It does seem to be a scam, someone started mining using the old code from github that has not finished being coded yet, for example it does not even have the starting difficulty adjusted yet.
Give the guy time to finish coding his coin and make a real genesis block for it and launch it for real.
-MarkM-
You must have missed what happened last night. He officially launched the coin. And it's a flop. Have a look @ the current hashrate idiot. Its one of the most successfull launches so far. * No windows client * Botched release, twice * Idiot dev who doesn't understand programming at all That's what we call a fail, guys. Give it a day and this crap will join the graveyard along with gamecoin, powercoin, etc. |
|
|
|
do what you want.
But still you just fucked milksakes coin release... shame on you
Not my fault he's incompetent and can't figure out how to release his own client. Nor is it my fault that he decided to premine his own coin. that' why he trusted you... and how you paid? well i don't wnat to fight you, isn't my problem I did the community a favor by uncovering his premining scheme. |
|
|
|
It does seem to be a scam, someone started mining using the old code from github that has not finished being coded yet, for example it does not even have the starting difficulty adjusted yet.
Give the guy time to finish coding his coin and make a real genesis block for it and launch it for real.
-MarkM-
You must have missed what happened last night. He officially launched the coin. And it's a flop. |
|
|
|
do what you want.
But still you just fucked milksakes coin release... shame on you
Not my fault he's incompetent and can't figure out how to release his own client. Nor is it my fault that he decided to premine his own coin. Hmm, after you dropped the code and when I joined the network there was only ~60 blocks so... He disconnected his node from the network shortly after I got a connection to it. Then I dropped the source and people began starting a new blockchain. |
|
|
|
|
Please use the automated faucet from now on
Thank you
|
|
|
|
Yay another crapcoin by another incompetent dev! Can't wait!  I think we are close to the point when official clients will surely have trojans built-in. I'm surprised this hasn't already happened, TBH. |
|
|
|
do what you want.
But still you just fucked milksakes coin release... shame on you
Not my fault he's incompetent and can't figure out how to release his own client. Nor is it my fault that he decided to premine his own coin. |
|
|
|
Is this a fake start from someone who hijacked the github or what?
The difficulty was going to be reasonable but sampling random pages from the huge thread it seems people are mucking around with some old code that the difficulty fix was not pushed to yet?
-MarkM-
Okay I checked the code, this is not the correct version yet at all, someone has gone running using the old original whatevercoin code they copied from, one of the >> 20 ones based on litecoin, the usual scam orphans difficulty, it is not even adjusted to bitcoin's >> 32 yet let alone an actually reasonable difficulty. GIve the guy time to make his real code, this hijacking his github just steals the name of his coin before he has even finished coding it. It might take him days to mine his genesis block if he doesn't make an exception for the genesis block in the difficulty checks but it will be worth it as we'll get a decent launch instead of yet another scamcoin. -MarkM- earlier we have a fight between MilkShake and Hazard.. cause everything was ready but Hazard premined 1300 blocks and he has to do everything again "sayed milkshake", and hazard sayed that milkshake was the one who premined... But everithing points on hazard... search for hazard coins.. that scamer just gets the code and launched a new coin, and leaked the code, screwing this release... now this is the real launch, cause the same milshake posted the github address on the 1st post, the big problem was, no executables on windows... someone just posted the "elacoind" but no qt, so many people feels bad, for me, i joined the pool. i really like the idea of this coin, i think is a good perspective, and a good incentive, the problem as always, the difficulty was too low, so many orphans... cheers HazardCoin was not intended to be taken seriously, if you haven't caught on yet. But at this rate, I might just make it a reality for the hell of it. |
|
|
|
Yay another crapcoin by another incompetent dev! Can't wait! |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your detailed analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
Close call! He almost got my 1 devcoin.
|
|
|
|
|
Too rich for my blood. Keep em.
|
|
|
|
|
I love that dog.
Anyway, I encourage you all to compile a coin using that insanely high value and see what happens every time you hit a difficulty retarget.
|
|
|
|
Correct.
Anybody using >> 10000 just doesn't know what he's doing.
Also you can see from getinfo that this coin started at 0 difficulty.
Almost true. There is no absolute zero difficulty in bitcoin. It started at 0.00024414 Anyway, my entire point was that he was trying to use this variable to control starting difficulty (incorrectly, at that), when it is not what it is used for at all. It's a shame that he saw my post and changed it immediately. Would have been very funny if 51% of clients were running the 1000000 version Goodnight friends. |
|
|
|
|
He also had TWO releases where he listed the genesis block as index 1 in the checkpoints file. It is supposed to be index 0.
There's so many amateur mistakes with this coin, nobody should be wasting their precious hashes on it.
|
|
|
|
anyway he changed to 40, whats the poind of trolling him ? Why everybody hates everybody ? jelaous ? becaous he made own coin ? Come one people, just take eachother hands and love eachoder (not gay way :PP or gay if u want The fact that anyone would release code with that value set at a damn million indicates the developer has no idea what the hell he's doing, and therefore has no business creating a coin. |
|
|
|
|
static CBigNum bnProofOfWorkLimit(~uint256(0) >> 1000000);
I'm aware of what is occuring. I am trying to convey that the higher you set that value, the higher the floor for the difficulty becomes. And by that value, I mean the bolded value. You seem to be confused as to what I'm referring to. I'm referring to the BOLDED number, not the final outcome of bnProofOfWorkLimit. Sorry if I haven't been entirely clear on that.
Bitcoin has theirs set at 35.
Litecoin is 20.
His is 1000000. Don't you see the problem there?
|
|
|
|
I'm sure many people are still running the 1000000 client. And it's hilarious that crap like this even gets pushed out. This guy has no idea what he's doing in the code. He's just editing random variables and hoping they do what he wants. You do realize it is >> right? higher >> means a lower number. Perhaps I phrased that poorly. Or in a way that you did not understand. Anyway... Allow me to rephrase it another way. By using an example. On bitcoin testnet, that variable in particular is decreased in order to reduce the minimum difficulty. You, however, decided to increase it from it's starting value of 20, to an insane value of 1000000. You are in for some nasty difficulty spikes because of this. LOL, I wonder if you actually know programming. It was shifted right. Bitops. SHIFTING IT RIGHT DOES NOT INCREASE IT, IT DECREASES IT. False. That variable is in place to stop the difficulty from ever getting too low. It serves as the floor for difficulty, basically. There is enough documentation online to prove this. You have increased that floor from 20 to 1000000. Ergo, you have INCREASED difficulty by an insane amount. You've already proven yourself to be incompetent. Don't even act like you know a damn thing about how bitcoin works, or coin creation in general. Er, those values are preceded by a right-shift operator. By changing the amount of right-shift from 20 to 1000000, he actually is making the value of bnProofOfWorkLimit smaller, not larger. In fact, because uint256 doesn't actually have 1000000 bits, by setting the amount of right-shift to 1000000, he's basically setting the value of bnProofOfWorkLimit to 0. I support all of your other posts, but this one isn't technically accurate. This value in testnet is specifically decreased to make block generation easier. It would follow that increasing it would make block generation harder. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
