Warning:
Mac wallet, found on digibyte.co, crashes.
Not the same version on Mega! But Mega version does not synchronize.
this is not serious!
An update, quick, otherwise I can not accept digibyte in my online store.
at me it works fine... I think we can't find a new block (that was yesterday also) we have to low has rate at me block 134237 (and he stopt with synchronizing) also the explorer say that this the latest block.... so that's the reason.... edit:new block is found! try again, he works normal at the moment! Yes, works again for me. Probably because of the hash issue. Yes this is all related to the current hash issue. |
|
|
|
Everything is fine.
If you have problems with the Mac wallet, a good alternative would be to run the windows wallet in a virtualbox.
that's fine to say if have you windows. I see here that the last block was:134145: http://explorer.cryptopoolmining.com/chain/DigiByteTook just 3 minutes under 6 hours to find the next block. Yes, you read that right, 6 hours for all intents and purposes! If anyone is wondering why no-one is mining DGB, that's your answer right there. You need go no further, need think no longer. And that was after an 83.185 diff that had already "adjusted" down from a previous 124.777 diff on the previous block just 4 minutes before 124145. Oh, how I'd like to know what's causing this and why the only coins I've found with similar issues are coins using DigiShield. Been on BlazingHashes for while now, same 13k coins sitting unconfirmed and nothing new. This is a problem. Not complaining, just reporting... Gen Est. Found Valid Orphan Avg Diff Shares Est. Shares Percentage Amount Rate Est. Last Hour 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Last 24 Hours 1440 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Sorry but, going to have to pull the rig at some point if things don't improve. We are working around the clock right now and will probably be up all night right now. We could use all the hash we can get for another 48 hours. We need to get everything stabilized. |
|
|
|
Everything is fine.
If you have problems with the Mac wallet, a good alternative would be to run the windows wallet in a virtualbox.
that's fine to say if have you windows... I see here that the last block was:134145: http://explorer.cryptopoolmining.com/chain/DigiByteTook just 3 minutes under 6 hours to find the next block. Yes, you read that right, 6 hours for all intents and purposes! If anyone is wondering why no-one is mining DGB, that's your answer right there. You need go no further, need think no longer. And that was after an 83.185 diff that had already "adjusted" down from a previous 124.777 diff on the previous block just 4 minutes before 124145. Oh, how I'd like to know what's causing this and why the only coins I've found with similar issues are coins using DigiShield. Before the 0.9.1 upgrade things were working as expected. If you look at the chart dates it all adds up. Todays block delay was do to a massive drop in hash combined with DigiShield & 0.9.1 reacting to several blocks found quickly in a row. If this were other coins like Litecoin or Bitcoin and the same thing happened it could be weeks between blocks. We are working as fast as we can on the multi-algo implementation and difficulty re-targeting adjustment. It also appears some multi-pools may be attempting some sort of timing attack. This combined with a very low hash is creating some issues to overcome. We are still in this for the long term. This is a bump along the way. In the mean time the block chain is still working. We will get through this. Please be patient. And if anyone would like to help coding in a solution, we could use all the help we can get to speed the process up. |
|
|
|
relax and buy some  +1 Always a great idea!  |
|
|
|
I once received the reward of 50k DGB for posting the first on page 300, quite some time ago I don't receive nothing, I was the first one who posted on page 400.... DGB:DLqANko7bwz2P5iEzyGxv5r2H3kbyVyoqQ LOL anyone send 5k digibytes:D thank you anyone! Cheers! |
|
|
|
DOGE is not going anywhere in the long term, connecting the fate of DGB to that of DOGE would be a huge mistake.
Not playing nice with DOGE is also a huge mistake. DOGE's real weakness is its Reddit. Yes its code has problems, but the Reddit is even more vulnerable. All someone has to do is come in and get one offensive post past the mods and it's over. The subReddit goes down and takes the community and the coin with it. If you ask me, it's only a matter of time which is sad because I am a big fan of DOGE and am working on getting dogecoin Prypto cards sold in comic shops around the Southeast US. Whoever corrals all those crazy teenagers in the aftermath (or if/when the economics of the coin sink it) and gets them under a new umbrella is going to seriously benefit. DGB could do a lot worse than have a young, vibrant, dedicated userbase to draw from. I'm not saying DGB should merge-mine, but we really ought to put out the welcome mat for them. Yes, Doge has been a great community & has been very friendly toward DGB. We recently have had some discussions with some of the devs bouncing ideas around. The Doge community is most definitely welcome into the DigiByte community! The problem with Doge is the January 2015 mining reward reduction. DigiByte is a long-term mine-able coin. It is hard to say what happens in 6 months. A lot can happen between now and then in this world. |
|
|
|
Jared,
Does the other party working on the deal have an opinion on the security or is that to the discretion of the dev team?
