|
I think there was an update recently for the merge mining. Did you update your wallet?
|
|
|
|
|
Really don't understand people coming up with 10 days, 11 days etc. It was to start 3 days after the 20th which means it would have started on the 23rd. We're now on day 8, not 10 or 11. Jeez.
|
|
|
|
What we want to stop is bots placing min order sizes to hide the order books... Modify the interface to allow people to be able to view the entire order book and get rid of the max limit on the API. Problem solved. Seriously, there's no way to stop bots. Any limits you might implement in order to try and stop bots from doing things will also impact real people so they get screwed over again. |
|
|
|
|
So if we upgraded yesterday and sync'd yesterday but haven't touched it at all today, do we just have to go back to using the old version and not have to redownload the entire blockchain again?
|
|
|
|
Block reward reduction is at block 37000. Actual halving will continue on schedule.
I still don't understand why some are worried about the price "right now". Isn't it better to worry about the price "later"? Honest question; as I've said, I don't market.
Is there a link for the timeline of the next halving? Or a date estimate? thnx. ~darylluke. Op says every 12813 blocks. So I think that's roughly every 9 days give or take depending on things like hash rate and difficulty. |
|
|
|
Those silly people selling so cheap lol. Once the next halving hits coins will be so hard to get and try to buy them back at what they sold them for good luck lol. If they really knew what was on the horizon lol .
How long until halving hits? How long before the 97% rewards reduction to miners kicks in? thnx. No halving, just the new block reward in about 700 more blocks which could be roughly 12 hours I guess |
|
|
|
|
By the way, this statement "I know some would say its a bald statement." I think you guys actually mean "BOLD", not "BALD" lol.
|
|
|
|
|
The discussion about the mining is interesting but somewhat flawed since no one can say how many coins they will get in a week or two once all those looking only for the highest profit drop out of the game and thus a persons daily percentage would go up.
And there should be no worry about miners "drying up" as that will never happen. There's a coin out there that few people know about and it's only minable via cpu and the wallet. Doesn't have a GPU miner at this point and can't be mined via pools. In fact, it recently had an update that "discourages" pool mining if I understand it correctly. It's initial reward was about 67 coins and he dropped it way down to about 6.7. And to top that off, it's not on any exchange so no one can sell them off. And yet people are mining it and in fact since it's launch, more people are mining it than at the start. So I wouldn't be concerned about not having any miners.
|
|
|
|
it's really shame, price should be around 100K if Dev didn't do inside trade and pissed on the community
Any reference/links to back that up? There was a pastebin to back it up. Really? Care to share that. Cause what I saw was a couple guys just talking about the price drop and saying insider trading. Basically, that people would start crying insider trading because of the drop, not that there actually was any. So was there a different pastebin with actual proof? |
|
|
|
Here you have these pro-devs and uber-geeks...
SCOLDING you that to use NXT you must become an amateur cryptologist... He doesn't have to be come an amateur cryptologist - quite the reverse. We discourage that. What he needed to do was use the password the default client provided. That would have been 12 words, with over 128 bits of entropy. It's because he chose to use his own password that he needs to know how to make a strong one. His refusal to say what his password actually was makes it impossible to say whether he did that. He is refusing because he's used similar passwords, with many of the same words, elsewhere. That too is a weakness. We discourage amateur cryptology because they so often get it wrong. Sort of sad that one has to generate some crazy password in order to secure an account. You don't. Just use the password the default client generates for you. Cause it seems to me NXT gets a lot of stolen NXT reports and would point to a fundamental problem with NXT. The problem isn't fundamental; it'd be easy to fix in the client. I'd rather it used a wallet.dat, same as Bitcoin. Some Nxt clients do. The downside is that if you lose the wallet.dat file, you lose access to your coins; and that has happened to people. Swings and roundabouts. It would help if the client didn't allow users to pick their own passwords at all. (I also think the client should ask for the account code, and only ask for the password when they actually make a transaction.) Well actually, it is a fundamental problem. It doesn't matter what password anyone generates. If you receive NXT and have not sent any out, a hacker doesn't even have to know your exact password to steal them. All they have to do is have a pregenerated key (based on some alternate password) that match your account number (part of the issue here is that this is only 64 bits long instead of 128+ like other coins) and they can steal them. That's why NXT implemented that "hack" to put your public key into the blockchain once you do your first send of coins and that makes it so a hacker then needs your full password to get access to your account. In other words, in order to secure your account, you have to first generate a strong password, receive some NXT and then send some out. Only then is your account going to be truly "secure". There are people on the nxt forum right now trying to generate keys to get access to accounts that have NXT sitting in them but have never had any outputs. https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/darknxt-up-for-grabs-first-come-first-serve!/ People should educate themselves before they start saying it's someones fault for not having a strong password. |
|
|
|
Is anyone getting a strange error at BTER? Secure Connection Failed
An error occurred during a connection to bter.com. The OCSP response contains out-of-date information. (Error code: sec_error_ocsp_old_response)
The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified.
Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem. I had that a day or two ago and temporarily disabled that check in my browser. I started getting it on a couple different sites as well. Perhaps try a different browser. |
|
|
|
Is he still going after it? His dead line still passed. Deadline was just for when he said he would start his attack and apparently a TW attack can take days and weeks to come to fruition. Read this thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789978.0 |
|
|
|
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=786201.0** Pay Attention Here **
*I have no intentions to attack or dedicate any resources to XMR. If anything DGC will be the next to get my full intention depending on what happens with their founder. This does not mean others will not exploit XMR especially given the attention all the troll hype has brought on this coin. You must have missed the other thread and when he posted in the Polo troll box he was going to attack XMR and confirmed it in the thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789978.0 |
|
|
|
monkeydong.... seriously grow up ...
Fair enough, but don't you think you might wanna make a comment toward Cormac instead ? Perhaps focusing on the content of my message rather than the "childish philosophical aspect" of the content of my deleted messages ? I guess it's something too "mature enough" to concider for some people. I for one am really, really tired of seeing you spam that message over and over and over again. We've seen it, we get it and it's serving absolutely no purpose at this point other than to be just some game you're playing for your own amusement. |
|
|
|
Are people still NOT receiving their coins in home wallet sending them from the exchanges to home wallet?
Has this been resolved? Makes me nervous to think the sending of coins has problems at this point. Why does that happen?
~darylluke. I moved some from Bittrex to my wallet on the 25th. IF there ever was a problem (maybe during the fork issue), it's been resolved for awhile now. Two people mentioned here in last 24hrs that they sent from xchange, but not arrived at home wallet. The two have NOT replied if it is resolved, and DEV did not reply to complaint here.So, it is UNCLEAR if it is an ongoing issue, or what is going on. ~darylluke. Where are you seeing this? I see one guy who posted saying he hadn't received anything and then roughly 15 minutes later posted that he got them. And another person talking about a completely different coin. |
|
|
|
Are people still NOT receiving their coins in home wallet sending them from the exchanges to home wallet?
Has this been resolved? Makes me nervous to think the sending of coins has problems at this point. Why does that happen?
~darylluke. I moved some from Bittrex to my wallet on the 25th. IF there ever was a problem (maybe during the fork issue), it's been resolved for awhile now. |
|
|
|
Hi guys, I'm trying the staking of this coin but I've got really weird number. Example: 26/09/2014: 16h00 --> I put 20,000 coin on a new address 27/09/2014: 09h45 --> 0.008 coin staked !!! it should have been ~4 coin instead of 0.008. Did I miss something ? You can have the details of what I'm talking about here: http://aero.blockexplorer.cc/address/AKGFfE8XZrZvGtQMNNSoy1LjsnK91Hq8AyThe amount of coins generated by staking varies.
A how I understand staking, the formula is AMOUNT X TIME X INTEREST RATE = STAKING So, for 20,000 coin, 17h45 and and an annual interest rate of 12% (1.37E-5 hourly rate), we've got: 20,000 X 17,75 X 1.37E-5 = 4.615 and I had only 0.008  Could someone tell me where the error resides ? Thanks. Could be wrong, but I don't think PoS is like getting interest in a bank etc. Seems like it's more based on blocks than actual elapsed time and you also have to take into account how long it's been since they actually matured and thus are eligible for staking. I also think you only get the "interest" if the block wins and I think the longer you go without winning, the more chance you have to win so eventually it will happen.
So, and again I'm not sure about this, if the block time is every 90 seconds, then maybe the % interest would be about 0.000034247% for a block. Which would work out to roughly 0.00684932 for 20k coins. But there may also be some adjustments based on how long it has been since the coins actually matured, or maybe how much of the stake weight your 20k had in that block.Bottom line, it's all a mystery. lol Edit: Had a look at the code and yeah, it is more akin to interest and near as I can tell what you got doesn't work out unless I don't understand how the whole coinage thing is calculated. Even so, you wouldn't have got the 4.6 as the coins had to mature first. So I would think at best you should have got 9.75 hours of interest. |
|
|
|
Yesterday I did notice a few times, when looking at it, that my miner software was reporting periods where blocks were being found ad little as 15 seconds apart some times 3-4 in a row. I thought it was odd at the time, now after BCXs last post maybe it was more than just odd.. I guess we shall see.
I would look at recent blocks (235525,235526) (235532,235533) (235542,235543) Coincidence, I think not. If I were the guessing type, I would call this symptoms of an "Anonymint inspired modified ArtForz Time Warp Attack" Just an observational opinion from a casual observer LOL ~BCX~ And (192298, 192299), (192326,192327), (192357, 192358) ... diabolical ... you've been at this for weeks!! Edit: Months even! (122604, 122605), (122614, 122615) - what's up with THAT? You sneaky devil. Would those blocks just happen to coincide with when BCX first came out on here and said there was a potential exploit a couple months back now? |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the update. I asked the other day how long it would take for a TW attack to start to show symptoms but no one gave me an answer.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
