[Donated $2k+ To Charity] Clean Water Coin: A Crypto Charity (Pure PoS)

[DreamMiner]

can you confirm that the Block Explorer is on the right block chain?
can you advise when the new wallet 1.7.3 will be released?

[1713942635]

1713942635

[1713942635]

1713942635

[1713942635]

1713942635

[1713942635]

1713942635

[Captain_Dirk]

Of course X11, or at least not Scrypt.
Since the Scrypt asics are on market, the mining has become only profitable to a small elite who can afford to develop such hardware.
This centralisation of cryptocurrencies goes directly into the basics of the whole concept of cryptocurrency.
Eventually asics will kill the whole concept and need to be stopped.
Therefore I would like to see, if safely possible, all crypto's switch to asic resistant algo's

[YouIsPeng]

Of course X11, or at least not Scrypt.
Since the Scrypt asics are on market, the mining has become only profitable to a small elite who can afford to develop such hardware.
This centralisation of cryptocurrencies goes directly into the basics of the whole concept of cryptocurrency.
Eventually asics will kill the whole concept and need to be stopped.
Therefore I would like to see, if safely possible, all crypto's switch to asic resistant algo's

OMG, "asic resistant algos" - LOL there is no such thing.

ASICs (Application Specific Integrated Circuits) are simply a chip that has been designed to perform one function very well and very quickly. It has been done for SHA256, it has been done for Scrypt
and it can be done for any algorithm.

If everyone switches to X11 then guess what? There will soon be X11 ASICs. I would hazard a guess that somewhere in China there is already one being designed. The only difference between X11 and Scrypt is that it doesn't stress GPUs as much meaning they run cooler and use less power, which I agree is a good thing but it doesn't mean much else. ASICs already use a fraction of the power of GPUs and produce next to no heat. And hash-for-hash don't cost much more. Remember, GPUs are not designed for mining coins but for playing games so whatever algorithm is used they will never be the most efficient way of doing it.

When you talk about 'centralisation' you seem to be referring only to miners - cryptocoins are not there just to make miners money you know, they are supposed to be USED as currencies without any interference from governments or banks etc. Their decentralised nature comes from the fact that the blockchain is downloaded and stored on individual users' computers all over the world and is not reliant on one institution. So the only requirement for someone to be involved is access to a computer or smartphone or whatever. Not everyone has to be a miner!

It is inevitable that anyone with more money to invest in the first place will be able to mine more currency for themselves, whether they are buying GPUs or ASICs. That's not the point, these currencies need to have a reason to be USED by people - which, I believe CWC has in abundance (once all the bugs are ironed out!) So moan however much you like about 'the elite' it will make no difference to you whether Scrypt, X11 or whatever is used, someone else out there will always be able to mine a lot more coins than you.

Bitcoin is now not widely mined except by the super rich as the difficulty is so high but you don't see it dying because none of us mere mortals can afford to mine it profitably do you? No, it is successful because it is USED. The only thing that makes a coin survive is its popularity. If a coin is popular and being used, the difficulty goes up which in turn makes it less profitable for everyone to mine, which in turn means more people switch to ASICs. This will happen whatever algorithm is used as it is designed into the very concept of cryptocoins. If the only reason you're into this is to make money, there are really only 2 ways you can do this- 1) Find and research a new coin which you think has potential and get in early and mine a bunch to hold onto until the price rockets (Imagine if you'd mined 10000BTC a couple of years ago when the difficulty was nice and low and held onto them!) or 2) Invest some fiat currency and do some day trading betting on which coin is going places. Neither strategy will guarantee you big bucks!

[free_istheway]

OMG, "asic resistant algos" - LOL there is no such thing.

ASICs (Application Specific Integrated Circuits) are simply a chip that has been designed to perform one function very well and very quickly. It has been done for SHA256, it has been done for Scrypt
and it can be done for any algorithm.

If everyone switches to X11 then guess what? There will soon be X11 ASICs. I would hazard a guess that somewhere in China there is already one being designed. The only difference between X11 and Scrypt is that it doesn't stress GPUs as much meaning they run cooler and use less power, which I agree is a good thing but it doesn't mean much else. ASICs already use a fraction of the power of GPUs and produce next to no heat. And hash-for-hash don't cost much more. Remember, GPUs are not designed for mining coins but for playing games so whatever algorithm is used they will never be the most efficient way of doing it.

When you talk about 'centralisation' you seem to be referring only to miners - cryptocoins are not there just to make miners money you know, they are supposed to be USED as currencies without any interference from governments or banks etc. Their decentralised nature comes from the fact that the blockchain is downloaded and stored on individual users' computers all over the world and is not reliant on one institution. So the only requirement for someone to be involved is access to a computer or smartphone or whatever. Not everyone has to be a miner!

It is inevitable that anyone with more money to invest in the first place will be able to mine more currency for themselves, whether they are buying GPUs or ASICs. That's not the point, these currencies need to have a reason to be USED by people - which, I believe CWC has in abundance (once all the bugs are ironed out!) So moan however much you like about 'the elite' it will make no difference to you whether Scrypt, X11 or whatever is used, someone else out there will always be able to mine a lot more coins than you.

Bitcoin is now not widely mined except by the super rich as the difficulty is so high but you don't see it dying because none of us mere mortals can afford to mine it profitably do you? No, it is successful because it is USED. The only thing that makes a coin survive is its popularity. If a coin is popular and being used, the difficulty goes up which in turn makes it less profitable for everyone to mine, which in turn means more people switch to ASICs. This will happen whatever algorithm is used as it is designed into the very concept of cryptocoins. If the only reason you're into this is to make money, there are really only 2 ways you can do this- 1) Find and research a new coin which you think has potential and get in early and mine a bunch to hold onto until the price rockets (Imagine if you'd mined 10000BTC a couple of years ago when the difficulty was nice and low and held onto them!) or 2) Invest some fiat currency and do some day trading betting on which coin is going places. Neither strategy will guarantee you big bucks!

Well said!

[mindfox]

can you confirm that the Block Explorer is on the right block chain?

It is in the right fork

can you advise when the new wallet 1.7.3 will be released?

What do you mean? Didn't we just released a new version?

[mindfox]

OMG, "asic resistant algos" - LOL there is no such thing.

ASICs (Application Specific Integrated Circuits) are simply a chip that has been designed to perform one function very well and very quickly. It has been done for SHA256, it has been done for Scrypt
and it can be done for any algorithm.

If everyone switches to X11 then guess what? There will soon be X11 ASICs. I would hazard a guess that somewhere in China there is already one being designed. The only difference between X11 and Scrypt is that it doesn't stress GPUs as much meaning they run cooler and use less power, which I agree is a good thing but it doesn't mean much else. ASICs already use a fraction of the power of GPUs and produce next to no heat. And hash-for-hash don't cost much more. Remember, GPUs are not designed for mining coins but for playing games so whatever algorithm is used they will never be the most efficient way of doing it.

When you talk about 'centralisation' you seem to be referring only to miners - cryptocoins are not there just to make miners money you know, they are supposed to be USED as currencies without any interference from governments or banks etc. Their decentralised nature comes from the fact that the blockchain is downloaded and stored on individual users' computers all over the world and is not reliant on one institution. So the only requirement for someone to be involved is access to a computer or smartphone or whatever. Not everyone has to be a miner!

It is inevitable that anyone with more money to invest in the first place will be able to mine more currency for themselves, whether they are buying GPUs or ASICs. That's not the point, these currencies need to have a reason to be USED by people - which, I believe CWC has in abundance (once all the bugs are ironed out!) So moan however much you like about 'the elite' it will make no difference to you whether Scrypt, X11 or whatever is used, someone else out there will always be able to mine a lot more coins than you.

Bitcoin is now not widely mined except by the super rich as the difficulty is so high but you don't see it dying because none of us mere mortals can afford to mine it profitably do you? No, it is successful because it is USED. The only thing that makes a coin survive is its popularity. If a coin is popular and being used, the difficulty goes up which in turn makes it less profitable for everyone to mine, which in turn means more people switch to ASICs. This will happen whatever algorithm is used as it is designed into the very concept of cryptocoins. If the only reason you're into this is to make money, there are really only 2 ways you can do this- 1) Find and research a new coin which you think has potential and get in early and mine a bunch to hold onto until the price rockets (Imagine if you'd mined 10000BTC a couple of years ago when the difficulty was nice and low and held onto them!) or 2) Invest some fiat currency and do some day trading betting on which coin is going places. Neither strategy will guarantee you big bucks!

That's why they are called ASIC resistant.

To create an ASIC is not a quick, cheap and easy process. It takes a serious amount of money (we're talking about 7 digit figures only for production), long time of designing/testing and well paid engineers/designers for it. Also, ASICs don't do well with "memory hungry" algorithms, because as you can understand you can't fit everything in one (or even more chip layers), so the board design complexity increases a lot, adding to the total cost of creation/production (memory controllers, data bus, etc).

Overall, it needs quite some time to create, thus making it harder/more expensive to produce.

[RoyalSands]

I believe that the calculation for "Pool Hashrate" on the official pool is incorrect.  It has been higher than the net hashrate many times.  The net hashrate listed on the pool is correct according to the wallet (getmininginfo).  So either someone on the pool is submitting "fake" low diff shares or there is a different problem with the calculation.

[RoyalSands]

OMG, "asic resistant algos" - LOL there is no such thing.

ASICs (Application Specific Integrated Circuits) are simply a chip that has been designed to perform one function very well and very quickly. It has been done for SHA256, it has been done for Scrypt
and it can be done for any algorithm.

If everyone switches to X11 then guess what? There will soon be X11 ASICs. I would hazard a guess that somewhere in China there is already one being designed. The only difference between X11 and Scrypt is that it doesn't stress GPUs as much meaning they run cooler and use less power, which I agree is a good thing but it doesn't mean much else. ASICs already use a fraction of the power of GPUs and produce next to no heat. And hash-for-hash don't cost much more. Remember, GPUs are not designed for mining coins but for playing games so whatever algorithm is used they will never be the most efficient way of doing it.

When you talk about 'centralisation' you seem to be referring only to miners - cryptocoins are not there just to make miners money you know, they are supposed to be USED as currencies without any interference from governments or banks etc. Their decentralised nature comes from the fact that the blockchain is downloaded and stored on individual users' computers all over the world and is not reliant on one institution. So the only requirement for someone to be involved is access to a computer or smartphone or whatever. Not everyone has to be a miner!

It is inevitable that anyone with more money to invest in the first place will be able to mine more currency for themselves, whether they are buying GPUs or ASICs. That's not the point, these currencies need to have a reason to be USED by people - which, I believe CWC has in abundance (once all the bugs are ironed out!) So moan however much you like about 'the elite' it will make no difference to you whether Scrypt, X11 or whatever is used, someone else out there will always be able to mine a lot more coins than you.

Bitcoin is now not widely mined except by the super rich as the difficulty is so high but you don't see it dying because none of us mere mortals can afford to mine it profitably do you? No, it is successful because it is USED. The only thing that makes a coin survive is its popularity. If a coin is popular and being used, the difficulty goes up which in turn makes it less profitable for everyone to mine, which in turn means more people switch to ASICs. This will happen whatever algorithm is used as it is designed into the very concept of cryptocoins. If the only reason you're into this is to make money, there are really only 2 ways you can do this- 1) Find and research a new coin which you think has potential and get in early and mine a bunch to hold onto until the price rockets (Imagine if you'd mined 10000BTC a couple of years ago when the difficulty was nice and low and held onto them!) or 2) Invest some fiat currency and do some day trading betting on which coin is going places. Neither strategy will guarantee you big bucks!

That's why they are called ASIC resistant.

To create an ASIC is not a quick, cheap and easy process. It takes a serious amount of money (we're talking about 7 digit figures only for production), long time of designing/testing and well paid engineers/designers for it. Also, ASICs don't do well with "memory hungry" algorithms, because as you can understand you can't fit everything in one (or even more chip layers), so the board design complexity increases a lot, adding to the total cost of creation/production (memory controllers, data bus, etc).

