[DVC]DevCoin - Official Thread - Moderated - page 287.

Wekkel

legendary

Activity: 3108

Merit: 1531

yes

Quote from: sidhujag on December 28, 2013, 02:53:21 PM

please confirm that your sends of 100 and 94 worked.

Nope, my 1,000 and 94 payment did not register. Must be something with the 1.0.8 client, but switching back to 1.0.7 did not change anything. Payments seem to register in the client but not on the network (0 confirmations, no show in block explorer). All my payments with the experimental Windows client back to (including) 26 December are not visible in the block explorer.

Something is going wrong.

Code:

{
"amount" : -1000.00000000,
"fee" : -1.00000000,
"confirmations" : 0,
"txid" : "f0fcc2e92f93fb26e508d305a82fa0274d61fcbb2737d3e39c44533bf5fa0020",
"time" : 1388257696,
"timereceived" : 1388257696,
"details" : [
{
"account" : "",
"address" : "1Md25acfmv3ifWoE25fMDMz96z5pCvi46D",
"category" : "send",
"amount" : -1000.00000000,
"fee" : -1.00000000
}
]
}

Code:

{
"amount" : -1000.00000000,
"fee" : -1.00000000,
"confirmations" : 0,
"txid" : "f0fcc2e92f93fb26e508d305a82fa0274d61fcbb2737d3e39c44533bf5fa0020",
"time" : 1388257696,
"timereceived" : 1388257696,
"details" : [
{
"account" : "",
"address" : "1Md25acfmv3ifWoE25fMDMz96z5pCvi46D",
"category" : "send",
"amount" : -1000.00000000,
"fee" : -1.00000000
}
]
}

Do you have an old version of the Windows client for me (let's say: 1.0.3)?

ranlo

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1007

Whoever runs this site: http://faucet.d.evco.in/

You have some things to take care of.

1) One of the advertising blocks (the bottom one on the sidebar) keeps forwarding the browser to their site, making it nearly impossible to use the faucet without an ad block/"stopping" the page load before that javascript hits the browser

2) It's not moving forward to new rounds. It now shows almost 300 people signed up for the current round, and after you submit an address it just pops up the "Error! Add your Devtome ID to your signature" or whatever message; it's not even loading the sidebar/footer upon submit

Unthinkingbit

hero member

Activity: 935

Merit: 1015

Quote from: markm on December 28, 2013, 04:29:35 AM

..
Who tested the spam-proofing?

I do not recall even hearing about any attempts at spamming, nor any analysis of how much it would cost to achieve how much of what kind of effect by spamming.

I never posted an analysis, but worked out that because of the low price of devcoin, the minimum fee should be 5 * Coin to make spam too expensive. I want to keep the fee at 5 * Coin, I just assumed I had to reduce it because Twobit's clients must have made some blocks. If it is possible to keep the fee at 5 * Coin, then it will be kept there.

Quote

Maybe spammers have been holding off a while anticipating it becoming five times cheaper to spam so are waiting until more than 50% of the network is ready to let them spam cheaply?

The only coin I heard of that was attacked by spam was litecoin. I added the change so that we'd be safe.

Quote

Devcoin is not really up a lot in price compared to bitcoin, so as long as we simply use 1000 (or maybe nowadays 2000 would be better now we mint 2000 times as many coins as bitcoin) we should continue to inherit bitcoins' analysis and calculation of how much the various aspects of fee ought best be set to.

Right now devcoin is worth roughly one millionth of a bitcoin, so proportionately to value our fees would be a million times higher. On the other hand, far fewer people hold the devcoin block chain, so we could be cheaper, by say a factor of a hundred making our fees about 10,000 times higher.

Quote

This is why I have always figured we'd just be doing the same usually changes to bitcoin code that we did originally: multiple all their span fix figures by a multiplier intended to reflect jow much less than a bitcoin we expect a devcoin to be worth.

Presumably we'd also inherit their expert analysis of which changes are forking ones that need to come into effect at a certain block number, as we'd see that when they changed their fee they did or did not do it as a change set to come into effect at a certain block.

