|
Just be careful with cryptonight V7, we still don't know if it is already supported by (some of) the ASICs.
|
|
|
|
Personally, I'm in 2 minds about POS vs POW.
I love the idea of getting rid of "wasting energy".
On the other hand, it's that "wasted" energy that gives the token additional undisputable value and is therefore a great layer of trust, next to the current trade prices on the exchanges.
Same effect as with gold. It's expensive to mine, hence it's rare, hence it's valuable. In theory, there should be some market-driven self adjustment happening to how much energy a coin consumes and I think that's what's happening. So POW isn't necessarily bad. Also, there are many voices warning against pure POS as there seem to be some issues with that, too.
I've thought about that topic a while ago, too and my feeling is that a new POW/hybrid POW/POS approach that somehow incentivizes contribution to coin network health might be a good approach. E.g. instead of just having the tokens "at stake", the POW part could be about providing network bandwidth (e.g. forwarding new transactions) or transaction history lookups. I'm not sure yet how to encapsulate these tasks in a way so that it can be verified independently that a node has done it. But it must be possible, SETI@home is somehow verifying processed packages as well.
The POS part could stay more or less the same as having tokens at stake I guess.
I agree with your comments on POW and POS. Maybe POW is expensive in terms of energy, but it's what makes it work; and let's remember bitcoin is the biggest coin, the first and it still works pretty fine, regardless of all the attacks it got over the years. Hybrid POW/POS could be a nice solution, but I'm not sure it's a good thing to introduce in a coin like XCN: I mean, what if those huge chinese xcn holders start staking? No coins for new users, no coins for small investors. Furthermore, there is a technical problem to solve: miniblockchain is about removing transaction history and keeping a balance sheet of accounts instead, which clashes with the POS concept of "coin age"; since every node needs to verify the stake transactions, they would need to know the coin age and history of those coins. I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that we need to rethink it and adapt to mini-blockchain. About SETI@home, they probably verify the packages in a centralised manner. |
|
|
|
Why does no one help me? Where can I download the version of Rebase 2 for Ubuntu?
I will upload an updated linux archive shortly. Just uploaded both updated CLI and GUI builds. |
|
|
|
Why does no one help me? Where can I download the version of Rebase 2 for Ubuntu?
I will upload an updated linux archive shortly. |
|
|
|
What does Komodo have to do with Cryptonite? |
|
|
|
The build.sh script only works if you cloned the git repository. You can run the commands and avoid that script, but I suggest you use "git clone" to get the sources and run "build.sh release". |
|
|
|
|
Fix has just been pushed. Binaries coming.
|
|
|
|
Network height is 1112 blocks. It's 556000 coins. Staking weight of network is 1277141 which is twice more than current supply.
Do you still believe devs doesn't stake?
stake weight is amount * time, you can't do the math that way. |
|
|
|
I have bought a handful of coins to test network, but would somebody willing to test it setting up a 10-20 nodes to sent it to them simultaneously.
Without it, it's hard to test with 2-3 computers, throughput of network. I can't make a couple of VMs, but it won't be enough.
I am interested in such a kind of performance test and would like to participate, but in the next weeks I have not so much time for it. In mid to late April, it would be possible for me. I'll confirm in 2-3 weeks. It would be reasonable to use a test network for that. Is there currently a XCN testnet running? I don't think so but we can quickly set it up. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Finally I get my hands on some Cryptonite.
Now we can swap xD.
Kidding.
Btw. counterfainted coins are black listed, and can't get to circulating supply, within network (only on chinese exchanges) yes?
Also we could make test on throughput of network and how it would handle it, with some batch scripting, if there would be some participants to it.
So guys what do you think?
Is there a swap undergoing or planned, as I hold some coins too. We talked about a possible coin swap to have a clean blockchain. Nothing planned yet. It should go along with the rebranding. |
|
|
|
I today tried to make performance test on network, and it wasn't so favourable - I thought that with 60sec blocks, it will get at least 1 confirmation in faster time, than 10min.
I have set one time minimal fee, second time it was the highest fee (1XCN), and it was the same, I waited 8-10 min to get 1 conf, rest confirmation were faster, but 10 min for 1 conf, with empty blockchain is a little disappointing
Slimcoin is processing faster transactions, which was strange for me, because it has slower block times (90 sec).
Also wallet is quite memory hungry - on my computers it consumes 800-900mb of ram, in comparison to 600mb consumed by Slimcoin node, and 200mb by Peercoin node (all fully synchronized).
