|
I don't have any ideas on the why, but damn, I need to figure out how to sell off some of mine.
|
|
|
|
Reiterating my needs once more: I need namecoind (command line daemon, don't care for GUI) to be rebased on top of a current bitcoind source code so I have access to the newer RPC calls and to allow easy tracking of bitcoin development to leverage the amazing work being done there constantly. All else is sugar, although said sugar is certainly important to increase adoption that is not my current priority.
The bitcoin source is really not architectured to support alts, and given that changes since 0.3 have made this more the case then it was even then I am pretty sure it never will be. I personally would really like to see the major alts put some effort to bring something like the picocoin codebase into a usable form for this. As it is built around a library it should prove more easy for the alts to share work and advance some things on their own rather then just somewhat blindly taking random patches from bitcoin on an uncoordinated basis. It may be easier or at least quicker to add in the RPC calls you want. That of course does not give you the tracking of the development, but I still think that will only last for a short term once again and a better long term solution is needed. That said, I think most currently agree with you, as they see it easier to just keep mirroring bitcoin development. Also, I will accept paying the bounty for a working namecoind as described above even if it doesn't have the merged mining stuff in, as that is something well served afaik with the outdated client.
That is simply not going to work, unless you mean a namecoin fork or alternative. Namecoin needs merge mining to at least validate the blocks already made with it active, even if you turn it off in this new version. Merged mining is a forking change. ead of a bounty there's someone willing to take this task for a set price I'll be happy to chip in with NMC, BTC, XRP, LTC and/or TRC. Just state your price and expected time to delivery and we can try and fund that (but ultimately only paid after delivery, though I'll be glad to put the 'prize' in escrow)
I might be up for that, even if I do disagree with the approach. I know there is some talk of doing this once leveldb is more stable for some of the other chains, and it would be easier to do both at once. |
|
|
|
Hmm... I see that page is from Dec 2011. I can say that that was not true at that time since I built two of the three clients available from dot-bit at that time and my two got built from Vince's source at the time. Of course it was never the head, but when he announced a tagged release. At that time also, there was no official source. Guess I will have to ask what is the right one to use then, I thought it would be the official source at this point now that they have one. |
|
|
|
I mean if I only mine namecoin can I mine more? I have some saved up but not enough to withdraw from btc-e
It is possible. You won't get more for doing it... well maybe some infinitesimal amount by less longpolls and whatever the stratum equivalent is for restarting when a block is found. So no real point to it. |
|
|
|
I remember hearing a lot about these "Bitcoin Police" a year or two ago. But now it seems they have disappeared?
What happened?
Bitcoin is still full of rogues, scoundrels, and swindlers. Why aren't they doing their job?
Probably found it too hard to collect taxes ! On a more serious note, they were never anything official. |
|
|
|
I have no idea is nelisky is trolling, but I know for sure zamgo is for whatever reason. I know he knows where the heck to find the sources. ( https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin ) The mac build is just an update to the one already featured on http://dot-bit.org/ , and the windows build is similar as what I used to do. Just in this case someone at least updated it already. That's new, being hinted as a troll. Look, I'm sure you mean well and everyone will know that you just meant you compiled the latest from namecoin git but that's not what I read on your post, I read it as "I altered the code, improved it somehow, here's a shiny binary and no reference to the source code". Ah, well I checked what I wrote, and I put updated mac port. Guess maybe I should have just put build. I figured people would know what I meant by port, especially since my old port/build is still featured on the official site. A port typically does not have improvements, and minimal code alterations only as needed to get it to build. Now that you explained I know that was not the case, you didn't change anything, just compiled. Fine, but a set of instructions on how to build it would be much better received.
https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin/tree/master/doc has the build instructions already though. I can quickly cook a namecoin version for windows/mac with a small easter egg added and you have no way of verifying, and you know the type of easter eggs that are common around here, right?
Be cool, and stay safe. Distributing binaries is a major no-no in most cases, and advocating it even if your intentions and code are the best will teach users to trust binaries referenced from threads, and that usually ends in "help, my wallet has been stolen and I don't know why" kind of posts.
Seems some people want binaries. Only way to offer them is to distribute them that I know of. I was for awhile known as the person who supplied the builds for windows and mac put on dot-bit.org. Personal life kept me distracted with other things for most of 2012, and I noticed that while someone had updated the widows builds, no one ever did it for the Mac. As I did back in 2011, I also build the gui version as they can be useful to some people as well. I used to use Multicoin as the gui for awhile, but that is too far out of date now. I do get your point, and that is why I avoid binaries myself, or usually run them sandboxed in a VM for awhile. I am just not sure what the alternative is for people that don't want to build it themselves. People that want binaries are going to have to pick who they trust I guess. If you have a better idea, I would like to know of it, so I can use it myself. |
|
|
|
Can you share the source code? Pushing binaries around is dangerous (for users) at best.
