[ANNOUNCEMENT] Ixcoin 0.3.24.2 SECOND mandatory update released

[Nasakioto]

We've made some changes to Ixcoin addressing issues raised since its release. This is a compulsory update otherwise your Ixcoin client will not communicate with other updated nodes after Sep 1rst 2011. The blockchain remains intact.

Upgrade to 0.3.24.2 as previous update 0.3.24.1 is now obsolete as is 0.3.24.

What's new in 0.3.24.2?

• New Difficulty Retargeting Algorithm
  
  A new difficulty adjustment algorithm will activate on block 20055. The current block count is 19968 so we should hit this count in about ~2 weeks. After that, difficulty retargets every 144 blocks (i.e. every 24 hours) with max increments of 10% and max decrements at 400% (like Solidcoin). The aim is to achieve a much more consistent block rate. (commit)  (commit2)
  
  
  
• New Peering Marker
  
  On Sept 1rst 2011 at 00:12:51 UTC (in under a week), the new client will switch over to a new Ixcoin-specific pchMessageStart peering marker from the original Bitcoin marker. This change was recommended by a few although we haven't had reports of any issues with this yet. Better safe than sorry. The updated Ixcoin nodes will not be able to communicate with non-updated Ixcoin clients after that date. This will require a restart of the Ixcoin client on or after Sept 1rst. (commit)
  
  
•   Other Miscellaneous Changes 
  
  * Blockchain lockin at block 19947 (commit)
  * Hard limit total Ixcoins to 21M (commit)
  * Fix minimized tray icon issue in Windows distro
  * Switched back to lfnet.org IRC instead of Freednode. Now using 10 channels #ixcoin00-09 (commit)
  * Bitcoin addresses are now detected as invalid Ixcoin addresses (commit)
  * Relay threshold now at block 19947
  * MacOS icon updated to Ixcoin
  
  
  

Where can I get the source?

The latest source is available at https://github.com/ixcoin/ixcoin

Where can I get the executables?

On Sourceforge:

ixcoin-0.3.24.2-linux.tar.gz SHA1: 219f78b075029fef5b0d3b11db1c0be885dffcb6

ixcoin-0.3.24.2-linux-src.tar.gz SHA1: 91ecdf45ba70eb07eaa96ff517d64d9d7bad18f5

ixcoin-0.3.24.2-win32-setup.exe SHA1: ea12435c74b5b4ce63098aa47f5372de722ba029

ixcoin-0.3.24.2-win32.zip SHA1: 6618515a429bcd8f3f8480ca87494120e530ffa8

Apologies for the multiple updates.

If you are upgrading from 0.3.24.1 and you are compiling from source, you can just update your main.cpp as the other updates are not essential.

There's also an upcoming release 0.3.25 of Ixcoin based on the bitcoin 0.3.25 release. This upgrade however will not be mandatory like this one.

Thanks.

Thomas.

[zebedee]

We've made some changes to Ixcoin addressing issues raised since its release. This is a compulsory update otherwise

Dude you're such a loser.  You don't know what you're doing and can't get it right first time.

What on earth is a 400% decrease of something that is necessarily positive, b.t.w.?

Waiting for the 3, and then 4, leading zeros of the exchange rate vs. BTC; it's only a matter of time...

[wolftaur]

We've made some changes to Ixcoin addressing issues raised since its release. This is a compulsory update otherwise

Dude you're such a loser.  You don't know what you're doing and can't get it right first time.

Cut the guy a little slack. Stealing code from someone else's project is really hard...

If you can't figure out Edit > Copy and Edit > Paste, that is.

[jackjack]

[ArtForz]

I really liked the first part of this one: https://github.com/ixcoin/ixcoin/commit/a489c4b0a4bf57a4c8807995cf806fd666760135

[wolftaur]

I really liked the first part of this one: https://github.com/ixcoin/ixcoin/commit/a489c4b0a4bf57a4c8807995cf806fd666760135

That wasn't a mistake, that was just him thinking the computer would accept his wishful thinking that ixcoin's block chain actually got to 130,000 blocks...

