Bitcoin Forum
November 22, 2019, 06:02:18 AM *
News: Help collect the most notable posts made over the last 10 years.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 [51] 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 ... 298 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] AEON [2019-09-27: Upgrade to version 0.13.0.0 ASAP HF@1146200 Oct 25]  (Read 612694 times)
kennyP
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 544
Merit: 500



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:36:24 PM
 #1001

@smooth, any chance you can help restore mountcoin (MCN) to health?

It depends what's wrong with it. Can you elaborate?

Similar situation to Aeon as far as I know, fair launch without any obvious shenanigans, but the original dev (presidentcoin) was a young guy out of his depth, and left early. Someone tried a takeover but that petered out after a few months, but the guy is still active on the forum, so maybe he would be willing and capable of handing over to someone else. I don't know if the chain is still going, but if it was it *might* be worth saving.

The MNT resurrection thread was https://bitcoin-forums.net/index.php?topic=658072.0

The last meaningful post from the guy who attempted the resurrection was https://bitcoin-forums.net/index.php?topic=658072.msg8090885#msg8090885
1574402538
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574402538

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574402538
Reply with quote  #2

1574402538
Report to moderator
1574402538
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574402538

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574402538
Reply with quote  #2

1574402538
Report to moderator
1574402538
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574402538

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574402538
Reply with quote  #2

1574402538
Report to moderator
The Bitcoin Forum is turning 10 years old! Join the community in sharing and exploring the notable posts made over the years.
1574402538
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574402538

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574402538
Reply with quote  #2

1574402538
Report to moderator
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184
Merit: 1286


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:49:20 PM
 #1002

@smooth, any chance you can help restore mountcoin (MCN) to health?

It depends what's wrong with it. Can you elaborate?

Similar situation to Aeon as far as I know, fair launch without any obvious shenanigans, but the original dev (presidentcoin) was a young guy out of his depth, and left early. Someone tried a takeover but that petered out after a few months, but the guy is still active on the forum, so maybe he would be willing and capable of handing over to someone else. I don't know if the chain is still going, but if it was it *might* be worth saving.

The MNT resurrection thread was https://bitcoin-forums.net/index.php?topic=658072.0

The last meaningful post from the guy who attempted the resurrection was https://bitcoin-forums.net/index.php?topic=658072.msg8090885#msg8090885


https://www.swaphole.com/?_escaped_fragment_=market/MNT/BTC#!market/MNT/BTC
Bad Cert
Quick check of swaphole.com if anyone wants to check into it.
Name: Stefan Kobrc
Organisation: RockLogic GmbH
Street: Am Hafen 6/1/21
City: Korneuburg
Postalcode: 2100
Country: Austria
Telephone: +4366488789552
Phone Type: mobile : A1 Telekom Austria Aktiengesellschaft
Email:

cryptrol
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 638
Merit: 500


View Profile
April 10, 2015, 09:58:00 AM
 #1003

Since there are no binaries available this can help someone :

Compile steps for Windows x64 using MSVC
First of all let's get all the tools we need :

- Download and install Microsoft Visual Studio Community 2013 (It's a free version of visual studio with some license limitations).
  You can uncheck the web development tools and SQL tools since you won't use them for building AEON.
  This will take time to download and install and you will have to reboot upon completion.
- Download and install cMake for windows from : http://www.cmake.org/download/ (Win32 install)[/li][/list]
- Download Boost 1.57 from http://www.boost.org/users/download/ , use the zip or 7zip archive and extract.
  You can use c:\boost_1_57_0 since this is what I am using for this steps.[/li][/list]
- Download and install Github for Windows from https://windows.github.com/ (This also includes a Git shell that we will use later).

Now the nasty part compile & build time !
- Build Boost :
  Open a command line and type :
Code:
 > cd c:\boost_1_57_0
  > bootstrap.bat
  > b2 --toolset=msvc variant=release link=static threading=multi runtime-link=static address-model=64
- Open the Git Shell (or Git bash) depending what you downloaded previously and do.
Code:
 > git clone https://github.com/aeonix/aeon.git
  > cd aeon
  > mkdir build
  > cd build
  > cmake -G "Visual Studio 12 Win64" -DBOOST_ROOT=c:\boost_1_57_0 -DBOOST_LIBRARY_DIR=c:\boost_1_57_0\stage\lib ..
  > cd ..
  > MSBuild Project.sln /p:Configuration=release
  
You should now find the exe files under build/release/src .
smooth
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2324
Merit: 1140



View Profile
April 10, 2015, 10:08:44 AM
 #1004

      Since there are no binaries available this can help someone :

      Compile steps for Windows x64 using MSVC
      First of all let's get all the tools we need :

      - Download and install Microsoft Visual Studio Community 2013 (It's a free version of visual studio with some license limitations).
        You can uncheck the web development tools and SQL tools since you won't use them for building AEON.
        This will take time to download and install and you will have to reboot upon completion.
      - Download and install cMake for windows from : http://www.cmake.org/download/ (Win32 install)[/li][/list]
      - Download Boost 1.57 from http://www.boost.org/users/download/ , use the zip or 7zip archive and extract.
        You can use c:\boost_1_57_0 since this is what I am using for this steps.[/li][/list]
      - Download and install Github for Windows from https://windows.github.com/ (This also includes a Git shell that we will use later).

      Now the nasty part compile & build time !
      - Build Boost :
        Open a command line and type :
      Code:
       > cd c:\boost_1_57_0
        > bootstrap.bat
        > b2 --toolset=msvc variant=release link=static threading=multi runtime-link=static address-model=64
      - Open the Git Shell (or Git bash) depending what you downloaded previously and do.
      Code:
       > git clone https://github.com/aeonix/aeon.git
        > cd aeon
        > mkdir build
        > cd build
        > cmake -G "Visual Studio 12 Win64" -DBOOST_ROOT=c:\boost_1_57_0 -DBOOST_LIBRARY_DIR=c:\boost_1_57_0\stage\lib ..
        > cd ..
        > MSBuild Project.sln /p:Configuration=release
        
      You should now find the exe files under build/release/src .

      Very nice work especially since there is a free version of Visual Studio available to all Windows users. I didn't know that!

      I'll include a copy of this post in the OP for now.
      cryptrol
      Hero Member
      *****
      Offline Offline

      Activity: 638
      Merit: 500


      View Profile
      April 10, 2015, 10:23:10 AM
       #1005

      Hey smooth, you seem to be everywhere Wink

      I am playing with the newest Bytecoin source to get it working with the AEON blockchain, IMHO it would be a very good starting point for developing from there. AFAIK the protocol and block data are compatible (once the Cryptonote parameters used by AEON are changed), I am right ?
      smooth
      Legendary
      *
      Online Online

      Activity: 2324
      Merit: 1140



      View Profile
      April 10, 2015, 10:36:01 AM
       #1006

      Hey smooth, you seem to be everywhere Wink

      I am playing with the newest Bytecoin source to get it working with the AEON blockchain, IMHO it would be a very good starting point for developing from there. AFAIK the protocol and block data are compatible (once the Cryptonote parameters used by AEON are changed), I am right ?

      Well, its hard to say. That certainly would have been true of the code from last year but reviewing all of the changes since then I don't know.



      cryptrol
      Hero Member
      *****
      Offline Offline

      Activity: 638
      Merit: 500


      View Profile
      April 10, 2015, 11:02:40 AM
       #1007

      Hey smooth, you seem to be everywhere Wink

      I am playing with the newest Bytecoin source to get it working with the AEON blockchain, IMHO it would be a very good starting point for developing from there. AFAIK the protocol and block data are compatible (once the Cryptonote parameters used by AEON are changed), I am right ?

      Well, its hard to say. That certainly would have been true of the code from last year but reviewing all of the changes since then I don't know.

      Ummmh, already tried, it's choking on block 214 (too big) and then inserts a duplicated transaction into blockchain and repeats ad eternum.
      I guess it's not so trivial, will have to take a closer look.
      Good thing is that previous blocks seemed to work ok.
      smooth
      Legendary
      *
      Online Online

      Activity: 2324
      Merit: 1140



      View Profile
      April 10, 2015, 11:07:33 AM
       #1008

      Hey smooth, you seem to be everywhere Wink

      I am playing with the newest Bytecoin source to get it working with the AEON blockchain, IMHO it would be a very good starting point for developing from there. AFAIK the protocol and block data are compatible (once the Cryptonote parameters used by AEON are changed), I am right ?

