[DVC]DevCoin - Official Thread - Moderated

[realdantreccia]

Oh cool I did not know I0Coin was still on any exchanges, I could not find it on CoinMarketCap to find out.

Yes unfortunately coinmarketcap needs to be updated by coin developers to let them know of any new exchanges coins are listed on from what I gather but all these coins have been listed for a long time on freiexchange  and still coins have not updated coinmarketcap so the devcoin etc developers must contact them for this to happen.

Freiexchange is ran by freicoin community and supported by fed fab (one of the blockstream founders along with Mr Timon)and VERY credible people so people should support this exchange which is hosting ancient coins for their legacy criteria although I do not see namecoin there yet for some reason.

I think I read something recently from someone trying to get a coin listed on CoinMarketCap, apparently the coin has to be on two exchanges both of which are themselves already listed on CoinMarketCap.

-MarkM-

I read what you said on Oct 20 over in the I0C post and from what I understood you sort of made it seem like exchanges just ignore the value of these coins anyway.  What I do know is you all have spent almost a decade on this board typing explanations and keeping the world updated on the progress of the project(s) without any guarantee someone from the outer world might even take the time to read a "bitcointalk.org" post.  I know after I started looking into this all 2 years ago, it still took time for me to get here where you all have been leaving valuable information all over this place.  Time is more valuable than paper currency with a federal government saying its "valid currency" - at the same time I'm sure the basket weaving done on all of your in-game currencies/assets whatever has been done with a set schedule, very carefully, and not outwardly obvious in a way that anyone will say "yeah you're right, it's going to be a great bet if you know what lies ahead from a developer's standpoint"... I don't even need that to realize that the devs here have been more than willing to discuss all of these things publicly and that takes time, repetition, and patience when dealing with an audience that may not even exist. I haven't posted here because there's no reason for me to.  I also don't mind people calling me whatever names they want over my beliefs.  But you seem pretty smart, markm, nova, traxo, develcuy, etc. - even Vlad - who can insult me all he wants, he still is using his time to do it.  So since you've all spent about a decade or so here in the public eye and who has any idea how long behind closed doors at DevCorp -- I trust you value your time as much as I appreciate it. This project will work out. Doesn't seem gimmicky, doesn't seem poorly planned, quite the opposite of anything that would throw a red flag. If time is what is necessary, I wouldn't expect anyone in my position to go sell their coins on a "3rd party exchange"... Not that those aren't a nice place to go buy coins, but I just don't see the point in it. There's got to be something bigger to this all. You said volume isn't necessarily a good thing on the I0C, markm, and I thought about that for quite awhile before I understood.  What this is going to take is time, and only some of you know how much. I'm willing to wait. These coins are from a secure blockchain, secure as any. I'm not going to be looking for USD, who says one can't use their [insert ancient coin here] as easy as ApplePay in the future... I'm gonna go out on a limb and say since all of you spend countless hours putting this all out here for anyone to stumble upon from a bitcoin related google search, this means something to you. I can wait.

[1714131820]

1714131820

[1714131820]

1714131820

[1714131820]

1714131820

[1714131820]

1714131820

[develCuy]

I can confirm that starting from block 396000 (round 99) onward, there are only 2500 new coins being generated, and they are being paid enterily to miners. Also, none of my wallets are downloading the receiver_99.csv file, yet they are still downloading blocks.

My guess is that miners are generating blocks while ignoring the latest receiver file, which should never happen. This might be due to a bug or a network attack. We should first discard the bug. Which is not an easy task because there are different versions of devcoin running the network, we should analyze each of them individually.

- develCuy

Now we have the issue reported in the issue queue https://github.com/devcoin/core/issues/76

So far we know that round 99 started at block 396000 on 2019-10-26 11:07:49 UTC, and that at least 4 of the 7 file custodian mirrors where well setup by  2019-10-23 17:04:45 UTC or 2 days and 18 hours in advance to round 99. Yet, we should investigate further to determine if that was enough time in advance and if not having the next receiver file prior to generating block 396000 makes the nodes to halve miners rewards and not paying shares, as proposed by Markm.

