[ANN][BITS][Bitstar] Now on Cryptopia, Nova and Yobit new wallet fork in testing

[Mark81]

Well we're looking to make deals for upwards of 100k at a time.

So if you have at least that amount for sale and can propose a reasonable price then pm me the details.

We are open to those who'd prefer settlement in BTC but fiat is preferred.

So is this for giving liquidity to Global Bitpoint ATM service so people can buy bits from ATM?

[T3CLtd]

No we have already accounted for the initial requirements of liquidity for the ATMs, this is in relation to something else.

[Mark81]

I downloaded the new wallet and had to re-download the block chain.  arr   Two weeks later and the blockchain is still only 79% downloaded and my balance is showing zero although past transactions are getting confirmed.  Now I do the repairwallet and now out of nowhere I'm staking but my wallet is not caught up yet?  I've never seen that happen before.  I'm only 79% downloaded but new staking transactions are coming through.   Is that normal?    

Hi! I confirm issues with new wallet. I had to resync wallet with fast resync pack and restarted wallet after extracting files to appdata\bitstar folder. My wallet was locked but it somehow managed to stake few thousand coins to wallet. Also resyncing was awful slow. What I did was that I closed my wallet and renamed my wallet.dat to something else and after that restarted wallet. Amazingly it started to resync wallet with great speed. Now I'm waiting to catch up blockchain and after that I will delete current wallet.dat and rename original back to wallet.dat. Let's see how it goes. I think there is some kind of bug in the code that brings up these issues?

[Bitstar_coin]

I downloaded the new wallet and had to re-download the block chain.  arr   Two weeks later and the blockchain is still only 79% downloaded and my balance is showing zero although past transactions are getting confirmed.  Now I do the repairwallet and now out of nowhere I'm staking but my wallet is not caught up yet?  I've never seen that happen before.  I'm only 79% downloaded but new staking transactions are coming through.   Is that normal?    

Hi! I confirm issues with new wallet. I had to resync wallet with fast resync pack and restarted wallet after extracting files to appdata\bitstar folder. My wallet was locked but it somehow managed to stake few thousand coins to wallet. Also resyncing was awful slow. What I did was that I closed my wallet and renamed my wallet.dat to something else and after that restarted wallet. Amazingly it started to resync wallet with great speed. Now I'm waiting to catch up blockchain and after that I will delete current wallet.dat and rename original back to wallet.dat. Let's see how it goes. I think there is some kind of bug in the code that brings up these issues?

It's not a issue or bug, when a new block arrives, be it old or current your wallet checks your inputs against it, so of course a empty wallet.dat will take less processing power as it has no need to check the block.  When you swap out your wallet.dat to the current one it will then have to rescan which also does this process, but because it does it in one big check rather than per block (of which we have many due to our fast transactions times), it will always be faster.

[wsmolive]

I  downland   bitstar-qt-1.4.0.0-adgr-fs-srvc.rar.  and updated two days.

[wsmolive]

[wsmolive]

1.4

[EBK1000]

I have downloaded the last wallet. I am on a Mac and it just doesn't sync. It just freeze up and gets stuck.

[Bitstar_coin]

I have downloaded the last wallet. I am on a Mac and it just doesn't sync. It just freeze up and gets stuck.

If you check the logs, its probably while its looking for new peers or its getting a bad block from a peer, we're working on a new release with faster peer lookup, database and peer banning.  We have fully tested the wallet on mac and it synced fine for us.

[EBK1000]

I have downloaded the last wallet. I am on a Mac and it just doesn't sync. It just freeze up and gets stuck.

If you check the logs, its probably while its looking for new peers or its getting a bad block from a peer, we're working on a new release with faster peer lookup, database and peer banning.  We have fully tested the wallet on mac and it synced fine for us.

This is what I get:

trying connection 31.221.51.98:62123 lastseen=167.6hrs
connect() failed after select(): Connection refused
trying connection 85.76.131.236:62123 lastseen=209.5hrs
received block b8143f993c9eb94a4708
ERROR: CheckProofOfStake() : INFO: read txPrev failed
WARNING: ProcessBlock(): check proof-of-stake failed for block b8143f993c9eb94a47080b93480f0323fa88464d95e2b653a57996ae99c8f5b8
connection timeout
Flushed 3646 addresses to peers.dat  6ms
trying connection 98.18.17.138:62123 lastseen=23.9hrs
received block 540a79f5979fcbb55836
ERROR: CheckProofOfStake() : INFO: read txPrev failed
WARNING: ProcessBlock(): check proof-of-stake failed for block 540a79f5979fcbb5583692bbce43046a7f35f036791979aec989ba0de996efca
connection timeout
trying connection 2.26.187.142:62123 lastseen=2893.0hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 80.42.170.71:62123 lastseen=4841.9hrs
received block 0da958f3567495a3af60
ERROR: CheckProofOfStake() : INFO: read txPrev failed
WARNING: ProcessBlock(): check proof-of-stake failed for block 0da958f3567495a3af60262d451d427e75f9061bfe8a2a1955edf7c3f18e3112
received block b0c17621f6a857ea8ba8
ERROR: CheckProofOfStake() : INFO: read txPrev failed
WARNING: ProcessBlock(): check proof-of-stake failed for block b0c17621f6a857ea8ba85eec6ec23cafeadaeb13e817db18305cbbe4e56f1935
connection timeout
trying connection 2.28.62.136:62123 lastseen=312.9hrs
received block 73536ced4fe65132c40e
ERROR: CheckProofOfStake() : INFO: read txPrev failed
WARNING: ProcessBlock(): check proof-of-stake failed for block 73536ced4fe65132c40ed0d424bb58b45405527e7ed2dee265f217a8e0813cd9
 

[jakiman]

Just FYI. It's back again at Bittrex. Need some extra trade volume.

This market is in danger of de-listing due to low trade volume and lack of user interest. It may be removed on June 19th unless the average daily trade volume for the last 7 days exceeds 0.2 BTC.

[T3CLtd]

With the development of SuperNET's iDEX platform near completion, serious consideration is being given to whether this coin should remain listed on Bittrex once it begins trading on iDEX. Being able to trade without the risks associated with centralised exchanges raises the question of why one would still use Bittrex.

The back-end setup for the ATM operation is intended to utilise the iDEX API.

If anyone has any opinion on the subject, I'd welcome feedback.

[Bitstar_coin]

The INFO: read txPrev failed seems to be a common problem on POS wallets, if you google "INFO: read txPrev failed" you will see many coins have this, the 2 fastest ways to fix this:

1) use our fast start pack (recommended)
2) restart the wallet when it gets stuck and set timeout to <1000ms


Once you have caught up, it should no longer happen.  We are working on a updated wallet at the moment though.

[4emily]

With the development of SuperNET's iDEX platform near completion, serious consideration is being given to whether this coin should remain listed on Bittrex once it begins trading on iDEX. Being able to trade without the risks associated with centralised exchanges raises the question of why one would still use Bittrex.

The back-end setup for the ATM operation is intended to utilise the iDEX API.

If anyone has any opinion on the subject, I'd welcome feedback.

Presumably the advantage to be had from Bits continuing to be listed on bittrex is the additional liquidity/exposure which that could provide. The only disadvantage of a continued listing I'm aware of is that which applies to all exchanges – the risk of losing your coins. A risk easily avoided of course by making sure you keep your coins off the exchange.

Assuming there weren't any other considerations, I'd vote for continued listing, at least until the iDEX platform had become well-established.

[jakiman]

My friend bought some BITS via Bittrex recently. He trades many other coins there also so the option of BITS being there is quite important.
Anyways, considering BITS has had over 5 BTC trade volume in the past day or so, it won't get de-listed once again.

[jakiman]

I'm just curious, is there any technical differentiator for BITS planned in the near future?
or anything else that will make BITS (specifically) a bit more unique and/or desirable?

I guess just being solid & stable over a long period of time is worth a lot.
So yeah, I really appreciate all the devs involved keeping BITS what it is!

[wsmolive]

V1.4.0.0  windows Wallet  is poor, extremely slow,i  have sync it two weeks . and most of time  it show :warning  the checkpoint is too old.
then stop ,never forward.

[T3CLtd]

I'm just curious, is there any technical differentiator for BITS planned in the near future?
or anything else that will make BITS (specifically) a bit more unique and/or desirable?

Experience is showing us that it is far more important to gradually develop the coin and the underlying tech, rather than embark on ambitious and risky technical leaps. With all the work being done with SuperNET and the resultant process of seeking to ensure that the decisions taken are correct in the context of this coin's utility and purpose within a commercially viable developmental path, the key-word has been 'patience'. Often there have been discussions of what modifications or changes to implement and we have frequently found that potential benefits are fleeting and simply not worth the risk.

Cryptocurrency innovation happens rapidly, stability and adoption, however, are slaves to the usual commercial processes.

The base principal still stands at promoting this coin as a 'like-bitcoin-with-interest' alternative currency, while a number of different technical modifications and collaborative business opportunities are evaluated and explored.

There are some pretty cool things being done behind-the-scenes for this coin project, but no guarantees or promises are being made about where they might lead because nobody can anticipate what the results will be for sure. One thing I am acutely aware of is the comparison between the early days of the public internet and just how cumbersome and complicated it could be to use, and these early years of cryptocurrency technology. Only when we are able to simplify the experience to the degree that people other than crypto-geeks like us are able to utilise the platform can we hope to succeed in turning innovative technology into viable business models.

[Zer0Sum]

With the development of SuperNET's iDEX platform near completion, serious consideration is being given to whether this coin should remain listed on Bittrex once it begins trading on iDEX. Being able to trade without the risks associated with centralised exchanges raises the question of why one would still use Bittrex.

The back-end setup for the ATM operation is intended to utilise the iDEX API.

If anyone has any opinion on the subject, I'd welcome feedback.

(1) "Near completion" means months, if ever, with those guys.

(2) BITS are not traded on iDEX... a special token called superBITS (a NXT asset) is. This is rarely made clear.
The spreads for superBITS will be huge unless these tokens attract 100s of day traders = very unlikely.

(3) All of NXT has 200-300 users. How many of those will trade superBITS tokens? 3? 5? 10?

(4) There has never been a decentralized crypto exchange with liquidity.
I'm sure iDEX will fake liquidity for a while (like putting up buy/sell walls), but this repels real traders...
Because it's too hard to make money with whales and walls manipulating the market.

(5) Only someone who has been shot-gunning SuperNET Koolaid would delist from Bittrex.

[EtherCoin]

With the development of SuperNET's iDEX platform near completion, serious consideration is being given to whether this coin should remain listed on Bittrex once it begins trading on iDEX. Being able to trade without the risks associated with centralised exchanges raises the question of why one would still use Bittrex.

The back-end setup for the ATM operation is intended to utilise the iDEX API.

If anyone has any opinion on the subject, I'd welcome feedback.

(1) "Near completion" means months, if ever, with those guys.

(2) BITS are not traded on iDEX... a special token called superBITS (a NXT asset) is. This is rarely made clear.
The spreads for superBITS will be huge unless these tokens attract 100s of day traders = very unlikely.

(3) All of NXT has 200-300 users. How many of those will trade superBITS tokens? 3? 5? 10?

(4) There has never been a decentralized crypto exchange with liquidity.
I'm sure iDEX will fake liquidity for a while (like putting up buy/sell walls), but this repels real traders...
Because it's too hard to make money with whales and walls manipulating the market.

(5) Only someone who has been shot-gunning SuperNET Koolaid would delist from Bittrex.

Hi ZeroSum, looks like your opinions have been generated from a slightly misconception, allow me to clarify:

(1) Near completion, yes. Considering the timeline (we have been working since October/November on it, from December with specific dedicated devs) it is very close to completion. Please consider the major changes that have occurred as of late (server architecture migration, major changes in core code - Ram/Lchains), and you will have your answers as for the reasons.

I would suggest you that you visit our slack (if you have not yet) and check both #instantDEX and #API channels for a more detailed approach.

(2) BITS is traded in instantDEX, and you receive BITS that are usable wherever you wants BITS to be used in. Tokens or not being traded in instantDEX at a very short-term step used as objection is irrelevant, and btw, this way is more secure than in a normal centralized exchange.

(3) Your facts need a serious reality check, only in China the NRS client has had thousands of downloads.

(4) There has never been any real crypto decentralized exchange, in fact. NXT AE is mostly assets exchange. We aim to change that with instantDEX, feel free to use its services if you find them useful (or not).
 
(5) Well, I might agree with you here, but let's see what happen... From a pure darwinian logic POV, in a few months, it would appeal stupid to NOT have your asset/coin in instantDEX. Time will tell.

Any other question, please let me know.

DISCLAIMER: I am a superNET core team member, so my answers that are NXT related should be taken as merely personal opinions. And to be honest, it is far from my intent to try to convince anyone from anything, if you do not feel comfortable holding or buying superNET, please do not. My goal is to do my best to clarify doubts or misconceptions.

Eth.