I am copying m-talk.org posts: Coin Magi has a supporter being with us quite a while. This time he will bring Magi into London BITCOIN EXPO 2015, and have it talked there, in particularly focusing on magi effecting on the mining in general, PoS-II, and MagiPay. We must thank him for this great opportunity and many efforts he had put into. The Magi team will make a donation in support of him. Here I call for people in this community can donate whatever amount to him. BTC: 188AmugttD1jfy2xYNy6muTzVzYha1JEuq XMG: 95V9eZnrghtEriGUhBwwEuqMbDm1HBJ58u p.s., will pass to him. |
|
|
|
Looks like we lost a lot posts.  Admin is trying to get those back "manually"?  |
|
|
|
I repeat : minted transactions dont show with "listtransactions" command, whatever arguments you provide.
You'll have to look through listtransactions carefully, locate those transactions having positive fee. A bit confused as to "mined" vs "minted", minted is a word more accurate? Of course, minted coins are mined coins... But in QT version, when you list the choice of filters, you have the two options, mined and minted. Mined show nothing (maybe because I dont mine with the wallet) and minted show transactions but marked ... mined  This is just a cosmetic bug. Here is the Qt client with corrected info: "Minted" --> "Generated by stake" and all stake transactions labeled as "Generated". http://coinmagi.org/files/magi-release/m-wallet-1.2.1.2-win.zipI'll get the mac os x version shortly. |
|
|
|
Good work dev. You should be proud of yourself and your team. You make your words are true! This is an achievement I am proud to support magi and its developers/teammates Oh Jim, you reminded me the old time, day and night ... |
|
|
|
Thanks guys, both added to the OP. |
|
|
|
|
A nice looking site & have fun.
|
|
|
|
whats happening in 2hours according to site
Joe is working on a new website for Magi as the previous one looked a bit old-fashioned and wasn't up to date. Still work in progress! Better good launch than fast and not finished! Give him some extra time!  how long more This is a site I was working on. Something came up so I have to work on that. |
|
|
|
|
damn it! powerpoint crashed in the middle of work, lots of stuffs lost ..... I hate micro** ...
|
|
|
|
I am running the latest client, v1.2.1.1. I don't have any coins in my wallet (or at all ), so perhaps this is a result of there being "nothing to stake"? That should not be the case, can you send me your debug.log file? coinmagicorp@gmail.com or support@coinmagi.org. |
|
|
|
Can anyone tell me, how keeping the wallet open, helps the magi?! How the contributor will be benefited? When?
The benefit is from PoS staking if you have balance in the wallet. For tries, keep it open all the time so that you can monitor the process; if you set password, unlock it that will enable staking. |
|
|
|
received block f305539e1a48b24c9b80
ERROR: CheckProofOfStake() : INFO: check kernel failed on coinstake 3e77c4d5c957069f38fdd59cfbe3d15197415e58abe7d851aef854f9eafab3c1, hashProof=0000a9cd1296008e7bdbca0790b7db1e124ff58ac05940a01b290f6e1dbb9b90
WARNING: AcceptBlock(): check proof-of-stake failed for block f305539e1a48b24c9b804e6e212a88f1f73433858e01b0db70147f4d31102425
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : AcceptBlock FAILED
received block f305539e1a48b24c9b80
ERROR: CheckProofOfStake() : INFO: check kernel failed on coinstake 3e77c4d5c957069f38fdd59cfbe3d15197415e58abe7d851aef854f9eafab3c1, hashProof=0000a9cd1296008e7bdbca0790b7db1e124ff58ac05940a01b290f6e1dbb9b90
WARNING: AcceptBlock(): check proof-of-stake failed for block f305539e1a48b24c9b804e6e212a88f1f73433858e01b0db70147f4d31102425
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : AcceptBlock FAILED
Did you see the above during downloading block chain, or after sync? That sounds mostly an invalid PoS block, and won't be counted into the block chain. I see it quite frequently. I'm not constantly monitoring debug.log, but it seems like whenever I check it, I can find these sorts of errors. Is this a local issue, or the blockchain keeping itself sane? Seems uncommon, is your client the latest version (> v1.2.0)? Can anyone else confirm the same issue? |
|
|
|
Well all miners (currently >30 of them on different clusters) are minimal ubuntu 14.04 images with only minerd installed. The limiting logic is in the virtualisation layer. When other production VM's demand resources the miners are limited by the host and lowering the CPU speed. This way a host is almost always using >95% of the CPU resources but automatically directs it to the VM's needing them in order of VM priority. I don't worry about the hostings running full blast all the time, I just need to exclude the low proirity miner-VM's from the monitoring scripts.
