If you're having transaction problems, I feel bad for you son... ... I got 99 problems but a SolidCoin aint one.  I wish I could check out the source code. I would love to know what caused these transaction problems. I have a feeling that it's ArtForz/BCX targeted transaction killing code that's affecting more people than RealSolid intended. But that's just a hunch. I guess I will likely never know the real reason. |
|
|
|
The new build works very nicely on Windows. Since the solo mining uses the internal miner in the Litecoin-qt application itself, the user won't benefit from having a CPU-instruction optimized minerd. (In my case, I get about 3 kh/s when solo mining vs. 3.75 kh/s when pool mining) Of course, the user could just use pool mining with 127.0.0.1 as the server address. Otherwise, you've made the miner GUI far better.  Yup, solo mining is for the novice users that don't want to muck with minerd. It's about 80% as efficient, but it works well and is simple. If you have an optimized minerd, you can point it to a pool or to yourself using 127.0.0.1. Most people will probably use a pool anyways. |
|
|
|
p2pool is about Bitcoin..bitcoin cannot be fixed obviously.
It's not obvious, nor does it appear to be true. Pools are a misdesign in a peer to peer system but p2pool does fix the problem quite nicely. Sadly almost no-one is using p2pool. My ultimate goal for Litecoin is to have p2pool integrated with the client. Each client would act as a node in the p2pool. If you have the internal miner running or if you point miners at your client, you will be mining in the distributed pool and will have litecoins trickling in every few minutes. Wouldn't this fit the definition of pool-proof? |
|
|
|
You forgot about the massive economy changes every other week  But yes indeed I was thinking about the combination of one-person dev "team" plus close-source thing. (= if the dev vanishes, so do the chances to carry on from where he left) Yeah I forgot to add: - he makes rash massive economy changes to the coin without any open discussions about the reasons and the consequences of his changes And if he disappears, all the money you've invested in SolidCoin goes poof. Think about that! I can disappear, and someone would just take over the development of Litecoin. Gavin and gang could disappear, and Bitcoin will still be ok. Checkout what Gavin said in another thread: CoinHunter, what will happen to SolidCoin if, God forbid, you get hit by a bus? What are the plans for the trusted CPF wallets? Do your heirs get control of them?
If CoinHunter/RealSolid gets hit by a bus, SolidCoin will be pretty much dead in the water. |
|
|
|
At least now we know how many people the development team contains...
There's nothing inherently wrong with having only one active developer (I'm the only active developer for Litecoin). Here's what's really bad though: - RealSollid thinks he's a super advanced coder and thinks he can do no wrong - he works on a closed source project by himself without any input or supervision - he releases hasty untested buggy releases (a lot of times to patch up previous bugs) - his project controls a lot of real money, so any transaction related bug can be devastating for users - and lastly, users are forced to use his latest untested elease because his trusted nodes effectively rejects clients that are not on the latest client. Really, this is just asking for trouble. Bitcoin developers spend months testing anything that could potentially be harmful to users, because they know that they are working on a critical financial software that affects millions of real dollars. The releases are clearly labeled "beta", I hope everybody knows what that means Spacy, it doesn't matter if you label it "beta" or even "alpha" if all users are forced to use the latest client. With Bitcoin (and Litecoin), users are not forced to use the latest beta release if they are not comfortable with the beta quality. They can still use the previous stable release if they want. Agreed... BUT since the coin is already being traded on exchanges etc. right now then it is a LOT less beta and a lot more live no matter what the client is labeled. Perhaps someone should request the exchanges to pull SC until we go to "live" clients? And not worry about coin generate changes that are based more directly on exchange prices?
viperjbm, hopefully you are realizing how bad the situation with SolidCoin can become. Sure a competent and benevolent dictator may be good, but if you find out that the dictator is not really benevolent nor competent, it's too late. |
|
|
|
- Remember last state. So client will start up and automatically and mine (solo or pool) if it was previously closed in that state
Where is this stored? It's stored in the same db as other config params in Bitcoin. It looks like it's using the wallet db, which seems silly but I didn't bother changing it. |
|
|
|
Still need to do:
- save config values using db as oppose to easyconfig.txt
- hook up solo mining option
- hook up mining status and hashrate with status icon at the bottom
- maybe move mining tab to right most tab (let me know if you don't want that)
Done! - Remember config settings in db - Implemented solo mining option to hook up with internal miner - Hooked up mining hashrate status with status icon for both solo and pool mining - Remember last state. So client will start up and automatically and mine (solo or pool) if it was previously closed in that state - Moved mining tab to last tab on right https://github.com/downloads/coblee/litecoin/litecoin-windows-client-0.5.0.3.zip |
|
|
|
You seem to have taken the protocol-dump parameter off. I had it enabled because otherwise it would take very long time for the output buffer to get filled and cleared (so the GUI application could read the output). It took around 3 minutes before it even showed the hash rate /wo protocol-dump being enabled.
Seems to be behaviour that differs between OSes. (I use Windows)
It causes a new problem with the new Debug Logging option though... Maybe if the protocol-dump related data could be omitted somehow?'
Didn't you add this read timer to read output every 500 millisecond? https://github.com/coblee/litecoin/blob/master/src/qt/miningpage.cpp#L29That seems to work for me. Is it not working on Windows? Not working on Windows. It only reads the output once the output buffer has been filled. Can you try a few things on Windows? Instead of waiting on signal readyReadStandardOutput(), use readyReadStandardError(). Does that help? If not, how about just readyRead() I know minerd only outputs to stderr, so stdout might not be flushed after each printout. |
|
|
|
You seem to have taken the protocol-dump parameter off. I had it enabled because otherwise it would take very long time for the output buffer to get filled and cleared (so the GUI application could read the output). It took around 3 minutes before it even showed the hash rate /wo protocol-dump being enabled.
Seems to be behaviour that differs between OSes. (I use Windows)
It causes a new problem with the new Debug Logging option though... Maybe if the protocol-dump related data could be omitted somehow?'
Didn't you add this read timer to read output every 500 millisecond? https://github.com/coblee/litecoin/blob/master/src/qt/miningpage.cpp#L29That seems to work for me. Is it not working on Windows? |
|
|
|
This move is made by someone who does not understand economics. CH/RS may be an advanced coder (though I'm starting to doubt that seeing his hashrate bug fix/unfixed/refixed issue), he has no clue about economics and market dynamics.
Seems like the economic noob's currency is still much more successful than the one from the pro Please define success. Does the price on btc-e define success? Bernie Madoff made a ton of money before he was put in jail. Was his business a success before it all fell apart? |
|
|
|
The rationale, in a nutshell, is that on the current base generation number of 32 there are too many coins being generated too quickly. We underestimated the number of miners there would be in the initial phase of SolidCoin 2.0 and now are in the position where the market is flooded with coins which are being mined for nearly zero cost and for which there are not enough buyers.
SolidCoin aims to achieve a value where 1SLC = $1-2. Even with all the stuff we have planned, this is never going to happen with the current generation rates, so action needs to be taken. Cutting the generation rate increases the cost to produce a SolidCoin and restricts the number of new coins being created.
With regard to being "fair", all I can say to you is that this has been announced in advance with plenty of warning. Everyone still has a chance to become an early adopter right now, and in fact it's much cheaper to become an early adopter now than it has been in the past.
Mining difficulty is relatively low right now and we're chucking out high value blocks like there's no tomorrow. The price of SolidCoin on the exchanges is also extremely low, much lower than it was when the chain was shut down a few weeks ago, so there has never been a better time to become an early adopter, either by mining yourself or buying up huge numbers of cheap coins - take your pick. I can't really see how we could make it any more "fair".
Ten98, this doesn't make any sense whatsoever. There's no reason to target 1SLC = $1-2. What is that a target for a month, a year, 5 years, 100 years? How can you possibly set that target? And why would you when your goal is to replace the dollar? Why not let the market decide? You could easily just call it 1NSC (new solidcoin) where 1NSC = 10SLC and have that be your base coin. Then if a SLC is only worth, $.1-.2, your NSC will be worth $1-2. This move is made by someone who does not understand economics. CH/RS may be an advanced coder (though I'm starting to doubt that seeing his hashrate bug fix/unfixed/refixed issue), he has no clue about economics and market dynamics. He's manipulating the market and artificially increasing the value of SC (just look at btc-e.com) and totally screwing over any chance of his coin succeeding long term. Yeah sure, it's a GREAT pump and dump scam, but that's about it. To all SC supporters, make sure you cash out your SC and make some money. CH/RS has rewarded you guys well by effectively made your SC work 4x-5x times. Take advantage of that before SolidCoin dies. |
|
|
|
3: The change is not "for the next 5000 blocks", I think you are being confused by the "Between blocks 45000 and 50000" part. Once SolidCoin changes to 5SC base generation per block, it will be permanent and is highly unlikely to ever change again (although it will still be possible if need be).
