 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
oh so the old dev is gone? i wasnt paying much attention to PMC since some time
v1.5.0.0 is my version of wallet - is that fine?
We are going by qt client version, I'm not even sure why it shows that number there to be honest. I'll take a look at that. Anyway if you mouseover the PreminePlus-qt.exe you will see your client version 0.7.3 (or 0.7.2 if you are on the wrong version). the v1.5.0.0 version comes from the defines at the end of src/version.h  |
|
|
|
the doc/build-unix.txt doesn't say about mkdir obj... And this builds only PreminePlusd, not PreminePlus-qt, was this intended?
Yea sorry I just saw you were talking about wallet-qt on ubuntu. and I overwrote that file with the original one before I recreated the git  Sorry I'm trying to do a million things at once. No problem, you're really doing a lot! thanks!  |
|
|
|
|
the doc/build-unix.txt doesn't say about mkdir obj... And this builds only PreminePlusd, not PreminePlus-qt, was this intended?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, I see the pmp wallet is only for windows.. Is there a linux version? or the sources? if you give me the sources I could try to make a linux (ubuntu) build
|
|
|
|
That is awesome. Sent you a little PMC Same here many many thanks to you both and the third donor (maybe creditcoin_CRD?)  |
|
|
|
So any word on what the problem was? was it a bug that will effect bitcoin as well in a few years? or was it a change made after the fork from bitcoin?
No, it was a bug of my own doing. I believe it is patched, and I'm testing it on an isolated blockchain. I believe everything is ok, But i want to mine more blocks on my testnet before I release the software. Sorry to bump this from last month, but I have not kept up with the latest events. What was the bug that allowed more coins to be mined? Was there a detailed explanation in some post? Please link of available. Thanks! There is some post about it several pages back, the exact location is unknown. The problem appears to exist in all coins. I have tested the anomaly under a number of different parameters and the result is the same. There is a mathematics error in the code where essentially the mining rewards continue to reduce by half even beyond the 8th decimal. IE: even after the mining reward is cut in half down to 0.00000001 it continues to half even though the result cannot be seen. Eventually this causes a script error, and causes the block rewards to start over from the beginning. The easiest fix is a manual entry to tell the network to never produce coins after BLOCK # "X" ("X" will vary based on how the coin is set up.) I believe this error will effect most (if not all) current bitcoin / altcoin forks. Wow! This is serious! We need to make sure everybody in the crypto community knows about this, including the fact you/PMC found and fixed it. I can't be 100% sure that all forks would suffer the same result, but I have enough reason to suspect it. And actually it was a random guy that spotted the error, we might be sitting here under different circumstances if it weren't for him. I merely patched it. Could you maybe test the Bitcoin code and confirm whenever you have some time? This would be a huge contribution of PMC if confirmed. Yes, I have been meaning to do so, I simply haven't had time since things have been progressing so well with PMC. However, I fully intend to try it out of curiosity. I'm the random guy! The bug was in the GetBlockValue function. The problem was that the reward amount was determined by cutting by half the initial block reward every 250 blocks and the division was made by shifting the bits to the right. Doing this 64 times resetted the reward to the initial one. (I think using a normal division should solve the problem). I just watched the bitcoin source and it has the exact same problem. The difference is that bitcoin halves the reward every 210000 blocks instead of 250. So the reward will be resetted at block 13440000, when the number of the block divided by 210000 will be 64. I think we should tell them... but we have al lot of time to do it (we are at block 288372...) You are an amazing person, and I cannot overstate my gratitude. thanks ps: I don't wanna seem greedy but in my signature you can find my address  |
|
|
|
I'm the random guy! The bug was in the GetBlockValue function. The problem was that the reward amount was determined by cutting by half the initial block reward every 250 blocks and the division was made by shifting the bits to the right. Doing this 64 times resetted the reward to the initial one. (I think using a normal division should solve the problem). I just watched the bitcoin source and it has the exact same problem. The difference is that bitcoin halves the reward every 210000 blocks instead of 250. So the reward will be resetted at block 13440000, when the number of the block divided by 210000 will be 64. I think we should tell them... but we have al lot of time to do it (we are at block 288372...) But... but that makes no sense. If it's unsigned, then shifting to the right adds zero on the leftmost bit. Do it 64 times, and you end up with zeroes only. EDIT: Aaah, int64_t. Nasty bug. it happens also with int, unsigned , long (I just tested it) |
|
|
|
So any word on what the problem was? was it a bug that will effect bitcoin as well in a few years? or was it a change made after the fork from bitcoin?
No, it was a bug of my own doing. I believe it is patched, and I'm testing it on an isolated blockchain. I believe everything is ok, But i want to mine more blocks on my testnet before I release the software. Sorry to bump this from last month, but I have not kept up with the latest events. What was the bug that allowed more coins to be mined? Was there a detailed explanation in some post? Please link of available. Thanks! There is some post about it several pages back, the exact location is unknown. The problem appears to exist in all coins. I have tested the anomaly under a number of different parameters and the result is the same. There is a mathematics error in the code where essentially the mining rewards continue to reduce by half even beyond the 8th decimal. IE: even after the mining reward is cut in half down to 0.00000001 it continues to half even though the result cannot be seen. Eventually this causes a script error, and causes the block rewards to start over from the beginning. The easiest fix is a manual entry to tell the network to never produce coins after BLOCK # "X" ("X" will vary based on how the coin is set up.) I believe this error will effect most (if not all) current bitcoin / altcoin forks. Wow! This is serious! We need to make sure everybody in the crypto community knows about this, including the fact you/PMC found and fixed it. I can't be 100% sure that all forks would suffer the same result, but I have enough reason to suspect it. And actually it was a random guy that spotted the error, we might be sitting here under different circumstances if it weren't for him. I merely patched it. Could you maybe test the Bitcoin code and confirm whenever you have some time? This would be a huge contribution of PMC if confirmed. Yes, I have been meaning to do so, I simply haven't had time since things have been progressing so well with PMC. However, I fully intend to try it out of curiosity. I'm the random guy! The bug was in the GetBlockValue function. The problem was that the reward amount was determined by cutting by half the initial block reward every 250 blocks and the division was made by shifting the bits to the right. Doing this 64 times resetted the reward to the initial one. (I think using a normal division should solve the problem). I just watched the bitcoin source and it has the exact same problem. The difference is that bitcoin halves the reward every 210000 blocks instead of 250. So the reward will be resetted at block 13440000, when the number of the block divided by 210000 will be 64. I think we should tell them... but we have al lot of time to do it (we are at block 288372...) |
|
|
|
Lmao, yea that one is mine I had .99 pmc and figured why the hell not!! yeah, and the other 1.0 pmc is mine. Placed it with the same logic. I think we placed it in the exact same moment . (Or maybe I simply didn't see there was already one) |
|
|
|
|
we need to make the links to the voting for the exchange more visible. Something like a big red "VOTE US ON CRYPTSY" at the beginning of the first post
|
|
|
|
|
why not a PMC-like distribution? giving all the coins for free
|
|
|
|
thanks!! |
|
|
|
|
1J5cheVRhvhfsJGjRa3EzQpSUUT78JekWg
|
|
|
|
I strongly believe that if we hit an exchange of this size or larger, this coin is going to explode. I think this is the most important thing we should be focusing on at the moment; if the price goes up the dice games and everything else will come naturally. As such, i'm going to start a giveaway!!!
Giveaway: 5 PMC per post requesting PMC be added! =DFunds are limited, but I will give away at least 100 PMC! If you post a meaningful post that I deem exceptional, then I'll double your reward! Don't complain if I don't though!! =D A few rules: - Post must be in the thread linked to above
- 1 user can not post more than 1 time per thread page.
- Once I am out, i'm out; there is no guarantee of payment.
- I could care less about shell account since this takes a little more effort than just posting an address and you are actually benefiting the community. If you use them, i'll probably still pay
- To get the funds, quote this post, and include your post # of your post and your wallet address so that I can verify!
#1389 1J5cheVRhvhfsJGjRa3EzQpSUUT78JekWg |
|
|
|
premine!!! it's the future! |
|
|
|
thanks to the donor |
|
|
|
|
