Bitcoin Forum
September 16, 2019, 05:22:36 AM *
News: If you like a topic and you see an orange "bump" link, click it. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 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 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] Infinitecoin - IFC | V1.8 Released! *Mandatory Upgrade, upgrade ASAP*  (Read 199187 times)
yogg
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 1778


Coldkey™ -- coldkey.eu


View Profile
September 22, 2013, 11:18:10 AM
 #1261

http://www.infinitedice.net has been updated to V1.7

waiting for that 248000 block switch.

1568611356
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1568611356

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1568611356
Reply with quote  #2

1568611356
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Stouse49
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 209
Merit: 100



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 07:46:16 AM
 #1262

After taking the source code and allowing the following to be output in the debug file, it was determined that the current difficulty is 250 (for block 246954).

Code:
GetNextWorkRequired RETARGET
nTargetTimespan = 3600    nActualTimespan = 1655
Before: 1c023b28  00000000023b2800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000; 114.74093
After:  1c010692  00000000010692be93e93e93e93e93e93e93e93e93e93e93e93e93e93e93e93e; 249.59029

The network hashrate according to the working pools adds up to about 7.5 MH/s (Although the client and coinchoose report something like 36Gh/s)

All things being equal, it looks like it will take 1.7 days to solve a block, after which the difficulty will adjust to about 62.  At this point in time, it has been 1.0 days.  Hopefully just another half day to go.


BTC:
stink
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 03:42:12 PM
 #1263

Someone has to know what the hell is going on with IFC? 35,732,342 KH, but difficulty is 1/10th what is should be.. more hash on IFC than LTC? no way....Fork or hash exploit?

BTC address: 1P4iEGR8oBjr27k3NyzLfi8wraGajMunLg
Cryptsy trade key: 48007eb091500413be905854f1c5d5a42bd9a94b
Stouse49
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 209
Merit: 100



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 04:03:08 PM
 #1264

Someone has to know what the hell is going on with IFC? 35,732,342 KH, but difficulty is 1/10th what is should be.. more hash on IFC than LTC? no way....Fork or hash exploit?

I hope someone knows what happened and how to fix it.  The current difficulty, as was mentioned above, is 249.59.  It doesn't look like a fork.  It has been about 33 hours since the last block was solved according to http://exploretheblocks.com:2750/chain/Infinitecoin.

i had 1.7 working, but now it hangs at 182788 blocks to go...........
been there for more than 24 hours.

any reason it should do this?

I upgraded to 1.7 and it was able to sync the block chain 12 hours ago.

BTC:
mullick
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966
Merit: 1000


View Profile
September 23, 2013, 04:57:52 PM
 #1265

This paints an interesting picture

http://exploretheblocks.com:2750/chain/Infinitecoin?count=2016&hi=246953
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2996
Merit: 1422


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
September 23, 2013, 09:03:48 PM
 #1266

Anyone currently running an IFC pool (no p2p please) lease contact me. I would like to provide some incentives to miners to get us to the turnover Smiley

THIS SPACE FOR RENT  Did I post something you found helpful? Send me a tip: 1Hz3HZT4v8qxtyYiRQ66UHTUSK3dKCnVMW
stink
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 09:29:22 PM
 #1267

What caused this? Fork, exploit, hack the world 1st scrypt asic?

BTC address: 1P4iEGR8oBjr27k3NyzLfi8wraGajMunLg
Cryptsy trade key: 48007eb091500413be905854f1c5d5a42bd9a94b
whitepaint0909
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 46
Merit: 0


View Profile
September 23, 2013, 10:12:37 PM
 #1268


I cannot make heads or tails of what is happening in this block chain...
stink
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100



View Profile
September 23, 2013, 11:35:20 PM
 #1269


I cannot make heads or tails of what is happening in this block chain...
Kapoop went the ifc?

BTC address: 1P4iEGR8oBjr27k3NyzLfi8wraGajMunLg
Cryptsy trade key: 48007eb091500413be905854f1c5d5a42bd9a94b
Hippie Tech
aka Amenstop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624
Merit: 1001


All cryptos are FIAT digital currency. Do not use.


View Profile WWW
September 24, 2013, 12:06:53 AM
 #1270

What caused this? Fork, exploit, hack the world 1st scrypt asic?

I think its a few of them. Shocked 

Or it could be some kind of hashpower/ share submission exploit.. or whatever they are talkin about here ..  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=285656.0

monocolor
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 766
Merit: 620


Own ONION


View Profile WWW
September 24, 2013, 01:41:24 AM
 #1271

I also had a sync problem. But when I get the version 1.7 and sync'ed from the scratch (delete everything in the config dir except wallet and config files), the sync seems OK. And I sync'ed to block 247330. I am not sure if this is a forked chain or is the good chain. I looked at the block explorer in the OP, and it shows at block 246953 for about 2 days, is the block explorer stuck? or there's a fork?

Anyway, I am glad to get over the block 246953, and be in a block close to the diff retarget switch block of 248000.

           ▀██▄ ▄██▀
            ▐█████▌
           ▄███▀███▄
         ▄████▄  ▀███▄
       ▄███▀ ▀██▄  ▀███▄
     ▄███▀  ▄█████▄  ▀███▄
   ▄███▀  ▄███▀ ▀███▄  ▀███▄
  ███▀  ▄████▌   ▐████▄  ▀███
 ███   ██▀  ██▄ ▄██  ▀██   ███
███   ███  ███   ███  ███   ███
███   ███   ███████   ███   ███
 ███   ███▄▄       ▄▄███   ███
  ███▄   ▀▀█████████▀▀   ▄███
   ▀████▄▄           ▄▄████▀
      ▀▀███████████████▀▀
DeepOnion
.Anonymous and Untraceable.
ANN  Whitepaper  Facebook  Twitter  Telegram  Discord 





      ▄▄██████████▄▄
    ▄███▀▀      ▀▀█▀   ▄▄
   ███▀              ▄███
  ███              ▄███▀   ▄▄
 ███▌  ▄▄▄▄      ▄███▀   ▄███
▐███  ██████   ▄███▀   ▄███▀
███▌ ███  ███▄███▀   ▄███▀
███▌ ███   ████▀   ▄███▀
███▌  ███   █▀   ▄███▀  ███
▐███   ███     ▄███▀   ███
 ███▌   ███  ▄███▀     ███
  ███    ██████▀      ███
   ███▄             ▄███
    ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀███████████▀▀
.
Stouse49
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 209
Merit: 100



View Profile
September 24, 2013, 03:13:25 AM
 #1272

I looked at the block explorer in the OP, and it shows at block 246953 for about 2 days, is the block explorer stuck? or there's a fork?

In my opinion this is not the result of a fork, but a difficulty adjustment stall.

At block 245000, the developer changed the difficulty retarget method.  Before 245000, the code appeared to adjust the difficulty every 120 blocks, based on the block solving time of those 120 blocks.  The Difficulty would adjust by a maximum of 4x (four times).  After 245000, in an effort to reduce the strip mining effects by the multipools, the retarget scheme changed to adjust every block based on the block solving time of the previous 120 blocks with a maximum adjustment of 4x.  This turned out to be a disaster with the most recent hash rate increase on the coin, because in the space of 10 blocks, the difficulty increased by a factor of over 1 million.  Using the old method (pre 245000), the difficulty would have only increased by a factor of 4. 

Code:
Block     Difficulty
246943 0.00024414
246944 0.0004377
246945 0.0017508
246946 0.007
246947 0.028
246948 0.112
246949 0.448
246950 1.792
246951 7.171
246952 28.685
246953 114.742
246954 249.59 Not solved

The hash rate reported by the client is incorrect.  The client reports 35.7 GH/s.  The hashrate calculation does not account for the changing difficulty.  Instead it assumes that last 120 blocks had a difficulty of 114.74, which results in a 35.7 GH/s number.  The code for calculating the network hash rate is another place an alt coin needs to be changed, when cloned from Litecoin.

My calculations for hash rate are as follows:
Code:
Block MH/s
246953 407.6
246952 535.7
246951 1,466.6
246950 171.0
246949 62.1
246948 24.1
246947 30.1
246946 30.1
246945 4.3
246944 1.9
246943 1.0

Since these hashrates are based on individual block times, they cannot be taken to be exact network hash rates due to luck.  The size of the multipool that was added may have been around 1 to 2 GH/s.

BTC:
erk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812
Merit: 500


View Profile
September 24, 2013, 03:24:07 AM
 #1273

I looked at the block explorer in the OP, and it shows at block 246953 for about 2 days, is the block explorer stuck? or there's a fork?

In my opinion this is not the result of a fork, but a difficulty adjustment stall.

At block 245000, the developer changed the difficulty retarget method.  Before 245000, the code appeared to adjust the difficulty every 120 blocks, based on the block solving time of those 120 blocks.  The Difficulty would adjust by a maximum of 4x (four times).  After 245000, in an effort to reduce the strip mining effects by the multipools, the retarget scheme changed to adjust every block based on the block solving time of the previous 120 blocks with a maximum adjustment of 4x.  This turned out to be a disaster with the most recent hash rate increase on the coin, because in the space of 10 blocks, the difficulty increased by a factor of over 1 million.  Using the old method (pre 245000), the difficulty would have only increased by a factor of 4.  

Code:
Block     Difficulty
246943 0.00024414
246944 0.0004377
246945 0.0017508
246946 0.007
246947 0.028
246948 0.112
246949 0.448
246950 1.792
246951 7.171
246952 28.685
246953 114.742
246954 249.59 Not solved
...

Gamecoin GME has a similar problem. You can't average your diff over a large number of block without making it overshoot and lock you at high diff. To solve it, they settled on a recalc ever 12 block with a 48 block history, even that's too much history to average over, but they only do a 10% diff change on each recalc so it compensated a bit.
 If you were going to do a diff recalc every block, you wouldn't want to average over the last 120blocks, more like 4 or 5 blocks would be enough.

Now you have a real problem, it will probably need a new client release to fix as the next diff change will be higher not lower. Better get onto it quickly before exchanges and pools get mad. The changes will probably have to kick in on the next block, or the client will have to start at a lower diff somehow.


monocolor
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 766
Merit: 620


Own ONION


View Profile WWW
September 24, 2013, 03:45:14 AM
 #1274

Dev already changed the diff retarget to the PPCoin algorithm, and set the switch block to be 248000. I think this algorithm should be reliable, as it has been used by all pos coins. The block 248000 may be a little conservative, but if people don't switch then we are in a bigger problem. It really depends on the diff, some cycles the diff did not go very high, but some are really high, it may depends on the hashrate at that time. It was faster a few days ago.

Some people attacked the IFC for sure. Any pow coin with 60 blocks or above retarget diff cycle can be attacked exactly the same way as IFC. That is, use high hash to boost the diff, then leave, then come back at low diff etc. After a few cycles, the coin will likely be blocked due to its high diff. IFC being the first one attacked this way possibly because its popularity.

But it looks like I am in another chain... I am at block 247330 sync'ed.

There maybe multiple chains out there, I saw one at 254488, another at 244999, but these two are not sync'ed though.

           ▀██▄ ▄██▀
            ▐█████▌
           ▄███▀███▄
         ▄████▄  ▀███▄
       ▄███▀ ▀██▄  ▀███▄
     ▄███▀  ▄█████▄  ▀███▄
   ▄███▀  ▄███▀ ▀███▄  ▀███▄
  ███▀  ▄████▌   ▐████▄  ▀███
 ███   ██▀  ██▄ ▄██  ▀██   ███
███   ███  ███   ███  ███   ███
███   ███   ███████   ███   ███
 ███   ███▄▄       ▄▄███   ███
  ███▄   ▀▀█████████▀▀   ▄███
   ▀████▄▄           ▄▄████▀
      ▀▀███████████████▀▀
DeepOnion
.Anonymous and Untraceable.
ANN  Whitepaper  Facebook  Twitter  Telegram  Discord 





      ▄▄██████████▄▄
    ▄███▀▀      ▀▀█▀   ▄▄
   ███▀              ▄███
  ███              ▄███▀   ▄▄
 ███▌  ▄▄▄▄      ▄███▀   ▄███
▐███  ██████   ▄███▀   ▄███▀
███▌ ███  ███▄███▀   ▄███▀
███▌ ███   ████▀   ▄███▀
███▌  ███   █▀   ▄███▀  ███
▐███   ███     ▄███▀   ███
 ███▌   ███  ▄███▀     ███
  ███    ██████▀      ███
   ███▄             ▄███
    ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀███████████▀▀
.
erk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812
Merit: 500


View Profile
September 24, 2013, 03:58:08 AM
Last edit: September 24, 2013, 06:02:14 AM by erk
 #1275

Dev already changed the diff retarget to the PPCoin algorithm, and set the switch block to be 248000. I think this algorithm should be reliable, as it has been used by all pos coins. The block 248000 may be a little conservative, but if people don't switch then we are in a bigger problem. It really depends on the diff, some cycles the diff did not go very high, but some are really high, it may depends on the hashrate at that time. It was faster a few days ago.

Some people attacked the IFC for sure. Any pow coin with 60 blocks or above retarget diff cycle can be attacked exactly the same way as IFC. That is, use high hash to boost the diff, then leave, then come back at low diff etc. After a few cycles, the coin will likely be blocked due to its high diff. IFC being the first one attacked this way possibly because its popularity.

But it looks like I am in another chain... I am at block 247330 sync'ed.

There maybe multiple chains out there, I saw one at 254488, another at 244999, but these two are not sync'ed though.
246953 looks like the last block.

http://exploretheblocks.com:2750/chain/Infinitecoin



monocolor
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 766
Merit: 620


Own ONION


View Profile WWW
September 24, 2013, 05:42:12 AM
 #1276

Dev already changed the diff retarget to the PPCoin algorithm, and set the switch block to be 248000. I think this algorithm should be reliable, as it has been used by all pos coins. The block 248000 may be a little conservative, but if people don't switch then we are in a bigger problem. It really depends on the diff, some cycles the diff did not go very high, but some are really high, it may depends on the hashrate at that time. It was faster a few days ago.

Some people attacked the IFC for sure. Any pow coin with 60 blocks or above retarget diff cycle can be attacked exactly the same way as IFC. That is, use high hash to boost the diff, then leave, then come back at low diff etc. After a few cycles, the coin will likely be blocked due to its high diff. IFC being the first one attacked this way possibly because its popularity.

But it looks like I am in another chain... I am at block 247330 sync'ed.

There maybe multiple chains out there, I saw one at 254488, another at 244999, but these two are not sync'ed though.
246953 looks like the last block.


If you sync from scratch with version 1.7, I think you will sync to this chain, which is currently at block 247332, this looks the correct chain to me. I tried it in another computer, I got the same thing.

           ▀██▄ ▄██▀
            ▐█████▌
           ▄███▀███▄
         ▄████▄  ▀███▄
       ▄███▀ ▀██▄  ▀███▄
     ▄███▀  ▄█████▄  ▀███▄
   ▄███▀  ▄███▀ ▀███▄  ▀███▄
  ███▀  ▄████▌   ▐████▄  ▀███
 ███   ██▀  ██▄ ▄██  ▀██   ███
███   ███  ███   ███  ███   ███
███   ███   ███████   ███   ███
 ███   ███▄▄       ▄▄███   ███
  ███▄   ▀▀█████████▀▀   ▄███
   ▀████▄▄           ▄▄████▀
      ▀▀███████████████▀▀
DeepOnion
.Anonymous and Untraceable.
ANN  Whitepaper  Facebook  Twitter  Telegram  Discord 





      ▄▄██████████▄▄
    ▄███▀▀      ▀▀█▀   ▄▄
   ███▀              ▄███
  ███              ▄███▀   ▄▄
 ███▌  ▄▄▄▄      ▄███▀   ▄███
▐███  ██████   ▄███▀   ▄███▀
███▌ ███  ███▄███▀   ▄███▀
███▌ ███   ████▀   ▄███▀
███▌  ███   █▀   ▄███▀  ███
▐███   ███     ▄███▀   ███
 ███▌   ███  ▄███▀     ███
  ███    ██████▀      ███
   ███▄             ▄███
    ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀███████████▀▀
.
fisheater
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770
Merit: 602



View Profile
September 24, 2013, 07:53:10 AM
 #1277

Dev already changed the diff retarget to the PPCoin algorithm, and set the switch block to be 248000. I think this algorithm should be reliable, as it has been used by all pos coins. The block 248000 may be a little conservative, but if people don't switch then we are in a bigger problem. It really depends on the diff, some cycles the diff did not go very high, but some are really high, it may depends on the hashrate at that time. It was faster a few days ago.

Some people attacked the IFC for sure. Any pow coin with 60 blocks or above retarget diff cycle can be attacked exactly the same way as IFC. That is, use high hash to boost the diff, then leave, then come back at low diff etc. After a few cycles, the coin will likely be blocked due to its high diff. IFC being the first one attacked this way possibly because its popularity.

But it looks like I am in another chain... I am at block 247330 sync'ed.

There maybe multiple chains out there, I saw one at 254488, another at 244999, but these two are not sync'ed though.
246953 looks like the last block.


If you sync from scratch with version 1.7, I think you will sync to this chain, which is currently at block 247332, this looks the correct chain to me. I tried it in another computer, I got the same thing.


Looks like this is a forked blockchain that gets around that block that has huge diff, which virtually jammed the chain. Let me see if I can sync to it.
erk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812
Merit: 500


View Profile
September 24, 2013, 08:41:16 AM
 #1278

Dev already changed the diff retarget to the PPCoin algorithm, and set the switch block to be 248000. I think this algorithm should be reliable, as it has been used by all pos coins. The block 248000 may be a little conservative, but if people don't switch then we are in a bigger problem. It really depends on the diff, some cycles the diff did not go very high, but some are really high, it may depends on the hashrate at that time. It was faster a few days ago.

Some people attacked the IFC for sure. Any pow coin with 60 blocks or above retarget diff cycle can be attacked exactly the same way as IFC. That is, use high hash to boost the diff, then leave, then come back at low diff etc. After a few cycles, the coin will likely be blocked due to its high diff. IFC being the first one attacked this way possibly because its popularity.

But it looks like I am in another chain... I am at block 247330 sync'ed.

There maybe multiple chains out there, I saw one at 254488, another at 244999, but these two are not sync'ed though.
246953 looks like the last block.


If you sync from scratch with version 1.7, I think you will sync to this chain, which is currently at block 247332, this looks the correct chain to me. I tried it in another computer, I got the same thing.


Looks like this is a forked blockchain that gets around that block that has huge diff, which virtually jammed the chain. Let me see if I can sync to it.
Trouble is that the shorter chain is jammed on Cryptsy at high diff with transaction confirmations riding on it.

monocolor
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 766
Merit: 620


Own ONION


View Profile WWW
September 24, 2013, 08:57:53 AM
 #1279

Looks like the chain I sync'ed is a forked chain at block 246948, so it does not violate any checkpoints. If some confirmations are overwritten, will anyone lose coins? Or the transactions will be considered not happened?

If someone will lose big coins, then we better wait. Otherwise we may use the forked chain which will get to the switch point earlier. The problem with block 246953 is that it is at big diff, no idea when it will be solved.

Apparently there's at least one more blockchain at block 254501 now.

           ▀██▄ ▄██▀
            ▐█████▌
           ▄███▀███▄
         ▄████▄  ▀███▄
       ▄███▀ ▀██▄  ▀███▄
     ▄███▀  ▄█████▄  ▀███▄
   ▄███▀  ▄███▀ ▀███▄  ▀███▄
  ███▀  ▄████▌   ▐████▄  ▀███
 ███   ██▀  ██▄ ▄██  ▀██   ███
███   ███  ███   ███  ███   ███
███   ███   ███████   ███   ███
 ███   ███▄▄       ▄▄███   ███
  ███▄   ▀▀█████████▀▀   ▄███
   ▀████▄▄           ▄▄████▀
      ▀▀███████████████▀▀
DeepOnion
.Anonymous and Untraceable.
ANN  Whitepaper  Facebook  Twitter  Telegram  Discord 





      ▄▄██████████▄▄
    ▄███▀▀      ▀▀█▀   ▄▄
   ███▀              ▄███
  ███              ▄███▀   ▄▄
 ███▌  ▄▄▄▄      ▄███▀   ▄███
▐███  ██████   ▄███▀   ▄███▀
███▌ ███  ███▄███▀   ▄███▀
███▌ ███   ████▀   ▄███▀
███▌  ███   █▀   ▄███▀  ███
▐███   ███     ▄███▀   ███
 ███▌   ███  ▄███▀     ███
  ███    ██████▀      ███
   ███▄             ▄███
    ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀███████████▀▀
.
markn
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 81
Merit: 10



View Profile
September 24, 2013, 09:02:33 AM
 #1280

Looks like the chain I sync'ed is a forked chain at block 146948, so it does not violate any checkpoints. If some confirmations are overwritten, will anyone lose coins? Or the transactions will be considered not happened?

If someone will lose big coins, then we better wait. Otherwise we may use the forked chain which will get to the switch point earlier. The problem with block 146953 is that it is at big diff, no idea when it will be solved.

Thank you for issue rectification and quick help!
Pages: « 1 ... 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 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 »
  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!