Topic: [DeM] Deutsche eMark - DEM - cryptocoin SHA256 POS/POW - page 31. (Read 237470 times)
As I sit and dig through the code, attempting to find the specific bugs related to the hundreds of orphan blocks per day, I find myself having to ask:
Quote
Exactly how many different coins was this code copy/pasted from, and were all of them copied before June of 2015?
Emark really only crypto worth real world money. And could really be backed with paper that is already familiar to the germans
Agreed man totally agree.
... lesser people would productively identify and document an issue - post it for everyone to see and discuss - so that the dev's could then address the issue (using clear and precise language as the dev ISN'T a native English speakers).
Clear and precise:- Blockchains should only be reorganized based on a longer valid fork.
- Blockchains should never be reorganized(reorg) based on timestamps.
- Reorgs that don't contain previously confirmed transactions allow for "double spends".
- Anyone that doesn't understand the 3 things above shouldn't be trusted with financial software.
Code:
== BEGIN PLAINTEXT MESSAGE ==
There shouldn't be hundreds of orphans per day based only on the timestamps of shorter chains.
== END PLAINTEXT MESSAGE ==
Signed with eMark address NMEVk78QgXr5pViqJyNgqDmmYAcqMYoGa6:
Hy97WAI43KvhXi4uXCJvBeVoLY/Vyu1jvudVnP537n19dFsUXyuotE9kNR0kEJvH/vv4Ga29NeKKCs2CajCrVv0=
There shouldn't be hundreds of orphans per day based only on the timestamps of shorter chains.
== END PLAINTEXT MESSAGE ==
Signed with eMark address NMEVk78QgXr5pViqJyNgqDmmYAcqMYoGa6:
Hy97WAI43KvhXi4uXCJvBeVoLY/Vyu1jvudVnP537n19dFsUXyuotE9kNR0kEJvH/vv4Ga29NeKKCs2CajCrVv0=
...you're suggesting - or rather insisting - that a double spend is a factor not only here (DEM) but on any blockchain generally? Based upon what?
I might have missed it, but didn't see any logs posted in the last few pages (since you guys started arguing) of this forum. What'cha got?
Since I'm far too lazy to explain it all (and post all of the logs), I'll let the Bitcoin wiki do the talking:Quote
Reorganize
A block chain reorganize (or reorg) happens when one chain becomes longer than the one you are currently working on*. All of the blocks in the old chain that are not in the new one become orphan blocks, and their generations are invalidated... The number of confirmations for transactions may change after a reorg, and transactions that are not in the new chain will become "0/unconfirmed" again. If a transaction in the old chain conflicts with one in the new chain (as a result of double-spending), the old one becomes invalid.
A block chain reorganize (or reorg) happens when one chain becomes longer than the one you are currently working on*. All of the blocks in the old chain that are not in the new one become orphan blocks, and their generations are invalidated... The number of confirmations for transactions may change after a reorg, and transactions that are not in the new chain will become "0/unconfirmed" again. If a transaction in the old chain conflicts with one in the new chain (as a result of double-spending), the old one becomes invalid.
*Or in the case of eMark, "when one chain has an earlier timestamp than the one you are currently working on"
You're clearly the only omnipotent genie in the crowd... lesser people would productively identify and document an issue - post it for everyone to see and discuss - so that the dev's could then address the issue (using clear and precise language as the dev ISN'T a native English speakers).
...you're suggesting - or rather insisting - that a double spend is a factor not only here (DEM) but on any blockchain generally? Based upon what?
I might have missed it, but didn't see any logs posted in the last few pages (since you guys started arguing) of this forum. What'cha got?
Since I'm far too lazy to explain it all (and post all of the logs), I'll let the Bitcoin wiki do the talking:Quote
Reorganize
A block chain reorganize (or reorg) happens when one chain becomes longer than the one you are currently working on*. All of the blocks in the old chain that are not in the new one become orphan blocks, and their generations are invalidated... The number of confirmations for transactions may change after a reorg, and transactions that are not in the new chain will become "0/unconfirmed" again. If a transaction in the old chain conflicts with one in the new chain (as a result of double-spending), the old one becomes invalid.
A block chain reorganize (or reorg) happens when one chain becomes longer than the one you are currently working on*. All of the blocks in the old chain that are not in the new one become orphan blocks, and their generations are invalidated... The number of confirmations for transactions may change after a reorg, and transactions that are not in the new chain will become "0/unconfirmed" again. If a transaction in the old chain conflicts with one in the new chain (as a result of double-spending), the old one becomes invalid.
*Or in the case of eMark, "when one chain has an earlier timestamp than the one you are currently working on"
Nice project!
Bring back our Deutsche Mark!
Bring back our Deutsche Mark!
...you're suggesting - or rather insisting - that a double spend is a factor not only here (DEM) but on any blockchain generally? Based upon what?
- I can read and follow a debug output.
I might have missed it, but didn't see any logs posted in the last few pages (since you guys started arguing) of this forum. What'cha got?
...you're suggesting - or rather insisting - that a double spend is a factor not only here (DEM) but on any blockchain generally? Based upon what?
Based upon:- In certain cases, portions of the blockchain are removed and replaced with a "older" and shorter chain.
- The shorter chain doesn't contain spends verified in the longer chain.
- Some transactions on eMark are in multiple orphaned blocks - thus becoming "unconfirmed" multiple times.
- Coins can be "respent" in the new chain with a different transaction (if the 2nd transaction is in the new chain before the 1st transaction).
- It's been done.
- The basic concept of how a double spend works on eMark is also how "Replace-By-Fee" works in Bitcoin (except Bitcoin doesn't orphan 6 blocks at a time and in Bitcoin the "stuck" transaction just hasn't ever been confirmed, rather than orphaned multiply).
- The greater the number of orphaned blocks at a single time is the greater the likelihood is that a double spend can occur.
- Some transactions on eMark are in multiple orphaned blocks multiple times (I've seen specific transactions be orphaned 9 times before the chain actually moved forward the supposedly safe "10 blocks".
- I can read and follow a debug output.
...No, double spende with entry in blockchain is not possible...
That delusional belief is why eMark will never be anything more than just another pump/dump shitcoin that goes nowhere. But, hey, I'm happy to have another coin permanently on my dumpcoin list. 
If you ever want to make this a viable coin, just know there are people waiting in the wings willing to help dispel your delusions.
Entertaining read but I'm a little confused....or maybe just not reading through the b*tt hurt..., you're suggesting - or rather insisting - that a double spend is a factor not only here (DEM) but on any blockchain generally? Based upon what?
...No, double spende with entry in blockchain is not possible...
That delusional belief is why eMark will never be anything more than just another pump/dump shitcoin that goes nowhere. But, hey, I'm happy to have another coin permanently on my dumpcoin list. If you ever want to make this a viable coin, just know there are people waiting in the wings willing to help dispel your delusions.
Yes, i read this thread every day
@glen, computergenie
Please stop this horrible discusion.
Yes, we have many ophans. But other coins to. Please google blackcoin or peercoin or Novacoin and many ophans.
No, double spende with entry in blockchain is not possible. If some providers think, 6 confirmations is enough, thats not our problem.
I work on V1.4.2 with some features to show txComment in the frontend.
I made my thoughts about the ophan blocks, were the come from. If i have a sollten, i will implement it.
@glen, computergenie
Please stop this horrible discusion.
Yes, we have many ophans. But other coins to. Please google blackcoin or peercoin or Novacoin and many ophans.
No, double spende with entry in blockchain is not possible. If some providers think, 6 confirmations is enough, thats not our problem.
I work on V1.4.2 with some features to show txComment in the frontend.
I made my thoughts about the ophan blocks, were the come from. If i have a sollten, i will implement it.
"44 years, from USA and named ComputerGenie" This is story of your live. Bravo !
*life 
"44 years, from USA and named ComputerGenie" This is story of your life. Bravo !
