Yeah. Patiently waiting.
Btw. Is Peter Todd still on board? Just wondering...
Full resync usually takes under 2 hours for me, but if you got really unlucky with nodes, you can try stopping viacoin, removing peers.dat and starting over: this way you will get another set of nodes from DNS seed and may have more luck with these. Regarding Peter Todd, he is. Keep in mind he is doing Science, as was always the case. |
|
|
|
Just recently downloaded the latest wallet. I get this error whenever I start it.
Any fixes for this?
Try starting viacoin-qt.exe from the command like with -reindex I think it's a problem with the old pre-merged mined DB format. Decided to start from scratch. Syncing is really slow. Any ideas how to speed this up? Nodes that stall block transfer are dropped eventually, nicer ones remain connected and client sync picks up speed. This is all automatic. |
|
|
|
Apologies if this has been covered before but what is the status on mining Blake algo with Nvidia vs AMD? AMD still much faster?
Thank you.
Titan X might beat 290X on this one. |
|
|
|
auxpow is always a dumping ground no matter how you look at it
It is also a huge hashrate and network security at a price of 18k coins/day tops. |
|
|
|
Simply based on the lack of a proper driving force or incentive structure, the project has little chance of success in our eyes and I'll be unwinding my position over the next few weeks. I'll likely be advising those I've brought into VIA to do the same.
Am I the only one who reads 'dark pump finally ran out of fuel, sell NOW'? |
|
|
|
@kalon: If it just randomly started doing that I'm guessing something might have went wrong with your block database. Try doing a fresh resync by deleting the old block files from your data folder or starting with -resync.
Actually looks more like exceeding open files ulimit (especially on ubuntu which has a ridiculously small default), but this could be caused by corrupted DB as well. |
|
|
|
OSX Yosemite
Version: 10.10.3 (14D105g)
Apparently thin space symbol is missing from the font (Helvetica Neue?). Can you type the symbol (unicode 0x2009) in TextEdit? |
|
|
|
Nope, the Trezor is constructed in a way that private keys never leave the device.
Maybe we should set up a bounty campaign to implement support for Trezor signing in the counterwalletd?
Trezor's new firmware has a 'Smart property' feature that looks like an API to sign arbitrary transactions. |
|
|
|
As to speed of mining on gpu's the current miners available for both are fairly equal when you consider that difference in the proof of work rounds.
This is only due to inefficiency of public implementations (haha, implementations, blatant copies of SPH lib code blindly adjusted to barely compile on AMD). Sifcoin has just a chain of hashes while quark has branches. |
|
|
|
The technical part of execution was just fine if I get it right. The drama of unsuccessful instamine/pump is a different story  Anyway, Quark was a huge success and a major innovation of its time, it would only make an honour to RedKendra to be its inventor. The Russian coin came up with that New [multi-hash] tech, not Quark. Quark devs copied and pasted it so no, they should get no credit for that either. But it seems few know that. lol, only top coders like me know. haha!!! Sifcoin has a slightly different PoW algo that does not thwart GPU as efficiently (and siphylis connotation in its name when spelled in Russian lol) |
|
|
|
And what is exactly bad about a coin made to be mergemined with Quark? Save that there is little sense in such a coin these days. read the link. purpose was good, the execution was terrible  The technical part of execution was just fine if I get it right. The drama of unsuccessful instamine/pump is a different story Anyway, Quark was a huge success and a major innovation of its time, it would only make an honour to RedKendra to be its inventor. |
|
|
|
And what is exactly bad about a coin made to be mergemined with Quark? Save that there is little sense in such a coin these days. |
|
|
|
Impressive in a good sense? You like mimiccoin?
Never heard of that one, looks like a blatant LTC clone. But Quark makes for it I suppose |
|
|
|
for information: The developer of skeincoin ("redkendra") is also known as Max Guevara (developer of Quark and mimiccoin) and "johnjoule" (developer of XJO). Also posting with "Willowrosenberg" as sockpuppetaccount. Wonder how much more coins and accounts he created  Even if true, what is particularly bad about that? The list of coins is rather impressive in a good sense. |
|
|
|
I saw that fix in the 0.9.4 release of bitcoin. I was considering just going with 0.9.4 but there's been some talk on the bitcoin thread about issues with re-indexing. Undecided.
Reindexing issues seem to be all about it being slow - this is actually something to expect for bitcoin huge blockchain. Probably there are no non-DER signatures in skeincoin blockchain yet, but it may cause a fork fest between different openssl version nodes if someone sends such tx. @RedKendra: this looks like a great chance to rebase |
|
|
|
Are people just plain dumb or is it greed/gambling? I was always sure it is the latter, but I am not so sure anymore. This is a serious question.
A greedy gambling addict is unambiguously dumb so it is not even a choice |
|
|
|
btw , they might be acting slow sometimes why ? because they are in Florida it is very hot down there
And don't forget the crocodiles. |
|
|
|
Not really sure what the deal is with Bittrex and adding XCP, XCH, & NXT assets. Exchanges like Bter and Poloniex can add them just fine, but Bittrex seems to not add them. Not adding coins like XCH while adding coins like DarkShibe, CannabisDark, UroDark...lol I dont get it. Wallets not based on bitcoin take more time, effort and code (read: money) to audit and maintain, apparently their decisions are based on that. |
|
|
|
well, a small change might be something that requires huge amounts of memory, or even to use diskspace in order to be calculated, which makes the use of GPU so slow that CPU are still usable for mining. (take a look at the momentum algorithm used on protoshares, miners are only 2 or 3 times faster on GPU).
Requiring to use disc space is surely not a small change. Their whitepaper seems to be outdated, when reading it the first thing I thought was that you can use bloom filter to significantly reduce memory requirements. Some googling revealed that someone else already pointed to this and other vulnerabilities in the proposed scheme were found. They seem to fixed them to some extent but its not fast to find any definite information. This all will require time, I can't just copypaste some code into SpreadCoin without understanding it. GPU miner is my priority now. Bloom filter is actually slower than the currently used solutions, since false positives are quite costly. Some people have tried it already, and using a regular hashtable and ignoring collisions is way faster (up to twice as fast depending on the implementation). But still, due to the size of the search space (2^50) and the amount of data to be hashed (2^26), even bloom filters would use an amount of memory that would not fit in the local memory of any GPU in the near future. So, even with a hashing data structure way more efficient than bloom filters (say, something twice as fast as the current implementation), we'd still have GPU and CPU mining ration bellow 5:1, which is quite acceptable. But then, momentum is not the only way to abuse the use of memory, there might be simpler ways to do so (preferably something that can be used with hashcash PoW, which makes for a much simpler transition). But then, i'm not the one deciding the priorities. Yet, the fastest pts miner uses a kind of a bloom filter in LDS. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
