Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 3162. (Read 9723814 times)

No, often (usually?) people pay for additional VPS instances just for use on testnet. It's better than having an unstable testnet daemon cripple your live MN.

Good morning Darkcoiners! That nice wake up! 0.00728  

TestNet MN's runs parallel to normal MN's (which still gets paid) on the same VPS ?!
what funding recourses do you mean ?

Hello guys,

Does anyone experience frequent crashes of the Darkcoin QT (newest version for MAC OS) on a macbook air? If needed, I still have my crash report.
Thanks.

There is nothing random about the house odds on a gambling site. They are dynamically adjusted. And anyone who has had a big win had better set up a new account with a new proxy, because I promise you that your future odds just got a lot worse.

+1 on this.  I have seen similar patterns on Directbet. 

I also rolled on a 1 to 90 bet and got a zero.  That really pissed me off

Maths will always win given enough of a chance.

Apparently, there's a lot of truth to this... I heard that the iPod 'shuffle' function was originally a random one, but then people complained that they'd get the same song twice and that it was much to frequent to be random! So Apple made the 'shuffle' function less random... To make it appear more random!    

Walter

http://fortune.com/2015/01/20/coinbase-raises-75-million-in-largest-ever-vc-round-for-bitcoin-company/

Its a personal decision but I have decided to stop funding resources on testnet now.  I think the devs need to have a proper think about how it can be bigger and better and not be dependent on the generosity of various individuals to provide USD resources for free.  Some of the people who started paying for VPS in testnet did so to try to improve the stability of releases where they didn't have the technical ability to help...I was one of them and it isn't working.

On a more positive note, I reckon once we have a version that we KNOW to be stable I'm sure we'll have enforcement back on in no time.  These are good times for Darkcoin...testing and release management seems to be the blot on the copy book.

This! I am not happy with the current "testing on mainnet" approach either.



We need to consolidate and go back to testnet.

tx
 

Yes Tungfa 35%

are we on 35 % in the moment
 

+ 1
 

I disagree.

We should have a testnet and testing methodology that means that we have fewer releases.  IMHO it is the regularity of releases that leads to the apathy to update.

Why should the various masternode hosting services upgrade to a version until they are sure it is stable?  I'm just grabbing figures from my head here but what if Flare hosts 300 masternodes and needs to manage the comms because there is also a protocol change?  Would you upgrade your customers to 11.0 straight away when there is a good chance we will be on 11.10 within a week?

I'd rather have one release that is stable with new features waiting to the next major release.

block 209840

Man, this is not about the motivation Now you're acting like a bad actor here. You invested your money and if you want the coin to succeed do as the devs ask you. Otherwise please sell and stop moaning about upgrades, even if they come very often. Other communities would love to have daily upgrades lol.

This really needs to be addressed.

I also updated to .09 within hours and then overnight in between .09 and .10 being released my MN went offline somehow and I must have fallen outside of the 71 minute timer so am out of the payment cycle (which perhaps all of us are anyway given enforcement has been switched off).

I know Evan and the dev team are working very hard and, like many here, I really do appreciate it but think it's imperative the payment processing and fairness of distribution amongst MNs is better managed during updates like this. That there are no hard and fast processes to take MNs out of the network that are on old versions and that many of these same MNs owners are getting paid where people who've been diligent in updating quickly aren't, isn't a workable situation (and MN owners will naturally start delaying updating if they're consistently loosing payments). It's also concerning that enforcement gets turned on and off so easily. Surely this just should be a stock standard part of the MN protocol that's not so centralised? (I know we're still in 'beta' effectively but can't we just leave enforcement on and live with whatever consequences of that as a lesser evil than manually switching it all the time? Forgive me if my comments indicate I'm not understanding this at all).

Hawkward!  I made the assumption that you were Hal because it is linked from Otoh.net with little explanation.  Sorry to hear about Hal.  I'm also very glad to hear that you don't have LGD!