Overall, it needs quite some time to create, thus making it harder/more expensive to produce.

Indeed, with the word "resistant" being key.

[mindfox]

I believe that the calculation for "Pool Hashrate" on the official pool is incorrect.  It has been higher than the net hashrate many times.  The net hashrate listed on the pool is correct according to the wallet (getmininginfo).  So either someone on the pool is submitting "fake" low diff shares or there is a different problem with the calculation.

First of all, I should note that official pool is using official pool software (too many officials in there, I know )

Now, it is known that stratum software (no matter which) can't calculate the hashrate properly and it gives a rough estimation.
The calculation of stratum software is based on committed work over time (a minute in our case) and the difficulty average.

Now, imagine the following scenario: X amount of shares were submitted at 0:59 [mm:ss], and calculations started at exactly 1:00. If for any reason the db backend delayed a bit to store them and they were stored *after* the calculation function retrieved db records, that means that those shares will not be calculated now, but in the next calculation round.
What that means, is that there will be a decreased reported hashrate for current calculation round, while there will be an increased reported hashrate in the next calculation round. That's how you see sometimes bigger than normal the pool's hashrate.

Now, add to the equation that wallet net hashrate calculates the average of difficulty of all found blocks (both PoW and PoS). PoS blocks are of a extremely low diff, which means it affects the average a lot.

Hope it makes sense.

[RoyalSands]

I believe that the calculation for "Pool Hashrate" on the official pool is incorrect.  It has been higher than the net hashrate many times.  The net hashrate listed on the pool is correct according to the wallet (getmininginfo).  So either someone on the pool is submitting "fake" low diff shares or there is a different problem with the calculation.

First of all, I should note that official pool is using official pool software (too many officials in there, I know )

Now, it is known that stratum software (no matter which) can't calculate the hashrate properly and it gives a rough estimation.
The calculation of stratum software is based on committed work over time (a minute in our case) and the difficulty average.

Now, imagine the following scenario: X amount of shares were submitted at 0:59 [mm:ss], and calculations started at exactly 1:00. If for any reason the db backend delayed a bit to store them and they were stored *after* the calculation function retrieved db records, that means that those shares will not be calculated now, but in the next calculation round.
What that means, is that there will be a decreased reported hashrate for current calculation round, while there will be an increased reported hashrate in the next calculation round. That's how you see sometimes bigger than normal the pool's hashrate.

Now, add to the equation that wallet net hashrate calculates the average of difficulty of all found blocks (both PoW and PoS). PoS blocks are of a extremely low diff, which means it affects the average a lot.

Hope it makes sense.

Interesting stuff, thanks for the explanation.

[YouIsPeng]

OMG, "asic resistant algos" - LOL there is no such thing.

ASICs (Application Specific Integrated Circuits) are simply a chip that has been designed to perform one function very well and very quickly. It has been done for SHA256, it has been done for Scrypt
and it can be done for any algorithm.

If everyone switches to X11 then guess what? There will soon be X11 ASICs. I would hazard a guess that somewhere in China there is already one being designed. The only difference between X11 and Scrypt is that it doesn't stress GPUs as much meaning they run cooler and use less power, which I agree is a good thing but it doesn't mean much else. ASICs already use a fraction of the power of GPUs and produce next to no heat. And hash-for-hash don't cost much more. Remember, GPUs are not designed for mining coins but for playing games so whatever algorithm is used they will never be the most efficient way of doing it.

When you talk about 'centralisation' you seem to be referring only to miners - cryptocoins are not there just to make miners money you know, they are supposed to be USED as currencies without any interference from governments or banks etc. Their decentralised nature comes from the fact that the blockchain is downloaded and stored on individual users' computers all over the world and is not reliant on one institution. So the only requirement for someone to be involved is access to a computer or smartphone or whatever. Not everyone has to be a miner!

It is inevitable that anyone with more money to invest in the first place will be able to mine more currency for themselves, whether they are buying GPUs or ASICs. That's not the point, these currencies need to have a reason to be USED by people - which, I believe CWC has in abundance (once all the bugs are ironed out!) So moan however much you like about 'the elite' it will make no difference to you whether Scrypt, X11 or whatever is used, someone else out there will always be able to mine a lot more coins than you.

Bitcoin is now not widely mined except by the super rich as the difficulty is so high but you don't see it dying because none of us mere mortals can afford to mine it profitably do you? No, it is successful because it is USED. The only thing that makes a coin survive is its popularity. If a coin is popular and being used, the difficulty goes up which in turn makes it less profitable for everyone to mine, which in turn means more people switch to ASICs. This will happen whatever algorithm is used as it is designed into the very concept of cryptocoins. If the only reason you're into this is to make money, there are really only 2 ways you can do this- 1) Find and research a new coin which you think has potential and get in early and mine a bunch to hold onto until the price rockets (Imagine if you'd mined 10000BTC a couple of years ago when the difficulty was nice and low and held onto them!) or 2) Invest some fiat currency and do some day trading betting on which coin is going places. Neither strategy will guarantee you big bucks!

That's why they are called ASIC resistant.

To create an ASIC is not a quick, cheap and easy process. It takes a serious amount of money (we're talking about 7 digit figures only for production), long time of designing/testing and well paid engineers/designers for it. Also, ASICs don't do well with "memory hungry" algorithms, because as you can understand you can't fit everything in one (or even more chip layers), so the board design complexity increases a lot, adding to the total cost of creation/production (memory controllers, data bus, etc).

Overall, it needs quite some time to create, thus making it harder/more expensive to produce.

Yes I realise it takes time and money to design and produce a new chip, my point was the previous post was claiming:

Eventually asics will kill the whole concept and need to be stopped.

..which is nonsense. It will only alienate people who have invested, however little, in ASICs. I don't agree with scrapping scrypt just because ASICs are available, the difficulty of CWC hasn't shot up because ASICs are available - why? Because it has yet to become popular enough to make many people want to mine it. Scrapping scrypt will just alienate anyone who has invested in some ASICS, and we're not talking about super-rich investors only - I personally have 6 GPUs and 10 Gridseeds and the Gridseeds use a tiny amount of power and are much more efficient hashers. They also cost a lot less for 10 than I spent on 6 decent GPUs. If people want X11 then add it as an option, this coin was launched as a scrypt coin and so scrypt should remain at least as an option.

I would suggest that other, more important priorities are addressed first anyway, like a stable wallet that syncs properly.

[steveperry]

running wallet v1.7.0.1 and it's doing some crazy stuff, it will sync and then be 1800 blocks behind and then sometimes i'll get the message at the bottom about contacting devs, most recently it's sitting idle and out of sync.  is there something i may do to fix this or do i just have to wait for new wallet version?

thanks

[YouIsPeng]

running wallet v1.7.0.1 and it's doing some crazy stuff, it will sync and then be 1800 blocks behind and then sometimes i'll get the message at the bottom about contacting devs, most recently it's sitting idle and out of sync.  is there something i may do to fix this or do i just have to wait for new wallet version?

thanks

Wallet STILL disabled at Bittrex. Is anything being done about this??

[CleanWaterCoin]

running wallet v1.7.0.1 and it's doing some crazy stuff, it will sync and then be 1800 blocks behind and then sometimes i'll get the message at the bottom about contacting devs, most recently it's sitting idle and out of sync.  is there something i may do to fix this or do i just have to wait for new wallet version?

thanks

Wallet STILL disabled at Bittrex. Is anything being done about this??

Yup

Richie has been out for the last few days, and he is really the only one who we have talked to over the last couple months -- none of the other guys are up to speed on WATER. So Mindfox and Richie finally touched base yesterday and everything should be all cleaned up tomorrow.

