Topic: [ANN][XCN] Cryptonite | 1st mini-blockchain coin | M7 PoW | No Premine - page 36. (Read 578501 times)

Thanks for the feedback! Not as promising as I hoped, but it's still a step forward for my search for solutions.

As far as I know there are no other MBC coins yet.

We did think about adding an alias system to Cryptonite, I already explained why we didn't implement it earlier in this thread: The main problem is that when you need to lookup an account in the account tree with only an alias you have to basically search through every account until you find it because you can't use the fast lookup properties of the trie structure. The same sort of issue also applies when registering an alias, other nodes basically have to check every other registered alias and make sure the alias in question hasn't already been registered

The account tree uses a special type of radix trie structure, see our wiki for more info. Each account is only tied to one address, that is why I often use the words account and address interchangeably.

You should find this interesting: Anonymity in the Mini-Blockchain scheme

Another question...

I've been brainstorming the past few months on a project that would involve the creation and deployment of a customized cryptocurrency for a specialized purpose. If the project were successful (and I've gotten it to the point where I have confidence it would be far superior to existing alternatives by most measurables), widespread adoption would result in extremely high transaction volumes (far beyond current bitcoin volumes). Thus my interest in the mini-blockchain approach.

However, I have a major concern/headache involving privacy. Inherent to my project would be the creation of accounts in the Account Tree that would be publicly identifiable. That is, people would typically set up an account (using client software that would include wallet functionality along with other features necessary to the project) that would include an "Alias" that would be visible in the Account Tree. The intent would be for the Alias to be publicly shared so that other users could easily transact using the alias rather than memorizing public keys.

(For reasons I won't get into, this is non-negotiable - I expect that 99.999% of users will want to create an alias, and even those who do not will need to share their public keys to use the system, allowing the public to identify the link between a person and their account.)

On the flip side, privacy is a must. It simply won't be acceptable to have everyone be able to see every time a user sends or receives a transaction (typically signifying an instance of the activity for which the project is designed), and who is at the other end of the transaction.

So I'm curious how the accounts are structured in the Account Tree in Cryptonite. Is each Account basically tied to a single public key? Are there any proved and efficient ways to shift funds in/out of such an account while obscuring their origin or destination? Conceivably, transaction volumes could be many billions/day if the project is successful, so the solution has to be compatible with that kind of scale.

In my earlier designs (prior to confronting the scalability problem and researching the mini-blockchain) I utilized 3rd party Nodes to obscure transfers and encourage off-blockchain transactions. (The use of Nodes is actually inherent in the project for other tasks which would be associated with each typical transaction.) So if some kind of anonymization based on 3rd party nodes is required they'd be available, but I wanted to avoid trusting 3rd parties for the financial stuff as far as possible, as a general principle.  

Clear as mud? I'll answer any questions as best I can to clarify.

TL/DR: I need anonymous transactions, while enabling people to openly share their public key (or alias tied to it in the Account Tree) with the world at large.

Is the mini-blockchain approach unique to Cryptonite, or are other coins now using it? It looks very interesting.

wallet started and resyncing again

thanks!

The first crash is a known bug, that resync button doesn't work. If you want to resynchronize you have to start your wallet with the -resync flag set. The second crash is probably because you didn't remove everything that needed to be removed. Just try using -resync and it should work.

when I clicked on "resync" the wallet crashed

when I restarted the program it said it couldn't read a block

I removed block and data folder, as log files and restart the wallet... it just crash again

last log file:

Good news, the explorer has been updated and the problem seems to be completely gone. The total sent and received values should now display the correct numbers and none of the transactions should be missing.

Unfortunately I don't think there is any open source pool software which supports the M7 algorithm, although I haven't looked in quite a while so I could be wrong.

What pool software is used for M7 algo coins? I've been trying to find a stratum based server but haven't found anything, are the pool operators using a modified nomp they're keeping to themselves?

Ok I found the bug, and unfortunately it will require a rescan of the entire blockchain to correct the problem, so I'll have to take the explorer down for a few hours while I do that. I have to get some sleep shortly so I'll do it when I return.

I'm having trouble finding a transaction which was ignored by the explorer. If anyone has an address which is missing transactions on the explorer and you know what the txid is for the missing transaction please provide it to me as it will help me find out why the explorer skipped that tx. Qt should keep a complete record of all your transactions so look for the txid there. I lost my old wallet file a while ago so unfortunately I don't seem to have a record of all my transactions and the records I do have match up perfectly with the explorer.

EDIT: never mind I found some.

Well I think there's probably more to it than that. I did do some work on the explorer recently. By the way I still haven't gotten around to fixing that bug with the sent and received values. It actually looks like some of the transactions have been missed by my script because I looked at an address with a low number of transactions and the inputs and outputs added up correctly. It might not be a very simple problem to fix but I'll spend a few hours on it tonight and see how I go. Also I should mention that catia got back from his trip a few days ago, however he probably wont be able to start working on Cryptonite immediately because he is dealing with some personal family issues.

Just a pump and dump. It happened also a while back, when price jumped to ~300 but then dropped to 45 again after around a week.
This coin has not a lot of voulme (yet!), so it's easy to pump it with just a few btc

I personally think it will drop again (which is a shame btw. since I really like this coin because of the mini blockchain), but noone can say for sure.

Can anyone explain why price is jumped so high in last week? Didnt watch this thread very long.

Return on nonce-pool !

pretty good coin. I just bought some. It's going for cheap.

You can find several nodes here: http://explorer.cryptonite.info/?page=peers

my wallet only get 1 connection. node please

Unfortunately that's not possible with the way I have designed the database. That's one of the reasons I wanted to switch over to mysql, it makes it easy to sort records by different fields. I could write a separate script to keep track of the top addresses but I don't want to give the explorer server too many tasks to deal with.