Official Anoncoin chat thread (including history)

[WDL]

Say your opinion!

A hypothetical question that does not necessarily have any ulterior motive; If Anoncoin switched hashing algorithm, what type of hashing algorithm would you liked to see then?

a cpu only algo

Agreed, CPU only. 1 CPU, 1 vote.

+

By the way,any hashing algorithm will be matched by ASICS in the coming time.I'm not worried about the algorithm.

[1715091667]

1715091667

[1715091667]

1715091667

[1715091667]

1715091667

[K1773R]

Say your opinion!

A hypothetical question that does not necessarily have any ulterior motive; If Anoncoin switched hashing algorithm, what type of hashing algorithm would you liked to see then?

a cpu only algo

Agreed, CPU only. 1 CPU, 1 vote.

+

By the way,any hashing algorithm will be matched by ASICS in the coming time.I'm not worried about the algorithm.

Finally, someone else who is able to understand this

[K1773R]

It seems that Cryptsy still have problem for withdrawing ANC. To withdrawal 3000 ANC I had to do 10 successive withdrawals.

Only 1921 ANC have arrived now, four of the ten transactions sent were not included in a block yet (but I see them as unconfirmed in my ANC-qt).

It seems the transactions are alot of small inputs and this increase the fee tremendously!

Here is an example of one of such transaction:
http://ancblockchain.com/tx/7ede9c1d53fb78ba4e16140a1389eee22ea7afd2df2ed9d7fc93c8b663ae90d6

I requested  547.27272638 ANC but got only 136.7956816 ANC from 375 inputs with a fee of 0.59 ANC (cryptsy paid the fee, I paid 0.03 ANC fee)

In total I paid 0.3 ANC in fee (ten times 0.03 ANC) to withdraw the 3000 ANC, the process of withdrawing took hours because I had to do it ten times and right now 4 transactions are still not confirmed.


Please Cryptsy can you do something to not have such a big number of < 1 anc inputs?? This become impossible to trade at you exchange if you do nothing about those hundreds of small inputs.

Hello everyone,

Im currently investigating an issue with our ANC wallet where the blockchain isnt picking up the majority of our send transactions. We apologize it took us so long to spot the issue. But we are working hard on correcting it and getting the unconfirmed transactions pushed to the blockchain

Some of them get confirmed after a simple restart of the daemon but others do not/ Ill keep everyone informed when I find the solution

Thank you for your patience

UPDATE:

I think it comes down to transaction sizes. Our daemon is sending transactions that are too large to be accpeted into the chain. Im basing this on the fact that all unconfirmed send transactions have unusually high fees paid. Our default Txfee is .01 ANC and the mean over the last 1000 transactions is 0.10169169169169 which is why our withdrawal fee is set to .1 ANC

Code:

anoncoind listtransactions "" 1000 | grep -A 1 -B 4 '"confirmations" : 0,' | grep fee
        "fee" : -0.82000000,
        "fee" : -0.90000000,
        "fee" : -0.98000000,
        "fee" : -0.65000000,
        "fee" : -0.69000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.81000000,
        "fee" : -1.00000000,
        "fee" : -0.68000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.73000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.78000000,
        "fee" : -0.79000000,
        "fee" : -0.85000000,
        "fee" : -0.96000000,
        "fee" : -0.64000000,
        "fee" : -0.66000000,
        "fee" : -0.67000000,
        "fee" : -0.69000000,
        "fee" : -0.71000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.73000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.79000000,
        "fee" : -0.84000000,
        "fee" : -0.87000000,
        "fee" : -0.92000000,
        "fee" : -0.95000000,
        "fee" : -0.98000000,
        "fee" : -0.63000000,
        "fee" : -0.64000000,
        "fee" : -0.65000000,
        "fee" : -0.66000000,
        "fee" : -0.68000000,
        "fee" : -0.68000000,
        "fee" : -0.69000000,
        "fee" : -0.70000000,
        "fee" : -0.71000000,
        "fee" : -0.71000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.73000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.78000000,
        "fee" : -0.80000000,
        "fee" : -0.83000000,
        "fee" : -0.88000000,
        "fee" : -0.92000000,
        "fee" : -0.99000000,
        "fee" : -0.98000000,
        "fee" : -0.97000000,
        "fee" : -0.87000000,
        "fee" : -0.81000000,
        "fee" : -0.86000000,

Our daemon is up to date so ill be going over the source to see if I can find anything that would cause this

Anyone else with the following problems with ANC?  My multipool operator sent earned ANC to me on August 18 at 2:01AM CDT, was not received and posted to my wallet until August 21 at 13:58 CDT.  The multipool operator states:  "The transaction hasn't been included in a block yet.  It should make it into a block eventually and be confirmed.  I have no control over this.  It's been an ongoing issue with the ANC network for a few weeks now."  That would seem to be a very strong negative against this coin.

