Updated source code: https://sourceforge.net/projects/galacticmilieu/files/DeVCoin/Also updated on my github. qt version has some new images. Both versions have updated receivers.h and a recent checkpoint. I cannot compile the qt version now that I have moved to Fedora 17, as it seems I do not have qmake-qt4 anymore. Compiling with just qmake, which is from qt3 or qt3.3, even if I use qmake -project first to update the project itself, ends up dying on some GUI thing somewhere even after I add into its makefile the required adding of -fpermissive for gcc and use of custom openssl that includes elliptic stuff that Fedora normally leaves out of its openssl. So I am figuring I need some way to use my installed qt 4, the way used to be to use qmake-qt4 but that no longer exists and its not clear what if anything one should use instead. qmake definitely seems to be compiling against qt3 not qt4, and I know I always needed qt4 for this thing. Luckily I have no intention of using a GUI but still its annoying that the thing won't even build. I had thought to put it on a bootable live usb image people could use as a boot-and-play system. As to changing the name of the program, I just do "mv bitcoind /usr/local/bin/devcoind" after doing "strip bitcoind", there are gosh knows how many makefiles plus some kind of qt project file thing one would have to hack at to have it actually build it to a different name in the first place, and I suspect the qt project file's own name might even have to be changed as I suspect it uses the name of the project file to decide on a name for the final program it builds, though I am not sure as I have never "done" qt. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
People are maybe still mining stuff, whatever they mine, for instant sale maybe instead of as a way of picking up dirt cheap coins to save up for a time when inflation (creation of new coins) is not so rampant.
Also possibly a lot of people buying are buying up dirt cheap coins, thus just not bothering to buy until they get firesale prices, since they know so many miners are going for fast sales instead of long term stockpiling of coins toward a year when the rampant inflation of these early years has cooled down some. (People make a big deal about bitcoin mining halving but it is only the first halving, almost half of all bitcoins have not been mined yet.)
Also maybe not all the ASIC makers and hackers and theives have converted all their gains into fiat yet or maybe so many hacks had made people convinced that even if they did have some coins they would just lose them to hackers or something, since bitcoin is still insanely low too. Until it goes back over $30 per coin you should maybe be worrying why bitcoin is so cheap not why altcoins are; maybe if bitcoin got back on its growth track it got derailed from back in 2011 alt coins might also recover some.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
Actually it has existed for a long long time already, it is called groupcoin.
DeVCoin is similar, but uses coins 1/1000 the size because some people used to be really worried about having to move the decimal so devcoin created it already moved by three places from the start.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
Too many people who only care about fiat mine bitcoin, that seems to be a lot of why its price in terms of fiat is so insanely low still.
Maybe now its mining reward has halved fiat-based opportunists will rape bitcoin a little less and it can start to climb again like it did back before the mybitcoin fiasco; though the massive amounts of fraud hacking and theft doubtless also has a lot to do with its insanely low value.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
As plots like the one at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/plotsharesindvc.html show, GRouPcorp book-keeping had again been falling behind; the first sudden jump was basically the previous post, now there has been another sudden jump due to its books being updated to reflect the sale of its shares, manifesting the gains the things it obtained with the proceeds have made since the sale. The next update of the plots should reflect new transactions that have been made since bringing the books up to date; specifically GRouPcorp has bought some sGFC (shares of GFC) in anticipation of gains General Financial Corp hopes to generate by building structured credit default swaps - while simultaneously "qualifying" debtors - using GRouPcorp's population rosters. In essence GRouPcorp, being group-oriented, has access to a lot of people and hopes to profit by providing some of those people access to credit through GFC and categorising the credit risks those people represent. Groups stand to benefit not only by obtaining a source of credit for their members but also by providing their members an opportunity to progress step by step through level after level of credit so that hopefully at least some of their members who might not otherwise be able to qualify could end up achieving "qualified investor" status. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
As more and more groups adopt Cyclos and/or Open Transactions, growth has been accelerating. Tables and plots have been put online at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/digitalisassets.html to help visualise that growth. More groups have equipped themselves with Tor and I2P, it looks like Torchat is possibly currently the most popular / mainstream communication method between guiildmasters, clanmasters, association masters, or whatever each group likes to call its top administrators. More and more groups have set up CoffeeMUD as a relatively inexpensive mode of representation of a clanhouse or guildhall or whatever they like to call their headquarters or regional hubs. The fact that Tor and I2P can cause players to experience "lag" seems to actually serve to help encourage taking a more strategic than reaction-time twitch-time tactical approach to using the system, which basically serves as a kind of glorified and human-readable API. Note that these deployments are not public-facing yet, they are internal tools and testbeds used by members of groups; work continues among those groups who consider three dimensional graphics an affordable expense on setting up beautiful clan/guild/etc demesnes using OpenSimulator on the theory that when the time comes for public faces immersive three dimensional virtual environments might be the way to go. When last I posted to this thread the general opinion had seemed to be that imagining that each and every nation implemented in standard distributions of Freeciv might end up being played and it would become necessary to start implementing additional nations for that platform seemed a far future pipedream; but groups have been forming faster lately than the freeciv developers have been adding more nations to the standard distribution and more groups have started seriously considering taking on the Freeciv scale of play. The security passphrase system in Open Transactions has been making it impractical to have trading scripts running 24/7 unattended by human operators so almost all trade has continued to be off-market, with group administrators largely serving as group members' interface to between-group trade. The latest evaluation of DeVCorp puts its net worth at 61020.09941520 DVC per share, however as noted previously that is not the last traded price nor the lowest or highest or average traded price but simply an actual accounting of the assets held by the Corp and the liabilities of the Corp. Whether anyone who picked up its offering or has since managed to acquire one or more of its shares will part with any shares, and if so at what price, is entirely up to them. Please remember that from the point of view of the planet known as Earth DeVCoin is a fictional corp based on a fictional planet in a fictional timeline and is not any kind of legally incorporated entity; the currencies it deals in are game-currencies, virtual tokens some of which have the interesting gameplay feature of being able to be traded between games, taken home by players to their own homes, used by players in games of their own invention and so on, not any kind of legal tender. The corp is simply a prop in a multifaceted game. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
Here is my hacks-so-far, as diff against github default main/head/whatever: diff ../poscoin/src/checkpoints.cpp src/checkpoints.cpp
33c33
< return true; // poscoin has no checkpoints
---
> if (fTestNet) return true; // Testnet has no checkpoints
88d87
< return true;
Only in ../poscoin/src: checkpoints.ppc
Common subdirectories: ../poscoin/src/json and src/json
diff ../poscoin/src/main.cpp src/main.cpp
866c866
< return min(MIN_STAKE_REWARD,nSubsidy);
---
> return nSubsidy;
1774c1774
< bnCentSecond += CBigNum(nValueIn) * max(nTime-txPrev.nTime,COIN_AGE_CAP) / CENT;
---
> bnCentSecond += CBigNum(nValueIn) * (nTime-txPrev.nTime) / CENT;
1875,1876c1875,1876
< if ((nBestHeight > 10) && IsProofOfWork())
< return DoS(50, error("CheckBlock() : proof of work is fail! :)"));
---
> if (IsProofOfWork() && !CheckProofOfWork(GetHash(), nBits))
> return DoS(50, error("CheckBlock() : proof of work failed"));
1979,1980c1979,1980
< // if (!Checkpoints::CheckHardened(nHeight, hash))
< // return DoS(100, error("AcceptBlock() : rejected by hardened checkpoint lockin at %d", nHeight));
---
> if (!Checkpoints::CheckHardened(nHeight, hash))
> return DoS(100, error("AcceptBlock() : rejected by hardened checkpoint lockin at %d", nHeight));
1983,1984c1983,1984
< // if (!Checkpoints::CheckSync(hash, pindexPrev))
< // return error("AcceptBlock() : rejected by synchronized checkpoint");
---
> if (!Checkpoints::CheckSync(hash, pindexPrev))
> return error("AcceptBlock() : rejected by synchronized checkpoint");
3601,3603d3600
< if (nBestHeight < FIRST_STAKE_BLOCK)
< fProofOfStake = 0;
<
diff ../poscoin/src/main.h src/main.h
35,37d34
< static const unsigned int COIN_AGE_CAP = 90 * 24 * 60 * 60;
< static const unsigned int FIRST_STAKE_BLOCK = 10;
< static const int64 MIN_STAKE_REWARD = COIN;
111c108
< CBlock* CreateNewBlock(CWallet* pwallet, bool fProofOfStake=true);
---
> CBlock* CreateNewBlock(CWallet* pwallet, bool fProofOfStake=false);
Common subdirectories: ../poscoin/src/obj and src/obj
Common subdirectories: ../poscoin/src/obj-test and src/obj-test
diff ../poscoin/src/protocol.cpp src/protocol.cpp
25,31c25,26
< //static unsigned char pchMessageStartBitcoin[4] = { 0xf9, 0xbe, 0xb4, 0xd9 };
< //static unsigned char pchMessageStartPPCoin[4] = { 0xe6, 0xe8, 0xe9, 0xe5 };
< //static unsigned int nMessageStartSwitchTime = 1347300000;
<
< // POSoin message start
< static unsigned char pchMessageStartBitcoin[4] = { 'P', 'O', 'S', ':' };
< static unsigned char pchMessageStartPPCoin[4] = { 'P', 'O', 'S', ':' };
---
> static unsigned char pchMessageStartBitcoin[4] = { 0xf9, 0xbe, 0xb4, 0xd9 };
> static unsigned char pchMessageStartPPCoin[4] = { 0xe6, 0xe8, 0xe9, 0xe5 };
Common subdirectories: ../poscoin/src/qt and src/qt
Common subdirectories: ../poscoin/src/test and src/test
(I called it POScoin. Whether it will end up any use for Point Of Sale systems remains to be seen though.  ) -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
If it will work it might be useful to that person who apparently has oodles of folk wanting to each start a separate chain, since basically if they sell more than half the company it makes sense the buyer should have control of it. They could spawn oodles of them so that there would be many many many small targets each available in effect for purchase by buying half their coins. Might work okay as a corporate shares system.
Maybe in fact they would be better than coloured coins because the majority owner's control would be kind of built in, instead of the sellers being able to wait for someone to buy most of their offering then go like ha ha so what you still have no power over the part we didn't yet sell to you, no control of the whole set so to speak.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
Looking at the code, it seems to basically be solidcoin without maybe only one master-node instead of several master-nodes.
I tried to hack out all proof of work nd all checking of checkpoints but then both sides seem to wait for the other to start saying something.
So possibly it won't even do anything until it gets a go-ahead from the solid node or something.
Since without proof of work blocks coins have to come from somewhere, I set the minimum reward for a proof of stake block to one coin.
The fact they won't even talk to each other is nasty though, it seems to imply that there is expected to alredy be something out there to get and that someone you connect to will push it at you.
I have been awake too long now to track down exactly why tht happens until after I sleep.
Cunicula it does seem likely you are correct that the whole proof of work thing is only there to provide an excuse for being controlled by the solid node(s) in the usual solid central control style system we have seen so many times before. I did try to put into the counting up of coin ages max of 90 days per each coin it found.
Maybe my problem is there is no coin-age initilly so maybe it does not try to make a stake block thus does not get the free minimum one coin reward for making a stake block. i might have to make it always have one coin's worth of chance to try, or something, in the case where it has no coins initially.
An incentive to be online is for transactions to get processed, since with stake blocks being the only blocks no transactions will go through unless at least one node stays online long enough for a block to get created; and maybe also the less people who are online trying to make a stake block the longer it maybe might take for one to be made. 9that one lone person who made one maybe used all his coin-age so needs 90 days to recover... so initially it might need at least 90 wallets to have been created in order for one block a day to be able to be made...)
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
There are no-inflation coins, there are plenty of techniques for distributing coins, the block reward method simply happens to also help get miners to mine for a few years initially. It is a very expensive way of getting them to mine, but it has worked (so far...) for a few chains. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Actually all luke really did to CoiLedCoin was grab all the coins (refusing to build on other people's blocks, orphaning them) while requiring high transaction fees, supposedly.
He didn't keep it up for long, and the coin has chugged along fine ever since as one of the under-the-radar "sleeper" coins.
When the masses think a coin is "dead" that is the window of opportunity for the little people to "post-mine" it, basically it simply goes into "early adopter mode" and the longer it stays in that mode the more coins the early adopters of the 'late' coin are able to quietly pick up.
A far more egalitarian distribution of initial coins can happen that way, in principle, at least until those who hate and oppose egalitarianism decide egalitarianism has gone too for or gone on too long and it is time to assert their superiority again by bullying someone...
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
Just use your normal bitcoin address as a devcoin address.
The address is already yours, you already have its private key, it is already waiting for devcoins to be sent to it.
Someday when you finally decide you have enough devcoins waiting there that it is worth learning how to export a key from one wallet and import it into another, copy the key over to a devcoin wallet and use your devcoins.
It was done this way deliberately so that we could put developers on the list initially way back when just by knowing their bitcoin donation address.