      Well, its hard to say. That certainly would have been true of the code from last year but reviewing all of the changes since then I don't know.

      Ummmh, already tried, it's choking on block 214 (too big) and then inserts a duplicated transaction into blockchain and repeats ad eternum.
      I guess it's not so trivial, will have to take a closer look.
      Good thing is that previous blocks seemed to work ok.

      In general I'm not in favor of this approach although you can certainly continue to research it. As a Bytecoin clone dashcoin already exists, so I don't see a good reason to go that route here. I can certainly tell you that the dashcoin community would welcome any help now that their previous developer was paid off by darkcoin/dash to abandon it. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1018296.0

      I personally wouldn't be comfortable trying to maintain something based on the Bytecoin code given how the development process is so non-transparent (only enormous commits to github, for example) and also their shady reputation means that every single code change would need to be carefully scrutinized (of course not a bad idea anyway). But overall its a lot of work for a small coin like this, at this stage. At some point in the future I wouldn't rule out merging some features from Bytecoin, but again we have to confront the issue of community buy-in on a significant license change.




      cryptrol
      Hero Member
      *****
      Offline Offline

      Activity: 638
      Merit: 500


      View Profile
      April 10, 2015, 11:28:29 AM
       #1009

      Hey smooth, you seem to be everywhere Wink

      I am playing with the newest Bytecoin source to get it working with the AEON blockchain, IMHO it would be a very good starting point for developing from there. AFAIK the protocol and block data are compatible (once the Cryptonote parameters used by AEON are changed), I am right ?

      Well, its hard to say. That certainly would have been true of the code from last year but reviewing all of the changes since then I don't know.

      Ummmh, already tried, it's choking on block 214 (too big) and then inserts a duplicated transaction into blockchain and repeats ad eternum.
      I guess it's not so trivial, will have to take a closer look.
      Good thing is that previous blocks seemed to work ok.

      In general I'm not in favor of this approach although you can certainly continue to research it. As a Bytecoin clone dashcoin already exists, so I don't see a good reason to go that route here. I can certainly tell you that the dashcoin community would welcome any help now that their previous developer was paid off by darkcoin/dash to abandon it. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1018296.0

      I personally wouldn't be comfortable trying to maintain something based on the Bytecoin code given how the development process is so non-transparent (only enormous commits to github, for example) and also their shady reputation means that every single code change would need to be carefully scrutinized (of course not a bad idea anyway). But overall its a lot of work for a small coin like this, at this stage. At some point in the future I wouldn't rule out merging some features from Bytecoin, but again we have to confront the issue of community buy-in on a significant license change.


      Yeah I understand your point of view, as I said it would only be a "starting point", the memory requirements right now are outrageous, developing from zero is an enormous work, and from the current implementations, the bcn one is the most field tested one, and besides that I found the LMDB Monero implementation approach a bit of an overkill for a "simple" blockchain.
      I will keep investigating.
      smooth
      Legendary
      *
      Online Online

      Activity: 2324
      Merit: 1140



      View Profile
      April 10, 2015, 11:37:13 AM
       #1010

      Hey smooth, you seem to be everywhere Wink

      I am playing with the newest Bytecoin source to get it working with the AEON blockchain, IMHO it would be a very good starting point for developing from there. AFAIK the protocol and block data are compatible (once the Cryptonote parameters used by AEON are changed), I am right ?

      Well, its hard to say. That certainly would have been true of the code from last year but reviewing all of the changes since then I don't know.

      Ummmh, already tried, it's choking on block 214 (too big) and then inserts a duplicated transaction into blockchain and repeats ad eternum.
      I guess it's not so trivial, will have to take a closer look.
      Good thing is that previous blocks seemed to work ok.

      In general I'm not in favor of this approach although you can certainly continue to research it. As a Bytecoin clone dashcoin already exists, so I don't see a good reason to go that route here. I can certainly tell you that the dashcoin community would welcome any help now that their previous developer was paid off by darkcoin/dash to abandon it. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1018296.0

      I personally wouldn't be comfortable trying to maintain something based on the Bytecoin code given how the development process is so non-transparent (only enormous commits to github, for example) and also their shady reputation means that every single code change would need to be carefully scrutinized (of course not a bad idea anyway). But overall its a lot of work for a small coin like this, at this stage. At some point in the future I wouldn't rule out merging some features from Bytecoin, but again we have to confront the issue of community buy-in on a significant license change.


      Yeah I understand your point of view, as I said it would only be a "starting point", the memory requirements right now are outrageous, developing from zero is an enormous work, and from the current implementations, the bcn one is the most field tested one, and besides that I found the LMDB Monero implementation approach a bit of an overkill for a "simple" blockchain.
      I will keep investigating.

      Implementation-wise it is arguably overkill, but from a code merging perspective it is fairly trivial (once the Monero project works out all the kinks in it), since it is a direct descendent of the code from which this coin was originally forked.

      So it does require a bit of more waiting until Monero is solid enough to consider merging, but given the age and history of this coin already, just the fact that it is being maintained at all is a huge improvement.

      Also, the memory usage of Bytecoin still seems fairly high to me (>1 GB). I think the LMDB approach will turn out to be lighter weight once its ready.
      cryptrol
      Hero Member
      *****
      Offline Offline

      Activity: 638
      Merit: 500


      View Profile
      April 11, 2015, 01:20:00 PM
       #1011


      Yeah I understand your point of view, as I said it would only be a "starting point", the memory requirements right now are outrageous, developing from zero is an enormous work, and from the current implementations, the bcn one is the most field tested one, and besides that I found the LMDB Monero implementation approach a bit of an overkill for a "simple" blockchain.
      I will keep investigating.

      Implementation-wise it is arguably overkill, but from a code merging perspective it is fairly trivial (once the Monero project works out all the kinks in it), since it is a direct descendent of the code from which this coin was originally forked.

      So it does require a bit of more waiting until Monero is solid enough to consider merging, but given the age and history of this coin already, just the fact that it is being maintained at all is a huge improvement.

      Also, the memory usage of Bytecoin still seems fairly high to me (>1 GB). I think the LMDB approach will turn out to be lighter weight once its ready.


      I will have to take a look to the monero code base.

      BTW, I managed to run the AEON blockchain using the new Bytecoin codebase, the runninng daemon is "only" 500Mb.  :



      It works, gets transactions and synchs with peers, of course it needs a lot of testing, and there is a bug that prevents from synching from 0, this may also be a bug in bytecoin. But converting the blockchain to the new format works. I will post my findings here.

      EDIT: And I mined a block with the daemon, let's see if it gets accepted Smiley
      cryptrol
      Hero Member
      *****
      Offline Offline

      Activity: 638
      Merit: 500


      View Profile
      April 14, 2015, 09:06:14 AM
      Last edit: April 14, 2015, 09:16:25 AM by cryptrol
       #1012

      So, the AEON blockchain can be run with both the Bytecoin (current) client and the AEON fork.

      I have a couple of nodes running with the modified Bytecoin source and mining blocks.
      There is an issue with the synchronization from scratch because Bytecoin introduced a growing block size cap during some of the last years update,
      so I will have to figure out the correct params for the AEON blockchain since right now there is no block cap other than CRYPTONOTE_GETBLOCKTEMPLATE_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE.

      But before going any further I would like to know if there is people interested in putting some work on this, since obviously maintaining a coin alive involves some work.

      My development plan would be changing the codebase of AEON to the current Bytecoin code in order to :
      - Be able to use multisig (this would provide us with a very powerful tool to further develop minimum trust apps around AEON). Multisig transactions are not untraceable, so by using it you can opt-out of anonymity (this is useful in many cases where you want to provide transparency).
      - Have a client ready that does not take 3 Gb or RAM to run, and have it as fast as we can.

      I know this changes the path initiated as a Monero fork by AEON but I seriously consider multisig essential and this last bytecoin update provides just that, so we could be up and running with it relatively fast and build apps around it. I have been considering to build a fork myself, but I really consider that we do have enough alts Smiley

      So please state your views, either positive or negative, on this and also mention what can you provide to the project (skills, resources, whatever ) so we can move on as a community.

      I am willing to contribute coding and devops for the project, as well as some project management.
      Also, it would be nice to have the initial developer opinions and help  Wink
      Your turn.

      smooth
      Legendary
      *
      Online Online

      Activity: 2324
      Merit: 1140



      View Profile
      April 14, 2015, 09:16:44 AM
       #1013

      I am opposed, as I think that a project started as a Monero fork should remain a Monero fork absent some good reason for a change (such as Monero becoming unmaintained).

      And as I said, I believe the demand for a Bytecoin fork is adequately met by Dashcoin.

      Finally, if for some reason you don't like Dashcoin, and you don't feel being a Monero fork is a good path, you can start a new Bytecoin fork.

      However, if there is strong community support for turning AEON into a Bytecoin fork I will step aside.
      cryptrol
      Hero Member
      *****
      Offline Offline

      Activity: 638
      Merit: 500


      View Profile
      April 14, 2015, 09:21:23 AM
       #1014

      I am opposed, as I think that a project started as a Monero fork should remain a Monero fork absent some good reason for a change (such as Monero becoming unmaintained).

      And as I said, I believe the demand for a Bytecoin fork is adequately met by dashcoin.

      However, if there is strong community support for turning AEON into a Bytecoin fork I will step aside.

      Since you are the current maintainer, your opinion should have higher weight, as I said I am really interested in multisig, what would you think about going the other way around, that is, including the multisig transactions in the monero fork?

      I just want to know your opinion since right now I don't know the efforts required to do this, and would need help.
      smooth
      Legendary
      *
      Online Online

      Activity: 2324
      Merit: 1140



      View Profile
      April 14, 2015, 09:28:53 AM
       #1015

      I am opposed, as I think that a project started as a Monero fork should remain a Monero fork absent some good reason for a change (such as Monero becoming unmaintained).

      And as I said, I believe the demand for a Bytecoin fork is adequately met by dashcoin.

      However, if there is strong community support for turning AEON into a Bytecoin fork I will step aside.

      Since you are the current maintainer, your opinion should have higher weight, as I said I am really interested in multisig, what would you think about going the other way around, that is, including the multisig transactions in the monero fork?

      I like the idea.

      I don't like a license change that will make it impossible to deliver the code in a mobile app-store format (at least on iOS where static linking is required). This includes even lightweight wallets and transaction signing tools (such as using multisig for 2FA) using the code base as a library.

      Note that Bytecoin does not suffer from this restriction because it is their own project so they can disregard the license. But with the change to LGPL they have inserted a bit of a poison pill for anyone else who wants to use their code.

      I'd rather see the effort going into a new multisig implementation with a less restrictive license. That I would be 100% behind, and I might even contribute some funding for it if that matters. Given that the Bytecoin multisig solution doesn't rely on advanced cryptography and is essentially a basic scripting system (as I understand it, but I haven't examined it carefully), I don't see this as being particularly difficult.

      cryptrol
      Hero Member
      *****
      Offline Offline

      Activity: 638
      Merit: 500


      View Profile
      April 14, 2015, 09:34:33 AM
       #1016

      I am opposed, as I think that a project started as a Monero fork should remain a Monero fork absent some good reason for a change (such as Monero becoming unmaintained).

      And as I said, I believe the demand for a Bytecoin fork is adequately met by dashcoin.

      However, if there is strong community support for turning AEON into a Bytecoin fork I will step aside.

      Since you are the current maintainer, your opinion should have higher weight, as I said I am really interested in multisig, what would you think about going the other way around, that is, including the multisig transactions in the monero fork?

      I like the idea.

      I don't like a license change that will make it impossible to deliver the code in a mobile app-store format (at least on iOS where static linking is required). This includes even lightweight wallets and transition signing tools (such as using multisig for 2FA) using the code base as a library.

      Note that Bytecoin does not suffer from this restriction because it is their own project so they can disregard the license. But with the change to LGPL they have inserted a bit of a poison pill for anyone else who wants to use their code.

      I'd rather see the effort going into a new multisig implementation with a less restrictive license. That I would be 100% behind, and I might even contribute some funding for it if that matters. Given that the Bytecoin multisig solution doesn't rely on advanced cryptography and is essentially a basic scripting system (as I understand it, but I haven't examined it carefully), I don't see this as being particularly difficult.

      I guess I will have to dive inside the original source and the current monero codebase then Smiley
      This will take some time.

      Regarding the license, I thought LGPL was enough for most use cases, but honestly I know nothing about app stores.
      smooth
      Legendary
      *
      Online Online

      Activity: 2324
      Merit: 1140



      View Profile
      April 14, 2015, 09:44:01 AM
      Last edit: April 14, 2015, 10:29:10 AM by smooth
       #1017

      I am opposed, as I think that a project started as a Monero fork should remain a Monero fork absent some good reason for a change (such as Monero becoming unmaintained).

      And as I said, I believe the demand for a Bytecoin fork is adequately met by dashcoin.

      However, if there is strong community support for turning AEON into a Bytecoin fork I will step aside.

      Since you are the current maintainer, your opinion should have higher weight, as I said I am really interested in multisig, what would you think about going the other way around, that is, including the multisig transactions in the monero fork?

      I like the idea.

      I don't like a license change that will make it impossible to deliver the code in a mobile app-store format (at least on iOS where static linking is required). This includes even lightweight wallets and transition signing tools (such as using multisig for 2FA) using the code base as a library.

      Note that Bytecoin does not suffer from this restriction because it is their own project so they can disregard the license. But with the change to LGPL they have inserted a bit of a poison pill for anyone else who wants to use their code.

      I'd rather see the effort going into a new multisig implementation with a less restrictive license. That I would be 100% behind, and I might even contribute some funding for it if that matters. Given that the Bytecoin multisig solution doesn't rely on advanced cryptography and is essentially a basic scripting system (as I understand it, but I haven't examined it carefully), I don't see this as being particularly difficult.

      I guess I will have to dive inside the original source and the current monero codebase then Smiley
      This will take some time.

      I can point out the issue. The original cryptonote white paper and the transaction types defined in cryptonote_basic.h allow for scripts but it was never implemented. So the task consists of implementing either enough of a scripting language (can be the one from the white paper or another, possibly even simpler, one) or just a special hard coded (no script) transaction type that allows for N/M multisigs. Then modifying the valid transaction type check and implementing code to verify the signatures. Overall it's a fairly simple task. The hard part is very careful coding and testing.

      You can read a brief summary of some of the license issues here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/459833/which-open-source-licenses-are-compatible-with-the-apples-iphone-and-its-offici

      cryptrol
      Hero Member
      *****
      Offline Offline

      Activity: 638
      Merit: 500


      View Profile
      April 14, 2015, 09:08:17 PM
       #1018

      Just wanted to say I am moving on.
      I have been diving a little into the monero code, TBH there where some small things that I didn't like (openalias, and some unnecessary refactoring of the bytecoin code base) and although it's in essence the same cryptonote technology I don't think it's worth the hassle to try to put time into coding the multisig into this monero fork which judging by it's network hash rate and this thread's activity it's pretty abandoned.
      I guess I will have to stick with Bytecoin for the time being, which is more in line with my own views despite it's damn shadiness.
      smooth
      Legendary
      *
      Online Online

      Activity: 2324
      Merit: 1140



      View Profile
      April 23, 2015, 06:49:08 AM
       #1019

      Greetings Aeonians.

      I'm preparing a new development plan for the coin going forward and I would iike to offer this as an opportunity for suggestions from the community. I have some of my own ideas but all serious ideas will be given serious consideration.

      MisO69
      Legendary
      *
      Offline Offline

      Activity: 1918
      Merit: 1005


      My mule don't like people laughing


      View Profile
      April 23, 2015, 02:33:42 PM
       #1020

      Greetings Aeonians.

      I'm preparing a new development plan for the coin going forward and I would iike to offer this as an opportunity for suggestions from the community. I have some of my own ideas but all serious ideas will be given serious consideration.


      Instead of merged mining this with Monero I would like to see a pure PoS implementation of Cryptonote. I realize this is a big project but maybe on the roadmap this could be the final destination for Aeon.
      Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 [51] 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 ... 298 »
        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!