- develCuy

After studying the source code a bit more, I'm more convinced that we neither have a bug or a network attack, instead we have the miner nodes doing what they are programmed to do as Mark already said. Why are they generating only 2500 DVC per block? Because miner nodes are unable to validate that the 50% + 1 of file custodians have their mirror of receiver_99.csv in sync. For that reason they aren't downloading that file, rather they apply a programmed "fallback reduction" that lowers the rewards to 2500 DVC.

There is an assumption that we had to have the file custodians in sync 2 weeks in advance to the new round, but I can't confirm it yet. So far I read in the source code that miner nodes keep trying to download the next receiver file before, during and after discovering a new block and regular nodes do it when syncing the blockchain with the network.

Long history short, we currently have a contradiction, because the file custodians doesn't seem to be hosting the exactly same copy (bit by bit) of receiver_99.csv. At least, that is what the nodes "can say". But when I compare the files, they are exactly the same. Another option is that somehow the nodes aren't able to download all copies of the receiver file, they might be getting a truncated file or even empty. This idea is reinforced by the fact we had 3 file custodians outdated or with their server offline, the remaining 4 should be enough but it doesn't seem to be the case.

I keep debugging the source code for finding a solution. All help is welcome! We have an open issue here https://github.com/devcoin/core/issues/76

- develCuy

I have finally figured out what is happening and I'm working on a fix. We had a mixture of situations:

1. Two custodians have their servers not working properly, they tend to go offline for different issues with their infrastructure
2. Ctya's server was shutdown in the middle of round 98, rather than at the end, not allowing Traxo to take over smoothly
3. Another custodian has enforced HTTPS connections but most of the miners nodes don't support it
4. The custodians not were in sync early enough for round 99

For the reasons above, we had 4 of the 7 mirrors "out of sync" for the standard of Devcoin blockchain, that leaves only 3 working mirrors when we need at least 4, the nodes are then rejecting the receiver files. The consequence of is that miners apply a penalty know as "fallback reduction", as an incentive for solving the issue with file custodians.

Hopefully, we can finally fix this situation, but it requires consensus from all the file custodians and perhaps adding a couple mirrors as I anticipated since previous rounds. My proposal is to implement one or two automated receiver files mirrors, so that we can lower the chance for this situation to happen again. Also, we have to be more strict with file custodians, if they are unreliable, we can't hold them for a single round more, and that is what I'm going to do from now on. Along releasing the receiver file earlier, we should define a safe deadline soon.

People interested on the technical details of what originated this situation please check the issue queue: https://github.com/devcoin/core/issues/76

Last but not least, the latest version of Devcoin supports HTTPS, but it looks like the majority of miners never managed to update their nodes. I don't blame them because we never released any official stable version for a long time. So we should do it now!

Let's clean up all the mess!

- develCuy

QUICK UPDATE

We are very close to have round 99 fixed. If some miner is interested on collaborate, please try the new prerelease version of Devcoin 0.8.6.0 from the official repository: https://github.com/devcoin/core

I recommend you to follow Qtera's instructions:

https://steemit.com/busy/@cpol/how-to-compile-your-very-own-devcoin-wallet-in-ubuntu-18-04

AND use the following command to download the source code:

$ git clone --branch 0.8.6.0 https://github.com/devcoin/core

FINALLY, don't use it with your current wallet, please create a new separate wallet for your trial.

WARNING: Please mine ONE and only ONE block, then shutdown your node and report your findings here.

Go go Devcoin!

- develCuy

[realdantreccia]

I can confirm that starting from block 396000 (round 99) onward, there are only 2500 new coins being generated, and they are being paid enterily to miners. Also, none of my wallets are downloading the receiver_99.csv file, yet they are still downloading blocks.

My guess is that miners are generating blocks while ignoring the latest receiver file, which should never happen. This might be due to a bug or a network attack. We should first discard the bug. Which is not an easy task because there are different versions of devcoin running the network, we should analyze each of them individually.

- develCuy

Now we have the issue reported in the issue queue https://github.com/devcoin/core/issues/76

So far we know that round 99 started at block 396000 on 2019-10-26 11:07:49 UTC, and that at least 4 of the 7 file custodian mirrors where well setup by  2019-10-23 17:04:45 UTC or 2 days and 18 hours in advance to round 99. Yet, we should investigate further to determine if that was enough time in advance and if not having the next receiver file prior to generating block 396000 makes the nodes to halve miners rewards and not paying shares, as proposed by Markm.

- develCuy

After studying the source code a bit more, I'm more convinced that we neither have a bug or a network attack, instead we have the miner nodes doing what they are programmed to do as Mark already said. Why are they generating only 2500 DVC per block? Because miner nodes are unable to validate that the 50% + 1 of file custodians have their mirror of receiver_99.csv in sync. For that reason they aren't downloading that file, rather they apply a programmed "fallback reduction" that lowers the rewards to 2500 DVC.

There is an assumption that we had to have the file custodians in sync 2 weeks in advance to the new round, but I can't confirm it yet. So far I read in the source code that miner nodes keep trying to download the next receiver file before, during and after discovering a new block and regular nodes do it when syncing the blockchain with the network.

Long history short, we currently have a contradiction, because the file custodians doesn't seem to be hosting the exactly same copy (bit by bit) of receiver_99.csv. At least, that is what the nodes "can say". But when I compare the files, they are exactly the same. Another option is that somehow the nodes aren't able to download all copies of the receiver file, they might be getting a truncated file or even empty. This idea is reinforced by the fact we had 3 file custodians outdated or with their server offline, the remaining 4 should be enough but it doesn't seem to be the case.

I keep debugging the source code for finding a solution. All help is welcome! We have an open issue here https://github.com/devcoin/core/issues/76

- develCuy

I have finally figured out what is happening and I'm working on a fix. We had a mixture of situations:

1. Two custodians have their servers not working properly, they tend to go offline for different issues with their infrastructure
2. Ctya's server was shutdown in the middle of round 98, rather than at the end, not allowing Traxo to take over smoothly
3. Another custodian has enforced HTTPS connections but most of the miners nodes don't support it
4. The custodians not were in sync early enough for round 99

For the reasons above, we had 4 of the 7 mirrors "out of sync" for the standard of Devcoin blockchain, that leaves only 3 working mirrors when we need at least 4, the nodes are then rejecting the receiver files. The consequence of is that miners apply a penalty know as "fallback reduction", as an incentive for solving the issue with file custodians.

Hopefully, we can finally fix this situation, but it requires consensus from all the file custodians and perhaps adding a couple mirrors as I anticipated since previous rounds. My proposal is to implement one or two automated receiver files mirrors, so that we can lower the chance for this situation to happen again. Also, we have to be more strict with file custodians, if they are unreliable, we can't hold them for a single round more, and that is what I'm going to do from now on. Along releasing the receiver file earlier, we should define a safe deadline soon.

People interested on the technical details of what originated this situation please check the issue queue: https://github.com/devcoin/core/issues/76

Last but not least, the latest version of Devcoin supports HTTPS, but it looks like the majority of miners never managed to update their nodes. I don't blame them because we never released any official stable version for a long time. So we should do it now!

Let's clean up all the mess!

- develCuy

QUICK UPDATE

We are very close to have round 99 fixed. If some miner is interested on collaborate, please try the new prerelease version of Devcoin 0.8.6.0 from the official repository: https://github.com/devcoin/core

I recommend you to follow Qtera's instructions:

https://steemit.com/busy/@cpol/how-to-compile-your-very-own-devcoin-wallet-in-ubuntu-18-04

AND use the following command to download the source code:

$ git clone --branch 0.8.6.0 https://github.com/devcoin/core

FINALLY, don't use it with your current wallet, please create a new separate wallet for your trial.

WARNING: Please mine ONE and only ONE block, then shutdown your node and report your findings here.

Go go Devcoin!

- develCuy

What if you're on Windows? Sorry for the n00b question. Would it work on windows subsystem like when I set up a node?

[markm]

By using the "treasuries" system to calculate the value of each coin based upon the "treasury" of the Civilisation, Nation, Corp, Clan etc etc whose currency it "is" (in the game), you can almost kind of look at all the coins so far thus treated as in a way just various different "denominations" of "the same darn thing".

So even if you (probably quite rightly) are dubious about the overall "real value" of any of it, if nothing else it ought to seem somewhat reasonable to consider the resulting relative values of those coins, all computed relative to each other from the "treasuries" each holds of the others, as having at least some leanings toward validity.

An unfortunate (for some folks anyway) side-effect of thinking of them this way is that you could thus choose to look at any one of them that has managed to get itself listed on "an exchange" as a yardstick from which to calculate the value of all the others as compared to whatever the one that is on an exchange is paired against on the exchange.

So for example if DeVCoin were on an exchange you could look at the Latest Rates include-file, which shows the value of various things in terms of DeVCoins (how much each thing is worth in DeVCoins), and, by reference to the price of a DeVCoin on some exchange or other, you could compute the value of all the other things in the file whose value is computed for that file from a "treasury".

It might not escape your notice that the file does list a few things that are NOT computed from a "treasury" thus are not really currently a direct full part of "that same darn thing" above-mentioned.

For example BiTCoin and LiTeCoin both lack such a "treasury".

So feel free to ignore the purported values shown in that file for such items.

Heck, it seems like lately BitCoins and LiTeCoins are worth a heck of a lot more DeVCoins than the file typically shows, IF you consult "exchanges".

The thing is, there are very few assets listed there that are on any "exchanges", or, indeed, have ever been on any "exchanges".

So the few that do get onto an exchange from time to time are for many people the only chances they get to cash any of those assets out to fiat.

And a lot of people are still really fond of fiat.

So it can probably be expected that on "spot markets" whichever of the denominations get onto an exchange are likely to fetch premium prices in terms of the other denominations.

While at the same time, also fetch un-premium  --  anti-premium --  prices on the exchanges as folks fall all over each other in a "race to the bottom" trying to convert out to fiat.

Then too, the whole crypto field has been in a horrible "bear market" for a couple of years now almost, such that even the most famous and well-regarded coins have been fetching insanely low prices in fiat. Heck, who thought we'd ever see bitcoin below ten grand American for gosh sakes?!

So anyway, maybe it could be useful from some folks' point of view to kind of average some kind of a conversion rate for "that whole darn thing" by figuring out the average difference between what the Latest Rates thinks a thing that does have a "treasury" its value is computed by is worth and what that same thing fetches on "exchanges".

Since the "treasuries based" value is a kind of attempt at a "fundamental" value, one could think of such a ratio/difference as being the difference between fundamental value and "discovered price".

If that is a valid way of looking at it though, the implication seems to be that currently the "discovered" prices seem typically to be bargains.

I have been thinking for a long time that according to market theory, so called "arbitragers" are supposed to be out there somewhere running around taking advantage of any areas in which markets are not all in agreement about what something is worth, snapping up anything that is a bargain in some places as compared to how much they can get for it in another place.

But I think maybe in this case it is not only that arbitragers are not paying close enough attention and acting swiftly but also that how you see it all, as a potential arbitrager, might depend quite a bit upon what your "home currency" happens to be.

Then too, also maybe that arbitrage over time is a bit different than instant-gratification arbitrage.

Personally I have tended, as a market-maker, which is maybe not really the same thing at all as an arbitrager, to not worry about the supposed value in terms of some third, fourth (etc) currency of either of the two involved in a pair I am market-making with, so maybe I just have not been seeing things the same way many or most other traders do.

For example in marketmaking DVC/BTC, I0C/BTC, IXC/BTC etc I do not worry about the value of either side of the pair in dollars or yen or francs or litecoins or even big macs or icecream cones, I just focus on increasing my holdings of both sides of the pair, building up both the buy side and the sell side, and in fact bearing in mind that of course which side is which depends mostly on which side you have some of and which side you are trying to get some of.

Whereas I suspect that some traders are not thinking of whether they are getting the non-bitcoin side for less satoshis than before, or getting more satoshis for them, but rather a more complicated calculation, worrying whether they are getting more dollars for them or getting them for less dollars. Or yen. Or francs. Or icecream cones or whatever.

And maybe that is actually a more sensible approach? Afterall, if both sides of a pair I am working with are going down in number of icecream cones they can buy, does it matter whether I am steadily accumulating more of both sides of my pair?

Hmm. Food for thought. But more of them presumably would buy more icecream than less of them would, so maybe "its all good"?

-MarkM-

[realdantreccia]

By using the "treasuries" system to calculate the value of each coin based upon the "treasury" of the Civilisation, Nation, Corp, Clan etc etc whose currency it "is" (in the game), you can almost kind of look at all the coins so far thus treated as in a way just various different "denominations" of "the same darn thing".

So even if you (probably quite rightly) are dubious about the overall "real value" of any of it, if nothing else it ought to seem somewhat reasonable to consider the resulting relative values of those coins, all computed relative to each other from the "treasuries" each holds of the others, as having at least some leanings toward validity.

An unfortunate (for some folks anyway) side-effect of thinking of them this way is that you could thus choose to look at any one of them that has managed to get itself listed on "an exchange" as a yardstick from which to calculate the value of all the others as compared to whatever the one that is on an exchange is paired against on the exchange.

So for example if DeVCoin were on an exchange you could look at the Latest Rates include-file, which shows the value of various things in terms of DeVCoins (how much each thing is worth in DeVCoins), and, by reference to the price of a DeVCoin on some exchange or other, you could compute the value of all the other things in the file whose value is computed for that file from a "treasury".

It might not escape your notice that the file does list a few things that are NOT computed from a "treasury" thus are not really currently a direct full part of "that same darn thing" above-mentioned.

For example BiTCoin and LiTeCoin both lack such a "treasury".

So feel free to ignore the purported values shown in that file for such items.

Heck, it seems like lately BitCoins and LiTeCoins are worth a heck of a lot more DeVCoins than the file typically shows, IF you consult "exchanges".

The thing is, there are very few assets listed there that are on any "exchanges", or, indeed, have ever been on any "exchanges".

So the few that do get onto an exchange from time to time are for many people the only chances they get to cash any of those assets out to fiat.

And a lot of people are still really fond of fiat.

So it can probably be expected that on "spot markets" whichever of the denominations get onto an exchange are likely to fetch premium prices in terms of the other denominations.

While at the same time, also fetch un-premium  --  anti-premium --  prices on the exchanges as folks fall all over each other in a "race to the bottom" trying to convert out to fiat.

Then too, the whole crypto field has been in a horrible "bear market" for a couple of years now almost, such that even the most famous and well-regarded coins have been fetching insanely low prices in fiat. Heck, who thought we'd ever see bitcoin below ten grand American for gosh sakes?!

So anyway, maybe it could be useful from some folks' point of view to kind of average some kind of a conversion rate for "that whole darn thing" by figuring out the average difference between what the Latest Rates thinks a thing that does have a "treasury" its value is computed by is worth and what that same thing fetches on "exchanges".

Since the "treasuries based" value is a kind of attempt at a "fundamental" value, one could think of such a ratio/difference as being the difference between fundamental value and "discovered price".

If that is a valid way of looking at it though, the implication seems to be that currently the "discovered" prices seem typically to be bargains.

I have been thinking for a long time that according to market theory, so called "arbitragers" are supposed to be out there somewhere running around taking advantage of any areas in which markets are not all in agreement about what something is worth, snapping up anything that is a bargain in some places as compared to how much they can get for it in another place.

But I think maybe in this case it is not only that arbitragers are not paying close enough attention and acting swiftly but also that how you see it all, as a potential arbitrager, might depend quite a bit upon what your "home currency" happens to be.

Then too, also maybe that arbitrage over time is a bit different than instant-gratification arbitrage.

Personally I have tended, as a market-maker, which is maybe not really the same thing at all as an arbitrager, to not worry about the supposed value in terms of some third, fourth (etc) currency of either of the two involved in a pair I am market-making with, so maybe I just have not been seeing things the same way many or most other traders do.

For example in marketmaking DVC/BTC, I0C/BTC, IXC/BTC etc I do not worry about the value of either side of the pair in dollars or yen or francs or litecoins or even big macs or icecream cones, I just focus on increasing my holdings of both sides of the pair, building up both the buy side and the sell side, and in fact bearing in mind that of course which side is which depends mostly on which side you have some of and which side you are trying to get some of.

Whereas I suspect that some traders are not thinking of whether they are getting the non-bitcoin side for less satoshis than before, or getting more satoshis for them, but rather a more complicated calculation, worrying whether they are getting more dollars for them or getting them for less dollars. Or yen. Or francs. Or icecream cones or whatever.

And maybe that is actually a more sensible approach? Afterall, if both sides of a pair I am working with are going down in number of icecream cones they can buy, does it matter whether I am steadily accumulating more of both sides of my pair?

Hmm. Food for thought. But more of them presumably would buy more icecream than less of them would, so maybe "its all good"?

-MarkM-

EDIT: Now I get it. BTW AXIOM and AXON blow my mind. Thanks for mentioning Yobit on 408 =P

[realdantreccia]

My Windows wallet 0.8.5.1 (beta one from devcoin.org) keeps getting stuck at the same block when I try synching (around the time 0.8.6.0) came out for Linux and what not. Just wanted to mention that. I've got it all backed up and I actually think maybe since deveCuy mentioned to mine "1 block only" that this is something I'd have expected so no worries. (just don't forgot your windows friends when you got the time =) ). Thanks!

[Vlad2Vlad]

My Windows wallet 0.8.5.1 (beta one from devcoin.org) keeps getting stuck at the same block when I try synching (around the time 0.8.6.0) came out for Linux and what not. Just wanted to mention that. I've got it all backed up and I actually think maybe since deveCuy mentioned to mine "1 block only" that this is something I'd have expected so no worries. (just don't forgot your windows friends when you got the time =) ). Thanks!

SNAP!  What?  0.8.5.1? 

0+8+5+1 = 14

1+4 = 5 = V

Red V Confirmed

Now I get it!

[Vlad2Vlad]

EDIT: Now I get it. BTW AXIOM and AXON blow my mind. Thanks for mentioning Yobit on 408 =P

SNAP!!!  AXIOM?  AXON?   AXE??!!! 

Now I get it! 

[Vlad2Vlad]

EDIT: Now I get it. BTW AXIOM and AXON blow my mind. Thanks for mentioning Yobit on 408 =P

Oh, what about Yobit?  You like Yobit? 

I’d personally advise against touching it.  Just a hunch.

[realdantreccia]

EDIT: Now I get it. BTW AXIOM and AXON blow my mind. Thanks for mentioning Yobit on 408 =P

Oh, what about Yobit?  You like Yobit? 

I’d personally advise against touching it.  Just a hunch.

Yeah. A similar problem with the Ixcoin wallet there seems to sap away all the wonderful qualities one would see in IXC if they just devoted the last two years of their life to learning as much as they could in their stupid little pee-brain/punching bag of a head - but I digress.

In fact alot of these issues seem to be resolving and you guys are doing good enough role play for me to see what coin has what problem and what chain split when and what dev "remembers" what or has "amnesia" from [insert "event"]... Thanks for teaching.

Again, punch away I do not care. It's a game after all.

[Vlad2Vlad]

Wiser, DevelCuy, I think you guys got your telegram room set up wrong.  I can only mute and unmute [i can’t post] and it looks like a channel instead of a group. 

[realdantreccia]

EDIT: Now I get it. BTW AXIOM and AXON blow my mind. Thanks for mentioning Yobit on 408 =P

Oh, what about Yobit?  You like Yobit? 

I’d personally advise against touching it.  Just a hunch.

Now, now. Don't go on being an anti-Ruskie racist.  Russian people aren't all out to get you patriotic folk.

You should blame QTUM: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1135151.msg11988089#msg11988089

IT'S HIS FAULT!

[Vlad2Vlad]

EDIT: Now I get it. BTW AXIOM and AXON blow my mind. Thanks for mentioning Yobit on 408 =P

Oh, what about Yobit?  You like Yobit? 

I’d personally advise against touching it.  Just a hunch.

Yeah. A similar problem with the Ixcoin wallet there seems to sap away all the wonderful qualities one would see in IXC if they just devoted the last two years of their life to learning as much as they could in their stupid little pee-brain/punching bag of a head - but I digress.

In fact alot of these issues seem to be resolving and you guys are doing good enough role play for me to see what coin has what problem and what chain split when and what dev "remembers" what or has "amnesia" from [insert "event"]... Thanks for teaching.

Again, punch away I do not care. It's a game after all.

Meh, how’s Englewood? 

So you do or do NOT recommend Yobit for everyone?  Thanks!

[Vlad2Vlad]

EDIT: Now I get it. BTW AXIOM and AXON blow my mind. Thanks for mentioning Yobit on 408 =P

Oh, what about Yobit?  You like Yobit? 

I’d personally advise against touching it.  Just a hunch.

Now, now. Don't go on being an anti-Ruskie racist.  Russian people aren't all out to get you patriotic folk.

You should blame QTUM: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1135151.msg11988089#msg11988089

IT'S HIS FAULT!

I click with them Ruskies great but for whatever reason Yobit has a long history of randomly locking wallets for a very long time (6+ months) which to me is a red flag.  But props to them for staying alive so long - it’s a real feat.

[realdantreccia]

EDIT: Now I get it. BTW AXIOM and AXON blow my mind. Thanks for mentioning Yobit on 408 =P

Oh, what about Yobit?  You like Yobit? 

I’d personally advise against touching it.  Just a hunch.

Now, now. Don't go on being an anti-Ruskie racist.  Russian people aren't all out to get you patriotic folk.

You should blame QTUM: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1135151.msg11988089#msg11988089

IT'S HIS FAULT!

I click with them Ruskies great but for whatever reason Yobit has a long history of randomly locking wallets for a very long time (6+ months) which to me is a red flag.  But props to them for staying alive so long - it’s a real feat.

Maybe "they" are protecting "your" chain's integrity by killing it in the vault while your IXC'ys coins accrue interest. Like a CD. Maybe. How's Englewood? Probably awful compared to where you live. Those people need charity, not a court jester. Why don't you go do some looking around yourself to see. Maybe there's a chance for you yet.

[Vlad2Vlad]

EDIT: Now I get it. BTW AXIOM and AXON blow my mind. Thanks for mentioning Yobit on 408 =P

Oh, what about Yobit?  You like Yobit? 

I’d personally advise against touching it.  Just a hunch.

Now, now. Don't go on being an anti-Ruskie racist.  Russian people aren't all out to get you patriotic folk.

You should blame QTUM: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1135151.msg11988089#msg11988089

IT'S HIS FAULT!

I click with them Ruskies great but for whatever reason Yobit has a long history of randomly locking wallets for a very long time (6+ months) which to me is a red flag.  But props to them for staying alive so long - it’s a real feat.

Maybe "they" are protecting "your" chain's integrity by killing it in the vault while your IXC'ys coins accrue interest. Like a CD. Maybe. How's Englewood? Probably awful compared to where you live. Those people need charity, not a court jester. Why don't you go do some looking around yourself to see. Maybe there's a chance for you yet.

They live in affirmative action America - Romanians only dream of such opportunities like one finds in Chicago and the rest of the US.

And there’s no interest earned on any ixc in Yobit wallets.  No idea what you’re saying. 

Come to DVC telegram - we have a big baller from the US you’d click with. 

t.me/DevToMe

Wiser and DevelCuy - you guys can join the above telegram too. Not sure why we’d want 2 channels. 

Cheers!

[realdantreccia]

EDIT: Now I get it. BTW AXIOM and AXON blow my mind. Thanks for mentioning Yobit on 408 =P

Oh, what about Yobit?  You like Yobit? 

I’d personally advise against touching it.  Just a hunch.

Now, now. Don't go on being an anti-Ruskie racist.  Russian people aren't all out to get you patriotic folk.

You should blame QTUM: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1135151.msg11988089#msg11988089

IT'S HIS FAULT!

I click with them Ruskies great but for whatever reason Yobit has a long history of randomly locking wallets for a very long time (6+ months) which to me is a red flag.  But props to them for staying alive so long - it’s a real feat.

Maybe "they" are protecting "your" chain's integrity by killing it in the vault while your IXC'ys coins accrue interest. Like a CD. Maybe. How's Englewood? Probably awful compared to where you live. Those people need charity, not a court jester. Why don't you go do some looking around yourself to see. Maybe there's a chance for you yet.

They live in affirmative action America - Romanians only dream of such opportunities like one finds in Chicago and the rest of the US.

And there’s no interest earned on any ixc in Yobit wallets.  No idea what you’re saying. 

Come to DVC telegram - we have a big baller from the US you’d click with. 

t.me/DevToMe

Wiser and DevelCuy - you guys can join the above telegram too. Not sure why we’d want 2 channels. 

Cheers!

Don't think you realize how poor Chicagoans are. But oh, that's just you being you again.

[Vlad2Vlad]

EDIT: Now I get it. BTW AXIOM and AXON blow my mind. Thanks for mentioning Yobit on 408 =P

Oh, what about Yobit?  You like Yobit? 

I’d personally advise against touching it.  Just a hunch.

Now, now. Don't go on being an anti-Ruskie racist.  Russian people aren't all out to get you patriotic folk.

You should blame QTUM: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1135151.msg11988089#msg11988089

IT'S HIS FAULT!

I click with them Ruskies great but for whatever reason Yobit has a long history of randomly locking wallets for a very long time (6+ months) which to me is a red flag.  But props to them for staying alive so long - it’s a real feat.

Maybe "they" are protecting "your" chain's integrity by killing it in the vault while your IXC'ys coins accrue interest. Like a CD. Maybe. How's Englewood? Probably awful compared to where you live. Those people need charity, not a court jester. Why don't you go do some looking around yourself to see. Maybe there's a chance for you yet.

They live in affirmative action America - Romanians only dream of such opportunities like one finds in Chicago and the rest of the US.

And there’s no interest earned on any ixc in Yobit wallets.  No idea what you’re saying. 

Come to DVC telegram - we have a big baller from the US you’d click with. 

t.me/DevToMe

Wiser and DevelCuy - you guys can join the above telegram too. Not sure why we’d want 2 channels. 

Cheers!

Don't think you realize how poor Chicagoans are. But oh, that's just you being you again.

Really tho?  Ever live in the east bloc?  Ever been to the hospitals and dentists here? 

Chicagoans are poor cause the idiots vote for the same leftists for decades.  And they’re lazy and refuse to take advantage of the opportunities sitting in their doorsteps.

And poor?  Pfft, forget welfare and housing assistance and all that, just foodstamps/WIC alone in the US is more than the Gross income for a full-time job in Romania.  And in Romania the food, fuel and energy cost more than in the US.  Go to all the democrat liberal ran ghettos in Chicago and you won’t find any shortage of obese “poor”. 

You guys have no idea what poor is - you have no idea what it feels like to be trapped in a country with no hope of a future or opportunities for you or your children. 

Now get off your Western pity pot and man up, son, cause I’m gonna accelerate the programme. 

[novacadian]

What is point of all this when you have no trading activity on the exchange and nobody willing to trade it against bitcoin or dollars?What is coin any use for??not so much a crypto coin

It may be interesting to note that in the years of my involvement with crypto only one BTC of my cryptfolio was ever traded for fiat. That was due to being caught in a spike in 2015 when padding a buy order on an exchange. You can call me a HODLer in the true sense of the word.

On the STEEM social media dApp, Condenser, one hears this all the time. The price of STEEM and how STEEM is over because of its price against fiat. There is still this hold over mentality that speculators are the only reason for crypto. They do not see, in STEEM's case, the fastest cheapest transactions on any blockchain out there. They do not see how the DPoS Governance of STEEM has dealt with the scalability issue. They do not see that STEEM is not so much a crypto coin as a utility token. There are games like Wizard of the Coast cards running on the STEEM blockchain that allows cards to be created, owned and traded over the same chain. There will soon be a time when people using STEEM dApps will not even know they are using a blockchain. One such dApp is under development in my hobby lab at trollkeep.com.


To see a crypto token only through the eyes of a fiat investor is very limiting in my opinion. DevCoin is a very old, secure and, almost, impossible to ursurp  blockchain. You may not see any value in it because of how much the token is presently trading against fiat. This viewpoint is shortsighted in my opinion. Although STEEM is DPoS and DevCoin is PoW, they share many simularities. They both reward content creators and both produce about the same amount of tokens annually. They are complimentary coins in my opinion. You will not be surprised to hear of me seeing great potential value in the DevCoin Blockchain; particularily in regards to the merged mining of #DevSTEEM.

This is not meant as financial advice due to the fact that crypto is a technology to me, more so than a financial vehicle. Like MarkM was told by me way back in the day when he wanted to chip in on a pizza or something with BTC. "It is a great technology, Mark, but it's not money."

In hindsight maybe we were both right. 

- Nova

[develCuy]

My Windows wallet 0.8.5.1 (beta one from devcoin.org) keeps getting stuck at the same block when I try synching (around the time 0.8.6.0) came out for Linux and what not. Just wanted to mention that. I've got it all backed up and I actually think maybe since deveCuy mentioned to mine "1 block only" that this is something I'd have expected so no worries. (just don't forgot your windows friends when you got the time =) ). Thanks!

Thanks for the feedback realdantreccia! Regarding the Windows wallet, @K1773R has a working bundle AFAIK. Btw, people with skills to compile Devcoin on Windows and OSX are welcome to jump in to help and earn a share of the 10M Bounty: https://github.com/devcoin/core/issues/77

- develCuy