Had to change setResizeMode to setSectionResizeMode in: qt/messagepage.cpp:73 qt/invoiceviewpage.cpp:49 qt/receiptpage.cpp:85 qt/invoicepage.cpp:90 - this is probably just a wonky QT5 issue on my end. ... but hurrah:  edit: daily block count in main.cpp:1453-1465 needs changing from 576 to 1440 assuming you want to keep the monthly schedule. |
|
|
|
Source code fixes complete. Should build on Windows and Linux easy. I broke my Mac so sorry apples. Windows x64 0.30.16.3Source CodeFinally. SO noone took up the bounty for how to setup a BN....hmm What do you mean? To write a guide? Yes, a good guide a dummy can follow. I could set up a DRK MN in my sleep I've done it so often, and there are numerous guides out there for it, but I can't really write one for a BCR BN until I've actually done it. And I'm still a ways short on BCR... Anyway, off to try building the latest client again. Do I grab 15, 15b or 15c? |
|
|
|
Unfortunately, both coinmarketcap and bittrex are listed at bitcredits... It should be Bitcredit. :/ Not a huge deal. Wondering why there is no market cap listed, only current price? They don't show the total coins mined Coins: 13281636 That explorer has been stuck on block 73746 for over a day or so. Wonder how much it costs to be on Chainz... Anyone know? 0.5 BTC last I heard. |
|
|
|
Unfortunately, both coinmarketcap and bittrex are listed at bitcredits... It should be Bitcredit. :/ Not a huge deal. Wondering why there is no market cap listed, only current price? They don't show the total coins mined Coins: 13281636 That explorer has been stuck on block 73746 for over a day or so. |
|
|
|
Current list of known issues :
1) CDB error on wallet shutdown.
2) Some wallets getting stuck @ block 40000
In wallet block explorer can't search by address. |
|
|
|
the http://bitexp.net explorer seems to be stuck at block 73746. Could whoever maintains it give it a kick please? And I'd love to play with the new client but still can't build it on linux: qt/messagemodel.cpp: In member function ‘MessageModel::StatusCode MessageModel::sendMessages(const QList<SendMessagesRecipient>&, QString)’:
qt/messagemodel.cpp:631:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]
}
^
make[2]: *** [qt/qt_libbitcreditqt_a-messagemodel.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/stu/Downloads/bicreditsnew-0.30.15c/src'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/stu/Downloads/bicreditsnew-0.30.15c/src'
make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
|
|
|
|
all that stands between me and happiness is :- c:\bitcredit-smsg\src/qt/messagemodel.cpp:346: undefined reference to `json_spirit::write(
json_spirit::Value_impl<json_spirit::Config_vector<std::string> > const&)' Just a thought, but can you even specify a 64 bit integer in standard json? |
|
|
|
Bit of a gift there, but could have been better. Little helpers now modified with a more aggressive buy curve.  |
|
|
|
They would have been live earlier. there are only 5 more errors left in the compilation process, but i am not so good with Qt Would be nice if someone stepped up to help finish up.
Why don't you update the git, who knows ... maybe someone will do it everyone working has been using branch 0.30.15c it's up to date After 2 hours ... I can confirm that Qt is a "wonderful mess" ... Nothing very much wrong with QT itself, but yeah the standard Bitcoin wallet is a structural shambles.  |
|
|
|
do you think price will go up all the time. i think it won't as more nodes will be created and when nodes released big dumps because of the cut supply increase price model you have here. the only reason why someone would make a node is to make money of the increase right. now if they think price wont go up they wont buy as the weekly return would not be worth it at whatever level you buy
BN's will provide services, (loans, escrow etc.) for which they will earn remuneration. Are you getting it yet? It's not all about the bloody price.  |
|
|
|
whats the idea? the idea here is more to cut supply increase price which will not happen indefinitely thus the model won't work. having this very limited amount of nodes manipulates the services the nodes provide.
'The model' is not designed to simply increase the cost of BCR in perpetuity. i trade the stock market. it doesn't take a genius to figure out why it won't go up all the time thus no point in becoming a node.
Again, you are confusing your own short term profit motives with what is intended. From the dev: The premise is simple.... we now have tons of currencies, but no real financial tools and services. This is a huge gap that needs filling and i have decided to step up to the task and try making it a reality.
My goals in succession were as follows
1) Create a viable currency as a base currency for all transactions.
