|
some nodes, apparently people are having trouble connecting ?
addnode=167.160.36.27
addnode=85.175.216.200
addnode=184.164.129.202
addnode=91.121.77.74
addnode=104.234.220.135
addnode=82.211.31.215
addnode=162.255.117.105
addnode=98.115.147.74
addnode=80.241.218.56
addnode=86.188.203.203
addnode=50.33.142.137
addnode=51.255.76.56
addnode=201.178.193.91
addnode=178.157.251.75
addnode=96.44.156.214
addnode=50.33.164.179
|
|
|
|
|
pls dont trust prospecta,
now he's trolling the bumbacoin thread,
i offered to send him 69 BUMBA coin but he was very rude instead and muttered something about needing more for drugs.
|
|
|
|
Thread locking, dev trolling and alleged hidden premines.
I'm out.
After I am done with you, you will be banned from ever being on the internet again or even owning a PC |
|
|
|
Dev care to comment on my earlier post, Why are there coins staking before ICO finished, very unfair for investors.
Coins for ICO 400m yet 427812100 before ICO finished. strange.
I would assume c-cex is staking the coins since they are running the ICO. I would also assume any coins not sold including the staked coins would get burned. Maybe that C-cex are staking, but there are over 4m staking over at Poswallet as well. if you look back over the thread you will see the coin was listed on two exchanges before the ICO was ran https://www.tradesatoshi.com/Exchange/?market=PIE_BTC https://novaexchange.com/market/BTC_PIE/?re=jyjced7fu5o0wjbrsc8fAlso looking here http://piecoin.thecryptochat.net/network shows you bit more info about the coin. All of these links are freely available for those who care to look back through the thread. They just are not shown in the main post where the ICO is advertised, although in my opinion they should be Ok my bad. I do agree that it should be mentioned in the main op. Not the most transparent of altcoins. So there are 400m at c-cex + more elsewhere. Totaling 427831172.30453736 to date. Thanks for the info. those 400m on the rich list are staking, http://piecoin.thecryptochat.net/address/PBuRbnexWbe7pVtZnKcofR1EmmUJa2BxRAand c-cex does have a history of staking coins. it's not entirely kosher practice in mine eyes, you deposit your coins, they stake them, they sell the stake, but they still have the stake they sold, so it keeps on staking. |
|
|
|
------Message clipped to save space-------
I did as said, but wallet don't sync ( 5 weeks)
Should it be PieCoin.conf and not piecoin.conf? good call  yes PieCoin.conf edited my post above .. |
|
|
|
I did as said, but wallet don't sync ( 5 weeks)
conf file is called PieCoin.conf try the nodes from here, https://novaexchange.com/addnodes/PIE/if not work delete current copy of blockchain in the datadirectory (backup your wallet !!) if not work download new copy of client from OP, |
|
|
|
Introducing 2nd generation fix !!!
Reducing possible spend amount to 1 billion coins,
https://github.com/bumbacoin/stronghands/releases/tag/v0140
.. will test further and see about increasing maximum spend value. but for now, the new version will limit spend to 1,000,000,000 this is due to a bug where the combined inputs of a transaction may exceed MAX_MONEY and break wallet. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1790622the logic of reducing max spend to 1 billion is that two inputs of over 1 billion may combine to exceed 2 billion. eg. two inputs of 1.1 billion, sending 1.2 billion will combine those two inputs to a value of 2.2 billion which is > MAX_MONEY For anyone with a broken walletit is the wallet.dat that is borken. there is a tx in the wallet.dat that is being rejected by the code. if you have a backup you should be able to just use the backup (will not have borked tx) and all will be fine. alternatively, i have compiled a SPECIAL QT with increased Max Money !!!! this should enable you to open your wallet and extract the privkeys, then you can import them into a new wallet please PM me and i'll send you a copy. it's not for general use. this is the expected error for such a borken wallet EXCEPTION: St13runtime_error
CWallet::GetDebit() : value out of range
ppcoin in ThreadStakeMinter()
terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::runtime_error'
what(): CWallet::GetDebit() : value out of range |
|
|
|
I usually just solve most large number issues by type-def-ing int64_t
But is you don't mind my asking, what is the true benefit of coins with such huge amounts of coins ?
well one obvious benefit is that it exposed a flaw in current coding. as i involve myself with numerous clones with questionable heritage i occasionally ask myself something similar. without any serious discussion on political matters, it is a political answer for me. i have come to a personal understanding that in times of bad governance, civil disobedience is necessary. the more alternative options the merrier, and each variation is another possible choice. and as much as the shitcoin megasphere is full of bad ideas, the long term benefit has yet to be revealed. |
|
|
|
oops, further testing means the quickfix isnt as useful as i first thought. the problem lies where the combine transaction inputs exceed 2 billion. so if you have two inputs of 1.2 billion, and you send even 1.3 billion coins, then because the outputs of 1.3 + 1.1 (change) = 2.4 billion > MAX_MONEY then the wallet will break. am still working on it, i hope to allow sending amounts of 2 billion. but the obvious next step quick fix is to reduce possible sending to 999,999,999 so please, for now with any current available client, do not send 1 billion or over |
|
|
|
lol to see CLOT we changed chain a few years back, and swapped ticker to BUMBA |
|
|
|
re: PAC You are limited to 99,999,999 PAC per TX. So I don't think PAC has the same issue. I bumba'dad about Stronghands, looks like it is being delisted  PAC ... nice trading trend, and I see the network #s are up! i see PAC also has MAX_MONEY of 1 trillion, and i will have to see how PAC handles limited tx to that value ... further checking the code base makes it look like the issue breaking wallets is when combined outputs exceed MAX_MONEY, so you could possibly still break the wallet by setting a high enough TX fee . have posted a new wallet and fix for STRONGHANDS and let cryptopia know. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1195510.msg17868442#msg17868442 |
|
|
|
|
with the goal of allowing tx of 2 billion coins,
i was thinking to modify vout checks to ((MAX_MONEY * 2) + 1) = 4,000,000,001
this would allow two large inputs (up to 1,999,999,999 each) plus small fee to join into a 2billion input
a fee of over 1 in the extreme instance would break it still, but pre error checks seem to catch that.
checking vin + fee > MAX_MONEY
.
this would create a couple of possible values of over 32bit integer limit of 2,147,483,647
|
|
|
|
I was going to do this tomorrow but i couldnt wait I set up a wallet with two inputs of 5001, Then testing it by sending 5002 coins broke it. # ./peerunityd sendtoaddress mxXeyDPTix9KQVcwDnDkSUcPvzskF5xNfS 5002
error: {"code":-1,"message":"CWallet::GetDebit() : value out of range"} error output nDebit Value=10002000000, Max Money=10000000000, Coin=1000000, Cent=10000
output /coin nDebit Value=10002, Max Money=10000 code does not lie Let's confirm some things. 1 coin == 100 cent max money == 10000 coin 2 x Inputs of 5002 == 10004 which is greater than 10000 and hence is out of range ........? i agree yes. |
|
|
|
I was going to do this tomorrow but i couldnt wait I set up a wallet with two inputs of 5001, Then testing it by sending 5002 coins broke it. # ./peerunityd sendtoaddress mxXeyDPTix9KQVcwDnDkSUcPvzskF5xNfS 5002
error: {"code":-1,"message":"CWallet::GetDebit() : value out of range"} error output nDebit Value=10002000000, Max Money=10000000000, Coin=1000000, Cent=10000
output /coin nDebit Value=10002, Max Money=10000 |
|
|
|
finally got it to do something that looks useful using this code int64 GetDebit(const CTransaction& tx) const
{
int64 nDebit = 0;
BOOST_FOREACH(const CTxIn& txin, tx.vin)
{
nDebit += GetDebit(txin);
if (!MoneyRange(nDebit))
{
printf(" Value=%llu, Max Money=%llu, Coin=%llu, Cent=%llu unsigned int", nDebit, MAX_MONEY, COIN, CENT);
throw std::runtime_error("CWallet::GetDebit() : value out of range");
}
}
return nDebit; getting this output Value=15721280000, Max Money=10000000000, Coin=1000000, Cent=10000 output / COIN Value=15721.28, Max Money=10000 so the issue is not a negative value, but rather checking the combined value of all inputs? (all mined blocks were ~8400) |
|
|
|
Do you have the problem with a new coin or peercoin directly?
I came across it in Stronghands, (a clone with 90billion coinsupply, one owner having 18 billion coins, and a 2billion MAX_MONEY ) then decided to check up stream and found same problem in Peerunity. i'm not that familiar with PPC rewards, but i doubt it will have a problem for some time. Do you test with a new chain? i tested on teh stronghands chain (took the wallet off line) and on peerunity testnet. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
