|
lunokhod2
|
 |
October 02, 2014, 09:03:25 AM |
|
SOMEONE PLEASE RESPOND TO THIS. The issue seems to be continually ignored and is of extreme importance for Anoncoin. Before Zerocoin is launced can we please try to fix whatever bug in the Anoncoin code that is causing transactions to get stuck? Cryptocurrencies are worthless if they cannot be used in transactions (without getting stuck). Merged inputs occur and are not an excuse to ignore the issue. Ok lets clear this up once and for all. I have NOT modified our daemon in anyway. We have built directly from source with no changes. Anoncoind is creating these transaction and paying the large fee required. yet they are not being accepted into the chain. As you can see by my previous post. 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 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 As you can see from my request to the daemon: anoncoind listtransactions "" 1000 | grep -A 1 -B 4 '"confirmations" : 0,' | grep fee I grabbed the last 1000 transactions and searched for any with "confirmations" : 0, and grabbed the fee for the transaction. All of the unconfirmed transactions in our wallet paid a high fee suggesting its due to block size. To counteract this until the issue is resolved by the developers i have merged any input in our wallet less than .1 anc ( about 50k of them ) into inputs over 1 ANC. These may have broken down to some smaller ones now so ill likely have to run it again Here are some others with the same problem Same Problem. It makes me mad all the time  And It's not good at all for beginners who want to buy into ANC when there are problems with Buying and Withdrawing. Same problem. Tried to withdraw from bleutrade 2 days ago and the transaction still havent gone trough. To fix this should be highest priority. 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 am on the anonmining.com pool and it took a couple of days for an autotransfer to actually post to my wallet. It was only 5 ANCs. What gives? In conclusion this is not a problem with cryptsy or "craptsy" as it is being called. It seems meeh and k1773R are aware and getting these transactions to confirm eventually so i see no reason to suspend the wallet as suggested above K1773R claims that the problem is with Cryptsy, and that he is not interested in fixing their problems. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
newb4now
|
|
October 02, 2014, 09:09:05 AM |
|
SOMEONE PLEASE RESPOND TO THIS. The issue seems to be continually ignored and is of extreme importance for Anoncoin. Before Zerocoin is launced can we please try to fix whatever bug in the Anoncoin code that is causing transactions to get stuck? Cryptocurrencies are worthless if they cannot be used in transactions (without getting stuck). Merged inputs occur and are not an excuse to ignore the issue. Ok lets clear this up once and for all. I have NOT modified our daemon in anyway. We have built directly from source with no changes. Anoncoind is creating these transaction and paying the large fee required. yet they are not being accepted into the chain. As you can see by my previous post. 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 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 As you can see from my request to the daemon: anoncoind listtransactions "" 1000 | grep -A 1 -B 4 '"confirmations" : 0,' | grep fee I grabbed the last 1000 transactions and searched for any with "confirmations" : 0, and grabbed the fee for the transaction. All of the unconfirmed transactions in our wallet paid a high fee suggesting its due to block size. To counteract this until the issue is resolved by the developers i have merged any input in our wallet less than .1 anc ( about 50k of them ) into inputs over 1 ANC. These may have broken down to some smaller ones now so ill likely have to run it again Here are some others with the same problem Same Problem. It makes me mad all the time And It's not good at all for beginners who want to buy into ANC when there are problems with Buying and Withdrawing. Same problem. Tried to withdraw from bleutrade 2 days ago and the transaction still havent gone trough. To fix this should be highest priority. 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 am on the anonmining.com pool and it took a couple of days for an autotransfer to actually post to my wallet. It was only 5 ANCs. What gives? In conclusion this is not a problem with cryptsy or "craptsy" as it is being called. It seems meeh and k1773R are aware and getting these transactions to confirm eventually so i see no reason to suspend the wallet as suggested above K1773R claims that the problem is with Cryptsy, and that he is not interested in fixing their problems. Well Mullick (Crytpsy rep) disagrees. The point is that it needs to be fixed. If ANC wants to attract new investors we cant have transactions getting stuck. Stuck transactions = unusable currency. Zercoin is what we are looking forward to. But we need to fix our current codebase. If people start buying ANC during Zerocoin beta and get transactions stuck faith will be lost before public release. Since our code is open source, others will steal the hard work of Gnosis on Zerocoin and implement it without the bugs (stuck transactions) that are currently being ignored. This needs to be top priority. |
|
|
|
|
niteglider
Full Member
 Offline
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
Lean into the curves.
|
|
October 02, 2014, 09:23:37 AM |
|
Well Mullick (Crytpsy rep) disagrees. The point is that it needs to be fixed. If ANC wants to attract new investors we cant have transactions getting stuck. Stuck transactions = unusable currency.
Zercoin is what we are looking forward to. But we need to fix our current codebase. If people start buying ANC during Zerocoin beta and get transactions stuck faith will be lost before public release. Since our code is open source, others will steal the hard work of Gnosis on Zerocoin and implement it without the bugs (stuck transactions) that are currently being ignored.
This needs to be top priority.
Are transactions getting stuck anywhere else besides Cryptsy? If not, then the problem is obviously on Cryptsy's end. And once zerocoin goes mainstream, other exchanges will see a rise in volume and Cryptsy won't be the only game in town anymore... Then Mullick will see to it that the problem is fixed. If, on the other hand, transactions are getting stuck elsewhere besides Cryptsy, then I have to agree that fixing the problem ought to be priority #1 for the reason newb4now posted. |
|
|
|
|
lunokhod2
|
|
October 02, 2014, 09:31:31 AM |
|
SOMEONE PLEASE RESPOND TO THIS. The issue seems to be continually ignored and is of extreme importance for Anoncoin. Before Zerocoin is launced can we please try to fix whatever bug in the Anoncoin code that is causing transactions to get stuck? Cryptocurrencies are worthless if they cannot be used in transactions (without getting stuck). Merged inputs occur and are not an excuse to ignore the issue. Ok lets clear this up once and for all. I have NOT modified our daemon in anyway. We have built directly from source with no changes. Anoncoind is creating these transaction and paying the large fee required. yet they are not being accepted into the chain. As you can see by my previous post. 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 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 As you can see from my request to the daemon: anoncoind listtransactions "" 1000 | grep -A 1 -B 4 '"confirmations" : 0,' | grep fee I grabbed the last 1000 transactions and searched for any with "confirmations" : 0, and grabbed the fee for the transaction. All of the unconfirmed transactions in our wallet paid a high fee suggesting its due to block size. To counteract this until the issue is resolved by the developers i have merged any input in our wallet less than .1 anc ( about 50k of them ) into inputs over 1 ANC. These may have broken down to some smaller ones now so ill likely have to run it again Here are some others with the same problem Same Problem. It makes me mad all the time And It's not good at all for beginners who want to buy into ANC when there are problems with Buying and Withdrawing. Same problem. Tried to withdraw from bleutrade 2 days ago and the transaction still havent gone trough. To fix this should be highest priority. 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 am on the anonmining.com pool and it took a couple of days for an autotransfer to actually post to my wallet. It was only 5 ANCs. What gives? In conclusion this is not a problem with cryptsy or "craptsy" as it is being called. It seems meeh and k1773R are aware and getting these transactions to confirm eventually so i see no reason to suspend the wallet as suggested above K1773R claims that the problem is with Cryptsy, and that he is not interested in fixing their problems. Well Mullick (Crytpsy rep) disagrees. The point is that it needs to be fixed. If ANC wants to attract new investors we cant have transactions getting stuck. Stuck transactions = unusable currency. Zercoin is what we are looking forward to. But we need to fix our current codebase. If people start buying ANC during Zerocoin beta and get transactions stuck faith will be lost before public release. Since our code is open source, others will steal the hard work of Gnosis on Zerocoin and implement it without the bugs (stuck transactions) that are currently being ignored. This needs to be top priority. I wish that this were fixed as well. However, if the problem is Cryptsy, then investors should lose faith in them, not Anoncoin. Everyone on this thread agrees that Cryptsy blows for reasons other than the stuck transactions. Have you ever dealt with their "customer services"? Have ever noticed the large number of scam coins they are dealing in? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TheKoziTwo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1552
Merit: 1047
|
|
October 02, 2014, 10:56:28 AM |
|
Matched 313.87678737 ANC, the offer is now expired. |
|
|
|
gunzeon
Member
Offline
Activity: 73
Merit: 10
There's a new king in the streets
|
|
October 02, 2014, 11:03:54 AM |
|
wrt Cryptsy Xactions, @K1773R knows how to fix them ....
One I had stuck had 400 inputs, I think K1773R rebroadcast it ... not sure, maybe that's something a cron script anywhere can do ... just my bit's worth
|
BTC: 1gunzeo8X7iYznsnmgveUQDuRj6vhzyK6 ~~~
|
|
|
K1773R
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008
/dev/null
|
|
October 02, 2014, 12:30:19 PM
Last edit: October 02, 2014, 01:02:00 PM by K1773R |
|
wrt Cryptsy Xactions, @K1773R knows how to fix them ....
