Topic: [ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin" - page 452. (Read 1151252 times)

What's the minimum difficulty that you're mentioning?
In other words, the network difficulty is currently around 213000. How many times the minimum difficulty is that ?
The client tells me I can expect a stake in 3 days, but it's not clear how that interacts with the randomness.

Thanks

Shouldn't be a problem... Just downloaded fine.

I often see problems like yours on hard drives with file system errors... Start an elevated cmd.exe command prompt, type:
chkdsk c: /f /v /x /r

Restart your computer and wait 2 to 5 hours... Good luck!


PS: @clam: THANK you for the GUI import function. Testing next XD

twitter.com/devnullius

In the last 4 days I've been trying to download the client from Mega,
but somehow even at 1% it's giving me "temporary error" whatever that is...
though it keeps progressing very slowly but always giving me constant errors
do I need to register first to be able to download it smoothly without problem?

Yes. I'm wondering if the guy who dug up DOGE-CLAMs for 4 days solid a while ago recently remembered his wallet, and has stated letting it stake.

The difficulty is around 10 times harder than usual, and has been for 3 days now.

Network weight has been crazy lately huh?

That's a great idea.

The '0' is the number of confirmations needed to list an address - so if we can find out how many blocks there have been since the CLAM snapshot of the Bitcoin blockchain was taken, that's the number we need to put there. And the 'true' means to list addresses that never received any coins, so we don't want that.

Checking blockchain.info I see that block 298520 has a timestamp of 2014-05-01 01:02:33, which I'm guessing is around the time the snapshot was taken - but the CLAM developers should be able to give us the exact block number for all three snapshots.

Then at a Linux shell prompt I can run:


to get a list of all the addresses which were funded on or before that block number and so should have CLAMs (if the funding wasn't just dust)

[ Edit: some of the addresses it lists may have had a balance before the snapshot, but been empty at the time of the snapshot and so won't have any CLAMs to dig; it would be nice if I could improve my script to only show addresses which had a "balance" (I hope lukejr doesn't see this) at a certain block number, but I don't see a way of doing that; I was excited when I converted the list of addresses in my wallet into CLAM addresses, then used 'validateaddress' in the clam wallet only to find that none of them had been imported - but it turns out all the listed addresses were empty at the dump date, because my whole wallet was empty at the time - apparently all my coins were invested on a dodgy dice site ]

Or, better, I can run:


to get the same list, but with the amount received, sorted in order of amount received:


If you don't have a Linux shell prompt, you can use the console in bitcoin-qt:

Run 'getblockcount' to get the current block number
Subtract 298520 from it, to get the depth of the CLAM snapshot (replace 298520 with the real number if it becomes known)
Run 'listreceivedbyaddress NNNN' where NNNN is the result of the above subtraction

i suppose because of fear in general of importing other wallets (no matter how much we try to show that it is completely safe in CLAMS) they would like to check first before diving in

would running "listreceivedbyaddress 0 true" in the debug console printout all the addresses in the wallet including change addresses? or is there a better command

Indeed. There's a difference to checking a single "address" and checking a "wallet". Maybe there should be information in the first post regarding each and the distinction between them?

I hate to repeat myself, but I think that this is very important.

The last thing we want is a user who HAS Clams waiting for them to think that they do NOT HAVE them.

---

If you don't understand "change" addresses, please be aware that using the various methods listed to 'check' may give you a false negative on claiming CLAMS. 

It is possible, and even likely, that there may be CLAMS waiting for you in a "change" address.

Sorry to hear that. The addresses in your wallet must not have been funded back on may 12th when the snapshot was taken.

Any addresses created after that time would not be seen on the clam chain

I imported my DOGE wallet and there is no CLAMs.

Well there's xploited's method above ( https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8460891 ) or see this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=623147.msg8254418;topicseen#msg8254418

Is there a way to check a Bitcoin address to see if it has been sent CLAMS without scanning the wallet? I checked the first post but didn't see anything.

I would let them stake once first as they are nicely aged and should stake reasonably quickly. After that do with them as you like

after importing wallets, should I create a new wallet and send all the clams to the new one (to avoid leaking private keys of the original wallets) ?

Will it reduce my minting ability if I do that ?

What can I do with all the clams now, any dice sites, merchants, pizza, clambase, xclamster ?

Add the word 'false' (without quotes) to the end of each of these commands except the last one and it will go much faster. 'false' prevents it rescanning the blockchain for each import. You only need to rescan after adding all your private keys.


Yes. But you don't need to import at all if all you want to do is check the balance. I provided a script before which converts between CLAM/BTC/LTC/DOGE addresses, without the need for a blockchain or any private keys.


You can import your private key before syncing to block 10k. Then, as you continue to sync, you will see your coins appear.

If you're only importing to check the balance then yeah, you'll need to sync to 10k to be sure the initial sends are all visible.

This is all correct.

However, please be careful.  You may have CLAMS in your wallet that are associated with an address you aren't aware of; i.e. you didn't receive coins to it.  These are called "change" addresses.  Almsot every single time you send out coins one of these "change" addresses is created and holds coins.

Just because you search an address you "think" holds your coins, does NOT mean that it still does hold your coins.

---

In short, the only way (without an intimate understand of the protocol) to be sure you have claimed all of your CLAMS is to import the entire wallet.  Otherwise, there is a very good chance you have missed "change" addresses.

Thats correct, my btc example wouldn't have shown up on khashier, it was just a randomly generated address to show how to do it.

I'm glad I could be of help  

Its also possible to go the other way.  Put your clam address in step 9 and find the btc/doge/ltc address

in step 4 you would replace  89  with   1e (for doge) 30 (for litecoin) or 00 (for bitcoin)

ok cool... but you're btc addr example wasn't entitled to any CLAMs distribution, so no hit on khashier
so I tried with my own address and followed your instruction on gobittest,
the result exactly the same as if I did it thru khashier search... THANKS
now I know two ways to find CLAM address (and the third is the script, which I have no way to test it)

It needs to be synced to 10k at least, or you won't have all the sends.

Dooglus posted a method in python a while back for converting an address (sorry, don't have the pg number)

I use the site http://gobittest.appspot.com/Address   for quick one offs.


Put the btc address in step 9, click send.

In step 4, remove the leading 00 and replace it with  89,  click send on step 4.  You should now have the corresponding Clam address

Here is an example or a random unfunded address.

16UwLL9Risc3QfPqBUvKofHmBQ7wMtjvM       into step 9

Step 4 is  00010966776006953D5567439E5E39F86A0D273BEE and becomes 89010966776006953D5567439E5E39F86A0D273BEE   hit send on step 4.  

Step 9 gives you the clam address
x8Q7qDAchSMe5nmGBf7akyx4zHhMMLp9gD


This works with BTC/DOGE and LTC addresses