This way all miners keep running, but get limited whenever production VM's demand resources. And monitoring won't go crazy because of some or all hosts are using all CPU cycles. But thx for the tips on Spexx's windows miner, would be nice to have the same logic in a linux miner.
Regards
Alternatively, have you tried the following miner that does the same thing by giving "-e" option (based on precomputed CPU usage reduction, no dynamic control yet). Let me know what you think. https://github.com/magi-project/m-cpuminer-legacyminerdlegacy -o stratum+tcp://pool_url:pool_port -u pool_user.worker -p password -t thread_numbers -e cpu_efficiency Currently I am running it in my digitalocean box. For anyone who can run full speed, I encourage the full speed mining for now as a contribution to "protect" magi mining, that's why we did the Proof of mining (PoM) campaign ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=802681.0). |
|
|
|
So... make sure there's very few GPU miners, and everything should be okay - assuming they are NOT farmers.
I am not meaning that.  I very much dream one day that every one mines XMG; no superb miners in this scene. People are free to go with this argument, but to me no guarantee. As I said, read (carefully) the recent hardfork post and the paper, and then come back figuring out what's the best course one should take. Simply don't go straight the way of mining in general. I believe people in this crypto scene now should / have to get smart, before taking any action / investment. There is no guarantee at all as to ROI, even bitcoin can't keep that promise. I guess I am speaking too far away. What I am saying is trying to reduce one's cost as much as possible (e.g., electricity or something else) by sending this heads up. If one is thinking of investment and getting a quick profit, that's just unlikely, not just in the crypto but everything else. Be smart. As I mentioned and particularly, Mining XMG could not be as profitable as you imagine giving a superb miner. Every one is in the network, what you get is up to what others are doing (situation might change in every moment). |
|
|
|
It's our pleasure to learn that a few new members came into magi. I believe the CPU mining is the appealing point. (don't forget the PoS-II too ) People who were excited to the CPU minable feature should understand why? I'd like to repeat some points we've covered again and again. DO NOT go with a superb miner, you might end up with nothing (or not as profitable as you imagine).Basic question : What makes magi CPU minable? Answers: # A unique design of the block reward (the more hash power, the lower reward) The M7M algo is something the tricky part now as there are a few others arguing possible GPU miners; just let it be, I'm not quite care about that now. I am mostly replying on the block reward design to enable the CPU mining part; if you don't yet look into that or understand it, read carefully the following post and paper: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=735170.msg9991269#msg9991269http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.7948Simply, the block reward is designed such that it encourages a moderate hashrate level. I understand the mining earning could go crazily low value; the good side is that magi is still at the low market cap; feel free to buy off some coins if you like it. Don't mine too hard, or PoW blocks will stop yielding coins (block chain still going).
...
The reward is designed best at the CPU mining level. Anyone fire up CPU farm or GPU may push reward towards a trivial level. The coming hard fork will tailor the reward at a much accurate level.
Remember, the more CPU miners (not too high hashrate though), the more secure of the reward. The more GPU miners (let's say in the future and assuming they have significantly high hashrate), no actual rewards will be yielded.
p.s., I am actually keen to see how magi's block reward design could cut down ASIC miners in a scrypt coin.
p.s., I got some personal stuffs which need to be taken care of; I apologize if I can't answer/update ASAP. All things have been noted down and will do as soon as I can.
|
|
|
|
So community POS takeover??? Sounds fun
NO, not at all, no one is taking over; me, just proividing some help here, that's about it. I believe NOBL is not about PoS or anything like that, but with the big business plan. For those who ask for my permission, blessing or opinion I don't really have much to say. My stance was always reduced rewards/merge-mining with DOGE/LTC and not touching PoS due to huge security concerns. The PoS drive began with the community 'democratic' vote so I didn't feel like the dictator of a decentralized coin. It's a shame I couldn't get delivery of PoS sorted which is why I felt it best in the community hands. I'd advise a real vote in IRC and for those ultimately chosen to determine the future of NOBL to really understand the technology/industry future and care about things more important than short-medium term price/position protection. Good luck with your choices.
Rofo, good to see you; my little suggestion regarding your prior takeover post: DO NOT hand NOBL over to someone else if you want to see it alive "forever", or it will be dead soon. I'm seriously saying that, no one else can handle a coin as much as its original dev. Only you know what the coin was and will be in the future. Just ask the question, for what reasons, somebody/party would take over the coin? I never see a successful coin because of taking over (correct me). I am free to take some tasks to pass NOBL over the PoS or whatever else. Let the community handle marketing stuffs etc, so that you can focus on your plan. But man, don't push yourself too hard; you know the crypto stuff is crazy, simply don't rely on it. I don't see any anticipation that we can get something out of it readily & quickly, unless undergoing the scam scheme (for quick profits), that's absolutely not what we're gonna do. Just relax yourself, few hours of crypto, few hours of your real life business. That's it! My stance was always reduced rewards and not touching PoS due to huge security concerns.
I think this would be about right choice too; magi did have a specific design on the dynamic block rewards; I bet that will be resist to multipool. For anyone who is interested to it (again this post, or PM me for more discussion; I am actually keen to see it's combining with the scrypt ago to resist ASIC (it's a soft control though; I'm quite serious on this): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=735170.msg9991269#msg9991269 (also find the paper in the OP). Edit: implementing this design into NOBL will only need a hardfork that can be done quite easily. No swap is needed, and we will be able to keep everything else the same, including the original NOBL code. |
|
|
|
I am not concerned about attacks with significant amounts of coins. Big holders have to spend a lot to purchase these coins. It is unlikely someone will be willing to invest heavily into a coin just to attack it.
This is about right; there could be many possibilities to make it happen though, for example, unintentional staking with big amount because of the "greed", let alone pool staking is happening. More or less this is a security hole. Joe, I would like to understand how Magi Coin's PoS works, could you tell roughly how many coins will be minted by:
- wallet with 1 Magi Coin
- wallet with 10 Magi Coins
- 100, 1000, 10000, 100000 coins?
Let us presume these wallets are online all the time for a month.
It's a bit difficult to estimate a month staking. In general, reward = coinage * APR / 365. To be simple, coinage is about linearly increasing with staking days (within the first four days). As an example, 100 XMG staking gets reward in the 3rd day, then reward = (100*3) * 2.6% / 365 = 0.021 XMG; 1000 XMG will get reward within half day: (100*0.5) * 2.6% / 365 = 0.036 XMG. For 10000, 100000 coins in staking barely gets reward. I assumed above coins are staked in a transaction. One can split 10000 over 10 transactions, that will lead to 10 times of staking with 1000 coins. |
|
|
|
Hi,
In the QT wallet, you can see the minted transactions (BTW there is a display bug at least in Win version, theses minted transactions are marked "mined" instead of "minted" but filter is working).
I can't find theses minted transactions with the command line "listtransactions". Do you have a way to show them using CLI ?
A bit confused as to "mined" vs "minted", minted is a word more accurate? listtransactions has a few options to track back past transactions you might want to try: listtransactions [account] [count=10] [from=0] Returns up to [count] most recent transactions skipping the first [from] transactions for account [account]. If [account] not provided will return recent transaction from all accounts. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