I see. So the plan is to permanently reduce generation from 32 to 5. Doesn't this unfairly benefit early adopters? I thought one of SolidCoin's goals was to be fair to everyone. Also, can you explain the benefit of this change? If we ignore the fact that early generated coins will now be worth more, changing number of solidcoins generated in each block from 32 to 5 is in the end basically just moving the decimal point. What's the rationale behind this? |
|
|
|
Alright, to be fair I have no idea how to proceed with the solo mining part, since I need to know the RPC port, username and password, and I have no idea how to do it without modifying the underlying code. I do not understand what you mean by that, the litecoin.conf needs to be editted just to have the needed info which for solo mining is given mutliple times litecoin.conf should contain this {mean fill in your wanted info } (default or change it if you like) rpcuser={ my username } or whatever name you think you want rpcpassword={ my password } rpcallowip=* ( can be changed into the local ip address if feel safer like 127.0.0.1) rpcport=9332 (xxxx) daemon=1 server=1 gen=0 block_nTime=1317972665 block_nNonce=2084524493 There is not much more needed this should be it and the litecoin.conf needs to be in the data map from litecoin in c:\users\{your windows username}\AppData\Roaming\Litecoin I mean, as in reading the litecoin.conf file after the application has started, so that the user simply has to select "Solo Mining" and press "Start Mining" to start solo mining in the Mining tab. Solo mining does not have url/port/user/password because it does need to use RPC to communicate with itself. All the block getwork data needed for solomining is already there in the mining thread. |
|
|
|
I haven't figured out a good way to present these 2 different mining options together without confusing the user.
Dropdown with "Pool" and "Solo" options, with a URL input for the pool getting disabled when solo is selected? That's exactly what I was going to do. I'll start working on it in just a minute. Please wait. I'm still flushing out the UI. So there's going to be a lot of conflicts if we both work on it at the same time. Alright, to be fair I have no idea how to proceed with the solo mining part, since I need to know the RPC port, username and password, and I have no idea how to do it without modifying the underlying code. Ok, I checked in some tweaks: - added drop down for pool mining versus solo mining (solo mining not hooked up to client's "-gen" option yet) - added debug logging checkbox. this will print out what minerd prints out. - various UI tweaks - fixed 1000 bitcoin bugs (just kidding, just imitating CoinHunter/RealSolid here) Still need to do: - save config values using db as oppose to easyconfig.txt - hook up solo mining option - hook up mining status and hashrate with status icon at the bottom - maybe move mining tab to right most tab (let me know if you don't want that) Here's a sneak peek:  I did not build a windows binary yet since these are just minor changes. But those who know how to build there own, feel free to check it out. |
|
|
|
I do like the mining option alot but the problem with it is that it uses only the default minerd So replacing it with the proper format one for any given cpu version is not an option anymore or you should add an option to load them... The difference between the normal and the original one is huge at the least. The programmer made many advanced miners for different cpu types. Which ofcourse can make a huge difference. Now for those who think running a other then the one intended for their cpu, and seeing bigger number i must disappoint you, your result probably ends up being rejected if you do. So just use the one exactly with the intended cpu extensions as given by the maker. ssse3 for intel core cpu's, i7 for what else  , and the amd sse4a for the latest models having this on board Amd users are in for a surprise when install this much better minerd.exe on my old x3-720 went from 1.3 to 2.8 khash/s each core .... Are you using the scryptminer gui then make a copy of the original minerd.exe and rename the specialist version to minerd.exe and off you go. You actually need to provide your own minerd binary. So it will use whatever minerd it finds in the same path as your Litecoin-QT application. |
|
|
|
I haven't figured out a good way to present these 2 different mining options together without confusing the user.
Dropdown with "Pool" and "Solo" options, with a URL input for the pool getting disabled when solo is selected? That's exactly what I was going to do. I'll start working on it in just a minute. Please wait. I'm still flushing out the UI. So there's going to be a lot of conflicts if we both work on it at the same time. |
|
|
|
I'm banned on #solidcoin so I miss out on all the fun. But someone just sent me this:  Not surprising, since SolidCoin is not a decentralized crypto currency. But the fact that CH/RS can arbitrarily muck with the amount of base generation coin just boggles my mind. The price of SC/BTC is too low because miners are generating too many coins? No problem, let me change the coins generated from 32 to 5 for the next 5000 blocks. WTF? Is this a crypto currency that you expect merchants to accept OR is this just monopoly money for 10 year olds? I know the SC supporters will all come here and explain why this is a good thing. That's pretty much expected. But in the end, it doesn't really matter because we're really not arguing about the same thing. SolidCoin is not even in the same ballpark as Bitcoin/Litecoin anymore. |
|
|
|
P2Pool will make the client a fully self-sustained ecosystem. I can't wait.
Yes, my ultimate goal is to have people start the client (or daemon) and p2pool will automatically start in the background and the client will be mining away. And as blocks are found, they will see their balance increase by a few litecents every few minutes. For those who want to muck around with minerd, they can compile their own optimized minerd and point that to p2pool using the GUI I have now. And for those who still want to use traditional pools, they can do that too. |
|
|
|
I haven't figured out a good way to present these 2 different mining options together without confusing the user.
Dropdown with "Pool" and "Solo" options, with a URL input for the pool getting disabled when solo is selected? Yeah, that probably makes most sense. Thanks for the suggestion. This will work well when we also support p2pool. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
