@lemons

Are you sure you're not running viruses in the background or antivirus scanners?

@techbytes

How is your algorithm better/resistant from Prime/quarkcoin?

My concern of point 2 is that we'll loose coins from the whole system. People will die, fall ill, or forget etc... etc... etc... but if we have limited coins, coins will be reduced over time and someday it'll be 0.

Post updated with suggestions.

Of course we need a coins with all the features.

Ah... I just got a block (12 hours)

Core i3 2120, 180KH/S

What can I expect from a developer who posts Microsoft Windows screenshots and clicking away..........?

And now I'm getting suspicious. Blocks being rejected on purpose? Can someone analyze the protocol routes and something fishy in the source code?

I mined 10 blocks and my balance is still 64.... it shows 10 transactions all mined, yet by balance is 64.

The client or the network is screwed up man....

Is there any possibility of a non-Windows client?

Slow confirmation (less than 5 minutes ... booooo), and difficulty change.

From my experience till now -- how may Xeon processors I need to mine a single block of coin?

If you're that much of a Windows fanboy, why didn't you make a new client in .NET?

I didn't know that, I always used a separate miner, and searching for one with this algo.

1) Energy efficiency -- In the long run, it should not waist energy by unlimited mining.

2) Lost coins -- Recovery of lost coins. Limited coins will be lost forever cause people will always loose their coins.

3) Dedicated hardware -- Limit this mostly to CPU, so only full blown computers can compute it, and one doesn't have to buy special purpose hardware. The hardware will be useless otherwise and after all coins have been mined (or unless there are unlimited coins which can be generated via mining) or mining is not profitable anymore, the miner will actually throw it away or sell it to someone else (who may be a cracker who's accumulating firepower for bad mining). This is partially true for GPU hardware, but they have a gaming purpose apart from computational purpose, and probably the miners will themselves use it in gaming. So all in all, prefer 1) CPU only, 2) CPU & GPU, 3) Special purpose hardware.

4) Fast confirmation times -- like 5 minutes (50 seconds block).

5) Quick difficulty change -- So upcoming of a sudden powerful miner doesn't take a HUGE advantage mining too many coins.

6) Protection against 51% attacks.

Which one fits the bill?

A few suggestions I propose --

1, 2, 6) We should have unlimited coins, but that'll violate point 1. I think the ideal method is that, after mining all coins, mined blocks will be rejected, and only proof of stake based coins can be mined. This'll also protect against 51% attacks, cause we need a lot of users instead of processing power.

1, 3) The algorithm should change with the difficulty (new cryptographic functions should be added/removed with difficulty) -- I don't know the OpenCL API, but this may help?
The algorithm should take up more memory with the difficulty. That'll shortlist systems with large amount of memory and cut out a lot of systems which would otherwise consume power trying to compute...

What... Am I missing something, how do you mine/'mint' this?

@DannyHamilton

Thanks for the responses! You're a life saver!

I read up more on 'transactions' as stored in blocks and it cleared things up.

I'm using bitcoin-qt.

So, addresses should not change, and address are the sole means to keep a track of bitcoin accountancy.

So before acquiring an address, does the Bitcoin wallet confirm with the network that there are no duplicated addresses? Or is it that the client completely relies on randomness and probability to generate a unique address each time?

Cause the process of acquiring new address is very frequent in the Bitcoin network. For each transaction, it's recommended to make a new address; considering the no. of transactions, don't you think the possible public/private key pair will exhaust soon, or overtime, the probability of a collision will increase dramatically?

That solves the problems. Thanks a lot!

Suppose I've some Bitcoins in my wallet, and I restart my client which will generate a new address, and then make a transaction.

How will I prove to the network, that the coins owned by me are genuinely owned by me and not fake? Cause the address has changed, where's the proof that I genuinely own the bitcoins?

Should I keep my wallet up all the time? If so, what if I change addresses?

If someone could modify the kernel to somehow be optimized for mining....

The Cryptographic API of the Linux kernel has a sha256 module.... maybe that can be used.

Thanks for the response!


Suppose there're 10 blocks, the top most block named 1, the lower one 2 etc....

What you're trying to say here, is that it's always possible to create a fork of the 10th block, i.e. branch the chain from the 10th block, but that would require to solve all blocks above it (10th, 9th, 8th, 7th ...) and it's length should exceed the current longest chain.

Hello everyone!

This's my first post so in the newbie forum, please tell me if I have to repost this in another forum in order to get proper answers, or please move it to the right forum (mods).

I was learning about Bitcoin, so there are a few question I'ld like to ask.

Firstly, does each Bitcoin have an identity like currency notes? For e.g. can we say that Bitcoin x is held by an address X, and bitcoin y is held by an address Z? Or is it that accountancy is done purely on basis of quantity of Bitcon held by different entities?

Is the wallet address the same as the public key?

Can a block (z) which's under many/one block be 'unlocked'? Or is modifying the block possible by giving an alternative and more difficult solution to the  block previous to z? If so, why is such a feature present?

Suppose there're 2 solutions provided to a block simultaneously, and one of the branches is abandoned cause the other was clearly ahead. Will the blocks of the abandoned chain be considered by the network or will they just be ignored. A related question -- will the miners of the blocks which belong to the shorter branch (which was abandoned) will earn bitcoins?