[ANN] Catcoin - 0.9.1.1 - Old thread. Locked. Please use 0.9.2 thread.

[hozer]

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_theory and find some engineering textbooks on PID control theory and then get back to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_theory_(sociology) and http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2425270 might be useful reading so we have some common language.

Do you care to share with us what 11 blocks you mined, or what address you mined them to?

Again, my position is 15% of the hashrate should get, on average 15% of the coins. If that is not the case, it's either because of random fluctuations, or covert exploits of the difficulty adjustment.

I know all I need to know about PID and control from my last two careers.  I've used PID and other control systems as an aircraft pilot and on a blue-water fishing boat, and have worked between users and engineers during design and acceptance testing for other control systems.  Finally, the guy that wrote our PID is a professional programmer that works daily writing PID controls.

We're done wasting time trying to find ways to talk with you.  Your whale hunting obsession/fetish isn't really that interesting or useful.

Finally, No, I'm not going to share crypto addresses with you.  Crypto is supposed to be nearly anonymous.  Your obsession with convincing people to use the same addresses is counter to that.  And I haven't mined 11 blocks.  I've mined 21 so far.  My two GAW Black Widow are doing 14MH/s each, and my two GAW Fury are crunching just over 3MH/s.  That's all the scrypt mining capability I have and it's 100% on CAT.

And I'm still finding blocks even after you removed your miner from the network.

So either I'm on some different blockchain, or you just told me your address is 9Uueyr4T8dmzeZHNhYPjYdZbPpxmE9tUMh and blockparser tells me this:

Code:

info: 
    transactions  = 7343
    received      =   185700.11330000
    spent         =   181550.11330000
    balance       =     4150.00000000


info: all done in 0.624 seconds

That's an impressive haul there.

Now maybe I'm misunderstanding you, and you meant 21 blocks since you started mining. Which is what I'd rather believe, but someone got 21 blocks in the last 24 hours, and has gotten 185,700 cat since they last changed their address. And if that address is not you, then that address is basically stealing catcoin *that you could have mined* if we had a 2 or 5 minute block time requirement.

[SlimePuppy]

A dev note on infrastructure:

One of the early strengths of CAT was the enthusiastic community that sprang up, eager to do whatever was necessary to help bring CAT to life.  During those early days, someone set up a seed node, someone else set up a block explorer, someone else hosted wallets, someone else started a Twitter account, someone else Facebook accounts (there were a couple of Facebook accounts...), etc.  It was fun to be part of!

But that community strength became a very serious weakness starting about three months after CAT was launched, because the seed node domain expired three months in and we lost our seed nodes.  Then, after releasing new code, the block explorer and charts fell off the network because the two different groups controlling those pieces didn't respond.  Losing the block explorer almost cost us our Cryptsy listing as they require a working block explorer for their listed coins.

We've had similar challenges since - catcoin.biz, more block explorer hits, no access to other sites, etc.

To fix that - and to finally present a focused, professional appearance - we're continuing to pull all the pieces together.  This will allow easier administration, a consistent look and message, and above all, a 100% guarantee that ALL of the necessary pieces will continue to function.

We're building resilience and redundancy into the mix, and we need to be able to link, adjust, update, and guarantee 24/7 access to every piece of our critical infrastructure.

Please check with us before deploying any servers - you'll probably be wasting your time and money.

Thanks,
Andy

[SlimePuppy]

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_theory and find some engineering textbooks on PID control theory and then get back to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_theory_(sociology) and http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2425270 might be useful reading so we have some common language.

Do you care to share with us what 11 blocks you mined, or what address you mined them to?

Again, my position is 15% of the hashrate should get, on average 15% of the coins. If that is not the case, it's either because of random fluctuations, or covert exploits of the difficulty adjustment.

I know all I need to know about PID and control from my last two careers.  I've used PID and other control systems as an aircraft pilot and on a blue-water fishing boat, and have worked between users and engineers during design and acceptance testing for other control systems.  Finally, the guy that wrote our PID is a professional programmer that works daily writing PID controls.

We're done wasting time trying to find ways to talk with you.  Your whale hunting obsession/fetish isn't really that interesting or useful.

Finally, No, I'm not going to share crypto addresses with you.  Crypto is supposed to be nearly anonymous.  Your obsession with convincing people to use the same addresses is counter to that.  And I haven't mined 11 blocks.  I've mined 21 so far.  My two GAW Black Widow are doing 14MH/s each, and my two GAW Fury are crunching just over 3MH/s.  That's all the scrypt mining capability I have and it's 100% on CAT.

And I'm still finding blocks even after you removed your miner from the network.

So either I'm on some different blockchain, or you just told me your address is 9Uueyr4T8dmzeZHNhYPjYdZbPpxmE9tUMh and blockparser tells me this:

Code:

info: 
    transactions  = 7343
    received      =   185700.11330000
    spent         =   181550.11330000
    balance       =     4150.00000000


info: all done in 0.624 seconds

That's an impressive haul there.

Now maybe I'm misunderstanding you, and you meant 21 blocks since you started mining. Which is what I'd rather believe, but someone got 21 blocks in the last 24 hours, and has gotten 185,700 cat since they last changed their address. And if that address is not you, then that address is basically stealing catcoin *that you could have mined* if we had a 2 or 5 minute block time requirement.

<facepalm> Pull your head out, Troy.  News flash - people transfer crypto coins.  They do it on a block chain.  The block chain is a ledger.  There are plenty of people that have either mined CAT from the beginning (when the blocks were damn near instant) or have been trading and building up their coins.  That's what the damn coins are FOR.  It's what they do.     You're all lathered up because someone TRANSFERRED (not mined, TRANSFERRED) 1.567 Bitcoin worth of CAT?  Seriously?!

And I have NEVER had a stash of CAT.  I have 100 in my personal wallet, 1100 in my account on Geekhash, and 14 pending blocks on my private pool.  They will be cashed out - either to help fund CAT infrastructure, pay for a programmer to fix the algo, or to be donated to my local cat rescue/adoption shelter.

Using a block time filter is THEFT.  People doing that are THIEVES.  They are CRIMINALS.  The CAT dev team are NOT thieves or criminals and will NOT tolerate anyone that is.

I can't make it any more clear that that.

If you want to be a block Nazi, Troy, or a busybody in everyone's wallet, do it somewhere else.

[hozer]

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_theory and find some engineering textbooks on PID control theory and then get back to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_theory_(sociology) and http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2425270 might be useful reading so we have some common language.

Do you care to share with us what 11 blocks you mined, or what address you mined them to?

Again, my position is 15% of the hashrate should get, on average 15% of the coins. If that is not the case, it's either because of random fluctuations, or covert exploits of the difficulty adjustment.

I know all I need to know about PID and control from my last two careers.  I've used PID and other control systems as an aircraft pilot and on a blue-water fishing boat, and have worked between users and engineers during design and acceptance testing for other control systems.  Finally, the guy that wrote our PID is a professional programmer that works daily writing PID controls.

We're done wasting time trying to find ways to talk with you.  Your whale hunting obsession/fetish isn't really that interesting or useful.

Finally, No, I'm not going to share crypto addresses with you.  Crypto is supposed to be nearly anonymous.  Your obsession with convincing people to use the same addresses is counter to that.  And I haven't mined 11 blocks.  I've mined 21 so far.  My two GAW Black Widow are doing 14MH/s each, and my two GAW Fury are crunching just over 3MH/s.  That's all the scrypt mining capability I have and it's 100% on CAT.

And I'm still finding blocks even after you removed your miner from the network.

So either I'm on some different blockchain, or you just told me your address is 9Uueyr4T8dmzeZHNhYPjYdZbPpxmE9tUMh and blockparser tells me this:

Code:

info: 
    transactions  = 7343
    received      =   185700.11330000
    spent         =   181550.11330000
    balance       =     4150.00000000


info: all done in 0.624 seconds

That's an impressive haul there.

