opening a wallet Digibyte has almost 4.5 million blocks, you can't compare it to the speed of other coins that have less blocks, if you keep your coins on Poloniex and Bittrex you don't have to worry about the long sync times. if you keep your coins on Poloniex and Bittrex, you're a fool FTFY |
|
|
|
|
Don't fucking deploy Segregated Witness. Problem solved.
It's already causing more issues than it's worth. It's a technical piece of shit.
|
|
|
|
I understand why jared is pro segwit, it's good for "marketing", but from a technical standpoint, its absolutely terrible.
Not going to disagree with anything else that's been said but the dev team is not 'pro segwit'. Was not my intent to imply that about the whole team. |
|
|
|
community thoughts on activation of segwit on DigiByte chain and consensus of community. All sensible thinkers welcome to comment. https://t.me/DigiByteCoincompletely unnecessary. DGB does not need a new scaling solution, it already has the best on chain scaling of any coin right now and can handle far more transactions on chain than any other coin + Segwit. I agree. No need for immediate activation. The fact that it's there for the future, if and when needed, is good enough for now. It's never a good idea to unnecessarily complicate things, and if it's needed for marketing purposes, "Segwit Ready" or "Segwit Capable" or something similar should get the job done, as well as implicitly saying that it isn't necessary at this time. Win-Win. :-) I'm inclined to agree but I think activation should happen in the region of 65% of miners. Here are some of the reasons stated by Jared on the subject. Digi Tater, [20.03.17 14:16] it fixes the transaction malleability issue Digi Tater, [20.03.17 14:17] it allows for roughly 4mb worth of transactions in the same space as 1 mb takes now Digi Tater, [20.03.17 14:17] most importantly it allows for a future of on chain "smart" contracts on UTXO based blockchains Digi Tater, [20.03.17 14:17] so from an applications standpoint it opens many doors Digi Tater, [20.03.17 14:18] It actually makes the most sense to combine both approaches, Segwit + increased block sizes Only for segwit transactions Best case scenario 4MB, and segwit saves space by removing the signature data to save KB in block space. This technically makes the coins spendable by anyone. Segwit in itself does not do this. It's the byproduct of a malleability fix. It finally opened the door for a much need hard fork for Bitcoin, yes. It's so bad people will now FINALLY hard fork the block size for bitcon; something Digibyte has already successfully done. For litecoin, not so many doors. It's already falied twice. No need to bring the failure and drama to Digibyte. Again, Segwit is so overly complex it actually does not make sense. I understand why jared is pro segwit, it's good for "marketing", but from a technical standpoint, its absolutely terrible. Please read this with an open mind http://www.wallstreettechnologist.com/2016/12/03/core-segwit-you-need-to-read-this/ |
|
|
|
community thoughts on activation of segwit on DigiByte chain and consensus of community. All sensible thinkers welcome to comment. https://t.me/DigiByteCoincompletely unnecessary. DGB does not need a new scaling solution, it already has the best on chain scaling of any coin right now and can handle far more transactions on chain than any other coin, and any other coin + Segwit. |
|
|
|
What are the three best things about Digibyte?
Security - real decentralization with Multi-Algo support and Digi-Shield Speed - very fast transactions Commited development team cheap as fuck best potential for ROI of nearly any alt on poloniex. it works, fast supports a trillion lot of TPS. more than will be needed for a long time. Furthermore, it's already programmed to increase with time. No scaling issues here. |
|
|
|
Coming soon! #DigiByte v6.13 DigiSync! Many core wallet updates! Fast synchronization & more scalability!
DigiByte vs Bitcoin
Transaction Volume: DigiByte can handle many more transactions per second. Bitcoin can only handle 7 transactions per second. DigiByte currently can handle 280+ transactions per second. The 2015 DigiSpeed hardfork introduced changes that double the capacity of the network every two years.
you're a fucking liar. Bitcoin can handle around 3 TPS, GET IT RIGHT. Why are we still using Shi Bitcoin again? |
|
|
|
|
I also think 10 days minimum stake time is too long. Instant gratification sells.
|
|
|
|
anyone watching the cryptopia volume? It's at 150000 coins / hour
Probably fake volume. There isn't enough liquidity for movement like that without a massive price increase. If any of the coins in circulation are touched, this coin will lose whatever credibility it has left. Inflation needs to be dealt with, not current supply. |
|
|
|
The only thing I want to know is how you did not know a month ago (at the beginning of ICO) that something which takes 6 months to code was not going to be ready in a month.
6 months to code? The team has been working on this project for 2 years. Development of software causes new issues as functions are added/changed, not to mention test time. Like ALL development, hurdles are hit and they must be overcome. Argon2d has no fast-verify code and it will take between 3-6 months to get it implemented as we need to write it from scratch.
Here is where he didnt say 2-3 months, said 3-6 months.. In either case where a project was supposed to be released a month after the ico, one might think that this issue of writing this from scratch, and the non-existance of fast-verify would have been known long before we opened our wallets up. This project promised transparency, accountibility, a sense of community, and a team of dedicated developers to release a asset backed security by todays date. ANY question relating to the interests of the ico holders should be answered in a timely fashion, especially in times of failure, or witholding key information that would negatively affect the securities you sell at the weaver. You cannot have one foot into corporate and one foot out into crypto.. either both feet in or stay decentralized kids so accountibility is important here.. if it wasn't me and many others would not have invested into athe silk network ltd. Public offering via the weaver. As funds were held in escrow until release (as i read) this should not be an issue in refunding investments. I couod see a week or two or a month even, but well into next year with no certain date, with a team falling apart, and an unknown name or title for the project, in the midst of a corporate dissolution and new incorporation... is completely and absolutely unacceptable. You guys stepped up to the big boys plate, so please act like adults and the crypto geniuses you claim to be, both in coding and business. Would be appreciated. Good luck on the home stretch and take these words into serious consideration. Dontigua we were having an ICO on the development of a crypto token based system that behaves like: 1 a currency, 2 an asset. Yet they remain crypto-tokens. The team is not falling apart, we are only dealing with blowback due to a sudden delay in release. Please refrain from being the cause of a problem that doesnt really exist. As i said. Tokens. You knew at the start of the ICO it wouldn't be ready. That's all I'm saying. I still have faith, but communication and transparency is KEY. |
|
|
|
|
The only thing I want to know is how you did not know a month ago (at the beginning of ICO) that something which takes 6 months to code was not going to be ready in a month.
|
|
|
|
DGB needs to update their technology, that's the main priority, Jared talked too much too soon imo. Technology first, promotion later.  Isn't the next update to bitcoins 0.13 code base?, if devs hurry they will beat litecoin who's devs are busy working on it. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1667080.0Gulden also doing a code base update according to roadmap for next release but don't know if this is 0.13 . do you mean about this? https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte4.13Horrible decision to go with core v13. DGB doesn't need segwit, rbf, or any of that bullshit which are "solutions" to the artificially created problems of a restricted block size. It's really going to over-complicate the DGB code base to a severe degree. |
|
|
|
|
I think a big problem with this project is too many CEO's (when referring to project direction and updates on the forums.) There needs to be a single community manager to communicate with the community. Spencer, being the lead developer, nor anyone else who is not the community manager, should not be coming on the forums with updates as it will (has) lead to miscommunication and (unintended) misinformation.
Everyone has a job title for a reason. They need to be allowed to focus on that specific job and not worry about what is going on here.
|
|
|
|
Monday been and gone.. still no roadmap or news...
