Topic: Slimcoin | First Proof of Burn currency | Decentralized Web - page 114. (Read 137076 times)
Hey so it's taking me a couple days to reach halfway syncing the wallet on OSX, is that normal? I've been using different networks and it seems to go the same speed regardless. Anyway I can speed up the sync?
(with no central settlement point all the trades go through) relies the BIP65 protocol.
There are other, more general use cases for CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY scripts. It just so happens that Hans Robeers has contributed a BIP65 backport to the PPCoin codebase - https://github.com/peercoin/peercoin/pull/149, so I plundered it to add BIP65 support to Slimcoin: https://github.com/slimcoin-project/Slimcoin/commit/3092f1edcb8a53da6d5586c61465bd7fb8b68a92
Code:
$ git clone https://github.com/slimcoin-project/Slimcoin/slimcoin.git
$ cd slimcoin
$ git checkout feature.bip65
$ cd src
$ make -f makefile.unix test_slimcoin
$ ./test_slimcoin
Cheers
Graham
Regarding funding development, the ideal long term solution is a situation in which the bigger economic picture is such that devs work on projects they support, and others do other work on those projects they support, according to their area of expertise. Putting too much emphasis on funding development is asking for shitcoins. On the other hand though, the market is not there yet and it is still necessary to pay people to work on some coins.
It's risky for new people to get into coins with no funding and unknown future. I've been around for quite a while and for me it was enough to read a few posts by gjhiggins and d5000. I saw professionalism and dedication and decided to stick around. But other people would probably like to read something about roadmap, funding and stuff like that.
Or maybe Slim isn't at the point where it's ready spread around. I'm new here, don't really know ) Anybody can answer that by the way? At what point Slim at the moment? gjhiggins said that the wallet is not stable enough to add Slim to Cryptopia for example. But somehow it's stable enough for Nova. I'm not a dev, so I don't get it. Can we try to add it on other exchanges or we need to wait for a more stable client?
Also can someone write a good short article about Slim? What it has to offer now and where development is heading. We could push it then to some media. Even cointelegraph maybe.
Beta ACME don't work for a few hours, what happend?
I got an unclear advice-only-no-action-needed email in Germlish from Hetzner going on about an “attack”. Reading between the lines, it would appear that the nonstandard port caused the traffic to be misidentified as a DoS attack by Hetzner's (security partners') algos.
I guess they blocked access. Machines are mindless monitors, so expect more of the same.
update: port assignment has been incremented to 6054
Cheers
Graham
Regarding funding development, the ideal long term solution is a situation in which the bigger economic picture is such that devs work on projects they support, and others do other work on those projects they support, according to their area of expertise. Putting too much emphasis on funding development is asking for shitcoins. On the other hand though, the market is not there yet and it is still necessary to pay people to work on some coins.
Regarding decentralized exchanges, it is sort of like if you have NASA develop a moon lander but they cannot figure out how to package cereal for the astronauts to eat. Should it go in round boxes? Square boxes? Tupperware? Maybe a university is needed to study the issue.
A simple program that downloads blockchains and creates the ability for people to commit certain coins for a certain period of time to trade for a specific amount of another currency, if another party wants, is not complicated. My guess is that the focus is on bells and whistles, or making a profit, rather than functionality. Blaketrader did everything a decentralized exchange needs to do, except make a pretty website.
Regarding decentralized exchanges, it is sort of like if you have NASA develop a moon lander but they cannot figure out how to package cereal for the astronauts to eat. Should it go in round boxes? Square boxes? Tupperware? Maybe a university is needed to study the issue.
A simple program that downloads blockchains and creates the ability for people to commit certain coins for a certain period of time to trade for a specific amount of another currency, if another party wants, is not complicated. My guess is that the focus is on bells and whistles, or making a profit, rather than functionality. Blaketrader did everything a decentralized exchange needs to do, except make a pretty website.
Beta ACME don't work for a few hours, what happend?
A little comment on the Blocknet issue:
For me, if Blocknet works as it is marketed, then it would be better than a centralized exchange and even better than Bisq (because it needs no arbitrators). I don't know if Blocknet is open source, but if it is, it could also be cloned if there are restrictions for new coins or a centralized management of their software repository. However, there were many doubts in the community about it to work - some have described it as vaporware or directly as "scam". I'm not following it actively so I can't comment on that.
However, there is already a working decentralized trading mechanism - and this is really a "truely" decentralized one. It's the atomic swap protocol used by Qora and Burst. Yes, these are Java coins without direct Bitcoin ancestry, but the developer, CIYAM, has stated that it can be implemented in Script-based coins with a simple new opcode called OP_CHECKSTATE (see here). However, no altcoin seems to have implemented that - I don't know if for technical reasons or because of lack of knowledge about CIYAM's AT technology.
There are other atomic swap proposals (see here for a general description), but most need a "transaction malleability" fix like Segwit or FlexTrans, and we're unfortunately far away from that still, I guess.
For me, if Blocknet works as it is marketed, then it would be better than a centralized exchange and even better than Bisq (because it needs no arbitrators). I don't know if Blocknet is open source, but if it is, it could also be cloned if there are restrictions for new coins or a centralized management of their software repository. However, there were many doubts in the community about it to work - some have described it as vaporware or directly as "scam". I'm not following it actively so I can't comment on that.
However, there is already a working decentralized trading mechanism - and this is really a "truely" decentralized one. It's the atomic swap protocol used by Qora and Burst. Yes, these are Java coins without direct Bitcoin ancestry, but the developer, CIYAM, has stated that it can be implemented in Script-based coins with a simple new opcode called OP_CHECKSTATE (see here). However, no altcoin seems to have implemented that - I don't know if for technical reasons or because of lack of knowledge about CIYAM's AT technology.
There are other atomic swap proposals (see here for a general description), but most need a "transaction malleability" fix like Segwit or FlexTrans, and we're unfortunately far away from that still, I guess.
Sorry, red flags all over this one.
uh-huh, c.f. the No true Scotsman” fallacy.
Even today, centralized exchanges have humans running around doing stuff. So the things they trade don't have to fit a standard perfectly. Until we perfect AI, attempts at decentralization will result in things having to meet more severe standards.
Blocknet is in the process of contacting all the developers of all the coins to determine the compatible coins for testing and adding to the exchange. This is the question they need answered:
...
To start determining which coins are compatible, we need to find out if a coin uses *BOTH* OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY(CLTV) *AND* JSON RPC.
Exacting standards that can be trivially verified by checking github repositories? Yeah, right. A truly decentralised exchange yet they need to “determine the compatible coins”. Yeah, right. Questions they need answering before coin users can use the exchange? Yes sirree, that's *truly* decentralised all right.
If the exchange *was* truly decentralised, onboarding would be a pure userland decision; slimcoin users would just rock up and use the exchange.
The terms “serial entrepreneur” and “peer-to-peer” are mutually exclusive.
Cheers
Graham
Because it will be truly decentralized, Blocknet has exacting standards for coin compatibility.
uh-huh, c.f. the No true Scotsman” fallacy.
Quote
Even today, centralized exchanges have humans running around doing stuff. So the things they trade don't have to fit a standard perfectly. Until we perfect AI, attempts at decentralization will result in things having to meet more severe standards.
Blocknet is in the process of contacting all the developers of all the coins to determine the compatible coins for testing and adding to the exchange. This is the question they need answered:
...
To start determining which coins are compatible, we need to find out if a coin uses *BOTH* OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY(CLTV) *AND* JSON RPC.
Exacting standards that can be trivially verified by checking github repositories? Yeah, right. A truly decentralised exchange yet they need to “determine the compatible coins”. Yeah, right. Questions they need answering before coin users can use the exchange? Yes sirree, that's *truly* decentralised all right.
If the exchange *was* truly decentralised, onboarding would be a pure userland decision; slimcoin users would just rock up and use the exchange.
The terms “serial entrepreneur” and “peer-to-peer” are mutually exclusive.
Cheers
Graham
I think what they mean by "decentralized," is simply "peer-to-peer." The way Blocknet makes the trades peer-to-peer (with no central settlement point all the trades go through) relies the BIP65 protocol. I'm not qualified to say if there was a better way to achieve this or not. Anyway, having devised a way to do peer-to-peer, they're trying to figure out which coins are compatible with their solution
What I wrote sounded like I was trying to be rhetorical ("true"...), but rather I was in fact making an observation, though a poorly-worded one. Namely, that total decentralization (i.e. "true" decentralization) requires total automation, and total automation requires a degree of standardization of the component parts (or "exacting standards"). Nobody is likely to solve the centralization problem without increasing standardization of the components.
In terms of the big picture, a push towards greater standardization is the dark side of the blockchain revolution. Decentralization advances freedom in some ways, but in other ways it threatens our independence.