Now maybe I'm misunderstanding you, and you meant 21 blocks since you started mining. Which is what I'd rather believe, but someone got 21 blocks in the last 24 hours, and has gotten 185,700 cat since they last changed their address. And if that address is not you, then that address is basically stealing catcoin *that you could have mined* if we had a 2 or 5 minute block time requirement.

<facepalm> Pull your head out, Troy.  News flash - people transfer crypto coins.  They do it on a block chain.  The block chain is a ledger.  There are plenty of people that have either mined CAT from the beginning (when the blocks were damn near instant) or have been trading and building up their coins.  That's what the damn coins are FOR.  It's what they do.     You're all lathered up because someone TRANSFERRED (not mined, TRANSFERRED) 1.567 Bitcoin worth of CAT?  Seriously?!

And I have NEVER had a stash of CAT.  I have 100 in my personal wallet, 1100 in my account on Geekhash, and 14 pending blocks on my private pool.  They will be cashed out - either to help fund CAT infrastructure, pay for a programmer to fix the algo, or to be donated to my local cat rescue/adoption shelter.

Using a block time filter is THEFT.  People doing that are THIEVES.  They are CRIMINALS.  The CAT dev team are NOT thieves or criminals and will NOT tolerate anyone that is.

I can't make it any more clear that that.

If you want to be a block Nazi, Troy, or a busybody in everyone's wallet, do it somewhere else.

The blockchain is public record, and all BIGNUM catcoin from address 9Uuwhatever have been **mined**, if you would care to look at public blockchain record. AND pretty much all of those coins have been mined at lower than average difficulty, giving that miner MORE catcoins per megahash than you are getting.

If you like this arrangement, then just frickin say so. Buy my opinion is that address is unfairly taking advantage of you and every other small miner who mines for a few days providing distributed network security and gets frustrated and quits because they get no catcoins.

The nonsense, both from you, and from 9Uuwhatever needs to stop, and we need to get on with a fair return, instead of giving a extra bonus to gigahash switchpools. We can start with the following patch:

Code:

diff --git a/src/main.cpp b/src/main.cpp
index d9e15b5..6bf098c 100644
--- a/src/main.cpp
+++ b/src/main.cpp
@@ -1454,7 +1454,7 @@ bool ConnectBestBlock(CValidationState &state) {
 
 void CBlockHeader::UpdateTime(const CBlockIndex* pindexPrev)
 {
-    nTime = max(pindexPrev->GetMedianTimePast()+1, GetAdjustedTime());
+    nTime = max(pindexPrev->GetBlockTime()+121, GetAdjustedTime());
 
     // Updating time can change work required on testnet:
     if (fTestNet)
diff --git a/src/rpcmining.cpp b/src/rpcmining.cpp
index 2d1ad9c..daef9df 100644
--- a/src/rpcmining.cpp
+++ b/src/rpcmining.cpp
@@ -573,7 +573,7 @@ Value getblocktemplate(const Array& params, bool fHelp)
     result.push_back(Pair("coinbaseaux", aux));
     result.push_back(Pair("coinbasevalue", (int64_t)pblock->vtx[0].vout[0].nValue));
     result.push_back(Pair("target", hashTarget.GetHex()));
-    result.push_back(Pair("mintime", (int64_t)pindexPrev->GetMedianTimePast()+1));
+    result.push_back(Pair("mintime", (int64_t)pindexPrev->GetBlockTime()+121));
     result.push_back(Pair("mutable", aMutable));
     result.push_back(Pair("noncerange", "00000000ffffffff"));
     result.push_back(Pair("sigoplimit", (int64_t)MAX_BLOCK_SIGOPS));

What this will do is tell your miners to always create blocks with a gap of at least 2 minutes on the block timestamps. If the miner controlling the 9Uu address adds this patch, it will significantly reduce the difficulty swings.