One I had stuck had 400 inputs, I think K1773R rebroadcast it ... not sure, maybe that's something a cron script anywhere can do ... just my bit's worth
No, the person with the stuck tx (sent or recieved) has to rebroadcast it, so i recieve it. all i did was changing max tx size and block creation settings. i pointed this out at some other posts already. |
[GPG Public Key]BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1 K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM A K1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: N K1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: L Ki773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: E K1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: b K1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
|
|
|
|
tomothy
|
|
October 02, 2014, 01:20:34 PM |
|
wrt Cryptsy Xactions, @K1773R knows how to fix them ....
One I had stuck had 400 inputs, I think K1773R rebroadcast it ... not sure, maybe that's something a cron script anywhere can do ... just my bit's worth
No, the person with the stuck tx (sent or recieved) has to rebroadcast it, so i recieve it. all i did was changing max tx size and block creation settings. i pointed this out at some other posts already. I've only had issues with transactions originating from cryptsy; never between wallets or friends. Just my $0.02. And I thought I saw a post about Darkcoin/ #drk, going open source? Does anyone else find it amusing that, (if it's true and they finally released the code) they took these steps now; with just a few weeks left until fill implementation of ANC/ZC? Just thought the timing was interesting... lols, there can be only one... |
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1115
|
|
October 02, 2014, 01:49:51 PM |
|
wrt Cryptsy Xactions, @K1773R knows how to fix them ....
One I had stuck had 400 inputs, I think K1773R rebroadcast it ... not sure, maybe that's something a cron script anywhere can do ... just my bit's worth
No, the person with the stuck tx (sent or recieved) has to rebroadcast it, so i recieve it. all i did was changing max tx size and block creation settings. i pointed this out at some other posts already. I've only had issues with transactions originating from cryptsy; never between wallets or friends. Just my $0.02. And I thought I saw a post about Darkcoin/ #drk, going open source? Does anyone else find it amusing that, (if it's true and they finally released the code) they took these steps now; with just a few weeks left until fill implementation of ANC/ZC? Just thought the timing was interesting... lols, there can be only one... I've been hearing 'within weeks of zerocoin implementation' for ever. Is there an actually date yet? |
Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
|
|
|
|
tomothy
|
|
October 02, 2014, 01:58:58 PM |
|
Sometimes I have difficulty reading a topic thread too; As it stands, Nov 1, Main net. Oct 15ish, testnet.  , hope that helps  |
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1115
|
|
October 02, 2014, 02:03:05 PM |
|
Sometimes I have difficulty reading a topic thread too; As it stands, Nov 1, Main net. Oct 15ish, testnet. , hope that helps I read it after asking the question. I always do that  Good luck! |
Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
|
|
|
|
lunokhod2
|
|
October 02, 2014, 02:49:04 PM |
|
wrt Cryptsy Xactions, @K1773R knows how to fix them ....
One I had stuck had 400 inputs, I think K1773R rebroadcast it ... not sure, maybe that's something a cron script anywhere can do ... just my bit's worth
No, the person with the stuck tx (sent or recieved) has to rebroadcast it, so i recieve it. all i did was changing max tx size and block creation settings. i pointed this out at some other posts already. I've only had issues with transactions originating from cryptsy; never between wallets or friends. Just my $0.02. And I thought I saw a post about Darkcoin/ #drk, going open source? Does anyone else find it amusing that, (if it's true and they finally released the code) they took these steps now; with just a few weeks left until fill implementation of ANC/ZC? Just thought the timing was interesting... lols, there can be only one... I've been hearing 'within weeks of zerocoin implementation' for ever. Is there an actually date yet? Please be so kind to READ THE FAQ. |
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1115
|
|
October 02, 2014, 02:53:21 PM |
|
wrt Cryptsy Xactions, @K1773R knows how to fix them ....
One I had stuck had 400 inputs, I think K1773R rebroadcast it ... not sure, maybe that's something a cron script anywhere can do ... just my bit's worth
No, the person with the stuck tx (sent or recieved) has to rebroadcast it, so i recieve it. all i did was changing max tx size and block creation settings. i pointed this out at some other posts already. I've only had issues with transactions originating from cryptsy; never between wallets or friends. Just my $0.02. And I thought I saw a post about Darkcoin/ #drk, going open source? Does anyone else find it amusing that, (if it's true and they finally released the code) they took these steps now; with just a few weeks left until fill implementation of ANC/ZC? Just thought the timing was interesting... lols, there can be only one... I've been hearing 'within weeks of zerocoin implementation' for ever. Is there an actually date yet? Please be so kind to READ THE FAQ. And please be so kind as to scroll up |
Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
|
|
|
|
varun555
|
|
October 02, 2014, 04:22:09 PM |
|
wrt Cryptsy Xactions, @K1773R knows how to fix them ....
One I had stuck had 400 inputs, I think K1773R rebroadcast it ... not sure, maybe that's something a cron script anywhere can do ... just my bit's worth
No, the person with the stuck tx (sent or recieved) has to rebroadcast it, so i recieve it. all i did was changing max tx size and block creation settings. i pointed this out at some other posts already. I've only had issues with transactions originating from cryptsy; never between wallets or friends. Just my $0.02. And I thought I saw a post about Darkcoin/ #drk, going open source? Does anyone else find it amusing that, (if it's true and they finally released the code) they took these steps now; with just a few weeks left until fill implementation of ANC/ZC? Just thought the timing was interesting... lols, there can be only one... Yes. I do find it interesting. My perspective is that of the two holy grails of crypto currency - decentralization and anonymity , we now see a surge in the momentum of the anonymity attribute as being the differentiator in the crypto world. The race to substitute BITCOIN started with the origin of alternate cryptocurrency space. The race is starting to get hot now!!!! |
|
|
|
|
matthewh3
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1003
|
 |
October 02, 2014, 07:01:52 PM |
|
Now that the lightweight wallet Electrum has been ported to Litecoin. I feel strongly that we should start a crowdfunding campaign for a bounty for porting Electrum to Anoncoin. And the building of an Electrum plugin for Zerocoin.
|
|
|
|
Gnosis-
Member
Offline
Activity: 101
Merit: 10
|
|
October 02, 2014, 10:32:52 PM |
|
Now that the lightweight wallet Electrum has been ported to Litecoin. I feel strongly that we should start a crowdfunding campaign for a bounty for porting Electrum to Anoncoin. And the building of an Electrum plugin for Zerocoin.
I think it's a little too early for a lot of people to be using non-standard wallet software, especially one that requires trusting server operators. I could be wrong; please try and support your position further |
ANC:AU4hFCFZLhB2gTyG4VbaEurXGrTMNW2nu6 | BTC: 14QnfqVG3CqLGBYHgD8tPYJVLxQ2AfvPEx | GPG: E6D0 96DE 5B3E 16C7 C57F DC3B 654D BB7A D847 993A
|
|
|
matthewh3
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1003
|
|
October 03, 2014, 01:23:38 AM |
|
Now that the lightweight wallet Electrum has been ported to Litecoin. I feel strongly that we should start a crowdfunding campaign for a bounty for porting Electrum to Anoncoin. And the building of an Electrum plugin for Zerocoin.
I think it's a little too early for a lot of people to be using non-standard wallet software, especially one that requires trusting server operators. I could be wrong; please try and support your position further Most people use mobile or lightweight devices for bitcoin and running a full wallet is not an option to the majority of users. It will really hamper Anoncoin adoption not having lightweight wallets like Electrum plus mobile wallets. Maybe someone could fork the blockchain.info GitHub for a suitable bounty instead. We do need lots of people running full nodes though. To try and avoid the sybil attack problem So maybe we should look at the Peercoin model. Where full nodes get paid via staking by running full time nodes 24/7/365. This would of course make the coin inflationary in nature although it could be done a very small rate. |
|
|
|
K1773R
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1008
/dev/null
|
|
October 03, 2014, 06:41:58 AM |
|
Now that the lightweight wallet Electrum has been ported to Litecoin. I feel strongly that we should start a crowdfunding campaign for a bounty for porting Electrum to Anoncoin. And the building of an Electrum plugin for Zerocoin.
You would have to find a person who does this. I dont see Electrum as healthy for the network. Im not talking about the trust/security issue. |
[GPG Public Key]BTC/DVC/TRC/FRC: 1 K1773RbXRZVRQSSXe9N6N2MUFERvrdu6y ANC/XPM A K1773RTmRKtvbKBCrUu95UQg5iegrqyeA NMC: N K1773Rzv8b4ugmCgX789PbjewA9fL9Dy1 LTC: L Ki773RBuPepQH8E6Zb1ponoCvgbU7hHmd EMC: E K1773RxUes1HX1YAGMZ1xVYBBRUCqfDoF BQC: b K1773R1APJz4yTgRkmdKQhjhiMyQpJgfN
|
|
|
alacast
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 30
Merit: 0
|
|
October 03, 2014, 07:55:44 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
