[I0C] I0coin - The Best Choice In Digital Currency - page 45.

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: tinderbox on January 10, 2016, 07:24:05 PM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 10, 2016, 02:23:46 AM

Quote from: domob on January 07, 2016, 03:00:29 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 06, 2016, 07:57:19 PM

Wow even the miner_tests pass or did you run the unit tests on i0coin? I see you haven't updated the alert key and the nonce's in miner_test... unless you have the same genesis block I don't think these will pass.

I did not run the tests for i0coin, but on the merge-mining branch of Namecoin from which i0coin is forked. i0coin itself only changes the chain parameters and branding. The regtests and unit tests for Namecoin (and the "just merge-mining" branch) are checked for every commit there.

So its just a tweak of params? Whats different about this coin? Why the need to clone but not offer any credible substance over the trunk?

Most cryptos are either exact clones of another, or just slightly different. I0coin's change in parameters from Bitcoin are small but gives it capabilities which improve on Bitcoin.

I0coin's features (many of which are improvements over Bitcoin):

> 6.7 times faster block times than Bitcoin so users can fully confirm txs in 9 minutes, not an hour like Bitcoin.

> 6.7 times the transaction bandwidth of Bitcoin even without block size increases.

> Faster mining rate early in I0coin's life means its 21 million coins are mostly mined already. Near zero currency inflation means new I0coin generation doesn't devalue existing coins.

> Merged mining is more energy efficient because it shares mining resources. This also offsets a reduced desire by miners to mine I0coin since it now has a small block reward. I0coin has remained in the top 5% of cryptocurrencies when considering network hash power.

> Block chain compatibility with all of Bitcoin's block chain technologies.

> I0coin also serves to expand overall cryptocurrency bandwidth. It's been well advertised that Bitcoin cannot even come close to fiat currency transaction volumes by itself. Additional cryptocurrencies which are closely aligned with Bitcoin can share the bandwidth.

This is an exact clone of namecoin (minus name service) with tweaked params.. Most coins have atleast something to offer on top of tweaked parameters.

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.

tinderbox

member

Activity: 104

Merit: 60

Quote from: brooksby on January 09, 2016, 07:10:24 PM

Again, feedback is welcome. This coin redesign is the first step. Once it's acceptable I'll complete the rest of the logo.

New coin design for I0coin:

I'll give a thumbs up on the new design. It improves on the old design and reduces the confusions you pointed out and definitely looks more metallic and realistic. My vote is yes.

tinderbox

member

Activity: 104

Merit: 60

Quote from: sidhujag on January 10, 2016, 02:23:46 AM

Quote from: domob on January 07, 2016, 03:00:29 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 06, 2016, 07:57:19 PM

Wow even the miner_tests pass or did you run the unit tests on i0coin? I see you haven't updated the alert key and the nonce's in miner_test... unless you have the same genesis block I don't think these will pass.

I did not run the tests for i0coin, but on the merge-mining branch of Namecoin from which i0coin is forked. i0coin itself only changes the chain parameters and branding. The regtests and unit tests for Namecoin (and the "just merge-mining" branch) are checked for every commit there.

So its just a tweak of params? Whats different about this coin? Why the need to clone but not offer any credible substance over the trunk?

Most cryptos are either exact clones of another, or just slightly different. I0coin's change in parameters from Bitcoin are small but gives it capabilities which improve on Bitcoin.

I0coin's features (many of which are improvements over Bitcoin):

> 6.7 times faster block times than Bitcoin so users can fully confirm txs in 9 minutes, not an hour like Bitcoin.

> 6.7 times the transaction bandwidth of Bitcoin even without block size increases.

> Faster mining rate early in I0coin's life means its 21 million coins are mostly mined already. Near zero currency inflation means new I0coin generation doesn't devalue existing coins.

> Merged mining is more energy efficient because it shares mining resources. This also offsets a reduced desire by miners to mine I0coin since it now has a small block reward. I0coin has remained in the top 5% of cryptocurrencies when considering network hash power.

