Again a .1 fee to transfer 6 LTC kinda sucks.
Is there really a need to transfer $0.06 equivalent? Even so for micropayments a sub 2% fee is pretty damn good. Most micropayment systems charge a lot more than that.
Topic: [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched! - page 352. (Read 1467253 times)
Is there really a need to transfer $0.06 equivalent? Even so for micropayments a sub 2% fee is pretty damn good. Most micropayment systems charge a lot more than that.
I'm going to suggest again to use the cumulative compounding fee structure I suggested on IRC.
This may affect pools negatively? Or they could just charge the transaction fees to the users. I think most pools do that already?
Again a .1 fee to transfer 6 LTC kinda sucks.
This may affect pools negatively? Or they could just charge the transaction fees to the users. I think most pools do that already?
Again a .1 fee to transfer 6 LTC kinda sucks.
It's great that Litecoin now has its own logo, but I have to say that the color scheme is quite awful. The "L" is quite muted and set against a very drab background color. Couldn't we come up with something better? Maybe offer some LTC from the faucet to have someone design something catchy?
Yes, looks like about 10% of blocks still contain spam.
0.5.0.8 only ignores spendable outputs < mininput for sending, so if you're at the receiving end of dust it still shows up in listtransactions and friends and causes increased memory use (current bitcoind and forks keep all wallet tx in memory).
If you want to try, http://pastie.org/2909400 is a band-aid to make the wallet ignore new incoming tx that only contain outputs to you < mininput. If you really want the dust later just set -mininput 0.00000001 and do a -rescan.
0.5.0.8 only ignores spendable outputs < mininput for sending, so if you're at the receiving end of dust it still shows up in listtransactions and friends and causes increased memory use (current bitcoind and forks keep all wallet tx in memory).
If you want to try, http://pastie.org/2909400 is a band-aid to make the wallet ignore new incoming tx that only contain outputs to you < mininput. If you really want the dust later just set -mininput 0.00000001 and do a -rescan.
Anyway, is the TX spam now completely over officially or is there some other drips of dust left ? How do I scrub my wallet ?
According to block explorer, the dust spam is still there.
Use 0.5.0.8 (50008) client to move your coins; by default txes below 0.0001 is ignored now when creating a new tx. (Haven't tried though, just saw the line in getinfo)
Seems like RS's PR skills are improving. Trying to get the LTC people to come over to SC.
Anyway, is the TX spam now completely over officially or is there some other drips of dust left ? How do I scrub my wallet ?
Anyway, is the TX spam now completely over officially or is there some other drips of dust left ? How do I scrub my wallet ?
OK, back to the topic,
What about:
http://litecoin.kicks-ass.org/graphs/graphs.html
and
http://allchains.info/
I think they need our help to back online....
What about:
http://litecoin.kicks-ass.org/graphs/graphs.html
and
http://allchains.info/
I think they need our help to back online....
I waited about 20 mins. The wallet file when plugged into my other machine works fine with the new client. I may just reinstall W7 -- been meaning to for awhile now, it's got some leftover problems from switching my Nvidia card to an ATI.
Err, by being gone I mean "the entire client doesn't load, outside of a process in explorer called litecoin-qt, using 400MB of RAM, and litecoind -getinfo says that the server is not running." The problem isn't my coins being gone, it's the whole client. I can still use litecoind, but I'm lazy and prefer the gui.
I have a minute or so of delay between when the splash screen goes away and the gui shows up. How long have you waited? If you have tons of spam transactions it could be a while.Check the debug.log, I'm not sure where it is under windows but look in the same directory as the wallet.dat file. If it is still getting written to then the process is still working and hasn't gotten around to showing the window.
Err, by being gone I mean "the entire client doesn't load, outside of a process in explorer called litecoin-qt, using 400MB of RAM, and litecoind -getinfo says that the server is not running." The problem isn't my coins being gone, it's the whole client. I can still use litecoind, but I'm lazy and prefer the gui.
AFAIK this thread is about LTC, not SC. On that note, I'm having some trouble with the newest Litecoin-QT -- I ran it, and it didn't show up (the process was there, using a ton of RAM like normal, but no icon etc). I backed up my wallet.dat, cleared the roaming/Litecoin folder, and started it, DLed blockchain (the client was appearing as normal at this point), but when I copied my wallet back over and restarted, it was back to being gone. I'm on 64bit W7, and the newest client works fine on my other W7 box.
Suggestions?
Suggestions?
Maybe the next feature coblee decided to implement is wallet blocking. Who knows ? I bet less than 10% of LTC supporters read the damn code he writes.
Probably try and do a -rescan command and they will shop up !
AFAIK this thread is about LTC, not SC. On that note, I'm having some trouble with the newest Litecoin-QT -- I ran it, and it didn't show up (the process was there, using a ton of RAM like normal, but no icon etc). I backed up my wallet.dat, cleared the roaming/Litecoin folder, and started it, DLed blockchain (the client was appearing as normal at this point), but when I copied my wallet back over and restarted, it was back to being gone. I'm on 64bit W7, and the newest client works fine on my other W7 box.
Suggestions?
Suggestions?
Anyone thinking these changes are in any way like SolidCoin, doesn't know enough about SolidCoin.
Say it with me.... "Voluntary."
Say it with me.... "Voluntary."
That's a bit like saying it's voluntary to update to a new SolidCoin version to get past a checkpoint. If someone cannot reliably send a transaction over the network I would say you are forcing them to update to use pretty much the main feature of a p2p cryptocurrency, sending money. A client which joins the network using an older version, can only connect to 8 other clients. If all of those clients have new rules for relaying transactions it's quite possible that new client will be unable to send some transactions out.
Sure, but you're admitting that whether or not someone is "forced" into using the new software is a function of the network, which is exactly what has been advertised from the start.
Care to make the same claim about SolidCoin?
Anyone thinking these changes are in any way like SolidCoin, doesn't know enough about SolidCoin.
Say it with me.... "Voluntary."
Say it with me.... "Voluntary."
That's a bit like saying it's voluntary to update to a new SolidCoin version to get past a checkpoint. If someone cannot reliably send a transaction over the network I would say you are forcing them to update to use pretty much the main feature of a p2p cryptocurrency, sending money. A client which joins the network using an older version, can only connect to 8 other clients. If all of those clients have new rules for relaying transactions it's quite possible that new client will be unable to send some transactions out.
Anyone thinking these changes are in any way like SolidCoin, doesn't know enough about SolidCoin.
Say it with me.... "Voluntary."
Say it with me.... "Voluntary."
The point is spending those coins will slow down the client right now b/c it takes forever to collect enough 0.00000001 LTC to make up a large enough value to send. So I changed the create transaction code to ignore these tiny values by default to speed things up. If you really want to spend them and wait forever for the client to create the transaction, you can by passing in a tiny min input.
You could also ignore these transactions (under the min amount) when checking blocks for wallet transactions. It will help improve the general performance of the wallet going forward too.
it now takes about half a minute to load the blockchain on my server. If it can improve the loading process it would be great.
The point is spending those coins will slow down the client right now b/c it takes forever to collect enough 0.00000001 LTC to make up a large enough value to send. So I changed the create transaction code to ignore these tiny values by default to speed things up. If you really want to spend them and wait forever for the client to create the transaction, you can by passing in a tiny min input.
You could also ignore these transactions (under the min amount) when checking blocks for wallet transactions. It will help improve the general performance of the wallet going forward too.
Just use the new client to send your coins to a new wallet. Leave the dust spam in your old wallet and throw the wallet away and forget that you actually own those coins because they are worthless anyways.
Remote coin kill switch? So 1 person decides about protocol changes, and that I can't use my coins anymore? Seems like some things that people criticized about SC2 are now happening at LTC
But I know, that's a totally different story...
Um...
If you really need to spend those coins, you can start the client with "-mininput=0.00000001"
The point is spending those coins will slow down the client right now b/c it takes forever to collect enough 0.00000001 LTC to make up a large enough value to send. So I changed the create transaction code to ignore these tiny values by default to speed things up. If you really want to spend them and wait forever for the client to create the transaction, you can by passing in a tiny min input.
Don't try to start a controversy when there isn't one. Please just go back to solidcointalk.org.
Just use the new client to send your coins to a new wallet. Leave the dust spam in your old wallet and throw the wallet away and forget that you actually own those coins because they are worthless anyways.
Remote coin kill switch? So 1 person decides about protocol changes, and that I can't use my coins anymore? Seems like some things that people criticized about SC2 are now happening at LTC
But I know, that's a totally different story...
Now devs who know more than me, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think any of these changes are mandatory. If you want, you could run an old version of litecoin-qt (or whatever), or even run your own wallet client thing. The TX fees are not required by the protocol persay, all that was being done was changing the default to accept them in a block and relay them...if I understand it correctly, you could mine blocks and not enforce ANY transaction fees, and no one could stop you.
The transaction fees are decided by the miners -- the miners could have rejected coblee's changes by not using the new version, and he couldn't have done anything. He produced a fix which most people think will work, so they switched over.
The transaction fees are decided by the miners -- the miners could have rejected coblee's changes by not using the new version, and he couldn't have done anything. He produced a fix which most people think will work, so they switched over.
Exactly the old clients still work and if anyone wishes to use them to receive then propagate the spam transactions then feel free to do so, just don't come bothering us with the problems it can cause if you can't be bothered to upgrade...
Many people now have 1000's (I have 6832) of tiny transactions that they cannot spend and need to be avoided or ignored for eternity.
They also exist in the block chain and will never disappear.
Just use the new client to send your coins to a new wallet. Leave the dust spam in your old wallet and throw the wallet away and forget that you actually own those coins because they are worthless anyways.
EDIT: Or do what I do. Just use the new client and ignore the dust spam. Yeah, they clutter the transaction list, but once most people upgrade, there won't be much dust spam anymore. And they will be ignored when you send money. So your client will just report an extra ~0.00002 LTC that you can never spend. No big deal, right?
Jump to: