|
cvaky
|
 |
February 10, 2015, 05:30:42 AM |
|
Guys we should more vote. Vote for Kryptohash https://c-cex.com/?id=voteWe will have new algo version 2, so we need better exchange. C-cex is not the best, but still ok before bittrex :-) . |
|
|
|
|
sine_fuc
Member
 Offline
Activity: 62
Merit: 10
|
|
February 10, 2015, 08:02:43 AM
Last edit: February 11, 2015, 01:13:03 AM by sine_fuc |
|
Guys we should more vote. Vote for Kryptohash https://c-cex.com/?id=voteWe will have new algo version 2, so we need better exchange. C-cex is not the best, but still ok before bittrex :-) . That voting page link should be placed on the op. Perhaps we need some btc to get KHC listed at cex. |
|
|
|
horizontalcareer
Member
Offline
Activity: 93
Merit: 10
|
|
February 11, 2015, 06:12:20 PM |
|
DRK has almost doubled during the past 24 hours because of the release of official InstantX.
@Dev,could KHC develop a similar masternode and InstantX to speed up transation and reduce the risk of being attacted ?
|
|
|
|
|
scamkiller
|
|
February 20, 2015, 04:28:40 PM |
|
Why does Android wallet need the network to transite from KSHAKE320 version 1 to KSHAKE320 version 2?
What's the difference between KSHAKE320 version 1 and KSHAKE320 version 2?
It is better to wait for the network to transition to version 2 so, I don't have to worry about making substantial changes to yet another Wallet. After testing 4 candidates for the KSHAKE320v2 over last couple of weeks, I decided to go with the simplest change to the Algorithm. Simple is always the best, IMO. This new algorithm will only be 2% slower than version 1 in GPUs and yet, it will still work as a preemptive strike against possible future ASIC implementations by requiring more computing power to those choosing not to use RAM. Other algos I tested were pretty much forcing the usage of RAM but, they were as much as 40% slower than algo version 1. Hi,wr104,when will the KSHAKE320 version 2 be released? |
|
|
|
|
wr104 (OP)
|
|
February 20, 2015, 04:47:13 PM |
|
Testing using the TestNet has been good so far. I'm keeping the amount of changes to a minimum to prevent unpleasant surprises. I think the new Wallet 0.5.0 and cgminer 3.7.7 could be released sometime next week. If you want, you can go to GitHub and look at what I've checked in to kryptohash branch 0.5.0.
The plan is to transition the network to version 2 beginning at block 50,000. Everybody will need to upgrade their Wallets before Block 49,000 to ensure a smooth transition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
scamkiller
|
|
February 21, 2015, 02:21:18 AM |
|
Testing using the TestNet has been good so far. I'm keeping the amount of changes to a minimum to prevent unpleasant surprises. I think the new Wallet 0.5.0 and cgminer 3.7.7 could be released sometime next week. If you want, you can go to GitHub and look at what I've checked in to kryptohash branch 0.5.0.
The plan is to transition the network to version 2 beginning at block 50,000. Everybody will need to upgrade their Wallets before Block 49,000 to ensure a smooth transition.
Thanks,wr104,please notify nonce-pool  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
cvaky
|
|
February 23, 2015, 05:52:46 PM |
|
Great, I will rent, if somebody provide rig there. |
|
|
|
|
|
binary_tree
|
|
February 25, 2015, 06:49:37 AM |
|
The Android wallet will come after the network transitions from KSHAKE320 version 1 to KSHAKE320 version 2.
Changing the algo itself isn't a big deal but, making the network to transition smoothly to the new algo version is a big task. So far, the work has been 10x greater than what I originally expected and I'm going to have to run few simulations in the testnet to ensure there won't be unpleasant surprises when the switch comes.
@wr104,Why does Android wallet need the network to transite from KSHAKE320 version 1 to KSHAKE320 version 2? What's the difference between KSHAKE320 version 1 and KSHAKE320 version 2? I also want to know the difference.  |
|
|
|
|
wr104 (OP)
|
|
February 25, 2015, 08:24:09 PM |
|
KSHAKE320 Algorithm version 2 is a preemptive strike against potential future ASIC implementations. While, it keeps the hashing performance on GPUs about the same, it does increase the computing cost on ASICs.