...And we are waiting that "C...Genie" makes his own ShitCoin ... for sure it will be the best Coin ever made....
Why would I make a new one, when there are so many, like eMark, that are already shit? 
now is good price to buy DEM !
And we are waiting that "C...Genie" makes his own ShitCoin ... for sure it will be the best Coin ever made....
And we are waiting that "C...Genie" makes his own ShitCoin ... for sure it will be the best Coin ever made....
@glen
Admittedly, your English is vastly better than my German; however, that only holds true when you're not so emotional. Please calm down, take your feelings out of the conversation, and type in rational, adult sentences...
Admittedly, your English is vastly better than my German; however, that only holds true when you're not so emotional. Please calm down, take your feelings out of the conversation, and type in rational, adult sentences...
is it only me ( a dense Guy ) that realize that you ALWAYS denied to discuss what 1 minute before ?
what you want to say with this BS about Industry Standard ? what talk about faster usage rate ?
have we/me/others talk about that ? what EXACTLY you want to talk about ?
i think we find out that you arent able to communicate on the right Level .. Could be cause its not Face/Face or could be cause we spoke about different Things,
You know the Specs of eMark
https://github.com/emarkproject/eMark#emark-specification
and the Specs are the written in Stone ( or a Hardfork with other Specs will overwrite )
and if Confirmations set to 10 ( safely ) with BT from 2 Minutes every Child can compute that a fully and safe Transaction take 20 Minutes about +-
soooo , that the Fact and BTC got 10 Minutes BT and 6 Confirmations Safe = 1 Hour +-
what you talk about ......
If you wish to make an Coin what YOU want , make it and for Gods Sake .... DO IT !
for all your RealWorld Use , for all what u want , but DO IT
So now really EOD , cause a had to diskuss more and better @Skype Chat eMark at 9PM
Glen
pls , dont answer . its useless.
what you want to say with this BS about Industry Standard ? what talk about faster usage rate ?
have we/me/others talk about that ? what EXACTLY you want to talk about ?
i think we find out that you arent able to communicate on the right Level .. Could be cause its not Face/Face or could be cause we spoke about different Things,
You know the Specs of eMark
https://github.com/emarkproject/eMark#emark-specification
and the Specs are the written in Stone ( or a Hardfork with other Specs will overwrite )
and if Confirmations set to 10 ( safely ) with BT from 2 Minutes every Child can compute that a fully and safe Transaction take 20 Minutes about +-
soooo , that the Fact and BTC got 10 Minutes BT and 6 Confirmations Safe = 1 Hour +-
what you talk about ......
If you wish to make an Coin what YOU want , make it and for Gods Sake .... DO IT !
for all your RealWorld Use , for all what u want , but DO IT
So now really EOD , cause a had to diskuss more and better @Skype Chat eMark at 9PM
Glen
pls , dont answer . its useless.
@glen,
I realize that you're a bit dense, but you are smart enough to know that many places use 6 confirmations as an "industry standard", aren't you?
Logically, the entire point of 2 minute blocks is a faster usage rate than a more supported coin that has longer block times (such as BTC or ETH). You get that, right?
If you have to extend the number of confirmations, then you don't actually have a faster usage rate. You get that, right?
If the time from initiating a transaction to the time the transaction is "safely" validated is longer than a more mainstream coin (such as BTC or ETH), then there is no value in a merchant using eMark. You get that, right?
Not everyone uses a QT wallet. You get that, right?
I realize that you're a bit dense, but you are smart enough to know that many places use 6 confirmations as an "industry standard", aren't you?
Logically, the entire point of 2 minute blocks is a faster usage rate than a more supported coin that has longer block times (such as BTC or ETH). You get that, right?
If you have to extend the number of confirmations, then you don't actually have a faster usage rate. You get that, right?
If the time from initiating a transaction to the time the transaction is "safely" validated is longer than a more mainstream coin (such as BTC or ETH), then there is no value in a merchant using eMark. You get that, right?
Not everyone uses a QT wallet. You get that, right?
Jump to: