 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 »
|
Can you tell me the browser are you using? are you using tor? maybe some things are not working on tor.
I am using Firefox (non ESR) on Debian 9. |
|
|
|
|
Ok, now I can login, then I click on the RIC market (or anything else), and am redirected to the Login page (without being actually logged out)...
But I can click on the Dashboard and Exchange links in the left menu without issue.
I cannot deposit anything (clicking on the blue circled + does nothing), but I can get the withdraw popup.
Plus many links not working.
|
|
|
|
Hi I need some testers on www.xequinex.com to complete the graphics. The deposit, withdrawal and exchange are working i just need some activity and feedback to end it as soon as possible. The accounts are the same as xpoolx.com and if you want to register, do it at xpoolx.com cause register is not implemented yet at xequinex.com Fees are 0 by now When I try to connect with my XPoolX account, I get a blank page with just a "4". No matter if the password is correct or not. If the Email address is fake, it is "1" instead. |
|
|
|
i find it amusing that gatra posted a bounty to bring riecoin up to 0.16, then basically disappears, with the work now being done for free.. smart lad  He better come back soon before people start thinking that he is a scammer... Last Active: August 06, 2018, 07:35:54 PM Also, where is dga and his 0.1 BTC bounty? Last Active: September 19, 2018, 07:54:12 PM I wonder if clo1 will still continue working even if he knew for sure that he will not receive any bounty. As a founder and cofounder, Gatra could at least find a way to use/promote Riecoin via Flixxio, but nope... And guytp: Last Active: October 16, 2018, 08:17:42 AM Any plans to expand Zapple, make it grow and do advertising? Or can we expect that guytp will also disappear and Zapple be abandoned? It was a good move, but since then there were not anything new. We would like that this project becomes healthy again, but there are still too much uncertainties. And of course still people selling a lot of coins and nobody buying. Only possible good news that I see besides the active rieMiner development will be the XPoolX exchange. |
|
|
|
rieMiner 0.9β3 is out! It is a big one! Direct download link of the official Win64 binary. - Assembly optimizations from Michael Bell = Mihawk = Rockhawk, thanks! Now, there is no reason anymore to use fastrie/xptMiner. Performance increase is variable depending on your computer and the rieMiner configuration and hard to measure, but should be at least ~5% and can be much more. Note that this version also uses more memory. - Partial CPU Underuse Bug fix, also from Rockhawk, this problem is significantly less important, but still present; - Now possible to use custom configuration file paths; - Now possible to save tuples counts by difficulty for statistical purposes; - Some aesthetic changes like showing 1 to 3-tuples/s metrics instead of 2 to 4; - Includes support of other constellations types to be ready in case of a POW change in the future, or just to be able to find different prime constellations; - Some other minor changes. Thank you again Rockhawk for your contributions! New developers are welcome! Check out the rieMiner Community Forum topic, the rieMiner's Github repository (be sure to read (again) the README), and its Rockhawk's fork.
|
|
|
|
|
So I tried a power of 9, but the calculation is still very imprecise (for example, taking Standard Benchmark and Easy Benchmark results for a given CPU should give the same earnings, but there is instead always a 2-5 fold difference, either with a power of 6 or 9). There must be something else to take in account.
Considering words instead of bits does not change much the results, the rounding may be negligible when compared to the uncertainties of the metrics.
And after thinking again about it, as I am really extrapolating the average time needed to find a block, it should already take in account the verifying work in some way, so it should actually be valid to directly use the Hardy-Littlewood k-tuple conjecture and a power of 6.
So for now, I will let the calculator as is and mark it as experimental. Any help to fix it is welcome.
|
|
|
|
Difficulty scaling should probably be 9th power instead of 6th. The prime checks are proportional to difficulty ^3 so it is constellation length + 3. This is what riecoin uses in computing difficulties.
The primecheck uses multiplications. For multiplication it should be the number of words rather than the number of bits that matters. It's possible you would get more accurate results with:
(d2/d1)^7*ceil(d2/64)^2/ceil(d1/64)^2
I'm only suggesting this for the calculator, not for riecoin.