I'm planning on releasing the new Wallet 0.5.0 and cgminer 3.7.7 this weekend. Stay tuned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
happyaltminer
|
|
February 25, 2015, 08:33:45 PM
Last edit: February 25, 2015, 11:19:11 PM by happyaltminer |
|
KSHAKE320 Algorithm version 2 is a preemptive strike against potential future ASIC implementations. While, it keeps the hashing performance on GPUs about the same, it does increase the computing cost on ASICs.
I'm planning on releasing the new Wallet 0.5.0 and cgminer 3.7.7 this weekend. Stay tuned.
Only 3 day left this week,I am waiting for your new wallet and miner.  |
|
|
|
linearzone
Member
Offline
Activity: 64
Merit: 10
|
|
February 26, 2015, 01:36:09 AM |
|
When will the region1 ,region2,... be used?  |
|
|
|
linearzone
Member
Offline
Activity: 64
Merit: 10
|
|
February 26, 2015, 01:43:44 AM |
|
Dev,could you reduce or remove the transaction fee please ? |
|
|
|
|
WORE
|
|
February 26, 2015, 05:08:40 AM |
|
Dev,could you reduce or remove the transaction fee please ? Um, as a miner? No. I think this was covered earlier in the thread. To send 10K KHC requires 50 KHC as a fee, not really that bad compared to sending cash, and the miner that solves the block gets the fee. |
|
|
|
|
linearzone
Member
Offline
Activity: 64
Merit: 10
|
|
February 26, 2015, 06:29:59 AM |
|
Dev,could you reduce or remove the transaction fee please ? Um, as a miner? No. I think this was covered earlier in the thread. To send 10K KHC requires 50 KHC as a fee, not really that bad compared to sending cash, and the miner that solves the block gets the fee. what if the price is thousands of satoshi ? High transaction fee inhibits the liquidity. |
|
|
|
|
WORE
|
|
February 26, 2015, 06:34:30 AM |
|
Dev,could you reduce or remove the transaction fee please ? Um, as a miner? No. I think this was covered earlier in the thread. To send 10K KHC requires 50 KHC as a fee, not really that bad compared to sending cash, and the miner that solves the block gets the fee. what if the price is thousands of satoshi ? High transaction fee inhibits the liquidity. If there is no incentive to mine the coin, then no one will. I'd say that would inhibit liquidity in a way that will impact the coin far worse. The fee doesn't apply to trades on exchanges, just from wallet to wallet. |
|
|
|
|
linearzone
Member
Offline
Activity: 64
Merit: 10
|
|
February 26, 2015, 06:44:22 AM |
|
Dev,could you reduce or remove the transaction fee please ? Um, as a miner? No. I think this was covered earlier in the thread. To send 10K KHC requires 50 KHC as a fee, not really that bad compared to sending cash, and the miner that solves the block gets the fee. what if the price is thousands of satoshi ? High transaction fee inhibits the liquidity. If there is no incentive to mine the coin, then no one will. I'd say that would inhibit liquidity in a way that will impact the coin far worse. The fee doesn't apply to trades on exchanges, just from wallet to wallet. Are you sure there is no fee from wallet to wallet? |
|
|
|
|
Riseman
|
|
February 26, 2015, 06:57:49 AM |
|
If there is no incentive to mine the coin, then no one will.
Is there no block reward? Did I miss something? |
|
|
|
|
|
wr104 (OP)
|
|
February 26, 2015, 04:07:39 PM |
|
The current transaction fee is half of 1 percent or, 5 KHCs for every 1,000 KHCs you want to send.
In your opinion, What would be the appropriate transaction fee?
|
|
|
|
|
|
WORE
|
|
February 26, 2015, 06:31:57 PM |
|
The current transaction fee is half of 1 percent or, 5 KHCs for every 1,000 KHCs you want to send.
In your opinion, What would be the appropriate transaction fee?
As a miner, how about 5% |
|
|
|
|
|
