Bitcoin Forum
April 25, 2019, 04:47:15 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 [151] 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 ... 2035 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency  (Read 4554583 times)
eizh
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 500



View Profile
May 21, 2014, 05:46:05 AM
 #3001


All the pools are reporting similar stats except they haven't found blocks in a while.  The one I linked had more results.  That's why I linked it.

http://moneropool.com/#pool_blocks --Block Found: about 4 hours ago

http://moneropool.org/#pool_blocks  --  Block Found: a day ago

http://monerominers.com/pool/#pool_blocks  -- 23 hours since it had a block

http://monero.crypto-pool.fr/#pool_blocks  -- Block Found: about 5 hours ago

http://extremepool.org/#pool_blocks  -- Block Found: about an hour ago

As I explained, they were testing those pools on a test network with a handful of CPUs. You're welcome to load the daemon and print out blockchain data yourself to check the difficulty on the main chain. Here's the data: http://monerochain.info/charts/difficulty

No discontinuity.
1556210835
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1556210835

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1556210835
Reply with quote  #2

1556210835
Report to moderator
1556210835
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1556210835

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1556210835
Reply with quote  #2

1556210835
Report to moderator
1556210835
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1556210835

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1556210835
Reply with quote  #2

1556210835
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1556210835
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1556210835

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1556210835
Reply with quote  #2

1556210835
Report to moderator
1556210835
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1556210835

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1556210835
Reply with quote  #2

1556210835
Report to moderator
Kuriso
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532
Merit: 500


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 05:48:39 AM
 #3002


All the pools are reporting similar stats except they haven't found blocks in a while.  The one I linked had more results.  That's why I linked it.

http://moneropool.com/#pool_blocks --Block Found: about 4 hours ago

http://moneropool.org/#pool_blocks  --  Block Found: a day ago

http://monerominers.com/pool/#pool_blocks  -- 23 hours since it had a block

http://monero.crypto-pool.fr/#pool_blocks  -- Block Found: about 5 hours ago

http://extremepool.org/#pool_blocks  -- Block Found: about an hour ago

As I explained, they were testing those pools on a test network with a handful of CPUs. You're welcome to load the daemon and print out blockchain data yourself to check the difficulty on the main chain. Here's the data: http://monerochain.info/charts/difficulty

No discontinuity.

Ok so is it normal to expect an i7-4930k (high end $500 CPU) to mine only .1447 MRO in over a day?

So based off that link the CPU power doubled in this amount of time not 392,796 times
eizh
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 500



View Profile
May 21, 2014, 05:52:27 AM
 #3003


Ok so is it normal to expect an i7-4930k (high end $500 CPU) to mine only .1447 MRO in over a day?

So based off that link the CPU power doubled in this amount of time not 392,796 times

No, your pool is unlucky. On average you'd expect something like 2 MRO per day. Yes, the CPU power did double over a single day.
Kuriso
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532
Merit: 500


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 05:53:46 AM
 #3004


Ok so is it normal to expect an i7-4930k (high end $500 CPU) to mine only .1447 MRO in over a day?

No, your pool is unlucky. On average you'd expect something like 2 MRO per day.

I'm mining on http://extremepool.org/.  That's also why I posted the difficulty.  They had the best block finds
crypto4jan
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358
Merit: 1017


account is retired


View Profile WWW
May 21, 2014, 06:07:05 AM
 #3005

I wil Follow this coin, good concept and I invested some BTC into It.
Succes

seek4dream
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 966
Merit: 501


“OPEN GAMING PLATFORM”


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 06:47:48 AM
 #3006

I wil Follow this coin, good concept and I invested some BTC into It.
Succes
wise decision, do so before it hit big exchange.
---it also applies to Qora. Grin

surfer43
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 250


"Trading Platform of The Future!"


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 06:51:40 AM
 #3007

http://moneropool.org has disabled longpolling. You should now be able to mine there with cpuminer-multi and we should find blocks more often.

FamousRocky
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100

RTFM ;D


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 07:06:10 AM
 #3008

monero on http://coinmarketcap.com/

P 20.... gogogo  Cheesy
konamist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 243
Merit: 250


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 07:28:00 AM
 #3009

Anonymous function is so hot these days, hope this is not just an excuse for p&d

Mineotaur
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 174
Merit: 100


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 07:28:18 AM
 #3010



 Cool

BTC: 13cbMaTiNdXPh1RNEAJ8CEGyae6msPKJGb
phzi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700
Merit: 500


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 07:45:54 AM
 #3011

Will definitely be keeping an eye on this coin.
oinquer
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 94
Merit: 10


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 08:32:37 AM
 #3012

sooo...im using GUI wallet and its stuck on initializing, with 1 block to download for hours already....conection has been moving up from 5 to 7 peers...
16888253
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100



View Profile
May 21, 2014, 08:33:20 AM
 #3013

MRO just a baby now ...Keep buying~~
fluffypony
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1024


GetMonero.org / MyMonero.com


View Profile WWW
May 21, 2014, 08:37:03 AM
 #3014

I'd like to address the comments that have been bouncing around, particularly the points AlexGr raised. I read some of the back-and-forth, and I'm glad we are debating and engaging like this.

As a brief history lesson, do you remember Tenebrix? It was the first scrypt-based coin. To quote Buffer Overflow's thoughts on the matter: "The block reward at block 1 was 7769999.00000000 TBX, then continues with 25.00000000 TBX for each block after that." Tenebrix was unabashedly premined, just as BCN has been. Litecoin cloned Tenebrix (Artforz was even the main developer contributing code to both Tenebrix and Litecoin), added a few small changes and bug fixes, and there you have it. Nobody really remembers Tenebrix or even Fairbrix (fair relaunch of Tenebrix by Coblee, who launched Litecoin at roughly the same time - it died due to lack of any hashrate which made a 51% attack trivial), but Litecoin? Well. Need I say more.

I do not think any of us have any bug-bear with the BCN developers. But it is a fallacy to believe that they are wizards that wrote the code and therefore the only people capable of maintaining it, as was already demonstrated in the Tenebrix / Litecoin debacle. Litecoin certainly didn't need to wait for lolcust to make code changes for them to fix bugs and improve the codebase.


I also feel we should challenge BCN's claimed 2 years of blockchain data for several reasons:

- The blockchain was not publicly observable or observed for those 2 years. We have no reason to believe it is true, and even if it was true it still means that ~151 billion of the 184 billion BCN (82%) were mined prior to its public release. Think about that pragmatically. Would you want to use a currency where unknown actors controlled over 80% of it? This alone takes Bytecoin from being decentralised to being centralised by virtue of those controlling the flow of the currency.

- Thus far we have not had any outpouring of public, known figures stating that they have used BCN for the past few years and can back up the 2 year claim. This means that the 151 billion is in the hands of people unknown, unknowable, and untrustworthy. Not only can they perform massive market manipulation with that, but everyone is left dabbling in the shallow end of the pool. Practically: at the current block reward the BCN network will spit out ~82.5 million coins a day down to ~44.7 million at the end of the year. That means that between now and the end of the year (224 days) the network will produce around 13.83 billion coins in a supposedly fair manner, or about 7.6%, barely enough to swing a cat much less affect the power wielded by those controlling 82% of the supply. By comparison, Monero has had 846 707 coins mined to date, of a total of ~18.4 million coins, or 4.6%, which leaves the market wide open for all to participate.

- The CryptoNote whitepaper was published on October 17, 2013, and the first commit to the Github repo was on November 15, 2013. By means of a comparison: Satoshi Nakamoto released the Bitcoin whitepaper in November 2008, and the network started in January 2009 with the first client, a not-too-disimilar timeframe. Had the BCN network started in November nobody would be questioning it. Rather, it stands to reason, by all accounts, that the individual(s) behind the CryptoNote whitepaper either wrote the initial code and gave it to the Bytecoin developer(s) who then ran with this, falsified a blockchain (trivial), and released it publicly in March after blockchain falsification was complete.

- The BCN mining code shipped purposely crippled, presumably as a way of making the falsified blockchain seem legitimate. Not just weird or written by a cryptographer who doesn't know how to optimise, but purposely crippled for slow mining. Things like recalculating a static value in every iteration of a loop instead of just once at the beginning is not a mistake, especially when viewed in light of the claimed 2 year history. Did nobody care to optimise the hashing code in 2 years, not even to improve the amount of time it takes to download and verify a blockchain from scratch? I find that unlikely. On the other hand: if you glance at our Github commits you'll notice that in two iterations (26c1a8569c and 49d55d3c30, primarily) we first improved the hashing by 2x its initial performance, and then further improved it to 12x its initial performance. It appears that the BCN devs are so lazy they haven't even merged our changes in, so everyone mining on their network has either used our changes or is mining 12x slower than they could. Or they just have a significantly faster miner already and couldn't be bothered.

- On their website, wherein they claim 2 years of stable work, they say: "Launched back in July 2012, Bytecoin has proved that it is going to stay for years to come." If that was the case, how did they not notice critical issues in the RPC API? The documentation on their wiki is blatantly incorrect (adding a trailing slash to the JSON RPC API URL causes a 404), and running simplewallet in RPC API mode tends to silently lose its connection to the daemon every few hours. That's a surprising issue not to have picked up in 2 years - was nobody using the RPC API in the wallet? None of the BCN merchants accepting payments needed to track said payments automatically? This seems highly improbable.


Monero is not merely a fair relaunch of an existing cryptocurrency. It is unashamedly a fair relaunch of Bytecoin, but the changes and bugfixes and improvements made in under a month speak volumes for the commitment we have to improving Monero. The Bytecoin developers have already shown their reluctance to merge our changes, why would they bother inheriting any further improvements we will make? If you want to use and mine Bytecoin with their crippled miner and their 82% premine please be my guest. I have nothing against the Bytecoin developers or their coin, and wish them all the best. As for me, and the rest of the Monero team, we will continue to take Monero to the next level without needing to wait for anyone's stamp of approval:)

AlexGR
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 1027



View Profile
May 21, 2014, 08:48:46 AM
 #3015

I'd like to address the comments that have been bouncing around, particularly the points AlexGr raised. I read some of the back-and-forth, and I'm glad we are debating and engaging like this.

As a brief history lesson, do you remember Tenebrix? It was the first scrypt-based coin. To quote Buffer Overflow's thoughts on the matter: "The block reward at block 1 was 7769999.00000000 TBX, then continues with 25.00000000 TBX for each block after that." Tenebrix was unabashedly premined, just as BCN has been. Litecoin cloned Tenebrix (Artforz was even the main developer contributing code to both Tenebrix and Litecoin), added a few small changes and bug fixes, and there you have it. Nobody really remembers Tenebrix or even Fairbrix (fair relaunch of Tenebrix by Coblee, who launched Litecoin at roughly the same time - it died due to lack of any hashrate which made a 51% attack trivial), but Litecoin? Well. Need I say more.

2011 wasn't exactly 2014. Post-2013 boom, the crypto landscape was filled with clones and thus the level of acceptability has gone down.

Quote
- The blockchain was not publicly observable or observed for those 2 years. We have no reason to believe it is true, and even if it was true it still means that ~151 billion of the 184 billion BCN (82%) were mined prior to its public release. Think about that pragmatically. Would you want to use a currency where unknown actors controlled over 80% of it? This alone takes Bytecoin from being decentralised to being centralised by virtue of those controlling the flow of the currency.

It's a stretch to go the "centralized" route by virtue of money supply distribution. But no, with 80% premine I'm not interested in being dumped by the bagholders, even if they are selling at 1 satoshi.
drawingthesun
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134
Merit: 1002


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 09:03:00 AM
 #3016

As I see it, having MRO take everything and upsetting the BCN devs by capitalizing on their work can backfire big time as they might "nuke" the clones and go with a V2 which heavily improves on V1. And then it's game over.

This is a really good point that I had overlooked myself.

The only way to position MRO for the long term is if the core developers are Cryptographers that have the expertise to stay ahead of the Bytecoin developers.

Otherwise a BCN 2.0 fair launch could be a problem.

If I was a BCN 1.0 dev, I would dump my BCN making myself a millionaire, and restart with the official BCN 2.0 to continue with my passion of making an anonymous Crypto without having to be greedy anymore.

How capable are the Monero developers?

Although remember, at the end of the day hash power wins, if Monero keeps gaining the majority of CryptoNote coin hashpower, then they can be well positioned to take on BCN 2.0
sdersdf2
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 09:07:11 AM
 #3017

I'd like to address the comments that have been bouncing around, particularly the points AlexGr raised. I read some of the back-and-forth, and I'm glad we are debating and engaging like this.

As a brief history lesson, do you remember Tenebrix? It was the first scrypt-based coin. To quote Buffer Overflow's thoughts on the matter: "The block reward at block 1 was 7769999.00000000 TBX, then continues with 25.00000000 TBX for each block after that." Tenebrix was unabashedly premined, just as BCN has been. Litecoin cloned Tenebrix (Artforz was even the main developer contributing code to both Tenebrix and Litecoin), added a few small changes and bug fixes, and there you have it. Nobody really remembers Tenebrix or even Fairbrix (fair relaunch of Tenebrix by Coblee, who launched Litecoin at roughly the same time - it died due to lack of any hashrate which made a 51% attack trivial), but Litecoin? Well. Need I say more.

I do not think any of us have any bug-bear with the BCN developers. But it is a fallacy to believe that they are wizards that wrote the code and therefore the only people capable of maintaining it, as was already demonstrated in the Tenebrix / Litecoin debacle. Litecoin certainly didn't need to wait for lolcust to make code changes for them to fix bugs and improve the codebase.


I also feel we should challenge BCN's claimed 2 years of blockchain data for several reasons:

- The blockchain was not publicly observable or observed for those 2 years. We have no reason to believe it is true, and even if it was true it still means that ~151 billion of the 184 billion BCN (82%) were mined prior to its public release. Think about that pragmatically. Would you want to use a currency where unknown actors controlled over 80% of it? This alone takes Bytecoin from being decentralised to being centralised by virtue of those controlling the flow of the currency.

- Thus far we have not had any outpouring of public, known figures stating that they have used BCN for the past few years and can back up the 2 year claim. This means that the 151 billion is in the hands of people unknown, unknowable, and untrustworthy. Not only can they perform massive market manipulation with that, but everyone is left dabbling in the shallow end of the pool. Practically: at the current block reward the BCN network will spit out ~82.5 million coins a day down to ~44.7 million at the end of the year. That means that between now and the end of the year (224 days) the network will produce around 13.83 billion coins in a supposedly fair manner, or about 7.6%, barely enough to swing a cat much less affect the power wielded by those controlling 82% of the supply. By comparison, Monero has had 846 707 coins mined to date, of a total of ~18.4 million coins, or 4.6%, which leaves the market wide open for all to participate.

- The CryptoNote whitepaper was published on October 17, 2013, and the first commit to the Github repo was on November 15, 2013. By means of a comparison: Satoshi Nakamoto released the Bitcoin whitepaper in November 2008, and the network started in January 2009 with the first client, a not-too-disimilar timeframe. Had the BCN network started in November nobody would be questioning it. Rather, it stands to reason, by all accounts, that the individual(s) behind the CryptoNote whitepaper either wrote the initial code and gave it to the Bytecoin developer(s) who then ran with this, falsified a blockchain (trivial), and released it publicly in March after blockchain falsification was complete.

- The BCN mining code shipped purposely crippled, presumably as a way of making the falsified blockchain seem legitimate. Not just weird or written by a cryptographer who doesn't know how to optimise, but purposely crippled for slow mining. Things like recalculating a static value in every iteration of a loop instead of just once at the beginning is not a mistake, especially when viewed in light of the claimed 2 year history. Did nobody care to optimise the hashing code in 2 years, not even to improve the amount of time it takes to download and verify a blockchain from scratch? I find that unlikely. On the other hand: if you glance at our Github commits you'll notice that in two iterations (26c1a8569c and 49d55d3c30, primarily) we first improved the hashing by 2x its initial performance, and then further improved it to 12x its initial performance. It appears that the BCN devs are so lazy they haven't even merged our changes in, so everyone mining on their network has either used our changes or is mining 12x slower than they could. Or they just have a significantly faster miner already and couldn't be bothered.

- On their website, wherein they claim 2 years of stable work, they say: "Launched back in July 2012, Bytecoin has proved that it is going to stay for years to come." If that was the case, how did they not notice critical issues in the RPC API? The documentation on their wiki is blatantly incorrect (adding a trailing slash to the JSON RPC API URL causes a 404), and running simplewallet in RPC API mode tends to silently lose its connection to the daemon every few hours. That's a surprising issue not to have picked up in 2 years - was nobody using the RPC API in the wallet? None of the BCN merchants accepting payments needed to track said payments automatically? This seems highly improbable.


Monero is not merely a fair relaunch of an existing cryptocurrency. It is unashamedly a fair relaunch of Bytecoin, but the changes and bugfixes and improvements made in under a month speak volumes for the commitment we have to improving Monero. The Bytecoin developers have already shown their reluctance to merge our changes, why would they bother inheriting any further improvements we will make? If you want to use and mine Bytecoin with their crippled miner and their 82% premine please be my guest. I have nothing against the Bytecoin developers or their coin, and wish them all the best. As for me, and the rest of the Monero team, we will continue to take Monero to the next level without needing to wait for anyone's stamp of approval:)


some excellent points here.
fluffypony
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1024


GetMonero.org / MyMonero.com


View Profile WWW
May 21, 2014, 09:15:35 AM
 #3018

As I see it, having MRO take everything and upsetting the BCN devs by capitalizing on their work can backfire big time as they might "nuke" the clones and go with a V2 which heavily improves on V1. And then it's game over.

This is a really good point that I had overlooked myself.

The only way to position MRO for the long term is if the core developers are Cryptographers that have the expertise to stay ahead of the Bytecoin developers.

Otherwise a BCN 2.0 fair launch could be a problem.

If I was a BCN 1.0 dev, I would dump my BCN making myself a millionaire, and restart with the official BCN 2.0 to continue with my passion of making an anonymous Crypto without having to be greedy anymore.

How capable are the Monero developers?

What can they introduce in "V2" that can't be merged downstream? Every significant improvement Bitcoin has made has been merged down into Litecoin, Dogecoin, and every other fork. "Restarting" won't be an option, as by then they'll have too many people holding coins that won't let BCN go (even if their holdings are a paltry sum compared to the premine). They can do a relaunch, but someone else will continue running with the original BCN for fear of losing their "investment".

Also on that topic, Bytecoin is such a bad name choice - not only is it too similar to Bitcoin, but the existing Bytecoin cryptocurrency makes things incredibly confusing for end-users...it's a PR nightmare:)

In terms of our capabilities, one need only look at an obvious example: in the ~4 weeks we've been working on the coin (part time, unpaid, voluntarily, with tacotime having been on leave and dealing with personal matters) we've improved the hashing function used in Monero and in Bytecoin to 12x its original performance (our initial improvements doubled it, further improvements brought it up to ~12x performance). The Bytecoin devs have not merged this upstream, although it would be a trivial exercise for them to do so. This function speeds up mining, but far more importantly it speeds up verifying the blockchain. Try loading a blockchain from scratch in Monero and compare the speed to Bytecoin...it's not even slightly comparable.

hrt
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 288
Merit: 250


View Profile
May 21, 2014, 09:18:41 AM
 #3019

MRO is not a cryptonode covert SHA512 algo DOESN'T have a ring signatures broken scam. Described in OP anonymous approach is fucked scam. Now gonna be on the way to 0.0009 FUCK

  โ  NIMBUSCOIN DEVELOPER   
fluffypony
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1024


GetMonero.org / MyMonero.com


View Profile WWW
May 21, 2014, 09:21:43 AM
 #3020

MRO is not a cryptonode covert SHA512 algo DOESN'T have a ring signatures broken scam. Described in OP anonymous approach is fucked scam. Now gonna be on the way to 0.0009 FUCK

How Can Post Be Real If Our Eyes Aren't Real?

Pages: « 1 ... 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 [151] 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 ... 2035 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!