Thank you for your remark. Now, I just realize that Riecoin.org also says in its FAQ that the work needed is given by O(log(p)^(n + 3)). I already noticed that a power of 9 was used to calculate the Superblock difficulty, but did not understand why it was not just 6 instead. So it was because I overlooked the verifying part. I will update the calculator later. |
|
|
|
For beginners here, I wrote a Getting Started page in my Riecoin website. Additionally, I created a Profitability Calculator. To use it, you need to get the 2 to 4 tuples/s metrics by benchmarking using rieMiner during enough time. Do not hesitate to report if you find something flawed in the calculator. |
|
|
|
I looked into transaction fees a a bit. I think there is enough flexibility through configuration options that we don't need to add a zero transaction fee capability. The parameters are:
mintxfee - the minimum transaction fee in RIC/kB
minrelaytxfee - the minimum transaction fee for a node to relay the transaction in RIC/kB
blockmintxfee - minimum fee for a transaction to be included in blocks created by mining code, in RIC/kB
The defaults are all 0.00001000 RIC/kB. The smallest value is .00000001.
-mintxfee=.00000001 -minrelaytxfee=.00000001 -blockmintxfee=.00000001 will allow transactions of 1 satoshi (or gatra). I have tested this on testnet.
This way we allow users, nodes, and miners to determine what rates should be instead of fixing it in code and we stay consistent with bitcoin.
I could see possibly lowering the defaults.
Sounds good. I am not against fees when they are such low, and letting everyone decide for the minimum fee is a good solution. Finally, users will probably not even care to pay a few riemanns instead of 0. I think that we can let the default settings as is (but it is really equal to me). The spamming prevention is a good point, though, but in this case, we would need to increase significantly the minimum fee, else it would still be easy to bloat the blockchain. It seems better to not penalize everyone and hope that no such attack occur before it becomes unpractical to make (if the fees somehow become in practice high enough to make such attacks unpractical, either by a price increase or by people setting higher fees). What work is remaining before a "ready for productions use" 0.16.3, according to you? Are we almost done, or there is still much work to do? Would the remaining work be more in the actual code, or more in the new version adoption and softforks/BIPs activation? |
|
|
|
I now have my own Riecoin page. There, you can currently find general links about Riecoin, and download Riecoin-Qt Deb64 and Win64 binaries. You will even find the full blockchain up to Block 968981 for Riecoin Core 0.16.3, to avoid having to sync everything. If I had more time, I would complete this page to make it more useful. If you wish IGJ, you can make a redirection from Pttn.Riecoin-Community.com to ric.Pttn.me. Step by Step how I compiled for Windows available here. Some modifications of the code will make many steps unnecessary. I think that we should not use that old Db4.8 anymore and upgrade to 5.3. At worst, this is just a blockchain redownload and a few dump/importprivkeys to do (or just send funds to new addresses). So everyone, help Riecoin modernize by starting using 0.16.3 now! I agree with IGJ, we should not take too much time to upgrade to 0.16.3. Then we must be ready to follow future Bitcoin Core updates actively and not end up again with an outdated wallet. Even if the update is still unofficial, it will eventually happen, so we should not wait gatra and advance our own. |
|
|
|
|
ziiip, All your arguments are valid, but I think that it is better for now to follow the Bitcoin direction and code, and not take risks by not using something that is working and widely accepted. Then, if Riecoin manages to get to the top 50 coins and attract many more competent developers, here we can start to discuss about alternate choices.
I would personally be glad if Riecoin becomes so widely used that we need fees to use it. But I agree that as long as the network is underused (i.e. far from having full blocks), we should modify the code to allow 0 fee transactions for transactions < 1 KB (you are right, up to 6 inputs). It is a certain advantage over Primecoin that require at least 0.01 XPM fee for every transaction, which is ridiculous!
