Topic: [ANNOUNCE] New Solidcoin Client Fully Open-Source! - page 7. (Read 23760 times)

Believe it or not, much, much, much worse than this. I'd hold up the owner of the company I worked for in 2007/2008 as an example but I'd be listing the stupids for the next three months even as fast as I type.

What? How retarded can one person possibly be? 

Ahh gotcha.  I had read as much on how bitcoin handles orphans, just didn't know that CH broke it.

Offtopic:  Just saw RS boot doublec from #solidcoin for talking about this.  What a trip.

Because of network latency, two miners may publish a block roughly simultaneously and both blocks will be distributed through the network before they collide. Any given miner must pick one of the two blocks. The longest chain, in terms of proof-of-work performed, will always win. Ties are broken by whichever block a given node has seen first when mining.

If you have two competing blocks at the same count and one miner publishes a block after, it will lengthen only one of the two chains because it must pick one of the two blocks as its antecedent. Once this has propagated through the network, the preceding block that "lost" is an orphan.

Because of network latency, especially at 3 minutes per block, you can't prevent orphans from happening. Orphans are expected, and handled correctly -- by all Bitcoin and friends clients except CoinHunter's newest versions.

The reason why there is a 120 block confirmation on mined coins is because the generated coins in any orphan are invalid, and the client provides a lengthy wait to make sure that if there are two competing chains that forked several blocks in the past (due to, say, a broken network connection between two parts of the globe) they can be merged before the coins are spent. This is why sometimes a pool's solved block may suddenly show up as invalid 3 hours later -- it just took that long for it to lose.

CoinHunter broke the handling of orphan blocks. As a result you aren't just downloading a block chain, you're basically getting a block tree, and that's not how the system is meant to work...

I think we need some new termonology to classify posts like this. Something like: "doing a Bruce Wagner".

Ahh yeah I gathered that, I just have no idea how to read or follow code. Why is it a bad thing if nodes do that GetBlock thing while downloading the chain?

It means some of the changes that CoinHunter/RealSolid's made in the commits below  are buggy:

https://github.com/doublec/solidcoin/commit/dd35c2a8876e7a5b2dee602911a0f4d3e9ef5323
https://github.com/doublec/solidcoin/commit/1f61387e8291d1c054c45d1b1517a3385cc1f45a

Can anyone explain what that means?

Oh, and if you think the orphan block handling "improvements" (aka completely disabling it) in 1.031 doesn't hurt anything (well, other than nodes not catching up to the current block under certain circumstances)...
grep your debug.log for "getblocks".
Notice some nodes appear to be sending a GetBlocks for *every single block they get* while downloading the chain?
Notice the block #s are nowhere near the "bad evil hacker" blocks?
You got 3 guesses which versions are exhibiting that broken behaviour.

Maybe he's started taking his Haldol again. We can only hope that means he'll be less of a self-deluded moron as time passes.

Wow! I think this is the first time he writes about himself in singular!

I think the only 'reflection' he's been doing is watching himself masturbate in the mirror to stroke his ego at the same time he's stroking his tiny cock.

CoinHunter, you really need to drop that aura of arrogance.

If you've done any reflection in the past several days I think you might realize it's a good idea.

Yeah bitparking is dying with its 3 other exchanges and three other pools. So is btcguild with their giant bitcoin mining pool. They are definitely dying.

Yeah the only problem with that is I have solved the 51% problem and that is also coming out very soon. Oops, did SolidCoin just protect itself a lot better than Bitcoin?

Furthermore when anyone new to SolidCoin google searches for it, guess which site they'll be getting? So yes please go convince the mining pools to abandon the official version in favour of some featureless fork of SolidCoin from an earlier version because they'll be removed off the site, no longer get new visitors and earn the distrust of the whole SC community. ie They'll die like SCGuild and Bitparking.

Have fun getting those to become relevant if the open-source client has more than 51% of the mining user base. Which is likely since pools often apply patches that didn't come from you.

I also forgot to add, make sure your new client is compatible with the API changes that exchanges and businesses will be using soon. I'm not sure how you can get those specs until I've released them, but nevertheless you can probably try!

I think this is funny because now Coinhunter is thanking Artforz for his support of solidcoin.

"It's already starting to fork"  . Haha, what a laugh. I was wondering why you had never really helped out the Bitcoin project but it's becoming obvious. You don't know C++ well.

To the OP it is fine if you want to develop a "open source" alternative to my "open source" program. Good luck with outpacing my development though. Just wondering when you are going to add more vuln. fixes, network improvements and multiwallet support like that which is due out in SolidCoin in a few days? Thanks for the support of SolidCoin, and good luck with your project.

I'm probably late to this but I fixed and published this problem. Look into my last posts, it should appear within the last week or so.