Topic: [ANN] Datacoin - Censorship-Free Data Storage - page 2. (Read 66848 times)
Are there still issues with this coin?
Hi guys,
Does any one have any ideas what's going on with Datacoin.
Had zero issues mining for months, now i can mine for hours, BUT every time i shut wallet and re-open, i have to do a full re-index....
This also happens with my "bank" wallet...
Getting a little bit bored of this now
Any ideas please.
Does any one have any ideas what's going on with Datacoin.
Had zero issues mining for months, now i can mine for hours, BUT every time i shut wallet and re-open, i have to do a full re-index....
This also happens with my "bank" wallet...
Getting a little bit bored of this now
Any ideas please.
dtc.graymines.net
Dear users!
Mine is shut down, hopefully temporarily.
There was a problem, somehow you managed to "dig" about 200k more DTC than was actually dug.
With the funds that have now appeared manual withdrawals have been made for some of you based on balances from the database.
Another problem is that the transactions from the backup wallet do not go online and are not confirmed, so you cannot get the rest.
Please wait patiently for an update.
These are withdrawals made manually, based on the balance from the database.
The mine has no more funds available for withdrawals.
As soon as I manage to transfer the funds from the backup wallet, the rest will be paid out.
PS.
Please bear in mind that I very rarely look at the forum and read your messages.
Especially that the mine has existed for a couple of years, I maintain it charitably at my own expense so that the project does not collapse - as we all know DTC have no value nowadays.
Dear users!
Mine is shut down, hopefully temporarily.
There was a problem, somehow you managed to "dig" about 200k more DTC than was actually dug.
With the funds that have now appeared manual withdrawals have been made for some of you based on balances from the database.
Another problem is that the transactions from the backup wallet do not go online and are not confirmed, so you cannot get the rest.
Please wait patiently for an update.
Code:
DGmwKtGuqZsJWtFAKwqVFayvWXSnvbTiYe 217 graymines
7381731dd112e9bbbf3af225128fdd1c2bae75c33f225cea2fc70c9dd609f83c
DQ3FKBmTPWoH4F7Rtj22NFZxahyyyPaddy 237 graymines
3ac47ea1a909da47f961601c1f2fb80d07b32798af71ef5cf3c0c63cd7ee6ce0
DCEZ4CKixPRQ3A1ykL4sJ7z3YQLigsdUz5 280 graymines
a46a18dc1fe2d3b682e6523d0b93ffe640892703bfc36929b1d33dcbeaf64575
D67L8aRaZe9Mj3KCeydLK6WxCuPhkvkK87 377 graymines
00f00e98d3e86377d0249716013d2d2acb56bc8dcfc804948f58fea54674e932
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 5000 graymines
93716781c6a0967ed18dfb77115b532f2c26cbcc2260392c435c3b6840d3b952
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 10000 graymines
0c3b2ece944bd5aa706275536fa6feea31cc13ad7669bc92e8f3ff88fc508ee7
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 10000 graymines
5772c742dd1568ca3c56e0a3a5f70b84c88df7c5155ea3a9ba8df3ef3a5595d2
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 608 graymines
9a7fe9ba65267017c5d73114a65cb32a22c28e5948d32db5c9c59fb7a1a93099
D5NtW3gYBA69Kvov9iN5T1QUptYpzrCrJd 10000 graymines
933aa7dbb82edddc9be8fa5099f53669f64ba672df99e6d2f2199b240653bdba
These are withdrawals made manually, based on the balance from the database.
The mine has no more funds available for withdrawals.
As soon as I manage to transfer the funds from the backup wallet, the rest will be paid out.
PS.
Please bear in mind that I very rarely look at the forum and read your messages.
Especially that the mine has existed for a couple of years, I maintain it charitably at my own expense so that the project does not collapse - as we all know DTC have no value nowadays.
Code:
DGopJYgnT5za5u64BPD1J4Hrt3ewEAqG2h 10000 graymines
97fbd729e163b4c6c3538f593bfa08ae8f3088bd3ab938c8c3864081daf3ce0d
D5NtW3gYBA69Kvov9iN5T1QUptYpzrCrJd 6000 graymines
0b560e0606819338be36bc68430210ca66fab5f81e92b39dec8200429edce785
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 350 graymines
c78c37ee05b8290a7b65e9c35186cfd133eac2319b419b5d26c7a75b33d0f24c
DGopJYgnT5za5u64BPD1J4Hrt3ewEAqG2h 2000 graymines
7e0fb49080b1fb71cfce623e5743d199231fb4c248f78b16859bcc1937e36296
dLeqozLLkdKAQSFJ7evtWCiWNoFcArHngK 283 graymines
ba6a242988b389fedd25e783c1124bec7563de282b086f9689752c47645787d1
D5NtW3gYBA69Kvov9iN5T1QUptYpzrCrJd 5123 graymines
01f1406f2ff0d54d284eee5d8f88eeac029d9d5433c0a6dcfe8799e0e24e9b3f
DGopJYgnT5za5u64BPD1J4Hrt3ewEAqG2h 5000 graymines
49ed269ef294f73dad1634a60da1ebaac7ae70fc1a0536900e4e1b63ef556611
D5NtW3gYBA69Kvov9iN5T1QUptYpzrCrJd 5000 graymines
fa9c960dc2c07faca2ae1b0eae493feea708263efd75d1b0cbae6a163e225c8c
DGopJYgnT5za5u64BPD1J4Hrt3ewEAqG2h 10000 graymines
47a6a08f73c042dafcef949bf23101db53c246596135110a85788aa50976d942
DGopJYgnT5za5u64BPD1J4Hrt3ewEAqG2h 5000 graymines
ad7ba41d1921b69eeaa5b2926dee056f97d4a87ec05c56e4504b29110c9ba650
D5NtW3gYBA69Kvov9iN5T1QUptYpzrCrJd 5000 graymines
3ef447d7b9ad792e6c95a76c953297442ac90272d84f965f011dade62a9ed0a9
DGopJYgnT5za5u64BPD1J4Hrt3ewEAqG2h 10000 graymines
544a8aac2e99f64a719df494dfc7ef136318e9744d6d6eff70fe0a6f20b9a82c
DGopJYgnT5za5u64BPD1J4Hrt3ewEAqG2h 10000 graymines
365ca5561fa07d8cd593dcac39b397b9d979f0179dcbd1a5792fc5e11593abee
D5NtW3gYBA69Kvov9iN5T1QUptYpzrCrJd 5000 graymines
76a15d0b135b40d22dbaad5de2c7792bc9ffdc5d38f27e1626fcdddbc93b0a8d
dLeqozLLkdKAQSFJ7evtWCiWNoFcArHngK 7000 graymines
50621722471c7e2510a35aa62324fd6cbc64047fc3fcc3c79ab8d987ac34c88a
Here are next transactions made to your wallets.
So far only address to pay, with 10k DTC is D5NtW3gYBA69Kvov9iN5T1QUptYpzrCrJd.
Rest is with balances less than 100 coins.
Do you feel that it's worth the effort?
It's difficult to express this without a sense of sounding whiny ... I have spent some time thinking about this in depth but I just can't convince myself that there is sufficient residual interest in the Datacoin chain to justify the amount of effort required for a migration. There isn't even enough interest to protect the chain against the current exploitation by just one individual of the emissions rate/difficulty modifier relationship.
Although I see myself as merely an occasional technical contributor, I can see why public perception may prefer a caretaker interpretation. However, even as an erstwhile curator, the main issue is that there's very little left to curate. The community seems to have evaporated leaving a few isolated individuals remaining. Communication ranges from terse to non-existent. Both the mining pool and exchange listing persist via the goodwill of the operators towards a 2013-vintage altcoin.
I have to confess that I'm struggling for an answer to the question - What's the point of continuing to support the remnants of a community that don't appear to want support?
Cheers
Graham
What really excited me about Datacoin was that PC program running on the blockchain.
I am wondering if it would not be better to stick to 0.15.99, as suggested, and concentrate instead on storing more programs in the chain.
We have all the tools. The built in block explorer could be added to 0.15.99, to render pictures, movies and software programs.
-extro
Hi Graham,
This should be something we can collaborate on to complete for Datacoin in time to bring 0.16.3 or whatever you like.
Apologies for the delay in my responding to your kind words and positive suggestions.
Do you feel that it's worth the effort?
I feel like once bitcoins are a ubiqutous currency globally and the hurdles El Salvador is facing with the IMF and World Bank have been overcome, it will be a short time thereafter where new faces will surge into many of the original communities which still have the will to live.
I like to think of network maintenance and protocol upgrades for the Satoshian derivatives which are closely linked to original Bitcoin sourcecode as heavily modular.
In the case of Datacoin we really have just two differences making us more unique than the myriad Scrypt altcoins.
We use the Sunny King pieces for proof-of-work and retargeting and we have added an additional field into the transaction.