Or maybe he just got confused between how many blocks he pre-mined, and how many coins he pre-mined, and thought that was just fine...

As far as the fact he manages to screw up the difference between "is this true" and "is this false" ... Come on, truth has GOT to be hard for someone who starts a block chain with the sole intent of giving himself more coins than anyone else, so we can't really claim to be surprised, right?

[JohnDoe]

Could anyone tell me why is there a need to limit decreases in difficulty? Why not just let it adjust freely?

[wolftaur]

Could anyone tell me why is there a need to limit decreases in difficulty? Why not just let it adjust freely?

The SolidCoin author felt it was a good idea. ixcoins is simply inheriting this because the ixcoins author did not have the ability to solve the retarget problem in ixcoin on his own. The difficulty mechanism belongs to SolidCoin, so check the SolidCoin thread for the rational and feedback.

[FlipPro]

Did you basically copy the solidcoin code to fix yours ? Wow :O.

[the joint]

Can I bum a cig?  My Ixcoins are worthless

Actually I don't have any Ixcoins.  Same thing.

[smoothie]

Did you basically copy the solidcoin code to fix yours ? Wow :O.

Yup that's how the pros do it!

[the joint]

Did you basically copy the solidcoin code to fix yours ? Wow :O.

Yup that's how the pros do it!

Satoshi...Nasakioto...He stole heritage too.  Thomas?  Really?  THOMAS Nasakioto?

[wolftaur]

Did you basically copy the solidcoin code to fix yours ? Wow :O.

That's exactly what he did, yeah. And he actually didn't get it right the first time, which is why there is a SECOND mandatory update release.

See, if ixcoins can't difficulty-adjust to something useful for months, his pre-mined 580,000 coins are going to be completely worthless. Who's going to buy them when we get to the point where transaction confirmations take six weeks? For all his talk about how this was to be a "direct" Bitcoin fork he was really quick to grab from another fork and change the fundamental rules when things went sour for him.

I'll also remind everyone that it comes as no surprise that he can't maintain his code by himself. If he knew what he was doing, he wouldn't have pre-mined thousands of blocks. He would have simply edited the code to put a million coins in block 1, and however many (96 I think?) in every block after. Of course then it would be much easier to see if the transactions were really for bounties as he later tried to claim.

[the joint]

Looks like my idea for RadioActive Coin is starting to seem a bit more appealing, eh?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=39751.0

[JohnDoe]

The SolidCoin author felt it was a good idea. ixcoins is simply inheriting this because the ixcoins author did not have the ability to solve the retarget problem in ixcoin on his own. The difficulty mechanism belongs to SolidCoin, so check the SolidCoin thread for the rational and feedback.

Actually it was inherited from Bitcoin. But I guess you are right that I won't get an answer here.

[wolftaur]

Actually it was inherited from Bitcoin. But I guess you are right that I won't get an answer here.

Yeah, my bad. Crossed wires for a moment and thought you meant the timing in adjustments, not the limit for adjustments.

[Tasty Champa]

You guys seem to be prone to cognitive dissonance.

serious,
you guys look like total fuck ups in life, like government flunkies. XD

Show me your man tits./

[wolftaur]

You guys seem to be prone to cognitive dissonance.

serious,
you guys look like total fuck ups in life, like government flunkies. XD

Show me your man tits./

They're called pecs. I can bench more than my body weight.

[jackjack]

Coinotron:

Code:

	GH/s 	Miners 	Round 	Profit/BTC 	Exchange rate 	Difficulty
IXC 	0.01 	1 	190 h 29 m 	0.44 	0.00211226 	16384

One miner? I really wonder who it can be

[zebedee]

We've made some changes to Ixcoin addressing issues raised since its release. This is a compulsory update otherwise your Ixcoin client will not communicate with other updated nodes after Sep 1rst 2011. The blockchain remains intact.

I wonder what Thomas would do if the same miners that pumped up his difficulty beyond reach showed up around block 20055 and ignored what he imagines to be a "compulsory" update, forcing the blockchain down a different path.  Could make for a fun split...