Thanks, now I understand, this meaning was unknown to me. I think there are words in slang
similar to those in any language, but they are unrecognizable to foreigners, especially if abbreviated.

Regarding the effort to drive up the price and then sell at the best, I think it's the goal of every
"to the moon" Hype. It is a clear goal but unspoken.
On the phenomenon of Hype in the altcoinworld, I'd be boring repeating the same bad opinions
expressed in another of my old message, which is why all of you are saved this time.

IMHO, in general would be better focus on concrete things, as the features present or obtainable
in the near future, rather than on the skyrocketing quotation.

Bye Bye

I agree with Bspus, if he only wanted to make easy money, he would have sold when the
price was much higher, to do it right now would not make much sense.

I guess actually more likely that he had a sudden need, I hope for him that the money was
needed for the down payment from his craved Lambo, perhaps of second hand.

Regarding the Gs, do not understand it myself, I thought of something like Giga satoshi
but I do not think it makes much sense.

However, it is undeniable that he has spent a lot of time for Nav in the previous months,
and from my point of view, every time I see a Viking who tries to go to the moon by any
means, I believe that I will remember him.



See you soon HashForce101.



Remy_5

Well, I feared there was a strict dependence (to do the thing Beta, before
any start, is needed the thing Alpha is already done), but I'm happy to know
is not so, and the tasks can advance indipendently, apart
the web\mobile wallet which also You are waiting.


Regarding Forum & Masternode.
Ok, I'll try to wait to ask until come a better time.

Regarding Pool
My concern is just for an optmization of beneficial/cost.
The cost for DevTeam/Foundation I presume will be equal in every month,
regardless of real use, but I suppose the users will be more or they
put more MHash, and then get more beneficial for all, in more cold months.

Regarding Cooperative Or Oligarchic System
I have nothing contrary to reward the investor, and I can imagine there are
some type of project which can start if and only if there is a big investment
stable at its back, and people ready to support it even more, but the choose
of the census/assets as only criterion of selection... this give me a bit of chills.

Let my explain, is not something regarding Nav or Foundation/DevTeam,
but with the born of AltCurrency, there was the hope to develop a better system
something different from the old RealWord monetary\economical system.

But more the thing get big and real, also considering the little scale,
more seem to me are emerging, step by step, the "old" same behaviors,
where new small Groups of Power can manipulate the markets, or the fate
of whole AltCoins world.

In other word, there is a passage from a deprecate old but stable and known system,
to another new, unknow and unstable but which is taking the worst from the old.
I don't know if the old system's rules are the only which work, or for
laziness the people don't try to find another better system.
Anyway this type of thoughts, I think they can lead us very away, and to be
honest, I don't have the necessary baggage of knowledge both in economical or
humanistic side.

Returning to us, maybe explaining what will be or what the Cooperative System
will do, can render a better view of this definition.

Regarding planned coin change.

Well... I think some people can have some idea or request.
Come on People pull out ideas!


Thanks, It's a good appetizer.  


Bye Bye

Yes, Yes, Yes!!!  He Did it!!!

Another step in the right directions.


Aside the jokes... my thanks. 

Bye Bye

ROTFL.  I know, I'm pedantic.... at least. 

I can send the question via PM, but maybe other are thinking at the same things,
so with a single act the DevTeam can answer at all, and avoid other loss
of time repeating again and again in many PM.

Bye Bye

Well, I think that the hard work always deserves an answer and thanks.

I congratulate really, in the new roadmap there is really great stuff, and I
imagine that the roadmap shortly will be integrated also in Project page on the site.

Obviously this can only bring many questions in a person curious, but I will
try to limit myself.

The connections between the various activities are an embellishment graphic
or denote a dependency between tasks / curator ?

The forum will be a brand new one, or it is a revision of *alk.org, which
so far it has been very under used?
 
Regarding masternode I not know well the concept so I might talk nonsense,
so please be patient, but from what I think to understand the DevTeam manages
currently at least 4, and is in constant search for funds to cover their costs
and keep them active.
A private how could get gain from the management of a masternode?

Launch a multiPool for mining in the hottest period of summer (hemisphere
borealis), you don't think it is a bit risky?
 
