 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
I've tried getting in contact with team members with no response, both in the original BRK discord and the drumora one. Both look deserted with the last activity 6 months ago. I am calling on those still active and/or interested in this projects future. Let's communicate and chart the way forward.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted all my data, do you need hard copies too? I only have my short birth certificate though, if you need the long one I can ask my buddy Elon if he'll let me borrrow his ship and i can go back to Mars and get it.
|
|
|
|
|
step 1) ENCRYPT YOUR PHONE
step 2) Verify software sources
step 3) use long alphanumeric passphrases (add special characters if possible)
step 4) Encrypt/Passphrase protect EVERYTHING
step 5) use a cold storage solution for large funds, only keep small amounts on connected devices
|
|
|
|
|
Hello
How goes development of the binary chain? I have a takeover proposal, simply put I'd like to take over development of Verium and can assist in development of Vericoin and the eventual Binary Chain. I have been developing services and products and rather than releasing another coin i thought i'd ask you to let me launch using Verium. I work fast and am proficient in C++, PYTHON, PHP and can do some web front end (i'm not really artistic).
Regarding Binary chain, how are you implementing it ? I have some ideas and some code (needs updating) that may be of use in its development. Please contact me if you wish to speak directly, I'd love to discuss development and if you are onboard with my proposal, we can chart a way forward.
I look forward to a favourable response
~Nick
|
|
|
|
|
I ask because I have a project that is in testing phase (ironing out the kinks), and rather than adding another coin to the already large array, i think it best to adopt one. This looks like an acceptable candidate since there does not seem to be any ongoing development and communication, perhaps a fresh set of developments and services would be of use.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello
Is this project still under active development ? Does the community perhaps use other forms of communication, there does not seem to be much activity here.
|
|
|
|
Vote for me and I will vote for you in return. witness miso69 Delegate pledge; I will hodl my coins and leave them in my wallet for a period of 1 year. After that I may continue to hodl or not. Thanks for your consideration.  voted ~nickyhash |
|
|
|
I managed to setup a node, vote for me please. is this normal though ? info
{
"head_block_num": 60176,
"head_block_id": "0000eb1003fa7da77fd71eadf37b86bd49ce3709",
"head_block_age": "3 seconds old",
"next_maintenance_time": "3 hours in the future",
"chain_id": "f3bebc47a4c53877cac2dc53317b0889716926688ac216f34fb093bd9d9cdb6a",
"participation": "100.00000000000000000",
"active_witnesses": [
"1.6.12",
"1.6.15",
"1.6.16",
"1.6.17",
"1.6.18",
"1.6.21",
"1.6.23",
"1.6.24",
"1.6.25",
"1.6.27",
"1.6.29"
],
"active_committee_members": [
"1.5.11",
"1.5.0",
"1.5.1",
"1.5.2",
"1.5.3",
"1.5.4",
"1.5.5",
"1.5.6",
"1.5.7",
"1.5.8",
"1.5.9"
]
}
My id is not showing up in the witnesses even though a maintenance period has passed since i set it up. |
|
|
|
./cli_wallet --wallet-file mywallet.json --chain-id f3bebc47a4c53877cac2dc53317b0889716926688ac216f34fb093bd9d9cdb6a ws://127.0.0.1:21000
Logging RPC to file: logs/rpc/rpc.log
901217ms th_a main.cpp:120 main ] key_to_wif( committee_private_key ): 5KCBDTcyDqzsqehcb52tW5nU6pXife6V2rX9Yf7c3saYSzbDZ5W
901217ms th_a main.cpp:124 main ] nathan_pub_key: XMS6MRyAjQq8ud7hVNYcfnVPJqcVpscN5So8BhtHuGYqET5GDW5CV
901217ms th_a main.cpp:125 main ] key_to_wif( nathan_private_key ): 5KQwrPbwdL6PhXujxW37FSSQZ1JiwsST4cqQzDeyXtP79zkvFD3
Starting a new wallet with chain ID f3bebc47a4c53877cac2dc53317b0889716926688ac216f34fb093bd9d9cdb6a (from CLI)
901217ms th_a main.cpp:172 main ] [Suspicious link removed]_server: ws://localhost:8090
0 exception: unspecified
Underlying Transport Error
{"message":"Underlying Transport Error"}
asio websocket.cpp:423 operator()
{"uri":"ws://localhost:8090"}
th_a websocket.cpp:630 connect
Can anyone tell me what i did wrong ? Solved nvm |
|
|
|
./cli_wallet --wallet-file mywallet.json --chain-id f3bebc47a4c53877cac2dc53317b0889716926688ac216f34fb093bd9d9cdb6a ws://127.0.0.1:21000
Logging RPC to file: logs/rpc/rpc.log
901217ms th_a main.cpp:120 main ] key_to_wif( committee_private_key ): 5KCBDTcyDqzsqehcb52tW5nU6pXife6V2rX9Yf7c3saYSzbDZ5W
901217ms th_a main.cpp:124 main ] nathan_pub_key: XMS6MRyAjQq8ud7hVNYcfnVPJqcVpscN5So8BhtHuGYqET5GDW5CV
901217ms th_a main.cpp:125 main ] key_to_wif( nathan_private_key ): 5KQwrPbwdL6PhXujxW37FSSQZ1JiwsST4cqQzDeyXtP79zkvFD3
Starting a new wallet with chain ID f3bebc47a4c53877cac2dc53317b0889716926688ac216f34fb093bd9d9cdb6a (from CLI)
901217ms th_a main.cpp:172 main ] [Suspicious link removed]_server: ws://localhost:8090
0 exception: unspecified
Underlying Transport Error
{"message":"Underlying Transport Error"}
asio websocket.cpp:423 operator()
{"uri":"ws://localhost:8090"}
th_a websocket.cpp:630 connect
Can anyone tell me what i did wrong ? |
|
|
|
|
I will try it out, but i find that hard to believe seeing as they did not mod how coins are selected for spending and staking in the wallet. Can you confirm that you have tested these features ?
