согласен, в прошлом году каждую неделю выкатывали новости, всякие хардфорки и биткоин кеши, плюс фьючерсы, все это заставило народ нести в крипту свои бабки, но после отката с 20к до 6к$ многие люди наверное ушли просто из крипты и заходить уже не хотят, потому что ситуация повторится. Уж слишком сильный был дамп, мне кажется народ просто распугали и поэтому так неохотно несут фиат в крипту.

тут в крипте мало денег, чтобы небыло такой сильной волатильности нужные очень жирные ордера, сейчас любой кит может обвалить курс на топовые монеты.

без бирж твои токены ничего не стоят, у меня знаешь сколько в кошельке этих токенов никому не нужных, ну а тут хотя бы радует что они сами отписываются и работа вроде как ведется, поживем увидим.

ну так уже вроде голосовали и ничего не вышло, неделю назад в телеге еще голосовали, думаю пока есть дропы крупные биржи не добавят такой токен себе.

чет у меня не прокатывает такое, у меня ордер сам отменяется пока я их кому то смогу толкнуть, видимо вам везет на лохов)

там больше объемов на какие то скам монеты нежели на нормальные проекты, видимо туда бежит любой новичок с пару сотен рублей в надежде навариться) Лично меня биржа не привлекает ничем, для новичков самый раз, чтобы освоиться.

я чет не заметил что эфир растет, сегодня за один день он потерял то что он набрал за неделю, хотелось бы чтобы он уже перевалил за 1к баксов, но видимо обстоятельства мешают.

вот из за этих непонятных решений и сливают сегодня эфир, не знаю может и специально давят курс чтобы панику сеять среди держателей, но я еще докупился правда)

а тебе то что, тебе главное заработать или как? Ну так подержи свои токены пока больше половины не сожгут и продай по хорошей цене и забудь про проект)

причем тут вообще баунти хантеры? Токены давно выдали и цена выросла на 500%, какой смысл говорить про хантеров вообще? Че за бред?

на рынке есть два типа людей, это киты и хомяки, каким бы он себя не называл трейдером рисующий всякие линии и т.д. он все равно хомяк 

нужны более крупные биржи, типа бинанса или битрекса, получается только японцы будут цену двигать вверх или вниз.

ну да, в прошлом году трейдеры вышли зафиксироваться а потом остались в сторонке наблюдать как биток 20к делает, многие выходили на 9-10к$

про этот госдолг уже сколько кричат, еще года 3-4 назад пророчили крах доллара в ближайшее время, но как мы видим доллар живее всех живых и умирать не собирается.

на данный момент я не завидую тем кто начал майнить в кредит, представляют что творилось у них в голове когда все падало 3 месяца)

Мир Дикого Запада шикарный сериал, затягивает прям на целый день, 1 сезон посмотрел за два дня. Советую всем любителям хороших сериалов.

Thank you very much, it's nice to know that there is someone who can
see and understand what's behind the numbers.

What I write now, it's just to close it, and it's long and boring, I'm sorry.

The data you provided gave me a first confirmation, I needed more details, so I
searched for them directly on the block explorer, but the result seemed
incomplete, but it's not a cryptoid problem, but instead of what the NavCoin
daemon communicates to it.

To shorten the time, I downloaded the executable version of the wallet 4.0.1.1
for linux, and put it into a virtualbox. I proceeded to sync, and also activated
the transaction index with txindex=1, in order to retrieve the data needed
for each transaction.

When the wallet came back to work, I requested the data from the third
transaction of that block:
getrawtransaction 3955fabb08e6f54ac4f9ef35f043e5ce465a49974495f2d9d6ea8f453775ca5d 1
{
  "hex": "01000000c3fff5580298b2eb6f74d607d641f01f197ffcbce9e344d880a461a27e4805dfb03f ...cut...
  "txid": "3955fabb08e6f54ac4f9ef35f043e5ce465a49974495f2d9d6ea8f453775ca5d",
  "hash": "3955fabb08e6f54ac4f9ef35f043e5ce465a49974495f2d9d6ea8f453775ca5d",
  "size": 376,
  "vsize": 376,
  "version": 1,
  "locktime": 975858,
  "anon-destination": "",
  ...cut...
  "blockhash": "69fb3392a4bcf11fe75ceb0f0d1aeb8fcbc0e63267696910f82c72dfc91378ba",
  "height": 975860,
  "confirmations": 14603,
  "time": 1492516800,
  "blocktime": 1492516800
}

As you can see, time and blocktime are the same, but at least in this case is wrong.
To me the old wallet 3 shows another "time", that is specific for each transaction.

If you look in "hex" string, starting from byte 5 to 9, you can find the real
value of the of the transaction's time field, which once turned and translated
into decimal becomes:
c3fff558 -> 0x58f5ffc3 ->  1492516803

So, how as wanted to demonstrate, in the block it has been incorporated (and
validated) a transaction, which from the point of view of the blockchain it has
been generated in a time subsequent to that of the block which contains it.

This is an event that the set of rules of NavCoin 2 blockchain reject,
but that the new wallet 4, accepted and made permanent by creating a
different fork.
Now that block is part of the Wallet4 fork story, it can not be remedied.

The fact that the getrawtransaction or decoderawtransaction command of
wallet 4 does not report the specific time of the transaction is not
surprising if we consider everything.

The Nav wallet 4 code comes from bitcoincore 0.13, and the internal format
of the transaction structure that it uses does not have a specific field
for time, whereas the Time field is very much used in the case of Nav wallets
and other coins based on POS.

The issue that the wallet 4 does not show a data like the transaction Time,
can make some controls much more complicated to do, but this issue can easily
be fixed in the code.

...

For experiment, I tried to see if making the old wallet 3 more "tolerant" to
that rule which was violated, it would be able to get back to the fork of
wallet 4, even using other new checkpoints to force it.

After many hours of resynchronization, finally the mod wallet 3 has pass that
block and go on... but after a while it stumbled into other blocks which it could
not accept for other reasons.

I read on Forum from "external" sources that has already been fixed the day of
passage to SegWit, so I think every extra effort to make compatible the old wallet 3
is now just a waste of time.

Some of the statistics I have shown here in the past were in part generated
with the help of some routines that were integrated into the code of a personal
version of the wallet 3.7, which now they can no longer work.

Unlucky I do not have the time to do all the code migration (and cross-check)
that would be needed, so I think I will not be able to do controls and statistics
as in the past, I'm sorry guys. 

Some of routines have become obsolete, and other information can also be
found now on the official block explorer, so this is not a great loss.

Of course it's a problem, bspus he is right.

Previously the block explorer was synchronized on the original mainchain 3.x,
just like me.

Now, the BE is on the new wallet fork (4.x), but if the block explorer is also
right on the existing nodes, then about 60% of the active nodes still follows
the original mainchain (3.x), a different fork not compatible with the new.

For myself, I dug a little into debug.log and it seems the point that has sprung forks,
(in my case) is born from the block at height 970172, hash
2b51ed1791793445b12ddf632f8a7e298874cd1dca74923d2554d38094dd0cd1
for the following reasons:
"
ERROR: CheckBlock() : block timestamp earlier than transaction timestamp
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : CheckBlock FAILED
Misbehaving: 2.87.177.211:44440 (0 -> 50)
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=2b51ed1791793445b12ddf632f8a7e298874cd1dca74923d2554d38094dd0cd1"
"

Evidently the new wallet forget to check out one of the rules, which together
with the other, govern the NavCoin blockchain, and accepted a malformed block.

A block with similar characteristics, but more recently it also happened later:
height = 975860  hash 69fb3392a4bcf11fe75ceb0f0d1aeb8fcbc0e63267696910f82c72dfc91378ba
in this case the last transaction appears to be generated 3 seconds in the future,
with respect to time of the block that contains it.

I know it seems a trifle, but this small violation, is a reason enough to reject
the block.
Since some wallet rightly do, and others do not, then come the fork, and here
comes the disaster.

I repeat, the problem is not the three seconds, but the wallets which are following
rules (partly) different.
In general, the common sense suggests that where a control can be leave out,
then they can be skipped also other less obvious.

When you change the shared basic rules of a blockchain then you need a mandatory
hardfork, that it must be well motivated and tested and rechecked.
That mandatory hardfork must be announced well in advance, in large letters,
on all possible media, and also with alerts via wallet.

With all due respect to those who have done the work on current wallet code,
really a lot of work of adaptation/integration, from what I read here, the new
wallet seems still a little immature.

Probably it would need another period of beta testing, in a separate network
but as in real life, it is made up of active nodes of all versions, with
frequent cross-checks.

Of course all this is just my humble opinion


PS:
If one of the experienced users with wallet 4, wanted to send the output of the command:
getblock 69fb3392a4bcf11fe75ceb0f0d1aeb8fcbc0e63267696910f82c72dfc91378ba true

It could be useful for verification of the various "time".

Lol !! Fanatic.

I agree, they have kept their promises, they deserve a bit of rest.
So for now, enjoy the holidays.

Best wishes to all for a Merry Christmas and a peaceful and prosperous New Year.

Ladies and gentlemen, the accelerations that in recent days we have
experienced, now seem to be overcome.
At the moment, we are traveling at cruise speed again.
Thanks for your cooperation, and continue to enjoy this journey.