[ANN][SLG] Sterlingcoin v1.7 | United Kingdom |

[Sterlingcoin]

Spencer Lievens has taken Sterlingcoin through to the voting stages of PoH - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=855130.0

Coinpayments vote finishes today 5 hours, 57 minutes, 55 seconds from now and we are now behind Stealthcoin by 2 votes - https://www.coinpayments.net/vote-results

Get voting people - https://www.coinpayments.net/vote

[1713241311]

1713241311

[1713241311]

1713241311

[1713241311]

1713241311

[california_jim]

Herewith, Sterlingcoin Crypto Currency Card - Premier Edition - screen shots (actual) pending some slight alterations before the main print run tomorrow and over this weekend.
 



 


All going to plan we will commence with express shipping to our StartJOIN pledges from Monday 1st of December.

Postman just delivered my card (no. 6 of 100, like a limited edition work of art!). Nicely packaged, excellent work, many thanks.

CJ

[nickelback65]

The other day I sent .15 btc for the video funding.  I hope that you received the funds.   It was signed Michael.   

[Rols]

Spencer Lievens has taken Sterlingcoin through to the voting stages of PoH - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=855130.0

Coinpayments vote finishes today 5 hours, 57 minutes, 55 seconds from now and we are now behind Stealthcoin by 2 votes - https://www.coinpayments.net/vote-results

Get voting people - https://www.coinpayments.net/vote

Last time 5 coins got added, so hopefully SLG get also added even if we finish second place.

[Sterlingcoin]

The other day I sent .15 btc for the video funding.  I hope that you received the funds.   It was signed Michael.  

We were wondering who had sent that

We will add you to the contributors.

EDIT: You have been added.

[nickelback65]

Thank you my friends.

Keep up the cool work with Sterlingcoin.   

[Sterlingcoin]

Looking at stealth addresses and stealth.cpp and stealth.h of Shadowcoin and the main change would be that of the acceptance of longer addresses.

Up from the 32 character length of a Sterlingcoin address to 128 characters of a stealth address.

This would obviously change information on the blockchain and could cause potential issues i.e. a fork or other such blockchain related issue.

There are multiple reasons why we believe stealth addresses to not be a viable option to incorporate to the Sterlingcoin codebase.

We will be holding a Google+ Hangout with anyone who wishes to join us (we will set a date) and we will explain why ToR and stealth addresses in general are pointless for most users.

Especially those users running Windows or those without basic knowledge about how to keep yourself as anonymous as possible to begin with when using the net.

i.e. those running ToR at home on a Windows computer.

(Why can't people just mix their addresses using coin control like a normal person :p)

^^^The last sentance is jovial^^^

EDIT: The Google+ Hangout is only an option if people wish this to happen, however if the majority agrees that stealth is really not needed for Sterlingcoin then we will simply leave it at that.

[oneoff]

The other day I sent .15 btc for the video funding.  I hope that you received the funds.   It was signed Michael.  

We were wondering who had sent that

We will add you to the contributors.

EDIT: You have been added.

Is there any script of the movie?

I haven't seen such information that may help future contributes to decision.

[Sterlingcoin]

The other day I sent .15 btc for the video funding.  I hope that you received the funds.   It was signed Michael.  

We were wondering who had sent that

We will add you to the contributors.

EDIT: You have been added.

Is there any script of the movie?

I haven't seen such information that may help future contributes to decision.

The plan was to have the contributors take part in the creation process of the video, including the script. We could still do this as a community effort prior to raising the entire amount however.

[andresm]

Looking at stealth addresses and stealth.cpp and stealth.h of Shadowcoin and the main change would be that of the acceptance of longer addresses.

Up from the 32 character length of a Sterlingcoin address to 128 characters of a stealth address.

This would obviously change information on the blockchain and could cause potential issues i.e. a fork or other such blockchain related issue.

There are multiple reasons why we believe stealth addresses to not be a viable option to incorporate to the Sterlingcoin codebase.

We will be holding a Google+ Hangout with anyone who wishes to join us (we will set a date) and we will explain why ToR and stealth addresses in general are pointless for most users.

Especially those users running Windows or those without basic knowledge about how to keep yourself as anonymous as possible to begin with when using the net.

i.e. those running ToR at home on a Windows computer.

(Why can't people just mix their addresses using coin control like a normal person :p)

^^^The last sentance is jovial^^^

EDIT: The Google+ Hangout is only an option if people wish this to happen, however if the majority agrees that stealth is really not needed for Sterlingcoin then we will simply leave it at that.

I agree, I don't believe Tor and stealth addresses would be the right direction for Sterlingcoin. It would bring along a lot of issues.

[syncsam]

Hey,
I don't post here much but thought I would weigh in, I personally don't think anon will help at all when trying to get things to go mainstream, just raises too many questions about what the coin is actually being used for and it would be harder to go mainstream as the general public will perceive it as being dodgy, then the coin has a negative vibe it would need to shake, those people who want anon can use a mixing service

[leigh2k14]

Looking at stealth addresses and stealth.cpp and stealth.h of Shadowcoin and the main change would be that of the acceptance of longer addresses.

Up from the 32 character length of a Sterlingcoin address to 128 characters of a stealth address.

This would obviously change information on the blockchain and could cause potential issues i.e. a fork or other such blockchain related issue.

There are multiple reasons why we believe stealth addresses to not be a viable option to incorporate to the Sterlingcoin codebase.

We will be holding a Google+ Hangout with anyone who wishes to join us (we will set a date) and we will explain why ToR and stealth addresses in general are pointless for most users.

Especially those users running Windows or those without basic knowledge about how to keep yourself as anonymous as possible to begin with when using the net.

i.e. those running ToR at home on a Windows computer.

(Why can't people just mix their addresses using coin control like a normal person :p)

^^^The last sentance is jovial^^^

EDIT: The Google+ Hangout is only an option if people wish this to happen, however if the majority agrees that stealth is really not needed for Sterlingcoin then we will simply leave it at that.

If it's not too much trouble to install stealth and tor then I say go for it, it would be nice to have some extra privacy options if needed.

You would also run the risk of looking a dodgy, so that needs to be taken into consideration.

[SpencerLievensSLG]

Looking at stealth addresses and stealth.cpp and stealth.h of Shadowcoin and the main change would be that of the acceptance of longer addresses.

Up from the 32 character length of a Sterlingcoin address to 128 characters of a stealth address.

This would obviously change information on the blockchain and could cause potential issues i.e. a fork or other such blockchain related issue.

There are multiple reasons why we believe stealth addresses to not be a viable option to incorporate to the Sterlingcoin codebase.

We will be holding a Google+ Hangout with anyone who wishes to join us (we will set a date) and we will explain why ToR and stealth addresses in general are pointless for most users.

Especially those users running Windows or those without basic knowledge about how to keep yourself as anonymous as possible to begin with when using the net.

i.e. those running ToR at home on a Windows computer.

(Why can't people just mix their addresses using coin control like a normal person :p)

^^^The last sentance is jovial^^^

EDIT: The Google+ Hangout is only an option if people wish this to happen, however if the majority agrees that stealth is really not needed for Sterlingcoin then we will simply leave it at that.

If it's not too much trouble to install stealth and tor then I say go for it, it would be nice to have some extra privacy options if needed.

You would also run the risk of looking a dodgy, so that needs to be taken into consideration.

I would like to do a Google+ Hangout with the community and show them in real time on a shared screen what they can do to protect themselves online.

[california_jim]

I would like to do a Google+ Hangout with the community and show them in real time on a shared screen what they can do to protect themselves online.

I think that is an excellent idea. You might need to do two, one at 12:00 GMT and one at 00:00 GMT say, that way there'd be less of a problem about it being the wee small hours for some. See who's interested and what time zone they're in - I'm interested and am GMT +0

CJ

[Rols]

I dont think stealth addresses are a good idea at the moment. This coin is a spendable coin and to use it then you have to reveal yourself to the merchant. There are a lot of things to do if you want to hide yourself and you can never be 100% stealth.

This coin need a lot of users and stealh maybe will scare some away. It should also put to much stress on the blockchain. I think you should consider to implement it later but not now.

There are a lot of work to do on other things that would be good for this coin. Well, that what I think about it.

[SpencerLievensSLG]

Well, I am around now.

How many other people are?

[SpencerLievensSLG]

Been doing some more work on the upcoming 1.4 release:

**Sterlingcoin 1.4 Changelog**
------------------------------
Created CHANGELOG
Encrypted messaging via address/compressedpubpey added with rich text editor
Splashscreen updated
Checkpoints added at blocks 84000, 88000, 92000, 96000
Relock on sending coins when "for staking only" is activated
Updated message on missing OpenSSL with EC support
Memory leak fixed
Removed Unused Variable and Dead Code
Removed LogException( ) which is never used
Removed CPubKey::VerifyCompact( ) which is never used
Removed GetMedianTime( ) which is never used
Removed LookupHostNumeric( ) which is never used
Removed EndMessageAbortIfEmpty() which is never used
Removed CWallet::ScanForWalletTransaction() which is never used
Removed unused Print/PrintHex functions
Removed unused UPnP code from main.h
OutputDebugStringF code cleanup
Fix start Bitcoin on system login
Fix periodical GUI lag
Fixed mention of getblockbynumber in help
Updated build docs
Fixed unconfirmed balance if wallet contains conflicted transactions
Fixed debug message
Fix to show short scriptPubKeys correctly
Fix to reject unknown block version
Fix namespace bug
Cleanup of main.cpp and main.h
Cleanup of bitcoingui.cpp and bitcoingui.h
Edited COLOR_BAREADDRESS & COLOR_UNCONFIRMED for legibility
Set qpalette options on bitcoingui.cpp
Created obj folder/directory in /src/ to fix build issue of Daemon
Updated ReadMe with correct build information for Sterlingcoin Daemon
Updated mrichtextedit.ui styling
Sterlingcoin safe shutdown during Windows Shutdown
Overall styling changes
Changes to overviewpage.ui styling
Removed Legacy GetNextWorkRequired
Updated Genesis Timestamps
Removed polling of showmyip.com as it doesn't exist anymore
Fix memory exhaustion by truncating messages to the tx size
Fixed "Export" vanishing when clicking "Statistics"
Amended "Fixed Size" for QT window
Cleanup of /contrib/debian/ & /contrib/macdeploy/

Total update to Sterlingcoin has 195 changed files with 17,040 additions and 4,095 deletions.

The plan is to now add checkpoints up until release.

[SpencerLievensSLG]

Couldn't help myself. Had a further look about at the code and did these other fixes:

wallet.cpp updated to stop wallet.dat being written to whilst loading
Fixed MacOSX Dock Minimising Issue
Coincontrol fix
URI fixes

Knowing what I am like I will probably still poke about at the code right up until release.

[Rols]

Couldn't help myself. Had a further look about at the code and did these other fixes:

wallet.cpp updated to stop wallet.dat being written to whilst loading
Fixed MacOSX Dock Minimising Issue
Coincontrol fix
URI fixes

Knowing what I am like I will probably still poke about at the code right up until release.

Brilliant job!

[leigh2k14]

I see we've mined just over 3M coins so far

How long till PoW finishes, end of the year?