[ANN] Firo (FIRO) - Implementing ZKP privacy without trusted setup

[zcoinofficial]

Hi all,

anyone out there with issue "stuck at block 53150" after migrating to zcoin0.13?

Debian 9
zcoin0.13 tar.gz

wiped .zcoin dir exept wallet, zcoin.conf, a readme doc file
build new blockchain in about 2 hour up to block 53149

restarted with zoin-qt -reindex -> same result
moved back to zcoin0.8 with old blockchain -> all fine

snipplet from debug.log:

2017-09-25 13:16:24 ProcessMessage -> received block 4a96f5b79070dfc3c4504049af510f41a81ddb8b7b2e2f7ef14c9787efcd2740 peer=6
2017-09-25 13:16:24 Received faraway block nHeight=53228, currentHeight=53150
2017-09-25 13:16:24 ProcessMessage, strCommand=block
2017-09-25 13:16:24 ProcessMessage -> received block e16e4b9e6f8526eb73e36f113322f349be2ded1d6c3e6718439c0b6c4861e2e2 peer=6
2017-09-25 13:16:24 Received faraway block nHeight=53229, currentHeight=53150
2017-09-25 13:16:41 ProcessMessage, strCommand=addr
2017-09-25 13:17:31 ProcessMessage, strCommand=ping
2017-09-25 13:17:31 ProcessMessage, strCommand=ping
2017-09-25 13:17:32 ProcessMessage, strCommand=ping
2017-09-25 13:17:34 ProcessMessage, strCommand=ping
2017-09-25 13:17:31 ProcessMessage, strCommand=ping
2017-09-25 13:17:32 ProcessMessage, strCommand=ping
2017-09-25 13:17:34 ProcessMessage, strCommand=ping
...
2017-09-25 13:25:45 ProcessMessage, strCommand=pong
2017-09-25 13:26:07 connect() to [2001:0:9d38:90d7:8c9:32b:c46b:d414]:8168 failed: Network is unreachable (101)
2017-09-25 13:26:14 ProcessMessage, strCommand=ping
...


Thx

Seems to be an issue with connectivity with old and new peers. Usually I just sync it up with znode.io and reload it and make sure i delete peers.dat and you will be up to date. Hopefully those bad nodes will go offline

[AND01]

Thai exchange why no zcoin trading news

[minerbro]

I believe we are still at the beginning of the journey.
With the full integration of MTP, this coin still has much to demonstrate !
So we expect so many great satisfactions from Zcoin

[kaijser]

Blockchain syncing doesn't seem to work for me.

Downloaded the windows bootstrap, it has processed 53150 blocks and then stays syncing forever. I tried to -reindex and it started over but I got the same problem. Solutions?

[funnel]

Blockchain syncing doesn't seem to work for me.

Downloaded the windows bootstrap, it has processed 53150 blocks and then stays syncing forever. I tried to -reindex and it started over but I got the same problem. Solutions?

Same here on windows 10, stuck at 53150.

[zcoinofficial]

Blockchain syncing doesn't seem to work for me.

Downloaded the windows bootstrap, it has processed 53150 blocks and then stays syncing forever. I tried to -reindex and it started over but I got the same problem. Solutions?

Same here on windows 10, stuck at 53150.

Delete peers.dat
Download the chain from znode.io
Reindex.

This will solve it until the pools update.

[AND01]

The existing zero-knowledge approach is to use a professional mine to mine, need to consume a lot of computing power. Non-interactive zero knowledge proof NIZK, like a good technology. Different from zcash zero knowledge to prove the biggest feature is: from UTXO into the balance model. The future can be involved in the calculation of mobile phones,

[zer0k]

well at the end of the day are the coins that matter. Here goes my short test:

miningpoolhub:
begin  --> sep 19 11:28:44 CEST 2017 --> 0 zcoin
end     --> sep 21 13:57:33 CEST 2017 -->  0.47537101 zcoin
** Average: 0.2635 Zcoin/day
 


Suprnova:
Begin --> sep  21 13:55:53  CEST 2017 --> 0 zcoin
Current -> sep 23 17:28:20 CEST 2017 --> 0.59912859 zcoin
** Average: 0.279 Zcoin/ day

Conclusion (what I suspected): Suprnova  looks  better. This is true specially taking into account (i) the  larger granularity at suprnova and (ii) how the test in suprnova has been done after MPH with larger global HR.  Ideally, one should run in suprnova much, much longer to do a more accurate average due to the lower share of this pool, but I think results point to suprnova as a better option in spite of the issues commented these days.

Testing with this method is only showing you that for those DIFFERENT time frames the pools paid out X amount of coins.
So, during those 2 different time frames you have very different variables at play like: pool hashrate, network hashrate, pool luck, block difficulty, etc. etc.

If you want a better test you have to get 2/4/6/8/X cards on the same system and point them at the pools at the same time. Then the only variable is the pool

[Bisha]

New release should solve all sync and pending transaction issues with the new command calls.

And breakout just now! Second leg up incoming!

[BigMcRat]

I mine on MiningPoolHub with ccminer trupvot v2.2.1,
I am getting only 60%-70% of my hashrate on Pool site,

anyone can help with this issue?

[majonezas]

anyone else having problems on suprnova? it started last night, gpu miner accepts shares only every 5 minutes, only ~200 shares overnight, and cpu miner loses connection every 10 minutes, and 0 earnings over the last day.

[majonezas]

well at the end of the day are the coins that matter. Here goes my short test:

miningpoolhub:
begin  --> sep 19 11:28:44 CEST 2017 --> 0 zcoin
end     --> sep 21 13:57:33 CEST 2017 -->  0.47537101 zcoin
** Average: 0.2635 Zcoin/day
 


Suprnova:
Begin --> sep  21 13:55:53  CEST 2017 --> 0 zcoin
Current -> sep 23 17:28:20 CEST 2017 --> 0.59912859 zcoin
** Average: 0.279 Zcoin/ day

Conclusion (what I suspected): Suprnova  looks  better. This is true specially taking into account (i) the  larger granularity at suprnova and (ii) how the test in suprnova has been done after MPH with larger global HR.  Ideally, one should run in suprnova much, much longer to do a more accurate average due to the lower share of this pool, but I think results point to suprnova as a better option in spite of the issues commented these days.

Testing with this method is only showing you that for those DIFFERENT time frames the pools paid out X amount of coins.
So, during those 2 different time frames you have very different variables at play like: pool hashrate, network hashrate, pool luck, block difficulty, etc. etc.

If you want a better test you have to get 2/4/6/8/X cards on the same system and point them at the pools at the same time. Then the only variable is the pool

and olso miningpoolhub has 0.9% fee where suprnova has 0% free

[Jazek]

anyone else having problems on suprnova? it started last night, gpu miner accepts shares only every 5 minutes, only ~200 shares overnight, and cpu miner loses connection every 10 minutes, and 0 earnings over the last day.

+1 0 earnings from suprnova

[doktor83]

anyone else having problems on suprnova? it started last night, gpu miner accepts shares only every 5 minutes, only ~200 shares overnight, and cpu miner loses connection every 10 minutes, and 0 earnings over the last day.

+1 0 earnings from suprnova

same thing.
Connection to the pool drops exactly every 4 minutes.

[aziernest]

is there any updated roadmap? I see we are already behind schedule for the roadmap.

[funnel]

When I ping miningpoolhub europe server I get the same ping as if I ping the us-east.lyra2z server. Suprnovas ping is way lower so I'm thinking this could make the difference in earnings. But suprnova is always dead so miningpoolhub is the only option. We would relally need a better pool.

[majonezas]

I mine on MiningPoolHub with ccminer trupvot v2.2.1,
I am getting only 60%-70% of my hashrate on Pool site,

anyone can help with this issue?

it will even out with time.
do you have rejected shares? hashrate is based on shares submitted

[Jazek]

When I ping miningpoolhub europe server I get the same ping as if I ping the us-east.lyra2z server. Suprnovas ping is way lower so I'm thinking this could make the difference in earnings. But suprnova is always dead so miningpoolhub is the only option. We would relally need a better pool.

Dev said in the last video that they are planning on making an oficial pool, i hope so

[BigMcRat]

I mine on MiningPoolHub with ccminer trupvot v2.2.1,
I am getting only 60%-70% of my hashrate on Pool site,

anyone can help with this issue?

it will even out with time.
do you have rejected shares? hashrate is based on shares submitted

no rejected shares, only lot of jumbs in difficulty.
Is your hashrate equal on pool side?

This is my config:

ccminer.exe –a lyra3z –o europe.zcoin.miningpoolhub.com:20581 –u xxxxxxx.xxx –p x –i 20

[funnel]

Rejected shares depend on which ccminer version you use. djm34 ccminer gives more rejected shares but more accurate estimated hasrate on miningpoolhub, ccminer 2.+ gives 15% more hashrate but the estimated hasrate on miningpoolhub is always way off. I still didn't figure out which one is better since the difficulty is always changing and I was jumping from suprnova to miningpoolhub every other day.