ANN[gryF]$GRYF/GryfX Virtual Currency Options Market, NEW INFO MUST READ

[Zorro23hu]

I have mined on Hashharder too, but we get only 0.04 GRYF / block instead of 4. After the investigation Hasharder pool wnt down. In my point of view, Hashharder pool's wallet was configurated wrong, because we should have got 4 GRYF, not to much comapring to the 2500, but "lot of penny make a phound".

I have two R9 270OC, with total 3.7 MH/s, and it can mine until 100-120 MH/s nethash to find blocks.

[Jookly]

and now the diff is over 400 and i might never find a block again.

C'est la vie

[Bagdar13]

and now the diff is over 400 and i might never find a block again.

C'est la vie

So I have 2 questions how is the diff over 400 with only 400 m/hash on the network, and why with a 60 second block timmer are blocks still taking about 220 seconds?

[istvandv]

and now the diff is over 400 and i might never find a block again.

C'est la vie

diff is too high for me too now, i only have 1.4Mh/s, i did manage to get a few 500 blocks but was not fortunate for bigger blocks

looks like gona need a working pool now

[Zorro23hu]

and now the diff is over 400 and i might never find a block again.

C'est la vie

diff is too high for me too now, i only have 1.4Mh/s, i did manage to get a few 500 blocks but was not fortunate for bigger blocks

looks like gona need a working pool now

Hi,

Come on to Minerpool, I'm starting the mining here, but need to find the first block!

edit: It seems, this pool also doesn't shows the correct reward, miner hash, etc.. I'm trying to find a block, and I will see it has good or worng configuration...

edit2: After 2 hours and 43 minutes Minerpools shows 0.13382671 GRYF Est Earnings. Imho, Minerpools also configured with 10 digits instead of 6 digits as Hasharder pool. I'm swithed off from this pool, because pool owner has to reconfigured the pool.

[Zorro23hu]

Wallet and blockchain stuck on 1559 near 3 hours ago. What's happend? To high difficulty with less miners?

[TheCoinFinder]

I have mined on Hashharder too, but we get only 0.04 GRYF / block instead of 4. After the investigation Hasharder pool wnt down. In my point of view, Hashharder pool's wallet was configurated wrong, because we should have got 4 GRYF, not to much comapring to the 2500, but "lot of penny make a phound".

I have two R9 270OC, with total 3.7 MH/s, and it can mine until 100-120 MH/s nethash to find blocks.

I explained in my post the reason it showed "0.4GRYF" - in your own wallet it will say 4 GRYF, due to the offsetting of the decimal point in this coin difference to all other coins.

The main issue though was that we actually found no blocks - as the wallet was rejecting all blocks. Even after we added in the 0 GRYF second coinbase transaction.

[Zorro23hu]

Thank you, it's a bad news  Maybe the coin dev will be solve this issue in closed time.

[Bagdar13]

Wallet and blockchain stuck on 1559 near 3 hours ago. What's happend? To high difficulty with less miners?

I have a guess and this is only a guess, someone hit with a lot of hashpower for one block. This caused the network difficulty to spike and now its stuck high.  I really really hope that the 50K blocks are actually random and not predictabile ala DogeCoin.

Dev, please figure out what is going on with the Diff and with the block timming.

Thanks and look forward to supporting your coin!

[Zorro23hu]

So, I agree with you and you can see in the wallet's blockexplorer, the last blocks only POS blocks... No chance to mine POW blocks, it's a current situation.

[Zorro23hu]

Newsletter:
Well the cat is out of the bag! GryfenCoin has been launched and we have been automatically added to 2 pools. The first pool was HashHarder and the second was MinerPools. However after 2 days, HashHarder dropped us from their pool. Due to a misinterpretation, they may have configured the wallet incorrectly. No Biggie!

Our original plan was to begin getting on Exchanges and Mining Pools 30 days after the launch. But since the cat is out of the bag, obviously there is nothing we can do about that.

Follow the link below to access the mining pool:

    Gryf.MinerPools.com



So, as I posted previous, Minerpools also doesn't work correctly, because it's showed false data. Imho the devteam+pool owner together should be investigated current issues of the POW mining instead of these (bad) news letters

[sunerok]

i think they are busy working =] they have a whole team, im sure with their heads together they will figure it out. i spoke with a dev the other day, he was very busy working on it.

[TheCoinFinder]

Newsletter:
Due to a misinterpretation, they may have configured the wallet incorrectly.

No configuration issue of our wallet. Changing the rules that govern how coin's values are interpreted - thats a bit different. Exchanges will also need to completely change their calculations for this coin.

Has the wallet been updated to remove the pointless donation address?

[Zorro23hu]

Hi Guys,

To avoid other misinterpretations, the mentioned Newsletter came from on email for me and other registered user on the official homapage. Maybe I had a mistake, that I didn't underlined and stressed that is not my opinion, and I was also surprised about it...


Best regards and good luck for this unmineable coin, however, I hope dev will be correct the source and wallet, because on the proposed pool also unuseable ATM.

[TheCoinFinder]

Code:

    if(IsProofOfWork())
    {
        CBitcoinAddress address(!fTestNet ? FOUNDATION : FOUNDATION_TEST);
        CScript scriptPubKey;
        scriptPubKey.SetDestination(address.Get());
        if (vtx[0].vout[1].scriptPubKey != scriptPubKey)
            return error("ConnectBlock() : coinbase does not pay to the dev address)");

        // gryfencrypto:
        int64_t nExtraFee = 0;//nFees * EXTRA_FEE_PCT;
        //if(nExtraFee < MIN_EXTRA_FEE) nExtraFee=MIN_EXTRA_FEE;
        if (vtx[0].vout[1].nValue < nExtraFee)
            return error("ConnectBlock() : coinbase does not pay enough to dev addresss");
    }

Is still in code.

If you could please update your coin to remove this.

Or ideally, another pool who has this working - if they could publish the stratum changes.

We have worked with many coins that have donation address requirements - and haven't had this issue of block submission before.

[CryptoPromotions]

If you require any promotional services please do send me a private message.

[stefanofg]

Code:

    if(IsProofOfWork())
    {
        CBitcoinAddress address(!fTestNet ? FOUNDATION : FOUNDATION_TEST);
        CScript scriptPubKey;
        scriptPubKey.SetDestination(address.Get());
        if (vtx[0].vout[1].scriptPubKey != scriptPubKey)
            return error("ConnectBlock() : coinbase does not pay to the dev address)");

        // gryfencrypto:
        int64_t nExtraFee = 0;//nFees * EXTRA_FEE_PCT;
        //if(nExtraFee < MIN_EXTRA_FEE) nExtraFee=MIN_EXTRA_FEE;
        if (vtx[0].vout[1].nValue < nExtraFee)
            return error("ConnectBlock() : coinbase does not pay enough to dev addresss");
    }

Is still in code.

If you could please update your coin to remove this.

Or ideally, another pool who has this working - if they could publish the stratum changes.

We have worked with many coins that have donation address requirements - and haven't had this issue of block submission before.

I cleaned up the code removing the second output in that transaction and commenting out all the reference to FOUNDATION address.
Anyway I  zeroed the transaction value initially just to release the coin on time without compromising the rest of code. Now I have finished performing tests and it seems stable and working properly.
The real point is: the problem was non existent at all. there was no coin going to FOUNDATION address before because the value was zero. Also why in the world a mining pool service would use an address in the src code to configure their software? You run coind and get a new valid address... that's it!
Also we truncated the COIN constant value to be sure that the total amount we decided to support would fit without overflowing.
Regarding the CentOs installing script, we are open to contributions. We don't have neither CentOs installed on our development systems, nor experts of this specific distro, so any kind of help will be highly appreciated.
Thanks for your precious feedback and support and get the new src at the usual location https://github.com/GryfenCrypto/gryfencoin.git

[TheCoinFinder]

I cleaned up the code removing the second output in that transaction and commenting out all the reference to FOUNDATION address.

Yep, we now have the new wallet code. And setup the pool again.

The real point is: the problem was non existent at all.

This was simply not the case. Your wallet was Rejecting blocks because of the very fact that you had kept the second transaction requirement in the code. Upon submitting a block to the wallet, it was REJECTING all found blocks because the "coinbase transaction does not pay the dev address".

So, the normal solution to this (as in X13 coins and others), is to locate the FOUNDATION address (in main.h) and modify the pool software to automatically generate a second coinbase transaction (usually referred to as the tx_charity or tx_donation). The address has to be encoded as an script pub key - which is trivial.

However, even after doing this - the wallet was still rejecting the coins.

Also we truncated the COIN constant value to be sure that the total amount we decided to support would fit without overflowing.

And this is all fine and dandy when it comes to your own coin's implementation of how it displays it. But as (all? nearly all?) other coins have the 8.8 notation - presumably most exchange/pool software is coded to handle that sort of storage - database rows would be typed potentially as 8.8 Deciminal types. This coin is using 10.6, which affects this type of storage very differently. Of course if people are using double floating point notation in all places, it should be ok - But expect hiccups.

We have modified our systems to display the correct Gryfen mined (basically x 100 does the trick) for clarity.

But be prepared for supporting any exchange adding this coin if you want them to display the coins properly.

[Ryven Cedrylle]

One of the big selling points for this coin's Twitter marketing was "CPU mineable." Is anyone actually CPU mining - specifically with a factory-default CPU? Are you getting anything?

[Bagdar13]

One of the big selling points for this coin's Twitter marketing was "CPU mineable." Is anyone actually CPU mining - specifically with a factory-default CPU? Are you getting anything?

So the difficulty is at 479 so no this coin cannot be CPU mined.  I mined about 300 blocks solo running x15 into localhost but the CPU seemed pointless at that point.  The whitepaper says they are going to implement a GPU only algo for the POS mining and for like bonus payouts different from the block rewards which will remain x15 if I read it correctly.