Yes I have the same problem with huge transaction from several small inputs from Cryptsy, the transactions refuse to be included in blocks.

Meeh, K1773R, can this be solved ? Cryptsy, what is this dust?

Thanks

As an update, the stuck tx's will be "soon" mined. Once i find a block

[meeh]

It seems that Cryptsy still have problem for withdrawing ANC. To withdrawal 3000 ANC I had to do 10 successive withdrawals.

Only 1921 ANC have arrived now, four of the ten transactions sent were not included in a block yet (but I see them as unconfirmed in my ANC-qt).

It seems the transactions are alot of small inputs and this increase the fee tremendously!

Here is an example of one of such transaction:
http://ancblockchain.com/tx/7ede9c1d53fb78ba4e16140a1389eee22ea7afd2df2ed9d7fc93c8b663ae90d6

I requested  547.27272638 ANC but got only 136.7956816 ANC from 375 inputs with a fee of 0.59 ANC (cryptsy paid the fee, I paid 0.03 ANC fee)

In total I paid 0.3 ANC in fee (ten times 0.03 ANC) to withdraw the 3000 ANC, the process of withdrawing took hours because I had to do it ten times and right now 4 transactions are still not confirmed.


Please Cryptsy can you do something to not have such a big number of < 1 anc inputs?? This become impossible to trade at you exchange if you do nothing about those hundreds of small inputs.

Hello everyone,

Im currently investigating an issue with our ANC wallet where the blockchain isnt picking up the majority of our send transactions. We apologize it took us so long to spot the issue. But we are working hard on correcting it and getting the unconfirmed transactions pushed to the blockchain

Some of them get confirmed after a simple restart of the daemon but others do not/ Ill keep everyone informed when I find the solution

Thank you for your patience

UPDATE:

I think it comes down to transaction sizes. Our daemon is sending transactions that are too large to be accpeted into the chain. Im basing this on the fact that all unconfirmed send transactions have unusually high fees paid. Our default Txfee is .01 ANC and the mean over the last 1000 transactions is 0.10169169169169 which is why our withdrawal fee is set to .1 ANC

Code:

anoncoind listtransactions "" 1000 | grep -A 1 -B 4 '"confirmations" : 0,' | grep fee
        "fee" : -0.82000000,
        "fee" : -0.90000000,
        "fee" : -0.98000000,
        "fee" : -0.65000000,
        "fee" : -0.69000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.81000000,
        "fee" : -1.00000000,
        "fee" : -0.68000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.73000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.78000000,
        "fee" : -0.79000000,
        "fee" : -0.85000000,
        "fee" : -0.96000000,
        "fee" : -0.64000000,
        "fee" : -0.66000000,
        "fee" : -0.67000000,
        "fee" : -0.69000000,
        "fee" : -0.71000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.73000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.77000000,
        "fee" : -0.79000000,
        "fee" : -0.84000000,
        "fee" : -0.87000000,
        "fee" : -0.92000000,
        "fee" : -0.95000000,
        "fee" : -0.98000000,
        "fee" : -0.63000000,
        "fee" : -0.64000000,
        "fee" : -0.65000000,
        "fee" : -0.66000000,
        "fee" : -0.68000000,
        "fee" : -0.68000000,
        "fee" : -0.69000000,
        "fee" : -0.70000000,
        "fee" : -0.71000000,
        "fee" : -0.71000000,
        "fee" : -0.72000000,
        "fee" : -0.73000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.74000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.75000000,
        "fee" : -0.76000000,
        "fee" : -0.78000000,
        "fee" : -0.80000000,
        "fee" : -0.83000000,
        "fee" : -0.88000000,
        "fee" : -0.92000000,
        "fee" : -0.99000000,
        "fee" : -0.98000000,
        "fee" : -0.97000000,
        "fee" : -0.87000000,
        "fee" : -0.81000000,
        "fee" : -0.86000000,

Our daemon is up to date so ill be going over the source to see if I can find anything that would cause this

Anyone else with the following problems with ANC?  My multipool operator sent earned ANC to me on August 18 at 2:01AM CDT, was not received and posted to my wallet until August 21 at 13:58 CDT.  The multipool operator states:  "The transaction hasn't been included in a block yet.  It should make it into a block eventually and be confirmed.  I have no control over this.  It's been an ongoing issue with the ANC network for a few weeks now."  That would seem to be a very strong negative against this coin.

Yes I have the same problem with huge transaction from several small inputs from Cryptsy, the transactions refuse to be included in blocks.

Meeh, K1773R, can this be solved ? Cryptsy, what is this dust?

Thanks

As an update, the stuck tx's will be "soon" mined. Once i find a block

Good luck

[Qak]

Any news about ZC? When it will be done?
Bad-english-man

[SmokingSkull]

Any news about ZC? When it will be done?
Bad-english-man

We shall wait for the weekly update from almighty meeh.

Catchy name...

[n00n]

new site:
http://image.bayimg.com/1ff07e5f6d9a029c0afbf6060611687f35949e66.jpg

please check it out and give us some serious input on the texts before its translated to hindi and so on.


i would like to include some words/themes, i dont know how, or if?

good for newbies:
bitcoin
global

good for techies:
open source

good for activists:
anti-authoritarian
activist
community powered
movement
non-corporative


all proposals are welcome.

[Apraksin]

Say your opinion!

A hypothetical question that does not necessarily have any ulterior motive; If Anoncoin switched hashing algorithm, what type of hashing algorithm would you liked to see then?

a cpu only algo

Agreed, CPU only. 1 CPU, 1 vote.

+

By the way,any hashing algorithm will be matched by ASICS in the coming time.I'm not worried about the algorithm.

Finally, someone else who is able to understand this

How come any hashing algorithm will be matched by ASIC ? Is it possible to explain this in layman terms?

[meeh]

new site:
http://image.bayimg.com/1ff07e5f6d9a029c0afbf6060611687f35949e66.jpg

please check it out and give us some serious input on the texts before its translated to hindi and so on.


i would like to include some words/themes, i dont know how, or if?

good for newbies:
bitcoin
global

good for techies:
open source

good for activists:
anti-authoritarian
activist
community powered
movement
non-corporative


all proposals are welcome.

Awesome, just awesome

- News is under last "editor's review now" I'll be back shortly with post.

[meeh]

And post is out! https://blog.privacysolutions.no/weekly-news/2014/08/25/weekly-news-1/

[K1773R]

Say your opinion!

A hypothetical question that does not necessarily have any ulterior motive; If Anoncoin switched hashing algorithm, what type of hashing algorithm would you liked to see then?

a cpu only algo

Agreed, CPU only. 1 CPU, 1 vote.

+

By the way,any hashing algorithm will be matched by ASICS in the coming time.I'm not worried about the algorithm.

Finally, someone else who is able to understand this

How come any hashing algorithm will be matched by ASIC ? Is it possible to explain this in layman terms?

ASIC stands for Application-specific integrated circuit.
The difference between GPU/CPU and ASIC, is that you are "hashing" in an "electrical way" without a layer wrapped around (ASM - CPU language, OS, etc).
Because of this they are much more efficient, but they can only do what their build for.

You can create an ASIC for everything u want. All you need is the money/ppl to design and create it.

When scrypt (LTC) came out, it was ment to be CPU only. Someone found a way to parallelize the algorythm so mining with GPUs got possible. Later the scrypt based coins got really big so creating ASICs was worth it, now they exist since quite some time.

It is possible to make something really hard to be implemented in an ASIC, but most of ppl who say this dont even understand what their talking about. They just say it as a marketing purpose.

[SmokingSkull]

If there is going to be a 2-Blockchain-Solution, I ask myself whether Exchanges are able to trade this Zerocoin separately?

I mean... ANC and this ZC are tied together as I understand this, since we would be able to exchange it with one another, right?

Still wondering : )

[K1773R]

If there is going to be a 2-Blockchain-Solution, I ask myself whether Exchanges are able to trade this Zerocoin separately?

I mean... ANC and this ZC are tied together as I understand this, since we would be able to exchange it with one another, right?

Still wondering : )

ZC trading would be stupid and probably wont work well. ZC is ment so you have anonymous transactions. The value is bound to ANC directly, its not a "new coin", "subcoin" or anything like this. Think of it as a token, if i "convert" 10 ANC to ZC, i have 10 ANC ZC tokens. Now i can redeem these 10 tokens to get 10 ANC back, but nobody knows which original 10 ANC it was, therefore its anonymous.

[lunokhod2]

If there is going to be a 2-Blockchain-Solution, I ask myself whether Exchanges are able to trade this Zerocoin separately?

I mean... ANC and this ZC are tied together as I understand this, since we would be able to exchange it with one another, right?

Still wondering : )

ZC trading would be stupid and probably wont work well. ZC is ment so you have anonymous transactions. The value is bound to ANC directly, its not a "new coin", "subcoin" or anything like this. Think of it as a token, if i "convert" 10 ANC to ZC, i have 10 ANC ZC tokens. Now i can redeem these 10 tokens to get 10 ANC back, but nobody knows which original 10 ANC it was, therefore its anonymous.

Also, the zerocoins will not be "stored" in the second blockchain. As far as I know, this will just be a long list that contains the zerocoin zero-knowlegde proofs used when converting a previously minted zerocoin to an anoncoin. After these proofs have been verified, they are useless, and there is not much reason to keep this hanging around.

As far as I know, it is not possible to transfer zerocoins. To do this you would need to give someone the private serial number and random number associated with the coin. I believe that you can transfer "zerocash coins", but that is a different story.

[lunokhod2]

Say your opinion!

A hypothetical question that does not necessarily have any ulterior motive; If Anoncoin switched hashing algorithm, what type of hashing algorithm would you liked to see then?

a cpu only algo

Agreed, CPU only. 1 CPU, 1 vote.

+

By the way,any hashing algorithm will be matched by ASICS in the coming time.I'm not worried about the algorithm.

Finally, someone else who is able to understand this

How come any hashing algorithm will be matched by ASIC ? Is it possible to explain this in layman terms?

ASIC stands for Application-specific integrated circuit.
The difference between GPU/CPU and ASIC, is that you are "hashing" in an "electrical way" without a layer wrapped around (ASM - CPU language, OS, etc).
Because of this they are much more efficient, but they can only do what their build for.

You can create an ASIC for everything u want. All you need is the money/ppl to design and create it.

When scrypt (LTC) came out, it was ment to be CPU only. Someone found a way to parallelize the algorythm so mining with GPUs got possible. Later the scrypt based coins got really big so creating ASICs was worth it, now they exist since quite some time.

It is possible to make something really hard to be implemented in an ASIC, but most of ppl who say this dont even understand what their talking about. They just say it as a marketing purpose.

Agreed. Perhaps a different way to look at this is the following: how much time will it take for an ASIC of a particular algorithm to appear on the market? If you want to avoid centralization of mining, it seems to me that you are condemned to hard-fork to alternative proof-of-work algorithms every X years. The goal should therefore be to make X as large as possible, all while making the computational gains associated with ASICs vs CPUs as small as possible.

[K1773R]

Say your opinion!

A hypothetical question that does not necessarily have any ulterior motive; If Anoncoin switched hashing algorithm, what type of hashing algorithm would you liked to see then?

a cpu only algo

Agreed, CPU only. 1 CPU, 1 vote.

+

By the way,any hashing algorithm will be matched by ASICS in the coming time.I'm not worried about the algorithm.

Finally, someone else who is able to understand this

How come any hashing algorithm will be matched by ASIC ? Is it possible to explain this in layman terms?

ASIC stands for Application-specific integrated circuit.
The difference between GPU/CPU and ASIC, is that you are "hashing" in an "electrical way" without a layer wrapped around (ASM - CPU language, OS, etc).
Because of this they are much more efficient, but they can only do what their build for.

You can create an ASIC for everything u want. All you need is the money/ppl to design and create it.

When scrypt (LTC) came out, it was ment to be CPU only. Someone found a way to parallelize the algorythm so mining with GPUs got possible. Later the scrypt based coins got really big so creating ASICs was worth it, now they exist since quite some time.

It is possible to make something really hard to be implemented in an ASIC, but most of ppl who say this dont even understand what their talking about. They just say it as a marketing purpose.

Agreed. Perhaps a different way to look at this is the following: how much time will it take for an ASIC of a particular algorithm to appear on the market? If you want to avoid centralization of mining, it seems to me that you are condemned to hard-fork to alternative proof-of-work algorithms every X years. The goal should therefore be to make X as large as possible, all while making the computational gains associated with ASICs vs CPUs as small as possible.

You forgot one thing.
Lets assume we have a new algoryithm which is currently CPU-only. Im porting it to GPU but dont release it to the public, so its easy to 51% attack the network for me. Someone else could created an ASIC in the meantime and therefre would have 51%+ more than me.

ASIC is not "bad", its the opposite. Once ASICs are out, its hard to optimize more. Therefore there will be no sudden spike in hashrate. Of course it first needs time that enough ppl run ASICs, but afterwards its "safer".

[meeh]

If there is going to be a 2-Blockchain-Solution, I ask myself whether Exchanges are able to trade this Zerocoin separately?

I mean... ANC and this ZC are tied together as I understand this, since we would be able to exchange it with one another, right?

Still wondering : )

ZC trading would be stupid and probably wont work well. ZC is ment so you have anonymous transactions. The value is bound to ANC directly, its not a "new coin", "subcoin" or anything like this. Think of it as a token, if i "convert" 10 ANC to ZC, i have 10 ANC ZC tokens. Now i can redeem these 10 tokens to get 10 ANC back, but nobody knows which original 10 ANC it was, therefore its anonymous.

Also, the zerocoins will not be "stored" in the second blockchain. As far as I know, this will just be a long list that contains the zerocoin zero-knowlegde proofs used when converting a previously minted zerocoin to an anoncoin. After these proofs have been verified, they are useless, and there is not much reason to keep this hanging around.

As far as I know, it is not possible to transfer zerocoins. To do this you would need to give someone the private serial number and random number associated with the coin. I believe that you can transfer "zerocash coins", but that is a different story.

Correct, so it's just a temporary storage. But we still discuss for how long, and how to trigger the deletion of old ones etc.

[meeh]

My activity to the left is ...
Activity: 420

And we all know what 420 is

[SmokingSkull]

Wait what? ZC can't be transferred?   

[lunokhod2]

Wait what? ZC can't be transferred?   

Here is how it will (probably) work:

1. Zerocoin Mint Transaction

In your wallet, you will convert a part (or all) of your ANC into zerocoins, with 1 ANC = 1 Zerocoin. The Zerocoins will be denominated in factors of 10, so you will need to choose how to do this. Your wallet will store some information for each zerocoin you generate (like the coin serial number, an associated random number used to generate the coin, and the denomination). The blockchain will record information saying that "your public ANC address sent X ANC to the zerocoin pool."

2. Zerocoin Spend Transaction

You tell your wallet to redeem some zerocoins to a specified ANC address. This part is done using zero-knowledge proofs and the private info in your wallet so that you don't disclose who you are. This ANC address could be yours (if you want to "wash" your coins) or someone elses (if you want to do an anonymous transaction). 1 ANC will be credited to this ANC address for each Zerocoin that is redeemed.

The end result is the following:

The person who receives the ANC from the Zerocoin spend transaction won't know who they came from. All they will know is that they come from 1 of the people who ever owned zerocoins up to that date. As the number of people owning zerocoins will likely be VERY large, it will be impossible to guess who that person is. This differs from most other mixing services where the number of people you are mixed with is small, allowing you to play guessing games to eventually figure out who sent the coins.

The only thing you will need to worry about is the following: If the number of people who contributed to the zerocoin pool for denomination X is small, you are in danger of being found out. The wallet should thus tell you how many coins are in the escrow pool for each denomination. Even if this number is large, there is a possibility that all these coins belong to the same person! Thus it would also be a good idea for the wallet to tell you how many unique ANC addresses were used in the zerocoin mint transactions.