For some ideological reason, a lot of bitcoin people want free transactions, which is a mistake because all transactions, no matter how legitimate, add to blockchain bloat. It's a mistake which altcoin developers have to fix.

Unthinkingbit

hero member

Activity: 935

Merit: 1015

Quote from: advanced on December 27, 2013, 11:53:58 PM

..
You say that the 96 shares for the first to make an open source DVC ATM machine should be only a side contribution. Moreover you want the ATM to run both ways (cash2dvc and dvc2cash).

I was pointed out that a one-way ATM will receive only half of the shares. I cannot stop to emphasise how hard it is to achieve such thing. The top todays manufacturers which are well funded, closed source and ship the ATM for freaking 4k$, only managed to build it one way. http://www.coindesk.com/lamassu-ships-first-bitcoin-atm/ .

If you really want to encourage me or others around to build an open source one, that cannot be done with a 'side contribution'.

That means that devcoin is not currently worth enough to fund an open source ATM. Devcoin is not worth enough to fund any but the simplest of hardware, like simple toys:
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=devcoin_bounty#capitalization_1_000_000_usd

I prefer not to make bounties for expensive hardware, which devcoin can not fully fund. I only made the bounty because someone asked for it.

Unthinkingbit

hero member

Activity: 935

Merit: 1015

Quote from: Hunterbunter on December 28, 2013, 01:09:34 AM

Some questions for the (armchair or otherwise) economists out there:

What is the intention behind used coins, when it comes to devcoins?

I should probably quantify what I mean by "used". It's those coins which people have purchased simply to inject cash into the devcoin system so developers can be paid - be they the devcoin admin team buying them from advertising revenue, or philanthropists which have more money than they know what to do with and wish to support open source development. They buy the earned coins off developers (giving them their pay), and then what? Is the intention for them to add them to wallets and leave them there forever?

What "use" are coins like these? A token to measure karma by before the gates of heaven?

What I want charity investors to do is hold the devcoins unless they have a financial emergency, or until devcoin rises in price enough that we can accomplish all the potential bounties:
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=devcoin_bounty#capitalization_10_000_000_000_usd

If devcoin ever does reach a market capitalization of 10 billion, devtome would be the largest wiki ever and would get a lot of revenue. At that point devcoin would have value as a regular investment, not just charity or speculation, and investors could sell their coins if they wished without affecting the price much.

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: Wekkel on December 28, 2013, 02:41:32 PM

Sent 1,000 DVC from 1.0.8 Windows client to Vircurex. Not shown in the block explorer yet.

Sent 94 DVC (triggered 6 DVC payment fee) to my (older) Linux wallet. Not shown in the block explorer yet.

No sign yet of your 1,000 into here (my Linux wallet).

It seems we both cannot get the 1.0.8 client to register payments into the network.

I exported my private key and imported it into a new wallet, I was copying my wallet.dat and running different versions so the client threw a fit thats why my sends weren't going thru.. but now I sent you and vircurex some coins and they are being posted on the blockchain. My vircurex account has received the funds.

Here is a transaction to you for 12k dvc:

http://darkgamex.ch:2751/tx/12d2d84a1f64b1f3b33b9dec45a3c95c953b3bc4054c1e36dc90822a90197152

please confirm that your sends of 100 and 94 worked.

Wekkel

legendary

Activity: 3108

Merit: 1531

yes

Sent 1,000 DVC from 1.0.8 Windows client to Vircurex. Not shown in the block explorer yet.

Sent 94 DVC (triggered 6 DVC payment fee) to my (older) Linux wallet. Not shown in the block explorer yet.

No sign yet of your 1,000 into here (my Linux wallet).

It seems we both cannot get the 1.0.8 client to register payments into the network.

weisoq

hero member

Activity: 720

Merit: 500

Quote from: sidhujag on December 28, 2013, 01:06:11 PM

I dont think your code is theofficial one.. ive been looking at the one i pointed out last post and fees been set to 5 coins... if you go back to 1 coin wouldnt that be a fork? If any client is using 5coins would thy accept blocks wih lower fees? This is why I changed it
back to 5 coins in 1.0.8 and its really only an issue for low dvc amounts.. Once you send over a few thousamd dvc seems the fee is fine (1.5 dvc with 1 dvc per 1k tx size and 0.5 dvc per output). So question is do we have to roll with the lower denominator of 5 coins to prevent a fork?

Repos that have min fee 5 coins:

https://github.com/doublec/devcoin
https://github.com/knotwork/old-devcoind/tree/master/src
https://gitorious.org/devcoin/devcoin/source/4e23c180945785c49bbab682b7f6c6e1eda29b05:src

Where is the one using 5x less fees?

I will send that linux address coins see if they to through.. then after a merged mine block is found and we all see it on our old clients and new We are good..

Thought UTB had now changed it back to 1*coin - http://devtome.com/doku.php?id=devcoin#generation_rate
I'm a bit lost now as to what's being changed, so leave you to it.

weisoq

hero member

Activity: 720

Merit: 500

Quote from: tabnk on December 28, 2013, 08:22:39 AM

How does devcoin work? Huh

http://devcoin.org/
http://devtome.com/doku.php?id=devcoin

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Just sent Wekkel's old client (Linux) 1200 DVC from my new client 1.0.8 which I funded from my vircurex account. Let's see if it goes through. Notice that it was only 1 dvc fee to send even though minfee variable is 5*COINS.

see screenshot of my transaction to him here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/devcoin/files/wekkel.PNG/download

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: Wekkel on December 28, 2013, 04:06:23 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on December 28, 2013, 03:50:37 AM

But for some reason when i send coins to vircurex (old client)
my transaction doesnt get accepted I think? Id like someone else to try or give me
their address while using old client so I cam try sending u coins.

This is my Linux client: 1NtbgQ61TH579orJQEpAZ4zGvgyzLX4L39

I had some payments disappear in the black hole as well. Those were payments from the Linux client to Cryptostocks.com. One went through some hours after the payment, the other after some days. The client showed the payment but the online block explorers did not state a payment having been made.

In the end, things were settled over time.

Can you try sending from the NEW client ( 1.0.8 ) to your cryptostock or vircurex account? We are trying to see if new client can send coins to old clients.

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: markm on December 28, 2013, 05:00:49 AM

Whatever is in my github repo is what I have been using all along.

As far as I know whatever mmpool has been using is based on that or mine is based on his, from way back when.

No idea what other pools might have used.

-MarkM-

I dont think your code is theofficial one.. ive been looking at the one i pointed out last post and fees been set to 5 coins... if you go back to 1 coin wouldnt that be a fork? If any client is using 5coins would thy accept blocks wih lower fees? This is why I changed it
back to 5 coins in 1.0.8 and its really only an issue for low dvc amounts.. Once you send over a few thousamd dvc seems the fee is fine (1.5 dvc with 1 dvc per 1k tx size and 0.5 dvc per output). So question is do we have to roll with the lower denominator of 5 coins to prevent a fork?

Repos that have min fee 5 coins:

https://github.com/doublec/devcoin
https://github.com/knotwork/old-devcoind/tree/master/src
https://gitorious.org/devcoin/devcoin/source/4e23c180945785c49bbab682b7f6c6e1eda29b05:src

Where is the one using 5x less fees?

I will send that linux address coins see if they to through.. then after a merged mine block is found and we all see it on our old clients and new We are good..

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: smeagol on December 28, 2013, 09:24:00 AM

I downloaded one of the newer clients, none of my generation is showing up and it says "117 weeks behind."

Isit supposed to be like that?

You had entire blockchain already? Check in the debug to see if you have any connections and that blocks are downloading...

smeagol

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1005

I downloaded one of the newer clients, none of my generation is showing up and it says "117 weeks behind."