Yes. Binaries from unknown sources are very dangerous. It's great there is some new namecoin work being done, but it has to be in the open for all of us to see or else no one will trust it. Post the source on github or another suitable location and let us all review it. I have no idea is nelisky is trolling, but I know for sure zamgo is for whatever reason. I know he knows where the heck to find the sources. ( https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin ) The mac build is just an update to the one already featured on http://dot-bit.org/ , and the windows build is similar as what I used to do. Just in this case someone at least updated it already. In any case, I am now that I have built the new baseline, I am starting to make some changes to the code to aid someone who wanted me to do something with the namecoin code for them. People used to say thank you for them. I won't bother posting those results if the community has become such trolls of stating the obvious and all of the sudden pretending they can't find the damn source code for namecoin, and stating the obvious to not run binaries you don't trust and build from source yourselves if you want. Anyway, the build are there for those that want them, and are easily ignored by those that don't. If they don't get downloaded I will know there is not demand for them anymore and not to waste my time uploading them. |
|
|
|
Now it it totally possible that that this wasn't a trojan horse. I do backup my unencrypted wallet in dropbox, and maybe someone in dropbox has compromised it (happened in linode before).
You really should not do that. Dropbox has been compromised in the past as well. If you want to use any cloud service to back up wallets be sure you use on of the ones that does zero-knowledge backups at least, like SpiderOak. |
|
|
|
The site is up and running but it looks like not everyone is resolving the domain name properly. We had to change the IP address last weekend. Our new IP address is 198.211.105.133. If you can't access it then either
- your DNS provider is not synched
- you might have mapped the old IP in your hosts file
No, the issue is far more than ttl issues with the dns. Are you sure you have your dns set up right? (edit: does not seem so). The site will drop out even when the dns is cached. The site will work from a web browser, but not from curl on the same machine within seconds of each other. The api has not worked at all this week. Emails are not being sent from the site. Seems no way to reach support. I think issuers should have some type of priority support also. However, in regards to the dns: NS15.DOMAINCONTROL.COM NS16.DOMAINCONTROL.COM NS81.DNSEVER.COM NS92.DNSEVER.COM Answered from ns81.dnsever.com (121.254.188.81) cryptostocks.com. 14400 IN A 69.73.152.225 Answered from ns92.dnsever.com (121.254.188.92) cryptostocks.com. 14400 IN A 69.73.152.225 Answered from ns16.domaincontrol.com (208.109.255.8 ) cryptostocks.com. 1800 IN A 198.211.105.133 Answered from ns15.domaincontrol.com (216.69.185.8 ) cryptostocks.com. 1800 IN A 198.211.105.133 You have four nameservers listed for the domain, and they disagree on the address and ttl to use. To make it worse, you have a short ttl on the good address and a longer one on the now old ones. If you had responded to my emails on Monday and Tuesday this could have been fixed by now. Then again, I have not checked your MX records, maybe they are also messed up and you are not getting mail? In that case you could have at least responded to my pm. You should have one master dns server, and the rest slave to it, so this can not happen. Also, godaddy is probably not a good registrar choice for this type of business. |
|
|
|
Anyone else feel that there should be published standards by the exchanges for when a coin should be listed and delisted? This would prevent backhanded deals, such as what was attempted with NVC & BTC-e.
Right now I think at least standards for things a coin must not do should be set. I say this because some of the newer chains all chatter on the same peer network. Thus slowing each other down with needless traffic to then reject. One post claims that many of these coins got made to help kill alts, so maybe this is not just complete incompetence in coin making. Either way, these coins should not be supported by legitimate exchanges. |
|
|
|
That's what digital coins are. The entire planet will soon find out about them and will want them but there's no way to get them cause mining now requires very expensive hardware but that's not the problem, 10% of Americans would spend the money, I did and I'm not even working right now, but the software, that's the real problem, it's so difficult with all the varioius pools and all the various mining programs to get the right one and it never works until you mess with it for days and most people just aren't good enough with computers or software to do that. So then the only thing left is to buy coins on the exhanges. problem with that is americans are scared people - they don't like risk. most would never buy off an exchange like vircurex that's been attacked and down twice in 45 days. And most americans won't buy coins until they feel it's safe.
What has you fixated on mining, and thinking it is just a matter of it being made easier? Did you learn about bitcoin from the weusecoins site? I noticed it has had this effect on a few people I know. So why don't a few of you smart guys who are obviously good programmers write some code for mining programs that will work with any PC or at least a higher end PC. It can't be harder than hacking into NASA or the pentagon. laborsome, perhaps, but not more difficult. I guarantee you the flood gates will open and people will easily pay $50 for a download they can trust or a disk with a software that makes mining easy. and once you do that you have done 2 HUGE things: a) you have brought digital coins to the masses for free (while making a killing off selling a $50 DVD) and b) you will make yourselves crazy rich cause as 5 million or 10 million mine your coins that will make them more rare and as more people mine them successfully they will brag about it and it will catch fire and this will lead to a massive explosion in mass acceptance as well as the price in many of the coins being mined.
Mining used to be very simple. You just checked a box in the client for it. It was taken out though, becuase it has become a negative value to try and mine on the cpu and most gpus. Soon it may be all gpus. Take a look at this graph.. http://bitcoin.sipa.be/getting miners has not been a problem, hence little value to improving the ease of it. Cause I really don't understand, you guys have a product and you want everyone to get a piece of it because that kind of popularity will lead to mass acceptance but when a normal person off the street tries to find these coins, any coins, in just a few days they find out that's it's practically impossible. If you guys are real programmers and it seems that you are and good ones at that why in the world don't you have a download somewhere on this site for a miner which downloads devcoins? A simple download where any computer illiterate guy can just push a button and that's it. Why not make devcoin the first easily mined coin cause right now there is no such thing. you guys might think it's easy but in the real world in every job I've had I was considered computer literate and quite often I was the guy in charge of training the other teams on new proprietary software because I leanred it the quickest and let me tell you, it's been a month and this stuff is still confusing to me and out of all the coins I tried to mine I was only able to mine litecoin which was a failure.
Most people are going to have to find another way than mining to get their coins. You said your litecoin mining was a failure, not because you could not mine, but because you did not get enough reward. The reward is going to go down more as more people try and people invest in dedicated minters. Devcoin's problem from a business standpoint is that it has too many coins and this kills the value and this is only going to get worse. How long would it take to write a program for an easy to use miner and just put it out there. once it gets popular you can even charge for it. The more people own devcoins the less devcoins are floating around, and the more
It would take almost no time to reactive the option to mine. It would be worthless though to the people who use it. They would see the same thing you did, little return and a higher electric bill. |
|
|
|
Where? I missed it. If you can find that statement, I stand corrected and retract most of my complaints.
Note that 'taking orders' is not nearly the same thing as 'shipping'. Obviously shipping cannot happen until the items are done. But I do expect a pipeline process where orders are shipped simultaneously with pieces being produced. IOW, it would make little sense to get a batch of 10,000 built and tested, and only then start taking orders and shipping.
It used to be linked to in the original post, but seems that post has been edited to hell, and contains none of the original information now. I really think people should edit things in a way that shows the edit history and not keep changing things. I found the original post from friedcat that kicked all this off, unfortunately he too has recently edited it. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=195004.msg2025318#msg2025318The jist of it is still there, that they have a lead time and start taking orders in the auction subforum. This group buy was an attempt to be ready for that , which has yet to happen. Instead we are trying to bypass that, which is fair enough,but it was never posted as an option available to start with. Now it says he can be contacted before this by group buyers. Does not promise anything, nor say they will be ready before the initial estimate. We need a way to show post revision on this board it seems! Not sure why you think it matters who has the money till the unit are ready to start to package. |
|
|
|
|
I am going to update the mac port.
However, I noticed all the seed nodes built seem to be bad, and with lfnet being flakey it is hard to bootstrap.
Anyone have any seed nodes they run they can give me the ip to to plug in before I upload?
|
|
|
|
|
Wonder if they are starting to pull a wikileaks, poker type of financial starvation.
Also, am I the only one who everytime I hear Dept of HLS, I wonder how I got into the script of a bad sci-fi movie?
|
|
|
|
You know what? I always felt that $200+ for this item was a total rip-off and I never expected to have it pay off in a traditional sense.
I knowingly overpaid because I expected that in doing so, it might induce Bitfountain/~friedcat to service this account rapidly and reliably and thus I would get my unit in a relatively rapid manner. This does not seem to be happening and I'm starting to wish to bail.
You also said you did not mind paying more in fees, since it was a insignificance amount to you. It was stated in the posting by friedat they would not be taking orders for 15-20 more days. I always expected to now see my unit till June most likely, or end of May if very lucky. This is why I thought it important to trim the costs since there was no way to get it faster Other USB devices are probably going to be coming out and at a much much much reduced price-point. These build on Avalon 110nm chips, Bitfountain 130nm chips if released in raw, or who knows what other chips which may be in the pipe-line.
Likely in Aug/Sept timeframe. In August the difficulty looks very likely to explode as well. If [I have to wait for a lot of delays in units which are supposedly done and be at the mercy of a supplier who is either not honest or not reliable, it is simply not a wise decision to overpay.
Only the preproduction dev units were done, it was stated it would be 15-20 days or so till these were done. These were never supposedly 'done' for the batch we ordered from, hence my earlier comments about it being silly to feel in such a rush. |
|
|
|
...oh. well then, since we don't need the CE mark and have 429 paid for, looks like we're in the lead. yay us!
course we're ALSO waiting on friedcat to make the official announcement that he's taking orders.
They may say you need an FCC reg. though. If they do, you need to remember these are parts and not complete in and of themselves. |
|
|
|
I don't know where it's getting port 52333 from. It should be port 8337. Where did you get the source from? Try: ixcoind -addnode=50.116.37.18:8337 I got the Windows "package" from here, I thought it was the closest to the "official" binary. Now forcing port 8337 didn't seem to do the magic. I think I need another devcoind.exe or compile it myself... You would have better luck had you gotten the binary from here https://www.box.com/s/1mqfk22gyqq97ytdmifi |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
