[ANN][XCN] Cryptonite | 1st mini-blockchain coin | M7 PoW | No Premine

[skunk]

Also I'd like to gripe a little about miner donations. Let me count them for you all. 1,2,3,4, no wait, no donate, none

i've sent you 100 coins (24h worth of desktop mining)
hopefully the ones with big irons will follow the example

[1713864143]

1713864143

[1713864143]

1713864143

[1713864143]

1713864143

[smooth]

So you (or not necessarily you personally but anyone who is interested in seeing this PoW succeed) optimize the other hashes too.

Wolf0 doesn't have some magic secret hash code optimizing machine delivered him by aliens from the future. He's just tweaking code. He's not the only one who can tweak code.

Yeah there is one other person, me. There's like 10000 things to optimize and he will always be one step ahead. He will always stand on the sholders of the OSS miner. My only goal is to make it so he has to do huge amounts of work for small gain. If rejects were fixed he's only got 20% on us and I have some ideas to get that down.

That's what I call parity. Once you pick the low hanging fruit, Amdahl's Law kicks in and yeah there might be 10000 things to optimize but reducing each to zero only buys you 0.01%. Plus there is nothing to prevent other people who want to see this coin succeed from contributing tweaks to the open source as well.

Concentrated mining by people with more efficient miners is bad for the coin, especially early on. That's one reason why I slammed your use of an immature PoW instead of one that is already well optimized. But if you (meaning anyone who wants to see the PoW succeed) are willing to put in the effort and get to parity, you can make it work.

BTW, you can't be the only one in the world trying to implement fast open source hashing on GPUs right?

BTW #2, I can't even find where to donate for the miner work. If I can't find it I'm sure some others can't find it either. Nothing in the README for example.

[djm34]

Catia now delivers for you 2.5MH of raw speed on 750ti. For free as per usual. Now let those complaints roll!

Great Any chance this will compile on windows? I saw "Win32 work and 2.5MH"  

I've put a solid 24 hours into getting it to compile on windows. Unknown even if any real progress was made. That toolchain is so fubar.

any info on how to compile on window ?

Probably the best approach is too add support for 1gh pool to ccminer. Getting cpu-miner codes to compile under MSVC is a nightmare. Probably won't work. So far the extent of progress is getting cpu-miner.c to compile. Whether we can get the rest of the codes to compile, or eventually link with some magic libcurl and libpthread which is compiled with msvc and we don't have is a serious unknown.

for some unknown reason, I get only rejected with ccminer (both 1gh and testnet).
The share/block are compared to cpu it matches but got rejected (or stale...)

[PeaMine]

Also I'd like to gripe a little about miner donations. Let me count them for you all. 1,2,3,4, no wait, no donate, none

i've sent you 100 coins (24h worth of desktop mining)
hopefully the ones with big irons will follow the example

301.02 XCN sent from my CPU mining adventures, hopefully someone releases a Windows GPU binary, as I am apparently not yet skilled enough for compiling.
Holding the rest as it seems price is actually going up! ever since the GPU was publicly released, can't explain that! Bought some more with BTC and then sold for 5% profit, so a nice spread for investors as well.
Though I tried this earlier and bought in at 7000...so...yeah...still paying for that lol.

[bitfreak!]

Concentrated mining by people with more efficient miners is bad for the coin, especially early on. That's one reason why I slammed your use of an immature PoW instead of one that is already well optimized.

At the end of the day you are right, we probably should have went with an existing PoW algorithm instead of creating a new one, but at the time we had good reasons for doing it that way and it seemed like a good idea. But it was a sub-optimal design decision, and if I could turn back time the one thing I would change is the PoW algorithm. But it's done now and we can't change it, so I don't know why you have to rant about it for 50 pages. I think we have got the point by now, you don't like new PoW algorithms. It's not like it's the end of the world, the long mining period will do much to offset any big miners in these early stages, and the private GPU miners will be made publicly available soon enough. All new PoW algorithms take time to be optimized, and complaining about it isn't going to get it done.

[catia]

New miner up. Getting 3970kh/s on some X16 connected 750ti. Sufferage on X1 to only about 3MH. Can probably reduce memory transfer with some effort to do 4 on even X1. Gonna hold off on that until the wolf gives us run though.

[smooth]

At the end of the day you are right, we probably should have went with an existing PoW algorithm instead of creating a new one, but at the time we had good reasons for doing it that way and it seemed like a good idea. But it was a sub-optimal design decision, and if I could turn back time the one thing I would change is the PoW algorithm. But it's done now and we can't change it, so I don't know why you have to rant about it for 50 pages. I think we have got the point by now, you don't like new PoW algorithms. It's not like it's the end of the world, the long mining period will do much to offset any big miners in these early stages, and the private GPU miners will be made publicly available soon enough. All new PoW algorithms take time to be optimized, and complaining about it isn't going to get it done.

I think you're off base here.

I haven't ranted on it for 50 pages. Since we originally discussed it I mentioned it once or twice. In this context it had to do with the need to optimize the one you have, in fact I was encouraging the catia's efforts, and if you read between the lines of my post I was offering to donate to support that effort.

[dboylc]

New miner up. Getting 3970kh/s on some X16 connected 750ti. Sufferage on X1 to only about 3MH. Can probably reduce memory transfer with some effort to do 4 on even X1. Gonna hold off on that until the wolf gives us run though.

compiled but cannot run minerd.
only can run minerd --help
:::::::::::::
 ./minerd -a m7 -o stratum+tcp://xcnpool.1gh.com:7333 -u CPtc1bSfyVLVRXna1yf8eJD6oZzxLwJBbT -p x -t 6
Try `minerd --help' for more information.

 ./minerd -V
cpuminer 2.4
 built on Aug  8 2014
 features: x86_64 SSE2 AVX AVX2 XOP
libcurl/7.35.0 OpenSSL/1.0.1f zlib/1.2.8 libidn/1.28 librtmp/2.3
libjansson 2.5

[cubex]

Concentrated mining by people with more efficient miners is bad for the coin, especially early on. That's one reason why I slammed your use of an immature PoW instead of one that is already well optimized.

At the end of the day you are right, we probably should have went with an existing PoW algorithm instead of creating a new one, but at the time we had good reasons for doing it that way and it seemed like a good idea. But it was a sub-optimal design decision, and if I could turn back time the one thing I would change is the PoW algorithm. But it's done now and we can't change it, so I don't know why you have to rant about it for 50 pages. I think we have got the point by now, you don't like new PoW algorithms. It's not like it's the end of the world, the long mining period will do much to offset any big miners in these early stages, and the private GPU miners will be made publicly available soon enough. All new PoW algorithms take time to be optimized, and complaining about it isn't going to get it done.

I beg to differ on this.  Having a new POW algo is not the problem. In fact, it is an innovative move and it is a plus.  Forget about scrypt and scrypt-n, they are becoming boring. Many of these coins are dying. Forget about X11,13,14,15..whatever.  People would call you a clone.  You have done well with a new algo.  Fresh from oven.  Smelling good! Give yourself a pat.

When you have a few miners having their own power private mining software, the coin ends up centralised within a few hands. This is bad. People do not have confidence when a coin is being controlled by a few people.  You need mass adoption.  The way to go is to level the playing field as much as possible.  And this is what Catia has done.  You may have set a bounty for a gpu miner earlier on and you would have ended up with fewer unhappy faces.  Nevertheless, it is not too late. In fact, we are still at the early birth of the coin.  You have proved to have good listening ears and you have attended to the users'/miners' needs.  As more miners become comfortable and confidence of XCN, they would become holders of the coin. Investors would join in. This is when the value of XCN would grow steadily. We would be seeing a bright future in XCN.

[catia]

New miner up. Getting 3970kh/s on some X16 connected 750ti. Sufferage on X1 to only about 3MH. Can probably reduce memory transfer with some effort to do 4 on even X1. Gonna hold off on that until the wolf gives us run though.

compiled but cannot run minerd.
only can run minerd --help
:::::::::::::
 ./minerd -a m7 -o stratum+tcp://xcnpool.1gh.com:7333 -u CPtc1bSfyVLVRXna1yf8eJD6oZzxLwJBbT -p x -t 6
Try `minerd --help' for more information.

 ./minerd -V
cpuminer 2.4
 built on Aug  8 2014
 features: x86_64 SSE2 AVX AVX2 XOP
libcurl/7.35.0 OpenSSL/1.0.1f zlib/1.2.8 libidn/1.28 librtmp/2.3
libjansson 2.5

Minerd no longer supports -a m7 option. Only algo is m7, so can't use that

[bitfreak!]

Important News

Sorry for the late notice, but everyone should try to update to revision 14080613 or later before 11:20pm UTC on the 10th. You will most likely have problems syncing after this time if you're running an older node. Old nodes already synced to the network should continue operating normally but we're not entirely certain and cannot guarantee anything. It is highly recommended to update as soon as possible to avoid any such issues.

On the issue of wallet corruption, it looks like it can occur if Qt is shut down while it is syncing, so try to avoid shutting down your client mid sync at all costs. If you upgrade to the latest revision you shouldn't have many problems syncing but if you're forced to restart during the sync stage then backup your wallet before shutting down. If you've already lost your wallet due to corruption I don't think there's much we can do about it.

EDIT: corrected time

[Finley]

some weakhands sell their coin for a such low price..lol

[cubex]

some weakhands sell their coin for a such low price..lol

Good news for investors/buyers.  Bad news for miners.  If they cannot hold on to their coins, they will be losing more.

[restless]

Can we have the link to Catia gpu miner in first post? or in the site?

Anyone who tried to build the miner under Kopiemtu? As I understand currently most successful OS for building it is Ubuntu?

[gorgo]

some weakhands sell their coin for a such low price..lol

actually the price is not that low considering a total supply of 1.84 billion coins.
I like this coin and its approach to shrink the blockchain size but the price is way too high for me to invest.

[restless]

some weakhands sell their coin for a such low price..lol

actually the price is not that low considering a total supply of 1.84 billion coins.
I like this coin and its approach to shrink the blockchain size but the price is way too high for me to invest.

But this amount of coins is spread over 10+ years. Actually the supply is better spread than Monero(XMR) for example.
A parity to Monero will gives possible price around 20000 satoshis. IF parity with monero acceptance is reached

[smooth]

some weakhands sell their coin for a such low price..lol

actually the price is not that low considering a total supply of 1.84 billion coins.
I like this coin and its approach to shrink the blockchain size but the price is way too high for me to invest.

But this amount of coins is spread over 10+ years. Actually the supply is better spread than Monero(XMR) for example.
A parity to Monero will gives possible price around 20000 satoshis. IF parity with monero acceptance is reached

Within reason, speed of mining doesn't really change the current fair value price directly. You have either higher inflation for a shorter period or lower inflation for a longer period). Pretty much cancels out, at least to a large extent.

If you think the speed of mining is a feature of the coin (and I'm leaning toward thinking this) that argues for a higher price. If you think the mining is "too slow" in some harmful way that would actually argue for a lower price despite the relatively low inflation (over several years).

[yummica]

depends on the mini-blockchain tech.the price of XCN is low.

[hankrules]

Done.

catia's git: https://ottrbutt.com/tmp/xcn750ticatia.png vs. my new one: https://ottrbutt.com/tmp/xcn750tiwolf.png

Same hardware - EVGA 750Ti at stock clocks with no factory OC that I know of; was a nice workout.

What the fuck man.

[cubex]

Calling all miners to retreat to 0.000023BTC

Going further down will only strangle ourselves. Let's unite together and retreat to a safer level.