YC
At the moment they are unaware and do not quite understand technically how all this works. We are working hard on multi-algo implementation and will start testing soon. Which by the way we could use all the help testing we can get. |
|
|
|
By, the way. Happy 500 thread pages everyone! In two days DigiByte will be 6 months old!
you posted the 10.000 post! Haha, very cool! |
|
|
|
|
By, the way. Happy 500 thread pages everyone! In two days DigiByte will be 6 months old!
|
|
|
|
Merge mining is good to strengthen the block chain but it will harm the value of both coins. Just look at what VTC & MON & PLX, their prices are at the bottom after adding merge mining. Easy get, easy dump. Merge mining will not be welcomed by DGB investors.
Yes, it does appear to be a hot issue for some. We are listening to everyone. No merged mining for the time being. But it is very healthy for us all to be having this discussion. |
|
|
|
All I keep hearing is "make digibyte attractive for miners". How about you making it attractive for investors? Do you really think that 99% of potential merchants and users have even heard of merged mining?
In my opinion all this algo switching and merge mining is a complete waste of time and resources. Bitcoin is fine being mined by asics and the same think would have been fine for DGB as well.
We absolutely want to make DigiByte attractive for investors. But our #1 priority right now is security. Without decentralized mining a network becomes more and more vulnerable to attack. Look at Bitcoin the last two days. Ghash.io with ASICs has had upwards of 47% of the entire Bitcoin net hash. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=644592.0As ASIC mining becomes more centralized with Bitcoin, Bitcoins days could be numbered. Multi-Algo is the fairest & most secure approach around right now. We are making this decision with long-term success in mind. Once again, we are going to hold off on merge mining for the time being. |
|
|
|
We could potentially merge mine with doge/litecoin on the scrypt algo, bitcoin on the sha256 algo and the myriad on the other three algos. This could make DigiByte very attractive to miners.
Now you are talking absolutely opposite thing to your previous post. If you want to get DGB by mining MYR, DOGE, LTC, BTC you will kill this coin. If you want to mine DGB and get MYR, BTC, LTC, etc you have to hardfork these coins to accept DGB PoW. It's impossible. Only MYR if they are agree. Only one coin is required to hard fork & merge mine. We could hard fork right now and merge mine with Doge or Litecoin on Scrypt. For example, when you mine Bitcoins you only get Bitcoins. When you mine Namecoin you get Namecoins & bitcoins. That is how merge mining works. So when Doge talked about merge mining with us we would hard fork and add the merge code. Then when people mined Doge they would only get doge. But when they mined DigiByte they would get DigiByte & doge. Ok it seems there are two different approaches of merged mining and we are talking about different things. Do it if you believe in it, you are dev. Personally I think that miners comes with value and not value comes with miners. Never liked the idea of merged mining, coins must not be a bonus. Yes. For the time being we will just keep implementing the multi-algo approach with no merged mining. It adds an additional step of complexity no one is sure about right now. |
|
|
|
We could potentially merge mine with doge/litecoin on the scrypt algo, bitcoin on the sha256 algo and the myriad on the other three algos. This could make DigiByte very attractive to miners.
Now you are talking absolutely opposite thing to your previous post. If you want to get DGB by mining MYR, DOGE, LTC, BTC you will kill this coin. If you want to mine DGB and get MYR, BTC, LTC, etc you have to hardfork these coins to accept DGB PoW. It's impossible. Only MYR if they are agree. Only one coin is required to hard fork & merge mine. We could hard fork right now and merge mine with Doge or Litecoin on Scrypt. For example, when you mine Bitcoins you only get Bitcoins. When you mine Namecoin you get Namecoins & bitcoins. That is how merge mining works. So when Doge talked about merge mining with us we would hard fork and add the merge code. Then when people mined Doge they would only get doge. But when they mined DigiByte they would get DigiByte & doge. |
|
|
|
We want to clarify what merge mining means. When we say merge that means miners have the ability to mine two coins at once. The coins and chains themselves stay completely separate. Transactions stay independent of each other. So does each coins respected value.
