I added the conf file and that didn't work either.
I seems the best solution would be to re-sync completely. My blk0001.dat file size is around 1,154 Mb, so much less than yours, and though I still use version 1.5.1.1, it syncs well (though took a while to re-sync for the last few months), and stakes perfectly. I could provide a blockchain snapshot if you would like one. I'll try resync see if that works. thx  That could take awhile, on my experience. The wallet used to sync about 500 blocks, then wait for quite some time, then sync further. Overall syncing for 4-5 months took more than 24 hours due to that. At least the CPU usage was reasonable, so I believe its not the reason of this behavior. I have two blk files ... is this normal ? It's as if my wallet is on two chains.  Well, having 2 blk files in that directory could be completely normal - as soon as the size of the "blk0001.dat" reaches 2Gb, the "blk0002.dat" is created, and as soon its size reaches 2Gb, the wallet creates "blk0003.dat", and so on. But in this specific case I believe the size of "blk0001.dat" should be less than 2Gb. Here is a snap from my directory with recently synced wallet:  |
|
|
|
|
Its already 20 days the chain is stopped... Seems nobody mines it, so the following questions come to mind:
- is there any pool for mining Bitsend?
- does wallet have a capability to mine SOLO..?
|
|
|
|
I added the conf file and that didn't work either.
I seems the best solution would be to re-sync completely. My blk0001.dat file size is around 1,154 Mb, so much less than yours, and though I still use version 1.5.1.1, it syncs well (though took a while to re-sync for the last few months), and stakes perfectly. I could provide a blockchain snapshot if you would like one. I'll try resync see if that works. thx That could take awhile, on my experience. The wallet used to sync about 500 blocks, then wait for quite some time, then sync further. Overall syncing for 4-5 months took more than 24 hours due to that. At least the CPU usage was reasonable, so I believe its not the reason of this behavior. |
|
|
|
I added the conf file and that didn't work either.
It seems the best solution would be to re-sync completely. My blk0001.dat file size is around 1,154 Mb, so much less than yours, and though I still use version 1.5.1.1, it syncs well (though took a while to re-sync for the last few months), and stakes perfectly. I could provide a blockchain snapshot if you would like one. |
|
|
|
I believe it should be perfectly possible to run an older blockexplorer version. After all, though EuropeCoin libraries are really old, there were perfectly working block explorers at the time when ERC was developed, and they will still run now, though may require older Linux distribution (e.g. Ubuntu 14 or 16.4 or similar) to run. It could be even possible to encapsulate them in Docker container, so they could run on newer machine, though this part I have never done and am not sure. I might look into this if Matthias and community think it makes sense to run an old block explorer (e.g. Iquidus). From the other hand though... Is it worth the effort to have old stuff bundled with other old stuff just to make some temporary solution..? "That is the question", as one Danish prince used to say back then... Porting ERC to a newer codebase will probably needed at some point anyway... |
|
|
|
GBYTE has been listed on the NonKyc.io exchange
That exchange seems to be focused on privacy (well, at least they claim to be). Is there any chance they would list blackbytes? |
|
|
|
|
I had some time to track and debug this situation in the code lately.
In short, I think I found the reason of the chain not syncing (and not moving), and generally speaking, can move it forward by making small temporary changes in the code (my local version).
However, there is a small[-ish] problem.. If I move it, I will create a fork, because my local wallet is synced to block 660564 only. To be able to move it from the most recent point, from block 674121 (which the node 95.217.78.169 has), I would need either access to that node, or a blockchain snapshot from that node. I believe this node belongs either to Matthias, or to someone in his group.
So my question is - can someone zip the blockchain files (or make a bootstrap.dat) containing the chain up to the block 674121, and provide a link to download it? If I get the latest chain version that way, I believe I can move the chain (not 100% confident, but will try and might make it, as was the case on one other chain few years back).
|
|
|
|
I am using previous version of client v.0.17.9.2 and running sometimes just to get sync with network and it works; "current number of blocks 1382830" with date 13 dec 2023. after seeing your post I started client and it get 2 connection with nodes with even older version of client: v0.14.2 ...but thats all, client can not get more connections and synchronise to current date - it seems it doesn't work anymore  The wallet version 21.1 seems to be stuck at block 1370647. It appears that other clients are disconnecting. I couldn't detect any fork. Debug "Potential stale tip detected, will try using extra outbound peer" Ehm.. Just for my better understanding. Christian, when are you wrote " Debug "Potential stale tip detected, will try using extra outbound peer"", did you mean you are debugging it now, or you suggest us to debug it? I am ok with both options, but would slightly prefer the first one |
|
|
|
So now the wallet seems to be stuck at block 4238949 about 15 weeks behind. Wallet show 4 connection, but I cannot send or receive anything, because wallet is not sync. How can we get things running? Masternode list seems to be empty. I can be a masternode, but I cannot send 10 000 TX to masternode wallet, because wallet not sync.
Is there anyone, who knows how to deal with this? TX was good project and running good on these days, but now it seems to be frozen. There is still Yobit trading.
Somehow the chain moved since, and now is stuck on block 4241686 So it means there is someone/something able to move the chain when needed... My wallet is in the same state as yours was back then, and staking doesn't seem to activate. Would be nice to move it, though not sure if that makes sense. BTW Yobit trading is fake, as almost everything on Yobit.. |
|
|
|
Folks, does anyone run version v0.21.1.0 wallet on Windows..? By some reason my wallet does not get any stable connection, whatever I try (playing with config options). Debug log shows it finds many peers, and sometimes I see it having 1 connection, but the next moment connection disappears again. It looks like connection attempts from my wallet get rejected, not sure why. Here is what I have in debug.log: 2023-12-21T15:35:49Z init message: Done loading
2023-12-21T15:35:49Z msghand thread start
2023-12-21T15:35:49Z GUI: Platform customization: "windows"
2023-12-21T15:36:00Z Loading addresses from DNS seed 212.237.211.107
2023-12-21T15:36:00Z Loading addresses from DNS seed 188.68.39.1
2023-12-21T15:36:00Z Loading addresses from DNS seed 185.194.142.125
2023-12-21T15:36:00Z Waiting 11 seconds before querying DNS seeds.
2023-12-21T15:36:11Z Loading addresses from DNS seed 217.61.61.66
2023-12-21T15:36:11Z Loading addresses from DNS seed 66.151.242.154
2023-12-21T15:36:11Z Loading addresses from DNS seed 31.25.241.224
2023-12-21T15:36:11Z 0 addresses found from DNS seeds
2023-12-21T15:36:11Z dnsseed thread exit
2023-12-21T15:46:17Z Potential stale tip detected, will try using extra outbound peer (last tip update: 630 seconds ago)
2023-12-21T15:51:25Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70084, blocks=832714, peer=1 (full-relay)
2023-12-21T15:55:40Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70086, blocks=1174570, peer=12 (full-relay)
2023-12-21T15:56:47Z Potential stale tip detected, will try using extra outbound peer (last tip update: 1260 seconds ago)
2023-12-21T15:57:52Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70084, blocks=832714, peer=16 (full-relay)
2023-12-21T16:07:17Z Potential stale tip detected, will try using extra outbound peer (last tip update: 1890 seconds ago)
2023-12-21T16:10:53Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70084, blocks=832714, peer=38 (full-relay)
2023-12-21T16:15:08Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70086, blocks=1174570, peer=45 (full-relay)
2023-12-21T16:17:20Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70084, blocks=832714, peer=49 (full-relay)
2023-12-21T16:17:47Z Potential stale tip detected, will try using extra outbound peer (last tip update: 2520 seconds ago)
2023-12-21T16:21:34Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70086, blocks=1174570, peer=55 (full-relay)
2023-12-21T16:28:17Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70086, blocks=1174570, peer=66 (full-relay)
2023-12-21T16:28:18Z Potential stale tip detected, will try using extra outbound peer (last tip update: 3151 seconds ago)
2023-12-21T16:30:13Z New outbound peer connected: version: 70084, blocks=832714, peer=72 (full-relay)
So it shows many peers, but at the same time my wallet shows 0 connection: 20:36:16

getpeerinfo
20:36:16

[
]
And the wallet does not sync, obviously.. Any idea what could be causing this? |
|
|
|
Hi guys, does anyone have any peers please?
I have just one - 95.217.78.169:8881
but also this error msg...
No block source available .... 6 weeks behind, Last Block Time Wed Oct 4 15:52:02 2023
Thanks
My wallet today also got only one connection (the same IP as yours). I remember it having two connections few days ago though, but I did not take note of the IPs then. Reports "No block source available", despite the fact I am on block 660564, while my peer is on block 674121..  I assume there is a fork in the network, and I am on a different fork than my peer. That's the only explanation of "No block source available" message I can think of. I have few unconfirmed mined blocks with about 20 confirmations. So I assume my chain is the shortest. Will try to resync and report. UPDATE: To my surprise, even when I try to sync wallet completely from scratch, it refuses to download blocks from that peer!  It writes "7 years and 20 weeks behind", but does not download a single block from 95.217.78.169:8881... Still writes "No block source available". Don't know how that could be. A bug in the wallet code, or a special configuration on the 95.217.78.169 peer..? |
|
|
|
|
Mattihas has actually been one of those rare developers with an integrity and a spirit, thats why it was discouraging to see what was seemingly happening here. Its really nice to see the old guard is alive and keeps fighting.
|
|
|
|
Looks like now 'MINUS ONE DAY' remaining until publication of roadmap by lead developer Mattihas Klees. The Europecoin seems to have ignition problems. That's understandable, and happens to a lot of projects; but then why does one make those promises, when he doesn't plan to fulfill them..? From https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-do-we-make-promises-cant-keep-andrie-penta: In the older days when people made a promise it was equal to signing a contract. Back in those days, keeping your word held special significance. Personal integrity was both expected and valued.
These days, many people make promises in a pretty casual manner-with no real intention to keep them. i.e. I'll send you the email today, I'll be there in 5 minutes, I'll call you to do lunch...promises which are never kept. The truth is that although times have changed, the importance of integrity has not.
We all need to realize that a PROMISE is a PROMISE. Especially in business, not keeping our promises can have a detrimental effect on our reputation.
It actually all goes down to the fact that promises create expectations and when those expectations aren’t met the brain responds by signaling a decrease in dopamine production.
It is a fact that we all need some sort of consistency-which leads to trust. So when someone makes a promise and the promise isn’t fulfilled, that consistency your brain was counting on, disappears. As trust is build over time, through a number of experiences shared with others, it is imperative that we follow a behavior which is consistent. |
|
|
|
I wonder how to actually remove liquidity from the pool, i.e. get my money back from there?
I was able to put some funds on GBYTE-USDC and USDC-OUSD markets quite a few months back. Noticed lately that payments from the pool have stopped 2 months ago. So wanted to remove the liquidity. Is there any write-up on the procedure?
Most likely your money is in the pools that are no longer rewarded. Use the address lookup in the upper right of https://liquidity.obyte.org and withdraw. Thanks for your reply! Actually I did withdraw, and got OPT-USDC-OUSD and OPT-GBYTE-USDC tokens back in my wallet. What to do next to get GBYTE for them? I tried using https://oswap.io/#/pools to remove liquidity from pools, but no luck, I just get some error messages... I noticed they seem to use a different token "O2-xxx" instead of "OPT-xxx", so there should be a different webpage to remove liquidity form older pools? UPDATE: nevermind, after some guesswork, I found https://v1.oswap.io/#/pools . It seems to work well. |
|
|
|
A HEADS UP! STEX delists the COLX market, alas.. Dear STEX Trader,
We would like to inform you that the following projects will be totally removed from STEX.com
Please, withdraw your funds before 31 May 2022.