> Block chain compatibility with all of Bitcoin's block chain technologies.

> I0coin also serves to expand overall cryptocurrency bandwidth. It's been well advertised that Bitcoin cannot even come close to fiat currency transaction volumes by itself. Additional cryptocurrencies which are closely aligned with Bitcoin can share the bandwidth.

domob

legendary

Activity: 1135

Merit: 1166

Quote from: sidhujag on January 10, 2016, 11:47:09 AM

Quote from: domob on January 10, 2016, 08:34:58 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 10, 2016, 02:23:46 AM

Quote from: domob on January 07, 2016, 03:00:29 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 06, 2016, 07:57:19 PM

Wow even the miner_tests pass or did you run the unit tests on i0coin? I see you haven't updated the alert key and the nonce's in miner_test... unless you have the same genesis block I don't think these will pass.

I did not run the tests for i0coin, but on the merge-mining branch of Namecoin from which i0coin is forked. i0coin itself only changes the chain parameters and branding. The regtests and unit tests for Namecoin (and the "just merge-mining" branch) are checked for every commit there.

So its just a tweak of params? Whats different about this coin? Why the need to clone but not offer any credible substance over the trunk?

Not sure what you mean here. It is an alt-coin like 99,9% of the others out there - with its own blockchain and slightly changed parameters. Apart from that, it is based heavily on Bitcoin's codebase plus merge-mining.

The ones that have any attention are those that actually have innovative code on top of bitcoin.. Theres not many clones with just tweaked params.. Sorry but to me thats a waste of resources.. To each his own i guess

This is true, and I personally agree (that's why I work mostly on Huntercoin and Namecoin). I was contracted to do the I0coin update, so that's what I'm doing here as well.

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: domob on January 10, 2016, 08:34:58 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 10, 2016, 02:23:46 AM

Quote from: domob on January 07, 2016, 03:00:29 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 06, 2016, 07:57:19 PM

Wow even the miner_tests pass or did you run the unit tests on i0coin? I see you haven't updated the alert key and the nonce's in miner_test... unless you have the same genesis block I don't think these will pass.

I did not run the tests for i0coin, but on the merge-mining branch of Namecoin from which i0coin is forked. i0coin itself only changes the chain parameters and branding. The regtests and unit tests for Namecoin (and the "just merge-mining" branch) are checked for every commit there.

So its just a tweak of params? Whats different about this coin? Why the need to clone but not offer any credible substance over the trunk?

Not sure what you mean here. It is an alt-coin like 99,9% of the others out there - with its own blockchain and slightly changed parameters. Apart from that, it is based heavily on Bitcoin's codebase plus merge-mining.

The ones that have any attention are those that actually have innovative code on top of bitcoin.. Theres not many clones with just tweaked params.. Sorry but to me thats a waste of resources.. To each his own i guess

domob

legendary

Activity: 1135

Merit: 1166

Quote from: sidhujag on January 10, 2016, 02:23:46 AM

Quote from: domob on January 07, 2016, 03:00:29 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 06, 2016, 07:57:19 PM

Wow even the miner_tests pass or did you run the unit tests on i0coin? I see you haven't updated the alert key and the nonce's in miner_test... unless you have the same genesis block I don't think these will pass.

I did not run the tests for i0coin, but on the merge-mining branch of Namecoin from which i0coin is forked. i0coin itself only changes the chain parameters and branding. The regtests and unit tests for Namecoin (and the "just merge-mining" branch) are checked for every commit there.

So its just a tweak of params? Whats different about this coin? Why the need to clone but not offer any credible substance over the trunk?

Not sure what you mean here. It is an alt-coin like 99,9% of the others out there - with its own blockchain and slightly changed parameters. Apart from that, it is based heavily on Bitcoin's codebase plus merge-mining.

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: domob on January 07, 2016, 03:00:29 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 06, 2016, 07:57:19 PM

Wow even the miner_tests pass or did you run the unit tests on i0coin? I see you haven't updated the alert key and the nonce's in miner_test... unless you have the same genesis block I don't think these will pass.

