Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 6996. (Read 9723475 times)

guys, come on , let's mining

been 5 blocks, many hours have past but haven't gotten any more payouts again. 

i had the payout cronjob run every 5 minutes, changed it to every 1 minute, so you should see it faster now

Something weird going on with lottery mining, had been mining at a block for around two hours, block finally solved in which I had contributed around a fifth of all the shares including solving the block but didn't get a payout.  nothing in unconfirmed, what gives?

edit:  Nevermind, finally came through!

It take 119 confirmations to confirm.

mining result how long to confirm

at http://pool.xcoin.co/  the status always show Unconfirmed

You're right, due to the algorithm being unique (at least for now), it cant' be picked by multipools with current protocol.

Though with relatively small change of protocol and some universal miner that can do several coin types (sha/scrypt/scrypt-jane/prime/quark/....) that would be possible, but as scrypt coins are now sort of majority in altcoins, I think it is not worth the effort for many to create such an universal miner.

It still leaves the coin a bit vulnerable to sudden spikes, like now.
The diff is supposed to go from 6.1 to 0.7, pretty big downspike (because of the initial rush fading), but goes actually only to 1.5 because of maximal adjustment is 4-times larger or smaller. This leaves us with 2x supposed difficulty for 2 more days ....
In the future there could be more spikes (if you publish a new cool feature or otherwise ignite some interest, people will rush in, mine until the diff skyrockets and then maybe many of them leaves once the hype fades, many of the rest leaving too when the coin becomes too hard to mine, leaving only the core miner stuck with difficulty 10-20 times of what it should be)

This coins has quite a potential for this due to new unique algorithms, so is could be easily hyped ... possibly hyped to death

Here, try this link: http://www.xcoin.co/v0.8.6.2-gab58f24-beta.zip

hi，i like it

but the wallet is unavailable

The requested URL /v0.8.6.2-g6f1db53-beta.zip was not found on this server.

There will allways be the initial rush for new coming coins, but so far i actually think we should stick to the retarget we have.. just me 2 cents  :-)

I definitely agree with you for the most part and I've thought quite a bit about this. Most of the coins having issues are scrypt-based right? So it's the same algorithm and thus it's easy to swap in and out of different coins for a site like middlecoin. However, xcoin is a new algorithm that takes a specialized client, so the people mining it must take some level of effort to set it up.

Also, it even possible to setup a site like middlecoin for CPU coins with unique algorithms? You would technically have to have all of minerd versions for every algorithm on the client's computer and it would have to turn them on and off depending on which one it (the site) wanted to mine. It seems possible, but it definitely doesn't exist yet.

So, while we had a huge rush in the beginning. I believe it should be a slow and steady rise from here on out. However, I could be wrong, who knows. In the case, I'll be more than willing to update the client and lower the retarget to 4 hours or something.

retarget every 576 block may not be the best according to today standards (with huge miners and multipools coming to rape a coin, mining many easy block and then leaving the coin when the difficulty skyrockets), perhaps consider lowering it while it is still possible (maybe set the retarget to lower value from date like 14 days from today, thus giving people time to upgrade their wallets). 576 blocks (1 day) is not that bad, but if some multipool pumps the difficulty 10 times and leaves, that 1 day of blocks will need to be mined for 10 days by the rest of the miners - some of them possibly leaving and waiting for the diff to go back down again, so it will be even more than 10 days being stuck at some high difficulty.

9 blocks till RETARGET (0.74 difficulty)

Yeah, it looks like a pool found a block and then sent it to another address, then kept 3XCO for fees?

Yes, you could still use the transaction amounts to track money through the system. This combined with some logic to use common transaction amounts or some other logic like that in the wallet could definitely help. Even with the problems, having coinjoin implemented directly into the client is a huge step in the right direction.

Wow, it's that open eh?

Still, this example implies that one could still link up the amounts of the transactions to find the end users.  How unique are transaction amounts, and how hard would it be to hide that level?  Is there a breaking up of the payment so that the amounts are harder to compare or something?  Or am I missing something due to the simplification of the explanation?  

At the xcoin explorer site http://explorer.xcoin.co/block/00000000068ff1c40a8cc39b920bc49fcf841fd131805558450efaf8072f5b9c, I can understand this one transaction, I think?  A block was found, created a payout of 122 coins to address 1, which paid out to two other accounts, presumably a pool minus fees?  Is that what I'm seeing?

Now on your sample explorer, it is indeed more complex looking to me.  But I'm not the sharpest tack in the box, LOL.  Could you explain a bit more what is happening?  Thanks!

Bitcoin is often promoted as being somewhat anonymous, but the main problem is that if I know your address, I can literally tell everyone you've ever paid. Imagine everyone you met, was able to see everything you bought in your checking account. That's pretty much the situation Bitcoin and other alt-coins are currently in. We need to move quickly to a anonymity-by-default approach.

There are many solutions out there for fixing this and we know how to implement them. But, the developers are very scared of implementing these fixes, with the possibility of bringing down a 10+ billion dollar economy.  So it will take years at the very minimum to do this.

So, that's where XCoin comes into play. I want solve many of these problems that Bitcoin and other alt-coins experience, making XCoin the beta to Bitcoin. The goal is to be years ahead in development, with cutting edge features that would be insanely difficult to pull off in their codebase.

So what progress was made this morning? I implemented a rough version of CoinJoin. The idea behind what I'm working on was originally put forward by Gregory Maxwell  and it's a great idea (if you want to read more, the original post is here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/coinjoin-bitcoin-privacy-for-the-real-world-279249).

In short, transactions in the Bitcoin Blockchain are stored like this:

"User1 paid User12 the amount 1.2BTC"
"User4 paid User2 the amount 1.2BTC"
"User11 paid User3 the amount 1.2BTC"

In XCoin they'll look like this:

"Debit User1 the amount 1.2XCO, Debit User4 the amount 1.2XCO, Debit User11 the amount 1.2XCO"
and
"Credit User12 the amount 1.2XCO, Credit User2 the amount 1.2XCO, Credit User3 the amount 1.2XCO"

Notice, in the XCoin you can't tell who paid who. But in Bitcoin the parties are linked together. This will be a large step forward to providing anonymity by default.

you're right, they aren't .. I thought about trying this one. http://satoshibox.com/52e574504c347bf1200041a7  , I got lucky with the protoshares gpu miner I bought last time, I wonder how many people picked up this one so far.

I'm sure people have tried. And some might even have it working. But they're probably not giving it away.

What is the status on GPU mining of this coin?

As it is 11 hash functions, it should not be probably that hard, quark uses 9 rounds from 6 hashes and there is already a GPU miner for it - not a good one though, it is closed-source, steals 12.5% of the generated coins and does not give that much of an advantage over CPU as there is for example for SHA256, but it is a proof that GPU mining is possible.

Anybody tried either working on GPU miner or at least examined the feasibility of creating one?