UCA (Ucacoin)
WSBT (WallStreetBets Token)
BANANA (ApeSwapFinance Banana)
DAI (Dai Stablecoin)
CHESS (ChessCoin 032)
SWFL (Swapfolio)
CRDT (Crypto Daily Token)
LCMS
WABI (Tael)
LMCH (Latamcash)
KICK (KickToken)
LST (LuckySeventoken)
JOOS (Joos Protocol)
PLTS (Ploutos)
QURO (Qurito)
ELY (Elycoin)
HYD (HYDRA)
GIT (GoDigit)
SBTC (Siambitcoin)
VOLTZ
C2C (C2C System)
NANJ (NANJCOIN)
CBUCKS (CRYPTOBUCKS)
BNZ (BonezYard Music Platform)
IDX (Index Chain)
REV (Revain)
HBX (HashBX)
HTML (HTMLCoin)
DAB (Dabanking)
YFX (Xenas.finance)
THRN (ThornCoin)
VOCO (Provoco)
LHC (Lightcoin)
COLX (ColossusXT)
BZX (Bitcoin Zero)
Please do not delay and withdraw your assets on time.
STEX Team |
|
|
|
|
I wonder how to actually remove liquidity from the pool, i.e. get my money back from there?
I was able to put some funds on GBYTE-USDC and USDC-OUSD markets quite a few months back. Noticed lately that payments from the pool have stopped 2 months ago. So wanted to remove the liquidity. Is there any write-up on the procedure?
|
|
|
|
|
@xxxx123abcxxxx: do you see any valid EW count where APR-2021 (or NOV 2021) could be the top of the PRIMARY[5] wave?
If it does exist, do you think it is less probable than the count you are considering currently?
Thank you for your time and input.
|
|
|
|
We're going to receive some NFT on Solana for our ULTMTTOKEN  Now DTBs are being burnt in exchange for getting share of future NFTs sales Thanks for the heads up. I could have forgotten about this project if it were not for your posts here.. |
|
|
|
Hi there, I'm new to this forum but have been a Spreadcoin holder before the Helium snapshot. I've been trying to restore my Spreadcoin wallet from a backup I made a long time ago. However, I have no clue how. It's a .dat file but the Spreadcoin wallet does not give me an option to restore.
Is there anyone who knows how to restore my Spreadcoin wallet from a .dat backup file?
Thank you in advance!
Feles
No active nodes. Well, I have two peers currently: [
{
"addr" : "188.154.32.213:41678",
"services" : "00000003",
"lastsend" : 1647288151,
"lastrecv" : 1647288153,
"bytessent" : 1323599,
"bytesrecv" : 1988905,
"blocksrequested" : 0,
"conntime" : 1647285347,
"version" : 70019,
"subver" : "/Satoshi:0.9.17.1/",
"inbound" : false,
"startingheight" : 3963567,
"banscore" : 0,
"syncnode" : true
},
{
"addr" : "91.250.82.171:41678",
"services" : "00000003",
"lastsend" : 1647288158,
"lastrecv" : 1647288145,
"bytessent" : 1203626,
"bytesrecv" : 2193028,
"blocksrequested" : 0,
"conntime" : 1647285370,
"version" : 70019,
"subver" : "/Satoshi:0.9.17.1/",
"inbound" : false,
"startingheight" : 3963567,
"banscore" : 0
}
]
|
|
|
|
Rule: Wave 3 can't be the shortest in terms of points; therefore...
"in terms of points" means "in terms of of percentage gain", right? So suppose the time is not a factor here. Do I understand it correctly? One other question, if you don't mind... https://elliottwaveplus.com/guide-2-wave-notes-an-outline-of-the-wave-principle/ says regarding extension of impulsive waves: Extension: in impulses, usually just one of waves 1, 3 or 5 extend. Wave 3 is the most likely to extend. Rarely, both 3 and 5 extend. Extensions can occur within extensions. For instance 3 of 3. Sometimes, at the end of an impulse in which one of the waves extended, there are 9 total waves, and it is difficult to determine which wave extended. There also can be extensions within extensions. 5 in extension manifests itself as 9, 13, 17, etc. 3 in extension can appear as a 7, 11, 15, etc. If neither wave 1 or 3 is extended, expect wave 5 to extend, especially if volume is greater in the 5th than the 3rd. I am unsure here - was any of the major waves extended up to this point (wave 1 or 3)? Thanks for your time and for sharing your knowledge. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
