NA

[veertje]

coinmine op visits this thread?  on 1.3.1?
 

They already updated on 1.3.1.

[Jero]

Clever gone I see 
Nice spreading of hashes http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/
And Digishield is kicking in right well I think http://guldencointrader.nl/moeilijkheid.php

[Halofire]

Clever gone I see 
Nice spreading of hashes http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/
And Digishield is kicking in right well I think http://guldencointrader.nl/moeilijkheid.php

looks like the difficulty has maintained more stable rate. looking good!

[thsminer]

Clever gone I see  
Nice spreading of hashes http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/
And Digishield is kicking in right well I think http://guldencointrader.nl/moeilijkheid.php

looks like the difficulty has maintained more stable rate. looking good!

Don't want to spoil the positive spirit but I saw these kind of messages with the DGW change also...

- The signs atm show Clever is still on the old wallet so i hope he's mining for J. Doe
- The latter means the diff would have been more steady with or without Digi
- the fact 30% of the wallets are old DGW AND Clever not on this chain does not make me confident (chains are chosen on work not on proper calculated diffs)
- Digi is more nervous due to the other way of retargetting and due to that the average blocks an hour are way to low, not a big deal but not OK either
- The main reason Digi was a better choice was to equalize the chances for all miners and discourage Clever, not as a final fix keep that in mind

So yes it looks OK but thats about it, if Clever jumps back in we can see if Digi does what we expected it to do.
On the other hand, in the past weeks we got company of another - I guess jump pool - and if Bio and friends   are planning to cut back on hashpower and we don't get Multi hour blocktimes it's a good sign. Till then we have to wait and see...


 

[veertje]

Dedicated miners: Congratulations!

Edit: https://explorer.guldencoin.com/ being updated?

[veertje]

Dedicated miners: Congratulations!

Edit: https://explorer.guldencoin.com/ being updated?

It is updated? The seeds that are NaN where a test if bad nodes (pre digi update) are getting banned if i remember correctly.

It is not available atm.

Edit: it's there again 

[Halofire]

Clever gone I see  
Nice spreading of hashes http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/
And Digishield is kicking in right well I think http://guldencointrader.nl/moeilijkheid.php

looks like the difficulty has maintained more stable rate. looking good!

Don't want to spoil the positive spirit but I saw these kind of messages with the DGW change also...

- The signs atm show Clever is still on the old wallet so i hope he's mining for J. Doe
- The latter means the diff would have been more steady with or without Digi
- the fact 30% of the wallets are old DGW AND Clever not on this chain does not make me confident (chains are chosen on work not on proper calculated diffs)
- Digi is more nervous due to the other way of retargetting and due to that the average blocks an hour are way to low, not a big deal but not OK either
- The main reason Digi was a better choice was to equalize the chances for all miners and discourage Clever, not as a final fix keep that in mind

So yes it looks OK but thats about it, if Clever jumps back in we can see if Digi does what we expected it to do.
On the other hand, in the past weeks we got company of another - I guess jump pool - and if Bio and friends   are planning to cut back on hashpower and we don't get Multi hour blocktimes it's a good sign. Till then we have to wait and see...


 

check it now and tell me things haven't changed. NLG and DIGI is good to go!
http://guldencointrader.nl/moeilijkheid.php

[markanth]

Clever gone I see  
Nice spreading of hashes http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/
And Digishield is kicking in right well I think http://guldencointrader.nl/moeilijkheid.php

looks like the difficulty has maintained more stable rate. looking good!

Don't want to spoil the positive spirit but I saw these kind of messages with the DGW change also...

- The signs atm show Clever is still on the old wallet so i hope he's mining for J. Doe
- The latter means the diff would have been more steady with or without Digi
- the fact 30% of the wallets are old DGW AND Clever not on this chain does not make me confident (chains are chosen on work not on proper calculated diffs)
- Digi is more nervous due to the other way of retargetting and due to that the average blocks an hour are way to low, not a big deal but not OK either
- The main reason Digi was a better choice was to equalize the chances for all miners and discourage Clever, not as a final fix keep that in mind

So yes it looks OK but thats about it, if Clever jumps back in we can see if Digi does what we expected it to do.
On the other hand, in the past weeks we got company of another - I guess jump pool - and if Bio and friends   are planning to cut back on hashpower and we don't get Multi hour blocktimes it's a good sign. Till then we have to wait and see...
 
 

thsminer:

I've been running a 1.3.0 guldencoind to keep an eye on the DGW chain..  clever is still mining on it.    i doubt anything malicious.. anyways, block height wise they're pretty much even with us. but for networkhashrate the digi chain is killing it..  17GH DIGI vs 4GH DGW last 100 blocks.  1.3.0 guldencoind queries cut and pastes below.

Code:

[root@dell ~]# guldencoind getbestblockhash
4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9
[root@dell ~]# guldencoind getblock 4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9
{
    "hash" : "4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9",
    "confirmations" : 1,
    "size" : 249,
    "height" : 194492,
    "version" : 2,
    "merkleroot" : "6418cbb4e728bd63cdcb683571b2d420a371cf50e25d05223bd4ad2d3760682e",
    "tx" : [
        "6418cbb4e728bd63cdcb683571b2d420a371cf50e25d05223bd4ad2d3760682e"
    ],
    "time" : 1422847904,
    "nonce" : 15892272,
    "bits" : "1c0116fb",
    "difficulty" : 234.90891779,
    "previousblockhash" : "b7396a43f6a92e2483b29b4de85cda44c69781b0b7bcc5652630ee2abb513a2c"
}
[root@dell ~]# guldencoind gettxout 6418cbb4e728bd63cdcb683571b2d420a371cf50e25d05223bd4ad2d3760682e 0
{
    "bestblock" : "4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9",
    "confirmations" : 1,
    "value" : 1000.00000000,
    "scriptPubKey" : {
        "asm" : "OP_DUP OP_HASH160 e96200b2643f6188c66305cd7b3a28923ab0bf0e OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG",
        "hex" : "76a914e96200b2643f6188c66305cd7b3a28923ab0bf0e88ac",
        "reqSigs" : 1,
        "type" : "pubkeyhash",
        "addresses" : [
            "Gf7wGAwJGDLfoHcNCRLKZqpk2EQU5ixA6c"
        ]
    },
    "version" : 1,
    "coinbase" : true
}
[root@dell ~]# guldencoind getmininginfo
{
    "blocks" : 194497,
    "currentblocksize" : 0,
    "currentblocktx" : 0,
    "difficulty" : 324.09852217,
    "errors" : "IMPORTANT: Shut down this wallet and download the new version 1.3.1! Very important and mandatory update!!\nBELANGRIJK: Sluit deze wallet af en download de nieuwe versie 1.3.1! Zeer belangrijke update!",
    "generate" : false,
    "genproclimit" : -1,
    "hashespersec" : 0,
    "networkhashps" : 4783660604,
    "pooledtx" : 0,
    "testnet" : false
}

EDIT: Now should we discuss Digi chain mining at a pace of 400 blocks per day? 

[thsminer]

Clever gone I see  
Nice spreading of hashes http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/
And Digishield is kicking in right well I think http://guldencointrader.nl/moeilijkheid.php

looks like the difficulty has maintained more stable rate. looking good!

Don't want to spoil the positive spirit but I saw these kind of messages with the DGW change also...

- The signs atm show Clever is still on the old wallet so i hope he's mining for J. Doe
- The latter means the diff would have been more steady with or without Digi
- the fact 30% of the wallets are old DGW AND Clever not on this chain does not make me confident (chains are chosen on work not on proper calculated diffs)
- Digi is more nervous due to the other way of retargetting and due to that the average blocks an hour are way to low, not a big deal but not OK either
- The main reason Digi was a better choice was to equalize the chances for all miners and discourage Clever, not as a final fix keep that in mind

So yes it looks OK but thats about it, if Clever jumps back in we can see if Digi does what we expected it to do.
On the other hand, in the past weeks we got company of another - I guess jump pool - and if Bio and friends   are planning to cut back on hashpower and we don't get Multi hour blocktimes it's a good sign. Till then we have to wait and see...


 

check it now and tell me things haven't changed. NLG and DIGI is good to go!
http://guldencointrader.nl/moeilijkheid.php

sorry mate, less than 15 blocks an hour for today. Thats the flipside...

[thsminer]

Clever gone I see  
Nice spreading of hashes http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/
And Digishield is kicking in right well I think http://guldencointrader.nl/moeilijkheid.php

looks like the difficulty has maintained more stable rate. looking good!

Don't want to spoil the positive spirit but I saw these kind of messages with the DGW change also...

- The signs atm show Clever is still on the old wallet so i hope he's mining for J. Doe
- The latter means the diff would have been more steady with or without Digi
- the fact 30% of the wallets are old DGW AND Clever not on this chain does not make me confident (chains are chosen on work not on proper calculated diffs)
- Digi is more nervous due to the other way of retargetting and due to that the average blocks an hour are way to low, not a big deal but not OK either
- The main reason Digi was a better choice was to equalize the chances for all miners and discourage Clever, not as a final fix keep that in mind

So yes it looks OK but thats about it, if Clever jumps back in we can see if Digi does what we expected it to do.
On the other hand, in the past weeks we got company of another - I guess jump pool - and if Bio and friends   are planning to cut back on hashpower and we don't get Multi hour blocktimes it's a good sign. Till then we have to wait and see...
 
 

thsminer:

I've been running a 1.3.0 guldencoind to keep an eye on the DGW chain..  clever is still mining on it.    i doubt anything malicious.. anyways, block height wise they're pretty much even with us. but for networkhashrate the digi chain is killing it..  17GH DIGI vs 4GH DGW last 100 blocks.  1.3.0 guldencoind queries cut and pastes below.

Code:

[root@dell ~]# guldencoind getbestblockhash
4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9
[root@dell ~]# guldencoind getblock 4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9
{
    "hash" : "4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9",
    "confirmations" : 1,
    "size" : 249,
    "height" : 194492,
    "version" : 2,
    "merkleroot" : "6418cbb4e728bd63cdcb683571b2d420a371cf50e25d05223bd4ad2d3760682e",
    "tx" : [
        "6418cbb4e728bd63cdcb683571b2d420a371cf50e25d05223bd4ad2d3760682e"
    ],
    "time" : 1422847904,
    "nonce" : 15892272,
    "bits" : "1c0116fb",
    "difficulty" : 234.90891779,
    "previousblockhash" : "b7396a43f6a92e2483b29b4de85cda44c69781b0b7bcc5652630ee2abb513a2c"
}
[root@dell ~]# guldencoind gettxout 6418cbb4e728bd63cdcb683571b2d420a371cf50e25d05223bd4ad2d3760682e 0
{
    "bestblock" : "4ab117917969d896e962eac3d231e4a0cd7d6e52350872336927f356a474b0b9",
    "confirmations" : 1,
    "value" : 1000.00000000,
    "scriptPubKey" : {
        "asm" : "OP_DUP OP_HASH160 e96200b2643f6188c66305cd7b3a28923ab0bf0e OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG",
        "hex" : "76a914e96200b2643f6188c66305cd7b3a28923ab0bf0e88ac",
        "reqSigs" : 1,
        "type" : "pubkeyhash",
        "addresses" : [
            "Gf7wGAwJGDLfoHcNCRLKZqpk2EQU5ixA6c"
        ]
    },
    "version" : 1,
    "coinbase" : true
}
[root@dell ~]# guldencoind getmininginfo
{
    "blocks" : 194497,
    "currentblocksize" : 0,
    "currentblocktx" : 0,
    "difficulty" : 324.09852217,
    "errors" : "IMPORTANT: Shut down this wallet and download the new version 1.3.1! Very important and mandatory update!!\nBELANGRIJK: Sluit deze wallet af en download de nieuwe versie 1.3.1! Zeer belangrijke update!",
    "generate" : false,
    "genproclimit" : -1,
    "hashespersec" : 0,
    "networkhashps" : 4783660604,
    "pooledtx" : 0,
    "testnet" : false
}

EDIT: Now should we discuss Digi chain mining at a pace of 400 blocks per day? 

Yep I noticed, posted above. Regarding the mining it appears Clever has build it own chain, but with this pace and diff it will die soon. Problem can be the fact that his 1.3 wallet still is able to communicate transactions with 1.3.1 wallets.

[markanth]

Yep I noticed, posted above. Regarding the mining it appears Clever has build it own chain, but with this pace and diff it will die soon. Problem can be the fact that his 1.3 wallet still is able to communicate transactions with 1.3.1 wallets.

yeah sorry about that.. I should learn to read.. and English is my first language.. *shakes head*

Anyways.. my first reaction is to give it some time to see how the mining scene and blocks per hour level out.. maybe a week? if the longest gap of the day is under 30-40 minutes I can live with that.. and as I said previously, NLG is a bit ahead of schedule with the coin creation.  so 400-450 a day for a week should be fine. 

I'll try to create some additional data products at nlgstats if something particular would help.

[ny2cafuse]

Yep I noticed, posted above. Regarding the mining it appears Clever has build it own chain, but with this pace and diff it will die soon. Problem can be the fact that his 1.3 wallet still is able to communicate transactions with 1.3.1 wallets.

This is part of the reason why a minimum protocol version block was in my original code.  It would have essentially banned 1.3 wallets from connecting to nodes other than 1.3 nodes.  This would force them to update or stay on their own fork, unable to talk to the correct chain.  There's a reason that CM is continuing their fork- there were enough wallets on the 1.3(remember that 30%) that say his blocks are valid.

As far as CM mining still, I mentioned that this was probably going to happen.  We need to keep an eye on this cross-communication though.  This could potentially bite us in the butt at some point.  Most importantly, we need to look at the transactions from the CM wallet to Bittrex to make sure we don't see a fork happen.  At some point Terk has to realize his precious profit is being sent to the void.  In the meantime, a question of ethics comes up.  Do we inform CM miners that their pool OP is wasting 4GH of their mining power on a fork because he doesn't pay attention to his pool, or do we let them mine nothing for all the months of raping us?

-Fuse

[WaterLooDown]

Yep I noticed, posted above. Regarding the mining it appears Clever has build it own chain, but with this pace and diff it will die soon. Problem can be the fact that his 1.3 wallet still is able to communicate transactions with 1.3.1 wallets.

This is part of the reason why a minimum protocol version block was in my original code.  It would have essentially banned 1.3 wallets from connecting to nodes other than 1.3 nodes.  This would force them to update or stay on their own fork, unable to talk to the correct chain.  There's a reason that CM is continuing their fork- there were enough wallets on the 1.3(remember that 30%) that say his blocks are valid.

As far as CM mining still, I mentioned that this was probably going to happen.  We need to keep an eye on this cross-communication though.  This could potentially bite us in the butt at some point.  Most importantly, we need to look at the transactions from the CM wallet to Bittrex to make sure we don't see a fork happen.  At some point Terk has to realize his precious profit is being sent to the void.  In the meantime, a question of ethics comes up.  Do we inform CM miners that their pool OP is wasting 4GH of their mining power on a fork because he doesn't pay attention to his pool, or do we let them mine nothing for all the months of raping us?

-Fuse

Hey Fuse, I did BCC Terk in the same message I sent you below for the Digishield update on the 14th Jan, so not sure why he didn't update to Digi yet.

Hi,

Guldencoin will be moving to Digishield around the 31st Jan, this will be a soft fork so you can update the wallet using any of the below links. Please can you make sure you do this ASAP so you don't have to worry about it at the last minute.

Thanks for your valued service for Guldencoin.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=554412.0



Countdown: https://digi.guldencoin.com



Updated version: v1.3.1.0-unk-beta (08-01-2015)

     

Kind Regards
Waterloo

[WaterLooDown]

Timeline for Jan has also been updated:

https://timeline.guldencoin.com/

[BioMike]

Do we inform CM miners that their pool OP is wasting 4GH of their mining power on a fork because he doesn't pay attention to his pool, or do we let them mine nothing for all the months of raping us?

Check back on their thread and see how they told us it was our fault being abused by CM. Well, let themselves find out their own fault of staying there.

[BioMike]

1) Block time of >30 minutes is still too long for me, to be honest. Diff extremes seem to be like pre-digi.
2) Where did that 6GH/s come from? New dedicated miners?
3) Are people on the other chain still able to send transactions? And get validations (by Clever)?

[neutraLTC]

great job guys 

[veertje]

1) Block time of >30 minutes is still too long for me, to be honest. Diff extremes seem to be like pre-digi.
2) Where did that 6GH/s come from? New dedicated miners?

1) Blocktimes seem more stable to me, with a few exceptions. 30 minute is very rare as it seems.
2) 98,9% is all from the pools: http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/
I saw yesterday, when diff is at 300 level, jump miners come in temporarely and most leaving short after again. http://www.coinmine.pw/poolinfo.php?coinid=109

[Frais]

2) Where did that 6GH/s come from? New dedicated miners?

I'm renting around 5 Gh/s at this moment..

[BioMike]

I saw yesterday, when diff is at 300 level, jump miners come in temporarely and most leaving short after again. http://www.coinmine.pw/poolinfo.php?coinid=109

Gazo is another one, but their ability to get blocks is way less than what Clever managed to get in the past. Both are at 11% together at the moment.