|
litecoin111
|
 |
October 20, 2014, 11:59:27 PM |
|
Rich list link wasn't working... can someone check please?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whoever mines the block which ends up containing your transaction will get its fee.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pilottage
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
October 21, 2014, 12:23:09 AM |
|
spookycoins I'm still in awe of the entire idea/concept/vision of The Blocknet. Congrats to everyone involved. And congrats to the early investors. Otsu Thank you to the XC guys for working hard to make this technology possible and thank you for recognizing the best tech in the crypto industry and bringing them all together! Pizpie On October 29'th. Bittrex, Poloniex, and Coingateway The entire NHZ team is very excited to be a part of building this decentralized blockchain ecosystem. Very great stuff! CryptoGretzky Dang missed the launch of the thread. Definitely looking forward to this great advancement in crypto! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
darylluke
|
|
October 21, 2014, 03:59:18 AM |
|
What I can say about the 2nd generation features is simple. The LTCD 2.0 branch is based on a complete redesign of blockchain-based currency. It has been forked directly from a project which I have been working on independently since before LitecoinDark was ever even an idea. Everything about the wallet, protocol -- even the blockchain itself has been redesigned to meet a new development paradigm. I will not give specifics about the 2.0 branch or any of the 2nd generation features until I have finished the 2.0 whitepaper (something I had never intended to release as anything more than a case study or proof of concept until after I joined this team), however, by definition, since it shares almost (possibly even zero) code with bitcoin/litecoin/etc and was written from the ground-up addressing some of the issues with 1st gen blockchain currencies, it is no doubt 2nd generation. In all honesty, LTCD 2.0 shares zero code with LTCD 1.x. Everything has been re-imagined. Mining, staking -- RPC/IPC connectivity, external dependencies, build systems, update procedures -- everything. So I'm sure you can understand why we have not and will not release any specifics until the whitepaper is ready to be published. What I can give you, however, is this:  Nothing special. Except that it's "transcribing" into a "ledger" via IPC/BC-API (through a dynamically-linked library connecting to a ledger daemon implementation.) This particular scribe implementation is written in C#. This particular ledger daemon, C++. But don't expect 2.0 in the near future. As I said before, I'm slowing down my pace because I have other priorities that need attention as well. (Family/Work/Life, etc.) Edit: I also said previously not to even bother giving place to claims that I make regarding progress. If you want to know what's going on, watch the code over the coming months. LTCD isn't even 2 months old yet. Please, be patient.  SWEET!! |
|
|
|
|
santamarko
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 31
Merit: 0
|
|
October 21, 2014, 05:25:51 AM |
|
Dear Community, We have bought a new block explorer and richlist what is much beter. https://chainz.cryptoid.info/ltcd/https://chainz.cryptoid.info/ltcd/Also we have put out a bounty for a multipool who payout into ltcd, give me a pm to discus. Ofcourse when the community knows good multipools who is willing to accept ltcd let me know! Regards, LitecoinDark Dev that page doesn't work dev. I hope you get a good block explorer... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
santamarko
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 31
Merit: 0
|
|
October 21, 2014, 06:16:44 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EcoChavCrypto
|
|
October 21, 2014, 08:15:06 AM |
|
So here's a little can of worms regarding PoS. Any discussion of "PoS" really needs to take into account a number of things before any talk about percentages can take place:
- The final anon feature of the coin
- Transaction fees
- Final mining reward
- PoS vs Forging
The coins whitepaper says that the final anon feature will be Darksend, which I assume is a "copy" of the Darkcoin tech. By design, that necessitate the use of Master Nodes which then necessitates the implementation of transaction fees. So not only does the cost required to run a Masternode need to be determined, but then the transaction fees as well since, unless I'm oblivious, the coin does not currently have.
As things stand today, the mining reward was significantly reduced which will lead to the coin being mined out "very" quickly. It's my understanding though that there will be a final "minimum" reward and I've assumed that it will be implemented when the PoS version is rolled out.
So the coin would have to have transaction fees implemented at some point as well. Now, I don't know much about actual mining, but don't miners also typically get transaction fees when a coin has that? So would the people running Masternodes compete for those transaction fees? Or would there be a different set of fees related to the anon transactions that the Masternodes would be paid?
My original thoughts about PoS were that "forging" would be a better idea. The forgers would get transaction fees while miners continue to add to the supply over time which would take care of lost coins etc and thus PoS isn't really required in order to solve that particular issue. But with forging, we'd now have another group competing for transaction fees right?
Am I completely off base with some of this? The whitepaper really doesn't discuss any of these sorts of things in depth.
As far as "pure PoS" goes, my feeling is 2%-5% is adequate. But in this case, the coin isn't pure POS due to ongoing mining and the running of Nodes.
On a personal note, I'm really not fond of anon tech that relies on trusting other people with running nodes. If you don't have enough people running the nodes you open up attack vectors and getting enough people that are willing to invest enough to run them can be difficult. Not to mention that a couple people with deep pockets could "own" the majority of nodes and then do what they wish. I prefer blockchain type anon (CN coins for example) for those reasons. Now some people say that blockchain anon isn't as secure as "eventually" someone will hack it. IMO if someone was able to eventually hack blockchain anon, we'd have much bigger problems for cryptocurrencies in general.
I'd much prefer the coin to implement something like the zerocoin/zerocash tech which no one has done as of yet. One coin was supposed to have implemented zerocoin within the next week or so but they just came out and said it won't happen for awhile. I don't know of anyone that's trying implement zerocash yet (there is a fundamental issue with it but I believe there can be a solution for it). It should be noted that zerocoin was talked about many times as potentially being added to bitcoin but from reading a bunch of threads it seems like they're sort of waiting for an alt coin to do it in order to prove it out. Zerocoin is fundamentally just a "mixer" whereas Zerocash is actually for anon transactions.
So from my perspective, there's a whole lot of intertwined things that really need to be nailed down first and then the actual values for things like fees, PoS percentages etc worked out so that they are all well balanced. Not an easy task but it needs to get done ASAP and spelled out clearly in the coins whitepaper. Without knowing all these things ahead of time, we could end up with a coin that has very high inflation on top of the high supply which would be a bad thing.
I'd also like to know what the PoS design would be. Whether it would just be the "old" peercoin coin age type thing, one of the newer PoS V2 (some other coin is building on V2 and calling it V3 but can't remember which), PoSV or something "new".
I don't know much about anon tech, but you might look into what StealthCoin is trying to do with Stealth Send, and do something similar. I would recommend creating a unique feature and joining SuperNET for the anon. There was a flaw in DarkCoin found recently that resulted in some coins being stolen and lets be honest DarkSend is not true anon, as great as CoinJoin may be its still traceable. I have been working on a node for the past week and once its up will be helping with some testing. I am starting to get my head around the tech, its some next level stuff that is going to have a massive impact when it is released. In fact James posted a comment on the BTCD forum a week or so ago mentioning that he would be interested in seeing what tech LTCD will come up with and wondering why LTCD has not yet applied for SuperNET inclusion. I for one would like to see LTCD and BTCD working together. |
|
|
|
Nthused
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1554
Merit: 1001
|
|
October 21, 2014, 08:20:12 AM |
|
So here's a little can of worms regarding PoS. Any discussion of "PoS" really needs to take into account a number of things before any talk about percentages can take place:
- The final anon feature of the coin
- Transaction fees
- Final mining reward
- PoS vs Forging
The coins whitepaper says that the final anon feature will be Darksend, which I assume is a "copy" of the Darkcoin tech. By design, that necessitate the use of Master Nodes which then necessitates the implementation of transaction fees. So not only does the cost required to run a Masternode need to be determined, but then the transaction fees as well since, unless I'm oblivious, the coin does not currently have.
As things stand today, the mining reward was significantly reduced which will lead to the coin being mined out "very" quickly. It's my understanding though that there will be a final "minimum" reward and I've assumed that it will be implemented when the PoS version is rolled out.
So the coin would have to have transaction fees implemented at some point as well. Now, I don't know much about actual mining, but don't miners also typically get transaction fees when a coin has that? So would the people running Masternodes compete for those transaction fees? Or would there be a different set of fees related to the anon transactions that the Masternodes would be paid?
My original thoughts about PoS were that "forging" would be a better idea. The forgers would get transaction fees while miners continue to add to the supply over time which would take care of lost coins etc and thus PoS isn't really required in order to solve that particular issue. But with forging, we'd now have another group competing for transaction fees right?
Am I completely off base with some of this? The whitepaper really doesn't discuss any of these sorts of things in depth.
As far as "pure PoS" goes, my feeling is 2%-5% is adequate. But in this case, the coin isn't pure POS due to ongoing mining and the running of Nodes.
On a personal note, I'm really not fond of anon tech that relies on trusting other people with running nodes. If you don't have enough people running the nodes you open up attack vectors and getting enough people that are willing to invest enough to run them can be difficult. Not to mention that a couple people with deep pockets could "own" the majority of nodes and then do what they wish. I prefer blockchain type anon (CN coins for example) for those reasons. Now some people say that blockchain anon isn't as secure as "eventually" someone will hack it. IMO if someone was able to eventually hack blockchain anon, we'd have much bigger problems for cryptocurrencies in general.
I'd much prefer the coin to implement something like the zerocoin/zerocash tech which no one has done as of yet. One coin was supposed to have implemented zerocoin within the next week or so but they just came out and said it won't happen for awhile. I don't know of anyone that's trying implement zerocash yet (there is a fundamental issue with it but I believe there can be a solution for it). It should be noted that zerocoin was talked about many times as potentially being added to bitcoin but from reading a bunch of threads it seems like they're sort of waiting for an alt coin to do it in order to prove it out. Zerocoin is fundamentally just a "mixer" whereas Zerocash is actually for anon transactions.
So from my perspective, there's a whole lot of intertwined things that really need to be nailed down first and then the actual values for things like fees, PoS percentages etc worked out so that they are all well balanced. Not an easy task but it needs to get done ASAP and spelled out clearly in the coins whitepaper. Without knowing all these things ahead of time, we could end up with a coin that has very high inflation on top of the high supply which would be a bad thing.
I'd also like to know what the PoS design would be. Whether it would just be the "old" peercoin coin age type thing, one of the newer PoS V2 (some other coin is building on V2 and calling it V3 but can't remember which), PoSV or something "new".
I don't know much about anon tech, but you might look into what StealthCoin is trying to do with Stealth Send, and do something similar. I would recommend creating a unique feature and joining SuperNET for the anon. There was a flaw in DarkCoin found recently that resulted in some coins being stolen and lets be honest DarkSend is not true anon, as great as CoinJoin may be its still traceable. I have been working on a node for the past week and once its up will be helping with some testing. I am starting to get my head around the tech, its some next level stuff that is going to have a massive impact when it is released. In fact James posted a comment on the BTCD forum a week or so ago mentioning that he would be interested in seeing what tech LTCD will come up with and wondering why LTCD has not yet applied for SuperNET inclusion. I for one would like to see LTCD and BTCD working together. Merged Mining with BTCD & LTCD (vice versa) would be very interesting ! |
|
|
|
|
Tearz
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 627
Merit: 250
The Pope Of Dope
|
|
October 21, 2014, 08:36:29 AM |
|
what if the only people to trace the coin were to enter a pass code that only the sender and receiver know about
if this sounds like a bad idea or doesn't make sense im fucking toasted ignore me lol
|
|
|
|
TonyHill
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
October 21, 2014, 11:43:16 AM |
|
Trollbyfire, Litecoindarkdev - somebody. Open me access to admincp forum. Are you for it does not follow. On it a lot of spam. Why do you turn off access to me? I made this forum, gave it to you and you have to just killed. Curve logo, the curve profile, 0 updates, Spam - what is it? ....  facepalm |
|
|
|
|
|
TrollByFire
|
|
October 21, 2014, 12:25:03 PM |
|
Trollbyfire, Litecoindarkdev - somebody. Open me access to admincp forum. Are you for it does not follow. On it a lot of spam. Why do you turn off access to me? I made this forum, gave it to you and you have to just killed. Curve logo, the curve profile, 0 updates, Spam - what is it? .... facepalm All I do is write code. I don't manage the forum, so I cannot help with this. |
BTC: 12JYhysrpqnzqhkZ6qRY8At3G14btEwTtF
|
|
|
TonyHill
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
October 21, 2014, 12:30:04 PM |
|
Trollbyfire, Litecoindarkdev - somebody. Open me access to admincp forum. Are you for it does not follow. On it a lot of spam. Why do you turn off access to me? I made this forum, gave it to you and you have to just killed. Curve logo, the curve profile, 0 updates, Spam - what is it? .... facepalm All I do is write code. I don't manage the forum, so I cannot help with this. okay no problem. then litecoindarkdev - that kind of nonsense. Why lowered my rights for admin, if you do not follow him? it is strange -_- |
|
|
|
|
|
Litecoindark (OP)
|
|
October 21, 2014, 12:35:17 PM |
|
Trollbyfire, Litecoindarkdev - somebody. Open me access to admincp forum. Are you for it does not follow. On it a lot of spam. Why do you turn off access to me? I made this forum, gave it to you and you have to just killed. Curve logo, the curve profile, 0 updates, Spam - what is it? .... facepalm I was playing last week with the security, I will grant you acces again. Next time a pm will be nice, thanks. |
BTC: 1JwLwhZNy8CtKL92NcwNHJNFB8gwF1kRN2
|
|
|
|
Martin958
|
|
October 21, 2014, 12:39:05 PM |
|
Not to downplay the hard work done by the devs and all involved here, but I'm noticing grammar errors still on the official website and on twitter which really affects peoples reactions to the coin in my opinion.
It was mentioned some weeks ago that someone could grammar check all notices and make things look more professional, but still the pigeon English continues.
I'm sorry for those who don't have English as their first language but if the coin is to break forward I think its an issue to address.
|
|
|
|
|
Hamuki
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1022
Merit: 1000
|
|
October 21, 2014, 12:46:21 PM |
|
Not to downplay the hard work done by the devs and all involved here, but I'm noticing grammar errors still on the official website and on twitter which really affects peoples reactions to the coin in my opinion.
It was mentioned some weeks ago that someone could grammar check all notices and make things look more professional, but still the pigeon English continues.
I'm sorry for those who don't have English as their first language but if the coin is to break forward I think its an issue to address.
As you say yourself.. Its not their first language.. But I guess if they can "hire" a translater". Or you could do it for them and maybe get a little LTCD if you are lucky. Again, that is unofficial ^ Ask if there is something you can help with. |
|
|
|
|
BitCoin Operated Boy
|
|
October 21, 2014, 12:50:20 PM |
|
Not to downplay the hard work done by the devs and all involved here, but I'm noticing grammar errors still on the official website and on twitter which really affects peoples reactions to the coin in my opinion.
It was mentioned some weeks ago that someone could grammar check all notices and make things look more professional, but still the pigeon English continues.
I'm sorry for those who don't have English as their first language but if the coin is to break forward I think its an issue to address.
Would you be interested in proofreading the contents? I will donate you 10k LTCD |
|
|
|
|
|
Martin958
|
|
October 21, 2014, 12:53:11 PM |
|
Not to downplay the hard work done by the devs and all involved here, but I'm noticing grammar errors still on the official website and on twitter which really affects peoples reactions to the coin in my opinion.
It was mentioned some weeks ago that someone could grammar check all notices and make things look more professional, but still the pigeon English continues.
I'm sorry for those who don't have English as their first language but if the coin is to break forward I think its an issue to address.
Would you be interested in proofreading the contents? I will donate you 10k LTCD I'm tempted to do that, although due to work I may not be able to do it everyday. |
|
|
|
|
|
BitCoin Operated Boy
|
|
October 21, 2014, 01:00:44 PM |
|
Not to downplay the hard work done by the devs and all involved here, but I'm noticing grammar errors still on the official website and on twitter which really affects peoples reactions to the coin in my opinion.
It was mentioned some weeks ago that someone could grammar check all notices and make things look more professional, but still the pigeon English continues.
I'm sorry for those who don't have English as their first language but if the coin is to break forward I think its an issue to address.
Would you be interested in proofreading the contents? I will donate you 10k LTCD I'm tempted to do that, although due to work I may not be able to do it everyday. There will be new page coming, once the video contest ends. There will be a bit of translation to do. I've tried to help with proofreading, according to my abilities, as English is not my first language neither. I don't think there will be that much to translate on the website but devs may need your help to occasionally proofread opp and news. You would need to ask the devs about it. I could donate you 10k LTCD once your proofread all new website. I will transfer 10k to dev's donation address, if you agree. It has to be confirmed with devs first. |
|
|
|
|
|
Martin958
|
|
October 21, 2014, 01:02:22 PM |
|
Merged Mining with BTCD & LTCD (vice versa) would be very interesting !
[/quote]
Could we take a community vote on this?
It sounds like an exciting proposition if its actually possible to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