It is a much more efficient use of your miners. You will use less electricity and get much more for your hash.
The next evolution of crypto currency mining will be merge-mined multi pools. They are already being developed. This means a coin does not have a choice and will be automatically merge mined with other coins.
Look at namecoin, it is still in the top 10 and has been merge mined for years.
With merge-mining MYR miners who dedicated their hash to mine MYR will get free bonus coins. Nothing to discuss there. As I said look at MON specs and charts. Fairest coin on the ground. Expect a small amount of current MYR pools will offer merged mining to their miners, other pools will add merged mining but all mined DGB by MYR miners on such pools will be claimed by pools. Then such free DGB will be dumped by pools. The one and only winner is MYR. You will secure MYR network and kill DGB. This is on the surface, obvious. Namecoin is special. Once again, people will have to mine DGB to get MYR. Not the other way around as that is not how the merge mining works. This is very beneficial to DigiByte. How you are going to punish MYR devs to accept DGB POW? We are not going to "punish" anyone. They are a very friendly bunch and we have been talking with them over IRC. They have even offered to help us test things. We are have not decided to merge for sure but we wanted to get a discussion started. We don't see how merge-mining would hurt. We only see how it could benifit DigiByte by making it much more attractive to miners. We could potentially merge mine with doge/litecoin on the scrypt algo, bitcoin on the sha256 algo and the myriad on the other three algos. This could make DigiByte very attractive to miners. Also please understand all "merging" means is when your hashes are submitted to the DigiByte chain they are then forwarded on to another coins chain to see if they might get "lucky" and find and block there as well as an added bonus. It is a much more efficient mining process for everyone. |
|
|
|
We want to clarify what merge mining means. When we say merge that means miners have the ability to mine two coins at once. The coins and chains themselves stay completely separate. Transactions stay independent of each other. So does each coins respected value.
It is a much more efficient use of your miners. You will use less electricity and get much more for your hash.
The next evolution of crypto currency mining will be merge-mined multi pools. They are already being developed. This means a coin does not have a choice and will be automatically merge mined with other coins.
Look at namecoin, it is still in the top 10 and has been merge mined for years.
With merge-mining MYR miners who dedicated their hash to mine MYR will get free bonus coins. Nothing to discuss there. As I said look at MON specs and charts. Fairest coin on the ground. Expect a small amount of current MYR pools will offer merged mining to their miners, other pools will add merged mining but all mined DGB by MYR miners on such pools will be claimed by pools. Then such free DGB will be dumped by pools. The one and only winner is MYR. You will secure MYR network and kill DGB. This is on the surface, obvious. Namecoin is special. Once again, people will have to mine DGB to get MYR. Not the other way around as that is not how the merge mining works. This is very beneficial to DigiByte. |
|
|
|
We want to clarify what merge mining means. When we say merge that means miners have the ability to mine two coins at once. The coins and chains themselves stay completely separate. Transactions stay independent of each other. So does each coins respected value.
It is a much more efficient use of your miners. You will use less electricity and get much more for your hash.
The next evolution of crypto currency mining will be merge-mined multi pools. They are already being developed. This means a coin does not have a choice and will be automatically merge mined with other coins.
Look at namecoin, it is still in the top 10 and has been merge mined for years.
Looks as you prefer merged mining over a stand-alone implementation But I'm still interested in the following question: does merged-mining with MYR require to implement multi-algo first? It sounds reasonable to me. If a coin already has multi-algo and want to switch to merged-mining, is then a hardfork required? Either way a hard fork is required. We want to avoid back to back hard forks. The biggest issue is that we need to have mining infrastructure in place at the exact block switch. So why not kill all three birds at once with only 1 hard fork. Also keep in mind people will have to mine DigiByte to get myriad. Not the other way around. It is one sided. |
|
|
|
What do you all think about merge-mining with Myriadcoin?
