◈◈Bitcredit ◈◈ Migrating to UniQredit◈◈

[bitcreditscc]

I've been telling people for 18 months that a single crappy old celeron could handle the entire Bitcoin blockchain with ease, and probably that of every other active altcoin simultaneously. They look at me (or type at me anyway) like I'm crazy for thinking that anything under a petawatt's worth of compute power could possibly cope.

Anyway, BCR's blockchain is currently humming along on a bit more than one crappy celeron, but not much - ("networkhashps" : 1,) - and I just squeezed over 300 txes into block 205593 and ... no issues, surprise. I shall be consolidating the rest of my BN payments shortly.  

Competitive PoW is utterly fucking daft.  


Also, it occurs to me that another aspect of BCR being, among other things, a (worlds first?) p2p hedge fund is that assuming the bid price follows to some extent the market price, any pumping will result in permanently locked in value.

BCR is one of a very few (Xaurum, backed by gold?) cryptocurrencies that can't be dumped to zero, assuming any of the underlying assets still have market value.

I'm confused. When I have a BN running do I setgenerate true or how is it "BN only mining"? also, are all your nodes running from the same machine? because i gave up yesterday trying to run more than 2 on my vps.

Slowly, people will start to get it.

@ pro, you know that the eventual system design will encourage every BN to participate in mining right? I tried running 8 off my 8 core box, no such luck. The computing requirements are getting higher, as such for a single core VPS i encourage running only one BN.

Full BN only mining will come in a few weeks, for now my focus has been debugging the existing material , fork resolution and fine tuning the bidding code. Over the next few days , the git will light up once again with more code and fixes as i start work towards 0.30.18

I see.
Yes I knew BN mining would eventually be encouraged I just didn't know if there was an actual command to make the BN mine or just by simply running the QT. Also will a cold node setup work aswell? or does the BN need to be running with the wallet.dat holding the funds in order to mine?

Cold setup is an important security feature that we will keep. for now just use the typical setgenerate true. Later versions will take banknode=1 to also mean setgenerate true

[alganonim]

Let's be honest it impossible to mine right now on all your BNs when you got more then 8 and you're using 1 even powerful VPS.

1 BN mining uses 1GB Ram and 1 CPU core,  I'm trying to use for some time 2 BNs mining on 2 core CPU with 2 GB Ram and 4Gb Swap, both cores are fully used, but still I don't see any 4.05 BCR fees incoming. (bitcredit-cli setgenerate true 1   , 1 core per 1 BN) this is cold BN on VPS

So I'm using also few home hot BNs wallets  (not the same as these 2 on cold VPS) and these works, 4.05 BCR are incoming for every BN. I know that all should work on 1 machine but it would be too much expensive and we are not escaping from "backing hot air" this way ...

If in future banknode=1 will mean setgenerate true without giving any option, then we will be again backing a hot air, VPS sellers will be very happy instead of ASIC makers.

BTW. how it will work, Intel Atom core will be enough to start mining the same way as Intel i5 just giving smaller hashrate, how about roseberry ?

Trying a new windows wallet on another machine and got the same problem starting as many of you, didn't start even once.

[bitcreditscc]

Let's be honest it impossible to mine right now on all your BNs when you got more then 8 and you're using 1 even powerful VPS.

1 BN mining uses 1GB Ram and 1 CPU core,  I'm trying to use for some time 2 BNs mining on 2 core CPU with 2 GB Ram and 4Gb Swap, both cores are fully used, but still I don't see any 4.05 BCR fees incoming. (bitcredit-cli setgenerate true 1   , 1 core per 1 BN) this is cold BN on VPS

So I'm using also few home hot BNs wallets  (not the same as these 2 on cold VPS) and these works, 4.05 BCR are incoming for every BN. I know that all should work on 1 machine but it would be too much expensive and we are not escaping from "backing hot air" this way ...

If in future banknode=1 will mean setgenerate true without giving any option, then we will be again backing a hot air, VPS sellers will be very happy instead of ASIC makers.

BTW. how it will work, Intel Atom core will be enough to start mining the same way as Intel i5 just giving smaller hashrate, how about roseberry ?

Trying a new windows wallet on another machine and got the same problem starting as many of you, didn't start even once.

By design each user/dac is expected to have one or two BNs only, the reason people can afford 3+ is because we are all early adopters, but moving forward as the backing increases we'll likely see the distribution change. My reference to VPS is made simply because the vast majority of users prefer them over running local nodes. Mining uses 750MB per core.... the "hot air" was escaped the moment we proved we could distribute coins in a fashion that does does not reward wastage on VPS and asics. By "expensive" to run a node, you are still looking at mining as a competitive single way to actually get profit....basically a remnant of "hot air" mentality.

A single BN in say 450 total BNs @ and a BN payout of 8 BCR, mining reward 8 BCR would get 32 BCR per day. @ a price of 1c each, that is $0.32 per day , almost $10 a month. If you are running this off a local node, then it's pure profit . using a VPS for online reliability would be break even... see where i am going? For any activity in crypto to make sense, we need to have assured minimum values that can support the basics....so instead of funneling funding to power companies, amazon and AMD , it now goes to backing BCR.

We now have a functional chain that works off our everyday machines, meaning no additional costs for it's existence and once i throw in the last BN mining stuff, completely (well...reasonably) secure. And with every additional bid, the price only ever improves.

[thelonecrouton]

Let's be honest it impossible to mine right now on all your BNs when you got more then 8 and you're using 1 even powerful VPS.

1 BN mining uses 1GB Ram and 1 CPU core,  I'm trying to use for some time 2 BNs mining on 2 core CPU with 2 GB Ram and 4Gb Swap, both cores are fully used, but still I don't see any 4.05 BCR fees incoming. (bitcredit-cli setgenerate true 1   , 1 core per 1 BN) this is cold BN on VPS

So I'm using also few home hot BNs wallets  (not the same as these 2 on cold VPS) and these works, 4.05 BCR are incoming for every BN. I know that all should work on 1 machine but it would be too much expensive and we are not escaping from "backing hot air" this way ...

If in future banknode=1 will mean setgenerate true without giving any option, then we will be again backing a hot air, VPS sellers will be very happy instead of ASIC makers.

BTW. how it will work, Intel Atom core will be enough to start mining the same way as Intel i5 just giving smaller hashrate, how about roseberry ?

100 Pi2 Banknodes would be 20x more decentralised than almost any other PoW currency.

As for hot air, yes it's not perfect, but right now DASH for example has about 80GH/s chundering away, which is what, equivalent to about 40000 Ti750's or something ludicrous? 40000 * 30W = 1.2 Megawatts. And that's not counting the rest of the system, all the less power-efficient AMD cards, CPUs etc - 3+ Megawatts is probably closer to the truth.

3MW @ $0.10/kW/h = $7200/day.
Miners get 1300 DASH/day which is currently worth about $3000.

So unless you're getting your power at under $0.05/kW you're not even breaking even on DASH mining. "But I get electricity for free!" - Uh huh, someone has to pay for it you freeloading oaf. 

Dog alone knows what the actual power consumption of the Bitcoin network is, ASICs or not I bet it's orders of magnitude worse than DASH.
Some basic Googling puts it at >200MW.

100 Pi's at <1W each seems rather more sensible... BCR can beat every other PoW currency in actual decentralisation for the cost of running a couple of light bulbs. Think about that hideously expensive energy delta as money going into backing BCR instead.  

And yes, because BNs will not be allowed to mine consecutive blocks, a low power ARM device would be just fine, there's no point wasting any more energy.

[dragos_bdi]

@bitcreditscc

there is a problem starting the daemon (probably this is the problem with qt also).
the daemon was started without blockchain.
the segmentation is at instantX transaction scanning

Reading symbols from ./bitcreditd...done.
(gdb) run
Starting program: /root/bitcreditd
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/share/gdb/auto-load/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6.0.19-gdb.py", line 63, in <module>
    from libstdcxx.v6.printers import register_libstdcxx_printers
ImportError: No module named 'libstdcxx'
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
Using host libthread_db library "/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libthread_db.so.1".
[New Thread 0x7ffff0cfe700 (LWP 25472)]
[New Thread 0x7ffff04fd700 (LWP 25473)]
[New Thread 0x7fffefcfc700 (LWP 25474)]
[New Thread 0x7fffef4fb700 (LWP 25475)]
[New Thread 0x7fffeecfa700 (LWP 25476)]
[New Thread 0x7fffee4f9700 (LWP 25477)]
[New Thread 0x7fffedcf8700 (LWP 25478)]
[New Thread 0x7fffed4f7700 (LWP 25479)]
[New Thread 0x7fffeccf6700 (LWP 25480)]
[New Thread 0x7fffdffff700 (LWP 25481)]
[New Thread 0x7fffdf7fe700 (LWP 25482)]
[New Thread 0x7fffdeffd700 (LWP 25483)]

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
CheckBlock (block=..., state=..., fCheckPOW=<optimized out>, fCheckMerkleRoot=<optimized out>) at main.cpp:2990

[bitcreditscc]

@bitcreditscc

there is a problem starting the daemon (probably this is the problem with qt also).
the daemon was started without blockchain.
the segmentation is at instantX transaction scanning

Reading symbols from ./bitcreditd...done.
(gdb) run
Starting program: /root/bitcreditd
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/share/gdb/auto-load/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6.0.19-gdb.py", line 63, in <module>
    from libstdcxx.v6.printers import register_libstdcxx_printers
ImportError: No module named 'libstdcxx'
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
Using host libthread_db library "/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libthread_db.so.1".
[New Thread 0x7ffff0cfe700 (LWP 25472)]
[New Thread 0x7ffff04fd700 (LWP 25473)]
[New Thread 0x7fffefcfc700 (LWP 25474)]
[New Thread 0x7fffef4fb700 (LWP 25475)]
[New Thread 0x7fffeecfa700 (LWP 25476)]
[New Thread 0x7fffee4f9700 (LWP 25477)]
[New Thread 0x7fffedcf8700 (LWP 25478)]
[New Thread 0x7fffed4f7700 (LWP 25479)]
[New Thread 0x7fffeccf6700 (LWP 25480)]
[New Thread 0x7fffdffff700 (LWP 25481)]
[New Thread 0x7fffdf7fe700 (LWP 25482)]
[New Thread 0x7fffdeffd700 (LWP 25483)]

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
CheckBlock (block=..., state=..., fCheckPOW=<optimized out>, fCheckMerkleRoot=<optimized out>) at main.cpp:2990

Taking a look, though mine has been syncing all this time.

[cisahasa]

Let's be honest it impossible to mine right now on all your BNs when you got more then 8 and you're using 1 even powerful VPS.

1 BN mining uses 1GB Ram and 1 CPU core,  I'm trying to use for some time 2 BNs mining on 2 core CPU with 2 GB Ram and 4Gb Swap, both cores are fully used, but still I don't see any 4.05 BCR fees incoming. (bitcredit-cli setgenerate true 1   , 1 core per 1 BN) this is cold BN on VPS

So I'm using also few home hot BNs wallets  (not the same as these 2 on cold VPS) and these works, 4.05 BCR are incoming for every BN. I know that all should work on 1 machine but it would be too much expensive and we are not escaping from "backing hot air" this way ...

If in future banknode=1 will mean setgenerate true without giving any option, then we will be again backing a hot air, VPS sellers will be very happy instead of ASIC makers.

BTW. how it will work, Intel Atom core will be enough to start mining the same way as Intel i5 just giving smaller hashrate, how about roseberry ?

100 Pi2 Banknodes would be 20x more decentralised than almost any other PoW currency.

As for hot air, yes it's not perfect, but right now DASH for example has about 80GH/s chundering away, which is what, equivalent to about 40000 Ti750's or something ludicrous? 40000 * 30W = 1.2 Megawatts. And that's not counting the rest of the system, all the less power-efficient AMD cards, CPUs etc - 3+ Megawatts is probably closer to the truth.

Dog alone knows what the actual power consumption of the Bitcoin network is, ASICs or not I bet it's orders of magnitude worse than DASH.

100 Pi's at <1W each seems rather more sensible... BCR can beat every other PoW currency in actual decentralisation for the cost of running a couple of light bulbs. Think about that hideously expensive energy delta as money going into backing BCR instead.  

And yes, because BNs will not be allowed to mine consecutive blocks, a low power ARM device would be just fine, there's no point wasting any more energy.

money to vps or asics..
someone tell the solution
burst tried one..

i think i have a idea that could work and costs no energy..

[BarTeam]

can you guys confirm you still can create new addresses and import them?

I might be overlooking something... just got the following error while importing a private key (with wallet unlocked and synched):

Code:

error: {"code":-5,"message":"Invalid private key encoding"}

[bitcreditscc]

I plan to make a public offer to any communities who whose coins lack a dev or, coins that have strong communities but no direction. The offer will be as follows :-

Our bidding process will be expanded with a secondary system that lists all accepted and interested coins, essentially we would encourage them to burn their coins and be allocated new coins on our chain. As it stands we have a 6 000 000 BCR fund that has remained untouched since the very first day , over the months there has never been any real use for it and now that we have moved to backing our coin with assets..it seems an unnecessary item. Rather than burn the coins or use them/sell whatever, i think it's a great opportunity to expand the BCR community while at the same time possibly draining value from other coins and adding it to our own. 

We would of course have stringent requirements for a coin to qualify and include as much oversight as we can. I think that the potential increase in community size and subsequent interest in ideas like bidding, BN mining could have some serious benefits for all.

Thoughts ?

[bitcreditscc]

can you guys confirm you still can create new addresses and import them?

I might be overlooking something... just got the following error while importing a private key (with wallet unlocked and synched):

Code:

error: {"code":-5,"message":"Invalid private key encoding"}

Hi

What type of key and from which chain are you trying to import, using which client version? All standard BTC/LTC/DASH keys should import pretty easily.

oh.. and on this subject , how would you guys like the extra utility of being able to use the same one private key across all these chains?

Say you get one BCR privkey and just translate it into the various chains you want...essentially meaning that you could instead of keeping a ton of privkeys...just store the one, that you can use on all BTC based chains?

[dbt1033]

Having some issues installing bitcredit-qt on Windows 8.1

It crashes on startup.  Any thoughts?

[dextronomous]

Yes like the key chain idea on all btc ltc dash keys.

When will it be possible that these wallets start up without crash or error. could you not have a chat with the maia coin
or x14 coin dev. guys makes great wallets.. hope to hear ya soon on this one.

a whole day has passed one wallet started and synced. and is giving me @&#@* inside the bitcredit.conf file.

then again the other one won't budge. move an inch. just errrooooor.. some gigabyte of memory like 12 or cores like 8 right now here, still no go.

please help
thanks again

[proletariat]

I plan to make a public offer to any communities who whose coins lack a dev or, coins that have strong communities but no direction. The offer will be as follows :-

Our bidding process will be expanded with a secondary system that lists all accepted and interested coins, essentially we would encourage them to burn their coins and be allocated new coins on our chain. As it stands we have a 6 000 000 BCR fund that has remained untouched since the very first day , over the months there has never been any real use for it and now that we have moved to backing our coin with assets..it seems an unnecessary item. Rather than burn the coins or use them/sell whatever, i think it's a great opportunity to expand the BCR community while at the same time possibly draining value from other coins and adding it to our own. 

We would of course have stringent requirements for a coin to qualify and include as much oversight as we can. I think that the potential increase in community size and subsequent interest in ideas like bidding, BN mining could have some serious benefits for all.

Thoughts ?

Very interesting idea, it would surely expand the BCR community. Just replying without much thought but the first thing that comes to mind is:  wouldn't create more value for the 'guest coin' seeing its supply diminished? and less value for current BCR holders 'shares'?  

[bitcreditscc]

Having some issues installing bitcredit-qt on Windows 8.1

It crashes on startup.  Any thoughts?

This has been an issue for a while, it is the result of a/some race condition(s) @ start-up. I intend to follow these up ASAP, it had been slated for this weekend, but i ended up using Saturday to put out fires.

For now just keep trying to restart, mine starts after two or three tries. Ubuntu/ *nix starts immediately though.not sure why.

[bitcreditscc]

Yes like the key chain idea on all btc ltc dash keys.

When will it be possible that these wallets start up without crash or error. could you not have a chat with the maia coin
or x14 coin dev. guys makes great wallets.. hope to hear ya soon on this one.

a whole day has passed one wallet started and synced. and is giving me @&#@* inside the bitcredit.conf file.

then again the other one won't budge. move an inch. just errrooooor.. some gigabyte of memory like 12 or cores like 8 right now here, still no go.

please help
thanks again

most developers/communities are cooperation shy. I'll give it a try though. Put up your debug.log on pastebin and i'll take a look.

[bitcreditscc]

I plan to make a public offer to any communities who whose coins lack a dev or, coins that have strong communities but no direction. The offer will be as follows :-

Our bidding process will be expanded with a secondary system that lists all accepted and interested coins, essentially we would encourage them to burn their coins and be allocated new coins on our chain. As it stands we have a 6 000 000 BCR fund that has remained untouched since the very first day , over the months there has never been any real use for it and now that we have moved to backing our coin with assets..it seems an unnecessary item. Rather than burn the coins or use them/sell whatever, i think it's a great opportunity to expand the BCR community while at the same time possibly draining value from other coins and adding it to our own. 

