Topic: [ANN] Slimcoin : Proof of Burn NEW BLOCK GEN, Mineable by low power computer! - page 71. (Read 284956 times)
June 23, 2014, 09:29:24 PM
Can not mine anyone.
June 23, 2014, 09:26:07 PM
My new wallet, no burning coins, But indeed found three POB blocks
June 23, 2014, 09:21:45 PM
PoS: 445?
Why?
Relaunch?
Dev: what are the details of the pos?
Why?
Relaunch?
Dev: what are the details of the pos?
June 23, 2014, 07:25:14 PM
Steve uses to provide us table of stats. It could be interesting now to see if we have a diff.
I plan to - starting at the latest hard fork [...] I can't help but think the current block generation rate appears to be higher, at least. But that might be psychology after the days of nothing happening 
Block generation was definitely lots faster - I guess the network took a while to balance out all the hashing power thrown at it that was ready to go as soon as the update was posted.
Here's some basic graphs from the re-launch:
 |  | |
 |  | |
 |  | |
 |  |
Yep, those who got in early on the relaunch made a mint
Keen observers might see a single dot in the otherwise 'down' period. That's block #15936, minted 2014-06-20 06:58:03 . (15937 and 15938 were also minted before the relaunch, but only by about an hour).
There's also a metric somethingsomething of PoS blocks now, so that's got its own bits and pieces in some of the graphs.
Perhaps also of interest - the massive block generation just after relaunch.
In the first 4 hours, ~420 blocks. Counting just the PoW blocks, ~331. That gives an interval time between PoW blocks of ~43.5s.
Compare that to the last 4 hours, ~194 blocks. PoW blocks, ~26. Interval: ~553.8s.
The vast majority of the later blocks appear to be PoS. I think the last 12 hours or so in the dataset were relatively stable, so breaking down blocks in that period:
PoW: 98
PoB: 28
PoS: 445
Like this post? Donate Slimcoin: STDpqwvEC6banMNzfNYDTuZy8xspHpGuNj
June 23, 2014, 05:38:33 PM
New thread to notify that Slimcoin was relaunched: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=663377.new#new
why do we need another "new" thread? To attract new miners ?
June 23, 2014, 05:36:43 PM
New thread to notify that Slimcoin was relaunched: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=663377.new#new
why do we need another "new" thread? June 23, 2014, 05:33:47 PM
Such announcement
June 23, 2014, 05:32:43 PM
New thread to notify that Slimcoin was relaunched: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=663377.new#new
June 23, 2014, 05:15:19 PM
DEV FYI:
Two pictures are same transaction received, I suppose this transaction came from POOL
Two pictures are same transaction received, I suppose this transaction came from POOL
Yeah , known bug..
same to me. Just skip it.
June 23, 2014, 05:01:55 PM
DEV FYI:
Two pictures are same transaction received, I suppose this transaction came from POOL
Two pictures are same transaction received, I suppose this transaction came from POOL
Yeah , known bug..
June 23, 2014, 04:54:06 PM
DEV FYI:
Two pictures are same transaction received, I suppose this transaction came from POOL
Two pictures are same transaction received, I suppose this transaction came from POOL
June 23, 2014, 04:15:20 PM
Someone email bter or the member who first posted about bter adding SLM to re-enable deposits!!
June 23, 2014, 03:30:00 PM
DEV, you should check the POS algorithm - it overloads the CPU as primer said before (I was forced to transfer all coins to other wallet to fix it) and distorts a sensible POW/POB algorithm. At the same time it's half cents per block doesn't make any sense for miners - I just closed the wallet with all my coins.
Many POS coin use the algo:
Takes a transaction if eligible, then calculates the interest then add the interest and split the transaction in two news transaction, and so on.
The problem is that algo is creating many transactions until the transaction are too small to split resulting in multitude of transaction you never made. Notes that the wallet when the amount of transaction is important takes more CPU, that's your problem.
And this is a real problem seen in majority of POS coins actually.
June 23, 2014, 02:54:33 PM
DEV, you should check the POS algorithm - it overloads the CPU as primer said before (I was forced to transfer all coins to other wallet to fix it) and distorts a sensible POW/POB algorithm. At the same time it's half cents per block doesn't make any sense for miners - I just closed the wallet with all my coins.
June 23, 2014, 02:44:52 PM
Steve uses to provide us table of stats. It could be interesting now to see if we have a diff.
I plan to - starting at the latest hard fork - just have to free up some time to do so (and shut down the wallet, restart with zero connections, as right now it's completely pegged with network and disk I/O). I can't help but think the current block generation rate appears to be higher, at least. But that might be psychology after the days of nothing happening June 23, 2014, 02:35:46 PM
DEV, please, look at POB blocks algorithm. Something's definitely wrong. I could post some numbers later if you need. Looks like SlimCoinAfterBurner() is called a lot rarely lately. Just 30 calls out of 200 blocks. About 6 calls an hour. It's a lot less it was before. POS blocks could distort it somehow. It was different before them. Everything else looks fine.
Out of those 200 blocks, how many were PoW. The SlimCoinAfterBurner() is only called every time a new PoW block is found, thus PoB blocks can only be found after PoW blocks, not PoS blocks.
I guess it's the number of POW blocks - 30 out of 200. Could POS blocks distort the algorithm? They pop up very often. A lot more often then POB blocks for similar share of coins. At the same time POW difficulty is pretty high for a coin without exchange. Could the algorithm try to adjust difficulty for POW+POS blocks together?
June 23, 2014, 02:22:26 PM
DEV, please, look at POB blocks algorithm. Something's definitely wrong. I could post some numbers later if you need. Looks like SlimCoinAfterBurner() is called a lot rarely lately. Just 30 calls out of 200 blocks. About 6 calls an hour. It's a lot less it was before. POS blocks could distort it somehow. It was different before them. Everything else looks fine.
Out of those 200 blocks, how many were PoW. The SlimCoinAfterBurner() is only called every time a new PoW block is found, thus PoB blocks can only be found after PoW blocks, not PoS blocks.
TheRealSteve uses to provide us table of stats. It could be interesting now to see if we have a diff.
IE: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7097546
June 23, 2014, 01:30:10 PM
i felt after reluanch pob blocks is much hard to find now,as i kept the pecentage of the burn coins. maybe half or 30% .
After 1 day continue, 0 POB block found ( with 1400 burnt coins )
It's hard to get PoB block now. 117231 slm have been burned.
No, it is simple, I have got env 1.2% so I should receive in mean 1.2% of all POB block. After 24h I think more than 100 blocks have been found. So I should at least have seen 1 mint block in my wallet.................
The question is: how many POB blocks have been found in 24h
sounds reasonable...
June 23, 2014, 01:29:27 PM
DEV, please, look at POB blocks algorithm. Something's definitely wrong. I could post some numbers later if you need. Looks like SlimCoinAfterBurner() is called a lot rarely lately. Just 30 calls out of 200 blocks. About 6 calls an hour. It's a lot less it was before. POS blocks could distort it somehow. It was different before them. Everything else looks fine.
Out of those 200 blocks, how many were PoW. The SlimCoinAfterBurner() is only called every time a new PoW block is found, thus PoB blocks can only be found after PoW blocks, not PoS blocks.
June 23, 2014, 01:17:44 PM
DEV, please, look at POB blocks algorithm. Something's definitely wrong. I could post some numbers later if you need. Looks like SlimCoinAfterBurner() is called a lot rarely lately. Just 30 calls out of 200 blocks. About 6 calls an hour. It's a lot less it was before. POS blocks could distort it somehow. It was different before them. Everything else looks fine.
Jump to: