Bitcoin Forum
December 18, 2017, 02:30:01 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 [92] 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 ... 159 »
  Print  
Author Topic: ⚒[CGA] Cryptographic Anomaly - The Elusive Coin⚒  (Read 224557 times)
tertius993
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 669


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 09:05:07 AM
 #1821

Is there a size limit on transactions from the new wallet?  Wouldn't let me send 40 CGA - just said it was "over the size limit" and then "create transaction failed".  (I may have misremembered the exact wording.)

20 was OK.

Seems a bit odd, 40 is hardly a lot.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513564201
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513564201

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513564201
Reply with quote  #2

1513564201
Report to moderator
1513564201
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513564201

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513564201
Reply with quote  #2

1513564201
Report to moderator
wzttide
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 01:15:56 PM
 #1822

Is there a size limit on transactions from the new wallet?  Wouldn't let me send 40 CGA - just said it was "over the size limit" and then "create transaction failed".  (I may have misremembered the exact wording.)

20 was OK.

Seems a bit odd, 40 is hardly a lot.
This is a common problem - your wallet is probably very fragmented, meaning you have a lot of transactions in and/or out. This forces the client to create large transactions (not the amount counts, the transactions count!). You can try to push a few extra fragments of CGA for the fee.
tertius993
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 669


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 01:59:59 PM
 #1823

Is there a size limit on transactions from the new wallet?  Wouldn't let me send 40 CGA - just said it was "over the size limit" and then "create transaction failed".  (I may have misremembered the exact wording.)

20 was OK.

Seems a bit odd, 40 is hardly a lot.
This is a common problem - your wallet is probably very fragmented, meaning you have a lot of transactions in and/or out. This forces the client to create large transactions (not the amount counts, the transactions count!). You can try to push a few extra fragments of CGA for the fee.

OK, that makes sense - the p2pool mining will have created a lot of small transactions.

I did pay the fee - it was 0.053 for 20 CGA!
wzttide
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 02:28:34 PM
 #1824

Is there a size limit on transactions from the new wallet?  Wouldn't let me send 40 CGA - just said it was "over the size limit" and then "create transaction failed".  (I may have misremembered the exact wording.)

20 was OK.

Seems a bit odd, 40 is hardly a lot.
This is a common problem - your wallet is probably very fragmented, meaning you have a lot of transactions in and/or out. This forces the client to create large transactions (not the amount counts, the transactions count!). You can try to push a few extra fragments of CGA for the fee.

OK, that makes sense - the p2pool mining will have created a lot of small transactions.

I did pay the fee - it was 0.053 for 20 CGA!

You can also set some extra fee in the options of your qt-client.

So the transaction did go through? If not: maybe it helps having 2 wallets: one for mining, one for spendings. I'm doing it the same way.
tertius993
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 669


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 02:37:00 PM
 #1825

Is there a size limit on transactions from the new wallet?  Wouldn't let me send 40 CGA - just said it was "over the size limit" and then "create transaction failed".  (I may have misremembered the exact wording.)

20 was OK.

Seems a bit odd, 40 is hardly a lot.
This is a common problem - your wallet is probably very fragmented, meaning you have a lot of transactions in and/or out. This forces the client to create large transactions (not the amount counts, the transactions count!). You can try to push a few extra fragments of CGA for the fee.

OK, that makes sense - the p2pool mining will have created a lot of small transactions.

I did pay the fee - it was 0.053 for 20 CGA!

You can also set some extra fee in the options of your qt-client.

So the transaction did go through? If not: maybe it helps having 2 wallets: one for mining, one for spendings. I'm doing it the same way.

Yes, it did, thanks.

I have stopped mining now, not really worthwhile any longer with my low hashrate.

But for future reference can you have two wallets on the same machine?  How do you set them up?
wzttide
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 03:23:11 PM
 #1826

Is there a size limit on transactions from the new wallet?  Wouldn't let me send 40 CGA - just said it was "over the size limit" and then "create transaction failed".  (I may have misremembered the exact wording.)

20 was OK.

