Also, how likely/possible is this to implement into a Monero release? Would it require a hardfork? (which isn't a problem since those are scheduled anyways)
Something like this would certainly require a hard fork to be implemented in a reasonable manner (if at all). Does your (if at all) comment refer to your view on the difficulty level in adding it or whether there will be a consensus that it is desired? Sorry that was terribly unclear. I was referring to the possibility of implementing it without a hard fork using some of the extremely convoluted soft fork mechanisms that have been proposed for adding things to Bitcoin without a hard fork. That's not really important or useful since we plan hard forks in Monero anyway. |
|
|
|
Also, how likely/possible is this to implement into a Monero release? Would it require a hardfork? (which isn't a problem since those are scheduled anyways)
Something like this would certainly require a hard fork to be implemented in a reasonable manner (if at all). |
|
|
|
Any speculations on what's going on with the clam price?
Seems a bit weird that it's dropping so low considering how most coins are invested on the site. Maybe some people just trying to manipulate the market to get their hands on more coins?
other than the clam digger whale, I gather someone just won about 40k Clamon just-dice, so have no doubt been cashing out Looks to me like he lost most of it back! |
|
|
|
...At the moment it looks pretty bleak, but it's an interesting experiment in any case...
Negative statements like this is like saying since were going to die someday the future looks bleak. As long as nobody has mounted a successful attack clam's POWS implementation, I would say the future looks bright. The longer clam simply runs as it is doing makes me think POWS has a future and POW mining is a waste of energy. What looks bleak is that ever since that whale digger showed up the price has been collapsing and he's only 20% of the way through his stash. |
|
|
|
I am now running a Monero node using the 0.9 beta version which is using almost no resources. Can I run an Aeon node at the same time? My comp is not very powerful but it does not have much problem running Aeon. My internet connection is 30 Mbs down and 5 Mbs up and is hardwired if it makes a difference.
If you can run AEON by itself then yes you can very likely run AEON along with Monero 0.9. |
|
|
|
I don't see how the long term outlook can be bullish. This is essentially a gambling coin that stakes, so basically giving out more coins that there is nothing to do with but gamble. Gamblers that lose will buy more gamblers that win will sell but the supply keeps increasing so the price has to go down.
This coin really has some interesting economic properties: 1. As the price goes up more people will be motivated to claim their "free" claims (I doubt it is a coincidence that the "whale" showed up after the huge price rise of the past year or so). When the price goes down, people won't bother. That gives it a supply curve more like a physical commodity like gold than Bitcoin. In turn that should tend to make the price less volatile and a better store of value. 2. Staking inflation is high (about 4% per month currently, but that declines as the supply increases) but if you stake your coins you do even better than that because not everyone stakes. I don't know where this coin is going to end up. At the moment it looks pretty bleak, but it's an interesting experiment in any case. |
|
|
|
I have aprox 120 CLAM thay I broght. And im loooosing and looosing money.
Does anyone have an investor tip? Should I stake? Deposit in justdice?
Thanx.
You should stake, invest in JD (which stakes for you) or sell. It doesn't make sense to hold CLAMs without staking because that's a very significant part of the return on investment. If you are just short term speculating it doesn't really matter but if you hold for a while the lost income from not staking adds up. If you don't want to stake yourself or invest in JD you can join my no-nonsense no-fee staking pool: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1200703.0 |
|
|
|
Given this projects' goals, people using it may assume that if it's Monero, its anonymity is not in question. Actually, based on your own words (in bold in the quoted material above) maybe the slogan on the MyMonero front page very well shouldn't be "Send and receive Monero safely and securely, anywhere and any time", and should, instead, be a warning that makes an effort to explain to people that their view keys are being sent to the server, that they're using a JavaScript-based wallet that is never going to be safe, and that this is only a stopgap solution. That would seem to better fit the principles of this project.
It's one of those situations where we can't qualify every statement that is made. It's like saying that we should change the Monero slogan from "secure, private, untraceable" to "secure (as long as you don't leak your private keys and no exploit or bug exists which lets someone steal your funds), private (as long as you're using i2p, coming soon, and the counterparties you deal with don't reveal your details), untraceable (as long as everyone is using mixin >0 and no systematic reveal of inputs leaks the real one)"...which is not quite as catchy;) It's definitely not quite as catchy, I'm just arguing that it's a special case where being upfront and transparent with people could be more important than being catchy. I think a FAQ or something somewhere on the site that explains the risks of a web wallet is a pretty reasonable approach, with maybe a simple link on the home page. That is just my unsolicited input, as I have no role in MyMonero. |
|
|
|
Have there been any efforts on getting a Poloniex listing? I just retweeted a request to add AEON and BBR on Cryptsy but can't recall much mentioned about Poloniex yet. Poloniex has by far the most CryptoNote coins so it seems like a logical exchange to focus on.
We have a better chance when either: The database merge happens and turns into a release, or AEON volume and value increases a lot. The memory footprint is a lot less than XMR, but both are still much larger than other wallets, and when you consider the number of wallets Poloniex has to run, you can understand why they wouldn't want to devote a huge amount of server RAM to one small coin. I'm pretty confident it will happen, but we'll have to wait a while longer. Meanwhile, don't forget OTC is another option in addition to Bittrex. I'm aware of some pretty significant OTC trades that have happened recently. |
|
|
|
@skidog,
That is really low hashrate, is that for the Xeon i7, or the Xeon x3 1231 v3? This latter one has AES-NI, so it should run much faster. Perhaps that older Xeon i7 does not have AES-NI? That's really the key factor that most influences hashrate, other than cache, which sets the optimal number of threads.
XEON X3 1231 V3 I am mining using minergate. Maybe that is the problem. I can change. Using windows 7 pro 64bit. Any suggestions on a miner? You use their application for mining, right? Do you set the number of cores more than the default 1 or 2? My bad e3 is correct. A while back I switched out the cpu but kept the old operating system. Maybe that is causing the problem. I had a dual core Pentium cpu. It seems to lock up my computer when I try to switch to wolfs miner. I'm not sure why. Maybe I need to reinstall my operating system to take advantage of AES-NI. I can reinstall with linux. Any suggestion on which linux would work best with the wallet. I usually run MInt. Mint should be fine, so use whatever you are comfortable with. I mostly use Ubuntu 14.04 LTS |
|
|
|
|
Well I voted for h3 last time, it's certainly not a bad move. I'll leave my vote as I feel we can successfully move the queen after Ng4 but we will probably move h3 and I'm happy with that.
|
|
|
|
Are you willing to elaborate about how the implementation you have in mind will be the soundest of current alternatives?
It already is, if people used the coin a bit more. The biggest outstanding anonymity issue with cryptonote are the chain reaction effects described in MRL-0001, especially with mix 0. But people do seem to want to use mix 0 because it solves some problems they have with dust and also because the transactions are smaller, so cheaper when per-KB fees are implemented. BBR has a fix for that but it requires that people voluntarily tag their outputs. It isn't clear what the incentive is to do that, and there are some other issues with it, nor does it address the issue of people wanting to use low mixes because they are cheaper. XMR proposes to fix it with a minimum mix factor, but that won't happen until it is hard forked sometime next year. In AEON the solution that is already implemented is to limit transactions with a mixin (fake outputs) of less than 2 to a maximum of one per block. Since we have four minute blocks that is only 360 per day (though not every block will necessarily have one so the actual number will be lower). As long as there are a few other transactions per block (with higher mix factors), the chain reaction can't occur and everyone's anonymity is protected. You can see for yourself in a chain explorer that when mix 1 or mix 2 transactions occur, they are always in the very first position (after coinbase). Any other transactions in a block will be higher mix. Because of how this works, it also means that mix 0 or mix 1 transactions can still be used by people who really want a small cheaper transaction, but they will have to complete with their fee for that one slot in each block. That still should end up being somewhat cheaper, without jeopardizing the anonymity of the chain overall. At the moment this doesn't quite work since the amount of usage is still too low. But at least we have the solution in place that if usage were to pick up the problem would fix itself. I have some incremental anonymity improvements in my development version that will go out with normal releases (not including the security releases where I don't introduce anything new) but addressing the chain reactions is the biggest one and that is already implemented right now. |
|
|
|
@skidog,
That is really low hashrate, is that for the Xeon i7, or the Xeon x3 1231 v3? This latter one has AES-NI, so it should run much faster. Perhaps that older Xeon i7 does not have AES-NI? That's really the key factor that most influences hashrate, other than cache, which sets the optimal number of threads.
I'm not sure what a Xeon X3 is but if that is a typo for E3 then this is the model: http://ark.intel.com/products/80910/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1231-v3-8M-Cache-3_40-GHzwhich does have AES-NI and a pretty high clock rate. |
|
|
|
Probably yes. But mining the coin is also important in order to decentralize the hash rate and improve security. The current situation with low concentrated hash rate is a negative that probably weights on the value and makes the future uncertain.
So if you are investing or otherwise supporting the coin please consider mining to a lower-hash rate pool (not minergate) and/or solo mining.
^ Emphasis mine. This is right on point Smooth. I just peeked at the Minergate stats for their AEON pool, and it shows about 6400 workers right now... I dare speculate this is some botnet's new home (Minergate, that is). Adding that they run a closed source pool, could/should we remove it from the OP's pool list? Yes I think it is reasonable to remove it from the list as long as has such a high hash rate share. Good suggestion. |
|
|
|
Well started mining. I dont have much just an extra cpu. An older xeon i7. I will let it run for a while. What kind of speed should i get with xeon x3 1231 v3 ? Looks like im getting 160 H/s with 4 cores running. temps around 55c to 58c on all cores. Pulling about 80 watts. from the wall. Runs at 55 watts without mining so power is pretty low.
That hash rate seems low to me. I don't know why though. You should be able to run 8 threads on that CPU, but even with 4 threads I would expect quite a bit more than 160. |
|
|
|
How does MultiBit deal with importing private keys and rescanning? As I understand it, Bitcoin Core doesn't maintain an address index and so has to rescan the whole blockchain when you add a new private key to the wallet, which is time intensive. If MultiBit is talking to regular Core peers, how do they look up the transactions of interest given only the addresses that the MultiBit wallet controls?
MultiBit classic retrieves the whole chain (after an optional earliest use date) after installing a BIP0037 filter which allows excluding most "uninteresting" transactions. It is still pretty time intensive. Multibit HD does not support importing Bitcoin Core wallets. It may allow importing individual keys but I'm not sure. Mostly it uses HD wallets where a single seed generates many private keys. Either way the restore process is largely the same, involving scanning of the blockchain. HD or not HD makes no difference to the actual blocks. |
|
|
|
I was just taking a tour around the pools and see that dwarfpool lists their top 20 miners. 4 of the addresses start with Poloniex.com and one with Bittrex.com. I take it that these are mining directly to the exchanges for selling. May not necessarily be for immediate selling (though it certainly could be). Some people just use exchanges as convenient wallets. Obviously this has downsides and I don't recommend using exchanges as wallets, but we can't deny it is common. |
|
|
|
Does Monero have any plans of trading more on other platforms besides Poloniex?
Monero trades on cryptsy, bittrex, bter, and probably others I'm forgetting. It can also be exchanged via shapeshift and xmr.to (the latter, one direction). Where people choose to do business is up to them. I guess the exchanges that provide the best service will get the most business. As a project we are neutral, and we help anyone who wants to support Monero. I've personally helped bter with their Monero stuff and cryptsy and shapeshift have also been on irc getting help from core team members and other knowledgable developers and community members. So you are neutral about Poloniex having an separate XMR market? Personally I really don't care what markets they have. I'm happy to let market participants work out what they want to do. That is just my opinion. (Not that they need my approval anyway.) I'm not aware of the core team or any of the other core team members taking any action or expressing any opinions about it being particularly important. We generally support whatever anyone wants to do with Monero, as long as it doesn't appear harmful. Do you foresee "actively" trading on the other exchanges XMR is registered at? Me personally? I've used some of the other exchanges on occasion, but I don't trade XMR actively, or trade anything actively at the moment. |
|
|
|
h3 to stop Ng4
those moves are very ineffective. It better to develop. Will post tomorrow a game I just played at the club where you can see why. I don't see Ng4 as that dangerous (we can just move the queen) but I'm going to vote for h3 because I don't like having to go on the defensive.
I see no point in debating because O-O looks fine and I agree with smooth that Ng4 is not "dangerous". However h3 is also a good move. See this game: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1802118&kpage=39.h3 would lead to literally the exact same position. In that game black played 9....Nd7 and 10....Nde5 It is not hard to imagine how h3 could be helpful since Ng4 and Nde5 accomplishes the same thing (as Nd7 and Nde5) and makes white move the queen again. So if any time is "wasted" with h3, time is potentially gained by not having to move the queen in response to Ng4 on its way to e5. We have a nice center with white. The problem is finding an easy way to develop our pieces to good squares. For example, we would like to play b3 and Bb2 but it is not always so easy for tactical reasons on the long diagonal. Svidler ended up "wasting" a move with Rb1 in a failed attempt to prepare it. We may want to talk about another plan besides Rb1 based on the game linked above. We could just skip Rb1 and just play b3. I don't see where Rb1 is needed, although maybe it helps a deter an attack on that side a bit. EDIT: Oh, okay the pawn at b2 is protecting the c3 knight from being pinned once black moves the knight (as in above game). Hmm. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
