fluffypony & co,

Just a quick update to say that I've sync'ed from scratch on my Windows box using the beta binaries, took me about 50 minutes to be fully up-to-date. This is on a relatively recent desktop (about 2 years old, with an SSD), and shoddy Internet access.

The only interesting observation I have at the moment, is that it was much faster to get me a fully sync'ed blockchain, than it is to get simplewallet to perform a full wallet rescan (as when doing a wallet restore). I have no clue if this is due to less parallelization of the simplewallet code, or just the nature & complexity of the work in this instance.

Task Manager tells me that a freshly started bitmonerod, is using about 26MB of RAM, though I figure it might not be fully settled yet.
w00t w00t 

In the next day or two, I'll try out some tiny transfers in-and-out, as well as daemon solo'ing (which I am willing to bet that I'll give up before I've found a block  ).
Big Cheers!

Thanks dEBRUYNE and double-thanks fluffypony.
Trying out the beta now, will report back any issues I might have (or on IRC if it looks lengthy for whatever reason).

Yes.


Those are too few inputs, which means that luck plays a major role in how quickly you might stake. Comparing to my own inputs, I'd estimate that you should see your coins staking at around 2500 to 3000 confirms tops. Your x400 sized inputs are not particularly lucky, could well have staked by now.
Make sure you have the wallet running with staking enabled at all times. If you only run the wallet on short periods of time, your chances of hitting a stake are dramatically worse. 

Connections to 7~10 peers should be perfectly alright.
If you want to manually add more, IIRC, the file should be genesyscoin.conf.

If you have a single input (all coins came in as 1 single transaction), then it is largely a factor of luck.
I have coins that staked at little over 1000 confirms, others not staked yet at 2800 confirms. It helps to split your coins into many inputs early on. Note that doing that now, will kill your accumulated weight.

Edit: @Dimitry:
If you're ok stating your balance and the number of inputs, I can tell you what (broad) range of staking to expect. FWIW, I'm at little over 30 stakes on the 100 coins/stake bracket at the moment. Good luck!

I sent the one time fee and registered to the MP Zone just now.

For anyone else trying out the process, you might need to wait for some additional confirmations on your fee TX before the registration succeeds, that, or I just had some delay at my end. There is textual feedback if your registration is processed successfully, in my case, just took a couple of attempts at submitting the form. You also get an e-mail confirmation.

Following registration, my account is not active yet, which I understand should happen sometime today (or from today onward). All looks well so far, I'm really looking forward to each milestone ahead.

About the absence of coins on exchanges:
We're at the peak of DPoS rewards. It would be nuts to have coins on exchanges at this point.
That said, and really just to help out others that might want to join GSY, I am willing to sell OTC a small amount, at most, my staking proceeds. Shoot me an offer over PM if interested, but -please- don't bother with below market rates, I'm not at all eager to sell.

@GSY team:
Perhaps run a modest signature design contest (and/or even a signature campaign) to help spreading the word out? I'm terrible at anything graphics, so this is not for me lol. I might add Genesys to my current signature later, just too busy to do that right now.

Any idea about the necessary collateral for the Skynodes? I know we're still long ways from having the masternode feature active, just curious if you have settled on the amount yet.

Cheers!

No issues at all here sly5am.

Thanks smooth & nikos64 for your feedback also.

I'm unable to compile at this time, but if no1 reputable has come up with binaries in the meantime, I'll see if I can get setup to compile as well sometime next week. Cheers!

Forgot that very important detail 
Windows 8 x64

I double-checked my hashrate if solo'ing with the daemon, on the same 6 threads, I'm at ~255 h/s (vs ~680 on the fastest standalone miner, and roughly ~600 on the slower one). I'm using the latest Win binaries that were posted (0.9.1.1 iirc).

@smooth, about solo mining on the daemon:

I seem to have about half the performance when mining on the daemon, in contrast to using one of the standalone miners available. I can run a standalone miner pointed at Moo's pool, and keep the daemon open anyhow to have keep a node up as well, but I know this is less valuable in terms of network security and decentralization.

Would it be possible to get the daemon mining code closer to the performance of the standalone ones?

I'm using Wolf's cpuminer at the moment, which nets me about 680 h/s with 6 threads on an i7 4770. I don't mind some hashrate drop due to solo mining, but it would be most gratifying if the hashrate was at least within 10% or so proximity of the standalone miners, not a whopping 50% less.

I've also used the one by tpruvot (git repo), which is slightly slower on my CPU, but might be more portable code so to speak, as it was originally forked from Lucas Jones's version.

If all else fails, I could try to run a private/local pool just for my solo mining, though I'm not sure I'm ready to take on the challenge. Then I could also point a GPU or two at it now and then. I'll be happy to take any input or suggestions to how easy/complicated this would be for someone that is knowledgeable on Windows but a Linux newbie.

Thanks for the recent updates, keep'em coming 

The block explorer looks to be stuck indeed. There's some counters showing the right total block count at the bottom (around 8060 now), but the last blocks on the list have not been updating for a moment.

Note, what you see in the wallet is the same as pointing your browser to:
http://chain.genesyscoin.com/

Fixed already, block explorer looking fully up-to-date again.

Some people will be happy to take a small profit % over their ICO cost, and move on to the next shiny thing. For people that play the long game, it's tough to call the price this early and on low volume though. The "low volume" is relatively speaking, we're actually seeing very neat volume for a coin that is so young and has much more to deliver and promote later on.

Personally, I think that the overall of funds raised on the ICO, and what has been delivered so far, generally points value upwards (as the likely trend). In any case, I'm not worried in the least, as this project is barely just off the ground.

The dev team has so far shown that they are focused on the gaming features, as well as listened to community suggestions and with that, introduced even more goodies into the plans. If the games and the other wallet features live up to the expectations, GSY will do very -very- well.

I don't see it as "in-game currency". My reading is that GSY is the currency backbone to the various services & the game being built. Access to certain content will require a one time GSY fee, as well as you'll have games and a P2P betting system integrated in the wallet.
Actually the main reason why I took the plunge on the ICO, is the fact that there is a built-in economy/demand (assuming that a community of users eventually builds up).

Wallet with games was already released and has been working pretty well. 
I requested a wallet without games, specifically as I prefer just a barebones wallet for staking, and later also for running a skynode. The wallet with games meets the purpose just fine, but for secure storage/staking, I'll much rather have a wallet without any bells and whistles.

That was fast  Cheers!

Dropping off a request for the dev team:

Would appreciate if it is possible to have a precompiled Win or Mac wallet, without any of the gaming/extra features. I understand that for staking/skynode most people would build and run a linux daemon, but that's not for everyone.
I might hold some balance on a gaming wallet as needed for certain features or to access special content, but I would much rather have the majority of my stake on a dedicated box that does not have any gaming functionality. Maybe a precompiled genesyscoind for Windows?

This project is looking very good so far. Good Job guys!

@IronFists:
For best results, you'll probably need to manually split your inputs. There's plenty of guides around on how to do this, the process is very similar for just about every PoS altcoin. It's a tough guess on the ideal input amount though, maybe somewhere in the region of 100 coins per input, maybe larger (or maybe smaller, I really don't know).
If I read correctly my wallet stats earlier, the minimum staking age is somewhat larger than the advertised 10 hours. I didn't take a screen capture or anything, will check once I get mature coins again. Anyone willing/capable can double-check on the source code as well.

@GingerAle,

I'm out and just online a couple of minutes a day for all of the week ahead, so I can't help much with troubleshooting during this time. However, here are some important basics:
 - cuda toolkit 7.0 is largely broken, and will cause most miner software to spit invalid hashes
 - good cuda toolkits are 6.5 (standard, usually fastest), and 7.5 RC (developer exclusive, usually slower, bleeding edge)
 - you need to edit configure.sh (linux), or VStudio project cuda properties (windows), to match your desired target architecture

The miner should launch with the same -l settings as you would previously used with regular cryptonight, but you can add some more blocks or threads as the light variant uses less memory (so you might hash faster with more threads). The light version is selected in ccminer, by adding -A to your launch string.

I've had confirmations of the miner working on Windows, on Linux, and all cards of compute level 3.5 & 5.x. Some lower compute levels should also work, but I have no experience on these, nor access to them. I've even used this ccminer on AWS already for kicks, works just fine (and can burn one's credit card really fast) 

Good Luck!

Thanks GSY team, that clears it up for me 

Thanks @alexrossi.

However, as the successful ICO requires that a working wallet & source code are released (along with other items mentioned in your escrow for this ICO), I then conclude that the GSY team has the ability to forcefully back out, by not releasing the necessary elements, should they find that the funding was insufficient.

That said, @GSY team: what is your minimum ICO funding to proceed? This is obviously very important, since the share structure is such, that investors are rewarded with more GSY, if the ICO raises less BTC. The more BTC is raised, the more diluted are the GSY shares.

Personally, I don't like this model too much, as it puts the investors interest partly in conflict with that of the project. If a funding minimum is clearly stated, then at least we have a known critical funding target, at which the dev team understands/claims that the goals are attainable.

It's not only to have a live testbed for features being developed with/for Monero. Importantly, it allows for a divergent path of legitimate cryptonote development, led by one of the most trusted individuals in this corner of cryptoland.

There will be features that - for any one of many reasons - will not make it into Monero.
These could range from things that would not make economical sense, or would be too risky, or would fail to align with the unwritten social contract here, or anything else in between. My expectation with AEON is to see an alternative cryptonote path, fundamentally cooperative with Monero, even if at times it might be considered a competing project.

Disclaimer: I do not expect (nor do I desire) to see any other cryptonote altcoin overthrowing Monero. 

Less hype please? There is actual substance in this project, so all that pumping is rather senseless, and in fact it just adds noise, making it harder to keep up with the more important matters on the thread: developments, helping out people that didn't prepare on-time for the fork, etc.
Thank you.