We would of course have stringent requirements for a coin to qualify and include as much oversight as we can. I think that the potential increase in community size and subsequent interest in ideas like bidding, BN mining could have some serious benefits for all.

Thoughts ?

Very interesting idea, it would surely expand the BCR community. Just replying without much thought but the first thing that comes to mind is:  wouldn't create more value for the 'guest coin' seeing its supply diminished? and less value for current BCR holders 'shares'?  

Well, in essence that depends on the status of that coin, there are coins that are literally dying off due to scandals, lack of developers(pump dump and run) , or just lack direction. After stringent assessment, we would have a list of viable coins, after which when the bidding is done, we allocate them BCR. Their bids would in turn be dumped on the hold outs who chose not to join us...so no... those coins would not gain value...rather depending on % interest and buy support, they would lose value.

Many of these have active members who actually contribute to the discussions and in some cases offer related services that accept the coin. The idea is to turn that attention here, because if we expand the community the pool of possible bidders expands...and the backed price has more potential to rise. We would gain 1) more member (hopefully productive ones) 2) value off the BTC made from dumping on the hold outs 3) larger pool of potential BN owners and bidders.

Most of them would gain  1) steady community (strength in numbers) 2) active continuous development 3) Direction 4) multiple revenue streams from within our system and 5) Access to all the tech and ideas we plunder from the coins who opt in(if there actually was anything useful beyond cloning).

This is a community decision and i'd really appreciate input fro as any as possible.

[proletariat]

I plan to make a public offer to any communities who whose coins lack a dev or, coins that have strong communities but no direction. The offer will be as follows :-

Our bidding process will be expanded with a secondary system that lists all accepted and interested coins, essentially we would encourage them to burn their coins and be allocated new coins on our chain. As it stands we have a 6 000 000 BCR fund that has remained untouched since the very first day , over the months there has never been any real use for it and now that we have moved to backing our coin with assets..it seems an unnecessary item. Rather than burn the coins or use them/sell whatever, i think it's a great opportunity to expand the BCR community while at the same time possibly draining value from other coins and adding it to our own.  

We would of course have stringent requirements for a coin to qualify and include as much oversight as we can. I think that the potential increase in community size and subsequent interest in ideas like bidding, BN mining could have some serious benefits for all.

Thoughts ?

Very interesting idea, it would surely expand the BCR community. Just replying without much thought but the first thing that comes to mind is:  wouldn't create more value for the 'guest coin' seeing its supply diminished? and less value for current BCR holders 'shares'?  

Well, in essence that depends on the status of that coin, there are coins that are literally dying off due to scandals, lack of developers(pump dump and run) , or just lack direction. After stringent assessment, we would have a list of viable coins, after which when the bidding is done, we allocate them BCR. Their bids would in turn be dumped on the hold outs who chose not to join us...so no... those coins would not gain value...rather depending on % interest and buy support, they would lose value.

Many of these have active members who actually contribute to the discussions and in some cases offer related services that accept the coin. The idea is to turn that attention here, because if we expand the community the pool of possible bidders expands...and the backed price has more potential to rise. We would gain 1) more member (hopefully productive ones) 2) value off the BTC made from dumping on the hold outs 3) larger pool of potential BN owners and bidders.

Most of them would gain  1) steady community (strength in numbers) 2) active continuous development 3) Direction 4) multiple revenue streams from within our system and 5) Access to all the tech and ideas we plunder from the coins who opt in(if there actually was anything useful beyond cloning).

This is a community decision and i'd really appreciate input fro as any as possible.

Hmm you truly make an excellent case for it. No current opposition from this community member. Cons: possible eventual spite from the minorities die-hard believers from those coins too. We would also inherit the troll and fud squads... Would like to hear more cons but currently the pros outweigh the cons by far IMO.

.....



**EDIT***

CON: potential (very probable) BCR dump from the newly acquired coins by other coin communities............. redeemable coins for BCR could be inflated to try and mitigate that though

[bitcreditscc]

I plan to make a public offer to any communities who whose coins lack a dev or, coins that have strong communities but no direction. The offer will be as follows :-

Our bidding process will be expanded with a secondary system that lists all accepted and interested coins, essentially we would encourage them to burn their coins and be allocated new coins on our chain. As it stands we have a 6 000 000 BCR fund that has remained untouched since the very first day , over the months there has never been any real use for it and now that we have moved to backing our coin with assets..it seems an unnecessary item. Rather than burn the coins or use them/sell whatever, i think it's a great opportunity to expand the BCR community while at the same time possibly draining value from other coins and adding it to our own.  

We would of course have stringent requirements for a coin to qualify and include as much oversight as we can. I think that the potential increase in community size and subsequent interest in ideas like bidding, BN mining could have some serious benefits for all.

Thoughts ?

Very interesting idea, it would surely expand the BCR community. Just replying without much thought but the first thing that comes to mind is:  wouldn't create more value for the 'guest coin' seeing its supply diminished? and less value for current BCR holders 'shares'?  

Well, in essence that depends on the status of that coin, there are coins that are literally dying off due to scandals, lack of developers(pump dump and run) , or just lack direction. After stringent assessment, we would have a list of viable coins, after which when the bidding is done, we allocate them BCR. Their bids would in turn be dumped on the hold outs who chose not to join us...so no... those coins would not gain value...rather depending on % interest and buy support, they would lose value.

Many of these have active members who actually contribute to the discussions and in some cases offer related services that accept the coin. The idea is to turn that attention here, because if we expand the community the pool of possible bidders expands...and the backed price has more potential to rise. We would gain 1) more member (hopefully productive ones) 2) value off the BTC made from dumping on the hold outs 3) larger pool of potential BN owners and bidders.

Most of them would gain  1) steady community (strength in numbers) 2) active continuous development 3) Direction 4) multiple revenue streams from within our system and 5) Access to all the tech and ideas we plunder from the coins who opt in(if there actually was anything useful beyond cloning).

This is a community decision and i'd really appreciate input fro as any as possible.

Hmm you truly make an excellent case for it. No current opposition from this community member. Cons: possible eventual spite from the minorities die-hard believers from those coins too. We would also inherit the troll and fud squads... Would like to hear more cons but currently the pros outweigh the cons by far IMO.

.....



**EDIT***

CON: potential (very probable) BCR dump from the newly acquired coins by other coin communities............. redeemable coins for BCR could be inflated to try and mitigate that though

yeah, i'd also like to hear more arguments against it / for it

@ 6 million with maybe a 1-2 months bidding window....i'm not sure about the dumping, it's possible, but also depends on how much is bid.... we are guaranteeing a % of coins proportional to each addresses' bids. In the event that there is little interest, yes there would be that danger , but i suspect some enterprising BCR holders would buy small chunks of the cheap bidding coins and soak up the even cheaper credits....i definitely would

[BarTeam]

can you guys confirm you still can create new addresses and import them?

I might be overlooking something... just got the following error while importing a private key (with wallet unlocked and synched):

Code:

error: {"code":-5,"message":"Invalid private key encoding"}

Hi

What type of key and from which chain are you trying to import, using which client version? All standard BTC/LTC/DASH keys should import pretty easily.

oh.. and on this subject , how would you guys like the extra utility of being able to use the same one private key across all these chains?

Say you get one BCR privkey and just translate it into the various chains you want...essentially meaning that you could instead of keeping a ton of privkeys...just store the one, that you can use on all BTC based chains?

BCR key ... ? I have just issued... a new one.. to be sure again
Windows Client 0.30.17.1 (bitcreditd.exe or the qt version is the same thing)
Chain..
        "height" : 205124,
        "hash" : "0024b8557ab2c3d414da544734d8e7a9e739999ec8ef45345646d82a0948979b",
        "branchlen" : 0,
        "status" : "active"

[bitcreditscc]

can you guys confirm you still can create new addresses and import them?

I might be overlooking something... just got the following error while importing a private key (with wallet unlocked and synched):

Code:

error: {"code":-5,"message":"Invalid private key encoding"}

Hi

What type of key and from which chain are you trying to import, using which client version? All standard BTC/LTC/DASH keys should import pretty easily.

oh.. and on this subject , how would you guys like the extra utility of being able to use the same one private key across all these chains?

Say you get one BCR privkey and just translate it into the various chains you want...essentially meaning that you could instead of keeping a ton of privkeys...just store the one, that you can use on all BTC based chains?

BCR key ... ? I have just issued... a new one.. to be sure again
Windows Client 0.30.17.1 (bitcreditd.exe or the qt version is the same thing)
Chain..
        "height" : 205124,
        "hash" : "0024b8557ab2c3d414da544734d8e7a9e739999ec8ef45345646d82a0948979b",
        "branchlen" : 0,
        "status" : "active"

wait for a new build based off the current git.