(...)
Previous wallets will no longer function at that point. Even if an older wallet is coded with the new pchmessage, all blocks generated by it will be rejected and a small percentage of its sent transactions will actually be accepted (due to DER encoding).
(...)
I am still not sure what truely happens here. To everyone here: The old members do get more and more quiet, as there is heavy (and plausible) uncertainty, what will happen to existing funds (despite that ones of one person) in the future.
I will explain what happens. All wallets have a "pchmessage" code. This code is generally used to keep wallets from other coins from interacting with wallets of other coins.
Currently, we have the same "pchmessage" code as Litecoin (you can see this discussion in previous posts).
As a result, if we added the ip address of a node to the NDL wallet that was the ip address for a node of a Litecoin wallet, both that Litecoin wallet and our wallet will think they're talking to a wallet of the same coin. This is why our network is inundated with alt-coin wallet nodes. Because as soon as those two wallets confirm they've got the same "pchmessage" code, they'll start sending each other their list of other nodes. So a single Litecoin node added to our wallets will result in our wallets asking that Litecoin wallet for all of its nodes regardless of whether the blockchain is our chain or not. Our wallet just wants to know the nodes. Only after our wallet gets the nodes will it begin to check the blockchains on those nodes and confirm that they are not on our blockchain. So one Litecoin ip address added to our wallets will result in our wallets getting inundated with the hundreds, if not thousands, of other nodes that have the same "pchmessage" code, including Litecoin and other alt-coin wallets. Eventually our wallets will reject all of them because they're not on the same blockchain, but it still takes up a lot of processing time and power and is ultimately just messy.
The original Dev for Noodlyappendagecoin forgot to change the pchmessage code to something other than the one used by Litecoin. By changing that code, our wallets will only interact with other nodes with the same pchmessage. Since old Noodlyappendagecoin wallets will have the old pchmessage code (the same as litecoin) they will stop connecting to the new wallets.
This was not an issue previously because no one had input an ip address for a Litecoin node until recently. That's when our network started to get messy. As explained; all it takes is a single Litecoin node to cause a cascade of disruption.
Regarding the new DER encoding. All transactions have an R and and S value in them, used for the signature verification. With the new encoding, it was decided that the "S" value couldn't be less than or higher than some specified value (I don't recall the exact specifics). The theory was this would eliminate some problems with people tweaking the transactions as technically there are normally 2 valid "S" values for every transaction and changing this mitigated it to some extent. Its been a while since I've looked it up. The result is that a wallet that doesn't take into consideration the new "valid" values of the "S" value will send transactions that don't conform to this rule and the new wallets will therefor reject those transactions. Some may still make it through since the S value correlates with a random number and can change each time you try to send a transaction.
The application of DER encoding is standard at this point in cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin uses and Litecoin uses it and they both had to transition to the DER encoding thereby effectively disabling old wallets. This transition is not some arbitrary decision on my part, its normal.
Additionally, as a result of the aforementioned dynamics, old wallets will try to submit blocks to the blockchain that have the now-determined-to-be invalid S values, which would result in that block being rejected. This would prevent old wallets from being able to mine once the fork goes into effect. This is the same set of "growing pains" that Bitcoin and Litecoin experienced when adding the DER encoding; its nothing new.
To reference your insinuation of my funds:
There is no code to change existing wallets' funds.
There's no modification of funds of any wallet. There's only one hard coded allocation of funds and that's the original address for the first block that the original dev setup. You can see it at:
https://github.com/number435398/Noodlyappendagecoin-project/blob/a4e384415428af9747ba569871e8366880919c13/src/validation.cpp#L1041-L1052static const uint64_t TOTAL_GENERATION = MAX_MONEY;
static const double FSM_FUNDS = 0.03;
uint64_t nSubsidy = 10000 * COIN;
CAmount GetBlockSubsidy(int nHeight, const Consensus::Params& consensusParams)
{
if(nHeight == 1)
{
nSubsidy = TOTAL_GENERATION * FSM_FUNDS;
// return nSubsidy + nFees;
return nSubsidy;
}
The original code shows the same:
https://github.com/His-Holy-Noodliness/noodlyappendagecoin/blob/1393e84397788417500a49349f1d41f7bc40759d/src/main.cpp#L1067-L1076int64 static GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64 nFees)
{
// standard block payouts are 10000 coins
int64 nSubsidy = 10000 * COIN;
if(nHeight == 1)
{
nSubsidy = TOTAL_GENERATION * FSM_FUNDS;
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
This can be further confirmed at
http://explorer.noodlyappendagecoin.net/block/a7d3e05f3f9e39a4676ea3e58a41718027786a4e05f37201e55c7f9b5713b706If I had tried to change that it would alter the entire blockchain and the entire block chain would get rejected. I actually had that problem early on when I hadn't set Block 1 to the proper amount that was already in the blockchain; the new wallet would reject the entire blockchain beginning with Block 1.