2) Integrate financial services and tools one at a time to meet industry demands
3) Introduce a consensus system that governs Blockchain Financial Institutions by way of democratic vote
4) Implement an Asset issuing facility on the blockchain that runs concurrently with BCR... meaning that people can issue stocks in their companies/ventures/banks right on the blockchain and transfer them as required.
5) Create a incubator for ideas, internal and external whose profits are brought into the BCR ecosphere thereby proving funding, profit and enterprise for all participants.
there was a white paper, an abject failure because my ideas evolve daily and it just could not get across ideas I want to express.
Any rise in price will be an artefact of value and utility provided. Bleating and moaning about early adopters is asinine. Nothing is preventing you from being one. |
|
|
|
But Dash gives opportunity for a few thousands people to earn money daily. This one will only allow this to a few early adopters.
This is nonsense. A BCR BN is 5X cheaper than a DRK MN. Early adopters take risks and (sometimes) reap rewards. There's also this wonderful thing called co-operation: Wanted: people willing to partner up at 25000BCR/stake to run a joint BN. Please PM.  |
|
|
|
With just 6 000 000 coins in circulation there can only be 24 bank nodes. Seems not many?
More reward per BN.  |
|
|
|
So there are masternodes and bank nodes? Or just bank nodes which require 250k?
The latter. |
|
|
|
There is a lot of nervous money in eg. stawks right now, P/E ratios are well beyond stupid, and there is increasingly little else available to hedge with that isn't also grotesquely ballooned, except PMs. Heh, big money leveraged to the hilt trading of DRK... the cryptognat witches are going to get slaughtered by the billion dollar algos. |
|
|
|
So is the idea that the Bank Node can be group purchased still an idea?
I don't think there's a simple/trustless way of doing it yet but just like with DRK there will be share schemes. I'll probably be running a joint BN with 10% stakes available. Been doing it with DRK MNs for 9 months without any problems. |
|
|
|
Are mining calculators correct (like what to mine) with their estimation in coins per day?
They don't factor in masternode "fees" do they?!
nobody knows that ? No idea, some might but I doubt it. You can work it out yourself and compare to whatever calc you are using: The block reward to miners is currently ~3 DRK @ ~576 blocks/day, so ~1728 DRK/day to miners. Divide your hash by the total and multiply by 1728 to give you an idea of what you can expect to make before pool fees and power costs. eg. (10MH/s divided by 100GH/s) * 1728 = 0.1728 DRK/day ~ 1.2 DRK/week. Numbers are approximate, YMMV, beware the pink oboe etc. Hope you have cheap/free elastictrickery. |
|
|
|
I advocate for tying the max amount of MNs to the coinsupply:
Max MN = (total coinsupply)/ 2880.
A while ago I remember there being a discussion about limiting one MN to one IP (or server)... what's the latest on that? You can't limit one SN to one IP. Nobody can know if your server is really running on one IP as a single instance or running as one of hundred virtual machines in a cloud. Also, your SN will never be required to be visible thru an IP, the SNs IP is not important since it's not broadcast anyway. With that in mind, coming back to your question: to prevent people from running multiple SNs (servicenodes) on a server, you will need to run services (on those servicenodes) that have a high load on the server CPU / RAM / HDisk... this will make running multiple SNs on a server problematic, and encourage the spreading of SNs over multiple Servers (and be it only virtual ones) For this to work we will need a sophisticated valuation system that gives the best servers the best score, and the worst servers the worst score. That's the tricky part. Or you could avoid all this pointless and impractical nonsense and just have a fixed collateral cost, and let market forces sort the numbers out. Spread MNs would be up and running on mainnet with IX far faster. |
|
|
|
Hey... You can always swing by our winery if your coming through the Northwest... I'll even hook you up with some wine. I can bury the hatchet with an old enemy... pm if your coming this way. Pictures, please! ebolajax cruisin the streetz, ward nurse in hot pursuit not shown:  |
|
|
|
Hmm, just noticed bitcoinwisdom has removed it's separate LTC/fiat bit.
I see it listed on the top ticker still... I'm sure it used to have its own big box between the Bitcoin and Altcoin sections. Probably went months ago, I don't visit bcw that often. That is actually since today. Lite coin is losing its 'special alt status' They did this in the past & then it reappeared again  Extortion. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