Isit supposed to be like that?

tabnk

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

How does devcoin work? Huh

weisoq

hero member

Activity: 720

Merit: 500

Maybe that could be addressed by just setting up a system where individuals or groups can pool funds separately from 'official' devcoin bounties. So those who want a devcoin atm (I'm also not that interested yet - getting a uk crypto-£ exchange would be a first step, reckon there's zero chance an atm would be permitted here) can get together and enable it in whatever way they think would be most effective. That would provide unlimited avenues for direct investment without getting into controversy over formal bounties. Perhaps even a method where if x% of estimated total required is raised by individuals it can move towards general bounties. i.e. there's nothing stopping anyone using their dvc to fund whatever they'd like to see, and I think that could develop over time.

markm

legendary

Activity: 2940

Merit: 1090

Whatever is in my github repo is what I have been using all along.

As far as I know whatever mmpool has been using is based on that or mine is based on his, from way back when.

No idea what other pools might have used.

-MarkM-

weisoq

hero member

Activity: 720

Merit: 500

Quote from: markm on December 28, 2013, 04:39:40 AM

Time? But there has not been any time has there? We are still discussing deploying the new version. If some minority of nodes has been running it from time to time like these two people who ran it to try to send each other coins have they even actually generated any blocks with it?

Or is the fact that the blockchain wasn't broken yet simply due to their low hash power that happened to cause no blocks to even be in the chain yet that they created?

Is there a list anywhere of blocks that could only have been generated by a node that has this change in it?

Maybe they have tried to form such blocks but the network has consistently rejected them thus they did not make it into the blockchain?

Have any of the merged mining pools used the new code yet?

My private p2pool certainly hasn't.

There no non merged mined devcoin pools are there?

Has any solo miner used it long enough to actually find a block yet?

(How many months does that take?)

-MarkM-

Unless I'm missing something, there was never an actual change to 5*coin as in UTB's listed technical changes (twobits didn't change it). It's been 1*coin the whole time. The discussion of the new version is whether to incorporate the original intention of 5*coin in the new code, in the context of discovering it was never implemented in the first place. So I think 'time' means everything from devcoin's creation to now. Edit: actually it would be from twobit's changes, whenever that was, to now.

markm

legendary

Activity: 2940

Merit: 1090

Quote from: weisoq on December 28, 2013, 04:34:28 AM

Quote from: markm on December 28, 2013, 04:29:35 AM

Who tested the spam-proofing?

I do not recall even hearing about any attempts at spamming, nor any analysis of how much it would cost to achieve how much of what kind of effect by spamming.

-MarkM-

I'm assuming that time was the test, and that UTB being willing to leave it where it is at 1*coin means it serves its purpose. That's me implying, I don't know if it's correct.

Time? But there has not been any time has there? We are still discussing deploying the new version. If some minority of nodes has been running it from time to time like these two people who ran it to try to send each other coins have they even actually generated any blocks with it?

Or is the fact that the blockchain wasn't broken yet simply due to their low hash power that happened to cause no blocks to even be in the chain yet that they created?

Is there a list anywhere of blocks that could only have been generated by a node that has this change in it?

Maybe they have tried to form such blocks but the network has consistently rejected them thus they did not make it into the blockchain?

Have any of the merged mining pools used the new code yet?

My private p2pool certainly hasn't.

There no non merged mined devcoin pools are there?

Has any solo miner used it long enough to actually find a block yet?

(How many months does that take?)

-MarkM-

weisoq

hero member

Activity: 720

Merit: 500

Quote from: markm on December 28, 2013, 04:29:35 AM

Who tested the spam-proofing?

I do not recall even hearing about any attempts at spamming, nor any analysis of how much it would cost to achieve how much of what kind of effect by spamming.

-MarkM-

I'm assuming that time was the test, and that UTB being willing to leave it where it is at 1*coin means it serves its purpose. That's me implying, I don't know if it's correct.

Topic: [DVC]DevCoin - Official Thread - Moderated - page 287. (Read 1058949 times)