[ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin"

[SuperClam]

Linux Binary:
CLAMclient 1.4.3.0 Linux

[SuperClam]

- Reduced the automatic output splitting threshold to 1 CLAM,

I don't think that's quite right.
It looks to me like the new code will combine outputs which are less than 1 CLAM into outputs of size 1 CLAM, but it will split anything that took less than 24 hours to stake (but only when it does eventually stake).
But maybe that's what you meant.

Indeed.
The intent was to just include a very simple fix that will prevent people from having their manually split outputs re-combined on them.

[garthkiser]

Join the effort in CoinSwap's IRC room to vote CLAMs onto the exchange.

Go to http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=coin-swap and enter "!vote CLAM" once per hour.

As of now CLAMs has over 200 votes and is near #3 on the list.

Thanks to user istvandv for pointing this out

[paulc010]

Well all I'm getting right now is a ton of "generated but not accepted" (for an hour and a half now). khashier seems to be on the old chain so no idea how to make sure mine is syncing to the correct one?

BTW the client says the network weight is over 93 million?

EDIT: Now 763 million...

[SuperClam]

Well all I'm getting right now is a ton of "generated but not accepted" (for an hour and a half now). khashier seems to be on the old chain so no idea how to make sure mine is syncing to the correct one?
BTW the client says the network weight is over 93 million?
EDIT: Now 763 million...

Indeed, difficulty is racing upwards to catch it - we are investigating.

Stop into #clams on freenode, we are exchanging blockhashes and monitoring the chain.

[Hippie Tech]

The last two stakes orphaned and my client has lost all connections/ gone offline.

51'd ?

[SuperClam]

The last two stakes orphaned and my client has lost all connections/ gone offline.
51'd ?

We went for a bit of a ride after the fork, all of the estimates are entirely off, though things are balancing out now.
If you want to check that you are on the right chain, or get things straightened out stop into IRC, friend.

[almightyruler]

We went for a bit of a ride after the fork, all of the estimates are entirely off, though things are balancing out now.
If you want to check that you are on the right chain, or get things straightened out stop into IRC, friend.

I've also noticed I seem to be staking a lot. Is there a simple way to get onto your IRC channel via a web client? I haven't used IRC for 10 years.

Difficulty currently 5000?  

Bit of the old signed integer overflow here...

{
    "enabled" : true,
    "staking" : true,
    "errors" : "",
    "currentblocksize" : 1000,
    "currentblocktx" : 0,
    "pooledtx" : 0,
    "difficulty" : 4911.38914873,
    "search-interval" : 16,
    "weight" : 23285562167,
    "netstakeweight" : 5109529310971,
    "expectedtime" : -226293232
}

[garthkiser]

We went for a bit of a ride after the fork, all of the estimates are entirely off, though things are balancing out now.
If you want to check that you are on the right chain, or get things straightened out stop into IRC, friend.

I've also noticed I seem to be staking a lot. Is there a simple way to get onto your IRC channel via a web client? I haven't used IRC for 10 years.

Difficulty currently 5000?  

Bit of the old signed integer overflow here...

{
    "enabled" : true,
    "staking" : true,
    "errors" : "",
    "currentblocksize" : 1000,
    "currentblocktx" : 0,
    "pooledtx" : 0,
    "difficulty" : 4911.38914873,
    "search-interval" : 16,
    "weight" : 23285562167,
    "netstakeweight" : 5109529310971,
    "expectedtime" : -226293232
}

http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=clams

[Thirdspace]

downloading the new client right now...
my chain is "again" on the wrong fork up to 2039xx
hopefully I can manage to resynch better than last time

2 times stuck @99% and the third time it saves to my hd but I got this error on chrome

CLAMclient_1.4.3.0_Windows.zip may harm your browsing experience, so Chrome has blocked it.

[dooglus]

Here's a chart showing the network difficulty per block from shortly before the fork until now:



The net client made it around 100 million times easier to stake, since the previous code would let you stake if your output's hash was less than:

Code:

difficulty_target * value_in_clams * age_in_days)

and the new code lets you stake if your output's hash is less than:

Code:

difficulty_target * value_in_satoshi

Your output's age is no longer taken into account. It used to be that your chance of staking increased the longer it had been since you last staked, but that no longer happens. Note that the output's value in satoshis is now used rather than its value in clams - that's where the factor of 100 million comes in. Given constant "difficulty", it is now 100 million times easier for a 1-day-old output to stake than it was before. However, it's only 50 million times easier for a 2-day-old output to stake, and only 1 million times easier for a 100-day-old output to stake. Most outputs used to stake within 50 days or so. I would guess the average time to stake used to be around 10 days. So we might expect the network difficulty to adjust by a factor of 10 million to compensate.

The difficulty adjustment code smoothly ramped the difficulty up by a factor of around 1 million, but it overshot, and it's taking a while to reach a new equilibrium. Here's a close-up of the last few hundred block difficulties:



Why did the network difficulty "only" adjust by a factor of 1 million? Perhaps because a significant percentage of the network didn't switch to the net client yet. Or perhaps because my math is wrong.

