[ANN] NoirShares Trade on PoloniEX, Noir Investment Options Open

[barwizi]

Shipping of the first three 1 TH units is in 24hrs.

[1714843428]

1714843428

[1714843428]

1714843428

[1714843428]

1714843428

[Coindgr]

I'd like to know when the initial general fund for shares will end with a few days in advance. Is it possible? I'm trying to get more funds.

[barwizi]

I'd like to know when the initial general fund for shares will end with a few days in advance. Is it possible? I'm trying to get more funds.

The general fund will not be closed, however those who participate in this mining-sub venture are the only one eligible to benefit from it. My conversations with other investors hinted at fears that they would be sharing with late comers. That will not happen, ever. I will close investment for mining soon, i will announce it and give two weeks advance notice. This is because every time i buy a miner i am doing it out of my own pocket, i front the payment and wait for investments to catch up. This has been going a bit slow in comparison, current investments can only pay for 2 units, i have funds in escrow and sequestered for 10. I will wait and gauge interest, if there is none, i will simply stop at 5 and close investment in mining.

those who participate will have the most rewarding experience as they will receive payouts from mining and all ventures, those who come after this will only get from the exchange and subsequent ventures.

[JakeThePanda]

I'd like to know when the initial general fund for shares will end with a few days in advance. Is it possible? I'm trying to get more funds.

The general fund will not be closed, however those who participate in this mining-sub venture are the only one eligible to benefit from it. My conversations with other investors hinted at fears that they would be sharing with late comers. That will not happen, ever. I will close investment for mining soon, i will announce it and give two weeks advance notice. This is because every time i buy a miner i am doing it out of my own pocket, i front the payment and wait for investments to catch up. This has been going a bit slow in comparison, current investments can only pay for 2 units, i have funds in escrow and sequestered for 10. I will wait and gauge interest, if there is none, i will simply stop at 5 and close investment in mining.

those who participate will have the most rewarding experience as they will receive payouts from mining and all ventures, those who come after this will only get from the exchange and subsequent ventures.

I sent you a message on the Bitshares forum, but I think this post may have answered my question.  Thanks.

[John122]

Since you just purchased the remaining 8 shares, I suppose we can't invest anymore, can we?
If we can't, would you be open to sell a part of your 8 shares? Jerjian and I would be interested in investing another amount of BTC in the General Fund.

[barwizi]

Since you just purchased the remaining 8 shares, I suppose we can't invest anymore, can we?
If we can't, would you be open to sell a part of your 8 shares? Jerjian and I would be interested in investing another amount of BTC in the General Fund.

I did that in order to make my accounting easier. How many do you want? It's even better for us if most of mine are bought out since that frees up my funds and i can order more miners with ease.  that means instead of waiting for investor funds to accumulate then buy... i buy first and investor funds accumulate when they are already on their way.

[John122]

We would like to invest another 0.55 BTC each. Do we still send it to the same address?

[barwizi]

We would like to invest another 0.55 BTC each. Do we still send it to the same address?

yes, that is the correct address

[John122]

Amount: 0.55 BTC
User: Zapa (John122)
Tx ID: 7b2600f1640efb21deac9ad812e1d8d723e5976698be49c2a9ca8f7894fca9fe

[jerjian]

User: jerjian

Amount: 0.55 BTC

Transaction number: ac73f0cc488306175ce3f1215afcd5875d9af2282ee981ad77bb5858d37197c4

[barwizi]

BTW, sorry guys, it seems i'm making unilateral decision, should i expand our sha256 base or should i buy some gridseed? My personal calculations and opinion say to stick with sha256 but your opinions collectively are what i am more interested in.

[lajz99]

BTW, sorry guys, it seems i'm making unilateral decision, should i expand our sha256 base or should i buy some gridseed? My personal calculations and opinion say to stick with sha256 but your opinions collectively are what i am more interested in.

IMO pass on gridseed and wait for something a little bigger.

I'd like to get in on a little scrypt action if that's what the group decides.

I also know of a site that can be used for voting for things like this if you want to go that route in the future.

[HermanCoin]

Date: 3/18/2014 17:12
To: 9cViAqUd7AKKZY5UyJUQo6nXCVJGTar1F7
Debit: -2500.00 NRS
Transaction fee: -0.01 NRS
Net amount: -2500.01 NRS
Transaction ID: 4fcff9a3a5f5a98a60f67b8058d2d5c434e38f4d0971d0f01b7b3857c66c7f43

It's for NIG

[pinwc4]

Just a quick FYI before I start getting PM's.  The pool is having an issue.  The blockchain got corrupt, we are resyncing and should be good to go again really shortly.

[pinwc4]

BTW, sorry guys, it seems i'm making unilateral decision, should i expand our sha256 base or should i buy some gridseed? My personal calculations and opinion say to stick with sha256 but your opinions collectively are what i am more interested in.

I would say pass on gridseed as well.  Though I would encourage you using more funds toward development.  I imagine many of us already mine at home so are less concerned about shares in mining and more interested in further development.  

Update:  Back in business, finding blocks, processing payouts etc.  Sorry for the lengthy delay, blockchain download kept getting stuck.

[degel_x]

Hi!!
I need some help here
I cant use coyote miner i'm getting this

Code:

[root@localhost Documentos]# ./linux_coyote_miner.0.3.0 
./linux_coyote_miner.0.3.0: error while loading shared libraries: libcrypto.so.1.0.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

My environment is a CentOS 6.4 and Dual Xeon
I think is something about shared libraries
so i decided build my own
this is my best approach

Code:

[root@localhost coyote_miner]# cd bitshares/
[root@localhost bitshares]# git clone https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/fc.git
Initialized empty Git repository in /home/Desarrollo01/Documentos/Noir/coyote_miner/bitshares/fc/.git/
remote: Counting objects: 3908, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (1912/1912), done.
remote: Total 3908 (delta 1814), reused 3891 (delta 1803)
Receiving objects: 100% (3908/3908), 2.69 MiB | 496 KiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (1814/1814), done.
[root@localhost bitshares]# cd ..
[root@localhost coyote_miner]# cmake . -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DBoost_INCLUDE_DIR:PATH=/opt/include -DBoost_LIBRARY_DIR:PATH=/opt/lib
statusCompiling on UNIX
-- Boost version: 1.55.0
-- Found the following Boost libraries:
--   thread
--   date_time
--   system
--   filesystem
--   program_options
--   signals
--   serialization
--   chrono
--   unit_test_framework
--   context
--   coroutine
-- Configuring project fc located in: /home/Desarrollo01/Documentos/Noir/coyote_miner/bitshares/fc
-- Configuring fc to build on Unix/Apple
-- Using custom FindBoost.cmake
-- Boost version: 1.55.0
-- Found the following Boost libraries:
--   thread
--   date_time
--   system
--   filesystem
--   program_options
--   signals
--   serialization
--   chrono
--   unit_test_framework
--   context
--   coroutine
--   locale
** for a debug build: cmake -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug ..
-- Finished fc module configuration...
-- Using  as BerkeleyDB root
-- Looking for: db_cxx-6.0
-- debug/usr/lib64/libdb_cxx.sooptimized/usr/lib64/libdb_cxx.so
-- Found BerkeleyDB: /usr/include  
-- Configuring Bitshares on UNIX/APPLE
-- Found ZLIB: /usr/lib64/libz.so (found version "1.2.3") 
-- Finished Bitshares configuration...
-- Configuring done
-- Generating done
-- Build files have been written to: /home/Desarrollo01/Documentos/Noir/coyote_miner
[root@localhost coyote_miner]# make
Scanning dependencies of target easylzma_static
[  1%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/LzmaDec.c.o
[  1%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/7zBuf2.c.o
[  2%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/Bra86.c.o
[  2%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/LzmaEnc.c.o
[  3%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/7zBuf.c.o
[  3%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/Bcj2.c.o
[  4%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/BraIA64.c.o
[  4%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/7zStream.c.o
[  4%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/Bra.c.o
/home/Desarrollo01/Documentos/Noir/coyote_miner/bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/pavlov/Bra.c: In function ‘SPARC_Convert’:
/home/Desarrollo01/Documentos/Noir/coyote_miner/bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/pavlov/Bra.c:108: warning: suggest parentheses around ‘&&’ within ‘||’
[  5%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/7zFile.c.o
[  5%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/7zCrc.c.o
[  6%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/LzmaLib.c.o
[  6%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/LzFind.c.o
[  7%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/pavlov/Alloc.c.o
[  7%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/compress.c.o
[  8%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/lzma_c.c.o
[  8%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/lzma_header.c.o
[  9%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/lzip_header.c.o
[  9%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/common_internal.c.o
[  9%] Building C object bitshares/fc/vendor/easylzma/src/CMakeFiles/easylzma_static.dir/decompress.c.o
Linking C static library libeasylzma_static.a
[  9%] Built target easylzma_static
Scanning dependencies of target fc
[ 10%] Building CXX object bitshares/fc/CMakeFiles/fc.dir/src/uint128.cpp.o
cc1plus: error: unrecognized command line option "-std=c++11"
cc1plus: warning: command line option "-fmax-errors=3" is valid for Fortran but not for C++
cc1plus: warning: command line option "-fmax-errors=3" is valid for Fortran but not for C++
cc1plus: warning: unrecognized command line option "-Wno-unused-local-typedefs"
cc1plus: warning: unrecognized command line option "-Wno-unused-local-typedefs"
make[2]: *** [bitshares/fc/CMakeFiles/fc.dir/src/uint128.cpp.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [bitshares/fc/CMakeFiles/fc.dir/all] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2

Any help would be appreciated i really like this coin

[username here]

BTW, sorry guys, it seems i'm making unilateral decision, should i expand our sha256 base or should i buy some gridseed? My personal calculations and opinion say to stick with sha256 but your opinions collectively are what i am more interested in.

Couple thoughts:

1.  There is so much heavy hashing equipment coming down the pipe for sha256.  I think we will see a huge jump in difficulty again so I am concerned with trying to constantly play catch up.

2.  The money in altcoins right now could disappear due to all the scams and pump & dumps.  This would result in a retreat into LTC.  If that does happen then scrypt mining will become extremely unprofitable because all the horsepower will be concentrated and the gridseed worthless.

Stick with sha256, mergemining ftw.

[barwizi]

BTW, sorry guys, it seems i'm making unilateral decision, should i expand our sha256 base or should i buy some gridseed? My personal calculations and opinion say to stick with sha256 but your opinions collectively are what i am more interested in.

I would say pass on gridseed as well.  Though I would encourage you using more funds toward development.  I imagine many of us already mine at home so are less concerned about shares in mining and more interested in further development.  

Update:  Back in business, finding blocks, processing payouts etc.  Sorry for the lengthy delay, blockchain download kept getting stuck.

Investors tend to like returns that are tangible and i have noticed that many attempts at bulding platforms died because managment took a long time to deliver. I was hoping to keep invetsors interested, while not just sitting on their funds. For now i am looking for web developers to help with modifying noirbitstalk to add some NIG specific features.

[Dracco]

what problem with pool? can't connect.!

[tersagun]

Can someone,very briefly, explain the investment system? I have seen the documents about it but it seems kinda complicated :-)
I would like to hear a "for dummies" from another user.

Thanks in advance!