[ANN][RIC] Riecoin: constellations POW *CPU* HARD FORK successful, world record

[gatra]

But weird thing is, that my wallet didn't sync any further and the blockexplorers too.
Let's hope it doesn't happen again

I noticed the same thing. My wallet was not synced for nearly 14 hours but my miner kept running and submitting shares. I watched both the miner and my wallet move on to the next block at nearly the same time.

This is because there were no mined blocks for 14hs. There were no blocks to sync.

[1715150996]

1715150996

[1715150996]

1715150996

[1715150996]

1715150996

[1715150996]

1715150996

[vancsj]

But weird thing is, that my wallet didn't sync any further and the blockexplorers too.
Let's hope it doesn't happen again

Ypool down and most hash power gone:(

[vancsj]

Yes, the superblocks will have higher difficulty and the record holder would have the highest, however if more than one of them share the same top difficulty you'll have to decide by comparing the value of the hash of the block's header (in the bit order that is used to generate the base prime), or just compare the base prime for those.

Hi gatra, do we have to roll the timestamp as frequently as before with the new super  block stratergy?

[gatra]

Yes, the superblocks will have higher difficulty and the record holder would have the highest, however if more than one of them share the same top difficulty you'll have to decide by comparing the value of the hash of the block's header (in the bit order that is used to generate the base prime), or just compare the base prime for those.

Hi gatra, do we have to roll the timestamp as frequently as before with the new super  block stratergy?

Hi!
Yes: maybe less frequently because larger numbers mean that looking at all the nonce space may take a little longer, but most likely the difference will be too small to be noticed.

[bsunau7]

Yes, the superblocks will have higher difficulty and the record holder would have the highest, however if more than one of them share the same top difficulty you'll have to decide by comparing the value of the hash of the block's header (in the bit order that is used to generate the base prime), or just compare the base prime for those.

Hi gatra, do we have to roll the timestamp as frequently as before with the new super  block stratergy?

Hi!
Yes: maybe less frequently because larger numbers mean that looking at all the nonce space may take a little longer, but most likely the difference will be too small to be noticed.

One of the things I noticed with gapcoin is that the time between blocks isn't monotonic (regular).  This seems to cause significant issues (at least for me) with the wallet as network elements (NAT) drop connection state without the end nodes knowing, so you get 45 minute "hangs" while you re-transmit packets to "dead" peers.

I hope that the "slow block" which a super block will generate doesn't have a de-stabilizing effect on the network.

Regards,

--
bsunau7

[gatra]

One of the things I noticed with gapcoin is that the time between blocks isn't monotonic (regular).  This seems to cause significant issues (at least for me) with the wallet as network elements (NAT) drop connection state without the end nodes knowing, so you get 45 minute "hangs" while you re-transmit packets to "dead" peers.

I hope that the "slow block" which a super block will generate doesn't have a de-stabilizing effect on the network.

Regards,

--
bsunau7

well, when ypool was down we saw that there was a long time without blocks, but when block generation resumed all pending transactions were included and clients resumed working without problems; so it looks like we tested this scenario.
it could be another problem with gapcoin

we'll see in a couple of days: superblock expected this weekend!

[gatra]

Yes, the superblocks will have higher difficulty and the record holder would have the highest, however if more than one of them share the same top difficulty you'll have to decide by comparing the value of the hash of the block's header (in the bit order that is used to generate the base prime), or just compare the base prime for those.

Ok, that should work directly then, I cache the primes in the explorer db, so it should just be a matter of sorting.

Beta version: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/ric/halloffame.dws

Will probably need to tweak stuff once the first super-block happens

Speaking of which, maybe just having the blockheight of the next super-block in the RPC getinfo API could be nice for a count-down.
I could hard-code it in the explorer, but this would be more fragile, and it could be nice to show the countdown in the Qt client as well.

Great work!
I'll do it: it would be helpful to see in the Qt if the superblock is happening, so the user knows that any tx could take a little longer than usual.

[fairglu]

I'll do it: it would be helpful to see in the Qt if the superblock is happening, so the user knows that any tx could take a little longer than usual.

Great!

we'll see in a couple of days: superblock expected this weekend!

Is there a web page, article, press release or something with super-blocks information and world record goals that we could draw attention to?
Not that I have many followers myself, but you can always get lucky in re-tweets, and some websites could pick up the news.

- or maybe it could be best to wait for the first successful super-block in case something goes wrong

[Ellieo]

I'll do it: it would be helpful to see in the Qt if the superblock is happening, so the user knows that any tx could take a little longer than usual.

Great!

we'll see in a couple of days: superblock expected this weekend!

Is there a web page, article, press release or something with super-blocks information and world record goals that we could draw attention to?
Not that I have many followers myself, but you can always get lucky in re-tweets, and some websites could pick up the news.

- or maybe it could be best to wait for the first successful super-block in case something goes wrong

You want from “whoaaa...” going to “buuuu hahaha”? Please pray that yPool don't act up again during the next few superblocks cycle.

[smalltimer]

junk keeps freezing and crashing. Old wallet was bad, new one is worse.

[Ellieo]

junk keeps freezing and crashing. Old wallet was bad, new one is worse.

Tell that to 5347 miners currently on yPool.

[smalltimer]

junk keeps freezing and crashing. Old wallet was bad, new one is worse.

Tell that to 5347 miners currently on yPool.

they got the same issue?

[Ellieo]

junk keeps freezing and crashing. Old wallet was bad, new one is worse.

Tell that to 5347 miners currently on yPool.

they got the same issue?

Nope. And the current amount just increased to 5394 from the previous. Mind you that's an active on going mining figure.

[LZ]

Hello guys,

New client v0.10.2 Mandatory update: we are doing a hard-fork

If you don't like this hard-fork thing you may contribute to RieMoney (XRM) classic Riecoin.

Topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=852721.0

[primer-]

Hello guys,

New client v0.10.2 Mandatory update: we are doing a hard-fork

If you don't like this hard-fork thing you may contribute to RieMoney (XRM) classic Riecoin.

Topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=852721.0

Why would anyone not like 'harforking thing' ? Nothing major (money supply) is being changed. Superblock change can only benefit the miners.

[LZ]

In fact, 0.10.2 is not originally announced Riecoin, it's something else.

Only the difficulty and the reward (subsidy) calculations are being updated.

I don't know why Gatra did not just fork his coin to make a new one.
Instead, he preferred to throw 30% of users and change the protocol.
If you allow him to do this who will stop him if he will change it harder?

[fairglu]

Instead, he preferred to throw 30% of users and change the protocol.

Hmmm? Protocol did not change with superblocks.
You only have to update your wallet.

Also according to the sample seen by the explorer (cf. https://chainz.cryptoid.info/ric/#!network), if more than 70% of the network is on the new version, of those that are not migrated, more than half are on 0.8.7, which should not be used as they do not include the security updates of the latter versions.

[Ellieo]

In fact, 0.10.2 is not originally announced Riecoin, it's something else.

Only the difficulty and the reward (subsidy) calculations are being updated.

I don't know why Gatra did not just fork his coin to make a new one.
Instead, he preferred to throw 30% of users and change the protocol.
If you allow him to do this who will stop him if he will change it harder?

This is very sad when you should be excited about the superblocks for k-tuple prime world records breaking. If you had followed the Riecoin development from the beginning then you should know moving forward by the hardfork is good. And it's a must from certain research prosepctives. I don't think it's in Gatra's intention to abandon your so-called 30% stackholders.

You and the other 30% have absolutely nothing to lose but everything to gain from v0.10.2.

Brothers. Sisters. Please update your wallet to v0.10.2

[jh00]

In the source code it says the fork is after block 159000. See isAfterFork1().
In a previous post Gatra stated that the first block in the new fork is 156672 which doesn't match with the source. Am I overlooking something?

[LZ]

If you had followed the Riecoin development from the beginning then you should know moving forward by the hardfork is good.

I'm here from the beginning as you may see. And hardforking is a bad practice.

Code:

cat << EOF | patch -p0
+++ src/makefile.unix
@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
    -l boost_filesystem\$(BOOST_LIB_SUFFIX) \\
    -l boost_program_options\$(BOOST_LIB_SUFFIX) \\
    -l boost_thread\$(BOOST_LIB_SUFFIX) \\
+   -l boost_chrono\$(BOOST_LIB_SUFFIX) \\
    -l db_cxx\$(BDB_LIB_SUFFIX) \\
    -l ssl \\
    -l crypto
EOF

sha1sum -c << EOF
9928c39fc2d593e2e83a55e51eecf7b9608c78fc *src/makefile.unix
EOF

I stay in the original network. Decide for yourself or someone will decide for you.