Confirmation time depends on hashrate, difficulty and luck. In average, shorter block time will always be faster. Also what is important and would be interesting to test is tx throughput. |
|
|
|
A "manual" approach is already available: using the public blockchain snapshot or a backup of your own chain (which will be much smaller). Thanks. I don't like this approach very much because it implies some centralization - even if it's not likely that it can be abused as XCN isn't suitable for "timestamping" purposes (like Factom). For now, I would prefer to export my transactions every week. Part of the information is already saved in the wallet, we could eventually try to add the missing information so the user doesn't see an incomplete transaction data.
I wonder how much bigger the wallet file would become, though.
That would be the approach I would favour. Maybe a separate file can be added so the wallet file isn't cluttered with transaction data? In the end it's just your blockchain data. Everyone's different because it starts collecting full tx data a couple weeks before your first use. You could backup it along with the wallet (i.e. blocks/ and trie.dat, with wallet.dat). |
|
|
|
Thanks for your efforts to list the coin at Freiexchange. Maybe they can evolve into a sort of "hidden gems exchange".  this is a side effect of mini-blockchain: if you sync from scratch and use an existing wallet, you loose information about the old transactions you did with that same wallet.
you can keep the old chain data ("blocks" folder), or use the blockchain snapshot (see first post), to recover that information.
Interesting. Would it cost a big effort to add a "database" to the wallet with information about past transactions which wouldn't get lost if the blockchain is re-synced? One could do something similar, in a manual way, exporting the JSON data about past transactions regularly and "bundling" them to a "poor man's database", but an automatic feature would be very fine - above all for people who like or even need to do some advanced accounting, like merchants and other crypto enterprises. A "manual" approach is already available: using the public blockchain snapshot or a backup of your own chain (which will be much smaller). Part of the information is already saved in the wallet, we could eventually try to add the missing information so the user doesn't see an incomplete transaction data. I wonder how much bigger the wallet file would become, though. |
|
|
|
What`s stopping Bitmain adjusting firmware to new fork and releasing X3 updated software ?
With a change of the pow it might not be enough to change the firmware, you need to make another chip. (expensive) That's why they didn't hardfork yet: the change was too small and the ASICs probably already support it anyways. |
|
|
|
Hi. Today i updated my cryptonite wallet to 1.4.11 ver. I copied my wallet.dat to new folder and run wallet. Wallet begin synced, but when process is done, i see this:
If a run old wallet 1.4.2 - seem all be ok
Whats wrong with new wallet? My blocks and transactions okay or no ?
getblockhash 1855488 in new and old wallet are same
this is a side effect of mini-blockchain: if you sync from scratch and use an existing wallet, you loose information about the old transactions you did with that same wallet. you can keep the old chain data ("blocks" folder), or use the blockchain snapshot (see first post), to recover that information. |
|
|
|
|
I've reported the error to coinmarketcap, so they can remove stellarport as an XCN market.
I also requested addition of freiexchange.
|
|
|
|
New binary release: https://github.com/pallas1/Cryptonite/releasesEven if the old version will continue working, everyone is encourage to update: the use of new libraries for the build increases security, performance and compatibility with newer OS versions. |
|
|
|
pallas did you send a add request to stellarport.io ? XCN trading there for 1800 sat and volume is high but we cant deposit there who is selling XCN there? its fishy  ps: stellarport.io admin: fchain.io has issued an XCN token that represents Chinese Yuan not Cryptonite. You won't be able to send Cryptonite to the Stellar network at this time LOL SCAM SCAM SCAM!!! XCN is biggest scam so far, and I im here for last 5+ years and mined 500+ coins!!!!!!!!!! First there was inside HACK then coins was privatly added to dozen of chines, tailand, etc exchange where you can not deposit or it was broken, and then you see fake trades to scam stupid newbies and asian ppl to buy THIS SCAM!!! They used the XCN ticker symbol without first checking if it's already in use, nor contacting us in any way. All their fault. About the chinese exchanges, we did all we could to make them work (and they did: for example btc38 and bter have been working for many months during 2017). Again this is all about the exchanges themselves and could have happened with any other coin. |
|
|
|
@Epsylon3: I think I've spotted bug. I'm using your miner under Linux. When your miner on C11 algo calling nvidia-smi is extremely slow and nvidia-settings hangs. There is no such problem on trupvot version, but it's lot slower...
Ok, but this IS tpruvot's version thread... |
|
|
|
Np, thanks very much! I will add it to the op and Twitter asap. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
