I agree. They make good tests for features that could be included in bitcoin without risking the existing bitcoin network.

Is there a changelog? Or source? The github repository doesn't seem to have been updated.

Yeah, but this pool's page is comparing their 1% proportional to Deepbit's 10% for PPS as an advantage of their pool.

The front page of your pools says:

Are you really paying out more per block than the block actually produces? That's very generous of you. You also say deepbit's fee is 10%. Isn't it 3%?

There's not really much you can do to stop people from setting up an exchange though. Even if they just trade in forums it's effectively become a vehicle for speculation.

This is pretty much it. The i0coin exchange earnt 3 bitcoins and 1100 i0coins in fees since opening. When opening a new exchange I'm mainly interested in the bitcoin side of the equation unless it seems likely that the alternative coins will take off long term.

An ixcoin/i0coin exchange would be mostly speculative on my part since I'd have no idea if either coin is likely to be worth anything. And with 0.2% fees on coins worth 1% of a bitcoin, it wouldn't pay for server costs unless trading was huge. I don't think trading would be huge (what i0coiner wants ixcoins and vice versa?) and if anything bots would remove all arbitrage opportunities quickly.

Not saying I wouldn't do it, but it's unlikely given the work involved. Setting up the exchange is easy - it's the support for it that's time consuming.

0.2% is not a large fee. The i0coin exchange made 3 bitcoins since opening in fees. I'm not sure that qualifies as 'nice profit'.

What platform? 'bitcoind' runs in server mode even if it doesn't return you to the command prompt. The JSON-RPC server is still running. You'd add '-daemon' or 'daemon=1' in the .conf file to get the behaviour to fork itself in the background (on linux anyway).

No, if they ran 'i0coind' then it uses server mode automatically. If they ran 'i0coin' with the GUI then they'd need '-server'. Without it their miner would not be able to connect and would give an error. You don't see mined blocks immediately because they take 120 confirmations to mature. Then they are reflected in the balance. They can also be 'orphaned' in which case they are lost. This is very common at the early difficulty levels when there is massive hashing power on the network.

Yes, it does. All 'server' mode does is enable the JSON-RPC interface. This is automatically done in the programs ending with 'd'.

And they expire in 48 hours.

I can confirm that I did this.

It happens when using git HEAD without any blocks downloaded yet. As a workaround I went back to commit c81732, downloaded the existing block chain, then went back to HEAD and it worked.

Why does the blocks page show 4 blocks as having 119 confirms to go?

They're real  buys  by people. The won't actually go through at that price since no one will sell at that price. They'll go through at the lower price of any sell that appears.

The IX Coin pool made a loss, even charging 3%, because it pays out on orphan blocks and there are a large number that occur when blocks are flying left and right every few seconds. So the real fee wasn't 3%, it was more like -1%.

i0coind has been locking up on me. The exchange, which has no i0coind transactions yet but is running a client has hung twice. The pool has hung once. This is using commit 364742d79411518ef3ee123d3d1fd653b4674354.

I've fired up a test bitparking pool for i0coin. It's at http://i0pool.bitparking.com and works like the existing namecoin and ixcoin pools. I'll switch to the release i0coind when it's available. All coins will be discarded when the new chain officially starts.

huge number of orphan blocks and chain splits due to blocks going by every few seconds. it'll make the currency unusable for anything without a large confirmation count until it settles down.

Can you provide a summary of the differences? Number of coins you've decided to generate, how often, etc? Putting this on the i0coin page would be good.