|
wesleyh
|
 |
February 18, 2014, 10:59:54 AM |
|
What is the format for account id's in aliases again?
Is it
acc:23232323 ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are several different types of Bitcoin clients. The most secure are full nodes like Bitcoin Core, which will follow the rules of the network no matter what miners do. Even if every miner decided to create 1000 bitcoins per block, full nodes would stick to the rules and reject those blocks.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
xcn
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 51
Merit: 0
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:01:31 AM |
|
What is the format for account id's in aliases again?
Is it
acc:23232323 ?
It should be cleared in NXT wiki, i think. |
|
|
|
|
|
mikesbmw
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:04:12 AM |
|
[2014-02-17 21:22:23.586] DEBUG: Failed to accept block 13734259069497850723 at
height 68803 received from node55.nxtbase.com, blacklisting
[2014-02-17 21:22:26.391] DEBUG: Failed to accept block 13734259069497850723 at
height 68803 received from miasik.no-ip.org, blacklisting
[2014-02-17 21:22:50.345] DEBUG: Failed to accept block 209947979157787352 at he
ight 68804 received from nxt.homer.ru, blacklisting
[2014-02-17 21:23:02.295] DEBUG: Failed to accept block 209947979157787352 at he
ight 68804 received from node10.nxtbase.com, blacklisting
a I don't understand why it keeps happening to your node, but again those two block ids are from the correct blockchain - at least on the nodes I run. I am still not sure, who determines what is the correct chain? i did a video interview with tai zen about how the network discovers the right chain. i cant make any promises but it may be helpful. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzKyXzZJJA8Okay, let me ask you some questions. I put these ones on the table some time ago in my analysis of 'Transparent Forging' and CfB haven't answered it, yet. So, maybe you can. You said: "The higher the stake involved in forging a block the 'better' the block." So, how should a node (not the network as every node decides on their own) decide when two blocks are forged: one from account A and one from account B. Now, there are several cases: 1) A comes first, TF says A is before B => A is on top of chain, B gets rejected when arriving (and vice versa) 2) B comes first, TF says A is before B => A didn't forge => B is on top of chain (and vice versa) 3) 2) happend; A arrived late; what happens? Will B get popped off? 3) ok so im not sure specifically how the client handles this situation. you could in theory have all of the nodes reject a as punishment for being late. there would be some advantages to this. personally though i think what you described in 3) would be wiser. ask a dev for specifics. IIRC, TF includes something like a penalty to accounts that were too late forging. From the perspective of a node, not forging and the forged block arrived too late are indistinguishable. That penalty is supposed to prevent selfish mining. Okay, let's go deeper: Let's assume, one part of the network underwent 1) and the other part underwent 2) (because of network latency). We now have a partition of the network in nodes (say N1) having A on top and in nodes (say N2) having B on top. How do we solve that? Subtract all of the targets on chain a, subtract all of the targets on chain b, see which number is larger. Sorry to ask again... Two simple questions: can this be safely disregarded? All is well? (the non-technical answer please  ) |
|
|
|
ChuckOne
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:10:59 AM |
|
Subtract all of the targets on chain a, subtract all of the targets on chain b, see which number is larger.
Subtract from what? technically it doesn't matter but probably zero would be the most strait forward. Err, so what about summing them up and see what number is smaller? Sounds easier to explain to most people. CfB said the next block will decide; still waiting for the how. According to Wiki TF decides the next forger dependent on the previous block. So, if there is a partition of the network N1 and N2, then the nodes in these two different partitions have different TF outputs. So, there are two cases: (next blocks/accounts are C, C' (part of N1) and D (part of N2); TF1 and TF2 are the output of TF of N1 and N2 respectively) 1) TF1 says C; TF2 says D => branches will get longer as foreign blocks get rejected 2) TF1 says C; TF2 says C' => C will get accepted; C' will get rejected as N1 expects C => What does N2? I would say: penalize C', ignore C and move on on its branch. Still don't see how this conflict can be resolved. I need some idea for that. bump |
|
|
|
|
abctc
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1778
Merit: 1025
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:18:07 AM |
|
- there is no reference to "consensus" on this link. |
██████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████ |
, the Next platform. Magis quam Moneta (More than a Coin) |
|
|
|
superresistant
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2128
Merit: 1120
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:22:10 AM |
|
Nxt on bitcoinwisdom NOW ! |
|
|
|
|
|
instacalm
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:22:45 AM |
|
Nxt on bitcoinwisdom NOW ! Great news! |
|
|
|
|
xyzzyx
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 490
Merit: 250
I don't really come from outer space.
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:22:59 AM |
|
What is the format for account id's in aliases again?
Is it
acc:23232323 ?
There doesn't seem to be a standard yet. I'm in favor of the "acct" scheme as defined in this IETF standards draft: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-acct-uri-07Using this proposed standard, a Nxt account would be specified by acct:1234567890@nxt The Android app by yueye000 uses a custom scheme of "nact". Using this custom scheme, a Nxt account would be specified by nact:1234567890 There's another custom scheme I've seen, but I forget what exactly it is and which client uses it. |
"An awful lot of code is being written ... in languages that aren't very good by people who don't know what they're doing." -- Barbara Liskov
|
|
|
|
marcus03
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:27:46 AM |
|
Nxt on bitcoinwisdom NOW ! I've asked to add NXT in their thread like 4 or 5 weeks ago and I think others, too. Very cool to now see it added! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mikesbmw
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:39:21 AM |
|
Nxt on bitcoinwisdom NOW ! Wow! Very cool! |
|
|
|
McDoxy
Member
Offline
Activity: 96
Merit: 10
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:43:08 AM |
|
Nxt on bitcoinwisdom NOW ! Wow! Very cool! OMG Finally! You can't select it under "Markets" yet though. |
|
|
|
|
bitmadaboutcoin
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:47:52 AM |
|
Nxt on bitcoinwisdom NOW ! Wow! Very cool! OMG Finally! You can't select it under "Markets" yet though. do you think it will be long before you can? |
|
|
|
|
|
pandaisftw
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:52:51 AM |
|
Nxt on bitcoinwisdom NOW ! Very nice! Finally a real-time graph I can watch! |
NXT: 13095091276527367030
|
|
|
|
xchrix
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:56:24 AM |
|
do you think it will be long before you can?
i think they will show it in the main menu when there is more data to show. maybe in some days. otherwise the 1d time period is looking bad.  very good news for NXT. but i dont think its realtime because bter isnt providing an API for this. maybe data every 30 seconds? |
|
|
|
|
mezzovide
Member
Offline
Activity: 101
Merit: 10
|
|
February 18, 2014, 11:58:04 AM |
|
Nxt on bitcoinwisdom NOW ! OMG... finally! |
Btc : 12LMdyWoyjJ1BZxfWmaZMWjTXn7S9y5EdK
|
|
|
stereotype
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1554
Merit: 1000
|
|
February 18, 2014, 12:12:34 PM |
|
do you think it will be long before you can?
i think they will show it in the main menu when there is more data to show. maybe in some days. otherwise the 1d time period is looking bad. very good news for NXT. but i dont think its realtime because bter isnt providing an API for this. maybe data every 30 seconds? Wisdom updates within a second or two of Bter. Well done to those who badgered Wisdom. |
|
|
|
|
|
Hegemon
|
|
February 18, 2014, 12:13:30 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sussex
|
|
February 18, 2014, 12:14:10 PM |
|
Reposted because I originally put this in an old thread.
Ok, I wonder if you guys can help?
I bought 500+ NXT through DGEX a few nonths ago, transfered them to my account and have not touched it for a couple of weeks.
Now, when I enter my password, it shows zero balance, zero transactions, nada.
I am sure the password is correct, I use keepass and have checked it against old backups, but it must still be logging me into the wrong account.
I have checked the account number against the explorer and that shows no information at all for the account number.
I'm guessing that my password must be wrong, but I am at a complete loss to explain how it could have happened. It was a randomly generated 30 character password.
Would it be possible for DGEX to trace the receiving account number of the transfers I made, to help me confirm if I am looking at the right account or not? There is no historical detail at all on DGEX, no txids, nothing, just dates.
Anyway, all help is appreciated, but I suspect the NXT has gone.
This is the first time I will have lost coins in this way, I'm a fairly experienced crypto geek, so if this can happen to me, it will happen to noobs. There's got to be a better way.
It's certainly put me off the NXT system.
EDIT:
I have just remembered that I saw my NXT in my account a few weeks ago when I was totting-up all my accounts.
EDIT EDIT:
I am trying to get the client to run on a Raspberry PI, this is the only reason I noticed the problem. If my client has downloaded a corrupt blockchain, would my password then log me into the wrong account? I ask because I am trying to reconcile the reason behind there being nothing shown in the block explorer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
wesleyh
|
|
February 18, 2014, 12:16:29 PM |
|
If it shows zero transactions it probably means you are on a fork or something. Make sure you update to latest NRS 0.7.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
