Topic: Ixcoin TODO - page 59. (Read 631753 times)

Cause dot org is just so much better.  So much more Bitcoin-esque.  We really need to get on the same page and look organized and professional.

I have sent Thomas a lot of messages over the past few months.  If I don't hear back soon I'm gonna go with what our partners want cause it looks like it's go time.  Then I'll just apologize and try to fix anything Thomas doesn't like when the time comes.  Gotta make a decision here soon and with no answer from Thomas I have little choice.

Hahaha.

You know the same thought crossed my mind when I wrote that but then I ran with it.

So check it out.

Gavin wanted 20mb block update, right?

Who stopped him and gave him the permission to do only 8mb, who owns and controls 60% of the Bitcoin network and are calling the shots right now?  Those are our partners. 

Believe it!  #ChinaPower

Why not put the redesigned website those big players made on ixcoin.io?

LOL still the same crazy fuck you were years ago...

I've been asked by the biggest players in crypto to update the dot org site and they even did a full redesign for us.

I simply cannot do that.  iXCoin is not my personal toy.  Even though our partners control the network - the protocol is still that of Thomas Nasakioto and he gave specific parameters for the site from which I will not deviate.

We'll have to use a sister site until Thomas changes his mind or forfeits all interest in iXCoin to someone on the board or to this community.

I own iXCoin.io and we have other good ixCoin domains to work with as well.


Edit:  You have a unique sense of humor [and you speak Chinese].  lol.  

A Fake Nasakioto account?
Look at mine. LOL

http://s12.postimg.org/gwpi0xnkd/crisis.jpg

Raise your hand if you can build a website.


I say all bets are off with Thomas. We do what we want with the image , logo, website.

For the Android wallet integration it only needs some entries to the com.coinomi.wallet.Constants:

    DEFAULT_COINS_SERVERS, the addresses of the electrum servers (minimum 2 servers)
    COINS_ICONS, an icon resource for the coin
    Optionaly a third party block explorer in COINS_BLOCK_EXPLORERS
    An entry to SUPPORTED_COINS to enable the coin

No need for thanks Vlad, just pointing out the obvious to every one,

If the ixorg site goes down the 9.3 wallet is available for download on your github account https://github.com/vladroberto/IXCoin/releases/tag/0.9.3.0

I really appreciate your vote, Cinnamon.   
[/quote]

The new in last few days "CPU coin" "axiom" uses the library that bitcoin is planning to move to, maybe a look at how they did that could be helpful?

Though note they also use totally non-bitcoin stuff for everything else.

I have actually made over a bitcoin I think at current prices just CPU-mining it since a few hours after its launch with about maybe ten or so cores in total.

Likely its price will drop though as more of it is mined and made-by-staking, unless using novel signatures and such really is a good selling-point.

-MarkM-

most alt networks are smaller in size than bitcoin , i have been using open ssl 1.0.2a for a while on builds , the ix network is not currently vulnerable to this issue at all if it is indeed anchored by 3.x code , if it is not, since a majority of mining power (very large majority in this case) is under control of two pools ix is still in no danger but , yes other coin networks could be vulnerable to this issue, it is a danger that is restricted to mining ........ using different wallets for normal transactions should not pose an issue ..... but ...obviously moving away from open ssl and other libraries would be the safest long term plan......... much easier said than done..

the short term fix is to make sure for any network the primary nodes and pools and wallets that are distributed are running preferably the same version of open ssl <<<<
also when building open ssl from source , traditionally it would be something like this in linux or mingw

./Configure no-shared no-dso mingw

make

Others who are familiar with this issue for a while including myself have been building open ssl with the algos disabled , fellow developers on the blake 256 team and I are in agreement with this as well and we have discussed it at length  ( also see Nitrogenetics posts on this in this forum)

./Configure no-zlib no-shared no-dso no-krb5 no-camellia no-capieng no-cast no-cms no-dtls1 no-gost no-gmp no-heartbeats no-idea no-jpake no-md2 no-mdc2 no-rc5 no-rdrand no-rfc3779 no-rsax no-sctp no-seed no-sha0 no-static_engine no-whirlpool no-rc2 no-rc4 no-ssl2 no-ssl3 mingw

EDIT TWO AUG 3 -15 ,  IF ANYONE IS USING THIS TO BUILD OPEN SSL , BEFORE YOU USE THE

make command

make depends

then make,

make


note this solved all issues i had with building it even openssl 1.0.2d  fyi ---------------------------------  sorry about that ------------


forgot all about it until just now when i started setting up a new build system to run tests finally with a good working copy of mingw 48

not for ix for something else but i thought, ''''''''''oh i forgot about this part''''''''''     


make

also https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/depends/packages/openssl.mk#L27


note in tests with open ssl 1.0.2d i was unable to 'disable cms' ----------  another thing people should consider is that when building recent versions of qt open source everywhere , if you ever compiled this monster it calls open ssl, i.e. you put it in your path before you build it,

I think while the bitcoin team says little of this i notice (probably for many reasons other than just this) their test builds are always done from 'scratch' not with a ready made build system...........  

imagine your qt everywhere 5.4.0 is compiled with a different (earlier) version of open ssl than the wallet itself..... i see a few possible issues there but  I tend to be a little 'over paranoid' on these things.  

On your other concepts I have always felt that merged mining is the real future and know of a few other 'experts' who agree and I have learned many things from them and hope to continue to do so.

I think maybe that is when the registrar's supervision of it expires, if so it looks like they have a year in which to re-sell it or convince Thomas to renew it.

This incident makes me even more glad I spend the extra bucks to use Network Solutions (which I originally did simply from the fact that they inherited from the internet orginal setup all the main domain extensions, probably sue to being made up of all kinds of CIA and NSA etc types or something. I got my domain way back when you could ask for a few hundred on speculation run them a while then pay for any you wanted to keep and let the rest go. I even had windows.com, windows.net and windows.org for while on spec then decided to let them go when no-one would bid anything at all for them on e-bay. )

Though I guess I should go check if Network Solutions really does have a way anyone can pay for someone else's domain...

...Yes it does, it looks like anyone could pop over there any time and renew my knotwork.com domain for me.

...But asking to renew ixcoin.org results in:


It seems likely that when ixcoin.org expires it will show up somewhere as another high value domain that can be purchased at above normal price, unless .org is not actually considered all that valuable. (But .net isnt really either, is it?)

Maybe it would be worthwhile to purchase ixcoin.world, preferably at a registrar that lets anyone pop in and pay for anyone else's domain?

(I have not checked whether namecheap, godaddy, etc let youhttps://www.namecheap.com/support/knowledgebase/article.aspx?type=article&contentid=241&categoryid=&articletitle=how-can-i-renew-my-expired-domain do that, maybe they do...)

Ok, I tried chat at namecheap as their domains menu had no renew option (I was not signed in) and instead of chat it sent me to a knowledgebase with a link to:

https://www.namecheap.com/support/knowledgebase/article.aspx?type=article&contentid=241&categoryid=&articletitle=how-can-i-renew-my-expired-domain

Which basically says to sign in and implies it would only be your own domains you'd be able to renew once signed in.

I think for our kind of purpose, a registrar that lets anyone renew anyone's domains is important, as it is often more important to keep the thing alive than to bicker about who technically "owns" it.

Similarly though one probably ought to also use a webhost that lets anyone pay for anyone else's website...

-MarkM-

I really appreciate your vote, Cinnamon.   

Mark, it says it was updated and it expires next year.  So why is it still showing expired?

Depending what registrar it is registered with, it is possible that anyone can pay for it.

I seem to recall for example noticing once upon a time at Network Solutions that they seemed to have an option whereby anyone could choose to pay for any domain to have its time extended; as if they don't particularly care who pays just as long as they get the money.

Of course this would mean you go ahead and pay but who-ever currently owns it continues to own it...


Looks like the registrar is PublicDomainRegistry.com

Damn. They have a renew page, http://publicdomainregistry.com/renew/ where you enter a domain name and they tell you who to contact about renewing it.

But it gives me an error when I ask it about ixcoin.org

It sounds like when you get a domain through them they are kind of an affiliate or something and actually register it somewhere else or something.

Or heck maybe they are just who the "whois" command on Ubuntu consults to do WHOIS lookups and aren't actually anything to do with actually registering the domain.

Reading more of the WHOIS results:


Maybe it is actually owned by that privacy-protection place, not directly by Thomas. Still dunno where they registered it though.

A lot of shady registrars these days, and, for all I know, places like that privacy protection place, put domains up for auction when they expire, as it seems the registrars have longer than the people who buy domains from them to hold on to a domain, or something like that. If they think it might have value they might just keep it or auction it.

-MarkM-

I have the login credentials for the ixCoin.org site, can I pay for the domain fee or only the owner of the site can pay for that?

We really need to get that back online ASAP cause that's the place people go to get the latest QT wallet download.

If anybody has a shortcut for that please post it here for easier access.  Thx!

So Cinnamon... About that little code detail... BIP66, the OpenSSL change and all that...

It sounds like all the merged mined coins need to be fixed for that?

Plus any other altcoins any of us are into will also be needing it most likely?

It sounds like we need someone familiar enough with the problem and apt enough at fixing it that putting it into coin after coin after coin until all are fixed will become easier and easier for them to do the more coins they do it to?

Along similar lines I am noticing more and more coins that could really do with having merged mining as a subchain implemented. Mostly these are coins that can be mined with just one or two CPU cores currently, so someone could potentially make good money by mining them all with a core or two each for a while while quietly preparing an upgraded version that will support merged mining so that eventually the coin can be brought back into the public eye - and onto exchanges - with at least some chance of being able to secure their blockchains. (Not all of these coins are SHA256 coins; in fact most of them are not.)

-MarkM-

fyi , I still plan to be around any resigning from Vlad's foundation should be no negative reflection on him or others or taken personally.

my area of skill (if any) is not in promotion or marketing but in code , details, ect....

in fact for those reading the 'big news' in the world of bitcoin today https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ewhli/bitcoindev_disclosure_consensus_bug_indirectly/ 

most will not be aware that I brought this issue up to a few people in private including Ahmed a while ago based on this old post of Maxwell's I had read early this year http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/33221963/ which while not cited anywhere here is an obvious extension of the same issue / i won't attempt to describe consensus forks here if you do not know what Maxwell is discussing here don't worry about it.


It is true my primary reason in moving on is to focus on other projects i am working on. I plan to still be around here and on github for technical items and
anything else that may come up. Everyone should continue to support Vlad 100% --- He has done more work than anyone I am aware of for ix and has the ability and 'bravado' to get big players to the table. This is certainly not a strength of mine.

If others attempt to kick Vlad out as president of the ix foundation, then I would likely decide to no longer contribute to the future of this project.

One thing about the planned mutiny and ambush.

I saw it coming weeks/months ago and I can clearly see the angle of attack.

Trust me when I say it's gonna backfire [again] so don't waste time upsetting me.  Just do things right as I have worked long and hard to do what is right for ixCoin and its community, often at a heavy personal cost to myself.  I have kept a lot of screenshots and emails to make my case - it's not gonna be as simple as the mutineers may think. 

Cheers!

I'm rarely wrong about these things so let's wait and see.  I hope in this case I am wrong.

As for Cinnamon, I specifically asked her for more information as to why she's quitting and she repeatedly said it was due to her other projects.  This is unexpected and we're gonna miss having her as part of the team.

Regarding iXCoin, it does seem hopefully stuck at sub 2 pennies but we are working to make things happen.  Marshall and Terpin should prove very effective in that regard, in my opinion.

Nothing is gonna happen until Bitcoin gets this blocksize deal over with.  That's when we will see major new players emerge as [parallel currencies] sidechains to Bitcoin and I believe iXCoin will be one of the major ones, or perhaps THE major one.

There's obviously the real risk that Bitcoin will find a way to do it alone but I don't think that's gonna happen.  Nonetheless, investors should be prepared to see iXCoin completely fail if Bitcoin does find a way to scale without any help from other alt-coins.