Will the new bitcoin client cause a problem for ASICMINER by limiting dust transactions or can ASICMINER now relay their own Satoshi size transactions?
Well, they can, but they should really stop spamming the blockchain regardless :/ |
|
|
|
waiting for the first one to say its wednesday and i still have not received my divs yet  It's wednesday and I still haven't received my divs yet.  I checked at 12:01am this morning and no divs.  From now in around 3 to 5 Hours. Be patient. also, there is some problem with confirming this transactionLooks like it didn't get relayed to Eligius, so I can't prioritise it  |
|
|
|
So you're proposing removing "a" from the English language? Oh holy shit. So does your client even change all the letters to tonal? Look, I'm not even going there. I'm not sure of the benefits or disadvantages of replacing LETTERS as well as numbers with tonal. I didn't even know that was possible! Or if you just mean how does somebody tell if I am spelling a word or saying a number in hex, one word: Context.But 1F is not 16... Lol. I made a mistake, sorry. 10 is sixteen. Wun Zero. Sorry about that. Still making the same point here, regardless of the mistake lol. I was contrasting it to your "1000" which was presumably decimal. I don't get what you mean. Do you mean 4096 (decimal)? How do you say that in hex? I don't get your question, you obviously know how to say it in hex, you said it. (I have been awake forty hours and it's 8 in the morning. Sorry.) I suggest rereading my last post after you've had some rest... |
|
|
|
What's the difference between "a" (1) and "ay" (5*2)? Eh? I don't get what you mean. 1 is pronounced "wun" and 10 (5x2?) is pronounced "ay". So you're proposing removing "a" from the English language? Wun Ef is how you pronounce 16. I wasn't bothered to look up IPA, I was merely writing how to pronounce 1F.. Lol. But 1F is not 16... How about 0x1000? Wait.. why do you need to actually define numerical constants with 0x when you are SPEAKING, isn't it a given that you are talking about a number when you are actually SPEAKING because of context? I assumed since you were only used a base 16 system for numbers that the 0x would be unnecessary. I was contrasting it to your "1000" which was presumably decimal. |
|
|
|
Though I would prefer hexadecimal any day. It's MUCH easier to get used to "012345689ABCDEF" rather than some kooky "An, de, ti, go, su, by, ra, me, ni, ko, hu, vy, la, po, fy, ton." How can you get used to something which doesn't really exist? "012345689ABCDEF" only covers writing, not speech. "123456789" (with a tonal-compatible font) is the equivalent in tonal. Are you kidding me? Ay. Bee. See. Dee. Ee. Ef. What's the difference between "a" (1) and "ay" (5*2)? Wun Ef is how you pronounce 16. Eh? Three Ee Eight is how you pronounce 1000. How about 0x1000? It's not that hard. And there are less examples of pronouncing a number in hex taking more syllables then there are with decimal numbers.
Sure with hex, it might be hard to say 10,000, but it's easier to say every number between those ending in multiple zeroes in almost every case.
Sixty five thousand five hundred and thirty six. That's TWELVE syllabes.
Wun Zero Zero Zero Zero. That's TEN syllables.
How do you say two hundred and thirty six thousand nine hundred and thirty five in tonal? It takes SIXTEEN syllables to say that in decimal.
Cause I bet it's going to take at least as many syllables as "Three Nine Dee Eight Ef" (That's five, by the way) which it would take in hex.
"Ti-bong, ni-mill, la-san, me-ton, ra." - 9 syllables Of course, in both decimal and tonal you could always list the digits too: "two three six nine three five" - 8 syllables. "ti ni la me ra" - 5 syllables. |
|
|
|
Though I would prefer hexadecimal any day. It's MUCH easier to get used to "012345689ABCDEF" rather than some kooky "An, de, ti, go, su, by, ra, me, ni, ko, hu, vy, la, po, fy, ton." How can you get used to something which doesn't really exist? "012345689ABCDEF" only covers writing, not speech. "123456789" (with a tonal-compatible font) is the equivalent in tonal. |
|
|
|
This is merged mining? Like NMC? With NMC merged mining, you get BTC and NMC, while helping both with identical work. With TBC extra-merged mining, you get BTC or TBC, while helping both with identical work. |
|
|
|
From my understanding, there is no benefit aside from saying a = b so mine a or b and its the same thing. So again, why mine tbc if it's the same as btc? If I'm mining btc already, what tangible benefit is there to switching to tbc or vice versa? Cryptocurrencies don't exist for miners. Miners exist for cryptocurrencies. I think it's perfectly reasonable to say nobody will just switch from BTC to TBC. Rather, the switch would be entirely from decimal/metric to tonal (when interacting with others also making the switch). Then you get the benefits of tonal being easier to work with universally. |
|
|
|
So this is not really an altcoin but just an alternative client for mining exactly the same, with the only difference a different base-system for numbering the amount of coins... The only thing different is the display in the client then, right? It really is an altcoin, though your understanding of the nature of it is correct. One does not need to do things the wrong way (making a separate blockchain for no reason) to make an altcoin. So why would miners adopt tbc ... They don't have to. TBC uses the same blockchain as BTC, so both benefit from the same mining work. That is, TBC miners benefit BTC, and BTC miners benefit TBC. ...if it really has no benefit or innovation over btc? It does, as explained in the OP. |
|
|
|
So this is not really an altcoin but just an alternative client for mining exactly the same, with the only difference a different base-system for numbering the amount of coins... The only thing different is the display in the client then, right? It really is an altcoin, though your understanding of the nature of it is correct. One does not need to do things the wrong way (making a separate blockchain for no reason) to make an altcoin. |
|
|
|
Sha256? Yes, it's extra-merged mined. Don't even need to do anything special, just have your bitcoin mining pay to an address of a TBC wallet. |
|
|
|
So it occurred to me that TBC doesn't have a forum thread here yet... I created this altcoin in January 2011 immediately after discovering Bitcoin. While many altcoins have been created since, none come close to TBC's ideal design: - Shares the same blockchain as BTC, so benefits from the full security and difficulty backing the Bitcoin blockchain.
- Mined together with BTC - unlike ordinary merged mining, you don't get BTC plus TBC, just one or the other at your choice.
- Completely compatible with all Bitcoin addresses: if you send BTC to a TBC client's address, it will automatically get converted and vice-versa.
The main, and only unique, feature of TBC is being based on the innovative Tonal number system. What Bitcoin aims to do for currency, Tonal aims to do for numbers in general. Instead of counting: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, etc... In tonal, you would count: an, de, ti, go, su, by, ra, me, ni, ko, hu, vy, la, po, fy, ton, ton-an, etc... That is, it is a radix 8 × 2 system, similar to hexadecimal. Because humans naturally perform binary operations (try cutting your next pizza into 5 or 10 slices!), once you get past the learning curve, this power-of-two radix is easier and more powerful to work with. Why not just use hexadecimal? - Ambiguity: "I have a fish!" - is that 1 or 8 × 2?
- Tonal is actually older! Hexadecimal was invented in 1954, while Tonal goes back to 1862.
- Hexadecimal is only used or specified for integers, whereas Tonal already defines all sorts of everyday units including lengths, time, capacity, weight, power, gold/silver coinage, calendar, temperature, and even postage stamps and music!
- Tonal also has defined pronunciations for large numbers, while hexadecimal must be read digit-by-digit.
1 TBC is defined as 1,0000 (tonal) satoshis - that is, 0.00065536 BTC. This amount was chosen for a number of reasons, including being nicely at four-tonal-places precision (standard for tonal) and balanced with the total number of Bitcoins if it were to achieve worldwide adoption (that is, there would be enough TBCs that everyone could reasonably have some). Other handy units and their equivalents: | Abbreviation | Pronunciation | TBC | BTC | | tam-bitcoin | 1 0000 0000 | 2 814 749.767 106 56 | | ᵇTBC | bong-bitcoin | 1 0000 | 42.949 672 96 | | ᵐTBC | mill-bitcoin | 1000 | 2.684 354 56 | | ˢTBC | san-bitcoin | 100 | 0.167 772 16 | | ᵗTBC | ton-bitcoin | 10 | 0.010 485 76 | | TBC | bitcoin | 1 | 0.000 655 36 | | TBCᵗ | bitcoin-ton | 0.1 | 0.000 040 96 | | TBCˢ | bitcoin-san | 0.01 | 0.000 002 56 | | TBCᵐ | bitcoin-mill | 0.001 | 0.000 000 16 | | TBCᵇ | bitcoin-bong | 0.0001 | 0.000 000 01 |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm expecting dividends to be delayed this week.
Edit: Nevermind, this is still a bit premature as most of the network is running 0.8.1.
Also, someone pointed out to me that the dust spam is sent separately from dividends, so it shouldn't matter for the real BTC
|
|
|
|
I like to make my presence known to those who have less posts than me so they know to kneel beneath me.
Aha, but the real question is: would you have more posts than them if you didn't spam threads with useless "Watching" posts?  |
|
|
|
Watching That's nice. I'm not sure anyone reading the thread really cares who is watching it...? |
|
|
|
BFGminer 3.0.1-.02 crashing no matter what on 6970 But not 3.0.0? More info? |
|
|
|
The GBT timeout issues are solved with bitcoin 0.8.2, best to upgrade. Yes 0.8.2 hasn't been released yet. But all pools have backported the related fix(es) in order to solve this problem already.... Or just use an existing pool It's better, but far from solved |
|
|
|
1/4" that is slim!!!
They should fit into power bar hubs and leave some gap for air flow, right? I'm not sure how much thickness the heatsink adds, however. Can you measure the current draw? It is ok to put one in the 2.0 hub, but 10 might be too much for most 2.0 hubs as they usually don't deliver more than 20W (4A@5V) from their power supplies. It reports 100mA to the USB interface, but I'm sure it's really closer to the 560mA friedcat announced. I don't have any easy way to measure actual current use. |
|
|
|
| ________________Measurement | Tonal | Imperial | SI | | Thickness: | 9 Mˢ | 0.23in | 6mm | | Width: | 29 Mˢ | 1in | 25mm | | Length: | 68 Mˢ | 2.4in | 60mm | | Length protruding from USB port: | 5 Mˢ | 2.1in | 53mm | | Length of PCB: | 4 Mˢ | 1.8in | 45mm |
Are these dimensions of the sample USB emerald version or the final sapphire version? Thank you. Emerald. My Sapphire isn't here yet. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