Seems a bit odd, 40 is hardly a lot.
This is a common problem - your wallet is probably very fragmented, meaning you have a lot of transactions in and/or out. This forces the client to create large transactions (not the amount counts, the transactions count!). You can try to push a few extra fragments of CGA for the fee.

OK, that makes sense - the p2pool mining will have created a lot of small transactions.

I did pay the fee - it was 0.053 for 20 CGA!

You can also set some extra fee in the options of your qt-client.

So the transaction did go through? If not: maybe it helps having 2 wallets: one for mining, one for spendings. I'm doing it the same way.

Yes, it did, thanks.

I have stopped mining now, not really worthwhile any longer with my low hashrate.

But for future reference can you have two wallets on the same machine?  How do you set them up?

Either use MuCoWa: http://mucowa.com
Or rename your "Cryptographicanomaly" folder in your appdata (depends on your OS), start the qt-wallet again and you'll have a new wallet. Rename the new folder "Cryptographicanomaly" and the old one back to "Cryptographicanomaly" to get access to your old wallet.
tertius993
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 669


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 03:29:16 PM
 #1827


Either use MuCoWa: http://mucowa.com
Or rename your "Cryptographicanomaly" folder in your appdata (depends on your OS), start the qt-wallet again and you'll have a new wallet. Rename the new folder "Cryptographicanomaly" and the old one back to "Cryptographicanomaly" to get access to your old wallet.

Oh, yeah I'd thought of the renaming fudge I was hoping there was some clever workaround ... I think MuCoWa is preferable ... Wink
sleepless
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 07:10:55 PM
 #1828

we need a mac client that works please!

+1! It's really important. We Mac users aren't such a minority group anymore Grin

WTF? I want this client, too Cry

Are you saying that both the Mac versions from CGAnomaly.com aren't working?

I tried both and I am running Mavericks (OS X 10.9) so I started with the one for 10.9 but had no luck. The one for 10.7 isn't working as well.
sublok
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 35


View Profile WWW
March 03, 2014, 07:21:51 PM
 #1829

we need a mac client that works please!

+1! It's really important. We Mac users aren't such a minority group anymore Grin

WTF? I want this client, too Cry

Are you saying that both the Mac versions from CGAnomaly.com aren't working?

I tried both and I am running Mavericks (OS X 10.9) so I started with the one for 10.9 but had no luck. The one for 10.7 isn't working as well.

Try to compile your own: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=437950.msg5213031#msg5213031)

I think that there might be a missing dependency on some macs, none of the wallets worked for me until I installed ran the following...

Code:
sudo port install boost db48 qt4-mac openssl miniupnpc git

CGA: AQMKRqz2tryYxFrKQ8C17VnTnhEFuL5q7C |
s4w3d0ff
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322


Spray and Pray


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 07:27:49 PM
 #1830

we need a mac client that works please!

+1! It's really important. We Mac users aren't such a minority group anymore Grin

WTF? I want this client, too Cry

Are you saying that both the Mac versions from CGAnomaly.com aren't working?

I tried both and I am running Mavericks (OS X 10.9) so I started with the one for 10.9 but had no luck. The one for 10.7 isn't working as well.

Try to compile your own: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=437950.msg5213031#msg5213031)

I think that there might be a missing dependency on some macs, none of the wallets worked for me until I installed ran the following...

Code:
sudo port install boost db48 qt4-mac openssl miniupnpc git

Ya, I'm sorry, I think it is the way that I am compressing the .app file. I'm working on fixing the issue. In the meantime, you could do the above or get Mucowa.

Edit: Can someone with OSX 10.9 try this one for me? http://cganomaly.com/downloads/Cryptographicanomaly-Qt.app.tar

BTC:15D8VaZco22GTLVrFMAehXyif6EGf8GMYV
|⚒|Cryptographic Anomaly|⚒|
s4w3d0ff
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322


Spray and Pray


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 07:41:39 PM
 #1831

BTW you guys see the price?  Grin Grin Grin Grin

BTC:15D8VaZco22GTLVrFMAehXyif6EGf8GMYV
|⚒|Cryptographic Anomaly|⚒|
dzimbeck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 08:16:53 PM
 #1832

I think I have a solution to the 51% problem in this coin. Im a newb so anyone can correct me if I am wrong. So here is my thoughts. Cant you switch this coin to a proof of stake hybrid? Then all you have to do is send 1 million coins to an obviously fake address and then nobody would ever have a high enough stake to perform a 51% attack. Does that work? then this way you now have a coin that is hard to mine somewhat asic resistant and minable on cheap computers.
Alohaboy?!
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
March 03, 2014, 08:21:15 PM
 #1833

BTW you guys see the price?  Grin Grin Grin Grin

oh yes ! love to see this !

Bitdegree██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
|██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
██  ██  █
tertius993
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 669


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 08:30:50 PM
 #1834

I think I have a solution to the 51% problem in this coin. Im a newb so anyone can correct me if I am wrong. So here is my thoughts. Cant you switch this coin to a proof of stake hybrid? Then all you have to do is send 1 million coins to an obviously fake address and then nobody would ever have a high enough stake to perform a 51% attack. Does that work? then this way you now have a coin that is hard to mine somewhat asic resistant and minable on cheap computers.

Where would the million coins come from?
s4w3d0ff
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322


Spray and Pray


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 08:57:55 PM
 #1835

I think I have a solution to the 51% problem in this coin. Im a newb so anyone can correct me if I am wrong. So here is my thoughts. Cant you switch this coin to a proof of stake hybrid? Then all you have to do is send 1 million coins to an obviously fake address and then nobody would ever have a high enough stake to perform a 51% attack. Does that work? then this way you now have a coin that is hard to mine somewhat asic resistant and minable on cheap computers.

Every coin has a risk to be 51% attacked (even bitcoin, tho that is very improbable unless someone were to highjack ALL the super computers in the world). This is the "double spending" attack where you mine your own transations and manipulate the network into giving you more coins.

The attack that was described earlier in this thread (re-org attack) is specific to Kimoto's Gravity Well. Coins with low network hash rate are more susceptible to this attack. You wouldn't really need 51%, just a decent amount of hash power and good timing. So I removed KGW.

The main issue with CGA was the fact that there are/were 0 blocks mixed in with blocks of worth. Due to the current protocol, you must know what the block is worth before you mine it. So someone "could" write a script that checks the current block to see if it is worth anything, and if it isn't stop mining. Then wait for a block that is of worth and start mining again. This was fixed by making every block worth something (this doesn't come into effect until block 48,000). All I did was divide the coin up among the blocks that would normally be 0. So, if the diff were to be at 3, you will see the block reward = 0.333333 when before/now it was/is the first 2 blocks would be worth 0 and the third would be worth 1.

BTC:15D8VaZco22GTLVrFMAehXyif6EGf8GMYV
|⚒|Cryptographic Anomaly|⚒|
mxq
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 48


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 09:07:35 PM
 #1836

CGA is going up with volume growing
 Grin Grin Grin
sleepless
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 09:17:11 PM
 #1837

Edit: Can someone with OSX 10.9 try this one for me? http://cganomaly.com/downloads/Cryptographicanomaly-Qt.app.tar

Tried it Wink

Quote
Process:         Cryptographicanomaly-Qt [26335]
Path:            /Volumes/VOLUME/*/Cryptographicanomaly-Qt.app/Contents/MacOS/Cryptographicanomaly-Qt
Identifier:      org.cryptographicanomaly.Cryptographicanomaly-Qt
Version:         -
Code Type:       X86-64 (Native)
Parent Process:  launchd [480]
Responsible:     Cryptographicanomaly-Qt [26335]
User ID:         501

Date/Time:       2014-03-03 22:15:32.399 +0100
OS Version:      Mac OS X 10.9.1 (13B42)
Report Version:  11
Anonymous UUID:  F8A04162-81F4-F616-2551-A2CB01315EA7


Crashed Thread:  0

Exception Type:  EXC_BREAKPOINT (SIGTRAP)
Exception Codes: 0x0000000000000002, 0x0000000000000000

Application Specific Information:
dyld: launch, loading dependent libraries

Dyld Error Message:
  Library not loaded: /opt/local/lib/libminiupnpc.8.dylib
  Referenced from: /Volumes/VOLUME/*/Cryptographicanomaly-Qt.app/Contents/MacOS/Cryptographicanomaly-Qt
  Reason: image not found

Binary Images:
    0x7fff67ec9000 -     0x7fff67efc817  dyld (239.3) <D1DFCF3F-0B0C-332A-BCC0-87A851B570FF> /usr/lib/dyld

Think that should be the issue.
forzendiablo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


the grandpa of cryptos


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 09:23:16 PM
 #1838

stratum+tcp://anomalypool.com:2124

ive puit 4mhs at this.

yolo
s4w3d0ff
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322


Spray and Pray


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 09:31:00 PM
 #1839

Edit: Can someone with OSX 10.9 try this one for me? http://cganomaly.com/downloads/Cryptographicanomaly-Qt.app.tar

Tried it Wink

Quote
Dyld Error Message:
  Library not loaded: /opt/local/lib/libminiupnpc.8.dylib
  Referenced from: /Volumes/VOLUME/*/Cryptographicanomaly-Qt.app/Contents/MacOS/Cryptographicanomaly-Qt
  Reason: image not found

Binary Images:
    0x7fff67ec9000 -     0x7fff67efc817  dyld (239.3) <D1DFCF3F-0B0C-332A-BCC0-87A851B570FF> /usr/lib/dyld

Think that should be the issue.

Missing miniupnpc lib?

Edit: I think that lib is optional. Did the app work tho?

BTC:15D8VaZco22GTLVrFMAehXyif6EGf8GMYV
|⚒|Cryptographic Anomaly|⚒|
dzimbeck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316


View Profile
March 03, 2014, 10:26:50 PM
 #1840

Quote
Where would the million coins come from?
I guess they would have had to be premined. My understanding of Proof Of Stake is that you cannot do a 51% attack unless you have a large stake in the coin. So the idea is to premine coins and send them to a fake/nonexistent address. This way nobody would ever be able to collect them and it would be as if they did not even exist. The dummy wallet would hold much more than 51% of the total supply and thus make the attack impossible. Can someone please inform me if I am misunderstanding proof of stake?

Quote
Every coin has a risk to be 51% attacked (even bitcoin, tho that is very improbable unless someone were to highjack ALL the super computers in the world). This is the "double spending" attack where you mine your own transations and manipulate the network into giving you more coins.

The attack that was described earlier in this thread (re-org attack) is specific to Kimoto's Gravity Well. Coins with low network hash rate are more susceptible to this attack. You wouldn't really need 51%, just a decent amount of hash power and good timing. So I removed KGW.

The main issue with CGA was the fact that there are/were 0 blocks mixed in with blocks of worth. Due to the current protocol, you must know what the block is worth before you mine it. So someone "could" write a script that checks the current block to see if it is worth anything, and if it isn't stop mining. Then wait for a block that is of worth and start mining again. This was fixed by making every block worth something (this doesn't come into effect until block 48,000). All I did was divide the coin up among the blocks that would normally be 0. So, if the diff were to be at 3, you will see the block reward = 0.333333 when before/now it was/is the first 2 blocks would be worth 0 and the third would be worth 1.

Ok I understand that change. That makes a lot of sense. But I guess my concern was, since the higher the difficulty the lower the reward it would deter large mining farms and allow people to mine it with their home computers. I guess the coin would be "resistant to popularity" since if miners jump on it, it becomes too difficult. So with that in mind, if the coin ever becomes valuable and nobody is mining it aggressively enough then isnt it very very easy to quickly mine the living shit out of it and take over the network with higher than 51% and even do a selfish mining attack? I can see this happening especially if the coins ever get valuable because of their rarity. Thats why I proposed my proof of stake solution above. Give a phony account a large stake (like premining millions of coins way beyond what the total supply will ever reach) and pretend like it doesnt even exist. Mind you, I'm still trying to understand all the different algorithms so I would really like to know your feedback on this and if I am making sense or not.
Pages: « 1 ... 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 [92] 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 ... 159 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!