The cooperative system, for as stated, is not likely to become a oligarchic system?
(but perhaps of this, we can talk about it in due time)

The re-design of the coin regard just the aesthetic side, or also some inside
technical parameter ?

I appreciate the quick change to the OP with removal of old merchants,
thing that I thank you Strugg, but I would like to remind you to update
also the link to the "BlockChain download", which should not aim for
NavajoCoin-2.0.6-Windows-Wallet-Final.zip but as correctly reported on site,
link to Navajo-Blockchain.zip.

And then to continue with the our telenovelas , I would like to remind you that
the block halving "Block 50,000 (15 NAV reward)" is never became active
and the reward is remained at 150 until the POW end (if you want you can check
with the block explorer), and that currently the parameters Min Age is two hours
and that the Max Age is 24 hours.

If there is some reason practical (or religious) that keeps you from
correct those parameters, please tell it to me, at least I will avoid to be
annoying as a stone in the shoe. 

Bye Bye

I hope you do not want a complete list, it would be embarrassing.

What disturbing me, is not the regrettable delay of web-wallet.
There may be dozens of reasons that led to the delay and that DevTeam may
not be directly responsible but only spectators like us.

What bothers me, for example, is the comment of Soopy, in which he says that
does not there is nothing of which to be disturbed.  Disturbs me the appeal
again to announcement of an imminent announcement with the announcement of new
plan in the developments in the project.
Technique that we have already seen, from the controversial results, and that
it has sometimes regretted.

What bothers me is the lack of such evidence of their work, especially the ordinary,
such as I am referring to the verification and update to the OP, repeatedly
requested and never fully carried out, (for example the two links to merchand
are either obsolete, or deleted, and we have no news that they seek others).

What disturbs me that in the last update released 2.08, which should solve a bug
introduced at least 75 days ago with the version 2.06, has been released only the
executable for Windows, which ironically was the only platform in which
the bug must have been bypassed with the one-click-install.

And both of autoinstall just mentioned that the latest version 2.08, there is
no track on GitHub, although it had been assured it would be available within
hours, which from my point of view this is a very serious and important thing.

Returning to the OP what bothers me a bit is that we now have a link version 2.08 exe,
one of Dropbox with another name, nothing for Mac, the GitHub (obsolete),
and the link which should lead to the download of blockchain zip but indicates
NavajoCoin-2.0.6-Windows-Wallet-Final.zip, somewhat misleading, and probably obsolete.

I try to make things clear, I am not saying that the DevTeam is not doing anything,
and on other occasions they have demonstrated their ability, but i think they must
make it clear what they do of good, and they must cure all the details on OP and site,
rechecking often everything, and react to problems with rapidity.

Having a clear idea as to be develop the future is great, very good, but prove every day
to best manage the present, IMHO is equally important.

Bye Bye

The block explorer is not yet so... updated.

Really sorry for you, AFAIK the transaction is already confirmed, it is in block  1239413, 237 confirm,
block hash b597cac229108a0e2c02272eb2c4f54fcb2f7fd1eb618345caa94d2392757746.

Bye Bye

I like this way of thinking, much more cadenced and realistic. 

Just one question: What is the propellant?

With regard to another message of David1365 on the ban to pump group, I agree, for their
interest they are doing great damage to all.

But I think they are difficult to recognize and ban as individual person, it might be
easier to recognize one of the most used of their weapons, the HYPE
and "To the moon" that too often deceive people.

Bye Bye

Days ago there was a technical request about the POS, I did not understand
if the request was sincere or just a provocation, but either way,
since the Dev are busy with persistent connectivity problems of the servers,
and so I guess they can not give them an answer to that request in the short
term, I try to answer as a simple user.

The request was for a chart showing the evolution of Pos Difficulty, in fact,
recently this was not discussed a lot, but in the last period there has been
some increase.
                
The following chart is the trend of the POSDIF extracted from a block-chain
starting from 2015-04-01 and aggregated at intervals of one hour.

The red trace (left axis) is the average of the POS, the black line is a moving
average of the POS with a window of 24 hours to soften fluctuations on a daily
basis, and the blue trace (right axis) is the average number of seconds between
the blocks.



As you can see there emerges a cyclical swing in the POS, a stronger on the 24 hours,
and one less noticeable over the week.
These changes are better shown on these two other graphs, whose blockchain's data
are aggregated into 15 minute intervals starting from 2015-01-05, and in turn
aggregates again on  hourly basis, wrapped over the 24 Hours, or wrapped over
the entire week.


Obviously the data are to be considered as preliminary and indicative only,
I may have committed errors of form or method (although I do not think).

This answer I do not think that fully meets the initial request, but I hope
that satisfies this technical curiosity.

Considering that a picture is worth a thousand words... this time I tried
to be more concise.

Bye Bye

Hi!

OK, three requests for you:

1) The problem that arises during the creation of the wrong "genesis block", with the use of installer
for Windows systems has been circumvented.
What do you intend to do for Linux and Mac?

2) When you want to update the GitHub?

3) Both the OP and  the official website, reported the data of the specifications of POS incorrect,
particularly MaxAge and MinAge, and they have changed by many many months.
The DevTeam, when the hell intend to update this wrong information?

And always about the OP, if you really want to discourage the use of Cryptsy for its slowness
in maintenance, then I do not really understand why BTER is still in the OP, its deposits are
blocked for months now. At least put in OP a clear warning on BTER.

And about the other exchange alcurEx, with all due respect, with its empty order list does not seem
to give great signs of flourishing health.

Bye Bye

@GreedyJohn & Gorian

Well, if the code on github does not compile, it is certainly not the fault
of Cryptsy, also Bittrex has encountered difficulties. 

Certainly at Craptsy they are very slooooooow, again, but IMHO the
benefits of to be there, could be substantial on long term.

Theres people who are quicker to make things right and who is not,
more reason to make things easy and done it well, and well in advance.

But now begin a boycott, frankly it seems to me senseless, and indeed
to see tones used, it seems to me that almost GreedyJohn is spreading FUD.
Or he wants to eliminate an independent market in a way so it can be more
easier the manipulation of price on Bittrex.

(And reading this now he will have a bilious attack.)   

But I do not think this is the impression that he really wants to give,
I think that none of the long-term investors want this.


If we really want to talk about quickness, take for example, the release
of version 2.06 and 2.07.

On March 24 Sum2Dev released a 2.07 HotFix with the new binary, to solve the
problem of the openssl dll, marginally noticed also in 2.06.
He wrote "The github will be updated with the new code ASAP."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=679791.msg10869318#msg10869318)

Maybe I'm wrong, but until now the GitHub still not been changed.
It does not seem very "ASAP".

And I will not even mention the problem of incorrect generation of "genesis block"
(the merkle error), not an error, but a real horror.
And I say this not to criticize, but only as a simple observation.

So if things are not done to be easy, when the others remain blocked or put a life to
perform an update, what sense does it complain or put them to shame?



@Borin
Not sure, but maybe I made an answer, not specifically to you, but the kind
of speech in general in forum. And perhaps in those occasion I was not very diplomatic.   
And I'm steel not sure if craptsy is only reason of lack of interest.


Bye Bye

Please, could you explain to me why, something that works now, would be holding back the entire network?

Possibly clearly.

OK! Thanks for reply.

Anyway... to avoid this exist the command reservebalance.

Bye Bye

PS2:
News regarding Cryptsy?

Old story, maybe 2.0.6 wallet fails to recreate the genesis block, due to new internal format.

If you hurry, as for QT Wallet you can try to upload the archive with the blockchain done by Shahim
and it should be in the OP.

Or you could use a simple 1 line quickfix, very unofficial, here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=679791.msg10743779#msg10743779

But to load the entire blockchain we could put quite a bit, in my case roughly 30 hours.



Good.

Could you give us any spoilers, what kind of fix you are thinking, for example
1) a simple external script or batch  to rename the dir and file.conf if necessary and
load the archive of blockchain before the first launch of the wallet,
2) a patch in the wallet code which load the entire blockchain at first start,
3) a patch which will make a series of partial automatic uploads of large segments
of blockchain as from your old idea?


BTW The webwallet will be able to produce stake?


Bye Bye


PS:
Any news from Cryptsy maintainer?

@ Shahim
These days I'm a little busy, and I can not transfer my routine.
Causes problems for the network if I still use the previous 2.0.6?
I think not, but it's best to ask.


@Rasco2010
I saw some old names recently, nice to see you again!

@Ivanok
Thanks, Wow 30 MB, i think even worst.

Bye Bye

15000 ?? What a greedy guy!   

Yes, the wallet keeps the private keys for the addresses, IIRC but also keeps
a track, a pointer or something (I should recheck the source) to private part
of database, which indicates all personal transactions received or made,
and txuo of coins available to be spent or stake.
This should be the part which the command repairwallet fix.

So the value of 1 coin or 1M coin, don't care, but 1 transaction or
100k TX have much impact.

I noticed this with the wallet of a failed coin which i use for some tests,
which with very few addresses, it was growing only for the stake and POW,
becoming as you yourself have said slow to die to handle.

Only after transferring all to a new wallet \ address, the new wallet is returned
to be usable... at least for a while. 


Bye Bye

I do not dispute the absolute value of the fee, but your question is well placed.
You might also want consider what is the value of a service in its own way unique,
but they are themes and economic theories, from which I remain happily out.  

Regarding the cost and use of the server, and how the cost of the servers just
to handle anonymity, here I am in the dark, we have been told that there are 12
servers, but I have no idea how they are intended or functions are divided
and whether they can be aggregated.

But of one thing I am quite sure, even without anonymity, there are live
costs to sustain.

Maybe we can think as academic discussion about the impact of anonymous
transactions on blockchain, at least from what has been explained in the course
of the beta test.
Obviously there are only conjectures and maybe wrong, happy to be corrected by Dev.

Instead of a transaction "clear" and directed, a transaction anonymous undergoes
multiple steps, as well as a fragmentation, which depends not so much on the
absolute value, but the composition of the figure that you want to move.
For example, if in the best of cases, to send for example 100 or 1000 occupies
a space of 1, and send 1050 it occupies 2, to send 975 or 9999 it can occupy 10.

So without making too many calculations, an anonymous transaction, may impact
differently on blockchain, but may come to occupy as a dozen normal transactions.

Moreover, the fragmentation of which I said before, also involves another effect,
which will take place later, when the recipient will spend the money received.
Its new transaction will consist of many small piles, which occupy a little more
space than normal, making the size in bytes of the transaction a little heavier.
Nothing catastrophic, but it is a burden that will be imposed on the entire
block chain.

The idea of slowing the blockchain, I do not really like, in general I prefer a
fast coin instead of having to wait several minutes for confirmation.
In the case of many transactions at same time, may be cases of gridlock,
in which transactions are put in a long queue, dilating much the time needed
to final confirmation, a bit as happen with btc.

Instead a fast block time, would reduce these queues, and make time to
confirm acceptable.

There might be a compromise solution, a block time slow when there are no
transactions, but it can accelerate immediately, when there are new transactions
to be incorporated or to be confirmed.

It seems to me that some coins have attempted this, but I do not remember the
name, or if they have been successful, but I think it's a fairly difficult
to implement it here and now, especially so with a coin already in operation.

Bye Bye

Congratulations to your friend, MobyDick, send him greetings from me.

If you happen to see Him, I have a technical curiosity to ask him, if possible I would
like to know how many megabytes occupied his wallet.dat.

It tends to increase with the use and with time, but I can not imagine what it can get.

Bye Bye

The question is uncertain.

We can not know exactly what has a single wallet, because normally a wallet
can hold up to 100 different addresses (sometimes more), although typically it
only uses a few addresses, and often for only a few transactions.

What we can do is count the addresses, and how much they hold.
Among the more than 90630 addresses that have been used at least once,
the addresses that have now more than 10K Nav are about 247, for a total
of about 56971K NAV, almost all the circulating Nav.

One interesting fact instead concerns the addresses that are less than 10K
and greater than 0, they are 2097, for a total 1110K Nav.

Of the latter, well 847 have not given any sign of activity in 2015, their total
is approximately 375K Nav, and the maximum value among them is the 8697 Nav,
but it is a rare case, are usually fractions of Nav, and the average value is 441 Nav.

Instead addresses that have produced stakes in the last week, were about 118.
The topstaker is still sfdzo3, with about 3312 blocks, but in the last 24
hours he has not produced anything, as we know it is migrating to bittrex.

The calculations are made partly manually just now, so error-prone, and constantly changing.

Bye Bye