Edit:

To get the data, I ran:

Code:

block=203200
while ((block <= $(cc getblockcount)))
do
    echo $block $(cc getblock $(cc getblockhash $block) | grep difficulty) | cut -d" " -f1,4 | tr -d ","
    ((block++))
done > diff.dat

(where 'cc' is an alias for 'clamd') and to plot the charts:

Code:

$ gnuplot
gnuplot> unset key
gnuplot> set logscale y
gnuplot> set grid
gnuplot> plot "diff.dat" with linespoints pt 7
gnuplot> unset logscale
gnuplot> plot [204200:*] "diff.dat" with linespoints pt 7

[Karn]

This sound about right

(getinfo)
"version" : "v1.4.2.1-355-gf36c215",
"protocolversion" : 60014,
"walletversion" : 60000,
"balance" : 94.20881502,
"newmint" : 0.00000000,
"stake" : 0.00000000,
"blocks" : 204771,
"timeoffset" : 0,
"moneysupply" : 15054374.76984581,
"connections" : 20,
"proxy" : "",
"ip" : "",
"difficulty" : {
"proof-of-work" : 0.00024876,
"proof-of-stake" : 4613.98166182
},
"testnet" : false,
"keypoololdest" : 1404539916,
"keypoolsize" : 101,
"paytxfee" : 0.00000000,
"mininput" : 0.00000000,
"errors" : ""

(getstakinginfo)
enabled" : true,
"staking" : true,
"errors" : "",
"currentblocksize" : 1000,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"pooledtx" : 0,
"difficulty" : 4587.99675682,
"search-interval" : 16,
"weight" : 9420881502,
"netstakeweight" : 6627397658617,
"expectedtime" : 268435456


your weight 94
network weight 6,600,000,000,000
expected time to earn reward 3106 days

[paulc010]

The numbers look shocking but it's working fine. New staking chance isn't factored into the network weight (which was only ever an indicator) or the expected time to stake calculation.

My wallet is staking just fine even though the client is telling me I need to wait a year

[dooglus]

Updated difficulty charts:

[tryphe]

Edited Karn's quote to clarify a few things.

--quote cut off--
"weight" : 9420881502,
"netstakeweight" : 6627397658617,
"expectedtime" : 268435456

your weight 94 <-- this is actually 9.4 Billion as seen above
network weight 6,600,000,000,000
expected time to earn reward 3106 days <--This is completely wrong because of how the client interprets the data based on the old numbers (it takes a wildly overestimated guess right now)

All of these numbers are arbitrary and an estimation of the network state based on recent data. In no way do they accurately represent the actual values(they are impossible to know). They are in the process of being revised to be human readable and not a bunch of jumble =p

In other words, you should not pay attention to any of the numbers in the staking tooltip(short of the network weight), especially the expected time. Please do not make any judgements based on these values. My best advice would be to stake for a while, and then make some estimations based on that.


Also:

"protocolversion" : 60014

This indicates that you are running the proper build. You should ignore the version string for now (i.e. "1.4.2.1..")

[Trololoh]

A few "fresh" nodes for ppl who need to re-download chain and to make sure you end up syncing the correct chain.

Clam.conf :

Code:

listen=1
connect=73.172.149.95
connect=54.75.227.85
connect=104.131.67.225
connect=73.55.207.245
connect=80.195.253.183
connect=82.26.243.220
connect=173.31.55.8

-As usual, move your wallet.dat to safe location before you sync.
-Check and verify that you are indeed on the right chain before you copy wallet.dat back.
-Currently use IRC chat for chain verification or post in forum.
-When done, delete peers.dat and change connect= to addnode=

[dooglus]

-Currently use IRC chat for chain verification.

Here's a recent block in my client:

> getblockhash 204990
d4dbfae71d2fd6bf224a4a4cfe83a7a17c2c40c6e7f7cdcb738bf597beb3d6c6

Can someone please confirm they see the same hash for that height?

[tryphe]

-Currently use IRC chat for chain verification.

Here's a recent block in my client:

> getblockhash 204990
d4dbfae71d2fd6bf224a4a4cfe83a7a17c2c40c6e7f7cdcb738bf597beb3d6c6

Can someone please confirm they see the same hash for that height?

Copy that!

[Trololoh]

-Currently use IRC chat for chain verification.

Here's a recent block in my client:

> getblockhash 204990
d4dbfae71d2fd6bf224a4a4cfe83a7a17c2c40c6e7f7cdcb738bf597beb3d6c6

Can someone please confirm they see the same hash for that height?

Yep, same hash for 204990 on my wallet.

[Quantum12]

-Currently use IRC chat for chain verification.

Here's a recent block in my client:

> getblockhash 204990
d4dbfae71d2fd6bf224a4a4cfe83a7a17c2c40c6e7f7cdcb738bf597beb3d6c6

Can someone please confirm they see the same hash for that height?

Also can confirm

correct

Q