Topic: [ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin" - page 435. (Read 1151252 times)

for some reason mine says out of sync and the little spinning circle is missing.. and no update bar , very strange

   I've got 45 connections, and up to date.  On block 208597

hmm suddenly not syncing

says 16 connections to clam network but no progress bar or syncing its blank

anyone else? was ok last night

Q

woot ! We're on the same block chain. lol

See.. comparing recent blockhashes works (if/when the comparisons are done in real time).

That's all exactly what I wanted to hear.

Good job.

True.


For those who do not have a deeper understanding, the above listed blocks are called "checkpoints".
They provide a bit of sanity for syncing clients on the network; more importantly, they are added to the code periodically during updates and as a matter of policy should include a block that is deep enough into the past to give a strong cost:benefit argument for their addition.  It is important when a checkpoint is set, that there are no competing chains at that depth so that the effect becomes to solidify a non-contentious point in the chain as opposed to "choosing".

For instance, the last checkpoint in the code you listed above was block # 175,000.  It was added during the last update which went into effect on block #203,500.  For those with less mathematical patience, that is 28,500 blocks into the past.

With a target of 1,440 blocks a day (though we were moving faster than that due to the exploits fixed), I think we can all agree that the impact of a re-organization in the magnitude of multiple "days" would not be conductive or appropriate in a ledger system; especially considering that the above re-organization would have had to emerge from a disconnected set of clients that did not exist in the cluster of nodes which included Poloniex, the primary exchange, or the primary network - which is quite simple given the limited scope of the current network.

In the future, that may not be so simple.  However, I think some comfort can be gleaned from the fact that we have publicly denounced other chain development teams which have chosen to "rollback" the ledger.  In addition, we clearly chose NOT to rollback the chain or blacklist addresses given the recent lottery exploit.  And, as long as the current team in place maintains control of the development project behind CLAMS - that will continue to be the case

The ledger is sacred.  
The ability to transact without fear of reprisal or seizure is sacred.

---

Caritas. Libertas. Aequitas. Monetas.

Well, like you say the client itself has a list of blocks and their hashes:


but you also get to change the code however you like, including forcing hardforks, so it's a little off to say that there isn't an "official" chain.

Unfortunately, it is a bit.. contentious.. to declare an "official" block for a given height.
During code updates, we often do place checkpoints for sanity, however beyond that it becomes a bit more murky.

On my personal client, I show for block# 208000:

d2ca72505c79979957573e5dd6e0bf08955e79cda57b66c2126f7cb85f200e83

Hope that is helpful

Everything is ok now that I'm on the newest client.

What do you say to, adding blockhash updates (every 100? - 1000? blocks) to the OP and /or display the current client version to the main title ?

BLOCK        HASH
207959       8b0e61e98ae4f8fff4355c4f6a2f5b99d6bee61c8f530143dfbd7627a1af7e6e
 
EDIT

Here is my .conf. As you can see, no addnode and connect flags were used.
 

One last difficulty chart update:

hello! tnx for the help i add the server=1 still dont work

server=1
connect=84.194.247.232:31174
connect=23.92.210.2:31174
connect=54.75.227.85:38343
connect=104.131.59.43:53103
connect=77.247.181.165:65190
connect=162.218.65.19:45406
connect=96.246.211.120:19476
connect=83.86.189.163:58108
connect=93.103.131.59:53324
connect=71.188.55.212:31174
connect=76.94.201.185:36079
connect=109.195.211.62:50318
connect=86.58.104.183:49860
connect=203.20.114.252:31174
connect=108.195.138.58:60527
connect=193.166.139.206:55786
connect=78.134.3.254:63941
connect=198.245.60.38:53497
connect=24.96.235.190:61000
connect=108.237.13.94:34724
connect=71.241.130.246:31174
connect=198.245.60.38:55364
connect=203.174.191.230:50533
connect=69.131.59.58:4719
connect=24.67.30.88:51620
connect=89.88.199.104:51398
connect=37.209.45.163:49312
connect=108.227.82.11:50317
connect=108.91.73.3:63989
connect=73.55.207.245:64773
connect=80.195.253.183:31174
connect=95.91.224.82:11614

Did we lose -reindex functionality in the recent hardfork?

All I see is a comment:

RPC is getting separated from the wallet (code wise). You can choose not to activate it if you don't need to.
 
If you add  server=1  to the clam.conf file the RPC will work.  

im trying to unlock my wallet I got this message "

Error: RPC server was not started, use server=1 to change this. (code -18)

Also can confirm

correct

Q

Yep, same hash for 204990 on my wallet.

Copy that!

Here's a recent block in my client:

> getblockhash 204990
d4dbfae71d2fd6bf224a4a4cfe83a7a17c2c40c6e7f7cdcb738bf597beb3d6c6

Can someone please confirm they see the same hash for that height?

A few "fresh" nodes for ppl who need to re-download chain and to make sure you end up syncing the correct chain.

Clam.conf :


-As usual, move your wallet.dat to safe location before you sync.
-Check and verify that you are indeed on the right chain before you copy wallet.dat back.
-Currently use IRC chat for chain verification or post in forum.
-When done, delete peers.dat and change connect= to addnode=

Edited Karn's quote to clarify a few things.


All of these numbers are arbitrary and an estimation of the network state based on recent data. In no way do they accurately represent the actual values(they are impossible to know). They are in the process of being revised to be human readable and not a bunch of jumble =p

In other words, you should not pay attention to any of the numbers in the staking tooltip(short of the network weight), especially the expected time. Please do not make any judgements based on these values. My best advice would be to stake for a while, and then make some estimations based on that.

---

Also:


This indicates that you are running the proper build. You should ignore the version string for now (i.e. "1.4.2.1..")