pos = scam!!! bitcoin = scam!!!
Fiat = scam. Better go buy some gold. 
Topic: DEAD - page 45. (Read 79213 times)
pos = scam!!! bitcoin = scam!!!
You sure Exposed the scam that crypto is. Thank to you, I will be selling all my BTC and ALT and never again touch anything crypto. Thank sir for your words of wisdom, you have opened my eyes.
That's not the issue. The value is to be returned in satoshis (multiplied by COIN). I thought I made that perfectly clear.
So, is nSubsidy1 and nSubsidy2 equal?Can't tell if trolling or you can't figure it out =p
int64_t nRewardCoinYear;
nRewardCoinYear = MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE; // 36.5 * COIN (main.h)
int64_t nCoinAge = 100 * COIN * 1;
int64_t nSubsidy = nCoinAge * nRewardCoinYear / 365 / COIN;
nSubsidy = 100 * COIN * 1 * 36.5 * COIN / 365 / COIN;
nSubsidy = 100 * COIN * 1 * 36.5 / 365;
Is it correct? Value is multiplied by COIN? nSubsidy in satoshi format?
ps
So, is nSubsidy1 and nSubsidy2 equal?
most of these scam shouters are just kids would not know python code from the highway code
I dont mind them at all, they are doing all the hard work for me
I love seeing my buy orders get hit cause of them.
That's not the issue. The value is to be returned in satoshis (multiplied by COIN). I thought I made that perfectly clear.
So, is nSubsidy1 and nSubsidy2 equal?Can't tell if trolling or you can't figure it out =p
That's not the issue. The value is to be returned in satoshis (multiplied by COIN). I thought I made that perfectly clear.
So, is nSubsidy1 and nSubsidy2 equal? Post revised because OP is a liar.
(ILT main.h L41)
(ILT main.cpp L998)
I was going to post a solution, but since you are intent on lying to all of us, I don't think that's wise. Not a complete clone, but it's up the family tree. Anyone with half a brain(in fact math only needs half) could figure out how to simplify this to make overflows practically impossible. What they might not see, is that dividing by COIN still puts the fuckin return value in non-satoshi format (THE REQUIRED FORMAT). The same thing I posted 11 pages ago. There is a little more to it, though.
(ILT main.h L41)
Code:
static const int64_t MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE = 36.50 * COIN; // 3650% annual interest
Code:
int64_t nRewardCoinYear;
nRewardCoinYear = MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE;
int64_t nSubsidy = nCoinAge * nRewardCoinYear / 365 / COIN;
I was going to post a solution, but since you are intent on lying to all of us, I don't think that's wise. Not a complete clone, but it's up the family tree. Anyone with half a brain(in fact math only needs half) could figure out how to simplify this to make overflows practically impossible. What they might not see, is that dividing by COIN still puts the fuckin return value in non-satoshi format (THE REQUIRED FORMAT). The same thing I posted 11 pages ago. There is a little more to it, though.
Did you calculate below
Code:
int64_t COIN = 100000000;
int64_t MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE = 36.5 * COIN;
int64_t nCoinAge = 100 * COIN * 1; // actually 100 coins one day aged
int64_t nRewardCoinYear = MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE;
int64_t nSubsidy1 = nCoinAge * nRewardCoinYear / 365 / COIN;
and
Code:
int64_t COIN = 100000000;
int64_t MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE = 36.5 * COIN;
int64_t nCoinAge = 100 * COIN * 1; // actually 100 coins one day aged
int64_t nRewardCoinYear = MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE;
int64_t nSubsidy2 = nCoinAge / COIN * nRewardCoinYear / 365;
Is nSubsidy1 equal to nSubsidy2?
I know the explanation of this: this is the only coin he had ever seen!! So its both the best and the worst!
Good explanation
! Will take a screenshot of your post !wtf, talk about mixed feelings by a n00b account.
Bipolar disorder, Crypto style
I felt scam when I saw the account name.
I know the explanation of this: this is the only coin he had ever seen!! So its both the best and the worst!
This is the worst coin I have ever seen!!!
This girl cant make her mind up
6 posts so far here's a summary:
"This coin looks amazing! Better buy now!"
"This is the best coin I have ever seen!"
"This dev is amazing!"
"We are starting to go up!"
"This is the worst coin I have ever seen!!!"
Your efforts to manipulate people are shockingly bad, welcome to my ignore list scrub.
wtf, talk about mixed feelings by a n00b account.
Bipolar disorder, Crypto style
Post revised because OP is a liar.
Do you like to tell us what the bug is?
overflow in calculation:
nSubsidy = nCoinAge * nRewardCoinYear / 365 / COIN;
There is absolutely no way that value, would ever overflow in this usage.
The arithmetic is wrong.
This bug is with a large annual interests
I'm wrong? And what about the last 10 pages of posts?
What you're saying here, is that the Bitcoin foundation chose int64 because it was to be susceptible to common arithmetic overflows? This is the opposite of why int64 is used instead of a float or double. You have a calculation range of +/- 9223372036854775807 (-1) satoshis, more than you would ever need, without any issue of precision. GP is wrong in the EXACT same place.
This isn't development, it's copy/pasting horribly written code and guessing what it does, then changing numbers. You assumed the code was already correct.
(GP main.h L41)
(GP main.cpp L982)
(ILT main.h L41)
(ILT main.cpp L998)
I was going to post a solution, but since you are intent on lying to all of us, I don't think that's wise. Not a complete clone, but it's up the family tree. Anyone with half a brain(in fact math only needs half) could figure out how to simplify this to make overflows practically impossible. What they might not see, is that dividing by COIN still puts the fuckin return value in non-satoshi format (THE REQUIRED FORMAT). The same thing I posted 11 pages ago. There is a little more to it, though.
Hello Intellect community
I found a bug in the code. Hardfork on Sunday. (Most likely) Testing in testnet
I found a bug in the code. Hardfork on Sunday. (Most likely) Testing in testnet
Do you like to tell us what the bug is?
nSubsidy = nCoinAge * nRewardCoinYear / 365 / COIN;
There is absolutely no way that value, would ever overflow in this usage.
The arithmetic is wrong.
The Gold Pieces arithmetic is bugged as well, in exactly the same place. You divide by COIN when you want coins and not satoshis. Does it really take 10 forum pages to correctly point this out?
nope, you're wrong, it is not a cloneThis bug is with a large annual interests
I'm wrong? And what about the last 10 pages of posts?
What you're saying here, is that the Bitcoin foundation chose int64 because it was to be susceptible to common arithmetic overflows? This is the opposite of why int64 is used instead of a float or double. You have a calculation range of +/- 9223372036854775807 (-1) satoshis, more than you would ever need, without any issue of precision. GP is wrong in the EXACT same place.
This isn't development, it's copy/pasting horribly written code and guessing what it does, then changing numbers. You assumed the code was already correct.
Quote
nope, you're wrong, it is not a clone
(GP main.h L41)
Code:
static const int64_t MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE = 5 * COIN; // 500% annual interest
Code:
int64_t nRewardCoinYear;
nRewardCoinYear = MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE;
int64_t nSubsidy = nCoinAge * nRewardCoinYear / 365 / COIN;
(ILT main.h L41)
Code:
static const int64_t MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE = 36.50 * COIN; // 3650% annual interest
Code:
int64_t nRewardCoinYear;
nRewardCoinYear = MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE;
int64_t nSubsidy = nCoinAge * nRewardCoinYear / 365 / COIN;
I was going to post a solution, but since you are intent on lying to all of us, I don't think that's wise. Not a complete clone, but it's up the family tree. Anyone with half a brain(in fact math only needs half) could figure out how to simplify this to make overflows practically impossible. What they might not see, is that dividing by COIN still puts the fuckin return value in non-satoshi format (THE REQUIRED FORMAT). The same thing I posted 11 pages ago. There is a little more to it, though.
Jump to: