Pages:
Author

Topic: [I0C] I0coin - The Best Choice In Digital Currency - page 45. (Read 82618 times)

sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
Does anyone know where we can get hold of the developer, We have compile the new i0coin wallet on the exchange but it seems to have in issue with RPC binding


Code:
Binding RPC on address 0.0.0.0 port 7000 failed.

Everything works fine until re try add an ip via rpcallowip, soon as we add an ip we get the following error message, changing the port is fine



Or if anyone has a link to the old version source cone we can reinstall the old wallet


Thanks

If I remember correctly, this branch connects to both old & new clients, v11.9.9:

https://github.com/domob1812/i0coin/tree/temporary

Code:
git clone -b temporary https://github.com/domob1812/i0coin.git

Or use:

Code:
git clone -b old-client https://github.com/domob1812/i0coin.git

..for the older version.
sr. member
Activity: 355
Merit: 250
Does anyone know where we can get hold of the developer, We have compile the new i0coin wallet on the exchange but it seems to have in issue with RPC binding


Code:
Binding RPC on address 0.0.0.0 port 7000 failed.

Everything works fine until re try add an ip via rpcallowip, soon as we add an ip we get the following error message, changing the port is fine



Or if anyone has a link to the old version source cone we can reinstall the old wallet


Thanks
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
Wallet problems on Cryptopia?

Not that I've heard.  What kind of problems are you referring to?


Missing deposits:

member
Activity: 104
Merit: 60
Been using the 10C faucet @ cryptoblox.com. Payouts is alright for a faucet. Unfortunately I have 9 deposits now that are not confirmed. Last confirmed deposit was on 12/26/15. Sent an email a week ago to faucet support, but as of date no reply. Does anyone know if there's a problem with this faucet? It's depositing, just not confirming Sad  Thanks in advance for you time Smiley

I've been a bit curious about them because their payouts are not showing up on the block explorer.  I'll send a PM and ask.


CryptoBlox hasn't logged in since early November, but I PM'ed him anyway.  The wallet doesn't seem to be syncing with the block chain even though payouts are still being generated and posted.  If CryptoBlox updates the wallet or just restarts it should come back online.  In the mean time, I wouldn't use the faucet.  We may need to get another one.



Thanks for checking into the faucet. Hope Cryptoblox restarts or updates wallet, I'd really like the coins, haha :p
If not yeah, another faucet would be great! Smiley

me too Sad
not had any of the payouts confirm since about dec.23rd.
i also sent a message with no response.
i also see that one of the adservers ('adbit') used on the pages is throwing up error messages too. looks
like cryptoblox admin has just not been around for a while... hope it isnt health issues or anything like that Sad



Yes, hopefully all is well with the Admin. I sent him another email the other day. That makes 3 now, but still no reply. I seen the adservers error messages too and now 10C faucet button is no longer on Cryptoblox. Maybe another faucet will be started soon, we can hope for that too anyways!

If someone can recommend a faucet I'll try to get I0coin added.
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 60
Wallet problems on Cryptopia?

Not that I've heard.  What kind of problems are you referring to?
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
Wallet problems on Cryptopia?
newbie
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
Just wanted to update that 2 days ago, all 10C deposits I was waiting for from CryptoBlox finally DID confirm.
I now have the coins and just wanted to say thanks to who ever made this possible! Smiley
newbie
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
Been using the 10C faucet @ cryptoblox.com. Payouts is alright for a faucet. Unfortunately I have 9 deposits now that are not confirmed. Last confirmed deposit was on 12/26/15. Sent an email a week ago to faucet support, but as of date no reply. Does anyone know if there's a problem with this faucet? It's depositing, just not confirming Sad  Thanks in advance for you time Smiley

I've been a bit curious about them because their payouts are not showing up on the block explorer.  I'll send a PM and ask.


CryptoBlox hasn't logged in since early November, but I PM'ed him anyway.  The wallet doesn't seem to be syncing with the block chain even though payouts are still being generated and posted.  If CryptoBlox updates the wallet or just restarts it should come back online.  In the mean time, I wouldn't use the faucet.  We may need to get another one.



Thanks for checking into the faucet. Hope Cryptoblox restarts or updates wallet, I'd really like the coins, haha :p
If not yeah, another faucet would be great! Smiley

me too Sad
not had any of the payouts confirm since about dec.23rd.
i also sent a message with no response.
i also see that one of the adservers ('adbit') used on the pages is throwing up error messages too. looks
like cryptoblox admin has just not been around for a while... hope it isnt health issues or anything like that Sad



Yes, hopefully all is well with the Admin. I sent him another email the other day. That makes 3 now, but still no reply. I seen the adservers error messages too and now 10C faucet button is no longer on Cryptoblox. Maybe another faucet will be started soon, we can hope for that too anyways!
dnp
full member
Activity: 401
Merit: 110
Been using the 10C faucet @ cryptoblox.com. Payouts is alright for a faucet. Unfortunately I have 9 deposits now that are not confirmed. Last confirmed deposit was on 12/26/15. Sent an email a week ago to faucet support, but as of date no reply. Does anyone know if there's a problem with this faucet? It's depositing, just not confirming Sad  Thanks in advance for you time Smiley

I've been a bit curious about them because their payouts are not showing up on the block explorer.  I'll send a PM and ask.


CryptoBlox hasn't logged in since early November, but I PM'ed him anyway.  The wallet doesn't seem to be syncing with the block chain even though payouts are still being generated and posted.  If CryptoBlox updates the wallet or just restarts it should come back online.  In the mean time, I wouldn't use the faucet.  We may need to get another one.



Thanks for checking into the faucet. Hope Cryptoblox restarts or updates wallet, I'd really like the coins, haha :p
If not yeah, another faucet would be great! Smiley

me too Sad
not had any of the payouts confirm since about dec.23rd.
i also sent a message with no response.
i also see that one of the adservers ('adbit') used on the pages is throwing up error messages too. looks
like cryptoblox admin has just not been around for a while... hope it isnt health issues or anything like that Sad

newbie
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
Been using the 10C faucet @ cryptoblox.com. Payouts is alright for a faucet. Unfortunately I have 9 deposits now that are not confirmed. Last confirmed deposit was on 12/26/15. Sent an email a week ago to faucet support, but as of date no reply. Does anyone know if there's a problem with this faucet? It's depositing, just not confirming Sad  Thanks in advance for you time Smiley

I've been a bit curious about them because their payouts are not showing up on the block explorer.  I'll send a PM and ask.


CryptoBlox hasn't logged in since early November, but I PM'ed him anyway.  The wallet doesn't seem to be syncing with the block chain even though payouts are still being generated and posted.  If CryptoBlox updates the wallet or just restarts it should come back online.  In the mean time, I wouldn't use the faucet.  We may need to get another one.



Thanks for checking into the faucet. Hope Cryptoblox restarts or updates wallet, I'd really like the coins, haha :p
If not yeah, another faucet would be great! Smiley
full member
Activity: 286
Merit: 100
Been using the 10C faucet @ cryptoblox.com. Payouts is alright for a faucet. Unfortunately I have 9 deposits now that are not confirmed. Last confirmed deposit was on 12/26/15. Sent an email a week ago to faucet support, but as of date no reply. Does anyone know if there's a problem with this faucet? It's depositing, just not confirming Sad  Thanks in advance for you time Smiley

I've been a bit curious about them because their payouts are not showing up on the block explorer.  I'll send a PM and ask.


CryptoBlox hasn't logged in since early November, but I PM'ed him anyway.  The wallet doesn't seem to be syncing with the block chain even though payouts are still being generated and posted.  If CryptoBlox updates the wallet or just restarts it should come back online.  In the mean time, I wouldn't use the faucet.  We may need to get another one.

full member
Activity: 286
Merit: 100
Been using the 10C faucet @ cryptoblox.com. Payouts is alright for a faucet. Unfortunately I have 9 deposits now that are not confirmed. Last confirmed deposit was on 12/26/15. Sent an email a week ago to faucet support, but as of date no reply. Does anyone know if there's a problem with this faucet? It's depositing, just not confirming Sad  Thanks in advance for you time Smiley

I've been a bit curious about them because their payouts are not showing up on the block explorer.  I'll send a PM and ask.
full member
Activity: 286
Merit: 100
You dont get it, your not a developer with any kind of experience sorry. Anyways i hope the dev here raises the quality of this project by properly assessing the ramifications of the changes

You sure like being vague don't you.  Give us some specifics on parameter issues.



Here is an example for you. It may or may not apply to this project but applies to one that I'm working on.

If you modify the block time from say 10 minutes to 1 minute you must assess bloat. The max size of a tx is 100k and max size of 1M per block. Logically you shoudl consider reducing max tx size of 10k and max block size of 100k, however with max tx size of 10k you can't fit a standard tx with anything above 50 or so txins so you need to keep that at 100k. Now you have the ability for a single tx to fill up an entire block (which may or may not open up other security ramifications in the system as a black box). Another thing to consider is the amount of blocks to keep by default with bitcoin's IBD push, since by default its set to a certain "size" in MB and changing max block size will affect this change because it seems optimized for this "size". It is set to 288 by default but if you reduce max block to 100k then you would want to set this to 2880 to match the same amount of data stored before pruning.

If you keep block size to 1M then you have 10x more bloat than bitcoin and that may invalidate any hope for it to survive under the logical pretense that storage efficiency will outweigh the network bandwidth constraints that would exist with 10x more bloat (this is because bandwidth costs more than storage in a blockchain network).

