hyc
Member
 Offline
Activity: 88
Merit: 16
|
 |
March 24, 2016, 10:58:36 AM |
|
I received a reply from cryptonotepool.org.uk today (from my email 5 days ago) saying they may look into upgrading this weekend. It didn't sound very definite though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"With e-currency based on cryptographic proof, without the need to
trust a third party middleman, money can be secure and transactions
effortless." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
robinson5
|
|
March 24, 2016, 02:20:52 PM |
|
What are coinbase transactions?
That's another term for mining. Bear in mind that Zcash's math also is supposed to ensure that every transaction has outputs = inputs. The main differences are: 1. The RingCT math is orders of magnitude simpler. I can almost understand it, and that's saying a fair amount (not a cryptographer). 2. Zcash has the trusted setup which, if compromised in any way, will allow coins to be created without any possibility of detection. RingCT has no trusted setup. I'm pretty sure with zcash that you can't even tell how many coins are in circulation. So you can make a rough estimate based on the emission curve but there is no way to know how many coins have been mined. Paired with the trusted setup this is pretty risky. RingCT doesn't have a trusted setup but once it's implemented will we still be able to see how many monero are in circulation? Or will you be unable to monitor total money supply? |
|
|
|
|
|
yang5034
|
|
March 24, 2016, 02:45:54 PM |
|
use transfer 0 for 200xmr to poloniex.com ,fee is 0.4 xmr,does that too high?
Where are you sending from? The default fee is 0.01 XMR per KB. It could very well be that you have a lot of dust in your wallet. Did you mine to it? yes all the coins were mined ,be send from the pools. all the dust are 1.73 ,i tried to send 100 xmr from my wallet fee is 2.1 Are you sending from simplewallet or from a pool directly? That fee looks way too high for simplewallet and the transaction will likely not go through if it is send from simplewallet because it is above the median and therefore miners will incur a penalty to include your transaction in the block. Like papa_lazzarou said, if you are sending from simplewallet, try to "undust" your dust with the sweep_dust function first. You should not have any issue transfering Monero thereafter. [wallet 46TRZS]: sweep_dust Error: not enough money to transfer, available only 0.179658438977, transaction amount 0.380000000000 = 0.190000000000 + 0.190000000000 (fee) i used the command sweep_dust got this error |
|
|
|
|
|
aerbax
|
|
March 24, 2016, 03:40:19 PM |
|
Crosspost from the speculation thread... |
|
|
|
|
Drhiggins
|
|
March 24, 2016, 03:42:40 PM |
|
My god can we find a block already on Monerohash.com Long wait since the fork.
|
Monerohash.com U.S. Mining Pool
|
|
|
dEBRUYNE
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1141
|
|
March 24, 2016, 03:44:52 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quicken
|
|
March 24, 2016, 03:50:02 PM |
|
Very nice!  Who should we credit for the text on Monero there? It seems pretty well researched. |
|
|
|
|
dEBRUYNE
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1141
|
|
March 24, 2016, 03:58:17 PM |
|
Very nice! Who should we credit for the text on Monero there? It seems pretty well researched. Fluffypony :-) |
|
|
|
|
|
dEBRUYNE
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1141
|
|
March 24, 2016, 04:12:28 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
waspoza
|
|
March 24, 2016, 04:59:34 PM |
|
I'm wondering why block time was increased, where can I read about it?
|
|
|
|
|
saddambitcoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1610
Merit: 1004
|
|
March 24, 2016, 05:08:49 PM |
|
Off the top of my head, block time was increased from 1 to 2 minutes to reduce the number of empty blocks, and also to reduce the number of orphan blocks.
|
|
|
|
GingerAle
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
|
|
March 24, 2016, 05:20:30 PM |
|
I'm wondering why block time was increased, where can I read about it?
Its been discussed elsewhere, but I'm not sure there's a cogent document about it. Basically, the 1 minute blocktime was put into place by the original developer, thankful for today, when he cloned bytecoin to create bitmonero. If you don't know the rest of the story, the current core team then forked bitmonero to create the chain we know and love today as Monero. If you dive into the historical posts, you can see the disagreement with 1 min vs 2 minute blocktimes, and the post-hoc rationale provided by TFT was that 1 minute blocktimes would increase distribution in the initial phase (more block finders would be solo miners etc), though its probably he wanted 1 minute blocks because short blocks were all the rage in 2014. And it was also put forward that the chain would switch to 2 minute blocks once the primary distribution was over, in order to prevent re-orgs (when presumably the blocks would be bigger later in the chain's life). So in short, the blocktime was increased to prevent high frequency of reorganizations. |
|
|
|
Its About Sharing
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1442
Merit: 1000
Antifragile
|
|
March 24, 2016, 05:21:46 PM |
|
Can someone explain the Azure news? I am a bit perplexed by what this could mean. Thx in advance, Its about sharing |
BTC = Black Swan.
BTC = Antifragile - "Some things benefit from shocks; they thrive and grow when exposed to volatility, randomness, disorder, and stressors and love adventure, risk, and uncertainty. Robust is not the opposite of fragile.
|
|
|
luigi1111
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1105
Merit: 1000
|
|
March 24, 2016, 05:37:24 PM |
|
I'm wondering why block time was increased, where can I read about it?
Its been discussed elsewhere, but I'm not sure there's a cogent document about it. Basically, the 1 minute blocktime was put into place by the original developer, thankful for today, when he cloned bytecoin to create bitmonero. If you don't know the rest of the story, the current core team then forked bitmonero to create the chain we know and love today as Monero. If you dive into the historical posts, you can see the disagreement with 1 min vs 2 minute blocktimes, and the post-hoc rationale provided by TFT was that 1 minute blocktimes would increase distribution in the initial phase (more block finders would be solo miners etc), though its probably he wanted 1 minute blocks because short blocks were all the rage in 2014. And it was also put forward that the chain would switch to 2 minute blocks once the primary distribution was over, in order to prevent re-orgs (when presumably the blocks would be bigger later in the chain's life). So in short, the blocktime was increased to prevent high frequency of reorganizations. It also lessens the slow-to-verify POW impact (which positively impacts orphans somewhat, but more so initial/catchup syncs). 1 minute blocks are on the dangerously short side for a decentralized POW currency, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
luigi1111
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1105
Merit: 1000
|
|
March 24, 2016, 05:39:51 PM |
|
Can someone explain the Azure news? I am a bit perplexed by what this could mean. Thx in advance, Its about sharing It basically means at this point that there is a template that can get a Monero node running on Azure quickly and easily. So pretty bare-bones right now. It could do other things in the future. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pönde
|
|
March 24, 2016, 07:23:16 PM |
|
Will MyMonero.com be up on tomorrow 25. March 06.00 GMT?
|
|
|
|
|
GingerAle
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
|
|
March 24, 2016, 07:58:53 PM |
|
Yes! Thank you Dr. Bookmarks. And btw the new american pegasus inspired yacht moon thing with all the peeps on it is.... amazing. |
|
|
|
saddambitcoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1610
Merit: 1004
|
|
March 24, 2016, 10:37:33 PM |
|
monero-nodejs 3.0 updatehttps://github.com/PsychicCat/monero-nodejsI recently updated the monero-nodejs library for simplewallet. Changes: - Refactored to use zero dependencies. Never worry about breaking changes in the future, and it should be compatible with most environments.
- Tests! Clone the repository and run npm install && npm test to test if your wallet is configured properly.
|
|
|
|
|