[hozer]

Here's a good argument that Bitcoin (and the altcoins even more so) have been programmed to die: http://cryptome.org/2014/05/bitcoin-suicide.pdf

edit: We need to be able to have a discussion about timestamps, both on blocks, and on transactions, and how we'd like to check said timestamps. Denial of the problem does not make it go away.

I have also argued about this way to much, and if anyone would like to discuss timestamps, find me on irc.freenode.net #catoshi-dev.

[SlimePuppy]

The blockchain is public record, and all BIGNUM catcoin from address 9Uuwhatever have been **mined**, if you would care to look at public blockchain record. AND pretty much all of those coins have been mined at lower than average difficulty, giving that miner MORE catcoins per megahash than you are getting.

If you like this arrangement, then just frickin say so. Buy my opinion is that address is unfairly taking advantage of you and every other small miner who mines for a few days providing distributed network security and gets frustrated and quits because they get no catcoins.

The nonsense, both from you, and from 9Uuwhatever needs to stop, and we need to get on with a fair return, instead of giving a extra bonus to gigahash switchpools. We can start with the following patch:

Troy - for the absolute last time:

Everyone KNOWS that blocks are being mined when the difficulty is low.  We know WHY they are being mined when the difficulty is low (they're the most PROFITABLE blocks).  We know WHY the difficulty is low.  We know WHEN the switch miners come in (difficulty below 20).  All of this is old news and is absolutely normal for the current state of our coin code.

IF you really are concerned about the fast blocks, you'd keep your miner on the coin - when you were mining with the rest of us, the diff stayed above 20 and there were few 'too easy' blocks to mine.

The FIX for this is the same as it has ALWAYS been - fix the algo so that we stop galloping.  Coins do their best to adjust to an AVERAGE BLOCK TIME TARGET and it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to understand that some faster than average blocks raises the difficulty and results in slower than average blocks.  Stop the too-low diff and there are no more 'cheap to mine' blocks.

We are going to fix the difficulty adjustment algo.  We are NOT going to deploy any code that steals from miners.

We're done here, Troy.  No more of your BS, no more FUD, no more busybody looking in other people's wallets, and no more conspiracy to commit fraud.

Seriously man - get some help.

[SlimePuppy]

Back to work...   New seed node is up and synchronizing.  Onward to the block explorer and new home for wallets.

News at 11... 

[damm315er]

Here's a good argument that Bitcoin (and the altcoins even more so) have been programmed to die: http://cryptome.org/2014/05/bitcoin-suicide.pdf

edit: We need to be able to have a discussion about timestamps, both on blocks, and on transactions, and how we'd like to check said timestamps. Denial of the problem does not make it go away.

I have also argued about this way to much, and if anyone would like to discuss timestamps, find me on irc.freenode.net #catoshi-dev.

The issues following denial of a problem, usually manifests itself when an exchange delists a coin because of said issue.

[SlimePuppy]

The issues following denial of a problem, usually manifests itself when an exchange delists a coin because of said issue.

Don't confuse denial of a problem with 1. open discussion of the actual problem after careful root-cause analysis and 2. noises made by people with a long history of actually trying to kill the coin.

After Hozer's last exploit - an active attempt to kill the network by running attack code on a seed node - it cost me personally about $400 and the rest of the team  time and money as well, because we used our own miners and leased all the scrypt hash we could get our hands on to 51% the damn network back together.  That almost DID cost our Cryptsy listing and DID cost miners.  Had we not taken drastic action, Hozer would have killed Cat that afternoon and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Try solo mining now, damm315er.  I've been solo-mining for the past 24 hours with 30 MH/s using the production wallet.  In that 24 hour period I found 11 blocks but one was an orphan.

If you really want CAT either mine it or buy it.  If not, then best of luck mining the coin(s) you prefer.

Andy

[ThePeePs]

From being a miner and holder of CAT a month after it was launched, I too have notice the sharp divide amongst those in the community that were either looking for CatCoin to be successful, or just profitable to mine. And while yes, it would be great to have a coin that's profitable to mine, that's counter to having LONG TERM successful coin.

CatCoin was one of the first coins I became really involved in, and is one of the few that is still around a year later.  Though I have only been involved in crypto for a year, there has one thing that I have noticed to be true.  If a coin looks to be successful for the long term, then looking at the short term, or even medium term outcomes is completely POINTLESS!

Yes, we have had our troubles with the diff re-targeting code when we were getting slammed by some multipools, in the past, but I think most, if not all, multipools are either ignoring us or have taken us out of their pools entirely. 


I have been quiet and netual on this, but I feel that it's time I speak up. The last thing we need right now is for people like Hozer and etblvu1, who have been either FUD'ing or trying to take over CAT, to continue to do so.  They need to sit down, shut up, and let the Dev team do their thing. 

Hozer almost had me running his rouge code on my P2Pool node, as he took me by surprise telling me that there was a new version of the wallet out, and I needed to update.  Luckly for me, I didn't take the bait, but almost did.  It was only after re-reading the dev channel log, seeing no mention of new release, or on here, that I saw that I shouldn't "upgrade" and didn't.

As for the logo, I still like our original one better, but just my two cents.

[blg425]

I always read doge as dogcoin, well in this case won't be making mistakes wit catcoin.

[SlimePuppy]

We want to welcome miner snipez to the CAT family.  His ~100MH/s on CAT has just gotten the last four blocks.

That's a significant vote of confidence for CAT from someone else that puts his money and miners where his mouth is.

Andy

[SlimePuppy]

FYI - pool operators and *nix users - don't upgrade to the latest openSSL before compiling your coind.  There is a problem with openSSL 1.0.0p / 1.0.1k that could cause trouble with coin block chains. 

Background:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=919373.0
http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/33221963/

This is not a problem with the Windows binaries, as those packages are manually installed at build time, and the windows packages/dependencies are statically linked.  Windows wallets are built with the exact packages we specify at build time.  For example:  The current wallet, 9.1.1/09.01.01 uses openSSL 1.0.1g, which fixed the Heartbleed security bug.

Linux users:  Earlier versions of openSSL can be found here:
https://www.openssl.org/source/old/1.0.1/
Don't use 1.0.1e or f as they suffer from the Heartbleed bug.  Any of the rest - from 1.0.1g through 1.0.1j - are recommended.

Andy

[ThePeePs]

FYI - pool operators and *nix users - don't upgrade to the latest openSSL before compiling your coind.  There is a problem with openSSL 1.0.0p / 1.0.1k that could cause trouble with coin block chains. 

Background:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=919373.0
http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/33221963/

This is not a problem with the Windows binaries, as those packages are manually installed at build time, and the windows packages/dependencies are statically linked.  Windows wallets are built with the exact packages we specify at build time.  For example:  The current wallet, 9.1.1/09.01.01 uses openSSL 1.0.1g, which fixed the Heartbleed security bug.

Linux users:  Earlier versions of openSSL can be found here:
https://www.openssl.org/source/old/1.0.1/
Don't use 1.0.1e or f as they suffer from the Heartbleed bug.  Any of the rest - from 1.0.1g through 1.0.1j - are recommended.

Andy

Thanks for the info!

[skillface]

I have been quiet and neutral on this, but I feel that it's time I speak up. The last thing we need right now is for people like Hozer and etblvu1, who have been either FUD'ing or trying to take over CAT, to continue to do so.  They need to sit down, shut up, and let the Dev team do their thing.

Agreed. I'm sick and tired of the bullshit they keep trying to pull. If they don't like the current situation with CAT they're welcome to start up their own coin rather than trying to take control of CAT while it still has a dev team. I also saw their antics on IRC ages back and I have little trust in them. They appeared to want what's best for the coin on the surface but to me it just appeared that they wanted the coin ran the way THEY wanted, everyone else be damned. I however do still have confidence in the current team.

For what it's worth I hold just under 10k CAT myself (and I've stayed in CAT ever since the first week after I started out with DOGE, which itself was my first foray into cryptocurrency) and I'm staying put. If CAT does fully die off (which I doubt) I'm probably done with cyptocurrency altogether.

That's my thoughts on the matter.

[vondi1122]

Since Slimepuppy asked me to take a stand on Catcoin, this is what I wrote him:

Hi Slimepuppy,

sorry for my late answer, was involved with rl-issues too much this week. I have followed the "arguing points" made in the CAT-Thread. And I have to say that I think both parties make valid points but I think this "minimum blocktime" aka "refusal of mining compensation" is not that good. Since, how you said, there is a chance that even tiny miners could get their solved blocks refused, when they by chance solve a block in under X minutes. Maybe there is a workaround for this, e. g. miners have to hold back their solved blocks before they can get the cashout. Example: Miner have to simply wait for 3 Minutes for a cashout. But I don't put serious hope in the success of such an approach.

Hozer&etblvue1

I had nice talkings with etblvue1, I like about him, that he has a constructive/reasonable and also unorthodox approch to solve CAT's problems. But the more I think about your protest I come to the conclusion that maybe etblvue1 approach is made under wrong premises.

Methods to solve difficultiy algorithm:

To make it short I believe to solve the difficulty adjusment issues we need sophisticated and skilled mathematics/Algorithms/"PID" M.Sc/PhD level. I would reject any "simple and fast" approaches. Quality before quickness.

I'll leave it at that for now. If you want you can copy&past this into the CAT-Thread. Actually I'd have liked to talk to etblvue1 first before dismissing his approach behind his back, since at first I thought his approach was not that bad. I think he'll not consider my swing of attitude as back-stabbing et cetera.

Thank you again for consideration and thank you for your efforts with CAT.

vondi1122

Sry for selfquote

Vondi1122

[ThePeePs]

I have been quiet and neutral on this, but I feel that it's time I speak up. The last thing we need right now is for people like Hozer and etblvu1, who have been either FUD'ing or trying to take over CAT, to continue to do so.  They need to sit down, shut up, and let the Dev team do their thing.

Agreed. I'm sick and tired of the bullshit they keep trying to pull. If they don't like the current situation with CAT they're welcome to start up their own coin rather than trying to take control of CAT while it still has a dev team. I also saw their antics on IRC ages back and I have little trust in them. They appeared to want what's best for the coin on the surface but to me it just appeared that they wanted the coin ran the way THEY wanted, everyone else be damned. I however do still have confidence in the current team.

For what it's worth I hold just under 10k CAT myself (and I've stayed in CAT ever since the first week after I started out with DOGE, which itself was my first foray into cryptocurrency) and I'm staying put. If CAT does fully die off (which I doubt) I'm probably done with cyptocurrency altogether.

That's my thoughts on the matter.

Same here, though I wish had just under 10k CAT 

[SlimePuppy]

It appears that Hozer took-down his catstat.info page with the block-time chart and block explorer.

The block-time chart can still be found at http://catcoinwallets.com

There's a block explorer here: https://altexplorer.info/chains/CAT/block_crawler.php


I didn't plan to deploy the new seed node and block explorer until next week - looks like that project needs to be moved up a bit...   

Happy Sunday
Andy

[SlimePuppy]

Ok, everyone.  If you check the block chart you'll see how the network responds to some steady hash.  



Nice regular blocks and no dips into switch-pool land.

Fear not - we're still working on fixing the algo so that it handles low hash periods.  

Welcome to a stable Cat.    

Thanks for your patience and feedback, Cats.  This marathon starts now!

Andy

[ThePeePs]

Ok, everyone.  If you check the block chart you'll see how the network responds to some steady hash.  



Nice regular blocks and no dips into switch-pool land.

Fear not - we're still working on fixing the algo so that it handles low hash periods.  

Welcome to a stable Cat.    

Thanks for your patience and feedback, Cats.  This marathon starts now!

Andy

Whoa, nice to see us back up in the 300's again