-MarkM-
That doesnt make any sense. How can you import devcoins into the bitcoin blockchain ? You are not making sense, how can using the same private key in multiple places / for multiple purposes make all places and purposes you use it for somehow the same place or purpose? If you sign a transaction on the devcoin blockchain, the devcoin blockchain will be effected, if you use the same private key to sign a transaction on the bitcoin blockchain the bitcoin blockchain will be effected. If you use the same private key to sign a valentine card to your mom possibly your mom will be effected. your mom doesn't suddely turn into a bitcoin or a devcoin. Sheesh. Maybe reading Satoshi's whitepaper would help, to get an idea how blockchains work? -MarkM- |
|
|
|
As can be seen in the plot at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/plotmbc.html it has not yet plummeted below the value of DeVCoins despite the fact that DeVCoins are deliberately designed to not be worth more than 1/1000 of the value of the more-normal types of coins. So I guess if you fear they will drop below DeVCoins in value maybe you should sell them for DeVCoins before that happens. -MarkM- I was just curious because I have no Ixcoin address, and I was making Bitparking account. But why are all existing coins dropping in value, on graph? Because that plot shows everything's value as measured in the top dog coin. If instead you plot everything against a coin that is going down, such as litecoin, things going down do not look as if they are going down as fast as when plotted against a top performer, and things going up look like they are going up faster, and things that are going down but are not going down as fast as litecoin could even look like they are not going down. Here is litecoin-based plot: http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/plotltc.htmlif you prefer to value things in terms of bitcoins, then again things look slightly different, as in a bitcoin-based plot only things going up faster than bitcoin is look like they are going up, and only things going down faster than bitcoin look like they are going down: http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/plotbtc.html-MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Just use your normal bitcoin address as a devcoin address.
The address is already yours, you already have its private key, it is already waiting for devcoins to be sent to it.
Someday when you finally decide you have enough devcoins waiting there that it is worth learning how to export a key from one wallet and import it into another, copy the key over to a devcoin wallet and use your devcoins.
It was done this way deliberately so that we could put developers on the list initially way back when just by knowing their bitcoin donation address.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
All I need is an address, so I can get some Devcoins at Bitparking pool. I'm not planning to solo-mine Devoins yet.
DeVCoin addresses are deliberately identical to BiTCoin addresses, so peopl;e can simply use a bitcoin address until some future day when they choose to export the address from a bitcoin wallet and import it into a devcoin wallet to access their coins. So you can just go ahead and use your bitcoin address for now, to have your coins safely wait for some day when you do get a devcoin wallet. This is misleading. It is impossible to import Bitcoins to the Devcoin blockchain, even if the addresses are the same... You don't import the coins, just the addresses. for any bitcoin address, the exact same address functions perfectly well as a DeVCoin address, without mixing the coins since the coins are on different blockchains. The same private key controls the address regardless of which blockchain it is used on. Technically one can even transform the appearance of the addrress by manipulating the prefix system to display it in a form that uses a different initial character to use it on other chains that mess with the prefix, but then people won't be able to see at a glance that really it refers from the same private key. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
Blockchain.info is the block explorer thing? Whatever, if it works and is free open source code adapting it should be pretty easy... As for dedicated apps yeah I bet vendors love them too, give people a walmart wallet not a buy from the competition wallet for example heh heh. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
All I need is an address, so I can get some Devcoins at Bitparking pool. I'm not planning to solo-mine Devoins yet.
DeVCoin addresses are deliberately identical to BiTCoin addresses, so peopl;e can simply use a bitcoin address until some future day when they choose to export the address from a bitcoin wallet and import it into a devcoin wallet to access their coins. So you can just go ahead and use your bitcoin address for now, to have your coins safely wait for some day when you do get a devcoin wallet. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
As can be seen in the plot at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/plotmbc.html it has not yet plummeted below the value of DeVCoins despite the fact that DeVCoins are deliberately designed to not be worth more than 1/1000 of the value of the more-normal types of coins. So I guess if you fear they will drop below DeVCoins in value maybe you should sell them for DeVCoins before that happens. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
As far as adoption goes, I thought websites are supposedly the adoptable medium, if you make people run a client at their end instead of simply using their browser you kill adoption anyway so details of the thing they have to download/install are kind of moot, if you want adoption you should be making websites, not user-machine-end client programs?
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on point of delivery.
A better example would be i0coins or even bbqcoins, that is, some example that takes into account the unlikeliness that you care about having a blockchain of it on your local disk.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
