Your version of miniupnp is incorrect. What version do you have installed? Try upgrading to the latest version. |
|
|
|
I0coin:
git clone git://github.com/kr105rlz/i0coin.git
This is ancient. See tiker's response for the correct location. |
|
|
|
This concept can be generalized to any form of property. I really think the block chain, and its ultimate use for this purpose, and the fact that you need bitcoins for all of these transactions, is the biggest asset that the bitcoin system has and will ultimately prove to be the thing that ensures bitcoin has intrinsic value.
Bitcoin developers were actively against storing data in the blockchain. Or is the name data you are proposing stored elsewhere? Mike Hearn outlined an approach for doing merge mining using naming as the example where it doesn't use its own blockchain if you're interested. |
|
|
|
210,000 * 50 / 48 = 218,750
And block 218,750 has been hit. i0coin now pays 24 coins per block. |
|
|
|
The current market cap for I0Coin is merely 150 BTC in that case. A question; has the I0Coin block reward halved yet? Apparently 50 blocks ago it was 210000.
It halves at 218,750. |
|
|
|
hmm, as the coin though that I designed been put into the client? I guess no one is pushing i0coins anymore, now they aren't doing that great. http://allchains.info/106 gigahash The hash rate is less than that. Notice the block count for i0coin on allchains.info. It appears to be stuck. It looks like mmpool is the main chain miner at the moment. The generation amount for i0coin drops from 48 to 24 in less than 100 blocks btw. |
|
|
|
Is there a reason I am getting high rejects ? Is it perhaps too much work rolling I do? Last night I had 321 shares submitted, 71 rejects aka 17.1%
Now I have 5832 submitted and 2.2%(129) rejected
I don't know why you'd be getting high rejects, unless you're ignoring long polling. What do you mea nby "too much work rolling"? |
|
|
|
Also i noticed that this question is uncomfortable for developers. They don't try to go deep into problem, but giving common answers.
There is only one developer and as far as I know they haven't responded to you yet - I don't know if that's an indication of being uncomfortable or not. You've been appealing to 'khal', but the namecoin developer is vinced. Have you looked through the namecoin thread to see if there's any reasoning? |
|
|
|
BIP16 transactions are simply accepted as valid by old clients. They can't become isolated due to this.
According to Gavin they can become isolated if someone mines a bad transaction. Is it a temporary isolation (duration only for that block)? Or was that issue fixed? f an attacker DID manage to create a block with a timestamp after the switchover date and a bad /P2SH/ transaction in it, then some percentage of the network will try to build on that bad block. Lets say 70% of hashing power supports /P2SH/. That would mean only 70% of the network was working on a good block-chain, and the result would be transactions taking, on average, about 14 minutes to confirm instead of the usual 10 minutes. |
|
|
|
|
explorer.devcoin.org has been dead for a while - is it going to be fixed or replaced?
|
|
|
|
Thanks for alerting us to the problem. Because you caught it early only 88 blocks were not big enough.
The advantage for those on a PPS pool - you get paid the full amount per share even though the actual block values were less. Bad luck for the pool though! |
|
|
|
is there a way to get my other addresses out of my wallet and make a new wallet that would work?
Ask in the dot-bit.org forums. Khalahan there just went through the process on their own wallet. |
|
|
|
when are the win-binaries ready for the non-compiling-guys?  are you, doublec, the team-leader for this solution? then send me - via PM - your nmc-address for the posted 1,000 nmc for solution, you may distribute it to the ones, who worked around this nmc-anti-spam... I put windows binaries here: ...they're now available at dot-bit.org... They should appear on the dot-bit.org site at some point. I helped contribute to the solution, along with khalahan from dot-bit.org. Send coins to to their donate address at the bottom of this page as they did a lot of the work to get the github repository updated and linux binaries, etc. |
|
|
|
Still ticking.
block 200,000 x 48 = 9,600,000 coins out soon to be 10,000,000 coins out at block 204,000 or so. This is ahead of bitcoin.
Only 18,000 blocks or so until the subsidy is cut in half to 24 coins per block. |
|
|
|
Are the proposed Value templates are final? Can they change? They looks like a drafts.
They are drafts but it's feedback from implementers (ie. people like you) that will help decide whether they're final. If you implement it, it'll no doubt become the final spec for namecoin/i2p integration. |
|
|
|
The usual way to lookup a single name is "name_scan" with the numeric argument set to 1. eg: namecoind name_scan d/bluishcoder 1
[
{
"name" : "d/bluishcoder",
"value" : "{\"map\":{\"\":\"69.164.206.88\"}}",
"txid" : "ebad6e9dfcb8d1204a49a6da089f6a102ea5779612c745d94766153215bc9a3f",
"expires_in" : 27317
}
]
You need to check if the returned name is the same as the one you asked for. If it is, and expires_in is greater than 0 you have the right record. Another approach is to monitor the namecoin network for blocks. When you get one do a "name_scan" to obtain the complete history. Cache that and do fast lookups using it. Whenever a new block arrives invalidate the cache and repopulate it. |
|
|
|
Are you having some server issues or perhaps light DDOS attack? Pool ran great for last couple of days and just now started to die every couple of seconds and then come alive again.
Not that I've noticed, it's working fine for me. Is it still happening for you? |
|
|
|
|
The namecoin chain is currently being spammed with dust. If you look at the block explorer the blocks have all been maximum size recently. There was discussion on IRC and the dot-bit forums about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