I did not run the tests for i0coin, but on the merge-mining branch of Namecoin from which i0coin is forked. i0coin itself only changes the chain parameters and branding. The regtests and unit tests for Namecoin (and the "just merge-mining" branch) are checked for every commit there.

So its just a tweak of params? Whats different about this coin? Why the need to clone but not offer any credible substance over the trunk?

brooksby

full member

Activity: 286

Merit: 100

Quote from: mmpool on January 02, 2016, 09:43:04 PM

Quote from: brooksby on January 02, 2016, 04:42:00 AM

With all this in mind I've designed a new logo. I've kept the color scheme to keep it looking as close to the existing logo as possible. The coin image didn't change. I've changed the font to look more modern, but it still has a similar look and feel. Most importantly, the zero and letter 'o' are clearly different. Compare them for yourselves. I welcome feedback, both pro and con on the new design.

I like the idea of making the logo more distinct. mmpool gets a lot of people confusing iocoin for i0coin. Is it possible to use a digit 0 with the diagonal line going through it to more solidly identify it as a number?

After thinking about making the logo more distinct, I came to the conclusion this can't be done without updating the whole coin design. Most of the time, across the numerous exchanges and information sites, the coin image will represent I0coin without the rest of the logo being present.

Below is my updated coin design. In this new design I include both the numeric "0" with a slash and the written word "zero". This should remove confusion about it being a zero or letter "o". I dispensed with the "I". It is not really needed, and it looked like an "X" when I put the slash through the "0". As the coin is reduced in size the "zero" words become less visible, but the numeric "0" stays visible to quite small coin sizes. I've provided various sizes for comparison. The color of this design is more of a golden hue than the orange of the existing. If the community likes the new design I'll also provide them for download on the website.

Again, feedback is welcome. This coin redesign is the first step. Once it's acceptable I'll complete the rest of the logo.

New coin design for I0coin:

domob

legendary

Activity: 1135

Merit: 1166

Quote from: sidhujag on January 06, 2016, 07:57:19 PM

Wow even the miner_tests pass or did you run the unit tests on i0coin? I see you haven't updated the alert key and the nonce's in miner_test... unless you have the same genesis block I don't think these will pass.

I did not run the tests for i0coin, but on the merge-mining branch of Namecoin from which i0coin is forked. i0coin itself only changes the chain parameters and branding. The regtests and unit tests for Namecoin (and the "just merge-mining" branch) are checked for every commit there.

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: domob on December 31, 2015, 04:32:12 PM

Quote from: sidhujag on December 31, 2015, 02:24:48 PM

Quote from: domob on December 30, 2015, 02:06:32 PM

Quote from: markm on December 30, 2015, 10:00:01 AM

(It seems like you are saying the development branch is what people currently get at the main URL?)

It is, and that is the same as just about any other software project out there (including Bitcoin). If you want stable code, use the releases (tags). If you want to stay on the latest code, use the main branch. Note that I believe the branches to be mostly bugfree, but they are nevertheless no explicitly created and tested releases.

Did you write unit tests that pass on risky code? Bitcoin is not the same as yours because the code is tested and isnt put in a state where ppl can pull broken code especially if test coverage is above 95%... The releases happen after integration testing. So you should not recommend pullimg master or dev branch unless ots unit tested at the least

Isn't that exactly what I wrote? I suggest to use the release tags, unless you know what you are doing and insist on pulling the branches (but I'm definitely not recommending doing that). This is what I wrote. Note that I actually do test the code before I push, but of course not as thoroughly as the release tags are tested.

No because bitcoin will run the unit tests on development code nightly, the master will break if code pushed invalidates it and through peer review the unit tests are pushed along with daily commits to ensure reliability of master, one simply does not run a binary from master if the unit tests have failed.

Wow even the miner_tests pass or did you run the unit tests on i0coin? I see you haven't updated the alert key and the nonce's in miner_test... unless you have the same genesis block I don't think these will pass.

brooksby

full member

Activity: 286

Merit: 100

Quote from: mmpool on January 02, 2016, 09:43:04 PM

Quote from: brooksby on January 02, 2016, 04:42:00 AM

With all this in mind I've designed a new logo. I've kept the color scheme to keep it looking as close to the existing logo as possible. The coin image didn't change. I've changed the font to look more modern, but it still has a similar look and feel. Most importantly, the zero and letter 'o' are clearly different. Compare them for yourselves. I welcome feedback, both pro and con on the new design.

I like the idea of making the logo more distinct. mmpool gets a lot of people confusing iocoin for i0coin. Is it possible to use a digit 0 with the diagonal line going through it to more solidly identify it as a number?

I'll see what I can do.

mmpool

sr. member

Activity: 375

Merit: 250

Quote from: brooksby on January 02, 2016, 04:42:00 AM

With all this in mind I've designed a new logo. I've kept the color scheme to keep it looking as close to the existing logo as possible. The coin image didn't change. I've changed the font to look more modern, but it still has a similar look and feel. Most importantly, the zero and letter 'o' are clearly different. Compare them for yourselves. I welcome feedback, both pro and con on the new design.

I like the idea of making the logo more distinct. mmpool gets a lot of people confusing iocoin for i0coin. Is it possible to use a digit 0 with the diagonal line going through it to more solidly identify it as a number?

brooksby

full member

Activity: 286

Merit: 100

I've been thinking about our I0coin logo for a while. Moving forward I see some need to modernize... just a bit. One of the issues that I0coin has had is confusion about whether the 'I0' is an 'I zero' or 'I' letter 'O'. It became even more confusing when a rival coin, I/O coin, came out last year, which really is 'I' letter 'O'.

Let's consider our existing logo. Notice that the zero in 'I0' and the letter 'o' in 'coin' look identical. This furthers the confusion. So I'd like to fix that with a logo which clearly shows the difference. As a secondary concern I think the existing logo font looks a bit out dated. And to top every thing off, I do NOT have the master graphics file for the existing logo. So there's really no way for me to create larger versions if need be.

With all this in mind I've designed a new logo. I've kept the color scheme to keep it looking as close to the existing logo as possible. The coin image didn't change. I've changed the font to look more modern, but it still has a similar look and feel. Most importantly, the zero and letter 'o' are clearly different. Compare them for yourselves. I welcome feedback, both pro and con on the new design.

Existing logo:

New logo:

brooksby

full member

Activity: 286

Merit: 100

As for the testing of release version 0.11.9, here are a few points to make.

First off, since I0coin software is over 99% the same as Bitcoin that brings along with it tremendous reliability and testing which was already done on Bitcoin.

Second, the primary difference with Bitcoin is the merged mining. That has been under live testing for a couple of months now with no problems reported. We also have 100% of the mining now performed using 0.11.9.

Third, domob and I have done testing. Some of my tests are listed below.

-whole 0.11.9 block chain downloaded from scratch
-connected to 51.254.131.226 (node hard coded in client) for block chain download
-connected to ybs6nrn4bpvckalt.onion (Tor address for 51.254.131.226) for block chain download
-pruned block chain to 600 MB
-loaded a 0.8.6 wallet with a 0.11.9 (pruned) client
-transferred I0C from 0.11.9 (pruned) to 0.8.6 client
-transferred I0C from 0.11.9 (pruned) to 0.11.9.9 (unpruned) client
-transferred I0C from 0.8.6 to 0.11.9 (unpruned)
-transferred I0C from 0.11.9 (unpruned) to 0.8.6 client
-set server=1, sent rpc commands and received correct responses
-txindex=1, successfully re-indexed block chain

brooksby

full member

Activity: 286

Merit: 100

Quote from: domob on December 31, 2015, 04:32:12 PM

Quote from: sidhujag on December 31, 2015, 02:24:48 PM

Quote from: domob on December 30, 2015, 02:06:32 PM

Quote from: markm on December 30, 2015, 10:00:01 AM

(It seems like you are saying the development branch is what people currently get at the main URL?)

It is, and that is the same as just about any other software project out there (including Bitcoin). If you want stable code, use the releases (tags). If you want to stay on the latest code, use the main branch. Note that I believe the branches to be mostly bugfree, but they are nevertheless no explicitly created and tested releases.

Did you write unit tests that pass on risky code? Bitcoin is not the same as yours because the code is tested and isnt put in a state where ppl can pull broken code especially if test coverage is above 95%... The releases happen after integration testing. So you should not recommend pullimg master or dev branch unless ots unit tested at the least

Isn't that exactly what I wrote? I suggest to use the release tags, unless you know what you are doing and insist on pulling the branches (but I'm definitely not recommending doing that). This is what I wrote. Note that I actually do test the code before I push, but of course not as thoroughly as the release tags are tested.

... and again that's the way Bitcoin does it as well.

domob

legendary

Activity: 1135

Merit: 1166

Quote from: sidhujag on December 31, 2015, 02:24:48 PM

Quote from: domob on December 30, 2015, 02:06:32 PM

Quote from: markm on December 30, 2015, 10:00:01 AM

(It seems like you are saying the development branch is what people currently get at the main URL?)

It is, and that is the same as just about any other software project out there (including Bitcoin). If you want stable code, use the releases (tags). If you want to stay on the latest code, use the main branch. Note that I believe the branches to be mostly bugfree, but they are nevertheless no explicitly created and tested releases.

Did you write unit tests that pass on risky code? Bitcoin is not the same as yours because the code is tested and isnt put in a state where ppl can pull broken code especially if test coverage is above 95%... The releases happen after integration testing. So you should not recommend pullimg master or dev branch unless ots unit tested at the least

Isn't that exactly what I wrote? I suggest to use the release tags, unless you know what you are doing and insist on pulling the branches (but I'm definitely not recommending doing that). This is what I wrote. Note that I actually do test the code before I push, but of course not as thoroughly as the release tags are tested.

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: domob on December 30, 2015, 02:06:32 PM

Quote from: markm on December 30, 2015, 10:00:01 AM

(It seems like you are saying the development branch is what people currently get at the main URL?)

It is, and that is the same as just about any other software project out there (including Bitcoin). If you want stable code, use the releases (tags). If you want to stay on the latest code, use the main branch. Note that I believe the branches to be mostly bugfree, but they are nevertheless no explicitly created and tested releases.

Did you write unit tests that pass on risky code? Bitcoin is not the same as yours because the code is tested and isnt put in a state where ppl can pull broken code especially if test coverage is above 95%... The releases happen after integration testing. So you should not recommend pullimg master or dev branch unless ots unit tested at the least

domob

legendary

Activity: 1135

Merit: 1166

Quote from: markm on December 30, 2015, 10:00:01 AM

(It seems like you are saying the development branch is what people currently get at the main URL?)

It is, and that is the same as just about any other software project out there (including Bitcoin). If you want stable code, use the releases (tags). If you want to stay on the latest code, use the main branch. Note that I believe the branches to be mostly bugfree, but they are nevertheless no explicitly created and tested releases.

markm

legendary

Activity: 2940

Merit: 1090

That still sounds a bit risky, guess I will wait until things stabilise and a stable version is set up as the default.

(It seems like you are saying the development branch is what people currently get at the main URL?)

-MarkM-

domob

legendary

Activity: 1135

Merit: 1166

Quote from: markm on December 29, 2015, 04:04:50 PM

And thus does git suddenly become a complicated mess.

Well, you most definitely can keep pulling from the master branch or the 0.12 branch (https://github.com/domob1812/i0coin/tree/0.12) and it should work for you (although I'll mostly update the 0.12 branch from now on, as this is what I consider still part of my bounty). The tags are just an added service in case you want to make sure that you have the same version as everyone else and not run into any bugs produced during recent development. If you want to pull the latest code, just do it and it should be fine.

Topic: [I0C] I0coin - The Best Choice In Digital Currency - page 45. (Read 81925 times)