Im wondering if chaeplin will claim the bounty
Trolls starting to show up? Fee Fi Fo Fum... I smell fear. That's usually a really good sign for the price movement. I really don't know how in the world anybody can claim anything... https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?8bd4b429c9f0651ebedab6b37ea2b1f7b64f4087e4a7dbd10e06c9af2122d8e6.htmThis is from a single transaction. I can even tell you that 10 XC was moved... so what though... there are exactly 90 different possibilities even knowing that 10 XC was sent. Now imagine if you don't know the amount, good luck with that.... |
|
|
|
3 days to go... Getting seriously excited now...
Large scale buying to initiate > 24 hours from now..
Can't wait till the team reveal the coinjoin killer tech... Maybe a 2x jump on the innovation news?  |
|
|
|
In the updated OP it now says 1000XC is the requirement for trustless mixing all the time. Is this final?
1000 XC for xnode do make sense because you will earn XC if run as a xnode. Yup, it's 1000 XC. This amount is still somewhat provisional. Also, if XC's value increases, it's very likely that the required balance will decrease. but why decrease the needed amount? i think 1000 is a good amount and the number of needed coins should be fixed and not changed. i mean what happens when the price increases -> the number of needed coins is decreased. but what happens when the price drops afterwards? will you increase the amount again? i think setting the number to a fixed value is the best solution and won't lead to confused users Changes would not be made often. It would need to increase, say, 20 times its current value before we'd change it. hmmm, I cannot wait to see 1 coin mixers. Gonna be hard to do when XC hits 1 M a coin. If you want to have at least one XMixer... the time is running out. At today's price, that's under $700 USD!! 3 months from now... whoever didn't get enough to run at least one XMixer is going to have so much regret. Save this post for future reference. |
|
|
|
So when this REV2 is release we will be getting paid For our Xnodes now/X mixer whatever were calling it
Hello I was wondering if for the xnode you will need it to run in a single wallet with 1000 xc or can you have multiple xnodes in a single wallet putting 1000 xc in different addresses? Yes nodes with a dedicated address containing 1000 XC will receive revenue for trustlessly forwarding transactions. You can run as many wallets as you like. You'd need a virtualisation environment to do this on a single computer. Do the wallets still need separate public IP or just different VM and single IP is fine? Yes they still do. Run them all over TOR. Oh boy... I think I will need some more bandwidth. Might get some VM from azure or amazon or something... Heh. Bring on the tx revenue! Any chance Dan can make it so that say you have multiple input/address that adds to up more than 1000 XC to act as a xmixer rather than separate wallets? Say you have 50k in a wallet, then it acts like 50 Xmixers rather than needing to run 50 separate wallets?? I doubt that'll be a good idea in terms of the blockchain. It's not a good idea to run multiple copies of your wallet.dat and then spend from both. You can corrupt the wallet.dat. Xmixers will be continually receiving and sending fragments. Imagine how much higher the chances of corrupting your wallet would be with that! In any case, having several wallets, each with a smaller balance, is more secure. If I had 50k I'd certainly spread them around a bit. :-) But... The need to run like 100 to 200 or more wallets... Omg... The number of VM that's needed is insane. I am just saying if you have inputs that are 1000 XC that it's automatically treated as one xmixer since the mixing is based on UTXO unspent output anyway. |
|
|
|
So when this REV2 is release we will be getting paid For our Xnodes now/X mixer whatever were calling it
Hello I was wondering if for the xnode you will need it to run in a single wallet with 1000 xc or can you have multiple xnodes in a single wallet putting 1000 xc in different addresses? Yes nodes with a dedicated address containing 1000 XC will receive revenue for trustlessly forwarding transactions. You can run as many wallets as you like. You'd need a virtualisation environment to do this on a single computer. Do the wallets still need separate public IP or just different VM and single IP is fine? Yes they still do. Run them all over TOR. Oh boy... I think I will need some more bandwidth. Might get some VM from azure or amazon or something... Heh. Bring on the tx revenue! Any chance Dan can make it so that say you have multiple input/address that adds to up more than 1000 XC to act as a xmixer rather than separate wallets? Say you have 50k in a wallet, then it acts like 50 Xmixers rather than needing to run 50 separate wallets?? |
|
|
|
So when this REV2 is release we will be getting paid For our Xnodes now/X mixer whatever were calling it
Hello I was wondering if for the xnode you will need it to run in a single wallet with 1000 xc or can you have multiple xnodes in a single wallet putting 1000 xc in different addresses? Yes nodes with a dedicated address containing 1000 XC will receive revenue for trustlessly forwarding transactions. You can run as many wallets as you like. You'd need a virtualisation environment to do this on a single computer. Do the wallets still need separate public IP or just different VM and single IP is fine? Yes they still do. Run them all over TOR. Oh boy... I think I will need some more bandwidth. Might get some VM from azure or amazon or something... |
|
|
|
So when this REV2 is release we will be getting paid For our Xnodes now/X mixer whatever were calling it
Hello I was wondering if for the xnode you will need it to run in a single wallet with 1000 xc or can you have multiple xnodes in a single wallet putting 1000 xc in different addresses? Yes nodes with a dedicated address containing 1000 XC will receive revenue for trustlessly forwarding transactions. You can run as many wallets as you like. You'd need a virtualisation environment to do this on a single computer. Do the wallets still need separate public IP or just different VM and single IP is fine? |
|
|
|
If there will be announcements Monday that we have yet to hear of, can you give us any hints as to what they are about? I know you love to tease.  The final release of rev 2 with the Coinjoin KILLER technologies revealed! |
|
|
|
why the price increase?
