Slimcoin | First Proof of Burn currency | Decentralized Web

[casper77]

what are the requirements for slimcoin node ? i have static IP, is this enough ?

More than enough (see below). Just add listen=1 to your slimcoin.conf file.
Strictly speaking, a static IP address isn't required, it's just more effective ...

ok
nothing prevents me from adding listen=1, especially that my wallet online since november 2016
slimcoin's thread is very different from others
does this project have any marketing plans or it's just for leveling coding skills of a group of enthusiasts ?

[gjhiggins]

slimcoin's thread is very different from others
does this project have any marketing plans or it's just for leveling coding skills of a group of enthusiasts ?

It's a community rather than a project so it's more useful to talk about strategy rather than specific marketing plans. d5000 has done a good job of keeping the ANN up to date.

The original basic raison d'être of a tripartite PoW-PoS-PoB minting system seems to have some practical merit as Slimcoin has turned out to be a survivor coin, having just passed its 5th anniversary. d5000 and I are separately exploring not-entirely-unrelated avenues of inquiry aimed at leveraging the Slimcoin blockchain to support content publishing.

Cheers

Graham

[gjhiggins]

I will get straight onto compiling up fresh binaries for Win/OSX and will post their availability here (in about an hour or so, I expect).

UPNP re-enabled client binaries compiled from current master:

 - Win 32bit
https:minkiz.co/noodlings/slm/slimcoinqt-5.0-win32.zip

 - OS X High Sierra
https:minkiz.co/noodlings/slm/SLIMCoin-Qt.dmg

Cheers

Graham

[muf18]

We are now displayed on the main page of chainz explorer.

I also asked, if they can have differation of PoB blocks, and that's the question to people more knowledgeable than I am, from people running chainz.

About burn blocks, it may be possible yes, though I need a bit more info to understand how to display/interpret them

For that block 1751324, I see a coinbase tx to SURxYohK1r5FzaZSJoP7R1mwMsFXaHR1Tq with 12.92 SLM created, while the bock data says it burned 1377571.952427 for the second output of the second tx of block 897680, which was to address SfSLMCoinMainNetworkBurnAddr1DeTK5.

How should that burn data be reflected exactly ?

@gjhiggins - do you see now more nodes listing?

[muf18]

I have often an error message, when I want to send SLMs around that the balance is insufficient, although I have more than required...
Or error that transaction couldn't be created
With newest client v0.6 with UPnP.

The older v0.6 client without UPnP from github works well.

Although even in older 0.6 client small amounts that are still on the wallet (like 1-2 SLM) can't be sent, cause it says "insufficent balance" .

[gjhiggins]

I have often an error message, when I want to send SLMs around that the balance is insufficient, although I have more than required...
Or error that transaction couldn't be created
With newest client v0.6 with UPnP.

The older v0.6 client without UPnP from github works well.

Although even in older 0.6 client small amounts that are still on the wallet (like 1-2 SLM) can't be sent, cause it says "insufficent balance" .

Ah, well. I guess we should just not bother with 0.6 then. At least I tried.

Cheers

Graham

[muf18]

It's strange, but I thought it's not a major bug.

I'll try to see what is causing it.

Edit: even more strange - after restart of the client it sent without problems...
Don't know why. Can it be caused by mining?

Btw. is it normal that wallets from 0.6 are incompatible with 0.5 client?

And as I see nobody is minting now?

[gavrilo77]

Trading on Nova again blocked

It is strange that Freiexchange doesnt have any issues since the beginning

[Gash]

Dude stfu being a survivor does not magically add up merit or value to ur coin or enterprise. U got to work hard to put it back on track, and this is what most people tend to forget when assessing the chances of certain coins to take over. Needless to say this is not the first proof of burn crypto. History knows many such coins that were artificially made rare by reducing the supply. All dead.

[muf18]

Dude stfu being a survivor does not magically add up merit or value to ur coin or enterprise. U got to work hard to put it back on track, and this is what most people tend to forget when assessing the chances of certain coins to take over. Needless to say this is not the first proof of burn crypto. History knows many such coins that were artificially made rare by reducing the supply. All dead.

It is the first cryptocurrency, which has Proof of Burn consensus mechanism. Burning coins within normal cryptocurrencies isn't making any consensus mechanism at all, it's wastage of capital.
Here it makes sense, cause it's alligned into consensus and incentive mechanism.

And besides foul language isn't appreciated so you can go back to your tasks. It isn't an enterprise, nor it isn't "somebody" coin.

[gjhiggins]

Needless to say this is not the first proof of burn crypto. History knows many such coins that were artificially made rare by reducing the supply. All dead.

You seem not to understand the role of burnt coins in Slimcoin. I recommend that you read the ANN a bit more closely before making offensively rude postings.

Cheers

Graham

[gjhiggins]

Trading on Nova again blocked

It is strange that Freiexchange doesnt have any issues since the beginning

Initially, the query came from Novaexchange during their pause in trading after they were bought out. Apparently the 0.5 wallet failed to create appropriate change addresses and listunspent was "wrong" and so the exchange's accounting didn't add up and under new strict accounting rules, that was a delisting issue. I tried to divine the precise nature of the problem from the informal description I was given but couldn't make any headway. I suggested they try the -avatar option but apparently that didn't work either.

At that time there was no difference between the PPCoin and Slimcoin transaction-handling code apart from P4Titan's additions for handling burn txs so I was unable to provide a fix. muf18 asked around various devs for help but no-one was interested. In a fit of desperation I copied over the coincontrol backport from PPCoin but I was informed by my exchange contact that they had been able to solve the problem by using a different approach.

All went quiet until mid-April when (unbeknownst to me) one of the Novaexchange staff DM'd me on Discord to report "problems with the wallet" and a fragment from the log that showed the exchange were using a checkout of the unstable "optimized-pos" master, followed a couple of weeks later by a "?". (I've learned to be really, really resistant to the development of casual assumptions of on-demand provision of technical support for exactly this reason. The exchanges are in permanent technical debt which they casually offload on to the same communities that they profit from. Nice trick if you can pull it off.)

When I picked up the laptop again in early May, I saw the DM and responded, advising the exchange to use a checkout of the updated master.

The next message was from the exchange staffer I'd worked with originally and who'd informed me that they'd solved the issue by a different means - apparently the accounting was incorrect due to an issue with change addresses but this time his description gave me a better understanding of the origin of the problem and I was able to commit a putative fix which my contact said he'd try out. That was over a week ago. I sent a follow-up "did it work?" a couple of days ago but haven't had a response yet.

Freiexchange don't experience the same accounting issues with their back end but I'm sure they'd be happy to pick up on a version where the change addresses actually work as intended.

Cheers

Graham

[gjhiggins]

Btw. is it normal that wallets from 0.6 are incompatible with 0.5 client?

Yes, that can happen if the clients are compiled with a version of BerkeleyDB other than 4.8.

Scenario: User has client compiled with 4.8, creates wallet that is 4.8-format. User upgrades to a client compiled with (say) 6.2 which automatically updates the wallet (on loading it) to 6.2-format. User decides to return to previous client but that can only read a 4.8 wallet, not the upgraded 6.2 one saved by the new client. This is why users are urged to make regular and frequent backups of their wallet, especially when upgrading the client. A backed-up 4.8-format wallet can be read by any client and generally, any later version can read a previous-version wallet.

Decision: slow but compatible 4.8 or fast but incompatible 6.2?

Linux users can decide for themselves but users of proprietary OSes (Win/OSX) have to depend on whether I can be arsed to provide compiled binaries for both compatible and incompatible bdb versions.   

Cheers

Graham

[muf18]

Ah, so 0.6 version is compiled with BDB 6.2?

Well that's good, just I didn't know it, we can put a respective description for it, to avoid confusion.

[gjhiggins]

Ah, so 0.6 version is compiled with BDB 6.2?

Which OS?

Cheers

Graham
 

[muf18]

Ah, so 0.6 version is compiled with BDB 6.2?

Which OS?

Cheers

Graham
 

I mean Windows version.

Edit: after testing - 0.6 github version is working reliably as intended, "5.0" minikiz v0.6 client isn't sending transactions apart from some really small - dunno why, it can't calculate it? Also it sometimes miscalculates amount in the wallet. All on windows 10 x64.

[casper77]

i confirm again that 0.6 version does not shown my burnt coins
so do your work better if you want to slimcoin's success

[muf18]

i confirm again that 0.6 version does not shown my burnt coins
so do your work better if you want to slimcoin's success

Well Graham really did everything he could probably do given the old codebase and the fact that it's different to other peercoin forks. So it's not really his fault, and also all people are volunteers, so what you said is quite rude.

[gjhiggins]

i confirm again that 0.6 version does not shown my burnt coins
so do your work better if you want to slimcoin's success

It will if you simply restart the client. Feel free to contribute a fix.

For clarity, I'm an occasional technical contributor and I also help with curating the community resources, so your sage advice on pursuing success is misdirected, as is your lack of appreciation of the amount of community effort required to maintain a working blockchain.

Cheers

Graham

[gavrilo77]

i confirm again that 0.6 version does not shown my burnt coins
so do your work better if you want to slimcoin's success

I dont have problem with 0.6. Burnt coins are shown in the wallet. Did you restart the client?