So when I imagine what it would look like for me to start building a new client to usher in the next protocol level - I see myself making commits which nearly mirror my prior work and then only have to "think" when it comes to the part which makes us distinct (the proof-of-work, retargeting and patching in the additional transaction field).
That is to say, most of the effort would be textbook processes and procedures where the work product is much more refined and elegant, yielding a more controlled network upgrade.
Is it worth the effort? I don't know, but I tend to like the older less perfect networks more than the newer more experimental projects which are not based on tried and true upstream Bitcoin code.
We could potentially pivot to auxiliary proof-of-work and seek out the goodwill of some merge-mining pool operators.
This would at least keep some of the smallest fish from abusing the chain continually and trade it for potential abuse from a bigger fish taking in nearly all of the rewards (but almost always certainly putting them up for sale) [which makes their share of the pie more manageable].
I'm certainly interested in your philosophy about long-term maintenance for mostly dormant network communities.
I like Datacoin because it provides a medium to preserve free speech.
Best Regards,
-Chicago
I've withdrawn the 0.16.3 release and deleted the repository as it's clear that supporting this particular upgrade is beyond my skillset.
I've done the protocol upgrade on another network from 0.8 through 0.14.3.This should be something we can collaborate on to complete for Datacoin in time to bring 0.16.3 or whatever you like.
Do you feel that it's worth the effort?
I don't think we need to go the scenic route here but its certainly a possibility we can entertain as well.
I have spent some time thinking about this in depth but I just can't convince myself that there is sufficient residual interest in the Datacoin chain to justify the amount of effort required for a migration.In the case of Datacoin we really have just two differences making us more unique than the myriad Scrypt altcoins.
We use the Sunny King pieces for proof-of-work and retargeting and we have added an additional field into the transaction.
So when I imagine what it would look like for me to start building a new client to usher in the next protocol level - I see myself making commits which nearly mirror my prior work and then only have to "think" when it comes to the part which makes us distinct (the proof-of-work, retargeting and patching in the additional transaction field).
That is to say, most of the effort would be textbook processes and procedures where the work product is much more refined and elegant, yielding a more controlled network upgrade.
Is it worth the effort? I don't know, but I tend to like the older less perfect networks more than the newer more experimental projects which are not based on tried and true upstream Bitcoin code.
There isn't even enough interest to protect the chain against the current exploitation by just one individual of the emissions rate/difficulty modifier relationship.
This is a real problem. The other issues are less important than the actual network security which is quantified by the proof-of-work mining the emissions.We could potentially pivot to auxiliary proof-of-work and seek out the goodwill of some merge-mining pool operators.
This would at least keep some of the smallest fish from abusing the chain continually and trade it for potential abuse from a bigger fish taking in nearly all of the rewards (but almost always certainly putting them up for sale) [which makes their share of the pie more manageable].
I'm certainly interested in your philosophy about long-term maintenance for mostly dormant network communities.
Although I see myself as merely an occasional technical contributor, I can see why public perception may prefer a caretaker interpretation.
My mistake, you used the word curator years ago in reference to leadership here and I couldn't remember 100% and wrote caretaker when I meant to use the word you gave in your self-defined role.The community seems to have evaporated leaving a few isolated individuals remaining. Communication ranges from terse to non-existent.
Even though y'all in this thread aren't a daily part of my life -- I still like you more than the prospect of getting involved with any other flavor-of-the-day project which has less favorable politics.I like Datacoin because it provides a medium to preserve free speech.
What's the point of continuing to support the remnants of a community that don't appear to want support?
Once network security is solved we will be able to transform from preserving free speech to protecting free speech - and in my mind this justifies continuing support.Best Regards,
-Chicago
I've withdrawn the 0.16.3 release and deleted the repository as it's clear that supporting this particular upgrade is beyond my skillset.
I've done the protocol upgrade on another network from 0.8 through 0.14.3.This should be something we can collaborate on to complete for Datacoin in time to bring 0.16.3 or whatever you like.
From what I remember, the last Bitcoin protocol upgrade was the August, 2017 upgrade which was brought in by 0.14.2 and then there was the lil fix to make 0.14.3.
It would make sense the can be no relay of TX between old 0.8 nodes and anything which requires BIP 66.
When I did it for the other network, I did it in 3 pieces to go from old protocol to current.
The first network upgrade was just another 0.8 branch release which fixed the difficulty adjustment algorithm.
