Bitcoin Forum
December 13, 2017, 09:57:04 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 ... 91 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Slimcoin | First Proof of Burn currency | New v0.5.1 binaries  (Read 87660 times)
casper77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120



View Profile
January 12, 2017, 07:19:57 AM
 #361

i can't send coins
novaexchange's address highlighted red in wallet
BUILD-g154b52a-alpha

.
                                            █                                           
                                           ███                                          
                        ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄        █████        ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄                       
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████████████       ███████       ███████████████████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                        ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀        █████        ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀                       
                                           ███                                          
                                            █                                           

PROVIDENCE
                            ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄                            
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████████████████████████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                            ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀                            
.█ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █    █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █ █  █ █ █ █ █ █ █  100% Cashless ────
.Physical Crypto Casino & Resort .
      █
     ███
    █████
    ▀███▀
     ▀█▀
▄▄         ▄▄
 █  ▄███▄  █
  ▄███████▄
  ▀ ▀███▀ ▀
     ███
      █
      █

      █
     ███
    █████
    ▀███▀
     ▀█▀
      █
     ███
    █████
    ▀███▀
     ▀█▀
▄▄         ▄▄
 █  ▄███▄  █
  ▄███████▄
  ▀ ▀███▀ ▀
     ███
      █
      █

      █
     ███
    █████
    ▀███▀
     ▀█▀
www.providence.casino
──────────────────────────────────────
FacebookTwitterTelegram
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513159024
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513159024

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513159024
Reply with quote  #2

1513159024
Report to moderator
1513159024
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513159024

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513159024
Reply with quote  #2

1513159024
Report to moderator
1513159024
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513159024

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513159024
Reply with quote  #2

1513159024
Report to moderator
gjhiggins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218



View Profile WWW
January 12, 2017, 01:32:55 PM
 #362

As far as I understand, OP_RETURN will be limited to 40 bytes

seen as a key for some other piece of information which can be referenced from there, not as a data storage

Still, having that key in an immutable blockchain opens the door to a lot of interesting pursuits.

I would be very curious to know more about your plans for OP_RETURN in the Slimcoin blockchain, when and if you want to reveal them.

OP_RETURN standard is 80 bytes these days (it's configurable via editing the code).

Indeed - e.g. use an app to create a standalone blog site (i.e. one page of HTML) that expands into a fully-decorated post (via using external cdn for all CSS/JS resources) publish the post as a single page of html to a torrenting service, such as https://torrage.info/.

“You can not search or list torrent files that are stored here, you can only access them if you already know the info_hash value of the torrent you want to download”

So, make a note of the torrenthash returned by torrage because that's the only time you'll see that reference and then  indelibly inscribe the torrenthash onto the Slimcoin blockchain:

I've added an “inscribe” option to the menu ...




which brings up a dialog box in which you paste the torrent hash





the transaction containing the torrenthash in the OP_RETURN data gets added to the txs processed in a mined block (I mined the block myself with setgenerate true 2)





The hash identifier of the transaction can be retrieved ...




The torrenthash retrieved ...




Aaaand that's clearly not right.

Which is why the latest commit message reads:

Quote
tx creation implemented, move to debug phase


Cheers

Graham
gjhiggins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218



View Profile WWW
January 12, 2017, 02:11:20 PM
 #363

I would be very curious to know more about your plans for OP_RETURN in the Slimcoin blockchain, when and if you want to reveal them.

Step two involves joining the following dots:

1. “This version of Qt WebEngine is based on Chromium version 49.0.2623.111, with additional security fixes from newer versions.”, i.e. Chromium can run in a wallet dialog
2. Angularjs

to imagine an angular app, say a blog, running in a wallet dialog, polling the blockchain for txs with torrenthashes spent by the default wallet address, grabbing the torrenthash and d/l the torrent to a local db (c.f. addr.dat) and rendering the contents in the app.

Basically opens up a mode of social networking in which the community collectively curates its own content. Not Bitcoin-killer but maybe FB-nibbler.

And, because Teal organisations develop according to evolutionary principles, I expect growth to happen via replication, not via scaling.

Cheers

Graham
cryptovore
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98


View Profile
January 12, 2017, 02:53:38 PM
 #364

Impressive. So it still needs to properly record the hash in the blockchain but I guess that's just a technicality. I saw the web2web proof of concept on github, looks like you are on the way of fully implement that in the Slimcoin blockchain.


I wonder what would happen if, instead of using hashes of torrents, we will store geolocation coordinates in those 80 bytes. Or just a mini-protocol hardcoded like TCP/IP packets: first 2 bytes identity, next 10 bytes, payload, next 40 bytes whatever. You can build an entire communication protocol on top of the blockchain.

cryptovore
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98


View Profile
January 12, 2017, 02:56:02 PM
 #365


Basically opens up a mode of social networking in which the community collectively curates its own content. Not Bitcoin-killer but maybe FB-nibbler.

And, because Teal organisations develop according to evolutionary principles, I expect growth to happen via replication, not via scaling.

Cheers

Graham


There is already an interesting project in the social media area, called Steemit.com, built on top of the Graphene blockchain. Also, AKASHA, built on Ethereum, just launched its alpha a few weeks ago.

Are you aware of any of those two?
psycodad
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 565



View Profile
January 12, 2017, 03:06:25 PM
 #366

Basically opens up a mode of social networking in which the community collectively curates its own content. Not Bitcoin-killer but maybe FB-nibbler.

^ Loved the FB-nibbler - I am all in for it  Grin

I like the direction Slimcoin is taking and I want to thank you Graham for your massive efforts, I think all here appreciate your work a lot!
It's great to be part of a thread where  functionality of the network is the main topic and not the prospective fiat or BTC value of the tokens.

Will give the OP_RETURN branch a whirl either today or tomorrow and will post my experience.





Protestatio facto contraria non valet.
gjhiggins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218



View Profile WWW
January 12, 2017, 03:19:53 PM
 #367

There is already an interesting project in the social media area, called Steemit.com, built on top of the Graphene blockchain. Also, AKASHA, built on Ethereum, just launched its alpha a few weeks ago.

From my perspective, both have strong centralised components and are focused primarily on the cryptocurrency aspects. Both of these are negative factors. It's really just a matter of probability; more centralised is more vulnerable and in the end, simply less effective. The crypto-currency component is a necessary-but-not-sufficient condition for success and is insufficient without a balanced presence of other necessary-but-not-sufficient conditions.

The focus of the central core drives the focus on the crypto-currency aspects which results in a narrowing of the appeal.

Cheers

Graham

Edit for coherence
cryptovore
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98


View Profile
January 12, 2017, 07:09:18 PM
 #368

Ethereum (AKASHA) is based on PoW and yes, it can be relatively easily controlled by powerful miners, which can lead to centralization (see what China does to Bitcoin farms these days). But Steemit is based on DPOS, which makes it less prone to attacks and relatively more distributed. It is my understanding that Slimcoin has a flavor of PoS too (still couldn't make that work on any of my machines so far, by the way, all my coins have been mined with PoW or PoB).

A certain degree of centralization may be needed in any system. I think centralization is becoming a hindrance only when it's acting against its own kind.

I will try to build the OP_RETURN version too and play with it for a while. Thanks again for your hard work on this.
gjhiggins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218



View Profile WWW
January 13, 2017, 01:08:18 PM
 #369

A certain degree of centralization may be needed in any system.

A moment's reflection should disabuse you of that notion.

But it's a natural point at which to make the third post in the “joining the dots” series.  

(Picking up at the end of the last post - for continuity ...)

1. The list of Teal characteristics is also a blueprint for any altcoin community that wishes to follow it.
2. Teal's “evolutionary purpose” breakthrough offers quite a different explanation of progress in the Bitcoin community. It too is pure Teal (albeit somewhat distorted/dysfunctional), so what's happening there can be seen as an anticipated natural evolution of purpose.



During my comparison of the matches between Teal characteristics and altcoin community characteristics, I found it quite instructive to mentally re-compose the mismatches in a form more appropriate for a fully decentralised context and contemplate whether the practical consequences of being able to pursue a “pure” form of Teal bring any operational advantages to the organisation.

They do and the advantages are significant. I'll skip the working out but a pure Teal organisation meets the criteria for a true (i.e. self-directed) collective intelligence (wikipedia entry) <- you can skim-read the intro to get an appreciation of the reality of the notion and its currency; the bibliography and external references offer a number of directions in which to explore.

So, joining up the dots: altcoin communities are nascent collective intelligences which can only develop from a set of starting conditions that we are only just beginning to be able to describe. The perspective raises some interesting questions. (Such as) If all alts are potential CIs, why are the Shibes the only functioning instance? Received wisdom holds that human society inevitably forms a hierarchy and that is “Just the way the world works, son”. Unfortunately, received wisdom persistently declines to be informed by social psychology, which is why “received wisdom” continues to be a code phrase for “simplistic bollocks”. Near-instantaneous person-to-person communication has rendered obsolete the main purpose of a hierarchy - a descending tree of proxies necessary for the remote projection of power.

While contemplating the potential advantages from my re-formulation of the mismatches into a form appropriate to a decentralised context, I also put in some thought about the effects of attempting to impose mismatches, specifically the effects of attempts to impose externalities from the hierarchy, such as exchanges (expecting the community to make good their business losses), the centralising effect of foundations, management teams, references to “investors”, development roadmaps, ICOs of any sort.

All of them are profoundly deleterious to any emergent social group trying to operate in a decentralised context. It's a major source of pluralistic ignorance amongst the participants and in a decentralised context, pluralistic ignorance acts to reduce the pro-social benefit to pretty much zero. Name one altcoin community you'd recommend your Mom join for a socially rewarding experience.

Other than Dogecoin, that is ...

Dogecoin is unremarkable from a technical perspective and its appeal has little to do with the cryptocurrency aspects of a peer-to-peer networked cryptocurrency. The Shibes have a strong pro-social contributive ethic that delivers an immediate and positive social experience for the participants --- which happens to be one of the key qualities exhibited by successful social groups.

Jackson Palmer was right on the nail when he coined the phrase “1 DOGE will always equal 1 DOGE”. The pro-social aspects of Dogecoin have proved themselves to be pretty much independent of the “performance” of the cryptocurrency on some externally-imposed KPIs that bear little relation to either the purpose or the functioning of the social group.

There's plenty of evidence that points in the same direction. Existing altcoin communities have weathered changes in: block time, rewards, algos, PoW to PoS, PoS to PoW, even changes in basic peer-to-peer protocol. It hardly demands a leap of faith to infer that the cryptocurrency component is not necessarily a defining feature of an altcoin community, ironic though that may be.

But, there's a kicker. There's always a kicker but this one's a bit different, it comes in two forms - to those with a simplex model, it's a vicious circle but to those with a complex model, it's a virtuous spiral.

...

One question which might reasonably be posed at this juncture is: what other key qualities are characteristic of successful social groups?

Quote
Collective Intelligence in Groups

Researchers have repeatedly demonstrated that a single statistical factor–often called ‘‘general intelligence’’ or ‘‘g’’– emerges from the correlations among how well different people do a wide variety of different cognitive tasks (e.g., [18, 19]). This single factor can then be used to differentiate the characteristic performance levels of different individuals and to predict which individuals are likely to perform well on other tasks in the future. In recent studies, Woolley et al [11] used the same statistical techniques used in individual intelligence research to see whether a similar collective intelligence factor exists for groups. In other words, they tried to determine the degree to which some groups are characteristically ‘‘smarter’’ than others across a wide range of tasks. To do this, they first gave different groups a variety of tasks that required qualitatively different collaboration processes [20, 21]. Then they used factor analysis to determine whether there was a single factor for a group–as there is for an individual–that predicts the group’s performance on all the different tasks.

