|
3
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant
|
on: May 14, 2014, 04:44:49 PM
|
tried to send 47 darkcoins and it says I need to pay a fee of 4.1 darkcoins (I tried to send ~70 but it said transaction too large). ?!
Saw something similar in 9.3.3. Tried to send 141 coins to one of my other wallets and it said "transaction too large" and asked for a 0.009 fee. I paid it since it was reasonable and the transaction went through without issue, but I've sent larger amounts to myself or to exchanges in the past and have never seen that pop up. any idea how to get it to send? I can't make a larger transfer, only 9.x drk works, 47 drk wanted 4.1 drk fee, 77 "too large" |
|
|
|
|
9
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant
|
on: May 12, 2014, 12:41:53 AM
|
I still can't figure this out and would appreciate any help: after the blockchain stopped syncing randomly (it was working for a while) I re-installed darkcoin-qt and all of my addresses except for one dissapeared, and with it hundreds of darkcoin. Anyone know what happened or how I can get them back? I had less than 10 addresses
Do you have a backup of the wallet from when you had that balance? Try listaddressgroupings in the console to look at the hidden addresses of the wallet. Thank you for helping! I do have multiple backups. Listaddressgroupings is only showing my one address that is working properly and nothing else. I still can't figure this out and would appreciate any help: after the blockchain stopped syncing randomly (it was working for a while) I re-installed darkcoin-qt and all of my addresses except for one dissapeared, and with it hundreds of darkcoin. Anyone know what happened or how I can get them back? I had less than 10 addresses
I have this sitting here, trying to think of what to say and how to help. I guess a good question would be, can you remember when those coins first came into your wallet? Was that one of the newer transactions or one of the older transactions? This address that is working properly (XiPahZ3EhtvDhbF3hS6KwnqMu68vgFRcG9", 87.69900461) is old and has been receiving drk since 3/19 just fine and is still working fine, the rest of my addresses are gone. My large transfer to the wallet was recent, and I haven't ever sent any drk OUT of the wallet and none are showing as missing or transferred out. |
|
|
|
|
11
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][DRK] DarkCoin | First Anonymous Coin | First X11 | First DGW | ASIC Resistant
|
on: May 11, 2014, 09:46:55 AM
|
hello guys I am having a scary problem with my darkcoin wallet and I would appreciate some help! I had around 700 darkcoins, but the wallet was not syncing (Stuck 16 weeks behind). I backed up the folder but after reinstalling darkcoin, it is only showing ONE of my many addresses, and its showing a balance of only 87 darkcoins. Only my mining address is shown, and its only received transactions. My other 5-6 addresses are not in the wallet. What can I do?  Did you finish syncing? I'm sorry but I'm going to bed right now. But unless you used up over 100 addresses, it should be there. Make sure you finished syncing, make sure you're on the right fork? Gosh, if you haven't paid attention to the hard forks of the past, it's possible you were mining on the wrong fork? I sure hope not! yes it is finished syncing, and I only had used about 6-7 addresses not more than ten for certain. I had bought most of the DRK from exchanges and I think 87 DRK was roughly half of my mining. I am much more worried seeing one address in there showing the funds, than if I had seen nothing. |
|
|
|
|
15
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: I no longer consider bitcoin as a decentralized currency...
|
on: May 07, 2014, 08:24:52 PM
|
|
not only are ASICs disallowing most people from mining, they are also used in massive pools. Isn't 51% of the network being mined by a few pools? That just means the three owners (or less?) of those pools have to be bribed, manipulated, threatened, or motivated to fundamentally destroy bitcoin. Not that resilient.
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 1,000,000 bits = 1 bitcoin. Future-proofing Bitcoin for common usage? VOTE
|
on: May 04, 2014, 01:14:30 PM
|
We are talking about future proofing so let's make 1 BTC = $100,000 for easy math.
Suppose Joe blow wants to order a $5 cheeseburger in BTC. Here's a few different scenarios:
A. "That'll be 0.00005 BTC please."
B. "That'll be 0.05 mBTC please."
C. "That'll be 50 uBTC please."
D. "That'll be 50 bits please."
A and B are eliminated right off the bat because nobody wants to recall how many zeroes they've put after the decimal.
This leaves us with reasonable C and D, but the word "bit" is far more marketable than "micro-BTC". Micro-BTC just doesn't roll off the tongue like bits does.
For those who say we have MicroBitcoin already, it's not about us... we get it, we're fine. We're already invested into BTC. Get over yourself. It's about widespread adoption transcending mathematical literacy, and "bit" is the ideal solution concerning avoiding decimals as well as ownership psychology.
this. I would like to add that uBTC is also confusing, though, whereas bits are not. |
|
|
|
|
17
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 1,000,000 bits = 1 bitcoin. Future-proofing Bitcoin for common usage? VOTE
|
on: May 03, 2014, 06:51:04 AM
|
Actually we have MicroBitcoin (μBTC) already. Why change it to Bits?
I prefer μBTC (spelled: uBit)
These are very confusing to use and they absolutely will not catch on in the near future. Whole numbers are easy, even if they are big numbers. Even laymen know what 100,000 is, but good luck trying to get everyone to understand what 1/1000th of something is. People ARE familiar with 1 cent and 10 cents, though. Bits uses large whole numbers and familiar fractions to be perfectly convenient. A $300 computer for 672,000 bits is NOT confusing. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
