You both are wrong. Dollars, bitcoins, and other currencies are NOT money. True money is Gold and silver (physical). Those I listed are just mediums of exchange (currency).
Don't you find that using completely different definitions from everybody else wastes a lot of time? Having to explain what you mean by all the words you use differently every time you're talking with someone new, I mean. Nope. Do you? |
|
|
|
All discussion as to the usability of namecoin aside, difficulty at parity actually means taking a loss mining namecoin.
Mining in a pool has a pool fee off the top, then there is a fee to transfer the namecoins from the pool to you, then a fee to transfer the namecoins to the exchange, the exchange charges a fee to exchange namecoins to bitcoins, then there is a fee to withdraw the bitcoins. This is all before the regular fees of bitcoin, 5 fees. They may be small individually but as you use it they add up. So if you generate the same number of bitcoin-valued namecoins you are taking a loss over directly generating bitcoins.
Who made that exchange site, adding fees to withdraw, destroyed namecoins trading. Congratulation! Because taking 0.01 on withdrawing is going to kill all trading! Yup 0.01 NMC is currently 0.37 cents. So yeah at the current rate if you withdraw your namecoins, you bet your ass they are taking a big chunk of your account! It's a static fee. Withdrawing 5000 NMC costs 0.01 NMC. Are you trolling, or just a little... not all there? Obviously you aren't able to decipher what is sarcasm and what is meant to be real. Once again, your attitude has gotten the best of you. LOL. I'm surprised you are listed as a hero member when you make remarks like the one above and also in the other discussion string. Oh and one more thing. It's not a static fee because when a .bit domain costs go to 0.01 namecoins you bet your ass the fees will be more like 0.00001 NMC. If it can change it is semi-static/semi-dynamic. Are you bored, or just a little... just little (in every form)? |
|
|
|
Namecoin is a naming system based on bitcoin with a few modifications. It is inspired by the bitdns discussion and recent failures of the DNS.
@VinceD, I would like you to appear as a guest on The Bitcoin Show.... asap. Please contact me by email or telephone as soon as possible. bruce@onlyonetv.comOr my Producer, aida@onlyonetv.com+1 646-580-0022 Or, the main number +1 646-580-0020 Or, my Producer's number +1 646-580-0290 Nice. This will give namecoin some publicity. I'll be watching the show! |
|
|
|
All discussion as to the usability of namecoin aside, difficulty at parity actually means taking a loss mining namecoin.
Mining in a pool has a pool fee off the top, then there is a fee to transfer the namecoins from the pool to you, then a fee to transfer the namecoins to the exchange, the exchange charges a fee to exchange namecoins to bitcoins, then there is a fee to withdraw the bitcoins. This is all before the regular fees of bitcoin, 5 fees. They may be small individually but as you use it they add up. So if you generate the same number of bitcoin-valued namecoins you are taking a loss over directly generating bitcoins.
Who made that exchange site, adding fees to withdraw, destroyed namecoins trading. Congratulation! Because taking 0.01 on withdrawing is going to kill all trading! Yup 0.01 NMC is currently 0.37 cents. So yeah at the current rate if you withdraw your namecoins, you bet your ass they are taking a big chunk of your account! |
|
|
|
Dunno guys, but keep in mind that namecoins aren't "money". There is a bunch of namecoin threads so I first suggest you look at those.
BTC isn't money either but you can trade it for money. It all depends on the current market value of the asset you are trading for money. Find the market value of bitcoin and namecoin then figure out how many you can mine each day (at current and projected difficulty levels), multiply by the price and you will have your answer. That's where you're wrong. BTC IS money - it's just that it is a different type of money. Money is any object or record, that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts in a given country or socio-economic context.[1][2][3] The main functions of money are distinguished as: a medium of exchange; a unit of account; a store of value; and, occasionally in the past, a standard of deferred payment.[4][5] Any kind of object or secure verifiable record that fulfills these functions can serve as money. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MoneyYou both are wrong. Dollars, bitcoins, and other currencies are NOT money. True money is Gold and silver (physical). Those I listed are just mediums of exchange (currency). |
|
|
|
You are kidding right? namecoin also needs to be renewed, and currently it's several times more expensive than just registering a ICANN domain with godaddy.