Afterwards, a 0.13.0 release occurred to usher in BIP66/BIP65 by consensus.
Lastly, a 0.14.3 release was performed to complete the network upgrade.
Along the way, this included the support for BIP 32 as well as a SegWit.
I don't think we need to go the scenic route here but its certainly a possibility we can entertain as well.
Are you at all interested in a IsSuperMajority() network upgrade in a next release using this built-in pool code which could be patched into 0.13.0 (perhaps [or whatever you like]) and then once those are activated, [the IsSuperMajority() forks] continue to lock-in the version bits soft forks?
Since the pool side of the equation and solo mining side of the equation is looking to be more well managed right now, I wouldn't be opposed to doing a white-box generic unpolished but functionally precise wallet to usher in the IsSuperMajority() BIPs.
The hierarchical deterministic wallet comes with 0.13.0 iirc (BIP 32) and activating BIP 66 and BIP 65 with it (but especially BIP 66) will give the Datacoin network a great baseline to then move people out of the 0.8 branch and ensure the problems associated with rejected transactions due to strict DER signatures (to prevent unintentional forks) may be resolved before attempting a SegWit network upgrade.
Also, I will be AFK a ton for the rest of the weekend - but I wanted to just pop in and thank you for the attention you're giving as caretaker for Datacoin and to help with strategy for future protocol upgrades now that more of the mining technology has been wrangled.
Apologies for the delay in my responding to your kind words and positive suggestions.
Do you feel that it's worth the effort?
It's difficult to express this without a sense of sounding whiny ... I have spent some time thinking about this in depth but I just can't convince myself that there is sufficient residual interest in the Datacoin chain to justify the amount of effort required for a migration. There isn't even enough interest to protect the chain against the current exploitation by just one individual of the emissions rate/difficulty modifier relationship.
Although I see myself as merely an occasional technical contributor, I can see why public perception may prefer a caretaker interpretation. However, even as an erstwhile curator, the main issue is that there's very little left to curate. The community seems to have evaporated leaving a few isolated individuals remaining. Communication ranges from terse to non-existent. Both the mining pool and exchange listing persist via the goodwill of the operators towards a 2013-vintage altcoin.
I have to confess that I'm struggling for an answer to the question - What's the point of continuing to support the remnants of a community that don't appear to want support?
Cheers
Graham
dtc.graymines.net
Dear users!
Mine is shut down, hopefully temporarily.
There was a problem, somehow you managed to "dig" about 200k more DTC than was actually dug.
With the funds that have now appeared manual withdrawals have been made for some of you based on balances from the database.
Another problem is that the transactions from the backup wallet do not go online and are not confirmed, so you cannot get the rest.
Please wait patiently for an update.
These are withdrawals made manually, based on the balance from the database.
The mine has no more funds available for withdrawals.
As soon as I manage to transfer the funds from the backup wallet, the rest will be paid out.
PS.
Please bear in mind that I very rarely look at the forum and read your messages.
Especially that the mine has existed for a couple of years, I maintain it charitably at my own expense so that the project does not collapse - as we all know DTC have no value nowadays.
Dear users!
Mine is shut down, hopefully temporarily.
There was a problem, somehow you managed to "dig" about 200k more DTC than was actually dug.
With the funds that have now appeared manual withdrawals have been made for some of you based on balances from the database.
Another problem is that the transactions from the backup wallet do not go online and are not confirmed, so you cannot get the rest.
Please wait patiently for an update.
Code:
DGmwKtGuqZsJWtFAKwqVFayvWXSnvbTiYe 217 graymines
7381731dd112e9bbbf3af225128fdd1c2bae75c33f225cea2fc70c9dd609f83c
DQ3FKBmTPWoH4F7Rtj22NFZxahyyyPaddy 237 graymines
3ac47ea1a909da47f961601c1f2fb80d07b32798af71ef5cf3c0c63cd7ee6ce0
DCEZ4CKixPRQ3A1ykL4sJ7z3YQLigsdUz5 280 graymines
a46a18dc1fe2d3b682e6523d0b93ffe640892703bfc36929b1d33dcbeaf64575
D67L8aRaZe9Mj3KCeydLK6WxCuPhkvkK87 377 graymines
00f00e98d3e86377d0249716013d2d2acb56bc8dcfc804948f58fea54674e932
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 5000 graymines
93716781c6a0967ed18dfb77115b532f2c26cbcc2260392c435c3b6840d3b952
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 10000 graymines
0c3b2ece944bd5aa706275536fa6feea31cc13ad7669bc92e8f3ff88fc508ee7
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 10000 graymines
5772c742dd1568ca3c56e0a3a5f70b84c88df7c5155ea3a9ba8df3ef3a5595d2
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 608 graymines
9a7fe9ba65267017c5d73114a65cb32a22c28e5948d32db5c9c59fb7a1a93099
D5NtW3gYBA69Kvov9iN5T1QUptYpzrCrJd 10000 graymines
933aa7dbb82edddc9be8fa5099f53669f64ba672df99e6d2f2199b240653bdba
These are withdrawals made manually, based on the balance from the database.
The mine has no more funds available for withdrawals.
As soon as I manage to transfer the funds from the backup wallet, the rest will be paid out.
PS.
Please bear in mind that I very rarely look at the forum and read your messages.
Especially that the mine has existed for a couple of years, I maintain it charitably at my own expense so that the project does not collapse - as we all know DTC have no value nowadays.
We appreciate your efforts man.
dtc.graymines.net
Dear users!
Mine is shut down, hopefully temporarily.
There was a problem, somehow you managed to "dig" about 200k more DTC than was actually dug.
With the funds that have now appeared manual withdrawals have been made for some of you based on balances from the database.
Another problem is that the transactions from the backup wallet do not go online and are not confirmed, so you cannot get the rest.
Please wait patiently for an update.
These are withdrawals made manually, based on the balance from the database.
The mine has no more funds available for withdrawals.
As soon as I manage to transfer the funds from the backup wallet, the rest will be paid out.
PS.
Please bear in mind that I very rarely look at the forum and read your messages.
Especially that the mine has existed for a couple of years, I maintain it charitably at my own expense so that the project does not collapse - as we all know DTC have no value nowadays.
Dear users!
Mine is shut down, hopefully temporarily.
There was a problem, somehow you managed to "dig" about 200k more DTC than was actually dug.
With the funds that have now appeared manual withdrawals have been made for some of you based on balances from the database.
Another problem is that the transactions from the backup wallet do not go online and are not confirmed, so you cannot get the rest.
Please wait patiently for an update.
Code:
DGmwKtGuqZsJWtFAKwqVFayvWXSnvbTiYe 217 graymines
7381731dd112e9bbbf3af225128fdd1c2bae75c33f225cea2fc70c9dd609f83c
DQ3FKBmTPWoH4F7Rtj22NFZxahyyyPaddy 237 graymines
3ac47ea1a909da47f961601c1f2fb80d07b32798af71ef5cf3c0c63cd7ee6ce0
DCEZ4CKixPRQ3A1ykL4sJ7z3YQLigsdUz5 280 graymines
a46a18dc1fe2d3b682e6523d0b93ffe640892703bfc36929b1d33dcbeaf64575
D67L8aRaZe9Mj3KCeydLK6WxCuPhkvkK87 377 graymines
00f00e98d3e86377d0249716013d2d2acb56bc8dcfc804948f58fea54674e932
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 5000 graymines
93716781c6a0967ed18dfb77115b532f2c26cbcc2260392c435c3b6840d3b952
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 10000 graymines
0c3b2ece944bd5aa706275536fa6feea31cc13ad7669bc92e8f3ff88fc508ee7
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 10000 graymines
5772c742dd1568ca3c56e0a3a5f70b84c88df7c5155ea3a9ba8df3ef3a5595d2
DSYrAVCoN55C4AD7DddCYXJ3wQd5UjUvL5 608 graymines
9a7fe9ba65267017c5d73114a65cb32a22c28e5948d32db5c9c59fb7a1a93099
D5NtW3gYBA69Kvov9iN5T1QUptYpzrCrJd 10000 graymines
933aa7dbb82edddc9be8fa5099f53669f64ba672df99e6d2f2199b240653bdba
These are withdrawals made manually, based on the balance from the database.
The mine has no more funds available for withdrawals.
As soon as I manage to transfer the funds from the backup wallet, the rest will be paid out.
PS.
Please bear in mind that I very rarely look at the forum and read your messages.
Especially that the mine has existed for a couple of years, I maintain it charitably at my own expense so that the project does not collapse - as we all know DTC have no value nowadays.
BTW, there is a problem with GUI of the wallet (version v0.16.3.0-2edec369aminki)
Be careful, this issue will make you lose your money
...
So it sends money to an empty address and the DTCs are lost forever.
The issue does not occur sending money from command line, so it is a GUI related problem.
Be careful, this issue will make you lose your money
...
So it sends money to an empty address and the DTCs are lost forever.
The issue does not occur sending money from command line, so it is a GUI related problem.
Indeed there was a problem, as advised on 2021-06-16 in this post ...
...
Don't use the 0.16.3 client, revert to either the 0.8.6 client or the Crossverse 0.15.99 client.
I've withdrawn the 0.16.3 release and deleted the repository as it's clear that supporting this particular upgrade is beyond my skillset.
Don't use the 0.16.3 client, revert to either the 0.8.6 client or the Crossverse 0.15.99 client.
I've withdrawn the 0.16.3 release and deleted the repository as it's clear that supporting this particular upgrade is beyond my skillset.
Cheers
Graham
BTW, there is a problem with GUI of the wallet (version v0.16.3.0-2edec369aminki)
Be careful, this issue will make you lose your money
Steps to reproduce:
The first sending goes right
But when you do the second sending (step 3), and for each subsequent sending, it shows the right destination address, but when it makes the transaction the address becomes NULL.
So it sends money to an empty address and the DTCs are lost forever.
The issue does not occur sending money from command line, so it is a GUI related problem.
Be careful, this issue will make you lose your money
Steps to reproduce:
- 1 go to the send tab
- 2 send money to an address (select it from previous used addresses)
- 3 repeat steps 1 and 2
The first sending goes right
But when you do the second sending (step 3), and for each subsequent sending, it shows the right destination address, but when it makes the transaction the address becomes NULL.
So it sends money to an empty address and the DTCs are lost forever.
The issue does not occur sending money from command line, so it is a GUI related problem.
How can I see the Network Hash Rate?
I tried with getmininginfo, getblockchaininfo, getnettotals... but there isn't
Is this https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/11139/how-is-the-network-hash-rate-calculated valid for Datacoin, too?
It's getnetworkhashps but it's only in the 0.16.3 client (don't use it for txs) I tried with getmininginfo, getblockchaininfo, getnettotals... but there isn't
Is this https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/11139/how-is-the-network-hash-rate-calculated valid for Datacoin, too?
-cut-
Something is not right...
I have this version, but not this method:
Code:
datacoin-cli getnetworkinfo
{
"version": "v0.16.3.0-2edec369aminki",
"subversion": "/Datoshi:0.16.3/",
"protocolversion": 70015,
...
Code:
datacoin-cli getnetworkhashps
error code: -32601
error message:
Method not found
(don't use it for txs)
Why not?
I use it with
Code:
prematurewitness=1
addresstype=legacy
Do you remember?
See this topic
For some reason my is listed as NOT Listening, but i have listen=1 set in .conf, any ideas?
My server reports pretty much everything as incoming, I get a better idea by running a client at home, anything that shows up in the Peers tab is a listening node.If your client is hosted on your home network, it likely won't be accessible externally unless your router supports NAT/UPNP and you have configured the router to enable UPNP for the machine running the client.
Belt and braces - have upnp=1 in the config (or rather ensure that you don't have upnp=0 in the config - which you don't seem to have).
Cheers
Graham
Yes, but could he listen as a tor hidden service?
What does this do?
Code:
listenonion=yes
If we could put people listening on TOR and if we can configure clients to search on TOR for listening nodes, we can have more nodes to maintain the network up.
I guess it is made with listenonion= and proxy= specs in conf file...
For some reason my is listed as NOT Listening, but i have listen=1 set in .conf, any ideas?
My server reports pretty much everything as incoming, I get a better idea by running a client at home, anything that shows up in the Peers tab is a listening node.If your client is hosted on your home network, it likely won't be accessible externally unless your router supports NAT/UPNP and you have configured the router to enable UPNP for the machine running the client.
Belt and braces - have upnp=1 in the config (or rather ensure that you don't have upnp=0 in the config - which you don't seem to have).
Cheers
Graham
Datacoin reports #2
A slight reduction in the number of active Datacoin nodes (as visible from my Hetzner-hosted node on 144.76.118.44) but healthy enough for the moment:
An "addnode list" and a description of the significance of "listening" are available upthread: #msg57299213
Cheers
Graham
A slight reduction in the number of active Datacoin nodes (as visible from my Hetzner-hosted node on 144.76.118.44) but healthy enough for the moment:
| address:port | client version | listening |
| 83.161.158.205:59129 | Satoshi:0.8.3 | no |
| 89.73.143.76:58258 | Satoshi:0.8.5 | yes |
| 95.217.78.168:60992 | Satoshi:0.8.5 | yes |
| [2a01:4f9:4a:1e17::2]:36688 | Satoshi:0.8.5 | no |
| 85.19.25.38:27551 | Datacoin:0.8.6/Datacoin:0.1.2(v0.8.6.0-dirty) | no |
| 213.31.19.87:64089 | Satoshi:0.8.6/Datacoin:0.1.2(v0.1.2.0dtc-hp14-gunk-beta) | no |
| 40.87.106.229:63764 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 140.186.218.230:51153 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 31.131.65.221:58060 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 51.148.146.204:54912 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | yes |
| 140.186.218.230:52004 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 45.33.238.99:56899 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | yes |
| 188.217.252.184:56475 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no |
| 185.62.96.74:59113 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no |
| 109.168.57.185:5748 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no |
| 94.63.199.33:54315 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | yes |
| [2001:818:e30e:d300:e5fe:883c:4268:808d]:55037 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no |
| 144.76.118.44:4777 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | yes |
An "addnode list" and a description of the significance of "listening" are available upthread: #msg57299213
Cheers
Graham
For some reason my is listed as NOT Listening, but i have listen=1 set in .conf, any ideas?
listen=1
daemon=1
server=1
rpcuser=xxx
rpcpassword=yyy
rpcport=6666
port=4777
Datacoin reports #2
A slight reduction in the number of active Datacoin nodes (as visible from my Hetzner-hosted node on 144.76.118.44) but healthy enough for the moment:
An "addnode list" and a description of the significance of "listening" are available upthread: #msg57299213
Cheers
Graham
A slight reduction in the number of active Datacoin nodes (as visible from my Hetzner-hosted node on 144.76.118.44) but healthy enough for the moment:
| address:port | client version | listening |
| 83.161.158.205:59129 | Satoshi:0.8.3 | no |
| 89.73.143.76:58258 | Satoshi:0.8.5 | yes |
| 95.217.78.168:60992 | Satoshi:0.8.5 | yes |
| [2a01:4f9:4a:1e17::2]:36688 | Satoshi:0.8.5 | no |
| 85.19.25.38:27551 | Datacoin:0.8.6/Datacoin:0.1.2(v0.8.6.0-dirty) | no |
| 213.31.19.87:64089 | Satoshi:0.8.6/Datacoin:0.1.2(v0.1.2.0dtc-hp14-gunk-beta) | no |
| 40.87.106.229:63764 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 140.186.218.230:51153 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 31.131.65.221:58060 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 51.148.146.204:54912 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | yes |
| 140.186.218.230:52004 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 45.33.238.99:56899 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | yes |
| 188.217.252.184:56475 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no |
| 185.62.96.74:59113 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no |
| 109.168.57.185:5748 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no |
| 94.63.199.33:54315 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | yes |
| [2001:818:e30e:d300:e5fe:883c:4268:808d]:55037 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no |
| 144.76.118.44:4777 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | yes |
An "addnode list" and a description of the significance of "listening" are available upthread: #msg57299213
Cheers
Graham
How can I see the Network Hash Rate?
I tried with getmininginfo, getblockchaininfo, getnettotals... but there isn't
Is this https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/11139/how-is-the-network-hash-rate-calculated valid for Datacoin, too?
It's getnetworkhashps but it's only in the 0.16.3 client (don't use it for txs) and was transcribed from the corresponding code in the unreleased Primecoin branch "primecoin-0.16.3". Its accuracy in terms of representing hashpower is questionable but its representation of relative variation should be a bit more reliable. I don't know why CrossVerse didn't include it in the 0.15.99 code, maybe it's profoundly unreliable.I tried with getmininginfo, getblockchaininfo, getnettotals... but there isn't
Is this https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/11139/how-is-the-network-hash-rate-calculated valid for Datacoin, too?
You are correct in your observation that it is based on an inference: “The hashrate can be calculated from the expected rate of finding a block (1440 a day), the actual rate of finding a block and the current difficulty”.
I reworked the plot in my own client to show a full week's worth (10080 blocks), the plot shows that difficulty is still adjusting to the new network hash rate:
Cheers
Graham
Datacoin reports #2
...
This morning graymines had 8 workers, now just 1.
The delay you observed is a direct result of the collapse of networkhashpersec.
-cut-
Uh-huh, networkhashrate has collapsed.
Is for this reason that the last mined block was #4027220 at 2021-06-21 09:16:58 UTC ?...
This morning graymines had 8 workers, now just 1.
The delay you observed is a direct result of the collapse of networkhashpersec.
-cut-
How can I see the Network Hash Rate?
I tried with getmininginfo, getblockchaininfo, getnettotals... but there isn't
Is this https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/11139/how-is-the-network-hash-rate-calculated valid for Datacoin, too?
Datacoin reports #2
...
This morning graymines had 8 workers, now just 1.
The delay you observed is a direct result of the collapse of networkhashpersec.
The reduced number of pool workers is likely related to the issue of coins stuck on segwit addresses.
GPU hashpower pretty much overwhelms CPU hashpower, very few blocks are mined with CPU so when GPU miners have been throwing hashpower at the chain and then suddenly stop, there is a huge drop in network hash and it takes time for the difficulty to adjust. During this period it is, ahem, difficult to mine a block, so the emissions rate plummets and blocks become few and far between.
Cheers
Graham
Uh-huh, networkhashrate has collapsed.
Is for this reason that the last mined block was #4027220 at 2021-06-21 09:16:58 UTC ?...
This morning graymines had 8 workers, now just 1.
The delay you observed is a direct result of the collapse of networkhashpersec.
The reduced number of pool workers is likely related to the issue of coins stuck on segwit addresses.
GPU hashpower pretty much overwhelms CPU hashpower, very few blocks are mined with CPU so when GPU miners have been throwing hashpower at the chain and then suddenly stop, there is a huge drop in network hash and it takes time for the difficulty to adjust. During this period it is, ahem, difficult to mine a block, so the emissions rate plummets and blocks become few and far between.
Cheers
Graham
Datacoin reports #1
A more encouraging current state of the Datacoin network (as visible from my Hetzner-hosted node on 144.76.118.44):
| address:port | client version | listening* |
| 83.161.158.205:55755 | Satoshi:0.8.3 | no |
| [2a01:4f9:4a:1e17::2]:42938 | Satoshi:0.8.5 | no |
| 95.217.78.168:4777 | Satoshi:0.8.5 | yes (DE) |
| 89.73.143.76:4777 | Satoshi:0.8.5 | yes (graymines.net PL) |
| 85.19.25.38:8800 | Datacoin:0.8.6/Datacoin:0.1.2(v0.8.6.0-dirty) | no |
| 113.110.231.187:4777 | Satoshi:0.8.6 | yes (CN) |
| 213.31.19.87:61690 | Satoshi:0.8.6/Datacoin:0.1.2(v0.1.2.0dtc-hp14-gunk-beta) | no |
| 213.31.19.87:59265 | Satoshi:0.8.6/Datacoin:0.1.2(v0.1.2.0dtc-hp14-gunk-beta) | no |
| 51.148.146.204:4777 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | yes (gjhiggins, NAT/UK) |
| 51.148.146.204:37578 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no (gjhiggins) |
| 140.186.218.230:51126 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 31.131.65.221:49317 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 40.87.106.229:49428 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 140.186.218.230:49353 | DatacoinCore.Veter:0.15.99.8 | no |
| 185.62.96.103:53475 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no |
| 51.148.146.204:48776 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no (gjhiggins) |
| 45.33.238.99:4777 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | yes (bytestamp.net, IT) |
| 109.168.57.185:4394 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no |
| 94.63.199.33:4777 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | yes (PT) |
| 144.76.118.44:4777 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | yes (gjhiggins, UK hosted DE) |
| [2001:818:e30e:d300:f914:db7c:a75:78f5]:59620 | Datoshi:0.16.3 | no |
*"listening" nodes are clients configured with listen=1, they can be synced from and they broadcast transactions.
For convenience, I have separated out those clients which are currently listening:
Code:
addnode=95.217.78.168
addnode=dtc.graymines.net
addnode=113.110.231.187
addnode=51.148.146.204
addnode=dtc.bytestamp.net
addnode=94.63.199.33
addnode=144.76.118.44
addnode=dtc.graymines.net
addnode=113.110.231.187
addnode=51.148.146.204
addnode=dtc.bytestamp.net
addnode=94.63.199.33
addnode=144.76.118.44
The client expects listening nodes to use the default port of 4777 so specifying the port is unnecessary - except in the rare case where a listening client has been configured to use a non-standard port and so it isn't discovered by default and its presence needs to be advertised here and it has to be specially added to datacoin.conf as addnode=
In general, a client connecting via a port other than 4777 is not listening and should not be included as an addnode because it is pointless and possibly misleading to do so.
Cheers
Graham
Jump to: