[ANN] SpreadCoin | True Decentralization (No Pools) | Testing New Masternodes

[AlexGR]

May I post a suggestion here?

Since some DRK features are implemented, and some could be improved upon, the original concept for the Darkcoin masternodes (RC2/RC3 releases) involved a protocol-level enforcement of the masternode payments. The problem with these releases was that there was some kind of bug that triggered sporadic network forking by misbehaving nodes or mining clients. The consensus wasn't working as it should.

In a sense, Darkcoin tried to use a dual consensus for every block: One for the transactions / mining, and one for the masternode payout. This didn't work as planned (there were sporadic forks of the network) and DarkSend development was lagging - so a workaround system was created instead that was "safer" and relieved some of the price speculation (it was the period of the great pump - and all eyes were on DRK news and how something would succeed or fail).

In that payment system (an evolution of which, is the current system of MN payments) the pools decided whether to pay or not in a semi-voluntary scheme. If a pool wanted to cheat payment, they could. The strategy was to shame the pools that "cheated" and it worked to compliance levels of 80-90%. The added threat of "enforcement" where Evan would "flip the switch" to fork off the non-compliant pools was also added as an extra measure. However, in my view, this is not the ideal solution to the problem. Rather, it should be done like it initially was conceived so that misbehaving clients are simply forked by themselves out of the network. No centralization / enforcement switch, no need for asking pools to play nice etc etc.

Perhaps the dev wants to give it a look* and see if he can come up with a system that works and which is free of forking bugs. It could also be implemented by DRK if successful, and it would also give added credibility to SPR itself for improving something in a significant way. The good thing with SPR is that, unlike DRK which is more mature, it can risk multiple hard forks to try things out.

* Perhaps the RC2/RC3 bugged solutions of DRK where there was a voting system in place to decide the MN payments are not the ideal concept for this implementation and another idea can be used altogether.

[1715144524]

1715144524

[1715144524]

1715144524

[shojayxt]

Is no one tried to make pool

Are you serious?  One of the best features of this coin is that there are no pools. 

[crypto_currency]

May I post a suggestion here?

Since some DRK features are implemented, and some could be improved upon, the original concept for the Darkcoin masternodes (RC2/RC3 releases) involved a protocol-level enforcement of the masternode payments. The problem with these releases was that there was some kind of bug that triggered sporadic network forking by misbehaving nodes or mining clients. The consensus wasn't working as it should.

In a sense, Darkcoin tried to use a dual consensus for every block: One for the transactions / mining, and one for the masternode payout. This didn't work as planned (there were sporadic forks of the network) and DarkSend development was lagging - so a workaround system was created instead that was "safer" and relieved some of the price speculation (it was the period of the great pump - and all eyes were on DRK news and how something would succeed or fail).

In that payment system (an evolution of which, is the current system of MN payments) the pools decided whether to pay or not in a semi-voluntary scheme. If a pool wanted to cheat payment, they could. The strategy was to shame the pools that "cheated" and it worked to compliance levels of 80-90%. The added threat of "enforcement" where Evan would "flip the switch" to fork off the non-compliant pools was also added as an extra measure. However, in my view, this is not the ideal solution to the problem. Rather, it should be done like it initially was conceived so that misbehaving clients are simply forked by themselves out of the network. No centralization / enforcement switch, no need for asking pools to play nice etc etc.

Perhaps the dev wants to give it a look* and see if he can come up with a system that works and which is free of forking bugs. It could also be implemented by DRK if successful, and it would also give added credibility to SPR itself for improving something in a significant way. The good thing with SPR is that, unlike DRK which is more mature, it can risk multiple hard forks to try things out.

* Perhaps the RC2/RC3 bugged solutions of DRK where there was a voting system in place to decide the MN payments are not the ideal concept for this implementation and another idea can be used altogether.

Pretty deep insight into DRK advantage and disvantage,valuble advice ,hope SPR can create sth better.

[Rux]

i bought 140 spr to stash it somewhere ...  http://prntscr.com/5hj44a

bought @ ccex, did withdrawal 20 min ago... still not showing in wallet...

is this common for ccex? (1st time on this exchange)

edit: nice to see my guys from DRK thread here

edit2: im mining around 10MH/s in last 4-5h but still not mine any block... wierd

[MadGhost]

You guys don't use IRC? #spreadcoin looks nearly empty.

As there is less members who come on irc usually

[RawrRawr]

Mr. Spread, C-CEX gives me privkey. Can you solve my problem? How much will it cost?

[Rux]

Mr. Spread, C-CEX gives me privkey. Can you solve my problem? How much will it cost?

is this the reason they maybe "blocked" withdrawals of this coin?

i dont like it... i invest then i see my coins in air...

[Mikolo]

i bought 140 spr to stash it somewhere ...  http://prntscr.com/5hj44a

bought @ ccex, did withdrawal 20 min ago... still not showing in wallet...

is this common for ccex? (1st time on this exchange)

edit: nice to see my guys from DRK thread here

edit2: im mining around 10MH/s in last 4-5h but still not mine any block... wierd

C-CEX require confirmation for this. Check your e-mail.

[Rux]

i bought 140 spr to stash it somewhere ...  http://prntscr.com/5hj44a

bought @ ccex, did withdrawal 20 min ago... still not showing in wallet...

is this common for ccex? (1st time on this exchange)

edit: nice to see my guys from DRK thread here

edit2: im mining around 10MH/s in last 4-5h but still not mine any block... wierd

C-CEX require confirmation for this. Check your e-mail.

damn their mail went straight to Junkmail... oh dear gmail

thx mikolo

edit: today i had 8 clients mining...but when i tried to put more in to it... it says creditentials problem... but i used same conf from working ones... with same gpu's and everything... is 8 clients max??

[Mr. Spread]

Mr. Spread, C-CEX gives me privkey. Can you solve my problem? How much will it cost?

It is free, I'm not C-CEX 
Sent it to your address: http://spreadcoin.net/explorer/5c25fe4cf950900a6e594af638fdc685fd905d8ab0bce02186475747d3230132

[e1ghtSpace]

Mr. Spread, C-CEX gives me privkey. Can you solve my problem? How much will it cost?

is this the reason they maybe "blocked" withdrawals of this coin?

i dont like it... i invest then i see my coins in air...

They blocked withdraws for everyone? Maybe there was a problem with the coin?

RawrRawr, did you pay them?

[thelonecrouton]

May I post a suggestion here?

Since some DRK features are implemented, and some could be improved upon, the original concept for the Darkcoin masternodes (RC2/RC3 releases) involved a protocol-level enforcement of the masternode payments. The problem with these releases was that there was some kind of bug that triggered sporadic network forking by misbehaving nodes or mining clients. The consensus wasn't working as it should.

In a sense, Darkcoin tried to use a dual consensus for every block: One for the transactions / mining, and one for the masternode payout. This didn't work as planned (there were sporadic forks of the network) and DarkSend development was lagging - so a workaround system was created instead that was "safer" and relieved some of the price speculation (it was the period of the great pump - and all eyes were on DRK news and how something would succeed or fail).

In that payment system (an evolution of which, is the current system of MN payments) the pools decided whether to pay or not in a semi-voluntary scheme. If a pool wanted to cheat payment, they could. The strategy was to shame the pools that "cheated" and it worked to compliance levels of 80-90%. The added threat of "enforcement" where Evan would "flip the switch" to fork off the non-compliant pools was also added as an extra measure. However, in my view, this is not the ideal solution to the problem. Rather, it should be done like it initially was conceived so that misbehaving clients are simply forked by themselves out of the network. No centralization / enforcement switch, no need for asking pools to play nice etc etc.

Perhaps the dev wants to give it a look* and see if he can come up with a system that works and which is free of forking bugs. It could also be implemented by DRK if successful, and it would also give added credibility to SPR itself for improving something in a significant way. The good thing with SPR is that, unlike DRK which is more mature, it can risk multiple hard forks to try things out.

* Perhaps the RC2/RC3 bugged solutions of DRK where there was a voting system in place to decide the MN payments are not the ideal concept for this implementation and another idea can be used altogether.

SPR is a bit different from DRK in that there are no pools, only solo miners. I suppose some means must be found of making sure miners that find blocks pay the Masternodes according to whatever block split Mr Spread settles on. Hopefully having nothing but wallets and Masternodes will simplify the system and make it easier to build this in at the protocol level, thus avoiding the whole 'having to deal with cheating pools' situation.

I'm pleasantly surprised that no SPR miners have complained about the prospect of losing some block reward to Masternodes - they all seem to grasp that Masternodes (and thus optional anonymous transactions, and upcoming InstanTX) will bring far more value to the coin than any loss to them individually in block reward. Plus if the early miners end up running MNs - and they should - they'll be doubly well off.

[pokeytex]

Mr. Spread, C-CEX gives me privkey. Can you solve my problem? How much will it cost?

is this the reason they maybe "blocked" withdrawals of this coin?

i dont like it... i invest then i see my coins in air...

I did a withdrawl last night with no problems.  Make sure you are approving the withdrawl from your email link?

[e1ghtSpace]

Can someone please tell me what a masternode is and why it is useful?


Edit: Oh, I found a good explanation. A masternode mixes coins for anonymous transactions.

[Rux]

sorry guys  

my deposits only halted, because gmail sent confirmation mail to spamfolder

my coins are on my local wallet now

im kinda having problems of finding block...

5h:45min mining at aprox. 9-10mh/s and no new block, im i that unlucky

oh yea, is there console command to show how much mh/s im mining at total

[e1ghtSpace]

sorry guys  

my deposits only halted, because gmail sent confirmation mail to spamfolder

my coins are on my local wallet now

im kinda having problems of finding block...

5h:45min mining at aprox. 9-10mh/s and no new block, im i that unlucky

oh yea, is there console command to show how much mh/s im mining at total

The command is "gethashespersec" without quotations.


But I think that only works for the build in cpu miner.

[Rux]

Can someone please tell me what a masternode is and why it is useful?

masternode can be used for so many things...

one of them is mixing coins...

on the other end, you "lock" X ammount of coins, and you get daily fee from doing that service (mixing)

like mining, but no electricity, no heat... no nothing !!!

[e1ghtSpace]

Hashrate has stayed about the same in the past 24 hours. It has gone up slightly but it looks like it is going down right now.

[LiteMine]

sorry guys 

my deposits only halted, because gmail sent confirmation mail to spamfolder

my coins are on my local wallet now

im kinda having problems of finding block...

5h:45min mining at aprox. 9-10mh/s and no new block, im i that unlucky

oh yea, is there console command to show how much mh/s im mining at total

You have 10/2490 MH/s of the network = 0.4%, so you won't find blocks very often due to low relative hashrate and variance.

I believe with 1440 blocks per day, you should get 5-6 blocks per day, or once every 4.1 hours on average. The variance will be horrible, so you could probably go a whole day or more without a block. If someone else knows better, please correct me.

[NoobKidOnTheBlock]

Anything new and exciting going on in the wild world of SpreadCoin? I'm loving that people who own SpreadCoin aren't willing to give them away for cheap That's the way to do it!!! This coin is easily worth at a minimum $1 a coin no problem whatsoever!! Keep up the amazing work Mr. Spread and if any new updates arise let me know