[ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched!

[Nthused]

SWIM is providing a Cannabis Seed Service & Accepts ŁTC

★★ SWIM's Cannabis Seed Service ★★ Worldwide Delivery ★★ Accepts BTC & ŁTC ★★

Maybe Litecoin is finally going to be used for these kinds of things a lot more

[1714243310]

1714243310

[Vlad2Vlad]

SWIM is providing a Cannabis Seed Service & Accepts ŁTC

★★ SWIM's Cannabis Seed Service ★★ Worldwide Delivery ★★ Accepts BTC & ŁTC ★★ |

Maybe Litecoin is finally going to be used for these kinds of things a lot more

Yes, good.  Good. 

[2112]

Litecoin Core 0.13.2 with SegWit coming out very soon...

Personally, I have doubts that you (plural 'you') will be able to deploy it successfully.

I'm basing this on my observation of Litecoin's testnet. It has again split into many different branches despite all of them using the original, unmodified, official Litecoin code. Nearly all nodes run 0.10.*, with majority at 0.10.4. The last major split of this type happened just before Christmas, at a height of 1013820. Right now the nearest one can get to 'official' main branch is at 1013879. The testnet hash rate stands at pitiful 152 H/s, yes, just over one hundred hashes per second.

I always espouses the opinion that the general traffic level and health on the testnet are a good indicators of the future health and traffic levels on the mainnet. Less than hundred blocks were mined over the holiday period on the testnet. What this really means is that nobody is doing any significant development, testing or deployment of the new Litecoin-related software and businesses. Even a single core decade old Intel/AMD CPU can sustain over 1 kilohash per second.

The problem of testnet splitting was reported here by me in the past and surely many more people are aware of it. The last time the Litecoin core developers simply decided to mask it by deploying a simple hidden mining pool backed by the ASIC miner. It wasn't a real solution to the propagation bugs, but at least masked them well enough to allow resumption of global Litecoin testnet operation. But the underlying bug clearly wasn't fixed since 0.10.2.2 days which anyone can observe today.

That "very soon" cannot be taken as a serious promise from a developer.

[cryptohunter]

Litecoin Core 0.13.2 with SegWit coming out very soon...

Personally, I have doubts that you (plural 'you') will be able to deploy it successfully.

I'm basing this on my observation of Litecoin's testnet. It has again split into many different branches despite all of them using the original, unmodified, official Litecoin code. Nearly all nodes run 0.10.*, with majority at 0.10.4. The last major split of this type happened just before Christmas, at a height of 1013820. Right now the nearest one can get to 'official' main branch is at 1013879. The testnet hash rate stands at pitiful 152 H/s, yes, just over one hundred hashes per second.

I always espouses the opinion that the general traffic level and health on the testnet are a good indicators of the future health and traffic levels on the mainnet. Less than hundred blocks were mined over the holiday period on the testnet. What this really means is that nobody is doing any significant development, testing or deployment of the new Litecoin-related software and businesses. Even a single core decade old Intel/AMD CPU can sustain over 1 kilohash per second.

The problem of testnet splitting was reported here by me in the past and surely many more people are aware of it. The last time the Litecoin core developers simply decided to mask it by deploying a simple hidden mining pool backed by the ASIC miner. It wasn't a real solution to the propagation bugs, but at least masked them well enough to allow resumption of global Litecoin testnet operation. But the underlying bug clearly wasn't fixed since 0.10.2.2 days which anyone can observe today.

That "very soon" cannot be taken as a serious promise from a developer.

You could be correct.

However, will you be the first to congratulate them if they do. Interesting observations though...what will they say about that?

Lets wait and see.

[2112]

You could be correct.

However, will you be the first to congratulate them if they do. Interesting observations though...what will they say about that?

Lets wait and see.

The question is "How could you tell if they did or did not successfully deploy it?" Can you just trust their say so? The current official Litecoin client has defect/problems/bugs related to network and hash-power splits. The Litecoin Core development group doesn't seem to be really interested into looking to this problem.

Anyone who already has a working Litecoin client can just quickly run a second copy on the testnet, just start it with a "-testnet=1" flag. The required disk space is just over 1GB and the bandwidth load is minuscule. There's enough seed nodes to download it quickly, but the problems of not propagating transactions and newly mined blocks will be obvious. It isn't like to reproduce the problem one needs some sort of complex environment. Just start a copy and wait till it hangs while having many open connections. To speed up the bug reproduction one could simply shut it down cleanly after downloading couple of months of blockchain and then try restarting the synchronization. The bug (or bugs) are very obvious and not hard to reproduce.

Likewise, to see the mining hash-power split one doesn't need dedicated Litecoin ASIC mining hardware. Even a single core on a multi-core CPU could theoretically produce blocks at the expected rate of about 2-3 minutes. But they just won't propagate as the most peer to peer connections get stuck in open state but "UNKNOWN" sync height.

[thrasher]

As discussed previously 2112, this is simply caused by older nodes mining version 3 blocks at a greater pace then the newer nodes who are producing version 4 blocks. This results in a fork which is NOT caused by a defect/bug since every release has at least 200 boost unit tests and another 40~ RPC tests to test all functionality of the codebase to ensure that there are no bugs. One can simply look at the main chain to observe that there have been NO forks at all. The Litecoin developers put out multiple notices on social media platforms to advise miners on testnet to update to the latest release but there are still old miners creating blocks.  The simple solution is to either a) Get the outdated miners upgraded or b) Have more version 4 hash power to out pace the version 3 hash power. This is not a unique issue to Litecoin, Bitcoin underwent the same thing where outdated nodes outpaced the newer codes, so some Bitcoin devs setup dedicated ASIC miners to ensure that it doesn't happen again which is the same course of action we'll undertake in order to prevent this from happening until enough of the older miners update their software.

We're up to the final stages of releasing 0.13.2, in which you'll see new block version getting produced on testnet before we push the release out to the public.

[D3m0nKinGx]

As discussed previously 2112, this is simply caused by older nodes mining version 3 blocks at a greater pace then the newer nodes who are producing version 4 blocks. This results in a fork which is NOT caused by a defect/bug since every release has at least 200 boost unit tests and another 40~ RPC tests to test all functionality of the codebase to ensure that there are no bugs. One can simply look at the main chain to observe that there have been NO forks at all. The Litecoin developers put out multiple notices on social media platforms to advise miners on testnet to update to the latest release but there are still old miners creating blocks.  The simple solution is to either a) Get the outdated miners upgraded or b) Have more version 4 hash power to out pace the version 3 hash power. This is not a unique issue to Litecoin, Bitcoin underwent the same thing where outdated nodes outpaced the newer codes, so some Bitcoin devs setup dedicated ASIC miners to ensure that it doesn't happen again which is the same course of action we'll undertake in order to prevent this from happening until enough of the older miners update their software.

We're up to the final stages of releasing 0.13.2, in which you'll see new block version getting produced on  before we push the release out to the public.

Why not option C) Ban the old version from connecting

[thrasher]

You would still have the old nodes propagating new blocks with each other if the newer clients banned the old ones which would still result in a fork. Currently, once 95% of 1000 blocks are a higher block version number, the newer clients reject the old version blocks.

[Burmik123]

As devs told - SegWit soon. But why price goes down? Maybe it is a lite destiny - downtrand with no bottom. And it is interesting for me - where people can find information about SegWit and where did this information posted?

[Vlad2Vlad]

We're up to the final stages of releasing 0.13.2, in which you'll see new block version getting produced on testnet before we push the release out to the public.

You guys are still doing testing on the testnet?  

Good, good.  We wanna make sure it's gonna work right.

[IIpeBeD_MeDBeD]

https://github.com/thrasher-/litecoin/commit/ec7590346a357689fbdd868ca9986be255313223
Really shit coin.
All that developers do with code - it is periodically change the start date of segwit voting.
shit coin

[8-bit]

How is the scalability of litecoin compared to that of bitcoin?

[jacobmayes94]

With the segwit, even more so than Bitcoin.

[losh11]

https://github.com/thrasher-/litecoin/commit/ec7590346a357689fbdd868ca9986be255313223
Really shit coin.
All that developers do with code - it is periodically change the start date of segwit voting.
shit coin

If we don't delay voting period, there can be a potential group of 25% of miners who haven't updated their pool infrastructure to support SegWit. When 75% is reached, if these guys don't upgrade their infrastructure, they will fork into a different branch.

It is highly preferable if this doesn't happen.

[Equalizer1970]

What a lazy sob Coblee is. Keeps on promising segwit release and nothing. His rep is completely shot. Might as well be another Bryce.

[TreasureSeeker]

Best to take time to get things right rather than release something that's not tested and checked adequately. I'm sure when segwit happens it'll be a great leap forward.

[Equalizer1970]

Best to take time to get things right rather than release something that's not tested and checked adequately. I'm sure when segwit happens it'll be a great leap forward.

The time to do all the testing and checking was in the summer, man. Give your head a shake. Pure laziness not getting all the ducks in row by now.

I could learned to programmed, did the commits and tested LTC myself in the time this has taken. No excuses. Complete incompetency!

[cryptohunter]

What a lazy sob Coblee is. Keeps on promising segwit release and nothing. His rep is completely shot. Might as well be another Bryce.

Is he not tied up with the marketing adoption side of things? He must have a truck of LTC so would be in his interest to help us out right?

The current levs of the ltc core devs? are we talking outstanding gmax buterin zimbeck or just average level coders/designers?

Are there privacy features coming or is it just seg wit for now. I see a few alts claiming they are almost there with segwit already?

[Equalizer1970]

What a lazy sob Coblee is. Keeps on promising segwit release and nothing. His rep is completely shot. Might as well be another Bryce.

Is he not tied up with the marketing adoption side of things? He must have a truck of LTC so would be in his interest to help us out right?

The current levs of the ltc core devs? are we talking outstanding gmax buterin zimbeck or just average level coders/designers?

Are there privacy features coming or is it just seg wit for now. I see a few alts claiming they are almost there with segwit already?

I think we should remove coblee and have community takeover of LTC. Empty promises aren't cutting it anymore.

[cryptohunter]

What a lazy sob Coblee is. Keeps on promising segwit release and nothing. His rep is completely shot. Might as well be another Bryce.

Is he not tied up with the marketing adoption side of things? He must have a truck of LTC so would be in his interest to help us out right?

The current levs of the ltc core devs? are we talking outstanding gmax buterin zimbeck or just average level coders/designers?

Are there privacy features coming or is it just seg wit for now. I see a few alts claiming they are almost there with segwit already?

I think we should remove coblee and have community takeover of LTC. Empty promises aren't cutting it anymore.

As far as I know he encouraged a community take over which is what we have now?
Who are the core devs anyway?