The better question is who was crazy enough to dump it to this low in the first place. |
|
|
|
I think you should keep it constant mate.. 1000 makes sense to me, keep it a round number and incentivise holding a reasonable number of coins...
Liking the OP.
Indeed. My guess is that it'll stay 1000 for a while. There's no obvious reason to change it. Glad you like the OP. :-) I liked the old figure of 550 XC, it would give people with less XC a chance to earn too, plus it would equal more nodes. You're right, it would allow more people to run a mixer node. On the other hand, putting the minimum balance at 1000 effectively means: Buy XC now while you can afford it!In addition, I reckon that the factor that'll drive the setting up of more nodes is primarily the renumeration they provide, not the minimum balance. If the income is worth it, then since people generally have the ability to buy 1000 XC, they'll do so. And the higher minimum is good for XC's price, so I reckon 1000 XC is a good bet for now. We will, of course, gauge the response. The amount isn't final. Keep at 1000 for now and see how much demand and what sort of profits can be made, then decide:) 1000 sounds like a decent number. You need mixers with that much coins so that # of input can be within a reasonable size if you want send a large amount of XC around. Can you imagine if you want to send say 100k XC and all the nodes are only at 500? The transaction will need a HUGE # of inputs to mix that many coins I would think.... Each input in the blockchain will take up around 100 bytes... Most of the times, the # of out output is greater than the input, so... we might need some mixers that have larger amounts of XC in there to help with moving large transactions. Maybe bonus fees for mixers with higher XC in there. |
|
|
|
It's great to see new OP  Synechist, would it be possible to update the op every time as new wallet releases come available with the new features? Would be nice to see those yellow balloons pop into green phase in real time during releases and progress It's really nice to see mobile wallets released before rev 3 too, has the work on those already begun? Yeah that should be possible. When things get delayed is when larger changes are necessary, because then I have to re-slice everything and hand-write the bbcode. And Bitcointalk is idiosyncratic at best in handling hyperlinked images, so it takes ages. Small changes like that should be easy. You can expect updates on mobile wallet development before too long. ;-) I sense a surprise. I need more XC.... |
|
|
|
On my way to an appointment, but before I leave I wanted to ask- I am running a mac wallet which has been staking for a month or so. For the past several days the wallet says it is staking but will not sync, it has been stuck on block 115118. Any suggestions as to what I can do? I have my wallet.dat backed up, if I reinstall the app will my xcurrency still be safe? Thanks guys.
You can try this: Close your wallet. Delete everything but wallet.dat in your user/library/application support/xcurrency folder. Reopen the wallet. It will have to re-sync the entire chain, but it should fix any stuck syncing issues. I tried this a few times, no succes. I had this issue with another wallet and I did the following to fix: 1. rename wallet.dat to wallet1.dat 2. open the wallet (which creates a new wallet.dat) and let it sync 3. close wallet 4. delete the newly created wallet.dat 5. rename wallet1.dat to wallet.dat 6. reopen wallet OK, thanks. I'll try that hmmm, tried that but it still won't sync. Very strange because it worked just fine until a few days ago. I hope someone has some more suggestions.  Have you tried running "repairwallet" in the console? yup, it returns "wallet check passed" : true". I don't know if that's good? It's usually easier to delete the block chain (all the files EXCEPT wallet.dat) and let it resync the whole block chain. Then do a repair wallet at the end if the balance is not correct. That's what I do anyway. Yes I agree, I've done that a few times in the past as well. But, even that doesn't seem to work this time. I backed up my wallet.dat, removed everyting and started XCurrency-Qt again. So this basically makes a fresh wallet. Even that won't sync. I'm gonna try it on a Windowsmachine, here at home. See what that does. Another method I used before is to dumpprivkey for all the address that has a balance, then... with a completely new wallet, importprivkey into that so you start completely fresh and then resync. |
|
|
|
On my way to an appointment, but before I leave I wanted to ask- I am running a mac wallet which has been staking for a month or so. For the past several days the wallet says it is staking but will not sync, it has been stuck on block 115118. Any suggestions as to what I can do? I have my wallet.dat backed up, if I reinstall the app will my xcurrency still be safe? Thanks guys.
You can try this: Close your wallet. Delete everything but wallet.dat in your user/library/application support/xcurrency folder. Reopen the wallet. It will have to re-sync the entire chain, but it should fix any stuck syncing issues. I tried this a few times, no succes. I had this issue with another wallet and I did the following to fix: 1. rename wallet.dat to wallet1.dat 2. open the wallet (which creates a new wallet.dat) and let it sync 3. close wallet 4. delete the newly created wallet.dat 5. rename wallet1.dat to wallet.dat 6. reopen wallet OK, thanks. I'll try that hmmm, tried that but it still won't sync. Very strange because it worked just fine until a few days ago. I hope someone has some more suggestions. Have you tried running "repairwallet" in the console? yup, it returns "wallet check passed" : true". I don't know if that's good? It's usually easier to delete the block chain (all the files EXCEPT wallet.dat) and let it resync the whole block chain. Then do a repair wallet at the end if the balance is not correct. That's what I do anyway. |
|
|
|
Dan said XC's "coinjoin killer" is similar to coinshuffle, but that is as much as he revealed. Yes my bad... wrong wording on the "basis" on my part. He said similar. |
|
|
|
Dan already told us that coinshuffle was the basis, but I think he added some special sauce to it to make it bulletproof. As you can see from this private transaction, https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xc/tx.dws?8bd4b429c9f0651ebedab6b37ea2b1f7b64f4087e4a7dbd10e06c9af2122d8e6.htmit already looks pretty killer. If you don't know the amount that was sent, there are a total 115 permutations. If you know only 10 XC was sent, there's still 90 permutations. BUT... we only know it's 10 now because that's what the limit is for the test version, but in the final version... how many of these addresses are actually the real destination owner? |
|
|
|
5 days to REV 2...
I think we are now in the window of action...
Could start to get very active soon, volume is picking up nicely...
Beautiful news! Very Beautiful news as not only the volume is rising, the price seems to be in an uptrend too The person that dumped 12 btc worth below 130k last nightmust have a "special" feeling now. haha |
|
|
|
Someone is taking out the orderbook on mint! And up to 170k on cryptsy...
yup, nice arbitrage. You have to be quick. Boner alert XC time is coming. Fasten your seat belt, we are going to fire. I guess you can only put off the inevitable for so long - And... again... we have such a wide base at the 130-150 area... look out up top! Also... XC is reviewed by Dan Metcalf DAILY! That's gotta add value if Dan reviewed it, lol. Imagine other coins paying 1-3 btc per review... It's like Dan is investing 1-3 btc worth of review into XC every single day! Let's think about that for a moment... |
|
|
|
Someone is taking out the orderbook on mint! And up to 170k on cryptsy...
yup, nice arbitrage. You have to be quick. Boner alert XC time is coming. Fasten your seat belt, we are going to fire. I guess you can only put off the inevitable for so long - And... again... we have such a wide base at the 130-150 area... look out up top! Also... XC is reviewed by Dan Metcalf DAILY! |
|
|
|
What is a coinjoin killer? I never heard of it.
I also think you mean "outdated" instead of "dated".
How old are you? Old enough, English is just not my native language. Then how can you go and attempt to correct grammar/spelling for others...? |
|
|
|
What is a coinjoin killer? I never heard of it.
I also think you mean "outdated" instead of "dated".
Dated or outdated both work. ELI5: XC Flawless Victory! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
