Linus Torvalds... I am not sure he would agree with your application of his quotes, but that is not really on-topic.
@mycoinsstore To answer your first question, I have a large stake in MMC2. I have been mining since the beginning of 2014 and I have been following the project since mid-2013.
Your are late dude, it's already MMC3 - look at sources
I can change your large stake of mmc2 to mmc3 at good rate.
MMC2 is a reference to the current MemoryCoin blockchain. There is no such thing as MMC3. You are confusing the wallet version with the blockchain.
MMC2 has a pre-mine of ~7.32%. The first block in the MMC2 blockchain is comprised of all MemoryCoin Beta balances as of block 8820 on the MMC1 blockchain (~6.2%) and ProtoShares (~1.12%).
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-memorycoin-cpu-coin-paid-dev-team-limited-supply-mmc-370806I also currently represent ~40% of the MMC2 network hashrate and I can easily increase my hashrate by at least 300%. I think that should answer your remaining questions about my interest in MMC2 and whether or not I am here to argue.
Oh, really? And how can you measure this percents? Please, provide us this great formula.
On average, I find ~20 of the last 50 blocks. 20 / 50 = 0.4 = 40%
I would like to get p2pool working again, but we need to coordinate our pools and properly bootstrap the sharechain. I am prepared to host a node that will function as a bootstrap address. I think that I can fork KillerByte's p2pool code and make the necessary changes to get things working. However, one problem might still remain. Did Delinquency and KillerByte ever solve the grant block issue with regard to p2pool? I am still looking over both Delinquency's and KillerByte's work to determine if the problem still exists, but I have been unsuccessful so far in identifying if it was actually resolved.
I agree. But, I don't understand what you mean in "coordinate our pools and properly bootstrap the sharechain" ?
I already have such node and I don't think that mmc blockchain has a lack of nodes.
About KillerByte's p2pool code - it's works and worked always. What do you want to change?
About grant block problem - this is still exist and can be eliminated (maybe I'm wrong) only by eliminating a "grant block" in sources. Moreover, it is unclear to whom these "grant blocks" should belong now?
Do you understand how p2pool works? I am specifically talking about p2pool nodes not MemoryCoin nodes. We can both run p2pool nodes, yes. However, our nodes will not be working on the same sharechain. In order to fix that, we need to update KillerByte's code with new bootstrap addresses and bootstrap the sharechain on one or two nodes. Once that is complete, anybody can add a new node if they want and we will all be working on the same sharechain.
The grant block issue to which I am referring was p2pool's inability to submit a valid grant block. There is a grant block every 80 blocks. If the problem was never fixed, the network may have issues with getting stuck on grant blocks.
I would also like to get the wallet updated. At a minimum, we need to update the seed nodes so that new folks can sync their blockchains without manually adding nodes. We will also need to compile new binaries for both Windows and OS X. I think that we need to put-off any discussion of updating the wallet to current Bitcoin sources.
I don't think so. Do you see any problems with wallet synchronization or lack of nodes? I can't see such problems.
I am not talking about major source code changes. There are at least a dozen invalid bootstrap addresses in the source code. The wallet needs to be updated with new bootstrap addresses.
The final issue we have is with YAM. After we get p2pool back on track, we need to contact yvg1900 and request that he update our p2pool addresses in his next update. I have a working hack that enables me to use YAM now, but I would prefer to get it properly fixed so that yvg1900 gets his 2%.
Yam works without any hacks now. The only issue is a greed of his author, who hard-coded nodes (dead now) and closed YAM sources.
So, one should restart it every 8 hours or ~400 shares. A very simple "hack" with a scheduler.
That is still a hack, regardless of how simple it is, and it is required in order for YAM to work continuously. You appear to be arguing with me simply to argue. The only difference is that you want something for nothing.
