Thank You!
Next version DGW, Masternode Vulnerability Fix and DarkSend UI
Masternode Vulnerability Fix is the issue, dash has been informed but only empty answer so far. i could also stop your crave chain at this point if i wanted, i did it to hxx.( because we will have a swap) https://chainz.cryptoid.info/hxx/there is many reasons why i say that you may also face coinswap.. i will work on hxx and give all the help i can to your code. i am about to take dash as latest code base but now i am not sure if it is a safe coin.. need to study it. Please help in the vulnerability it will take me some time to have a solution... this is not full time job look at dash now, they have some serious problems |
|
|
|
edit:
WindowsQT 32bit
client version 2.0.3.6
protocol 60036
https://github.com/hexxcointakeover/hexxcoin/releases/tag/2.0.3.6
basically:hexxcoin is safe to use, only the reward rules are now different if you want.
this is until we do a coinswap for other reasons.
some darkcoin based coins can be exploited,
so the code is in this wallet for everyone to use,
and see that it will work
staker/miner can now hold masternode rewards by himself when staking/mining with tweaked code.
staker/miner will have normal 25% stake + staker/miner can now keep the 1 coin masternode reward.
you can still use the old normal 2.0.1.0 wallet/ git source 2.0.3.7/60037
some point we will take a snapshot of hxx chain to coinswap.
some users hexxcoin masternode wallet:  edit: i just populated hexxcoin network with clients that have all the masternode payment enforcement rules turned on to the source code. also the "tweaked" wallet has rules on. result: enforcement clients still accept zero paid masternode blocks to the chain even that masternode payment enforcement rules are turned on. i expected fork to happen, it did not happen. so, this did not stop this "hardly a vulnerability" thing. will test more later time, next test will be with another coin based on current dashsource. if that coin fails, hexx will move out of this code.
|
|
|
|
|
Total time logged in: 53 days, 6 hours and 9 minutes.
|
|
|
|
|
i must say this cryptoid guy (= blockexplorer)
best i have ever seen.
site updates before you send any message, hope yobit would work as cryptoid
|
|
|
|
|
did the dev runout already?
source preview?
or just hype to sold old coins?
i will look into this, have bad feelings about this one..
|
|
|
|
|
you guys are gonna be rich..
kim will buy this coin all him self..
|
|
|
|
damn, you are smart..  did your ICO cover the 0.1btc? |
|
|
|
Such a shame! Seemed like a good idea at the time...  While some people want to make real great things someone want only hurt others. I have to admit that the idea behind this coin could work but after the launch the difficulty to mine increased so bad that the idea about mining solo couldn't work anymore. 5minutes of work: setup your p2pool, rent hashpower needed, hit the power into your pool that is called solo. Oh, i thinked that solo mining means only that you mine using the wallet and not a pool, well to be clear, i'm not an expert about mining, i usually only check if a coin rise or drop and if a coin sounds good i try to get some of them to see if i can earn something. yes in the "old days" it was like you said that is why i sold all my gpus when i still got pretty good prize of them. if i want to mine, i rent power to public pool or my own pool. |
|
|
|
Such a shame! Seemed like a good idea at the time... While some people want to make real great things someone want only hurt others. I have to admit that the idea behind this coin could work but after the launch the difficulty to mine increased so bad that the idea about mining solo couldn't work anymore. 5minutes of work: setup your p2pool, rent hashpower needed, hit the power into your pool that is called solo. |
|
|
|
|
as you see 5000blocks is not any deadline to hardfork.
chain is moving on but the reward is 1 coin.
|
|
|
|
haha.. HTTP requests URL: http://checkip.dyndns.org/TYPE: GET USER AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1) DNS requests node.walletbuilders.com (95.211.57.108)
walletbuilders.com (104.31.86.52)checkip.dyndns.org (216.146.38.70) Yup, it's the same dev... As said before.. as long as those ICO's are free and as long as walletbuilders is free, he will keep doing that shit.. so angry about this shit that i might even setup a pool for this coin |
|
|
|
haha.. HTTP requests URL: http://checkip.dyndns.org/TYPE: GET USER AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1) DNS requests node.walletbuilders.com (95.211.57.108)
walletbuilders.com (104.31.86.52)checkip.dyndns.org (216.146.38.70) |
|
|
|
|
--large-address-aware...........................
|
|
|
|
Hey dev, where did you go? I wasn't trying to mock the coin or anything. Yeah, launch didn't go so well but you warned us it was your first coin. Hell, even if STRP never hits an exchange, you might as well finish what you started. Consider this coin a practice run. Next one will be better.
Even if you are no professional, the alt scene needs more guys with even basic coding and programming skills because you have the ability to actually contribute. Guys like me who just blah blah blah and contribute nothing but words are a dime a dozen.
I am still here, I am just having problems and it is embarrassing. I had no idea compiling a wallet on windows was such a nightmare. I stayed home from work today to try to get this worked out, but still there are problems. First I was attempting it on a Windows 8.1 VM on my netbbok. I could not even get all the dependencies installed there without errors. Last night I borrowed a Windows 10 laptop, and was able to get all dependencies compiled(I fell asleep while QT was compiling cause it took over an hour). Fresh this morning I called into work and made an excuse. Jumped into the laptop and started fresh. Halfway through compilation I get a net.cpp error. I googled my issues, and tried 10+ fixes. None of them worked. I erased all libs and dependencies and started over. Got to the same compilation problem. It looked like a upnp issue so I tried to qmake without upnp(USE_UPNP=-) No luck. I decided that maybe it is a windows 10 issue so I am currently installing a VM version of Windows 7. This is basically my last hope. I do not want to get someone else to compilate it because if I did, I can't vouch for it cause I have no idea if it is legit or not. Maybe I am not cut out for this shit. I have compiled many sources before, but always on Ubuntu. your mistake: ifneq (${USE_UPNP}, -) LIBS += -l miniupnpc -l iphlpapi DEFS += -DSTATICLIB -DUSE_UPNP=$(USE_UPNP) endif ok, solution: endif ifneq (${USE_UPNP}, -) LIBS += -l miniupnpc -l iphlpapi DEFS += -DMINIUPNP_STATICLIB -DUSE_UPNP=$(USE_UPNP) endif |
|
|
|
OCminer is correct, this is not something anyone should invest in. First reason.... no tech details, Second reason... no tech details, Third reason those images are shit. Logo placed on top of towel with a bit of transparency to make it look as if it is embroidered.plus spelling errors is always a clue, dev not speaking about concerns is another, take your ICO and shuv it
As already said, I'm not fudding.. This dev has multiple "projects"/"coins" running at the same time.. Dashlite, netcoin, Bitcoin Hashcore and a lot other coins.. If everybody buys and buys his ICO's and as long Yobit provides ICO's for free + Walletbuilders creates coins for free ... he will continue with this shit... this sound like..pure scam. "ICO" thats the key fancy pictures, empty promises, closed source to get all the trojans in? nice try.. of cource yobit wants source and maybe gets a clean one, but binaries can be anything else than clean. or have we some new way to stop pools? ocminer could tell that there is none. of course if we have only qui wallet with no source, thats not a problem to use it with pool i used qt client with my pool because i was lazy to compile or will we see wallet only mining? |
|
|
|
|
the problem:
static const int64 nTargetTimespan = 10 * 30; // stripecoin: 5 minutes
it makes jumpy diff, span time too short
not so serious..
|
|
|
|
Looking at the two pools... diff adjustment is weird.
pool.mn found 105 through 111
suprnova found 108 through 114
both pools claim to have found blocks 108, 109, 110, 111
two different forks?
Yeah, something is not right here. I am not sure what caused this, I am looking into it. I would suggest not to mine any more and save your hash till I figure it out. Ugh, I should have known better. Good luck to you. seems like https://pool.mn/strp is the one forked( and will do it again..) they should add supenova as their addnode chain is moving now correctly, no fork |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