They found that the first factor accounted for 43% of the variance in performance on all the different tasks. This is consistent with the 30–50% of variance typically explained by the first factor in a battery of individual cognitive tasks [18]. In individuals, this factor is called ‘‘intelligence’’ or ‘‘g.’’ For groups, Woolley et al. [11] called it ‘‘collective intelligence’’ or ‘‘c,’’ and it is a measure of the general effectiveness of a group on a wide range of tasks. The c factor was also shown to predict how well the groups performed more complex tasks at a later time, above and beyond the predictive ability of the average individual intelligence of group members.

They also found several factors that were significant predictors of c. First, the average and maximum intelligence of individual group members were correlated with c, but only moderately so. In other words, having a lot of smart people in a group did not necessarily make a smart group. Second, there was a significant correlation between c and the average ToM scores of group members, as measured by the ‘‘Reading the Mind in the Eyes’’ test [22]. Third, c was negatively correlated with the variance in the number of speaking turns by group members. In other words, groups where a few people dominated the conversation were less collectively intelligent than those with a more equal distribution of conversational turn taking. Finally, c was significantly correlated with the proportion of females in the group, with groups having more females being more collectively intelligent. In addition, the researchers found that the effects of proportion of females were largely mediated by ToM scores since, consistent with previous research, women in the sample scored better on this measure than men. In a regression analysis including proportion of women, ToM scores, and conversational turn-taking, ToM scores remained the only significant predictor of collective intelligence.
- http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0115212

Spot the kickers? The complex one is: “The c factor was also shown to predict how well the groups performed more complex tasks at a later time, above and beyond the predictive ability of the average individual intelligence of group members.” So “c” is empirically demonstrated and note the inference that overall, a group will outperform an average individual.

The next logical step (for me) is to work out what might be involved in providing explicit support for the more effective functioning of a nascent collective intelligence. The role of the cryptocurrency can be reduced to that of providing a stable frame of reference for the emergence of the CI (exactly as DOGE does for the Shibes).

The simplex one, the vicious circle is: “groups having more females being more collectively intelligent”. One of the most apparent distinguishing characteristics of the overwhelming majority of altcoin groups is an almost total gender imbalance. In a decentralised context, this is a serious impairment.

For all but a handful of altcoins, having just one female member is an unattainable goal. Just to give you some idea of the gap: the phrase “STEEM ladies” made Ngaio physically shudder and she admits to avoiding bitcointalk because she metaphorically gags on the locker-room stench.

(If anyone is interested in a reading list of peer-reviewed papers in the domain of social group behaviour and collective intelligence, drop me a PM. Alternatively, try Collective Intelligence 2014 as a starting point.)

Cheers

Graham
cryptovore
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98


View Profile
January 17, 2017, 06:48:30 PM
 #370

I enjoyed the discussion about Collective Intelligences and I feel it deserves, maybe, a separated thread.

My question this time is: does the Slimcoin blockchain dynamically adjusts difficulty? The desktop version has a graph in which it shows the current difficulty and (I presume) the average. The current difficulty line soared for a few days and it was also scattered (less transactions? less coins generated? less coins mined?) but now is back to its initial level, with more consistency. I also noted that during the high difficulty and scattered line the generated / minted coins were less.

So, is there an algorithm that adjusts the difficulty when there isn't enough supply on the market? Or it's just the fact that some people with big machines entered the blockchain when they saw SLM listed on novaexchange, and then, when they saw the price at just 350 Satoshis they decided to get out?

Any insights will be highly appreciated.

Thank you.
sulfurtank
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


View Profile
January 17, 2017, 07:38:29 PM
 #371

Here is the translation. He set the system clocks backwards more than 100 days on one of his machines, and put a miner on it which resulted in the original chain being overwritten and buried under newer chain that's adjusted to show the corrupt block headers. He put nodes on both chains, sent a transaction to his address on the forked chain and got a message saying that the two chains are incompatible.
gjhiggins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218



View Profile WWW
January 19, 2017, 03:04:46 PM
 #372

I enjoyed the discussion about Collective Intelligences and I feel it deserves, maybe, a separated thread.

Glad you enjoyed it, point taken.

Quote
My question this time is: does the Slimcoin blockchain dynamically adjusts difficulty? The desktop version has a graph in which it shows the current difficulty and (I presume) the average. The current difficulty line soared for a few days and it was also scattered (less transactions? less coins generated? less coins mined?) but now is back to its initial level, with more consistency. I also noted that during the high difficulty and scattered line the generated / minted coins were less.

So, is there an algorithm that adjusts the difficulty when there isn't enough supply on the market? Or it's just the fact that some people with big machines entered the blockchain when they saw SLM listed on novaexchange, and then, when they saw the price at just 350 Satoshis they decided to get out?

Any insights will be highly appreciated.

I can't offer any insights, sorry.

As far I understand it, all (bitcoin protocol) blockchains dynamically adjust difficulty in an attempt to maintain the desired block minting target spacing, i.e. controlling the emission rate.

In Slimcoin's case, the target spacing (nTargetSpacing) is 90 seconds. From the ANN:
Quote
Block time is 1.5 minutes (90 seconds)
Difficulty re-targets continuously
Block rewards decrease in value as the difficulty increases

The three-part minting mechanism complicates the calculations, e.g: https://github.com/slimcoin-project/Slimcoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L1072
Code:
//Target timespan for PoB is 30 PoW blocks

With Bitcoin/clones, the specification is in the implementation. In consequence, the code is canonical and is the only place where true enlightenment can be gained.

The simulation code also offers a glimpse of the complexities:
https://github.com/slimcoin-project/Slimcoin/blob/master/simulations/pob_difficulty.py

You may well be right about the origin of the recent changes in the Slimcoin difficulty. Unfortunately, the situation only affords near-limitless conjecture, we are not in a position even to be able to assess whether is was a result of direct human intervention or a programmed automaton.

For best results, Turing tests should be conducted face-to-face and offline.

Cheers

Graham
cryptovore
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98


View Profile
January 19, 2017, 07:44:18 PM
 #373

Thank you for the explanation and the time taken to respond. I will dig through the code to see where I can find more info.

As far as I can see, the difficulty adjusted again, this time on a downward trend, so probably some computation power left the game.

Cheers!
d5000
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1582



View Profile
January 23, 2017, 02:45:56 AM
 #374

I'm happy to continue to see activity ... thanks gjhiggins! The OP_RETURN inclusion was something I also was interested in, but considered it a bit early to propose it.

OP_RETURN would enable Slimcoin to use asset libraries like OpenAssets or even the brand new (alpha still) PeerAssets - the latter having the advantage to come from the Peercoin community, so it should be easy to port it to SLM. PeerAssets probably would also make possible a decentralized form of cross-blockchain trading.

I'm still struggling a bit with the 0.4 Linux version - once I provide it an advanced blockchain it syncs without problems but it fails to download it from the start - the problems beginning at block 530. It's possible that it's a configuration problem on (both of) my systems (although they are different Linux distributions).

       ▀
   ▄▄▄   ▄▀
   ███ ▄▄▄▄  ██
       ████
    ▄  ▀▀▀▀
▄▄
      ██    ▀▀
██▄█▄▄▄████████
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀███▀▀▀
██████████████████
████▄▀▄▀▄▀███▀▀▀▀▀
████▄▀▄▀▄▀███ ▀
████▄▀▄▀▄▀████████
▀█████████████████
]
,CoinPayments,
█████
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████
█████
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████
█████
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████
Slimcoin Community
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 33


View Profile
January 23, 2017, 01:47:31 PM
 #375


Thanks! I added the BTC market to the OP of this thread.

@gjhiggins & others: If there is something more I should add to the OP I'm open to all suggestions.

Operated currently by user d5000.
psycodad
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 565



View Profile
January 23, 2017, 02:18:55 PM
 #376

I'm still struggling a bit with the 0.4 Linux version - once I provide it an advanced blockchain it syncs without problems but it fails to download it from the start - the problems beginning at block 530. It's possible that it's a configuration problem on (both of) my systems (although they are different Linux distributions).

Had the same problems, until Graham explained how to checkout and build the master branch in this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1141676.msg17253183#msg17253183

HTH

Protestatio facto contraria non valet.
mirador17
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 800



View Profile
January 23, 2017, 03:14:04 PM
 #377

The windowsversion is working good on my win7/64.
d5000
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1582



View Profile
January 23, 2017, 05:01:46 PM
 #378

Had the same problems, until Graham explained how to checkout and build the master branch in this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1141676.msg17253183#msg17253183

HTH

Yay! I managed to get it to work now - at least the first couple of thousand blocks are downloading really fast now.

What's strange is that I am sure I had checked out the master branch the last time I tested it ...

So ok, I think we can say now: with alpha 53 (ga4405760) the problem seems to have been fixed.

I think if we finish testing successfully, gjhiggins deserves to get the bounties that have been announced some weeks ago by various community members for the "working Windows wallet" and the "fixing of the most annoying bugs" (see OP for the exact messages where they were announced).


       ▀
   ▄▄▄   ▄▀
   ███ ▄▄▄▄  ██
       ████
    ▄  ▀▀▀▀
▄▄
      ██    ▀▀
██▄█▄▄▄████████
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀███▀▀▀
██████████████████
████▄▀▄▀▄▀███▀▀▀▀▀
████▄▀▄▀▄▀███ ▀
████▄▀▄▀▄▀████████
▀█████████████████
]
,CoinPayments,
█████
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████
█████
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████
█████
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████ ██
█████
gavrilo77
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 690



View Profile
January 24, 2017, 06:27:51 AM
 #379

Had the same problems, until Graham explained how to checkout and build the master branch in this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1141676.msg17253183#msg17253183

HTH

Yay! I managed to get it to work now - at least the first couple of thousand blocks are downloading really fast now.

What's strange is that I am sure I had checked out the master branch the last time I tested it ...

So ok, I think we can say now: with alpha 53 (ga4405760) the problem seems to have been fixed.

I think if we finish testing successfully, gjhiggins deserves to get the bounties that have been announced some weeks ago by various community members for the "working Windows wallet" and the "fixing of the most annoying bugs" (see OP for the exact messages where they were announced).



Yes. I have told 50 000 and we will need address

BitSend ◢◤Clients | Source
www.bitsend.info
| Your Digital Network | 10MB Blocks
| Algo: XEVAN | DK3 | Masternodes
| BSD - Tether USDT Pair ✔
| Bittrex | C.Gather | S.Exchange
| Cryptopia | LOCALCRYPTO | Livecoin
| CoinPayments | Faucet | Bitsend Airdrop

████
 ████
  ████
   ████
    ████
     ████
      ████
       ████
        ████
       ████
      ████
     ████
    ████
   ████
  ████
 ████
████

████
 ████
  ████
   ████
    ████
     ████
      ████
       ████
        ████
       ████
      ████
     ████
    ████
   ████
  ████
 ████
████
enerbyte
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 552



View Profile
January 24, 2017, 11:35:07 AM
 #380

Had the same problems, until Graham explained how to checkout and build the master branch in this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1141676.msg17253183#msg17253183

HTH

Yay! I managed to get it to work now - at least the first couple of thousand blocks are downloading really fast now.

What's strange is that I am sure I had checked out the master branch the last time I tested it ...

So ok, I think we can say now: with alpha 53 (ga4405760) the problem seems to have been fixed.

I think if we finish testing successfully, gjhiggins deserves to get the bounties that have been announced some weeks ago by various community members for the "working Windows wallet" and the "fixing of the most annoying bugs" (see OP for the exact messages where they were announced).




Yes. I have told 50 000 and we will need address

I agree, I need an address to send 50000 also

XCN: CLz5fzonHjTnTaH3tRYm8bg2c4L627bXYp
BBR: @enerbyte
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 ... 91 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!