Good to have the OP at page 1 and page 1000!
Edit: original OP
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8307440
Thanks ex33s😉
A nice celebration is by having issues solved.
Topic: [ANN] [XMG] MAGI | CPU mining | mPoW | mPoS | [MagiPay] - page 320. (Read 2375939 times)
Good to have the OP at page 1 and page 1000!
Edit: original OP
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8307440
Thanks ex33s😉
A nice celebration is by having issues solved.
Message received from Cryptopia exchange.
They will look into the wallet updates & if all things are running smooth Cryptopia might keep XMG on the exchange. Lets wait & hope for good news! 😀
They will look into the wallet updates & if all things are running smooth Cryptopia might keep XMG on the exchange. Lets wait & hope for good news! 😀
How does 1.4.4.1 change the PoS rules? I'm running the new wallet unlocked with ~1.5k xmg, but it doesn't seem to want to stake like it used to. Do I not have enough coins? I sent them to myself again a few days ago, and was expecting to see some stake weight by now.
Let's keep the chain moving 
When i send to an address within the wallet, it doesnt send it at all. It just pays a small fee but it doesnt move the coins. So i resolved by creating a new wallet.dat file and sending it back and forth. If there is a better way to do this, please do let me know.
Moving forward, it seems it is still not staking despite the move. I have mPoS enabled and it has been a few days. Not sure what else to do. I recall it was staking in the past, but now it says "not enough weight" and i have +4K in there...
Any help would be appreciated.
You can move from one address to another within your wallet with
Code:
move [minconf=1] [comment]
Nice! Cheers mate. I always wanted to know how to do that
Yyyaaayyyy 1K!! Good work. Keep the love flowing
Haha Goldlabel you always make nice pictures!
And funny ones!😅
And funny ones!😅
Good to have the OP at page 1 and page 1000!
Yup, but you should always read the OP too, since quotes is a snapshot of that post looked when you did the quote!
Extremely nice to see magi passing 1k pages
that 1k page is taking forever! hahaha
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mobnetic.coinguardian
Nice app to keep you updated about XMG value
that 1k page is taking forever! hahaha
Indeed!!!
I can't d/l the new wallet. I upgraded my router and it's built-in av/firewall by Trend Micro is blocking the d/l saying it is malware.
Is there any other site I can grab the wallet from?
Is there any other site I can grab the wallet from?
You should only get the wallet from http://m-core.org/download/ for magi, specially if you are using binary.
Some antivirus report wallets and those are false positives.
Yeah - I always used to get that with the sweetspot miner - but just created an exception in my anti virus rules. They are pretty harsh with anything to do with crypto.
I think the Magi is because it uses IRC - some viruses also use IRC to list hosts, so its probably just a catch-all on Trend Mircro
(But seriously, only download from the official link on the OP)
i dont know why people like to use antivirus with a lot of false positives. Stick with proven track record if you want to use antivirus or go no antivirus at all. Bitdefender Nod32 kaspersky norton are some of the proven antiviruses
that 1k page is taking forever! hahaha
I can't d/l the new wallet. I upgraded my router and it's built-in av/firewall by Trend Micro is blocking the d/l saying it is malware.
Is there any other site I can grab the wallet from?
Is there any other site I can grab the wallet from?
You should only get the wallet from http://m-core.org/download/ for magi, specially if you are using binary.
Some antivirus report wallets and those are false positives.
Yeah - I always used to get that with the sweetspot miner - but just created an exception in my anti virus rules. They are pretty harsh with anything to do with crypto.
I think the Magi is because it uses IRC - some viruses also use IRC to list hosts, so its probably just a catch-all on Trend Mircro
(But seriously, only download from the official link on the OP)
I can't d/l the new wallet. I upgraded my router and it's built-in av/firewall by Trend Micro is blocking the d/l saying it is malware.
Is there any other site I can grab the wallet from?
Is there any other site I can grab the wallet from?
You should only get the wallet from http://m-core.org/download/ for magi, specially if you are using binary.
Some antivirus report wallets and those are false positives.
http://m-core.org/issues.txt
I'd like to address some concerns raised in the past as well as recently. A short summary:
## Concerns raised by the new PoW/PoS block mining/minting rule (v1.4.4.1)
* Potentially disturbed the way how difficulty was being adjusted
* Block rewards are affected accordingly
* Hashrate calculation needs an adjustment
* PoW block rejection causing less effective blocks mined
## Difficulty adjustment in slow response to the hashrate
## Big Hashrate concerns
## PoW / PoS rule violation
For details check out the link.
The first and foremost, we need a change to the difficulty adjustment algo. The situation has been associated with miners who jump in at low difficulty and mine blocks before the difficulty increases. A block-to-block adjustment should reflect the scene of miners in and out that creates hashrate fluctuations. Importantly, the block reward adjustment itself should be sensitive to difficulty / hashrate variation.
I'd give an expectation of one month to address the concerns; however, the final release might depend. I will update over the course. For the major concerns and possible approaches are mentioned below.
1) Difficulty adjustment algo as mentioned above
2) The new PoW/PoS generation rule concerns block finding efficiency by some pools
* Reverse the PoW block time to original 3 minutes. The idea of using 4 minutes changed in v1.4.4.1 is to reduce the PoW violation; PoW violation seems to occur anyways unless block time is significantly elongated. Instead, the larger block time reduce the number of PoW blocks and thus less chance hitting on the small-scale pools.
* Mitigating PoW block violations
The initial purpose of the PoW rule is to avoid flash mining that likely causes the forking issue; I believe this isn't that helpful on the forking under the new release. In addition, the new rule helps on the situation that big miners jump in when difficulty is low and mine blocks easily and quickly. I thought about reducing down to one PoS block between PoW blocks; however, this is not enough I believe. There is randomness in blocks at different time (though regulated by difficulty), and possibly blocks come out adjacent to another PoW; even though with reducing two to one PoS block between PoW would still lead to rejecting one portion of PoW. One way to take is to have the PoW rule similar to the PoS rule: multiple PoW blocks (say three) one after another allowed, but no more than four (numbers are example). It should be noted that there is a chance when big miners come along they might mine the allowed blocks, and left those blocks to be rejected to other miners; again this can be in part sorted by well-shaped difficulty adjustment. In either way, mitigating PoW block violations is the way to go from what I can see.
3) Big hashrate miners & fast block reward adjustment
A fast-response difficulty adjustment will facilitate evaluating the difficulty properly and thus the block reward (reward-difficulty dependent to each other). Other than this, block reward adjustment should also take place fast and reflects the hashrate in no time; hashrate would be another parameter to have in place.
Given a better responsive block reward, it won't be necessary to turn off PoW at high network hashrate as we talked a while ago. However, I'd go the turning-off approach at a rare situation, like 5-10 fold increase in the hashrate. We'd be aware disturbance to how PoW operates will get side effects as we've seen.
The coin targets at mining to be available to broad audience and general users. I was aware that there is no way to get done by few people, and would put the way in community and encourage participating in suggestions to make it better. Feel free to suggest.
I'd like to address some concerns raised in the past as well as recently. A short summary:
## Concerns raised by the new PoW/PoS block mining/minting rule (v1.4.4.1)
* Potentially disturbed the way how difficulty was being adjusted
* Block rewards are affected accordingly
* Hashrate calculation needs an adjustment
* PoW block rejection causing less effective blocks mined
## Difficulty adjustment in slow response to the hashrate
## Big Hashrate concerns
## PoW / PoS rule violation
For details check out the link.
The first and foremost, we need a change to the difficulty adjustment algo. The situation has been associated with miners who jump in at low difficulty and mine blocks before the difficulty increases. A block-to-block adjustment should reflect the scene of miners in and out that creates hashrate fluctuations. Importantly, the block reward adjustment itself should be sensitive to difficulty / hashrate variation.
I'd give an expectation of one month to address the concerns; however, the final release might depend. I will update over the course. For the major concerns and possible approaches are mentioned below.
1) Difficulty adjustment algo as mentioned above
2) The new PoW/PoS generation rule concerns block finding efficiency by some pools
* Reverse the PoW block time to original 3 minutes. The idea of using 4 minutes changed in v1.4.4.1 is to reduce the PoW violation; PoW violation seems to occur anyways unless block time is significantly elongated. Instead, the larger block time reduce the number of PoW blocks and thus less chance hitting on the small-scale pools.
* Mitigating PoW block violations
The initial purpose of the PoW rule is to avoid flash mining that likely causes the forking issue; I believe this isn't that helpful on the forking under the new release. In addition, the new rule helps on the situation that big miners jump in when difficulty is low and mine blocks easily and quickly. I thought about reducing down to one PoS block between PoW blocks; however, this is not enough I believe. There is randomness in blocks at different time (though regulated by difficulty), and possibly blocks come out adjacent to another PoW; even though with reducing two to one PoS block between PoW would still lead to rejecting one portion of PoW. One way to take is to have the PoW rule similar to the PoS rule: multiple PoW blocks (say three) one after another allowed, but no more than four (numbers are example). It should be noted that there is a chance when big miners come along they might mine the allowed blocks, and left those blocks to be rejected to other miners; again this can be in part sorted by well-shaped difficulty adjustment. In either way, mitigating PoW block violations is the way to go from what I can see.
3) Big hashrate miners & fast block reward adjustment
A fast-response difficulty adjustment will facilitate evaluating the difficulty properly and thus the block reward (reward-difficulty dependent to each other). Other than this, block reward adjustment should also take place fast and reflects the hashrate in no time; hashrate would be another parameter to have in place.
Given a better responsive block reward, it won't be necessary to turn off PoW at high network hashrate as we talked a while ago. However, I'd go the turning-off approach at a rare situation, like 5-10 fold increase in the hashrate. We'd be aware disturbance to how PoW operates will get side effects as we've seen.
The coin targets at mining to be available to broad audience and general users. I was aware that there is no way to get done by few people, and would put the way in community and encourage participating in suggestions to make it better. Feel free to suggest.
seems like a good plan and not too aggressive. Will wait for the next upgrade. Cheers
Agree, seems like better balance. Gonna be nice to see it implemented!
When i send to an address within the wallet, it doesnt send it at all. It just pays a small fee but it doesnt move the coins. So i resolved by creating a new wallet.dat file and sending it back and forth. If there is a better way to do this, please do let me know.
Moving forward, it seems it is still not staking despite the move. I have mPoS enabled and it has been a few days. Not sure what else to do. I recall it was staking in the past, but now it says "not enough weight" and i have +4K in there...
Any help would be appreciated.
You can move from one address to another within your wallet with
Code:
move[minconf=1] [comment]
When i send to an address within the wallet, it doesnt send it at all. It just pays a small fee but it doesnt move the coins. So i resolved by creating a new wallet.dat file and sending it back and forth. If there is a better way to do this, please do let me know.
Moving forward, it seems it is still not staking despite the move. I have mPoS enabled and it has been a few days. Not sure what else to do. I recall it was staking in the past, but now it says "not enough weight" and i have +4K in there...
Any help would be appreciated.
Moving forward, it seems it is still not staking despite the move. I have mPoS enabled and it has been a few days. Not sure what else to do. I recall it was staking in the past, but now it says "not enough weight" and i have +4K in there...
Any help would be appreciated.
Also now PoS is disabled by default unless specifying the following in magi.conf:
Code:
posii=1
I'm trying to make some pages that are informative to the mining and staking. I will post them once ready.
Worked like a charm! thanks mate
too soon!
Jump to: