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

[BayAreaCoins]

qwed,  Try the wallet again.

Feel free to post in our thread as well if you'd like.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1680953.0

[1715001253]

1715001253

[qwed]

I believe that 10 wallet dig would be this one:  https://freebitcoins.com/clamchecker/wallets/id/35/

The system dug 10 addresses and it was paid together with dig number 33, which had 4 wallets.

I'm checking on the error right now.

t was a fictional example. In that link https://freebitcoins.com/clamchecker/wallets/id/35/ i have more than 100 address. From this  wallet dig found 10 addresses  and I found 14 more.
 I tried the wallet again and there is the same error (

[BayAreaCoins]

I believe that 10 wallet dig would be this one:  https://freebitcoins.com/clamchecker/wallets/id/35/

The system dug 10 addresses and it was paid together with dig number 33, which had 4 wallets.

I'm checking on the error right now.

t was a fictional example. In that link https://freebitcoins.com/clamchecker/wallets/id/35/ i have more than 100 address. From this  wallet dig found 10 addresses  and I found 14 more.
 I tried the wallet again and there is the same error (

Hmmm so you think your wallet dig #35 still had over 90 addresses that need to be dug?

You manually dug 14 more addresses from that wallet that you dropped the .dat into the site?

Ya that's a bit odd... would you mind emailing both of the .dat to kef@freebitcoins.com.  (The .dat that won't upload and the .dat with the 90 more digable addresses.)

This will seriously help us chase down the problems and see what the digger is having issues with <3.

Our drop and dig step up should harvest ever CLAM from every address and change address on it.  Even if you have 100,000 addresses... it should grab everything.  

We need to look a little deeper into what is going on when you use our site, so that email with those two .dat's would be great.  Be sure you remove all your coins prior to sending that type of stuff & be sure you never use those wallets again (but save them just in case!)

[dooglus]

Hi,
What happens when you stake with the same wallet on two different computers?
I am currently investigating possibility to have geographically separated computers to have backed up mining in case of blackouts/Internet connection issues.
Could it cause some issues?

I tried this a few times but it didn't work well. I think the two wallets would always stake at the same time, but in different ways, resulting in each one trying to orphan the other one's new block.

[dooglus]

i imported my wallet from bitcoin to clam and i received 18 clam, but i had only one transaction in the 12 of may in 2014, why 4 claimin? does the hidden addresses count too?

It doesn't matter when your transaction was.

All that matters is how many addresses you have which had a non-dust balance when the snapshot happened. So long as an address had a balance on that date it received 4.6 CLAMs.

[dooglus]

I think this coin would be more decentralized, if Proof-of-Working-Stake has a limit 1000 or maximum 10000 Clams,

What do you mean by that? 1000 CLAMs per address? Wouldn't people just split their coins into multiple addresses? I don't see how you are going to be able to limit the amount of CLAMs any person can stake when you have no way of knowing which addresses are owned by which people.

because Just-Dice have almost all coins and it is centralized.

Just-Dice has less than 50% of the CLAMs that have been dug up, and way less than 50% of all the CLAMs.

There is no incentive for users to stake, if exists so big PoSW miner.

The incentive is that you earn CLAMs for staking. Just-Dice takes a 10% commission on staking in order to make using Just-Dice less attractive than solo-staking.

It shouldn't affect your incentive whether a single entity is staking 1 million CLAMs or if 1000 entities are staking 1000 CLAMs each. Your wallet will be the same percentage of the total in either case.

[BayAreaCoins]

because Just-Dice have almost all coins and it is centralized.

Just-Dice has less than 50% of the CLAMs that have been dug up, and way less than 50% of all the CLAMs.

It's a fucking shame that the other half of the CLAM holders/services are to stupid to stake their coins... Fucking bastards. 

[antaresus]

What do you mean by that? 1000 CLAMs per address? Wouldn't people just split their coins into multiple addresses? I don't see how you are going to be able to limit the amount of CLAMs any person can stake when you have no way of knowing which addresses are owned by which people.

One node only must choose one biggest address for staking.

[dooglus]

What do you mean by that? 1000 CLAMs per address? Wouldn't people just split their coins into multiple addresses? I don't see how you are going to be able to limit the amount of CLAMs any person can stake when you have no way of knowing which addresses are owned by which people.

One node only must choose one biggest address for staking.

If you limit staking to one address per node and 10k CLAMs per address then large holders would simply set up multiple nodes.

I don't see how your scheme is either workable or desirable.

[antaresus]

What do you mean by that? 1000 CLAMs per address? Wouldn't people just split their coins into multiple addresses? I don't see how you are going to be able to limit the amount of CLAMs any person can stake when you have no way of knowing which addresses are owned by which people.

One node only must choose one biggest address for staking.

If you limit staking to one address per node and 10k CLAMs per address then large holders would simply set up multiple nodes.

I don't see how your scheme is either workable or desirable.

That is better for the network. The more nodes there are, the more secure the network is.

[kedyoon]

What do you mean by that? 1000 CLAMs per address? Wouldn't people just split their coins into multiple addresses? I don't see how you are going to be able to limit the amount of CLAMs any person can stake when you have no way of knowing which addresses are owned by which people.

One node only must choose one biggest address for staking.

So how to prevent people from cheating？

[Tarz]

What do you mean by that? 1000 CLAMs per address? Wouldn't people just split their coins into multiple addresses? I don't see how you are going to be able to limit the amount of CLAMs any person can stake when you have no way of knowing which addresses are owned by which people.

One node only must choose one biggest address for staking.

If you limit staking to one address per node and 10k CLAMs per address then large holders would simply set up multiple nodes.

I don't see how your scheme is either workable or desirable.

That is better for the network. The more nodes there are, the more secure the network is.

A possible solution to limiting the amount of nodes one person can run is to blacklist or ban nodes with digitalocean and amazon aws IPs. These two services are among the cheapest VPN providers and the chances are that people will use them for setting up extra nodes. Or you can lift the CLAM price and that will make running a node unaffordable for many clamers.

[SuperClam]

What do you mean by that? 1000 CLAMs per address? Wouldn't people just split their coins into multiple addresses? I don't see how you are going to be able to limit the amount of CLAMs any person can stake when you have no way of knowing which addresses are owned by which people.

One node only must choose one biggest address for staking.

If you limit staking to one address per node and 10k CLAMs per address then large holders would simply set up multiple nodes.
I don't see how your scheme is either workable or desirable.

That is better for the network. The more nodes there are, the more secure the network is.

A possible solution to limiting the amount of nodes one person can run is to blacklist or ban nodes with digitalocean and amazon aws IPs. These two services are among the cheapest VPN providers and the chances are that people will use them for setting up extra nodes. Or you can lift the CLAM price and that will make running a node unaffordable for many clamers.

While it is 'possible' to blacklist specific nodes, this type of 'solution' is not only fragile, but violates a core principle of the project.

[almightyruler]

What Wallet Import Format (WIF) does CLAM use? I'm trying to import private keys generated by pycoin - in Bitcoin WIF format - but they don't seem to be recognised.

A rescan finds keys that were imported via importwallet (entire wallet), but ignores keys imported via importprivkey (single key, Bitcoin WIF, no error reported.)

[Dr Charles]

Joined the CLAM train today through BTCPop... I look forward to working with the community a little more

[Kefkius]

What Wallet Import Format (WIF) does CLAM use? I'm trying to import private keys generated by pycoin - in Bitcoin WIF format - but they don't seem to be recognised.

A rescan finds keys that were imported via importwallet (entire wallet), but ignores keys imported via importprivkey (single key, Bitcoin WIF, no error reported.)

WIF prefix is 133 instead of Bitcoin's 128. I have this change for pycoin:

Code:

diff --git a/pycoin/networks/legacy_networks.py b/pycoin/networks/legacy_networks.py
index 98132a9..1770689 100644
--- a/pycoin/networks/legacy_networks.py
+++ b/pycoin/networks/legacy_networks.py
@@ -81,5 +81,7 @@ NETWORKS = (
     
     # DCR Decred testnet : tprv/tpub
     NetworkValues("Decred", "testnet", "DCRT", b'\x23\x0E', b'\x0F\x21', b'\x0E\x6C', h2b('04358397'), h2b('043587D1')),
+
+    NetworkValues("Clams", "mainnet", "CLAM",  b'\x85', b'\x89', b'\x0d', h2b("0488ADE4"), h2b("0488B21E")),
     
 )

Then do

Code:

$ ku <Bitcoin WIF> --override-network CLAM

to output the CLAM WIF given a BTC WIF.

[almightyruler]

WIF prefix is 133 instead of Bitcoin's 128. I have this change for pycoin:

Thanks. I have added another coin to pycoin before, but in this instance I was scratching my head trying to figure out the BTC/LTC/DOGE defines in the CLAM source. Much appreciated!

[almightyruler]

Hmm, still having problems with importing a raw key into the wallet, via WIF.

One thing I've noticed is that CLAM (and probably most coins that share its codebase) doesn't seem to complain if the key you import doesn't have the correct prefix. Slightly convoluted example:

1. Export bitcoin private key to raw format:

> bitcoin-cli getnewaddress
1DNMvoz7q3QMEnUWwctqXNSWBcnf7JJC1J

> bitcoin-cli dumpprivkey 1DNMvoz7q3QMEnUWwctqXNSWBcnf7JJC1J
KxnTzDFWtCGwZZVosS8RMZpsbDZ1GChqhK5tHrNkTZgihZXYymin

> ku KxnTzDFWtCGwZZVosS8RMZpsbDZ1GChqhK5tHrNkTZgihZXYymin
 hex                         : 2eb01b9cdbc459b141d9a31e618cab20f938d95be3544bf038eeb3e50083acf9  <- private key in hex


2. Convert raw format to WIF and import:

> ku -n CLAM 2eb01b9cdbc459b141d9a31e618cab20f938d95be3544bf038eeb3e50083acf9
wif                        : Lhgcr241kxrdS9Zedp6tLSJJqPZGSJ4UWXCY687DuxTH7DZj8Rf7
> clamd -importprivkey Lhgcr241kxrdS9Zedp6tLSJJqPZGSJ4UWXCY687DuxTH7DZj8Rf7 "" false  <- this is the key in CLAM WIF format

> ku -n BTC 2eb01b9cdbc459b141d9a31e618cab20f938d95be3544bf038eeb3e50083acf9
wif                          : KxnTzDFWtCGwZZVosS8RMZpsbDZ1GChqhK5tHrNkTZgihZXYymin
> clamd -importprivkey KxnTzDFWtCGwZZVosS8RMZpsbDZ1GChqhK5tHrNkTZgihZXYymin "" false  <- this is the same key in BTC WIF format - no error reported!

I already have the keys in raw hex format (I'm extracting them from files/raw disks by looking for appropriate header bytes) so what I want to do is part 2, but for some reason CLAM doesn't seem to be picking up the keys/addresses on a rescan.

[crazyivan]

Hey guys, glad to see CLAM s doing well. Anything new and interesting causing this price pump?

[gembitz]

Hey guys, glad to see CLAM s doing well. Anything new and interesting causing this price pump?

CLAM segwit? lol