Topic: (ANN) Netcoin has gone POS! With PIR & OWI - page 49. (Read 142149 times)

http://explorer.netcoinfoundation.org/tx/d78fd57fe3e0789a59e7d06c7d280812b33a55689699c4dd3004381c718bb636

what is Not yet redeemed?
if not yet redeemed where the coins may go? will it goes back to my wallet?
693.69446537   0.00000000   nNZYHDLS98UvWhpfDxNCLUwq7Xb1UtfCQ5 ()   > 1 days ago   NET
TxID: d78fd57fe3e0789a59e7d06c7d280812b33a55689699c4dd3004381c718bb636

Hmmm not had any reports about that before coinerer...

Anyway... Peeps time for a little update...

So, for the past 8 hours we have been monitoring the new 2.2 chain... As you know it froze yesterday and to be honest we thought it was a gonna. Then in the middle of the night it sprang to life!

We have been mining here http://pool.netcoinfoundation.org and watching as the blocks come in, it's certainly not perfect but much much better than it was previously, around about 100% more blocks coming than on the 2.1 chain.

So we have obviously decided for now to stick with the 2.2 chain until we make further improvements.

So by all means come along and join the hashing.

Thanks a lot everyone

Meee

EDIT: Oh and the good thing is it is 400 NET per block at the moment, double what it should be, and that's great because it makes up for the slightly slower blockchain.

EDIT: Oh and thanks for the effort coinerer but the official wallet also uses all the latest libraries. Yes 5.3.1 does cause some issues, hence why we use 4.8.6.

Today after I scanned the same file

         http://netcoin.orgfree.com/netcoin-2.20.7z

Bitdefender reported malware site.



Last time AutoShun reported malware site, and today AutoShun reports Urated site.

Isn't this very confusing?

Decide yourself if you will use this small website http://netcoin.orgfree.com

I noticed this, the same error at website http://quarkcoin.orgfree.com

I am surprised with 2 warnings too.

I think this is caused by ads from orgfree.com or from the counter, not from my files. I can't remove ads, but I can remove counter.

Be wary of coinerer's link peeps !

https://www.virustotal.com/en/url/7c08410315e917554f18b505307dbc6335d7a2476105e8760009141bec00d835/analysis/1413205243/

1)

I think both cases do the same. Better practice is to use if...else if...else...if...else. If both cases do the same, it means no need to fork, I think. This in only my opinion and I don't know whole procedure of coin development.


2)

I am not sure if I understand all correctly.

You talk about some problems in Netcoins. Which are problems in Netcoin?

3)

For me, only problem with PoS  is my PoS is not confirmed sometimes, not too often

4)

I made website
                            http://netcoin.orgfree.com

where I put Netcoin wallet compiled with all the newest libraries.  You can check it In this version which uses Qt5.3.2 I see GUI problems which should be corrected. (colors)

There is another option to explore... The older client is still moving... We could revert back to it and then kill the POW and see how the POS goes on it's own... Only problem with this that I see is I have no idea how the POS will act on it's own, but could be worth a shot?

What do you guys think of that? I know it has been suggested before, so maybe we could try?

Yeah sure I mean we would have it as the same params etc, it would be just as it is now just a new chain... I was thinking of using PPC coin base, though I am open for other suggestions.

I'm also fine with keeping the name Netcoin, I only thought of a new name at the time of writing because I didn't know how exchanges would deal with it, but since writing I see that they can just swap over to the new chain and so the name etc can stay unchanged.

So suggestions of coinbase really then?

EDIT: Hmmm okay can't use peercoin as it is sha256 and not scrypt.

EDIT: While we're at it we might as-well chose a coinbase that has multi-algo?

New coin should have the same name Netcoin, neither Reloaded nor something else is acceptable.

All parameters should stay unchanged.

New coin should be considered as only an update to Netcoin, only as new version of the same coin Netcoin.

New version of NetCoin should be based on the source code of new Bitcoin versions.  Possible updates has to be as easy as possible.

More than 90% of coins are based on old Bitcoin source code, and Netcoin should avoid that.

Okay guys, I was up all last night looking at this and trying things out on testnet... Really, the problem could lie in so many places, so I am here to ask you what you think about the trade in option... IE we make a new coin, Netcoin Reloaded or something... Pre-mine the existing coin total that is in circulation... And then you send us your Netcoins we send you the new coins 1 for 1...

This has some benefits... We'll know the coin will work properly... Also the block chain will be smaller.

It will be a bit of a pain and a lot of work for us. But we're willing to do it if this is something you are okay with and want. So if you can please let us know what you want us to do.

One way or the other we'll get it sorted!

But now I really don't know how to proceed... I'll need to hard fork again I imagine but on testnet lastnight I tried something... I had an updated client that included the else statements (apart from the one for reward)... My friend had the current wallet and they could talk to each other... It was actually like the else statements made no difference, at least it didn't reject the current client and visa versa...

So... I am thinking if I get the pools to update to the new client with the else statements we SHOULD still be able to talk to the other clients and get the chain moving again as intended... If it doesn't work then well there must be some other issue at play here.

But I think it must be the compounding difficulties, I can't see any other reason... But what is odd is this... Why didn't it do it on testnet? 0.o

Yes I looked in digibyte and saw the if else... and I think if digibyte had more than one change we would see the else if too... But certainly... And yeah I know exactly why it is at 400... Right we moved the block time to 2 minute a piece for pos and pow... pow used to be 1 minute... Because of this we double the pow reward and gave an extra 25% bonus for wallet adoption...

Now as the block times were off and difficulty retargetting wasn't working I changed it back to 1 minute block time and thus wanted to half the reward but keep the 25% bonus... But as the block switching had no else statements I guessed that the reward change didn't need them either...

Now I know both need the else statements. If that makes sense XD

Second case includes all possibilities if...if...if...else. This is the right way writing if..then...else clauses, and it is used in other coins (Digibyte,...)

I found answer on my question. you are rewarding with 25% current miners, with 400 net/block instead of 320 net/block.

Is 325 million NET still limit for PoW coins?

Well I'm not sure that is going to help to be honest, because this is down to how they made the hard fork for the difficulty retarget. As you can see we got 3 changes we have the original difficulty at the bottom, then we put in KGW then we put in digishield and then we put in an altrered digishield... What I think is happening is it is compounding the difficulties...

So imagine we should be at difficulty 1... We would actually be at difficulty 4... Then say we go to difficulty 2... We'll actually be at difficulty 8 and so on, so the higher the difficulty goes the more it goes up... difficulty 4 would be difficulty 16, so it just gets worse.

I mean the POS came from pandacoin... But unless they changed difficulty retargeting multiple times I'm not sure what it is going to tell you.

Which coin is the most similar to Netcoin at this moment?

@ coinerer and everyone really... I think there has been a major balls up stemming back from a long time ago... Back from when we had KGW put in... I'm not 100% so I need your thoughts here...

But to answer you coinerer I missed out an else statement and I think with the difficulty it is the same deal, but I am not fully to blame for that one. So here is the code that we have now for chosing which diff retarget to use...

// POW blocks tried various algorithms starting at different block height
unsigned int GetNextProofOfWork(const CBlockIndex* pindexLast, const CBlock* pblock)
{
    const CBlockIndex* pindexLastPOW = GetLastBlockIndex(pindexLast, false);

    // most recent (highest block height DIGISHIELD FIX)
    if (pindexLastPOW->nHeight+1 >= (fTestNet ? BLOCK_HEIGHT_DIGISHIELD_FIX_START_TESTNET : BLOCK_HEIGHT_DIGISHIELD_FIX_START))
        return GetNextWorkRequiredV2(pindexLastPOW, false);

    // most recent (highest block height)
    if (pindexLastPOW->nHeight+1 >= (fTestNet ? BLOCK_HEIGHT_POS_AND_DIGISHIELD_START_TESTNET : BLOCK_HEIGHT_POS_AND_DIGISHIELD_START))
        return GetNextTrust_DigiShield(pindexLastPOW, false);

    if (pindexLastPOW->nHeight+1 >= (fTestNet ? BLOCK_HEIGHT_KGW_START_TESTNET : BLOCK_HEIGHT_KGW_START))
        return GetNextWorkRequired_KGW(pindexLastPOW);

    // first netcoin difficulty algorithm
    return GetNextWorkRequired_V1(pindexLastPOW,pblock);
}

I THINK it should have been like this

// POW blocks tried various algorithms starting at different block height
unsigned int GetNextProofOfWork(const CBlockIndex* pindexLast, const CBlock* pblock)
{
    const CBlockIndex* pindexLastPOW = GetLastBlockIndex(pindexLast, false);

    // most recent (highest block height DIGISHIELD FIX)
    if (pindexLastPOW->nHeight+1 >= (fTestNet ? BLOCK_HEIGHT_DIGISHIELD_FIX_START_TESTNET : BLOCK_HEIGHT_DIGISHIELD_FIX_START))
        return GetNextWorkRequiredV2(pindexLastPOW, false);

    // most recent (highest block height)
    else if (pindexLastPOW->nHeight+1 >= (fTestNet ? BLOCK_HEIGHT_POS_AND_DIGISHIELD_START_TESTNET : BLOCK_HEIGHT_POS_AND_DIGISHIELD_START))
        return GetNextTrust_DigiShield(pindexLastPOW, false);

    else if (pindexLastPOW->nHeight+1 >= (fTestNet ? BLOCK_HEIGHT_KGW_START_TESTNET : BLOCK_HEIGHT_KGW_START))
        return GetNextWorkRequired_KGW(pindexLastPOW);

    else// first netcoin difficulty algorithm
    return GetNextWorkRequired_V1(pindexLastPOW,pblock);
}

Am I right? If so... I am not sure how we can fork it like that... Because as you can see non of the else statements are there. Some help would be greatly appreciated.

Why is new PoW block 400 instead of 320 in Netcoin v2.20 ?

1) At the beginning of makefiles (for netcoind .exe) add if necessary:

# Copyright (c) 2009-2010 Satoshi Nakamoto
# Distributed under the MIT/X11 software license, see the accompanying
# file license.txt or http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php.

CXX ?= g++

USE_UPNP:=0


2) then change every appearance of g++ with $(CXX)


3) Below obj/noui.o add:


    obj/noui.o \
    obj/zerocoin/Accumulator.o \
    obj/zerocoin/AccumulatorProofOfKnowledge.o \
    obj/zerocoin/Coin.o \
    obj/zerocoin/CoinSpend.o \
    obj/zerocoin/Commitment.o \
    obj/zerocoin/ParamGeneration.o \
    obj/zerocoin/Params.o \
    obj/zerocoin/SerialNumberSignatureOfKnowledge.o \
    obj/zerocoin/SpendMetaData.o \
    obj/zerocoin/ZeroTest.o


4) In makefiles (i am interested in makefile.mingw ) below obj/%.o: .... add commands for compiling obj/zerocoin/%.o : ...


obj/%.o: %.cpp $(HEADERS)
   $(CXX) -c $(CFLAGS) -o $@ $<

obj/zerocoin/%.o: zerocoin/%.cpp
   $(CXX) -c $(CFLAGS) -o $@ $<

Hey coinerer, are you talking about the windows Qt or netcoind?

But yeah I know these folders need creating for linux netcoind and most likely for the windows netcoind too... It's something I keep meaning to do and infact we did do at one time but I think they got lost along the way somewhere XD

I will get that sorted soon as possible.

Thanks for the heads up

EDIT: Oh, what did you mean by "Adjust configuration files too."?

Thanks again.

EDIT:

Sorry forgot to mention, we don't use leveldb. Which is why they aren't there.

Let's correct some mistakes in the source code because I can't compile Windows wallet.

Source code is from https://github.com/netcoinfoundation/netcoin

1) In the source code it is missing folder
        src/leveldb

2) and in the source code it is missing files
        src/leveldb.cpp and src/leveldb.h

3) in the source code it is missing 2 folders:
        src/obj/
        src/obj/zerocoin

For 1) and 2) I used files from Litecoin 0.8.7.4. Very likely you can use files from the newer versions of Bitcoin.

Adjust configuration files too.