ok, the website is up again  Yes, for me too the site was down. Now it is back online, but the block explorer is out of date. I just did an independent control, and as I can see, in blockchain all is well. No fork in the last 30K blocks, the average of rhythm of the blocks last week has settled at around 28.8 seconds, the topstaker produces a lot of blocks as usual, even a little too much.  And below is a top 25 rich-list, unofficial:
Deep Watch Report from block 1 to block 967252 at 2015-02-21 19:20:08
DWR Rank Address total Last (UTC) POS
DWR 1 sfdzo3...ruMNxe 5172288.247196 2015-02-21 19:08:36 19241
DWR 2 sNyNwM...Qdtqtr 4302140.145631 2015-02-19 19:40:33 0
DWR 3 sJVkG6...9zaRCQ 3000000.000000 2015-02-13 02:02:39 0
DWR 4 sYf5qH...irfE12 1441497.517748 2015-02-21 19:01:39 36760
DWR 5 sRsizG...UFMBgU 1312033.302967 2014-10-16 07:53:41 0
DWR 6 sVFUSF...gnm44i 1286781.206637 2015-02-21 02:56:54 2981
DWR 7 sJT5qP...n3tmjJ 1233087.484075 2015-02-21 03:24:06 2802
DWR 8 sfHdGy...dEhvw8 1200020.000000 2015-02-19 11:10:12 0
DWR 9 sWrHre...SvXKpu 1102943.868725 2015-01-12 18:10:57 0
DWR 10 sexovu...XDXtGK 1048019.253034 2015-02-19 09:55:47 39859
DWR 11 sa9r31...M6ZgMk 1030000.000000 2015-02-06 20:02:57 0
DWR 12 sgF6G7...gVaHxW 1008291.466102 2015-02-21 15:25:21 3834
DWR 13 sQHkqU...wGEdrx 1007177.274687 2015-02-21 04:36:06 31939
DWR 14 sNtBHm...oZnpVx 991508.686839 2015-02-21 03:00:14 2227
DWR 15 sY2nmk...kXSmKv 923607.456659 2015-02-20 22:09:01 0
DWR 16 sa17i3...iHZC1u 902457.592355 2015-02-20 10:26:41 5969
DWR 17 sLe2bC...CMETPv 889702.995696 2015-02-20 05:50:33 31
DWR 18 sWtY6b...RRLAek 848710.450582 2015-02-20 07:32:59 54
DWR 19 sKXAKx...cxPmjg 842756.878260 2015-02-21 19:01:14 18918
DWR 20 sdhGjR...oswfmq 801063.289672 2015-01-26 00:33:40 0
DWR 21 sh4ztZ...tsg6xt 781416.692615 2015-02-01 17:44:22 0
DWR 22 sJNqJd...GsvXMe 732279.482878 2015-02-11 15:25:52 0
DWR 23 sd8dyP...o81JWY 617745.286883 2015-02-21 18:58:42 25408
DWR 24 sdR5v6...pFjuWJ 600000.000000 2015-02-17 12:35:47 0
DWR 25 sYda5n...yji5CF 599849.936153 2015-02-21 19:08:50 24955
Bye Bye |
|
|
|
What's wrong with NAV? I remember it was 200 sat but nowadays it hit 4k sat, any great news happen?  You are the proof that we need to get more people interest and known about navajocoin. We need more articles and news around the world about anon technology. So to answer your question, Navajo is now in beta testing of unique anon system. For about week test should ended and we will enter the phase that everybody expect from several months Meanwhile, in recent months there have been some releases to better secure the network of wallet, we are now at version v2.0.5.0-UT-ZAH, for at least a month. Who did not do it, because he did not know, he forgot, or for any other reason, please update its wallet. I'm sick of seeing peers who still use version 2.02.  |
|
|
|
Of course I take this opportunity, especially in this period of distraction for beta testing,
to encourage everyone to keep the official NAV wallet open, and in this way keep the network
secure and balanced.
Do more coins keep it more secure or more wallets? A greater number of wallet open, possibly with substantial money. IMHO, as a general rule, most is distributed the ability to generate the staking successfully, so to validate independently the previous blocks generated by others, then it is more secure and stronger becomes the network. (The key words are "generated by others") Conversely, with few open wallet and blocks generated by a few actors, the network slows down the propagation of the blocks, and network security globally weakens. If we make the parallel with the POW, when a single pool of miners grows enough to take the majority of the entire network hashrate, even momentarily, then problems can arise. The administrators of the pool are well aware of this fact, and the more conscientious when they grow too much, they themselves often invite their users to migrate to other pools and in this way to redistribute their hashrate. I believe that the topic could be discussed at length by more experienced people, I replied only very roughly, but I hope it's enough. Bye |
|
|
|
I think that first addresses on the rich list might be addresses of markets cold wallets. I assume that because my bittrex address has much less coin than I have in real.
If you're referring to the address sfdzo3, our humpback whale of 5.2 M NAV, IMHO I think that is not a cold wallet. It is said that the Exchange, for reasons of immediate availability, they take disabled staking in their wallet, both hot ones normally used, and also cold ones, which are held just off-line. Instead, the address of which I said before, is absolutely the nav "topstaker", and only he alone produces about 2900 blocks per week. Definitely very hot. Of course I take this opportunity, especially in this period of distraction for beta testing, to encourage everyone to keep the official NAV wallet open, and in this way keep the network secure and balanced. Bye Bye |
|
|
|
|
Before beginning the fever for anonymity, I would like to solve a small technical curiosity
linked to the scalability of the algorithms used by the "Stake Report Dialog" and the results
that it provides to the most active users, the topstaker, I mean those people producing
at least 800 stakes block in a week.
What I would be curious to know is this:
1) How many stakes you produce per week (even approximately)
2) How is the calculation time that the "Stake Report Dialog" shows after "Last recalc took".
3) How many MByte occupies your wallet.dat
These are not "sensitive" data, but if you want you can even answer me in PM, in some way.
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
Collapse ? You mean BTC from 1100$ to 200$, LTC from 40$ to 1.5$ ?) I don't think it's a collapse. Just remember their price when they first came on the market Or 3 years ago - BTC 15$, LTC 0.075$. This is a big "game". And NAV only in the beginning. I missed to write "long term investment", but it was implicit. Perhaps the term "collapse" may have other meanings, but with values 40 to 2, I think "collapse" or "crumble" can give a good idea. So I think we can agree in summarizing one of the important thing is the timing of entry and that probably for NAV one of better moment is now, before the NAV can grow at its peak. IMHO Saying it in this way, it seems to me give a better prospective. |
|
|
|
Soopy preparing to go to the stars!lol perfect
I'm pretty sure you're also warming the rocket and you're getting ready for anonymity.... at your way.  |
|
|
|
I am still having problems with the new wallet and win7. Task monitor shows it as "not responding" and with a cpu usage of 0%.
Is there a log i can post? or something in the console to type to generate a log? its hung for over an hour now so Im gonna have to reset the machine again (Which btw is a fresh install with all updates applied and the only thing i have installed is the wallet.
As last resort, try to kill the wallet with the taskmanager, or other utility like those, and save a copy of the debug.log, may be useful later (next year). For those who still have problems, until the next fix, I would advise to close normally the wallet and restart it, at regular intervals, this would be safe. Regarding the dimension of the intervals, you must rely a bit on your experience, depends on many variables. Bye Bye |
|
|
|
Happy New Year to the other side of the world! This really is a man who thinks in a four-dimensional. I wish you to all the readers of the forum, a prosperous and peaceful New Year to all of you, and your loved ones. Bye Bye |
|
|
|
To the others, can somebody reproduce this behaviour?
May be a intermittent problem, can be nothing, or a hard row to hoe. It would be very useful to know which versions have problems: 1) On which operating system (32 or 64) was working the Wallet 2) If you were using binary taken from OP or if it is a personal compilation 3) If after the crash, in the debug.log there are strange errors (especially in the last lines) 4) Possibly, in what state was the wallet at the time of the crash, (for example: the window was open on the Overview page, or on the transaction list, or in staking, or if you were running some operation) 5) How much time the wallet was open before crash 6) How much memory the computer have 7) If the dialog Stake Report was open or not. In this regard, I do not think that the Stake Report is the cause, but as a precaution, I would recommend you do some tests normally holding it closed. (  ) PS: Sorry, i was away with family. |
|
|
|
MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL OF US Totally agree. MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!! Bye Bye |
|
|
|
Soopy is there!!  Bye Bye |
|
|
|
where is snoopy???
 He is a bit stuck ... too many cookies. |
|
|
|
I built my database from 0 and is now fully synced  . It took a few hrs (overnight) but well worth the wait which included a reboot at around block 28XXXXX. The opened the wallet again and sync continued. [cut] Recently I not followed the new coins, so I don't know there is any new way or idea to shrink the blockchain database, but I think it would require a complete redesign of the structure of the cryptocoin itself. I have to correct this statement that I made some time ago, today without searching I ran across a comment that brought me to know the existence of "a unique Hybrid Flex blockchain. That brings instant confirmations and compresses old transactions to create instant sync times." Recalling that old conversation, obviously it intrigued me. Here is the page where I stumbled, and a secondary that can lead to the whitepaper: http://www.coinssource.com/gaw-miners-releases-paycoin-a-banking-and-crypto-hybrid/https://coinwarp.net/tag/paycoinI did not have much depth reading, but if I understand correctly with that system it creates two classes of nodes \ wallet: a smaller version of wallet which use a blockchain reduced and another with more rights that maintains and authorizes transactions with the full version the blockchain. I'm bringing this information, not to advertise a new currency, but only to complete the previous answer, and also inform people like me they were not informed. Personally I am not able to say whether this technology is safe, and whether it is possible to import it into NavajoCoin, just to be able to formulate a response it would take a very long and thorough analysis. Paradoxically, but I speak of mere sensation without facts, it might be easier to carry out a re-foundation of the Navajo, rather than an integration of outside technology so fundamental. Bye Bye |
|
|
|
Remy_5, do not confuse me with the usual helpful GreedyJohn. This time I was faster than him gregofdoom I offer my apologies, GregOfDoom, you've been very helpful and fast. I am so used to associate the large font with GreedyJohn that this time I have not double-checked the name.  Thanks again. |
|
|
|
version" : 60043,
"subver" : "/NavajoCoin:2.0.4/",Is this the right wallet...Or do I need an update...I usually have about 16 connections with this wallet. Not sure how you get 57. my nodes
addnode=navajosupernode1.no-ip.biz
addnode=navajosupernode2.no-ip.biz
addnode=navajosupernode3.no-ip.biz
addnode=navajosupernode4.no-ip.biz
addnode=navajosupernode5.no-ip.biz
addnode=63.165.243.110
Do not worry Skydog, your version is correct. Regarding the number of connections, I confess that even I was a bit skeptical about the numbers so high often indicated by GreedyJohn, but I have to admit that he's right. I generally am used to have less than a dozen connections, much more than enough, but without touching any parameter configuration, I had some lucky moments when I arrived at 49, and if only yesterday I was 16 connections, now I am 26. They are the "magic" of the Internet, and of a network of NAV peers spread all over the world (or my case an internet provider a bit miserable). Bye Bye |
|
|
|
If they do not provide soon to be updated, I think the Dev Team will take
care of the disregard of these "heedless" ... in some manner.
Why are they able to do that? I thought the update was a hard fork which should have made old wallets useless. Often when blockchain versions are compatible, as in our case, is granted a grace period, to give way to each of migrating to the latest version. Finished this grace period, or with a later update, the old versions are finally driven out by the network. Someone could not even be aware of the last update and should be informed in some way. Can they still do damage, whether on purpose or by accident?
No, I do not think there is any risk. As the data provided by GreedyJohn GregOfDoom confirm, the large majority of the nodes has been successfully updated quickly, and this makes the network robust and secure. In the worst case scenario, the nodes with old obsolete version could create a small fork between them, but only harm themselves, because the rest of the network and exchange refuse their blocks and their transactions. So, no, there are no risks ... at least for us. They are only the old nodes to risk now, and they should decide to wake up, now or in the next update. This is my opinion, unless corrections DevTeam. Bye |
|
|
|
Given that you have a lot of connections and therefore a better point of view,
you could do me a favor and check if there are others careless peers, please?
Remy_5, I have 54 connections. People still use the old wallets. Thank you, you have been very kind and helpful as always. There are not many, but they are not even a few. Hmmm...  If they do not provide soon to be updated, I think the Dev Team will take care of the disregard of these "heedless" ... in some manner. Bye Bye |
|
|
|
MY WALLET HAS 57 ACTIVE CONNECTIONS TO NAVAJOCOIN NETWORK. This is the best record so far!
GreedyJohn, at the moment I only have 16 connections, and through the command getpeerinfo, I see that at least one of the peer has not yet taken steps to update to the current version mandatory "subver": "/NavajoCoin:2.0.4/". Given that you have a lot of connections and therefore a better point of view, you could do me a favor and check if there are others careless peers, please? Bye Bye |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
