[TX]TRANSFER - BITTREX - MULTIPOOL - ANDROID - POS,TOR,MN, STEALTH

[bhokor]

Hey guys it looks like some of the clients are having troubles with the proof of service implementation whilst testing InstantX. In dash the feature was introduced in 0.11.2 and later removed for 0.12.0. I didn't notice this right away and did end up adding it for 0.11.2. The reason it was removed is because the network was having troubles agreeing with each other on such a large network. And therefore i thought we would be in the clear after i had noticed it. Apparently that's not the case, And I'm getting a few reports that not everyone has the same list of masternodes again. I'm going to try and get a temporary client released for the people staking and for the masternodes. To get the payments for the masternodes back on track. To remove the proof of service implementation should only take a few hours.

I'll get back to everyone shortly about this.

How can not everyone have the same masternode list? i thought it is a fixed list for everyone joining the network

[infernoman]

Hey guys it looks like some of the clients are having troubles with the proof of service implementation whilst testing InstantX. In dash the feature was introduced in 0.11.2 and later removed for 0.12.0. I didn't notice this right away and did end up adding it for 0.11.2. The reason it was removed is because the network was having troubles agreeing with each other on such a large network. And therefore i thought we would be in the clear after i had noticed it. Apparently that's not the case, And I'm getting a few reports that not everyone has the same list of masternodes again. I'm going to try and get a temporary client released for the people staking and for the masternodes. To get the payments for the masternodes back on track. To remove the proof of service implementation should only take a few hours.

I'll get back to everyone shortly about this.

How can not everyone have the same masternode list? i thought it is a fixed list for everyone joining the network

The masternode list is relayed to each of the peers as they join the network. The proof of service implementation adds in a scanning error, and a check for that error before relaying any of these masternodes. These clients that are not being relayed. are being falsely accused of having a scanning error as seen in dash 0.11.2 Thats one of the reasons it was removed. We just didnt experience it until I started using the services the masternodes are supposed to provide. I am just about finished with the changes now. And it will not require a hard fork. But is going to be a highly recommendable update. Or else you may run into false flags from the proof of service implementation.


EDIT: This list is not fixed, as checks are done every few minutes to make sure the masternode is online. The masternode list can vary from day to day. Dependant on how many people are running masternodes. Proof of service implemented a scanning error for them. Which seemed to vary from client to client. Causing the list's to differ.


Windows first as always, Then linux and then Mac.

Windows :
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wrwjir5tey0lwze/transfer-1.2.2.1-61402-win32.rar?dl=0


Linux :
https://www.dropbox.com/s/sv2b1enwzv6aoek/transfer-1.2.2.1-61402-linux.rar?dl=0


Mac:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jsuga266w99elgu/transfer-1.2.2.1-61402-mac.zip?dl=0


EDIT: OP was also slightly optimized. And some of the new features added to the OP

[WigitGetIt]

I have updated the website with the new wallet links. 

http://transfercoin.io/

[infernoman]

Tonight/Today I've been working on removing as much as I can from the source being dependant on openssl. Currently I've swapped alot of the files over, including smessage and the CPubkey and CPrivkey functions that most of the source is dependant on. One of the things I'd like to do is move away from the openssl dependency and switch toward secp256k1. This will help greatly help with syncing speeds by reducing the time each block takes to be processed by up to 65%. I've been looking at this for a while now and have had some better success whilst looking through bitcoins codebase. And finding and removing what was strung around ours. There were multiple definitions of functions in different files. Causing some un needed glut.

From the testing tonight, syncing from block 0 with a brand new wallet, took just over 20 minutes to download 160k blocks. Averaging around 123 blocks per second. IMO thats REALLY good compared to most altcoins around here, but once I'm finished with the secp256k1 ECDSA check's instead of using openssl's. This wallet is going to be LIGHTNING fast.

Concerning the recent problems, Once you swap over to the client that was released last night. You should not have any more problems with staking. And once enough of the new clients come online. I'll work on testing InstantX some more. Until then I'm just trying to keep busy. But I havent slept all night. Or day now. So I imagine I'll be in bed not too long from now.

Enjoy your day, and the time off work. if you have your holidays yet. And if you need me the easiest way to get ahold of me is through the IRC channel.

[chey]

... I'm just trying to keep busy. But I havent slept all night. Or day now. So I imagine I'll be in bed not too long from now.

Please please...take a break

[infernoman]

... I'm just trying to keep busy. But I havent slept all night. Or day now. So I imagine I'll be in bed not too long from now.

Please please...take a break

This helps me keep my mind off of whats going on at the hospital and I've had tons of support from the community so its not like you guys are stressing me out at all lol. If you take a look at github youll notice that I do take a day or two off every week, I just work very quickly when I am working. But thanks for your concerns I actually took a break yesterday and was playing some counter strike global offensive. If any of you have that you can add me on steam, and maybe we can play a few rounds during downtime.
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198071790695/

[CosaNostra]

With the devs, like you guys, this coin shall be bigger than dash.
I'm hodling and waiting for that sweet moment 

[gregofdoom]

With the devs, like you guys, this coin shall be bigger than dash.
I'm hodling and waiting for that sweet moment 

That's right, TX is very underrated, but it is only a matter of time, as we will see its true value ...
Will it be x10, x20 and maybe even more? We will see.

[nrvasquez]

I'm calling TX will go up to $20 USD

[metamorphin]

With the devs, like you guys, this coin shall be bigger than dash.
I'm hodling and waiting for that sweet moment 

That's right, TX is very underrated, but it is only a matter of time, as we will see its true value ...
Will it be x10, x20 and maybe even more? We will see.

Everything is possible, because in the final result: Transfer has more in functions and features!

Greetz
Meta


https://www.staisybit.com


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1091402.0 -- staisybitthread

[nrvasquez]

I love TX and I appreciate the work infernoman has put into TX.  If TX will go to 3 algorithms, POW, and POS this coin will be more valuable than LTC and DASH combined.  I propose SHA256 (POW), Scrypt (POW), and X11 (POS). Keep the same block time, block reward and features.  This will allow many people to resurect their old SHA256 and Scrypt miners.  I'm sorry if I am speaking out of line.  Thank you for your time.

[WigitGetIt]

I love TX and I appreciate the work infernoman has put into TX.  If TX will go to 3 algorithms, POW, and POS this coin will be more valuable than LTC and DASH combined.  I propose SHA256 (POW), Scrypt (POW), and X11 (POS). Keep the same block time, block reward and features.  This will allow many people to resurect their old SHA256 and Scrypt miners.  I'm sorry if I am speaking out of line.  Thank you for your time.

IMO this is not a good idea.  At current prices it wouldn't be profitable for miners to my for a BR of 1 TX. If people are looking to resurrect there sha256 and scrypt miners they can mine at the multipool http://infernopool.com/getting_started for TX. If you know some people that would like to mine for TX nrvasquez, point them to the multipool link.  

I do not think you are speaking "out of line", as Infernoman is always happy to hear ideas from the community.  

Edit: Just an idea with the amount of coins I earn mining at the multipool.

Between 2 and 2.2 th/s I earned 89.87146167 TX in 3 Hours. In 7 hours (After the previous 3 hours) I have mined 252.20328066 TX, and still currently mining.

Check my stats here http://infernopool.com/miner/TuCpMkaEUKk9s7uT6DLQcRGVRgnjF9enDT

I think the Full PoS is the best option.  The price will come when we get the mobile wallets released. Plus we are looking at payment processors, which will require a hire trading volume and price rise. We just need to be patient and allow Infernoman to continue his hard work. We can all support him and the project by mining at the multipool and using the Masternode maker Service for TX http://mn.infernopool.com/. Aslo by letting people know about the project using different social media tools. 

[limaphii]

having issues updating my wallet. when i unrar it it says file not found. Obviously im not tech savy. Any suggestions? i want to upgrade my wallet and get a node going again.

[limaphii]

run time error 53? Cant i just copy the source onto a note pad and then update my wallet that way? Its been a while since ive messed around with wallets and such.

[limaphii]

Wait. I think I got it.

[CosaNostra]

I'm calling TX will go up to $20 USD

Now that's a damn good target! 
$20 per 1 TX? Hey, why not?

[limaphii]

I think something is wrong. 1 active connection to network?

[infernoman]

I think something is wrong. 1 active connection to network?

addnode=198.27.97.172
addnode=213.108.119.84
addnode=37.138.182.176
addnode=46.188.4.74
addnode=50.142.213.254
addnode=65.94.93.131
addnode=67.242.48.182
addnode=71.75.9.254
addnode=74.106.192.103
addnode=74.120.220.250
addnode=79.109.251.218
addnode=87.133.77.203
addnode=91.97.57.162
addnode=99.236.215.227
addnode=198.50.243.89
addnode=198.50.243.89:9999
addnode=198.50.243.89:9998
addnode=198.50.243.89:9997
addnode=198.50.243.89:9996
addnode=198.50.243.89:9995
addnode=198.50.243.89:9994
addnode=198.50.243.89:9993
addnode=198.50.243.89:9992
addnode=198.50.243.89:9991
addnode=198.50.243.89:9990
addnode=198.50.243.89:9989
addnode=198.50.243.89:9988
addnode=198.50.243.89:9987
addnode=198.50.243.89:9986
addnode=198.50.243.89:9985
addnode=198.50.243.89:9984
addnode=198.50.243.89:9983
addnode=198.50.243.89:9982
addnode=198.50.243.89:9981
addnode=198.50.243.89:9980


Hopefully that should help out

it looks like the network had some troubles agreeing with the most recent proof of service issues. I will be putting out an alert across the network to update to version 1.2.2.1 immediately if not done already. Currently the block explorer is out of sync. But bittrex is still in line. Currently we are on block 164236

EDIT:
Transferdev github updated. Block explorer back online. And a message sent across the network to update to 1.2.2.1


EDIT 2:
Anyone that may be having issues with the blockchain syncing slower than normal. Add this line to your .conf file "maxorphanblocks=1000" The limit on this version was changed, and was causing one of our users to experience a longer than normal sync time. In the next revision I will release -- I'll include the updates for secp256k1, increase this limit to 1000. And also improve the syncing times yet again. Once i'm able to finish the changes for secp256k1 we will see an increase of around 15-65% in syncing times, from our current position.

[nrvasquez]

Has anyone tried to install the TransferCoin Wallet on a Raspberry Pi

[ozboy2014]

What's the eta on android wallet please?