Idiotic idea, pools will dump DGB to the hell because only small amount of MYR miners will claim their FREE DGB coins. Check MON price charts, pools are dumping it regardless of a price. You will kill this coin offering merged-mining, all your efforts will be buried. I wouldn't call it "idiotic" but I also think this would pin a "Discount" label on DGB. Better finish multi-algo implementation asap. If the chain stays slow for 2-4 days longer it doesn't hurt that hard as there is still only low activity on the blockchain. If it goes multi-algo dev must calculate initial difficulty for each algo and do something with readjustment to avoid instamine by SHA ASICs, FPGA farms, etc... This is what DigiShield does, the difficulty adjustment code will be adjusted as needed. This is not an issue. Nor is it how multi-algo works. Each algo can only find so many blocks in a row before the other algos must find one. Each algos difficulty is adjusted independently. What type of algos will you have in place? The same as Myriad coin or different? In the interest of time we may stick with the same for the time being. We are the first coin to ever fork to multi-algo. It is very complicated to implement. We were planning on doing this over a couple months. We are now forced to try and do this in a few days to a couple weeks. Otherwise our only option is to do back to back hard forks which is no where near ideal or feasible. Is merged-mining easier/quicker to implement than a standalone multi-algo? Or is the multi-algo implementation nevertheless needed for merged-mining? Yes, it will me easier to implement. We will get a short term boost but more importantly the infrastructure for mining will be available from the beginning. |
|
|
|
|
We want to clarify what merge mining means. When we say merge that means miners have the ability to mine two coins at once. The coins and chains themselves stay completely separate. Transactions stay independent of each other. So does each coins respected value.
It is a much more efficient use of your miners. You will use less electricity and get much more for your hash.
The next evolution of crypto currency mining will be merge-mined multi pools. They are already being developed. This means a coin does not have a choice and will be automatically merge mined with other coins.
Look at namecoin, it is still in the top 10 and has been merge mined for years.
|
|
|
|
What do you all think about merge-mining with Myriadcoin?
Idiotic idea, pools will dump DGB to the hell because only small amount of MYR miners will claim their FREE DGB coins. Check MON price charts, pools are dumping it regardless of a price. You will kill this coin offering merged-mining, all your efforts will be buried. I wouldn't call it "idiotic" but I also think this would pin a "Discount" label on DGB. Better finish multi-algo implementation asap. If the chain stays slow for 2-4 days longer it doesn't hurt that hard as there is still only low activity on the blockchain. Multi-pools have already been dumping DGB for a long time. That is part of the crypto world as we know it. Comparing DigiByte to "Mon ocle" is nowhere near a fair comparison. We had never heard of them until you mentioned it. You still won't listen. There is no worse blind than the one who do not want to see. You will convert DGB from solid coin to free bonus for MYR miners. A lot of pools will have a lot of free DGB because a lot of users will not claim DGB and such pools will dump it to the hell. Period. There is much more to this than you realize. DigiByte is an older coin then Myriad. We have just as large of a user / investor base. If anything this will give many more people incentive to mine DigiByte. For multiple reasons. This is not a winner take all scenario my friend. |
|
|
|
What do you all think about merge-mining with Myriadcoin?
Idiotic idea, pools will dump DGB to the hell because only small amount of MYR miners will claim their FREE DGB coins. Check MON price charts, pools are dumping it regardless of a price. You will kill this coin offering merged-mining, all your efforts will be buried. I wouldn't call it "idiotic" but I also think this would pin a "Discount" label on DGB. Better finish multi-algo implementation asap. If the chain stays slow for 2-4 days longer it doesn't hurt that hard as there is still only low activity on the blockchain. If it goes multi-algo dev must calculate initial difficulty for each algo and do something with readjustment to avoid instamine by SHA ASICs, FPGA farms, etc... This is what DigiShield does, the difficulty adjustment code will be adjusted as needed. This is not an issue. Nor is it how multi-algo works. Each algo can only find so many blocks in a row before the other algos must find one. Each algos difficulty is adjusted independently. What type of algos will you have in place? The same as Myriad coin or different? In the interest of time we may stick with the same for the time being. We are the first coin to ever fork to multi-algo. It is very complicated to implement. We were planning on doing this over a couple months. We are now forced to try and do this in a few days to a couple weeks. Otherwise our only option is to do back to back hard forks which is no where near ideal or feasible. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