Voting sounds good for later. The votes could be weighted by balances (with a limit to avoid whales taking all the decisions) or simply require a minimum and significant RIC balance, to get people buying RIC and be involved. It is also better to agree to go to a direction together instead of starting pointless debates and shitforks that split all the efforts...
|
|
|
|
First ever RIC transaction with MultiSig address (with "T" prefix (equivalent to "3" Bitcoin addresses), it seems that clo1 agreed to use my suggested prefixes) mined in 966545  ! 20 RIC were sent to TWaXpZTMJoFAGMzFj5r4uwq7S7kWirtZkp, and another "T" address was used as change. Riecoin is becoming ready for the next decade! This is so new that Cryptoid is not even showing the addresses correctly, with a "3" as prefix instead of "T". This also means that rieMiner would already be 0.16.3 ready. Next step will be to test if I can send from such addresses. News about transactions not broadcasting using 0.16.3 can be found in this topic (also read the end of previous page). For now, if you want to create transactions with 0.16.3 and get them confirmed, add the IGJ's 78.83.27.28 node, and wait that I find a block (will take about 1/2 day on average currently)... Or maybe other miners can start mining using a 0.16.3 wallet, I am the only one for now! After fixing this (if possible), we should start to distribute some Deb64 and Win64 binaries to start the transition. Edit: hmmm, weird... It seems that it is impossible to spend the coins from "T" addresses... The Debug.log says "CommitTransaction(): Transaction cannot be broadcast immediately, no-witness-yet", so it is not willing to broadcast... |
|
|
|
clo1, is there any way to send Riecoins without paying any transaction fee like the 0.10.2 (if not, this would in another hand be nice to encourage people to mine, even though only a few hundreds gatras* is not much )? Is it normal that I am not seeing incoming transactions (sent from another 0.10.2) with 0.16.3; I see them only when someone mined them? Also, transactions sent using 0.16.3 seem not to be broadcasting. They appear in GetBlockTemplate, but not for another wallet. The text "broadcast though x nodes" is not appearing, it only says that it is in the MemPool. I had to double-spend to get back some coins... I am pretty sure that I am connected to enough nodes... I might try to mine one such transaction to see what happens. Especially one with the Replace By Fee activated. * 1 gatra = 10^(-8) RIC, or we could also say 1 riemann too :p Edit: transactions mined and broadcasted successfully in 966103. 3559bd615e38ec983e0cc1b688a73eed1f82cd3bc4a4a027a88b75229b74f899 used Replace By Fee, as you can see with the 4294967293 sequence value. A transaction is considered to have opted in to allowing replacement of itself if any of its inputs have an nSequence number less than (0xffffffff - 1). If nobody used 0.16.3 to send any transaction in the network before, this is the first transaction created by a Riecoin Core 0.16.3 and confirmed in the MainNet ! Now, am I the only one that have the transactions not broadcasting, using 0.16.3? |
|
|
|
Bounty deadline for the CPU Underuse bug fix extended to November 1 2018, 00:00 Zurich timezone and increased to 2000 RIC, and even 5000 RIC if more work is done! Read this post. Remember that 5000 RIC was worth hundreds of $ before the crash, and could be much more in the future. After the deadline, the reward will be reduced to 500 RIC (or 1250 for the complete rewriting) until January 1 2019 00:00 Zurich Timezone, or as soon as the new wallet is officially approved. So please someone try to fix the CPU underuse bug before November. I do not have the time to do this myself until a while.
|
|
|
|
For Bounty Hunters: I am now willing to donate 1000 RIC for the person who fixes this rieMiner issue elegantly. This offer will expire on October 8 2018 at 00:00 Zurich Timezone. It is currently about the price of one beer, but remember how much a pizza cost years ago... And who knows if this is just 2 lines to change, but I am currently too busy to look. After this deadline, the bounty will be reduced to 250 RIC and remain valid until the new wallet is officially updated, or until January 1 2019 at 00:00 Zurich Timezone if gatra never comes back. Note that this bug is present since fastrie/xptMiner. Obviously, there must be no performance loss, you should benchmark before and after and compare before submitting the fix. And by elegantly, I mean, inter alia, a fix that is not just a workaround (you could for example compute 2 sieves and imitate the launching of 2 instances with less threads, but this is not worth any bounty). The fix must also make Testnet mining work properly with any sieve size (in my 2700X, only about 25% of the CPU is used when mining at difficulty 304 using 16 threads!). Registrations reopened at uBlock.it
Nice, I can now test your pool myself, thank you.
|
|
|
|
Great everyone, thank you. So now the repository is https://github.com/riecointeam/riecoin , and the https://github.com/clo-prime/riecoin-0.16 one is dropped? lzknr, one possibility for you could be to look at some thin wallets (like Electrum) and fork one for Riecoin. Indeed, having a Riecoin Core update is nice, but for mainstream adoption, we need something very simple that can be used instantly out of the box (i. e. without having to download the blockchain,...). And sure, an Android wallet is a must have. If you are willing to do so, it will be a very nice contribution for Riecoin. |
|
|
|
|
Finally I can post again! I wonder what happened...
As a serious bug was discovered in Bitcoin Core, we should upgrade to Riecoin 0.16.3 as well and not just 0.16.0.
Any news about the upgrade, clo1? We have not seen you since a while.
While we are at it, where is gatra? He did not appear since August 6! So like some people mentioned in the community forum, I am a bit worried whether he even remembers about it...
|
|
|
|
|
Great!
There is no performance change as they use the same algorithm. I tested both in pooled mining and got the same results (note that the find rates in xptMiner needs to be divided by 4.096). I hope that the new features, interface, and modernization that rieMiner proposes would still justify the xptMiner replacement for most miners.
The code is also much easier to work for people willing to improve the algorithm.
And about the block that was not accepted, I will assume that it was an orphan anyway... Block 953811 was this time submitted without any issue via the Riecoin Core 0.16.
|
|
|
|
New bêta release, rieMiner 0.9β2 (2018-09-16) - Drops GetWork support, adds an assistant to configure rieMiner without rieMiner.conf. One standalone binary for Windows 64 bits is included. It should work on Windows 7+ with Core 2 Duo or more recent, and you can download it in the rieMiner GitHub release page. Official binaries will always include a developer fee of 2% for solo mining, which is very reasonable, as solo mining pools are usually taking about 5% of fees. You can remove it by compiling yourself the program. I hope that you were able to configure rieMiner to mine, xandry. Else, try rieMiner 0.9β2 with its assistant doing the work for you. Edit: clo1, I found my first block submitted via Riecoin 0.16. But it was not accepted in the network. I am not sure what happened. The block that I found was 953518. Why did the wallet redownload the 953517 and discarded my 953518? Was I just very unlucky finding an orphan? But in this case, why does this happens if the real 953518 was found only 4 minutes later? I am pretty sure that my connection is fine... By some chance I also found 953521 and 953528, which were accepted, but they were submitted to the old 0.10.2 wallet. 2018-09-16 22:22:47 UpdateTip: new best=153151906342817a46aec18c3211f5c4d14dd24f78685e5865c09d6908cf70ce height=953516 version=0x00000002 work=000000000000000000000000000000000009605b03a157e499602ddc3398e9a7 tx=2252145 date='2018-09-16 22:21:46' progress=0.999998 cache=0.3MiB(2223txo)
2018-09-16 22:22:47 CreateNewBlock(): block weight: 904 txs: 0 fees: 0 sigops 400
2018-09-16 22:24:23 UpdateTip: new best=621eba06c9047e2931b330c94a45a1b3041772c67f54255c714ab3940f5d1ac9 height=953517 version=0x00000002 work=000000000000000000000000000000000009605b47b0336dcee2055c9d991dc2 tx=2252146 date='2018-09-16 22:23:56' progress=0.999999 cache=0.3MiB(2224txo)
2018-09-16 22:24:23 CreateNewBlock(): block weight: 904 txs: 0 fees: 0 sigops 400
2018-09-16 22:25:08 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:25:08 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:25:20 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:25:20 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:25:55 UpdateTip: new best=4a9ad3dc47ca6e61485f6ad506ec33df54a6eeb7288ed983a1cf7cdeed50482f height=953518 version=0x20000000 work=000000000000000000000000000000000009605b8bbf0ef70463dcdd079951dd tx=2252147 date='2018-09-16 22:25:44' progress=1.000000 cache=0.3MiB(2225txo)
2018-09-16 22:25:55 CreateNewBlock(): block weight: 904 txs: 0 fees: 0 sigops 400
2018-09-16 22:27:55 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:27:55 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:27:57 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:27:57 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:28:04 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:28:04 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:29:35 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:29:35 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:29:44 UpdateTip: new best=621eba06c9047e2931b330c94a45a1b3041772c67f54255c714ab3940f5d1ac9 height=953517 version=0x00000002 work=000000000000000000000000000000000009605b47b0336dcee2055c9d991dc2 tx=2252146 date='2018-09-16 22:23:56' progress=0.999991 cache=0.3MiB(2225txo)
2018-09-16 22:29:45 UpdateTip: new best=be664dc86be5020b72e380940419fe0cfefa4b0c569182f515a2080d4675ca36 height=953518 version=0x00000002 work=000000000000000000000000000000000009605b8bbf0ef70463dcdd079951dd tx=2252147 date='2018-09-16 22:25:05' progress=0.999993 cache=0.3MiB(2227txo)
2018-09-16 22:29:45 UpdateTip: new best=3ee54168430c3e73efbf61fda5fae56567bc35cdb1db72cde83fb3e429aa516b height=953519 version=0x00000002 work=000000000000000000000000000000000009605bcfcdea8039e5b45d719985f8 tx=2252149 date='2018-09-16 22:30:38' progress=1.000001 cache=0.3MiB(2231txo)
2018-09-16 22:29:45 CreateNewBlock(): block weight: 904 txs: 0 fees: 0 sigops 400
2018-09-16 22:30:36 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:30:36 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:30:38 UpdateTip: new best=53b48f01c56c28e84872992c571b300b267a8a62c256c7ae19f34e13369c049d height=953520 version=0x00000002 work=000000000000000000000000000000000009605c13dcc6096f678bdddb99ba13 tx=2252150 date='2018-09-16 22:29:45' progress=0.999999 cache=0.3MiB(2233txo)
2018-09-16 22:30:39 CreateNewBlock(): block weight: 904 txs: 0 fees: 0 sigops 400
2018-09-16 22:31:18 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:31:18 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:31:58 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:31:58 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:32:31 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:32:31 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:32:46 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:32:47 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:33:43 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:33:43 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:34:46 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:34:46 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:34:58 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:34:58 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:35:01 UpdateTip: new best=144348ecbcd975c5cbd43c7b42d24cc3c62283ec65bfb21ad101b25902399fd5 height=953521 version=0x00000002 work=000000000000000000000000000000000009605c57eba192a4e9635e4599ee2e tx=2252151 date='2018-09-16 22:34:42' progress=1.000000 cache=0.3MiB(2234txo)
2018-09-16 22:35:02 CreateNewBlock(): block weight: 904 txs: 0 fees: 0 sigops 400
2018-09-16 22:35:36 ERROR: CheckProofOfWork() : n+12 not prime
2018-09-16 22:35:36 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (proof of work failed)
2018-09-16 22:35:58 UpdateTip: new best=12af672fdcaae93d10a295b827885ab7697648d7ff484a34efb649b240501c67 height=953522 version=0x00000002 work=000000000000000000000000000000000009605c9bfa7d1bda6b3adeaf9a2249 tx=2252152 date='2018-09-16 22:35:29' progress=0.999999 cache=0.3MiB(2235txo) |
|
|
|
All options is ignoring as ill formed configuration line.
The syntax for each line is and only is Not or whatever else. No :, no ;. just a = between the key and the value. Just do a simple copy paste and replace the values. I've had rieMiner 0.9β1 running on uBlock for about 12 hours now, and it seems to be working just fine Thank you for the feedback ! |
|
|
|
|
