Bitcoin Forum
May 24, 2019, 04:09:31 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 [114] 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Slimcoin | First Proof of Burn currency | Decentralized Web  (Read 114446 times)
gavrilo77
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 745
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 10, 2018, 10:27:01 PM
 #2261

It means, that SLM on Nova are lost, if they cant fix the problem???
Sorry, I can't speak for Novaexchange so please don't ask.

As I mentioned, they're experiencing a problem with change addresses not behaving in the way they need. Lost change wasn't a problem before but they're under new ownership and it is now, to the extent that they are prepared to delist rather than tolerate the problem.

I can't really conceive how you equate that with "lost".

Cheers

Graham

My question was not specifically related to your post. It was general question if they have problem with wallet. However i dont have anything on Nova, i was just curious

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

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

████
 ████
  ████
   ████
    ████
     ████
      ████
       ████
        ████
       ████
      ████
     ████
    ████
   ████
  ████
 ████
████
1558714171
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1558714171

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1558714171
Reply with quote  #2

1558714171
Report to moderator
GET 25 FREE SPINS AT REGISTRATION
GET 100% BONUS ON FIRST DEPOSIT
PLAY NOW
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
muf18
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 308


View Profile
July 10, 2018, 10:33:26 PM
 #2262

It means, that SLM on Nova are lost, if they cant fix the problem???
Sorry, I can't speak for Novaexchange so please don't ask.

As I mentioned, they're experiencing a problem with change addresses not behaving in the way they need. Lost change wasn't a problem before but they're under new ownership and it is now, to the extent that they are prepared to delist rather than tolerate the problem.

I can't really conceive how you equate that with "lost".

Cheers

Graham

My question was not specifically related to your post. It was general question if they have problem with wallet. However i dont have anything on Nova, i was just curious

Yea it would be another blow for SLM holders, who didnt withdraw funds. At least 330K SLM is there and probably there is much more than that.
d5000
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1468


Decentralization Maximalist


View Profile
July 10, 2018, 10:55:29 PM
 #2263

Well, if Nova really decided to block these SLM forever, that would be at least massively unprofessional, so I don't think they'd do that if they want to build confidence as a new player on the exchange market.

I mean to have read that for coins they delist they always gave a withdraw option. If the problem is related to change addresses, there is absolutely no excuse to not letting users withdraw their funds.



A little addition to the post about a "equilibrium PoB burn rate":

There is another option to change the equilibrium apart from PoB block frequency and PoB block reward: the "decay rate" of the "EffectiveBurntCoins" variable (explained at the end of the "ELI5" on the website). I can imagine a slightly faster decay rate could make sense at a first glance; that would mean that people would only burn coins if they see a ROI in the next ~3 months for example (and not in ~1+years like now). It would, however, also mean that the effect to reward long term engagement (first paragraph of the "Advantages" page on the Slimcoin website) would be smaller.

A faster decay rate would also decrease the average burn rate and make attacks on PoB easier*. The slow decay rate has an interesting side-effect: as "old burners" will try to find blocks at least until they make profit, the validator (=people that find blocks) set is pretty stable, and phases when few coins are burnt do not mean less security of PoB blocks.

Overall, I think the current PoB implementation is well thought out: it allows a high burn rate but doesn't make Slimcoin too deflationary to be useful as a currency.

*As the current protocol doesn't allow two PoB blocks in a row, a PoB-only attack can only try a double-spend to "scam" a person which accepts 1-confirmation transactions. As this is unlikely, PoB-only attacks are extremely unlikely, too - but they could be combined with a PoS nothing-at-stake or PoW 51% attack, so the security of PoB blocks has a lot of significance.

keliokan
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 71
Merit: 1


View Profile
July 11, 2018, 06:58:00 AM
 #2264

I agree, PoB is well implemented.

A question about the PoS and its effect on the wallet stability.
Is there a way to improve this, the possibility of using just a small amount of the balance to be able to stake without affecting the wallet response is not really great.

K.





Well, if Nova really decided to block these SLM forever, that would be at least massively unprofessional, so I don't think they'd do that if they want to build confidence as a new player on the exchange market.

I mean to have read that for coins they delist they always gave a withdraw option. If the problem is related to change addresses, there is absolutely no excuse to not letting users withdraw their funds.



A little addition to the post about a "equilibrium PoB burn rate":

There is another option to change the equilibrium apart from PoB block frequency and PoB block reward: the "decay rate" of the "EffectiveBurntCoins" variable (explained at the end of the "ELI5" on the website). I can imagine a slightly faster decay rate could make sense at a first glance; that would mean that people would only burn coins if they see a ROI in the next ~3 months for example (and not in ~1+years like now). It would, however, also mean that the effect to reward long term engagement (first paragraph of the "Advantages" page on the Slimcoin website) would be smaller.

A faster decay rate would also decrease the average burn rate and make attacks on PoB easier*. The slow decay rate has an interesting side-effect: as "old burners" will try to find blocks at least until they make profit, the validator (=people that find blocks) set is pretty stable, and phases when few coins are burnt do not mean less security of PoB blocks.

Overall, I think the current PoB implementation is well thought out: it allows a high burn rate but doesn't make Slimcoin too deflationary to be useful as a currency.

*As the current protocol doesn't allow two PoB blocks in a row, a PoB-only attack can only try a double-spend to "scam" a person which accepts 1-confirmation transactions. As this is unlikely, PoB-only attacks are extremely unlikely, too - but they could be combined with a PoS nothing-at-stake or PoW 51% attack, so the security of PoB blocks has a lot of significance.
gjhiggins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1060



View Profile WWW
July 11, 2018, 03:56:01 PM
 #2265

A question about the PoS and its effect on the wallet stability.
Is there a way to improve this, the possibility of using just a small amount of the balance to be able to stake without affecting the wallet response is not really great.
The problem description is rather vague, you are far more likely to get coherent and relevant responses if you can be more specific in describing the problem.

Cheers

Graham
muf18
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 308


View Profile
July 11, 2018, 04:51:44 PM
 #2266

I agree, PoB is well implemented.

A question about the PoS and its effect on the wallet stability.
Is there a way to improve this, the possibility of using just a small amount of the balance to be able to stake without affecting the wallet response is not really great.

K.





Well, if Nova really decided to block these SLM forever, that would be at least massively unprofessional, so I don't think they'd do that if they want to build confidence as a new player on the exchange market.

I mean to have read that for coins they delist they always gave a withdraw option. If the problem is related to change addresses, there is absolutely no excuse to not letting users withdraw their funds.



A little addition to the post about a "equilibrium PoB burn rate":

There is another option to change the equilibrium apart from PoB block frequency and PoB block reward: the "decay rate" of the "EffectiveBurntCoins" variable (explained at the end of the "ELI5" on the website). I can imagine a slightly faster decay rate could make sense at a first glance; that would mean that people would only burn coins if they see a ROI in the next ~3 months for example (and not in ~1+years like now). It would, however, also mean that the effect to reward long term engagement (first paragraph of the "Advantages" page on the Slimcoin website) would be smaller.

A faster decay rate would also decrease the average burn rate and make attacks on PoB easier*. The slow decay rate has an interesting side-effect: as "old burners" will try to find blocks at least until they make profit, the validator (=people that find blocks) set is pretty stable, and phases when few coins are burnt do not mean less security of PoB blocks.

Overall, I think the current PoB implementation is well thought out: it allows a high burn rate but doesn't make Slimcoin too deflationary to be useful as a currency.

*As the current protocol doesn't allow two PoB blocks in a row, a PoB-only attack can only try a double-spend to "scam" a person which accepts 1-confirmation transactions. As this is unlikely, PoB-only attacks are extremely unlikely, too - but they could be combined with a PoS nothing-at-stake or PoW 51% attack, so the security of PoB blocks has a lot of significance.

It's because of wallet bloat (when you are miner).

If you would move your balance into new wallet - completely new with UTXO bloat - it will stake, without problems, for a long time.
muf18
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 308


View Profile
July 12, 2018, 06:40:13 PM
 #2267

There is problem in network with mining - when using Slimminer, with hashtable 1-3 or 5-6 - I'm getting only 2-4Kh/s instead of 150-160Kh/s with my Ryzen 7 1700.

With hashtable 4, it was gettting 25-75 KH/s (unstable), but now it's the same, as with others.

Slimminer is using only 1-6 threads. It's really strange... I had some timeouts, when solo mining, but now hashing power totally collapsed.
d5000
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1468


Decentralization Maximalist


View Profile
July 12, 2018, 06:53:48 PM
 #2268

A question about the PoS and its effect on the wallet stability.
Is there a way to improve this, the possibility of using just a small amount of the balance to be able to stake without affecting the wallet response is not really great.
I guess you refer to the fact that the wallet/client is slow when not using "reservebalance"?

The problem seems to be related to the PoW algorithm, so it's not easily "solvable".

Have you tried what is suggested on the Slimcoin website - consolidate your balance into one or a few UTXOs (outputs)? This can be done sending all your balance to another address you own. If it doesn't work because you have too many outputs, then you can try to send several big transactions. It would cost at much a couple of cents in transaction fees ...

A coin control solution would help here - but I remember Graham wrote it wasn't trivial porting the PPC coin control feature to Slimcoin ...

muf18
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 308


View Profile
July 12, 2018, 07:08:45 PM
 #2269

@d5000 - can you check Slimminer, am I the only one with the problem, or everyone has the same problem (under utilization of CPU when mining).

Ok - there is something wrong with above 12-13 threads on miner now. It wasn't a problem 2-3 days ago...
d5000
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1468


Decentralization Maximalist


View Profile
July 12, 2018, 07:31:59 PM
 #2270

@muf18: I'm currently not on a machine where mining makes much sense, and I've never used slimminer. So it would be better if an experienced miner checks it. If nobody else can help you, i'll check it but it will need some time.

gavrilo77
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 745
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 12, 2018, 08:01:15 PM
 #2271

@muf18

You are right for ryzen. I have 1700X and it is the same hash as yours. The other one, Threadripper, is working normal

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

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

████
 ████
  ████
   ████
    ████
     ████
      ████
       ████
        ████
       ████
      ████
     ████
    ████
   ████
  ████
 ████
████
muf18
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 308


View Profile
July 12, 2018, 10:46:18 PM
 #2272

Strange it's just happened 1-2 days ago.

Lowered thread count to 10 - stable enough to have 120kh/s.
keliokan
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 71
Merit: 1


View Profile
July 13, 2018, 10:06:07 AM
 #2273

Yes, i did it and it worked.
Thanks,

K.

A question about the PoS and its effect on the wallet stability.
Is there a way to improve this, the possibility of using just a small amount of the balance to be able to stake without affecting the wallet response is not really great.
I guess you refer to the fact that the wallet/client is slow when not using "reservebalance"?

The problem seems to be related to the PoW algorithm, so it's not easily "solvable".

Have you tried what is suggested on the Slimcoin website - consolidate your balance into one or a few UTXOs (outputs)? This can be done sending all your balance to another address you own. If it doesn't work because you have too many outputs, then you can try to send several big transactions. It would cost at much a couple of cents in transaction fees ...

A coin control solution would help here - but I remember Graham wrote it wasn't trivial porting the PPC coin control feature to Slimcoin ...
keliokan
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 71
Merit: 1


View Profile
July 13, 2018, 10:08:20 AM
 #2274

PoS went down a lot 2 days ago,
Could it be related ? It would be really weird...

K.

Strange it's just happened 1-2 days ago.

Lowered thread count to 10 - stable enough to have 120kh/s.
gavrilo77
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 745
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 16, 2018, 01:13:25 AM
 #2275

PoS went down a lot 2 days ago,
Could it be related ? It would be really weird...

K.

Strange it's just happened 1-2 days ago.

Lowered thread count to 10 - stable enough to have 120kh/s.

Maybe there is a bug in miner. When i replaced miner with the new .exe started to work normal again

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

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

████
 ████
  ████
   ████
    ████
     ████
      ████
       ████
        ████
       ████
      ████
     ████
    ████
   ████
  ████
 ████
████
eddycurrent
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 48
Merit: 1


View Profile
July 16, 2018, 04:13:02 AM
 #2276

Hello all,

I have also noticed this issue with low hashrates on 1700x ryzen cpus, however the drop in hashrate seems from what have seen so far to be at least somewhat to do with a connection issue as the miners kept loosing connection to the daemon and the daemon itself seemed to become unresponsive. If I will keep looking to see if I can pinpoint anything.

Regards
keliokan
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 71
Merit: 1


View Profile
July 16, 2018, 09:06:23 AM
 #2277

I had this problem on a intel cpu, the wallet was used also to stake.
When i stopped to stake, the hashrate went back to normal.

K.


Hello all,

I have also noticed this issue with low hashrates on 1700x ryzen cpus, however the drop in hashrate seems from what have seen so far to be at least somewhat to do with a connection issue as the miners kept loosing connection to the daemon and the daemon itself seemed to become unresponsive. If I will keep looking to see if I can pinpoint anything.

Regards
cctothemass
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 281


View Profile
July 17, 2018, 11:27:10 PM
 #2278

Recently I read the news about Hive mining, "The Hive is an agent-based mining system. Users create “worker bees” which secure the network while earning block rewards for their bee keepers".
Litecoin cash team Scoundrels promote a veiled PoB concept, as something unique, as if they were his discoverers.
I don't understand why so much attention is paid to the scamforks, but "emeralds" like the slimcoin are bypassed.  Angry
d5000
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1468


Decentralization Maximalist


View Profile
July 20, 2018, 03:16:51 AM
Last edit: July 20, 2018, 03:31:42 AM by d5000
Merited by psycodad (1)
 #2279

As I wrote several times I'm working on a simple publishing tool for Slimweb, and the GUI is now working. The goal is that publishing should be at least as easy as publishing a website on a cheap shared hosting provider. It covers all steps a Web2Web publication needs - only the HTML file must be edited in a third-party editor, but as most know you can even use Word for that.

I finally decided to do it in a wizard-style layout.

Some screenshots:

Welcome screen:


Address selection:


HTML file selection;


Transaction checking dialog:


Torrent file/WebTorrent dialog:


Goodbye screen:


Not very nice, but dead simple.

It is now able to run without the rest of the ACME tools (I've forked the part of Graham's blocknotifybase file I needed into the rpchost.py file, obviously without changing credits/license).

The new repo is here: https://github.com/slimcoin-project/slimweb-publisher

It runs on Linux:

Code:
python3 pubwizard.py [testnet]


Command line tool:
Code:
python3 inscriber.py CONTENT [ADDRESS]


 Windows may need some tweaking (I've not tested it). Please be careful when testing - this tool creates raw Slimcoin transactions and in theory could thrash your coins! Don't use it with your main Slimcoin wallet (create a test wallet, best on another partition or on a VM).

It may need some "embellishment" still - now it uses the standard Qt theme (depending on your OS). Do someone know a nice Qt5 stylesheet which could be used? Also, a "Slimweb" logo would be fine Wink

Vitala
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 94
Merit: 10


View Profile
July 20, 2018, 04:53:01 AM
 #2280

That's amazing (for me) feature. Please, explain, where will be hosted my page - in blockchain or in centralized service? And also, how anybody can see my page?

Pages: « 1 ... 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 [114] 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 »
  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!