We are all waiting for a update from you buchaski.
What are the new plans for this project?
perhaps the plans were met with too much scepticism. |
|
|
|
OK guys I really need some help here Sintoms - I take a random ID transaction from my wallet and put on the search bar of the explorer, and it show me the details of that transaction, perfect BUT sometimes it shows "Error! : Search found no results for:xxxxxxxxxxxxxx". Now I select a random hash from the screen click it, got to address bar and paste my transaction ID after " http://198.50.229.39:3001/tx/PASTE_YOUR _ID_HERE" It actually show the the details of the transaction Now the weir thing is that if now I come back to block-explorer homepage and put my transaction ID in the search bar it also show me the details the the transaction and no more errors. Really I don't know how to fix this, I was planning to wipe out the database of the explorer and erase the .loco folder (except the wallet and conf file) and build again from scratch but if any of you have any idea about this issue, I'll be much greatfull (I'm not asking a magic solution, just put me in the right way) i played with it looking at stuff for 15 minutes or so and had no problems at all. (using chrome) is there any chance you were selecting orphan blocks ? i know my wallet has a few  |
|
|
|
hmmm, and firefox gives me empty pages for all 3 links. lol. these work on chrome and ff for me. |
|
|
|
I test setup masternodes, but i dont have 30000 loco to start it. Any help my? - masternodes adrress 5qwe73uAy8iBpuhX1Uwi5yRHEFsqM7T67h
masternodes aren't operational for about another 2 weeks. so keep collecting  |
|
|
|
Incompatiblity with current secp256k1 is one, i had to take measures to have two second versions on the system without them overwriting each other. Using custom commands in the build commands to link to the corresponding libraries. I run the wallets in docker images, so i could solve it that way to force the right libs into the container and run it. But if anyone is running more than one wallet on a machine using the same libs but different versions, than they will run into the same problem.
a-ha.. i am just compiling in ubuntu and working through errors, this is one thing i was was wondering about, i have found too many incompatible versions of secp256k1 in the wild so i went in assuming problems build secp256k1 in src/secp256k1 folder , used only the below , did not "make install" ./autogen.sh ./configure make then i added the following to the makefile, and commented out (not sure if both addprefix are necessary, but it doesnt hurt the process) # -l secp256k1 DEFS += $(addprefix -I,$(CURDIR)/secp256k1) $(addprefix -I,$(CURDIR)/secp256k1/include) LIBS = $(CURDIR)/secp256k1/src/libsecp256k1_la-secp256k1.o didn't need to make it static  edit. just synced to the same block mentioned above getblockhash 32101 07bfb92040d6e78a5c35dd2d4bf77d0a8b1387248cc42e0fa09b41d5637f8af1 |
|
|
|
|
best=07bfb92040d6e78a5c35dd2d4bf77d0a8b1387248cc42e0fa09b41d5637f8af1 height=32101
it's the simplest way to tell ..
-
sent test coins to nova, they're on same chain it seems .. hmm, unless the transaction was valid on all forks etc etc .. lol
|
|
|
|
|
heh i've wondered the same thing a few times ..
|
|
|
|
|
yes there's a hard coded seed.
46.233.42.249 it seems
edit
hmm maybe not..
probably just got that from irc
|
|
|
|
not paying much attention but POS discussion wise.. benefits of PoS is defense against rogue PoW hash. for any "low value" shit coin.. this is very useful to keep the blocks reasonably consistent rather than at the mercy of anyone with a vaguely mediocre farm. we went with constant block rewards because it is a simple way to encourage more staking inputs. with many coins, it's more profitable to keep your coins in a single input, quicker to stake meaning higher compounding return. not good for network  with constant reward it is more profitable to earn more stakes over time than the quick bang .. good for network i recall reading some discussion on removing coinweight from calculations, which also encourage more staking inputs .. was that PoS2? -- also LOCO is a current "new" staking coin. it's actually left its seriously high return periods but is still high. dev developed some personal issues just after release, but is still around, and suggests he will be back in the saddle in the next few days. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1438233currently on block 31706 Block 0 - 5000 = 0 coins Per block Block 5001 - 7500 = 100,000 % Block 7501 - 10,000 = 75,0000 % Block 10,001 - 12,500 = 50,000 % block 12,501 - 15,000 = 25,0000 % Block 15,001 - 17,500 = 10,000 % Block 17,501 - 20,000 = 5,000 % block 20,001 - 22,500 = 2,500 % Block 22,501 - 25,000 = 1,000 % Block 25,001 - 30,000 = 500 % Block 30,001 - 60,000 = 250% Block 60,001 - 120,000 = 100% block 120,001 Onwards is set to 50% Per Year PoW constant reward of 5 coins/block edit. actually, there were some "benefits" to the dev not being entirely present. the minimum stake age during the first 20k blocks or so was accidentally set to 24hrs rather than the 6hr in the OP. this resulted in most blocks during that period being earned via PoW rather than a massive spike in growth via PoS. one could only hope for possibly two stakes during each mega high reward section rather than eight or so. |
|
|
|
there's a fork :p i sent Nightz a pm, and the exchange. this explorer http://198.50.229.39:3001/and the exchange seem on the longer fork, which has less peers there's a few older clients running on the longer chain, i havent looked to see what changes are implemented where, { "addr" : "101.175.180.227:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go2:1.2.0/", "startingheight" : 30880, }, { "addr" : "46.236.161.66:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go2:1.1.0/",, "startingheight" : 31149, }, { "addr" : "198.50.229.39:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go:1.0.0/", "startingheight" : 31149, }, { "addr" : "46.226.186.70:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go2:1.2.0/", "startingheight" : 30882, }, { "addr" : "46.233.42.249:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go2:1.2.0/", "startingheight" : 30882, }, { "addr" : "82.27.198.82:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go:1.0.0/","startingheight" : 31149, e }, { "addr" : "37.146.67.74:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go2:1.2.0/", "startingheight" : 30882, }, { "addr" : "213.202.214.140:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go2:1.2.0/", "startingheight" : 30882, }, { "addr" : "75.85.20.118:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go2:1.2.0/", , "startingheight" : 30882, }, { "addr" : "37.59.18.108:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go2:1.2.0/", "startingheight" : 30883, }, { "addr" : "151.77.195.64:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go2:1.2.0/", "startingheight" : 30884, }, { "addr" : "79.69.39.40:34575", "version" : 61401, "subver" : "/Go2:1.2.0/", "startingheight" : 30888, } |
|
|
|
|
anyone having problem syncing, the node to add is 194.135.88.119
the reason why the last block is 2 weeks old is because no-one is mining.
it currently expects around 93 mhs to acheive a 1 minute block.
"networkhashps" : 93921342,
-
there are also issues with the way the wallet joins the network, it shares the same "magic number" with LTC
this is part of the handshake protocol, because it has not been changed it can think that other coins belong on the same network.
this is the result of a getpeerinfo atm with 2 connections (only 1 of which is actually 2bacco coin, the other is some other undetermined coin which also shares the same magic number). (when "fully" connected there are 4 nodes on the "network" atm, only one of which is 2bacco , the other 3 are the different coin).
you can simply tell they are different networks by the blockheight,
the first one is 2baccowith current blockheight of 30463 blocks.

[
"addr" : "194.135.88.119:11065",
"services" : "00000003",
"lastsend" : 1461808516,
"lastrecv" : 1461808507,
"bytessent" : 1122,
"bytesrecv" : 2215,
"blocksrequested" : 0,
"conntime" : 1461808506,
"version" : 70002,
"subver" : "/Satoshi:0.8.6.2/",
"inbound" : false,
"startingheight" : 30463,
"banscore" : 0,
"syncnode" : true
},
{
"addr" : "104.207.159.87:11065",
"services" : "00000003",
"lastsend" : 1461808579,
"lastrecv" : 1461808580,
"bytessent" : 229,
"bytesrecv" : 2215,
"blocksrequested" : 0,
"conntime" : 1461808579,
"version" : 70002,
"subver" : "/Satoshi:0.8.6.2/",
"inbound" : false,
"startingheight" : 47968,
"banscore" : 0
}
]
|
|
|
|
Upon looking at the code i see there is no maximum stake age set in the code so that should not become a factor in staking but in fact max stake age is 24 hours, which is ridiculous, it's not that simple to figure out how it works, not the constant in code, maybe some error in variable types or similar shit, simple line-by-line comparison to other coins code may help, i don't have time for this why are you deleting your ealier posts ?? good to see you have time for something useful. |
|
|
|
hmm, one more great feature, tx weight stops growing after 24 hours,
not sure under what conditions, maybe always.
if always, that qualifies from shitcoin to scamcoin for sure
welcome to PoSv2 |
|
|
|
Thank you bumbacoin, for the tip. Also, the debug window/console is under the 'Help' menu in the 2bacco coin wallettip o' the day, go to the top of the thread page, enter addnode into the search field and press return add addnode=194.135.88.119 to conf file you can also add it by opening your debug window/console
and enter
addnode 194.135.88.119 addI've just realised the conf file should be named coin.conf |
|
|
|
|
would've helped to have a mac wallet for sure
|
|
|
|
I just dumped 29,000 LOCO Enjoy the 90 satoshi shit coin. I invested $100 into hash power. Usually I'm 100% right that the coin is worth the investment. The only time I'm wrong is when a developer ditches for whatever reason. And guess what!? It happened!!! You win some you lose some. not that many in the market history? are you holding some for the pump ?? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