|
|
|
|
As far as I know, it's work in progress for Blackcoin
I checked it out, they have made progress, but are still far from a working version. |
|
|
|
Is there a PoS coin uses code based on at least Bitcoin 0.10.x onwards ? The existing sources from over 20 coins i have investigated seem to be based on code as old as 0.7.x and 0.8.x
afaik Amsterdamcoin uses the new codebase. There is the chainparams.cpp which subtitutes many stuff from main.cpp and so on. https://github.com/CoinProjects/AmsterdamCoinActually no that is still the 2012/2013 codebase, you can verify that here :- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/0.8 It's astonishing how people have just resorted to forking without at least trying to update the code. I'll take a crack at it maybe.. The advances in bitcoin if applied with PoS could result in some very interesting applications. For those interested in this, i'll keep this thread updated with info on what i find and if i attempt, a link to the git. BTC uses Header Sync, so far many have said this is incompatible with Proof of Stake coins. Only PoS coin to attempt header sync was Pandacoin with a hybrid blockchain, it had so many block chain corruption issues, that most people quit using the header sync and stayed with the original method. Mintcoin recent Devs has stated header sync does not work with PoS coins. A working PoS coin using Header sync without corruption issues, would be of great interest to all PoS communities.  I'll do what i can, though i do not see how the headers first implementation would be impossible for PoS. |
|
|
|
Is there a PoS coin uses code based on at least Bitcoin 0.10.x onwards ? The existing sources from over 20 coins i have investigated seem to be based on code as old as 0.7.x and 0.8.x
afaik Amsterdamcoin uses the new codebase. There is the chainparams.cpp which subtitutes many stuff from main.cpp and so on. https://github.com/CoinProjects/AmsterdamCoinActually no that is still the 2012/2013 codebase, you can verify that here :- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/0.8 It's astonishing how people have just resorted to forking without at least trying to update the code. I'll take a crack at it maybe.. The advances in bitcoin if applied with PoS could result in some very interesting applications. For those interested in this, i'll keep this thread updated with info on what i find and if i attempt, a link to the git. |
|
|
|
|
Is there a PoS coin uses code based on at least Bitcoin 0.10.x onwards ? The existing sources from over 20 coins i have investigated seem to be based on code as old as 0.7.x and 0.8.x
|
|
|
|
|
zcashd: scheduler.cpp:19: CScheduler::~CScheduler(): Assertion `nThreadsServicingQueue == 0' failed.
Am i getting something wrong here ?
|
|
|
|
the incentive is the desire to keep bitcoin decentralised and diverse and thus secure the blockchain against corruption of any sort..
its not as if it requires a data centre now or in the future.
after all even at 4mb of bloat (core's new happy number) thats only a MAXIMUM possible 208gb bloat a year= 1tb every 5 years.
at which time most people upgrade their computers anyway.
also a 2tb hard drive is under $100. so its not like you need to spend alot if your into building a PC. even a standard $400 branded pre-made desktop PC have 2tb as standard (10 years+ of upto 4mb block bloat)
as for the internet. again adsl is more than enough. and fibre is even more.
i know some people will cry that they are having internet issues. but no "bitcoin incentive" will cure that cry.
no money in your pocket can change limitations of the cabling reaching your property.
most ISPS upgrade an entire area at a certain time. not a single house over night.
if you are having issues. then cut down on how many connections you have. 8 is about reasonable 60 is overkill (unless you have good reason to be a supernode)
if you care about bitcoin security more then your ping speed of playing call of duty on the side. good
if you care more about playing call of duty than bitcoin security, then good keep playing. but dont expect to get paid just to run a node.
most node users are those with a big desire for bitcoin security. not financial gain of just running a node.
if running a node becomes just a financial gain. then many people will start running 1000+ nodes from one location.. which is no better for security than running just 1.
my personal point of view.
i would rather see 6k nodes where 2k each are run by different implementations. (diversity)
where all 6k nodes are running from different locations. (not stacking up multiple nodes at remote hosting/ home garages)
rather than
200,000 nodes all running one implementation due to some commissioned earnings reward to use specific node.
half many are running via a single owner.
EG
things like 21.co running hundreds of nodes all set up and located but in control of 21.co engineers=bad
individual diversity and distribution=good
I can see your POV, i also read the originators words on the topic. I agree using proven method like moore's law results in a better outlook, but should we also not have a fall back, you know , just in case ? |
|
|
|
|
Are there any proposals that have attempted to tackle this problem ?
|
|
|
|
|
By use, do you those who actively buy/sell or just anyone over rather long periods of time ?
|
|
|
|
|