Shortly: Just why should ANYONE ELSE look at this inception as it would be an improvement?
According to standard exchanges, NDL is "worthless". If we upgrade it to the new protocols it can then be traded and therefor will be considered to have worth. I'd say that's quite valuable. Your 30 million NDL is currently worth $0.00. If there are no bugs with the new wallet, then that 30 million NDL becomes worth $1050 if NDL trades for 1 satoshi each. For every satoshi of value that an NDL increases it multiplies that $1050 by the number of satoshi.
I don't know what uncertainty there could be. The code is available for perusal, and has been for months, but its just a mod of the Litecoin wallet, which is standard. I have also consistently advocated people backup their wallets. I, myself, have multiple old folders that are time and date stamped for the purpose of archiving old variations on the blockchain if it is needed for subsequent reference. If there's some massive bug we've overlooked; we'll roll it back. But we can't just sit around and refuse to go outside because something might happen to us; we have to grow.
I only am citing from the above:
"Previous wallets will no longer function at that point. Even if an older wallet is coded with the new pchmessage, all blocks generated by it will be rejected and a small percentage of its sent transactions will actually be accepted (due to DER encoding)."
Now: What is the implication that should be a benefit to NDL-Holders, is this a win-win case or another robbery?
So far there has not been a single positive argument for the less negative cases, so I still don't know what to think about it, - and because of that: Please everyone do your own dd.
So, because there is "no positive argument for the less negative case" people should be running for the hills? I don't even know what statement, that hasn't already been made, would fit your criteria. The repository is there if you want to go over it. If you're so concerned that I'm making some irreversible, malicious, and or inappropriate changes, then go through the code, and or keep a backup copy of the current chain and your current wallet. I've always advocated backing up one's wallet.
Then you're accusing me of robbery? You're accusing me of spending around a year of being in this forum and months of programming in an attempt to try to rip off a very small community of a coin that doesn't even have value, that is also, by some, considered to be "dead" and that may still end up being worth nothing even after all this effort on my part and DaveF's part. The last time this coin was traded, I think it was worth around 5 NDL per 1 satoshi, so your 30 million would be worth a mere $210 and the entire current coin supply would be worth around $75,000, assuming someone would be willing to buy the whole coin supply.
You're accusing me of similar plans to Jon Stewart's hypothetical terrorist in this video:
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/gn2sjr/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-friends-without-benefits---9-11-respondersIts from the Zadroga Bill; the bill to help pay 9/11 first responders' medical bills. This was necessary since so many of them were dying from strange cancers and even selling off their homes and all their possessions just to be able to afford to pay their medical bills for their cancers that were caused by them helping people and helping clean up on 9/11. Someone wanted to add an amendment to the bill that stated that terrorists couldn't receive payments to cover their medical bills from 9/11, but, that doesn't make sense because no terrorist would have helped save people and clean up on 9/11 to get lung cancer just to take advantage of medical benefits from the federal government. Its not worth it nor is it realistic to assume anyone would do such. The same thing applies here. When you consider the hundreds of hours I've spent (yes, hundreds when you consider programming, compiling dozens of exes for testing, etc) versus what the coin is worth, I'd be a freaking moron to do that. It wouldn't be worth it.
I now have the knowledge and the experience to program a brand new wallet for a brand new coin if that's what I really wanted; I don't need Noodlyappendagecoin. I want Noodlyappendagecoin.
You're like the homeless guy claiming I want to steal your old ratty blanket as I drive up in a brand new BMW. I'm not asking you to give me your blanket and such paranoia is really weird. And unlike your ratty old blanket, with Noodlyappendagecoin you can always roll it back if it got bad enough.
I haven't changed the algorithm, I haven't changed the difficulty adjustment equation, I haven't changed the encryption, I haven't changed the block times, I haven't changed the difficulty change time. I think I did add some light transaction fees (its been like 2-3 months since I released this version so I'd have to go back and double check to be exact). I felt that making a change to the difficulty algorithm (as some suggested) was going too far for this version upgrade AND was not necessary for the growth of the coin at this time AND there was no consensus as to what to change it to. Everything else was already programmed for me by the Bitcoin Developers, that was then modified by the Litecoin developers, which I then modified. My changes are standard for the "industry" if you will.
PPS: By the way, my announcement of sending 30 Million NDL to someone who creates an up to date wallet for this coin is still alive. It only should be a benefit for everyone involved benefitely ... so, perhaps we will have two chains in near future.
Besides your grammer/syntax being a bit odd; I don't even remotely understand how that would result in two chains or why you would try to break this community apart for a mere wallet upgrade. Admittedly I wanted to increase the block size, but I didn't, as I was concerned that might be too much for me to arbitrarily do that didn't conform to the criteria of "necessary". If there's a specific thing that actually and truly harms things, then point it out. Right now its as if you're just trying to be a doomsayer without evidence. If you want to be a doomsayer, that's fine, go for it. But show evidence. If you're claiming Planet X is about to collide with the earth, then tell us the coordinates of your observations in the sky so we can confirm your suspicions.
If you've been burned before with regards to other coins and you're apprehensive, fine, I totally get that, but explain that. Keep a backup of your current chain and wallet; just make a copy the Noodlyappendagecoin folder in your Users> (insert user here) > AppData > Roaming folder and rename it to reference the date that you're copying it. That way if there's a need to roll it back, you have it ready.
I've put hundreds of hours into this trying several different versions of the wallets to find which one works best etc.
I find your evidence-lacking-anti-my-new-wallet perspective to be insulting. I've put substantial amounts of time into this project without compensation and so has DaveF. Maybe you're comfortable with sitting around with this project not having any exchange value for 4 years and, frankly, going nowhere, but I know I'm not and I doubt DaveF is okay with that either. I'm moving the project forward without any attack on anyone who's been involved in the project. I even offered the original dev a substantial stake if he'd come back and remake the wallet (before I did). He didn't respond.
I've put tons of work into this coin. It should be moving forward and adapting, not sitting around gathering dust. You saw me offering 100 million NDL for someone to make the wallet. No one took the offer. So I did it. We need to move forward. Sans any major issues, I don't plan a lot of changes after this particular update either; this is the minimum necessary to garner value for this project and get traded. We can't even fund anything regarding this project because NDL isn't worth anything so we can't even trade it or sell it to fund itself.
If you want to say you don't trust me or you're just not convinced of trust, fine, then say that. At least clearly preface your doom-saying so that others don't think you're privy to something that you're not.
I also wonder and ask, if you're going to dismiss me as you have for all the work I've put into this, even if I disappeared, how would you treat anyone else who tried to get involved in the project, would you treat them the same way? If you did, how long do you think they'd stay?
PS. If I was going to steal people's NDL, then why have I been, and continue to mine to wallet address NLfFUfsgBB5GsriyzFrSAdhpT4VhGBqLgs? Info located at
http://explorer.noodlyappendagecoin.net/address/NLfFUfsgBB5GsriyzFrSAdhpT4VhGBqLgsGoing at least as far back as block 1351264 (
http://explorer.noodlyappendagecoin.net/block/f98250c84982d0458217b34d84d996790e89848329966e8c8c251044ac5b690b), with hash f98250c84982d0458217b34d84d996790e89848329966e8c8c251044ac5b690b with the tx hash of 578c196cd4d42a9d6750905e1b93e5d5912179f96f29e85e1382929a27431155 (
http://explorer.noodlyappendagecoin.net/tx/578c196cd4d42a9d6750905e1b93e5d5912179f96f29e85e1382929a27431155). Why would I do that? It'd be a waste of my time and computing power to do that if I was going to scam everyone out of their coins.
it has its own package manager...