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

[rocoro]

Possible workarounds include making a separate wallet and importing only the private keys you want to spend from

I made a separate wallet.dat,  had coins deposited to that, then just did the splitting from there to an address that is in the other wallet.dat.
I don't know if that's ok, but seems to have worked.... ?

[smooth]

Possible workarounds include making a separate wallet and importing only the private keys you want to spend from

I made a separate wallet.dat,  had coins deposited to that, then just did the splitting from there to an address that is in the other wallet.dat.
I don't know if that's ok, but seems to have worked.... ?

Yeah that's a good approach and that's what I'm doing for the pool. If you've already mixed outputs of different sizes in one wallet you can use splitto to get them split down as they stake. I'm also using that in the pool since the first couple of investments went together with some already-split coins.

[romjpn]

JD bankroll just crossed 1 million.

Good indicator that investors are remaining confident indeed. Let's go back to that 1~1.5$ range   .
Now we should try to get on a major exchange for example, with a DOGE/USD pair. It would be good to be integrated directly into some payment gateway as well, like DOGE with GOcoin.

[dooglus]

It might also very well prompt a massive increase in the rate of digging. This digger very likely sped up his digging in response to talk of a fork that would prevent him from digging the rest. If a big increase in the staking rate is proposed, others will likely accelerate their digging as well.

That's OK. I would prefer inflation now over lingering uncertainty.

Instead we should leave well enough alone, stop creating more evidence in support of the law of unintended consequences, and allow confidence to recover. With the damage that is already done that will take some time already, but it can happen.

It's not clear to me how much of the drop in price was due to fear of the digger dumping and how much was due to potential buyers being put off by the talk of a change to the rules. I suspect it's much more the former than the latter, but I know you think the opposite.

1) We don't have to break any promises. "If you owned BTC you may already own CLAM!" stays true. The 4.6 per address that you "may already own!" stays there. We aren't accused of deleting people's property.

No, you will be accused of diluting people's property instead. Congratulations.

True enough. It's impossible to please everyone.

What happens when support subsequently changes after the 50% support is reached? Coins change hands, opinions change and suddenly something that had 50% support last week doesn't this week. This week being an excellent example since apparently 200K+ coins have apparently changed hands.

That's an issue with this CLAMour thing. It's possible to buy votes, in the form of CLAMs. You need 500k CLAMs or so to get 50% support for your petition, so maybe for a million dollars you could get your petition some attention.

The most meaningful proposals will be ones that are ready to implement quickly if supported. Otherwise the voting should continue and the 10K window be viewed as just that, an ongoing "window" into current opinion of stakeholders. Or alternately a second vote can be held at a later date to reaffirm, once an implementation is ready.

This of course won't be an issue for uncontroversial proposals that will get significant support regardless of the time window. It is my hope that stakeholders are enlightened enough to decline to vote for controversial proposals where the inevitable conflict will cause damage to the community even if they personally believe the idea is a good one (and instead work to educate the community such that if the idea really is a good one, support can be achieved). This will force those putting forth a proposal to craft it in a manner that gains overwhelming support instead of trying to use the voting mechanism as a PR tool to legitimize a 51% attack. I'm not entirely optimistic, but we will see.

Yes, "we will see" sums up how I feel about it pretty well.

[dooglus]

The next 24 hours are extremely busy for me; I will try to check in periodically if I can.

dooglus will likely keep us updated on the progress of the UI for the users of Just-Dice.

Initially I was thinking I would allow Just-Dice users to enter any 8-digit petition-IDs they wanted to, and use those in the CLAMspeech when staking blocks. Each user would get their fair share of chances to stake a block based on their investment size.

Then I figured it would be better if I only allowed 'voting' for petition-IDs which had been correctly registered with a 'create clamour' message.

So I set about making changes to the client to have it track valid petition-IDs.

The place to track them is in the block index, so you don't have to keep re-parsing the CLAMspeech every time you start the client. That means I need to change the block index database format, and so users will need to "clam-qt -reindex" after upgrading.

Except it turns out that -reindex doesn't work, and never has. So I set about fixing that. I have some code which now does make the wallet try to reload the blk0001.dat file when you ask it to -reindex.

Except it turns out that when loading my blk0001.dat file (which I know contains all the valid blocks), it gets stuck. Like this:

2015-11-30 04:01:48 SetBestChain: new best=dcfa7e4952dc67913af4e6411136f0a944a69397fa74a2006d81d5c58961ef4a  height=230252  trust=992559058268678270  blocktrust=47672287752932  date=11/29/14 19:38:24
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : using modifier 0xd891dd792afb83b0 at height=230252 timestamp=2014-11-29 19:38:24 UTC for block from timestamp=2014-11-19 05:09:04 UTC
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : check modifier=0xd891dd792afb83b0 nTimeBlockFrom=1416373744 nTimeTxPrev=1416373626 nPrevout=18 nTimeTx=1417289952 hashProof=0000464a6d7fdf299d6cb552ed2183e932c3e72c686745a2d38fccd57b76dc1e
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : using modifier 0xd891dd792afb83b0 at height=230252 timestamp=2014-11-29 19:38:24 UTC for block from timestamp=2014-11-19 05:09:04 UTC
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : check modifier=0xd891dd792afb83b0 nTimeBlockFrom=1416373744 nTimeTxPrev=1416373626 nPrevout=18 nTimeTx=1417289952 hashProof=0000464a6d7fdf299d6cb552ed2183e932c3e72c686745a2d38fccd57b76dc1e
2015-11-30 04:01:48 SetBestChain: new best=793a7f762ea19e0960c61e7151e6103c63f4e5962493bbceae1cfe5a6c73425d  height=230253  trust=992606706175219479  blocktrust=47647906541209  date=11/29/14 19:39:12
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : using modifier 0xd891dd792afb83b0 at height=230253 timestamp=2014-11-29 19:39:12 UTC for block from timestamp=2014-11-29 10:20:48 UTC
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : check modifier=0xd891dd792afb83b0 nTimeBlockFrom=1417256448 nTimeTxPrev=1417256448 nPrevout=1 nTimeTx=1417290096 hashProof=0000170c754848f3ea304426c91bee86653722588093902247c03d79693d572d
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : using modifier 0xd891dd792afb83b0 at height=230253 timestamp=2014-11-29 19:39:12 UTC for block from timestamp=2014-11-29 10:20:48 UTC
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : check modifier=0xd891dd792afb83b0 nTimeBlockFrom=1417256448 nTimeTxPrev=1417256448 nPrevout=1 nTimeTx=1417290096 hashProof=0000170c754848f3ea304426c91bee86653722588093902247c03d79693d572d
2015-11-30 04:01:48 SetBestChain: new best=fe68e35cea86b443c9a627a23a683dfa244e3409dad55a2c980df19cd0b3e369  height=230254  trust=992654354081760688  blocktrust=47647906541209  date=11/29/14 19:41:36
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : using modifier 0xd891dd792afb83b0 at height=230254 timestamp=2014-11-29 19:41:36 UTC for block from timestamp=2014-11-22 14:33:52 UTC
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : check modifier=0xd891dd792afb83b0 nTimeBlockFrom=1416666832 nTimeTxPrev=1416666832 nPrevout=1 nTimeTx=1417290112 hashProof=0000a92cb4a5e765047b4533ae01f26d97f2836f5404a733c506d617e490d66f
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : using modifier 0xd891dd792afb83b0 at height=230254 timestamp=2014-11-29 19:41:36 UTC for block from timestamp=2014-11-22 14:33:52 UTC
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : check modifier=0xd891dd792afb83b0 nTimeBlockFrom=1416666832 nTimeTxPrev=1416666832 nPrevout=1 nTimeTx=1417290112 hashProof=0000a92cb4a5e765047b4533ae01f26d97f2836f5404a733c506d617e490d66f
2015-11-30 04:01:48 SetBestChain: new best=7f8a17cf772ee23d824f1c691c7b5185c509aa231fcf39d1809960099fe61a87  height=230255  trust=992701953177795485  blocktrust=47599096034797  date=11/29/14 19:41:52
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : using modifier 0xb87513256eaf240d at height=230255 timestamp=2014-11-29 19:41:52 UTC for block from timestamp=2014-11-19 22:59:44 UTC
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : check modifier=0xb87513256eaf240d nTimeBlockFrom=1416437984 nTimeTxPrev=1416437964 nPrevout=674 nTimeTx=1417290144 hashProof=00008f23d6df7658fd16a7c2065de6eb071e8031221ba97496de482c0620bbb0
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : using modifier 0xb87513256eaf240d at height=230255 timestamp=2014-11-29 19:41:52 UTC for block from timestamp=2014-11-19 22:59:44 UTC
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : check modifier=0xb87513256eaf240d nTimeBlockFrom=1416437984 nTimeTxPrev=1416437964 nPrevout=674 nTimeTx=1417290144 hashProof=00008f23d6df7658fd16a7c2065de6eb071e8031221ba97496de482c0620bbb0
2015-11-30 04:01:48 SetBestChain: new best=5812e11089399a7d41f5675bb5a1aed7f4ddf1e0c9e7ab7c78ff59738958d10f  height=230256  trust=992749503563224479  blocktrust=47550385428994  date=11/29/14 19:42:24
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : using modifier 0xb87513256eaf240d at height=230256 timestamp=2014-11-29 19:42:24 UTC for block from timestamp=2014-11-29 04:37:52 UTC
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : check modifier=0xb87513256eaf240d nTimeBlockFrom=1417235872 nTimeTxPrev=1417235872 nPrevout=1 nTimeTx=1417290160 hashProof=000011528c9dc4f88dbb95bf274d03b4ab654fd130cc98fe37d2f2719b3ad0d7
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : using modifier 0xb87513256eaf240d at height=230256 timestamp=2014-11-29 19:42:24 UTC for block from timestamp=2014-11-29 04:37:52 UTC
2015-11-30 04:01:48 CheckStakeKernelHash() : check modifier=0xb87513256eaf240d nTimeBlockFrom=1417235872 nTimeTxPrev=1417235872 nPrevout=1 nTimeTx=1417290160 hashProof=000011528c9dc4f88dbb95bf274d03b4ab654fd130cc98fe37d2f2719b3ad0d7
2015-11-30 04:01:48 SetBestChain: new best=b38d40e2670d3193e4fbb041ba03987e7037d2664fa44858969d07926f0979c2  height=230257  trust=992797005337641892  blocktrust=47501774417413  date=11/29/14 19:42:40
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ERROR: ProcessBlock() : duplicate proof-of-stake (COutPoint(33bb7c7471, 1), 1417290096) for block 5db0b2b31f4f6b8ed11031c3782cf48dbbee8cae45a9d2ddedd474a72c59b947    "height" : 230254,
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ERROR: ProcessBlock() : duplicate proof-of-stake (COutPoint(41ec06a7dd, 1), 1417290112) for block 35e0d330e75dbc20a0c6f3030f13811d7a82e8c0d3568df78f6d1202521adabc    "height" : 230255,
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ERROR: ProcessBlock() : duplicate proof-of-stake (COutPoint(cfbeb87f48, 674), 1417290144) for block e57018e94e9857e83eb3b0e9a4d70d2202853a076e091db342b9b19d2c1f0a32    "height" : 230256,
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=e57018e94e9857e83eb3b0e9a4d70d2202853a076e091db342b9b19d2c1f0a32    "height" : 230256 in real chain
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=c8703390494e472a59b6aabc216a7f26e57dc817e2202a98b995dd462d22f2f3    "height" : 230257 in real chain
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=074ea8da9cd6ae3a51353508f96956955cf4a13fa0be239f9b15b2081b09c610    "height" : 230258 in real chain
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=510c0f05358658783b67b2a1f5fe51828c408735848273e84eb850426f86ce41
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=91be5991b706661f1567f91c0caa8d7b7fb3f97426533dc6ca754b4a66e20ec1
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=c1bd50724722570a3c8edc9193c4e4afd60721331fb5e42077703bbbf8d65ff9
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=91be5991b706661f1567f91c0caa8d7b7fb3f97426533dc6ca754b4a66e20ec1
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=a740cbc91995360bd956aa8983fe30a35f7336dfebfbf4c2e4d9388cffcf577f
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=8451a72733e0e52cd3bbcd7a1af42d5ca1807c456e9a2f9efeff400b3214c32e
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=b59029a8485ce7887f69d38acd974b5d2b54edf830d73262d6f43ed24457ce2f
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=fd6773c2752d7340e2ce02611c17a7e13fd7cc8263a358e42a3c35d821f7441d
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=912fe8ef120f4421be4808d99b8550392aabc40241759e84a58441e9bf9f0d56
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=956e1b3fd78e7dd4d58eb6b66a9b1ea5b01096fc0ea1e7128110cb5b9dcd1eda
2015-11-30 04:01:48 ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 0, prev=da0c90177d0f706177d6693b9504d5fb731352bdd83c7c1dbf47ea4ac08a02d6

This is very likely the same bug that was reported recently - the client is unable to sync the chain over the network without multiple restarts. It is also unable to sync from a local blk0001.dat file if it contains a few orphan blocks with duplicate proofs of stake in them.

So that's where I'm at - bogged down in the reference client's C++ code, trying to figure out how to get it to -reindex properly.

[freedomno1]

I'm all out of CLAMs. I sold 50 btc at 0.00076 and about 50 btc more around 0.0008. That's it for me. The price should go up now. Great for those that got in at such a cheap price!

Good to hear, enjoy your Btc
Interesting recovery

[Hippie Tech]

I'm all out of CLAMs. I sold 50 btc at 0.00076 and about 50 btc more around 0.0008. That's it for me. The price should go up now. Great for those that got in at such a cheap price!

Good to hear, enjoy your Btc
Interesting recovery

Indeed... Polo's fees will add up quickly while you're faking market activity by buying your sell orders back.

Gullable as you may be.. your shillery makes you an accessory to this fraud/ crime.

Speaking of which..
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=210646

Any day now with the taking down of your scam promo/sig, "Creative".

[smooth]

What happens when support subsequently changes after the 50% support is reached? Coins change hands, opinions change and suddenly something that had 50% support last week doesn't this week. This week being an excellent example since apparently 200K+ coins have apparently changed hands.

That's an issue with this CLAMour thing. It's possible to buy votes, in the form of CLAMs. You need 500k CLAMs or so to get 50% support for your petition, so maybe for a million dollars you could get your petition some attention.

That's an issue, but not the issue I raised.

[Muttley]

Does the whale digger really sold all his CLAMs yesterday? No more dumps?

[smooth]

Does the whale digger really sold all his CLAMs yesterday?

If you believe what he says, yes. Beyond that it is impossible to know.

No more dumps?

Other people, including whoever supposedly bought his 100 BTC worth of CLAMs, might dump.

The stake weight on the network has gone up by about 200K CLAMs, so someone is staking coins that weren't be staked yesterday. That is unambiguous.

[Muttley]

Does the whale digger really sold all his CLAMs yesterday?

If you believe what he says, yes. Beyond that it is impossible to know.

No more dumps?

Other people, including whoever supposedly bought his 100 BTC worth of CLAMs, might dump.

The stake weight on the network has gone up by about 200K CLAMs, so someone is staking coins that weren't be staked yesterday. That is unambiguous.

True. I noticed the stake weight too.
Thanks.

[dooglus]

Does the whale digger really sold all his CLAMs yesterday? No more dumps?

He claims to have:

I'm all out of CLAMs. I sold 50 btc at 0.00076 and about 50 btc more around 0.0008. That's it for me. The price should go up now. Great for those that got in at such a cheap price!

I bought 10k CLAMs at 0.00082, and know of several others who bought similar or large amounts at around the same price.

There's no guarantee that the new buyers won't be selling or that a new digger won't appear. But for now it seems the downward price pressure is on hold.

[Kefkius]

I've just created a clamour petition: http://clamsight.com/tx/9777a04456f7f15f4aa56209ec85ed207268a2274b5ba1de03ac718f0ca600ac

Here is the clamspeech: "create clamour ff839af983f5e0e9f85ea3bd93cb8c7b47e0ba2f5aea4100be12d8eb4cc77bc2 https://gist.github.com/Kefkius/88e2a1a5c965f4be83e"

The gist at the URL has the following contents:

Code:

Change the behavior of the opcode CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY so that it behaves identically to Bitcoin's implementation.

Probably not something that people care enough about to vote on, but it's an example use case.

[thefix]

This thread has become pretty annoying, just mostly one person saying the same thing over and over to try and impose their views on others.

Glad to see some other tools to involve the community so I never have to stop by here again


“If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.”


― Adolf Hitler

[Szaja1990]

as always , I bought and the price is going down.
hate crypto world

[sx100]

Does the whale digger really sold all his CLAMs yesterday?

If you believe what he says, yes. Beyond that it is impossible to know.

No more dumps?

Other people, including whoever supposedly bought his 100 BTC worth of CLAMs, might dump.

The stake weight on the network has gone up by about 200K CLAMs, so someone is staking coins that weren't be staked yesterday. That is unambiguous.

There was another 50 bitcoin dump about twelve hours after the whale digger said he'd run out of CLAMS. Either he was lying or someone else who bought in low was taking profits. CLAMS had the biggest price swings of any coin yesterday, and that could have drawn speculators to the market looking for a fast profit.

[bobboooiie]

Does the whale digger really sold all his CLAMs yesterday?

If you believe what he says, yes. Beyond that it is impossible to know.

No more dumps?

Other people, including whoever supposedly bought his 100 BTC worth of CLAMs, might dump.

The stake weight on the network has gone up by about 200K CLAMs, so someone is staking coins that weren't be staked yesterday. That is unambiguous.

There was another 50 bitcoin dump about twelve hours after the whale digger said he'd run out of CLAMS. Either he was lying or someone else who brought in low was taking profits. CLAMS had the biggest price swings of any coin yesterday, and that could have drawn speculators to the market looking for a fast profit.

There was a lot of people margin trading since volume was huge, so that might have been margin call . also is no one ever supposed to sell or whats your point ?

[smooth]

Does the whale digger really sold all his CLAMs yesterday?

If you believe what he says, yes. Beyond that it is impossible to know.

No more dumps?

Other people, including whoever supposedly bought his 100 BTC worth of CLAMs, might dump.

The stake weight on the network has gone up by about 200K CLAMs, so someone is staking coins that weren't be staked yesterday. That is unambiguous.

There was another 50 bitcoin dump about twelve hours after the whale digger said he'd run out of CLAMS. Either he was lying or someone else who brought in low was taking profits. CLAMS had the biggest price swings of any coin yesterday, and that could have drawn speculators to the market looking for a fast profit.

There was a lot of people margin trading since volume was huge, so that might have been margin call . also is no one ever supposed to sell or whats your point ?

There is also high demand for borrowed CLAMs (i.e. short selling). People are being naive if they don't think there is a motive behind the FUD.

[dooglus]

There was a lot of people margin trading since volume was huge, so that might have been margin call . also is no one ever supposed to sell or whats your point ?

I saw that too. After buying 10k CLAMs and not being able to withdraw them, I put them up for lending at 0.5% per day. They were very quickly taken up by people. The rate has since dropped considerably from lenders undercutting each other, so now you're better off staking instead of lending probably.

[smooth]

There was a lot of people margin trading since volume was huge, so that might have been margin call . also is no one ever supposed to sell or whats your point ?

I saw that too. After buying 10k CLAMs and not being able to withdraw them, I put them up for lending at 0.5% per day. They were very quickly taken up by people. The rate has since dropped considerably from lenders undercutting each other, so now you're better off staking instead of lending probably.

When you put up CLAMs for lending that is taken up not buy margin buyers but by people selling CLAMs short (i.e. betting on CLAMs dropping in value), which is something that has been happening a lot during this whole episode. Margin calls on short selling result in market buys, not market sells.

People buying coins on margin will be borrowing BTC, but it is hard to interpret much from the BTC lending market since people could be doing that to buy any of the coins on margin, and probably most of that is the bigger coins like ETH.