[CleanWaterCoin]

running wallet v1.7.0.1 and it's doing some crazy stuff, it will sync and then be 1800 blocks behind and then sometimes i'll get the message at the bottom about contacting devs, most recently it's sitting idle and out of sync.  is there something i may do to fix this or do i just have to wait for new wallet version?

thanks

We are on 1.7.0.2. Here is the windows binary: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9AVjo3qD9DANUo1TUZHb3k2ODQ

We are just waiting for the mac wallet and then we will update the ann, but feel free to update to 1.7.0.2 in the meantime!

[welyoe]

SYNCed ... after deleting all except my wallet.dat ... and I use 1.7.0.2 version

[CleanWaterCoin]

SYNCed ... after deleting all except my wallet.dat ... and I use 1.7.0.2 version

[YouIsPeng]

SYNCed ... after deleting all except my wallet.dat ... and I use 1.7.0.2 version

WON'T sync .. after deleting all (including my wallet.dat) ... and I use 1.7.0.2 version too.

Hangs at block 83102.

getpeerinfo gives the following:

[
{
"addr" : "188.226.199.223:53591",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404391688,
"lastrecv" : 1404392035,
"conntime" : 1404388987,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : false,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87495,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "46.173.9.98:63829",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404391401,
"lastrecv" : 1404390697,
"conntime" : 1404389011,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 85600,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "86.206.85.106:63566",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392035,
"lastrecv" : 1404392035,
"conntime" : 1404389016,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87495,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "218.214.0.242:14082",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404391421,
"lastrecv" : 1404391388,
"conntime" : 1404389018,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 83102,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "212.89.239.20:53591",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392036,
"lastrecv" : 1404392036,
"conntime" : 1404389027,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : false,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87495,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "107.170.217.4:53591",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392178,
"lastrecv" : 1404392178,
"conntime" : 1404389100,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : false,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87497,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "184.163.251.183:53111",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392167,
"lastrecv" : 1404392177,
"conntime" : 1404389139,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87497,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "188.165.3.223:59857",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392039,
"lastrecv" : 1404392039,
"conntime" : 1404389386,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87500,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "188.165.194.96:60823",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404391839,
"lastrecv" : 1404391418,
"conntime" : 1404389439,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 85316,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "108.47.87.216:53591",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392178,
"lastrecv" : 1404392178,
"conntime" : 1404389485,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : false,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87501,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "95.34.158.248:51070",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392177,
"lastrecv" : 1404392177,
"conntime" : 1404389585,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87506,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "171.33.252.201:52732",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392178,
"lastrecv" : 1404392178,
"conntime" : 1404389836,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87507,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "204.246.67.106:53591",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392036,
"lastrecv" : 1404392036,
"conntime" : 1404389874,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : false,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87507,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "64.34.49.151:50635",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392177,
"lastrecv" : 1404392178,
"conntime" : 1404390042,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 8815,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "182.244.92.87:53591",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392152,
"lastrecv" : 1404392151,
"conntime" : 1404390168,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : false,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 64082,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "46.165.208.140:52088",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404391423,
"lastrecv" : 1404391387,
"conntime" : 1404390309,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 83113,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "213.168.110.76:35299",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404391819,
"lastrecv" : 1404391820,
"conntime" : 1404390521,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 83208,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "180.254.102.76:12719",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392174,
"lastrecv" : 1404392178,
"conntime" : 1404390961,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87515,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "107.170.89.103:34949",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404392178,
"lastrecv" : 1404392178,
"conntime" : 1404391394,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 87519,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "46.201.250.113:63133",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1404391822,
"lastrecv" : 1404391820,
"conntime" : 1404391816,
"version" : 60006,
"subver" : "/cleanwatercoin:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : true,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 68408,
"banscore" : 0
}
]

[YouIsPeng]

BTW, before anyone suggests it I am fully aware that I can go through and cherry pick the nodes that seem to be on the correct chain then use connect= to force the wallet to connect only to them.

I was under the impression that this new wallet was supposed to have built-in checkpoints to avoid having to go through all this crap again. If you go back about 50 pages in the thread we spent weeks trying to find a .conf file that would sync the wallets properly.

Mindfox - why isn't the wallet syncing now??

[endchat]

Maybe I am lucky, but I have 0 issues with 1.7.0.1

synchs and stakes perfectly for me since the beginning