Topic: [ANN] TagCoin - Multi Token Wallet and Trading Platform - page 38. (Read 301292 times)

we really need a dev to check. i'll see if i can get hold of one

Will you check?

If it is the case the next question how come this is in the code?

If this is in fact the issue with TAG, I will be a very happy camper, and I will go on record as saying I was completely wrong about my suspicions of a network hack/attack.

Fingers crossed.

-Fuse

no problem

Ahmed, thanks for the link.

Fuse, is this not the exact thing I told you about in chat lastnight? That it's likely due to some inexperienced developer tweaking settings to make the coin more responsive, and trying to sell it off as a feature? I'm buying a lotto ticket tonight.. I'm like 10 for 10 this week.

Action item: Look into the TAG code.

I don't mind doing this sometime today or tomorrow, but I'm guessing someone else here will beat me to it.

reading that thread it very much sounds like it is possible that it is the negative retarget bug. i guess we would have to check the source code?

and afaik it affect everyone since youre pool had the issue, my pool had the issue, zc's pool had the issue and im sure many others did too.

this could just be someone malicious on the network playing games. and due to the bug being able to do so. i think we need to check this first and see if it is this bug so it can be hard forked and fixed. From what i recall the coins with issues are starcoin based coins which i dont think this is. (initially it was rock
solid while starcoin based coins never are)

Ahmed


EDIT: https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/2684-theredmist/?p=27084

^there is the relevent part

Something else to keep in mind, a lot of coins are permutations of each-other and at times, poor ones at that. As I mentioned to Fuse yesterday, it's possible that some code snippets have been taken out over time by folks, not knowing they were important, which later led to issues like this.

If there have been nefarious actions against TAG specifically, it could be due to its popularity and stable price. It has remained concrete-stable despite volatility for the past 5 months. That is noteworthy.


Exactly my point.

Mark can do this with his farm... smart move. 

-Fuse

Brief overview of negative retarget with sublinks: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-orbitcoin-is-broken-395940

Ahmed, it's certainly worth investigating a negative retarget situation. Is it simple a matter of a pool being ahead in time and then mining some coins to check? Cuz I can easily do that, and will volunteer one of my private pools for it if anyone wants to pop blocks fast.

In keeping with some of the coins in the world, I've noticed a few of them have had previously-confirmed (defined as confirmed and paid for a very long time, not just recent) blocks suddenly turn orphan, usually not a string of them either (indicating a fork), but just a sparse 1 or 2. Very odd. What's more odd is this occured across several coins around the same timeframe. Could just be an odd bug (or nothing at all) but worth mentioning.

With TAG, I've been following it and some other "stuff" in the netheregions of the internet, and my overall estimation is that something "isn't quite right" though I can't say what.

One thing is for sure, TAG hashrate has dropped by 70% in the past 2 days. So while it is worth noting the asian market is trading in greater volumes, the network is slowly dying out/collapsing. This may or may not matter to the developer from a business standpoint, as long as there's a few MH, transactions will still work for the "rewards" system.

Ahmed, where have you been all my life?

OK... so how do we check if this is the issue, and is this negative retarget issue fixable?

Also, why would this only effect certain pools, or is this a completely random occurrence?

-Fuse

just out of curiosity this isnt the negative retarget? bug which orbitcoin experienced recently?
if the coin was to be relaunched i personally would say stick with POS but go for a coin like hobonickles. that has a solid codebase and an active and quite innovative dev (he created the first ever multi wallet QT) and afaik it hasnt had any of these issues.

 

I hear you on that one, Ahmed!

I honestly think at this point that there will not be a fix found, because it isn't a problem with the coin.  If it's a code issue, the coins this code were based off of would have had similar issues before, giving us a solid basis for what the problem is.  Now if by some chance it is a code issue, this will be an ongoing issue for a very long time and will probably kill this coin's support for the rest of it's life.  If that's the case, you scrap this code and relaunch the coin as a straight 1 to 1 clone of something proven, like LTC or hell even EAC, and you cut your loses before they bleed you dry.  I'm 100% sure that the dedicated community would probably get behind it, as it would be a wise choice for a push forward for the long term goal and future of TAG.  Yes people will complain, as they probably hold a ton of coins waiting to dump at a later time, but it's the smart move for this coin's future, and the future of it's use for the Tagbond platform.

Now.... if you do this, or even scrap POS as another attempted fix, and you find out it's still happening, then there's network manipulation.  At that point, you're screwed either way, and any pool outside the sphere of the manipulator's protection will continue to orphan as long as they decide to shut us down with orphans.  With the amount of trade volume on btc38 compared to cryptsy, and the fact that for some reason Botpool hasn't been getting hit as hard with the orphans after the fixes, I'm thinking the asian markets have some kind of hand in the manipulation.  There, I said it.  I know I'm getting into conspiracy theory stuff here, but I truly believe this is the case.  China is trading 2-3 times the amount of TAG that the rest of the world is trading, and it's straight into Yuan.

At this point, you cut the loses for the community by relaunching the coin on solid POW coin code, and you smoke out the rats.

-Fuse

Seems like nobody got a clue what's going on. How can this go into production like this.

Dev you better solve this otherwise this whole thing is gonna fall apart real soon.

oh we certainly have. maybe even further. fixing the pools when it happens is all too fun too

Have you guys had a previously-confirmed block (or more than one) turn orphan hundreds or thousands of confirmations later? That's always fun.

exactly which almost everyone has done so i dont really see this "update" as fixing anything to do with orphans at all. infact if the banning was the case then why hasnt hobonickles had this issue (they use rizon too, and it still hasnt been updated to not use it. (atleast the fix hasnt been pushed to the main repo(mine))

And users who hard code nodes into their config file...

urmmm. Rizon banning nodes would only stop discovery of new nodes. existing nodes and nodes from other peers would still be found by P2P (or seed nodes if built in) so this ban would only affect brand new clients. i still dont see how this could cause orphans as people with existing clients would have all their peers stored in the peers.dat file :/

We just posted version 1.0.5 on github that fixes the IRC issued caused by Rizon banning the use of irc for coins and peer matching. This would probably have caused that last round of orphans. This should be considered mandatory.

The value of tag has been plummeting non stop.  I have been having a lot of luck on tag.cryptominer.net. No huge orphan issues in days, but I am going to stop mining tag as it's too risky at the moment.  I really hope this gets ironed out because this is a great concept with the POS benefits.  Difficulty is also all over the place.  I am dumping all my mining power into doge as its been the coin of choice recently.