THis is just an example of 1 single parameter changing, now multiply that with x number of ramifications for every parameter now you have atleast 1000x extra checks to do by making something like 5 changes to the consensus model (that is an over-exaggeration but you get what I mean now?)

Point taken.

It wouldn't hurt to do a review to ensure parameters are optomized.  And optomized parameters today may not be in a year.  They may need to evolve based on a number of factors.  Average transactions per block, average block size, etc.

I'd expect it's a continuous, iterative process.

Thanks for the heads up.


domob, brooksby,
Do you know of any questionable parameter settings?



If you change block times you probably need to adjust size of block and all other params that go with that.

Based on four years of operation I don't see any immediate problems.  Nevertheless, we should do a review of parameters.  Maybe 'sidhujag' would like to be an independent, unbiased reviewer.  The best way to improve a coin is to try to find weaknesses, and even do stress tests.

newbie
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
Been using the 10C faucet @ cryptoblox.com. Payouts is alright for a faucet. Unfortunately I have 9 deposits now that are not confirmed. Last confirmed deposit was on 12/26/15. Sent an email a week ago to faucet support, but as of date no reply. Does anyone know if there's a problem with this faucet? It's depositing, just not confirming Sad  Thanks in advance for you time Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2044
Merit: 1005
You dont get it, your not a developer with any kind of experience sorry. Anyways i hope the dev here raises the quality of this project by properly assessing the ramifications of the changes

You sure like being vague don't you.  Give us some specifics on parameter issues.



Here is an example for you. It may or may not apply to this project but applies to one that I'm working on.

If you modify the block time from say 10 minutes to 1 minute you must assess bloat. The max size of a tx is 100k and max size of 1M per block. Logically you shoudl consider reducing max tx size of 10k and max block size of 100k, however with max tx size of 10k you can't fit a standard tx with anything above 50 or so txins so you need to keep that at 100k. Now you have the ability for a single tx to fill up an entire block (which may or may not open up other security ramifications in the system as a black box). Another thing to consider is the amount of blocks to keep by default with bitcoin's IBD push, since by default its set to a certain "size" in MB and changing max block size will affect this change because it seems optimized for this "size". It is set to 288 by default but if you reduce max block to 100k then you would want to set this to 2880 to match the same amount of data stored before pruning.

If you keep block size to 1M then you have 10x more bloat than bitcoin and that may invalidate any hope for it to survive under the logical pretense that storage efficiency will outweigh the network bandwidth constraints that would exist with 10x more bloat (this is because bandwidth costs more than storage in a blockchain network).

THis is just an example of 1 single parameter changing, now multiply that with x number of ramifications for every parameter now you have atleast 1000x extra checks to do by making something like 5 changes to the consensus model (that is an over-exaggeration but you get what I mean now?)

Point taken.

It wouldn't hurt to do a review to ensure parameters are optomized.  And optomized parameters today may not be in a year.  They may need to evolve based on a number of factors.  Average transactions per block, average block size, etc.

I'd expect it's a continuous, iterative process.

Thanks for the heads up.


domob, brooksby,
Do you know of any questionable parameter settings?



If you change block times you probably need to adjust size of block and all other params that go with that.
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 60
You dont get it, your not a developer with any kind of experience sorry. Anyways i hope the dev here raises the quality of this project by properly assessing the ramifications of the changes

You sure like being vague don't you.  Give us some specifics on parameter issues.



Here is an example for you. It may or may not apply to this project but applies to one that I'm working on.

If you modify the block time from say 10 minutes to 1 minute you must assess bloat. The max size of a tx is 100k and max size of 1M per block. Logically you shoudl consider reducing max tx size of 10k and max block size of 100k, however with max tx size of 10k you can't fit a standard tx with anything above 50 or so txins so you need to keep that at 100k. Now you have the ability for a single tx to fill up an entire block (which may or may not open up other security ramifications in the system as a black box). Another thing to consider is the amount of blocks to keep by default with bitcoin's IBD push, since by default its set to a certain "size" in MB and changing max block size will affect this change because it seems optimized for this "size". It is set to 288 by default but if you reduce max block to 100k then you would want to set this to 2880 to match the same amount of data stored before pruning.

If you keep block size to 1M then you have 10x more bloat than bitcoin and that may invalidate any hope for it to survive under the logical pretense that storage efficiency will outweigh the network bandwidth constraints that would exist with 10x more bloat (this is because bandwidth costs more than storage in a blockchain network).

THis is just an example of 1 single parameter changing, now multiply that with x number of ramifications for every parameter now you have atleast 1000x extra checks to do by making something like 5 changes to the consensus model (that is an over-exaggeration but you get what I mean now?)

Point taken.

It wouldn't hurt to do a review to ensure parameters are optomized.  And optomized parameters today may not be in a year.  They may need to evolve based on a number of factors.  Average transactions per block, average block size, etc.

I'd expect it's a continuous, iterative process.

Thanks for the heads up.


domob, brooksby,
Do you know of any questionable parameter settings?


legendary
Activity: 2044
Merit: 1005
You dont get it, your not a developer with any kind of experience sorry. Anyways i hope the dev here raises the quality of this project by properly assessing the ramifications of the changes

You sure like being vague don't you.  Give us some specifics on parameter issues.



Here is an example for you. It may or may not apply to this project but applies to one that I'm working on.

If you modify the block time from say 10 minutes to 1 minute you must assess bloat. The max size of a tx is 100k and max size of 1M per block. Logically you shoudl consider reducing max tx size of 10k and max block size of 100k, however with max tx size of 10k you can't fit a standard tx with anything above 50 or so txins so you need to keep that at 100k. Now you have the ability for a single tx to fill up an entire block (which may or may not open up other security ramifications in the system as a black box). Another thing to consider is the amount of blocks to keep by default with bitcoin's IBD push, since by default its set to a certain "size" in MB and changing max block size will affect this change because it seems optimized for this "size". It is set to 288 by default but if you reduce max block to 100k then you would want to set this to 2880 to match the same amount of data stored before pruning.

If you keep block size to 1M then you have 10x more bloat than bitcoin and that may invalidate any hope for it to survive under the logical pretense that storage efficiency will outweigh the network bandwidth constraints that would exist with 10x more bloat (this is because bandwidth costs more than storage in a blockchain network).

THis is just an example of 1 single parameter changing, now multiply that with x number of ramifications for every parameter now you have atleast 1000x extra checks to do by making something like 5 changes to the consensus model (that is an over-exaggeration but you get what I mean now?)
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 60
You dont get it, your not a developer with any kind of experience sorry. Anyways i hope the dev here raises the quality of this project by properly assessing the ramifications of the changes

You sure like being vague don't you.  Give us some specifics on parameter issues.

legendary
Activity: 2044
Merit: 1005
6.7 more transaction bandwidth? Well this means more bloat and probably cheaper dust attacks, perhaps a candidate for a unit test because i bet by simply "tweaking parameters" you will degrade a security aspect od the underlying mechanics which are all assuming certain thresholds.. This is the problem with most devs in coins they simply do not understand software enough to fully comprehend what they are actually doing but just a get rich quick by trying to fool others that hey ive offered a betted alternative which is untested and probably full of hidden bugs of which are the worse kind.


If you're referring to fast block times being less secure it's no less secure than someone paying a vendor in Bitcoin and waiting only for the transaction to show up in the receiver's wallet (no confirmations).  Vendors can't wait 10 minutes for every customer, let alone an hour.  Users can set the number of confirmations to what ever makes them comfortable.  I would argue that one quick I0coin confirmation is better than no Bitcoin confirmations since you know at least one miner has validated the transaction.

As for bloat, yes, the block chain grows faster, but many other coins have similar or faster block times.  But with the recent introduction of pruning this has little affect on the average I0coin user.  Users set the size of the block chain to just about any size they want. 

Parameters are generally a balance between opposing, but equally important features.  Security vs. tx times.  Block rewards vs currency inflation.  I think it's useful for different coins to have different parameter settings to demonstrate how they work in real world scenarios.



You dont get it, your not a developer with any kind of experience sorry. Anyways i hope the dev here raises the quality of this project by properly assessing the ramifications of the changes
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 60
6.7 more transaction bandwidth? Well this means more bloat and probably cheaper dust attacks, perhaps a candidate for a unit test because i bet by simply "tweaking parameters" you will degrade a security aspect od the underlying mechanics which are all assuming certain thresholds.. This is the problem with most devs in coins they simply do not understand software enough to fully comprehend what they are actually doing but just a get rich quick by trying to fool others that hey ive offered a betted alternative which is untested and probably full of hidden bugs of which are the worse kind.


If you're referring to fast block times being less secure it's no less secure than someone paying a vendor in Bitcoin and waiting only for the transaction to show up in the receiver's wallet (no confirmations).  Vendors can't wait 10 minutes for every customer, let alone an hour.  Users can set the number of confirmations to what ever makes them comfortable.  I would argue that one quick I0coin confirmation is better than no Bitcoin confirmations since you know at least one miner has validated the transaction.

As for bloat, yes, the block chain grows faster, but many other coins have similar or faster block times.  But with the recent introduction of pruning this has little affect on the average I0coin user.  Users set the size of the block chain to just about any size they want. 

Parameters are generally a balance between opposing, but equally important features.  Security vs. tx times.  Block rewards vs currency inflation.  I think it's useful for different coins to have different parameter settings to demonstrate how they work in real world scenarios.


Pages:
Jump to: