Sweet. Looks nice! Would be great to integrate a merchant map like that into the Guldencoin android/ios wallets. Similar to Airbitz for BTC. |
|
|
|
A few weeks ago Bittrex released some new wallet stats: https://beta.bittrex.com/Market/?MarketName=BTC-NLG&tab=distributionThis distribution page shows the 50 biggest NLG Bittrex wallets (these wallets aren't equal to Bittrex Guldencoin addresses). There's only one noticeable Bittrex wallet, and that's the No. 1 with over 7 million Guldencoins in it. Since the amount in this wallet is steady it's safe to say this wallet has nothing to do with Clevermining. Nevertheless I think it's a good thing to know what the amount of NLG is that's possible ready to dump/be sold. beta.bittrex.com gone? those distribution stats were pretty nice. Hoping they will come back. (surprised they exposed the information in the first place) |
|
|
|
Nice detective work Frais!  Here's my list of miner addresses that I keep an eye on for nlgstats (with your addition): GQye5pkLeAUfzdo5nJgF2VweiW21tPxPdz : unknown dedicated GNLDxtgtRzKewoyUP3JZxVjYG2sRn3b2pE : unknown jumper? Gazo1qWgAxtkRfapMjv6GQWJskeWTPWGkd: unknown jumper? GYcuT85n197Rfb2Jz3sPmQ65B3gsggo5tv: guldenminer GKgnBwkryzUF9HnWzHTR9A3e6r5URC3Czv: coinmine.pw GYVAwj54nP3XwzUv1QxAiRw9dYjWfmLUe7: neogulden Gf7wGAwJGDLfoHcNCRLKZqpk2EQU5ixA6c: clevermining GTumSsfv6dKUurP3va3adzWszRiUzJ6zkn: guldenpool (fee address) GNDA5MZWcm4AjLtNuEmYpgH8qsxo4vrnY8: hardcoreminers GMnaaMMV66NHmsEVVfik2tGinMQ8nVG1DA: criptoe GgiTmq7cLjChbTRb4izJVpqff31XwQR5wv: nlg.mastermining.net GfLBkzXHVggrFkaZmbR3CNmPoJ4oKi4rVE: yaamp.com |
|
|
|
|
Great work guys on Nocks! Very Awesome. Since this could be used worldwide, yeah a pull-down to switch to English would be nice.
|
|
|
|
Found this when googling for large hash scrypt pools: https://www.litecoinpool.org/pools thankfully the pools at the top mine the honest way. Continuing to bite my tongue about how we arrived at diff 9125................................. moving on.................... interesting story of bad luck / good luck today on the Guldencoin blockchain. Took neogulden pool an hour and 25 minutes to solve block 197236 with difficulty 881 Took neogulden pool less than 9 minutes to solve block 197368 with difficulty 9125 @Fuse: Nice simulator! Can you tell us how many blocks per 24 hours you get in it with no jump pool involved but just dedicated miners with a constant hash rate? I understand we shouldn't be wrapped around this 576 number.. but my curiosity is getting the best of me. |
|
|
|
My humble 2 cents on this delisting talk Believe me, I'm first in line to cut the mobster multipools off of NLG, but Bittrex currently provides some much needed liquidity for NLG.. Some examples.. litebit utilizes Bittrex to exchange NLG for BTC.. see https://explorer.guldencoin.com/#/address/GZxv6W747MWN2X2vBJJwDxdSd2NdFSrumu over 61 million NLG sent/received.. If someone buys a sandwich at subway and the store owner has decided to immediately convert to fiat to pay his rent/suppliers/employees, that has to be converted to Euro and there has to be way for him/her to do that. I'm assuming that takes place NLG->BTC->EURO for now. NLG->BTC part takes place on Bittrex? BTC->EURO via BTC/EURO exchanges? Sure down the road a liquid NLG/EUR would be fantastic. But that's probably not going to happen anytime soon. On the other hand... try to keep it delisted. Other users will be asking for listing it again. I'm not trying to be argumentative.. from my (perhaps naive) perspective there is both good and bad associated with being listed on Bittrex.. please don't take my input as anything other than trying have a discussion to develop a better understanding.. |
|
|
|
My humble 2 cents on this delisting talk Believe me, I'm first in line to cut the mobster multipools off of NLG, but Bittrex currently provides some much needed liquidity for NLG.. Some examples.. litebit utilizes Bittrex to exchange NLG for BTC.. see https://explorer.guldencoin.com/#/address/GZxv6W747MWN2X2vBJJwDxdSd2NdFSrumu over 61 million NLG sent/received.. If someone buys a sandwich at subway and the store owner has decided to immediately convert to fiat to pay his rent/suppliers/employees, that has to be converted to Euro and there has to be way for him/her to do that. I'm assuming that takes place NLG->BTC->EURO for now. NLG->BTC part takes place on Bittrex? BTC->EURO via BTC/EURO exchanges? Sure down the road a liquid NLG/EUR would be fantastic. But that's probably not going to happen anytime soon. |
|
|
|
I have some bad news, I have confirmed with a miner that used to use CM until end of last week that ROI was down when CM was not hitting Guldencoin. So Guldencoin is what make or break CM now.
Maybe suggestion of reducing block time might work but CM will always be there to get easy blocks. I don't think much can be done unless we become next Doge or litecoin so more efforts to keep going mainstream. Then a lot of dedicated miners. Another option is merged mining like Dogecoin has?
Terks CM is the matriarch of switch pool despite what he says when his pool was not hitting the chain for 2 days the other switch pools had lot less effect. This morning is back to 50% and needs NLG to survive for his business. It quite a sad situation.
Thanks for sharing your report! To be honest the report from your miner friend kind of surprised me. If you look at clever's reported profitability ( http://clevermining.com/profits) there is no dip in profitability Feb 2 through 5 when clever was not mining NLG. Did the reported BTC per MH reported on clever's profitability charts not match your friend's ROI? To talk about things besides mining Yesterday I finally got some time to listen to Rob Buerra's talk on the Krypto Kings podcast. Wow! What a great job Rob did talking about Guldencoin. Highly recommend it for those who haven't listened to it yet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fO1cqE-ZNCI |
|
|
|
Crypto in general is still very young and there will be a lot of obstacles on the road when growing up. We are experiencing one of those obstacles. For us the problem is not that its happening, but that its possible. We will not try to solve it with reason or trust, because we believe in a system that is not based on trust. So we will solve it with code. Because thats when innovation happens and how crypto will grow up.
So I have been following this coin in silence since I heard about it on the sterlingcoin ANN.
Guldencoin is in a very fortunate position that it has big enough support to withstand jump pools. These same jump pools destroyed a lot of coins into the ground as first dedicated miners left and then their weak communities gave up. Guldencoin community has a strong will which I truly believe can overcome any obstacle. I wish this was the case for Britcoin but it wasn't.
Yesterday I spoke to one of my mates about Guldencoin because I believe in this project just like most of you do and he bought some up yesterday on bittrex. Which brings me to my next point, I see plenty people wasting time crying about the Hitlers of altcoin currencies also know as jump pools. Now the only way to get nullify the effect of these devils is to grow your coin even more. More users means more purchases and more spending, higher price means more dedicated miners come and smooth out the chain. Litecoin does not have to worry about jump pools, so that coin is free of that evil that plagues the altcoin market.
Now instead of wasting time on what these parasites are doing , spend the time on promoting the coin. Don't be hesitant to promote it because it is constantly getting better and I truly believe this project will succeed even with these devils taking 45% of the coins.
These are just 2 of the many posts I just read catching up on the forum after a long day's work. Inspirational. I'm proud to be part of this community and biting my tongue pretty hard to put the back and forth between Terk behind us. Just remember guys.. slow and steady. Putting up a big 800 satoshi buy wall on bittrex tomorrow only raises the maximum difficulty clever mines NLG at and could create larger block gaps. |
|
|
|
Please let me quote two posts in which I explained this. Please read it entirely and with understanding before you reply, because only then we can have a constructive discussion. Thank you!
Terk, I've read all the text you provided as reference and I appreciate you coming into the NLG thread to speak your side of things in a calm collected manner. You are obviously a well educated person and you write very well. Unfortunately that is where my appreciation ends. I'm new to cryptocurrency, but you don't have to know much the see Clevermining and other jumping multipools are ripping off dedicated miners of altcoins by only mining low difficulty blocks. In all the texts you referenced not once did I see a rationale for why you only mine low difficulty blocks. The motivation is obvious, to make the most profit. But at whose expense? That doesn't seem to bother you morally. This is all kind of abstract so I'll try to make a real-life analogy.. it's definitely not perfect but the best I could come up with at 2:30 in the morning. Imagine instead of a dedicated NLG miner I am a coal miner. Every morning I wake up and put in an honest day's work. And at the end of the day, I get my fair share of the reward that is split between all the other dedicated workers at the site. As I'm walking home, you come by, show me you are 200x more powerful than me, and take half my earnings. Then you tell me "see those big guys over there.. you don't want them messing with you.. they are really rough, maybe they'd break your leg and would put you out of commission for a few days.. and they'd probably take all your reward.. now me.. I'm a good guy.. I only take 50% and don't mess up your legs.. and! I can protect you!.. so you become good friends with me, and I'll take care of you." So you're essentially what? the crypto-mafia? Is this wall street 2.0? multipool/jump pools add zero value to the development of cryptocurrencies. If fact they are worse than that.. they are a detriment. Instead of a community of people coming together to put their heart and soul into developing their coin with innovative new features and new applications, they are spending their resources trying to figure out how to protect their coin from mining pools like yours. Don't you get it? As you jump in and mine all the low dif blocks, the smaller dedicated miners are left to solve the hard blocks who eventually give up and try to find a new project they can work on. I'm sure you get it. You probably try and get those discouraged miners to come join you, telling them they'll make more BTC with you. To be honest, I don't even understand why you have a topic on this forum, you seem to be operating in the exact opposite direction as Satoshi intended with bitcoin's distributed architecture. I'm just thankful you weren't around when BTC was just establishing real-world value.. I bet you'd be salivating over that 2-week lock in difficulty. I usually sign "respectfully" when I am addressing someone directly but I honestly can't do it in this case. The respect instead will go to those miners who mine dedicated to the coin they believe in, especially while getting ripped off by multi-pools. Whatever their motivation, at least they are doing it the fair way. Lang leve de Guldencoin! --Mark |
|
|
|
1) Block time of >30 minutes is still too long for me, to be honest. Diff extremes seem to be like pre-digi.
2) Where did that 6GH/s come from? New dedicated miners?
1) Blocktimes seem more stable to me, with a few exceptions. 30 minute is very rare as it seems. 2) 98,9% is all from the pools: http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/I saw yesterday, when diff is at 300 level, jump miners come in temporarely and most leaving short after again. http://www.coinmine.pw/poolinfo.php?coinid=109 More analysis would have to be done, but I'm not sure if I would classify coinmine.pw as a traditional jump multipool.. jumping pools (IE: clever) typically only mine low difficulty blocks and hide what coins they're mining and what hash they are putting towards a coin. If you look at this link: http://www.coinmine.pw/poolinfo.php?coinid=109 they have mined blocks recently with diff over 1000. and they tend to point their hashrate towards NLG for longer periods of time. They seem a bit more responsible and transparent than clever was.. when in the past clever was pointing a LOT of hashrate at NLG to solve only low difficulty blocks in a matter of seconds. We'll have to continue to watch coinmine.. now gazo1q on the other hand, typically only mines blocks below 500.. it takes them a minute to solve a block so not sure if they are pointing all their hashrate at NLG or they are holding back. |
|
|
|
Yep I noticed, posted above. Regarding the mining it appears Clever has build it own chain, but with this pace and diff it will die soon. Problem can be the fact that his 1.3 wallet still is able to communicate transactions with 1.3.1 wallets.
yeah sorry about that.. I should learn to read.. and English is my first language.. *shakes head* Anyways.. my first reaction is to give it some time to see how the mining scene and blocks per hour level out.. maybe a week? if the longest gap of the day is under 30-40 minutes I can live with that.. and as I said previously, NLG is a bit ahead of schedule with the coin creation. so 400-450 a day for a week should be fine. I'll try to create some additional data products at nlgstats if something particular would help. |
|
|
|
looks like the difficulty has maintained more stable rate. looking good! Don't want to spoil the positive spirit but I saw these kind of messages with the DGW change also... - The signs atm show Clever is still on the old wallet so i hope he's mining for J. Doe - The latter means the diff would have been more steady with or without Digi - the fact 30% of the wallets are old DGW AND Clever not on this chain does not make me confident (chains are chosen on work not on proper calculated diffs) - Digi is more nervous due to the other way of retargetting and due to that the average blocks an hour are way to low, not a big deal but not OK either - The main reason Digi was a better choice was to equalize the chances for all miners and discourage Clever, not as a final fix keep that in mind So yes it looks OK but thats about it, if Clever jumps back in we can see if Digi does what we expected it to do. On the other hand, in the past weeks we got company of another - I guess jump pool - and if Bio and friends  are planning to cut back on hashpower and we don't get Multi hour blocktimes it's a good sign. Till then we have to wait and see... thsminer: I've been running a 1.3.0 guldencoind to keep an eye on the DGW chain.. clever is still mining on it. i doubt anything malicious.. anyways, block height wise they're pretty much even with us. but for networkhashrate the digi chain is killing it.. 17GH DIGI vs 4GH DGW last 100 blocks. 1.3.0 guldencoind queries cut and pastes below.
[root@dell ~]# guldencoind getbestblockhash
4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9
[root@dell ~]# guldencoind getblock 4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9
{
"hash" : "4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9",
"confirmations" : 1,
"size" : 249,
"height" : 194492,
"version" : 2,
"merkleroot" : "6418cbb4e728bd63cdcb683571b2d420a371cf50e25d05223bd4ad2d3760682e",
"tx" : [
"6418cbb4e728bd63cdcb683571b2d420a371cf50e25d05223bd4ad2d3760682e"
],
"time" : 1422847904,
"nonce" : 15892272,
"bits" : "1c0116fb",
"difficulty" : 234.90891779,
"previousblockhash" : "b7396a43f6a92e2483b29b4de85cda44c69781b0b7bcc5652630ee2abb513a2c"
}
[root@dell ~]# guldencoind gettxout 6418cbb4e728bd63cdcb683571b2d420a371cf50e25d05223bd4ad2d3760682e 0
{
"bestblock" : "4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9",
"confirmations" : 1,
"value" : 1000.00000000,
"scriptPubKey" : {
"asm" : "OP_DUP OP_HASH160 e96200b2643f6188c66305cd7b3a28923ab0bf0e OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG",
"hex" : "76a914e96200b2643f6188c66305cd7b3a28923ab0bf0e88ac",
"reqSigs" : 1,
"type" : "pubkeyhash",
"addresses" : [
"Gf7wGAwJGDLfoHcNCRLKZqpk2EQU5ixA6c"
]
},
"version" : 1,
"coinbase" : true
}
[root@dell ~]# guldencoind getmininginfo
{
"blocks" : 194497,
"currentblocksize" : 0,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"difficulty" : 324.09852217,
"errors" : "IMPORTANT: Shut down this wallet and download the new version 1.3.1! Very important and mandatory update!!\nBELANGRIJK: Sluit deze wallet af en download de nieuwe versie 1.3.1! Zeer belangrijke update!",
"generate" : false,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"hashespersec" : 0,
"networkhashps" : 4783660604,
"pooledtx" : 0,
"testnet" : false
}
EDIT: Now should we discuss Digi chain mining at a pace of 400 blocks per day? |
|
|
|
Yeah, but those can't make up 15% of the blocks, right? special digi-day edition of http://nlgstats.iblogger.orgmore miners covered and updates every minute. coinmine taking 5%, jumper Gazo1q taking 10% of the missing 15%.. which makes things interesting.. *IF* both clever and Gazo1q did not switch to 1.3.1, they've got about 50% of the hashrate.. as long as they continue to jump they'll both be stuck once the 1.3.0 chains diff jumps. coinmine op visits this thread? on 1.3.1? Good luck guys! --Mark |
|
|
|
So Gazo is more directly competing with Clever? If that keeps Cever below 50% I'm fine with that, but better to have them all gone.
I'm still kind of new to crypto but that's my take on it as well.. makes NLG mining less profitable for clever as some of the low difficulty blocks are going to other jump pools instead of clever having them all to themselves. The flipside with the current algorithm is there are potentially higher difficulty upswings as multiple pools are now bringing their hashing power to NLG to solve those low diff blocks. With the new algorithm only looking at the time between the last block and new block to set the new difficulty those jump pools should theoretically exit sooner.. we'll see what happens Once in a while clever solves a high difficulty block.. not sure why.. testing? Anyways, will be interesting in a few days to see what happens. Hoping this will do the trick and we'll see dedicated miners return to NLG for their fair share of the rewards. |
|
|
|
 Any details, what to expect? Digshield just kicking in on block 194300? Since we're only mining an average of 550 blocks per day in January, I'd tack on about 3 hours to this estimate. Just curious.. does anyone care much about # of blocks in 24 hours coming in short every day since switching to DGW?.. My personal view is it's not a big deal.. too many NLG were mined April 5 to April 14 (almost 3,000 per day) so we are still technically ahead of schedule in terms of NLG creation. See http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/charts/blocks_per_day.html come to think of it that would probably make a good running chart.. how many blocks ahead/behind schedule we are.. In terms of what to expect after the switch to the new algo, I'm really excited to see how the difficulty swings and block gaps look a week or so after the switch. A lot will probably depend on whether or not this will shake clevermining and other jumpers off the chain.. there now seem to be other miners/multipools(?) jumping in only to mine low difficulty NLG blocks (took them long enough to figure it out). Gazo1qWgAxtkRfapMjv6GQWJskeWTPWGkd for example only seems to solve low difficulty blocks and sends the NLG rewards straight to bittrex. See chart below of Gazo1q solved blocks.. Has been mining NLG since December 11. Despite the NLG difficulty range typically bouncing between 300 and 2000, Gazo1q typically doesn't solve a block above 600.  |
|
|
|
Thanks Veertje. The 150M NLG pre-mine distribution stats to Dutch citizens looks up to date.. the one I was questioning was the 20M Premine for Development, Marketing, Bounties. |
|
|
|
Hi everyone - hoe gaat het? (brushing up on my Dutch) I was poking around the guldencoin website today and noticed the dev-premine distribution accounting page hasn't been updated since September 16. If there have been distributions made since then, can this page and the explorer's total coins api call be updated accordingly? If no distributions have been made, then maybe add a "last updated" note to show this is still being maintained on a regular basis? page: https://distribution.guldencoin.com/#/dev-premineNot complaining. Really appreciate the transparency this provides. It's great! Couple other thoughts: Any thoughts on multi-sig in NLG? The three 50 million cold storage wallets would be good candidates for it. The android wallet has been pointing to a dead block explorer for months now.. maybe it can point to the official one instead? or otherwise just remove the functionality completely? Keep up the great work guys. |
|
|
|
Sorry I haven't looked at the code.. busy busy busy..
assuming nTargetSpacing == 150, you recommend rejecting a solved block that comes in less than 50 seconds after the last one?.. maybe this is a little too aggressive?.. or not?.. I'm on the fence.. would be interested in other's thoughts.
Does the default digi code actually reject a solved block with timestamp earlier than the previously accepted? or is this just something you are suggesting?
Thanks --Mark
There is no code in place in the algo to reject blocks under a certain time. This is something he is proposing as a new feature. I like the idea, but this would require testing. Not to prove it's validity, but rather it's vulnerabilities. Timestamps can be altered, like I mentioned, and are the basis for TW attacks. Delaying a set of blocks past the accepted time limit could be easily achieved by someone with enough know-how and patience. I would suppose that 24Kilo could do it with his knowledge of TW attacks, but we would have to test this. While it's a valid proposal, IMO it's not likely something that will be immediately needed with the DIGI implementation. I would like to look into the possibility of implementing something like this in the future, although not as aggressive as suggested by c_e_d. Maybe a community led testnet? -Fuse Agreed. Towards the end of January I'd be more than willing to run a node on the testnet and do some blockchain analysis. I even have a few scrypt miners that I've retired that I can dust off. |
|
|
|
I don't see a problem today to reject those blocks instead of accepting them into the chain. A submitting miner should be able to keep his clock within a few seconds of synced time nowadays, which should always lead to a positive nActualTimespan. If a miner mines a block faster than his clock is off, than bad luck for him (his own fault).
Or they are doing a time-warp attack by adjusting the times on purpose. 24Kilo has successfully done this with lesser coins, as "taught" in a way by the master of the TW attack via PM bragging. -Fuse I even would reject every block that took less time than nTargetSpacing/3, which still allows 'lucky blocks' but denies blocks of only a few seconds (*hint*) and even helps DIGI to catch up faster to the needed diff for high spikes in hashrate. MPs like clever would need to adjust their hashrate down alot to not fall into the trap of their very fast blocks getting rejected. And the spikes in diff would not be that high, only leaving us stuck for far less time. Sorry I haven't looked at the code.. busy busy busy.. assuming nTargetSpacing == 150, you recommend rejecting a solved block that comes in less than 50 seconds after the last one?.. maybe this is a little too aggressive?.. or not?.. I'm on the fence.. would be interested in other's thoughts. Does the default digi code actually reject a solved block with timestamp earlier than the previously accepted? or is this just something you are suggesting? Thanks --Mark |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
From the guldencoin forum:
