|
DanWalker
|
 |
August 02, 2016, 03:19:34 PM |
|
why cant i send globalcoin from my wallet to an exchange . it is up to date running the newist version and is in synce. but when i try to send , the address bar turns red .and nothing happens. i tried to send to 2 exchanges ,same issue..... why do the exchange sites start with wallet the #7at the start . my dektop wallet starts with a G
|
| | .
.Duelbits. | │ | ..........UNLEASH..........
THE ULTIMATE
GAMING EXPERIENCE | │ | DUELBITS
FANTASY
SPORTS | ████▄▄▄█████▄▄▄
░▄████████████████▄
▐██████████████████▄
████████████████████
████████████████████▌
█████████████████████
████████████████▀▀▀
███████████████▌
███████████████▌
████████████████
████████████████
████████████████
████▀▀███████▀▀ | .
▬▬
VS
▬▬ | ████▄▄▄█████▄▄▄
░▄████████████████▄
▐██████████████████▄
████████████████████
████████████████████▌
█████████████████████
███████████████████
███████████████▌
███████████████▌
████████████████
████████████████
████████████████
████▀▀███████▀▀ | /// PLAY FOR FREE ///
WIN FOR REAL | │ | ..PLAY NOW.. | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions must be included in a block to be properly completed. When you send a transaction, it is broadcast to miners. Miners can then optionally include it in their next blocks. Miners will be more inclined to include your transaction if it has a higher transaction fee.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
DigitalHoldings
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 57
Merit: 0
|
|
August 02, 2016, 10:12:38 PM |
|
why cant i send globalcoin from my wallet to an exchange . it is up to date running the newist version and is in synce. but when i try to send , the address bar turns red .and nothing happens. i tried to send to 2 exchanges ,same issue..... why do the exchange sites start with wallet the #7at the start . my dektop wallet starts with a G
You are not using Globalcoin, addresses have always started with a 7. You've mistaken another coin with a similar name would be my guess. |
|
|
|
|
BitcoinNational
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1010
Join The Blockchain Revolution In Logistics
|
|
August 14, 2016, 03:29:56 PM |
|
What's the word on the website; the pretty thing has dissappared?
Other than that nice solid support at 300sats, super low inflation, great classic POW in the making.
Will trade TALK for GLC 1:1;
both @300sats 65M coins;
you can stake the TALK and yield 15% and trade me your gains back at 1:1 again.
Fair hedge.
|
|
|
|
Forexer
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 71
Merit: 0
|
|
August 14, 2016, 06:32:51 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
megacrypton
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 168
Merit: 100
Secured & Trusted Crypto Trade Platform
|
|
August 19, 2016, 11:31:57 AM |
|
|
MegaCrypton.com: *Trade 200+ Coin Pair(p2p)*Trusted*Secured*Web Wallet
|
|
|
ave_chaincoin
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 50
Merit: 0
|
|
August 19, 2016, 01:49:08 PM |
|
https://i.imgur.com/iwhqrco.jpgI propose transitioning to Proof of Stake v3 with static block rewards. Rather than patching the current headache of a code base I suggest abandoning the old code, starting from a fresh code base, and manually importing balances into the new client. Of course this means starting over from block 0, so it's a bit more dramatic than just a hardfork, so community consensus is a must. Any updates on moving to Version 2.0?  |
|
|
|
|
Forexer
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 71
Merit: 0
|
|
August 20, 2016, 05:40:46 AM |
|
Bounty:
Android Wallet Creation - 10000GLC
|
|
|
|
|
|
ozboom
|
|
August 23, 2016, 10:55:31 AM
Last edit: August 29, 2016, 08:00:10 PM by ozboom |
|
Bounty:
Android Wallet Creation - 10000GLC
I will throw in another 40,000 GLC for this bounty (making it 50,000 GLC total). I'll also gladly pay a bounty for restoring the website. |
|
|
|
|
almightyruler
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1092
|
|
August 26, 2016, 12:06:36 PM |
|
Hey all. Reading the source, in main.cpp...
int64 nSubsidy = 100 * COIN;
[...]
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 288400); // Approx 1 million blocks per year
At current block height, 2161131 / 288400 = 7.4935
That division result gets rounded and converted into an integer, so 2161131 / 288400 = 7 bits to shift the reward by.
I was thinking that C++ rounded either up or down to the nearest integer, which means we'd be very close to a block reward halving (once the result is a tiny bit over 7.5) but after some research it seems it actually truncates the result by ignoring the decimals, so 7.999 becomes 7. In that case, it's not until the result hits 8.000, at block 2307200, that the reward halving will happen.
At some point in the future due to block halving the reward calculation will fall below the minimum accepted input of 0.0001, which is likely going to cause problems. At block 5768000, the reward will change to 0.00009500, which is lower than the minimum accepted input of 0.00010000. Not sure if the client will reject PoW blocks at the moment they're mined (I've seen this happen with another coin where the coinbase transaction could not be created because the reward was too low), or it will just ignore the inputs from mined blocks when trying to send. Either way, the increase in (usable) money supply will probably effectively halt at that point... assuming people are still mining with such a low reward! If it does keep working, by block 9517200 the reward will be 0.00000001, and at block 9805600 you will need more than 8 decimal places to express a non-zero amount.
Okay, got a bit carried away with calculations, so...
tl;dr next reward halving is at block 2307200, and in another 3 or 4 years there's going to be some serious issues with PoW mining when the reward is effectively dust.
|
|
|
|
|
Telescopium
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 242
Merit: 250
Diamond good coin
|
|
August 29, 2016, 11:02:18 AM |
|
Hey all. Reading the source, in main.cpp...
int64 nSubsidy = 100 * COIN;
[...]
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 288400); // Approx 1 million blocks per year
At current block height, 2161131 / 288400 = 7.4935
That division result gets rounded and converted into an integer, so 2161131 / 288400 = 7 bits to shift the reward by.
I was thinking that C++ rounded either up or down to the nearest integer, which means we'd be very close to a block reward halving (once the result is a tiny bit over 7.5) but after some research it seems it actually truncates the result by ignoring the decimals, so 7.999 becomes 7. In that case, it's not until the result hits 8.000, at block 2307200, that the reward halving will happen.
At some point in the future due to block halving the reward calculation will fall below the minimum accepted input of 0.0001, which is likely going to cause problems. At block 5768000, the reward will change to 0.00009500, which is lower than the minimum accepted input of 0.00010000. Not sure if the client will reject PoW blocks at the moment they're mined (I've seen this happen with another coin where the coinbase transaction could not be created because the reward was too low), or it will just ignore the inputs from mined blocks when trying to send. Either way, the increase in (usable) money supply will probably effectively halt at that point... assuming people are still mining with such a low reward! If it does keep working, by block 9517200 the reward will be 0.00000001, and at block 9805600 you will need more than 8 decimal places to express a non-zero amount.
Okay, got a bit carried away with calculations, so...
tl;dr next reward halving is at block 2307200, and in another 3 or 4 years there's going to be some serious issues with PoW mining when the reward is effectively dust.
So all that remains is to go to the POS. And maybe even change the algorithm on the X11. Currently, the popularity of the coins using anonymous transactions continues to grow. |
|
|
|
megacryptonstatus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
September 05, 2016, 07:49:27 PM |
|
GLOBALCOIN with Megacrypton.com |
|
|
|
|
megacryptonstatus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
September 07, 2016, 03:33:00 PM |
|
Trade GLOBALCOIN with Megacrypton.com |
|
|
|
|
megacryptonstatus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
September 09, 2016, 01:00:24 PM |
|
Trade GLOBALCOIN with Megacrypton.com |
|
|
|
|
megacryptonstatus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
September 10, 2016, 01:06:57 PM |
|
Trade GLOBALCOIN with Megacrypton.com |
|
|
|
|
megacryptonstatus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
September 11, 2016, 02:06:29 PM |
|
Trade GLOBALCOIN with Megacrypton.com |
|
|
|
|
megacryptonstatus
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
September 12, 2016, 01:54:08 PM |
|
Trade GLOBALCOIN with Megacrypton.com |
|
|
|
|
ave_chaincoin
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 50
Merit: 0
|
|
September 25, 2016, 02:57:59 AM |
|
Any news?  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
almightyruler
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1092
|
|
October 17, 2016, 02:07:53 AM |
|
Blockchain is very unstable, with massive reorganisations (for example: delete 10380 blocks, add 11684 different blocks) 10/16/16 15:42:21 REORGANIZE
10/16/16 15:42:21 REORGANIZE: Disconnect 10830 blocks; 79167ddf0ae6353c29f2..d71937710be52f8848ce
10/16/16 15:42:21 REORGANIZE: Connect 11684 blocks; 79167ddf0ae6353c29f2..0345a81013a22fa581fb
10/16/16 15:42:34
************************
EXCEPTION: 11DbException
Db::del: Cannot allocate memory
globalcoin in ProcessMessages()
10/16/16 15:42:34 ProcessMessage(block, 383 bytes) FAILED
Tried restoring an older blockchain and then syncing up, but the same thing happens. I suspect the client can't properly switch to the longest/preferred chain because the changes are so massive. The blockchain itself is also getting quite bloated at 2.2 million blocks in size. The 3 peers I can see are at 2 different starting heights, so I guess there's been a fork, and there are now two competing chains. |
|
|
|
|
|