Also the cheapest price in the world would do nothing, if the whole world don't support the protocol.
Several times more expensive huh? With the current rates it costs around $7.5 usd to register .bit and it will keep on getting lower. Renewal costs $0. Meanwhile godaddy costs $12 per year. You are incorrect to say that Renewal costs will go to $0. It is more like it will approach 0 NMC. 0.01 NMC in 6 to 8 months might be worth $7.50. |
|
|
|
Namecoin is certainly not 'dying'. In fact the development team has been very active, and activity has been picking up on the exchange. It seems to me that some people are getting nervous that all their money is in Bitcoins.
If you left all your money in Bitcoins, and walked away from a year and came back, there's a chance it could be worth 0. Not because governments made it illegal, or because more people were goxed... but because Namecoin has more features and simply made it obsolete in comparison, so it fell into disuse.
Namecoin can do everything that Bitcoin can do, and also the DNS stuff.
I'm not clear on how namecoin pricing works, but if everyone got into namecoin, and it's value skyrocketed, wouldn't that defeat the purpose of namecoin? Nope. The price to purchase a domain name (in namecoins) goes down the more blocks are mined over time. |
|
|
|
Honestly I was just asking. You don't have to be a jack-wagon.
I don't have to be anything, I just am, I'm a guy with a computer. You forgot attitude on your list. |
|
|
|
|
Having 4H, 1H, 30Min, 15Min charts would be helpful too. Currently the granularity seems off since I can see 5min, 60min, and 24 hours (too big and too small).
|
|
|
|
Latest news about the project :- expiration time has been increased, as asked by a lot of people, from 12k to 36k blocks (250 days instead of 83). Change will take effect at block 24k ( commit). - fees will decrease faster after block 24k, to avoid the past situation where registering a name cost near 40$ ( current price : 7.5$). - 2000 domains names are currently reserved for a total of 2020 names. 44 names have expired and are free again (see also expiring soon). - namecoin difficulty is subject to a boomerang effect : after a x4, a x0.38 is currently expected. But, hashing power seems to increase again since several days (instant power drop to x0.20 but is now at x0.31). - draft spec still needs your comments to be finalized. Khal how much faster are the fees to buy domains going to decrease by after block 24k? |
|
|
|
|
Honestly I was just asking. You don't have to be a jack-wagon.
|
|
|
|
The highest hashing rate I have seen on your pool Chris was about 300Gh/s. What on your end does it show is the highest your pool has been at?
About 305Gh/s. It's about 1/5th of that now. You ready with the proper server equipment to handle the rush? I suspect you will see >1000 GH/s this time around on your pool alone. But I could be wrong, I'm just going on the potential GH/s we have out there already and assuming that less than 1/10th of it comes to NMC even for a few days. Your thoughts? |
|
|
|
Indeed... The highest hashing rate I have seen on your pool Chris was about 300Gh/s. What on your end does it show is the highest your pool has been at? |
|
|
|
Come to think of it, if the US government wanted to kill bitcoin today that'd be the way to do it. Ask the NSA to switch their cracking lab to mining for a few hours over a weekend, rack the difficulty up to say 20-30 million and bitcoin is history. The fact that it hasn't been done proves to me that the US gov't, at least, is utterly unconcerned with bitcoin.
I don't think the NSA has enough money for that or GPUs currently available. The difficulty can also only increase 4x per increment. Since when was there a limit on the increase per difficulty adjustment? I thought it was proportional to the time allotted of 2 weeks, 6 blocks per hour... |
|
|
|
There's not enough computing resources available to make it 100x the current rate.
At current difficulty, no. If difficulty falls to 1/4 the current level (like it was when we last dogpiled on), yes. Ok, the 1000 was a bit of hyperbole, but if all BTC miners switch for a day at 15k difficulty we could mine out all 2016 blocks in around 24 hours. Leaving namecoin with a 1.5 million difficulty, and several years of massively subsidized mining at a rate of a block per week until it adjusts back. In reality something short of that will happen. Come to think of it, if the US government wanted to kill bitcoin today that'd be the way to do it. Ask the NSA to switch their cracking lab to mining for a few hours over a weekend, rack the difficulty up to say 20-30 million and bitcoin is history. The fact that it hasn't been done proves to me that the US gov't, at least, is utterly unconcerned with bitcoin. I agree with your principle but not the actual numbers. At a difficulty of 26,000 it would take ~42 seconds per block and ~2650GH/s (total network hash rate) to make the 24hour mark. But that would amount to 26,000 x 14 = 364,000 difficulty and NOT 1.5 million. Once again I think you exaggerated a bit on your calculations. But I must agree with all of you, once the difficulty of NMC adjusts downward by 50% watch some fireworks take place. |
|
|
|
|
When compiling pushpool on ubuntu 11 I get a database.engine error message and then it quits compilation.
I have tried multiple database setups and I still get the same error. Any help please?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Okay so I tried to install XAMPP but I found out that the installation only appears to come in 32bit. Beside the point.. I did a complete install of PostgreSql and created the appropriate tables and inserted some test user data. I still get the message when running ./pushpoold -E: [2011-07-01 05:42:24.263811] invalid database.engine
Am I missing something? I even updated my server.json file with the proper settings. What I am confused about is how pushpoold can be built/compiled and yet require a database engine in place to do that process, but when I try to run pushpoold I get a message saying "invalid database.engine". Can someone please help me? It seems like I am hitting every possible problem when it comes to pushpoold setup. How did you compile it? I compiled it with: ./configure
make
make install
./pushpoold -E do ./autogen.sh && ./configure && make && ./pushpoold -DE
Okay I did ./autogen.sh and I get: -bash: ./autogen.sh: No such file or directory Here is what my pushpool directory looks like: root@NCM:/home/pushpool-0.5.1# ls
aclocal.m4 config.status example-cfg.json msg.o
anet.c config.sub hist.c NEWS
anet.h configure hist.o protocol.h
anet.o configure.ac htab.c pushpoold
AUTHORS COPYING htab.h README
autotools-config.h db-mysql.c htab.o server.c
autotools-config.h.in db-mysql.o INSTALL server.h
blkmond db-postgresql.c install-sh server.json
ChangeLog db-postgresql.o m4 server.o
compile db-sqlite.c Makefile stamp-h1
config.c db-sqlite.o Makefile.am ubbp.h
config.guess depcomp Makefile.in util.c
config.log elist.h missing util.o
config.o example-blkmon.cfg msg.c
Am I missing a particular file? |
|
|
|
Okay so I tried to install XAMPP but I found out that the installation only appears to come in 32bit. Beside the point.. I did a complete install of PostgreSql and created the appropriate tables and inserted some test user data. I still get the message when running ./pushpoold -E: [2011-07-01 05:42:24.263811] invalid database.engine
Am I missing something? I even updated my server.json file with the proper settings. What I am confused about is how pushpoold can be built/compiled and yet require a database engine in place to do that process, but when I try to run pushpoold I get a message saying "invalid database.engine". Can someone please help me? It seems like I am hitting every possible problem when it comes to pushpoold setup. How did you compile it? I compiled it with: ./configure
make
make install
./pushpoold -E |
|
|
|
Okay so I tried to install XAMPP but I found out that the installation only appears to come in 32bit. Beside the point.. I did a complete install of PostgreSql and created the appropriate tables and inserted some test user data. I still get the message when running ./pushpoold -E: [2011-07-01 05:42:24.263811] invalid database.engine
Am I missing something? I even updated my server.json file with the proper settings. What I am confused about is how pushpoold can be built/compiled and yet require a database engine in place to do that process, but when I try to run pushpoold I get a message saying "invalid database.engine". Can someone please help me? It seems like I am hitting every possible problem when it comes to pushpoold setup. |
|
|
|
I keep getting the following message when installing components that work with pushpool on Ubuntu 11.04. Any one know why I would get the following message? Processing triggers for libc-bin ...
ldconfig deferred processing now taking place
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