wake up guys... give a look at the others road map. it's allways the same song for a pump then dump in your face. big partnership every time but never one come true... suspence for noob. the only winner are jumley and other jared partners (noobs pump and DGB team dump in your face) all is BS... many conferences and nothing... give all a look at the last road map and tell me what was done... and now a new road map  ? what a Good joke lolll Dont forget that the buy wall (150 or 200btc ) it's allways jareds team The community...well, the pumpers, come around every so often and cry for roadmaps, updates, and when they dont get it they complain that the dev team is just a bunch of pump and dumpers and say shit like this "wake up guys... give a look at the others road map. it's allways the same song for a pump then dump in your face. big partnership every time but never one come true... suspence for noob. the only winner are jumley and other jared partners (noobs pump and DGB team dump in your face) all is BS... many conferences and nothing... give all a look at the last road map and tell me what was done... and now a new road map Huh? what a Good joke lolll" "Monday been and gone.. still no roadmap or news..." ...so predictable, so obvious, so shameful. |
|
|
|
Is it best to split the HBN wallet into 5k HBN wallets? I have a few wallets with 20k, 10k, 15k that equal about 77,600 HBNs.
For the past few weeks I have been finding the computer I run my HBN wallet has crashed , after rebooting & loading HBN I will get wallet corruption errors.
I am able to recover the backup wallets only by using a recent capture of the blockchain, then copy-pasting the backups into the appdata folder while the wallet is syncing. The I close down HBN & reload from a shortcut with the tick -rescan & that take many hours to complete plus the re-sync.
So I am wondering if the wallet work load is messing with the computer being stable, it works fine and is still a decent computer with 4GHz CPU & 16GB of memory.
The scammer shitcoinheads at Cryptsy/ craptsy behind this coin are likely using your rig to secretly mine this or some other shitcoin. If you're intent on feeding these maggots, use 'netstat' to monitor the network connections while the client is running. You might also want to download Speedfan and check the system temps. The crashes are a good sign that your cpu is overheating. There's been a lot of people who've looked at the source code of HBN, maybe someone should take a closer look. needle in a haystack. HBN has high CPU usage even when not unlocked for staking. (usually 10% minimum.) I won't rule anything out, but I won't jump to conclusions. |
|
|
|
Great Marketing. Hopefully the price will move up It'll be tough when you have the market movers and banksters pumping shitcoin after shitcoin. Hard for legit projects like this to get going. |
|
|
|
|
Looks like bittrex forgot.
|
|
|
|
At $25.000 market cap, 5% would be only $1250. And there is no buy support to absorb even that, so the new dev couldn't just dump the coins. A new dev would be automatically committed to bet on the market to recover from where we are now.
With all due respect, I disagree. 1) I beleive any dev interested in HoboNickels should buy into the coin first to show commitment to an already well-developed coin. As you have pointed out, it is cheap enough to buy at this moment in time; 2) To give the new dev (or Tranz) 5% of the market cap i.e. 1,500,000 HBN would give the dev a massive power to mint an obscene amount; 3) To stake and mint 1,500,000 coins in a large number of blocks would raise the difficulty in favour of the dev and push the rest of us out; 4) The minting interest on 1,500,000 HBN unloaded every 10 days would depress the market if 'dumped' on a continual basis; 5) The power given to one hand to potentially be able to dump 1,500,000 HBN in a short period of time is something that I don't want hanging over my head - once bitten twice shy. Someone dumped a large amount of HBN in the last few months for HoboNickels to be where it is now; 5) We all already contribute to HoboNickels whether it be through our contributions to this column, or maintaining the network by staking with our computers - we need to recognise that valuable input. We have a strong community that any dev worth his salt should be happy to have behind him in support. As far as increasing the 250 HBN threshold, I disagree with that too. To increase it tenfold, as has been suggested, could compromise one of HoboNickel's claims to fame - a low coin supply which aids value (supply and demand). In my opinion Tranz has steered HoboNickels in the right direction. I don't think we need to change anything too much. I believe there is good cause to believe that the price of HoboNickels will increase soon enough given a modicum of care and attention. I agree with you. The coin's specifications are perfectly fine. If anything, increase the blocktime to 1-2 minutes and adjust the rewards to compensate. The problem lies within the codebase and blockchain bloat. We honestly need a blockchain swap at this point. We need to swap to the latest hybrid codebase and go from there. We do not need to introduce a premine for dev work. The coin is cheap enough as it is. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