I think that was the idea to not have any ICO with our coin or platform, you know. I guess we must have some funding later on, but ICO is a bad example and there are so many bad ICOs now, that after this bubble going to take full effect it would have bad name
makes sense
although how do our devs get funding then? donations? it'll be surely possible after Slim in top 100 coins
so now the question is how to get there ) maybe an article on Cointelegraph? shouldn't be too expensive
I think that was the idea to not have any ICO with our coin or platform, you know. I guess we must have some funding later on, but ICO is a bad example and there are so many bad ICOs now, that after this bubble going to take full effect it would have bad name
I think Hush dev came up with a fine idea how to get development funded. He wants to integrate Counterparty functionality to Hush, issue tokens and sell them on ICO.
gjhiggins, did you think of something similar for Slim? You and other devs would have money for long term development and you'll be able to hire more people.
gjhiggins, did you think of something similar for Slim? You and other devs would have money for long term development and you'll be able to hire more people.
Sorry, red flags all over this one.
uh-huh, c.f. the No true Scotsman” fallacy.
Exacting standards that can be trivially verified by checking github repositories? Yeah, right. A truly decentralised exchange yet they need to “determine the compatible coins”. Yeah, right. Questions they need answering before coin users can use the exchange? Yes sirree, that's *truly* decentralised all right.
If the exchange *was* truly decentralised, onboarding would be a pure userland decision; slimcoin users would just rock up and use the exchange.
The terms “serial entrepreneur” and “peer-to-peer” are mutually exclusive.
Cheers
Graham
Because it will be truly decentralized, Blocknet has exacting standards for coin compatibility.
uh-huh, c.f. the No true Scotsman” fallacy.
Quote
Blocknet is in the process of contacting all the developers of all the coins to determine the compatible coins for testing and adding to the exchange. This is the question they need answered:
...
To start determining which coins are compatible, we need to find out if a coin uses *BOTH* OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY(CLTV) *AND* JSON RPC.
...
To start determining which coins are compatible, we need to find out if a coin uses *BOTH* OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY(CLTV) *AND* JSON RPC.
Exacting standards that can be trivially verified by checking github repositories? Yeah, right. A truly decentralised exchange yet they need to “determine the compatible coins”. Yeah, right. Questions they need answering before coin users can use the exchange? Yes sirree, that's *truly* decentralised all right.
If the exchange *was* truly decentralised, onboarding would be a pure userland decision; slimcoin users would just rock up and use the exchange.
The terms “serial entrepreneur” and “peer-to-peer” are mutually exclusive.
Cheers
Graham
Interestingly, two stakes arrived the moment I set up staking, but so far no more since -- which is OK since they were filling T-bone-sized stakes. 
. Thanks to everyone who helped me navigate the steps to setting up staking.
@d5000, your sheet is really helpful. Had I known about it, I think I would have figured out what to do just by studying that.
@dzarmush From what I have heard, Blocknet is the most progressed of the decentralized exchanges -- with a public release release several weeks away. Because it will be truly decentralized, Blocknet has exacting standards for coin compatibility.
@gjhiggins Speaking of which, Blocknet is in the process of contacting all the developers of all the coins to determine the compatible coins for testing and adding to the exchange. This is the question they need answered:
To start determining which coins are compatible, we need to find out if a coin uses *BOTH* OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY(CLTV) *AND* JSON RPC.
I don't know whether Slimcoin is compatible or can be made so. If you let me know I will pass it along.
. Thanks to everyone who helped me navigate the steps to setting up staking. @d5000, your sheet is really helpful. Had I known about it, I think I would have figured out what to do just by studying that.
@dzarmush From what I have heard, Blocknet is the most progressed of the decentralized exchanges -- with a public release release several weeks away. Because it will be truly decentralized, Blocknet has exacting standards for coin compatibility.
@gjhiggins Speaking of which, Blocknet is in the process of contacting all the developers of all the coins to determine the compatible coins for testing and adding to the exchange. This is the question they need answered:
To start determining which coins are compatible, we need to find out if a coin uses *BOTH* OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY(CLTV) *AND* JSON RPC.
I don't know whether Slimcoin is compatible or can be made so. If you let me know I will pass it along.
@dzarmush: The operation to obtain the "Circulating Supply" is easy - simply they would have to rest the balance of the Burn Address from the available supply.
The problem is that there is currently no web service that provides that number or even the burn address balance in a machine-readable way (slimcoin.club or bchain.info could be web-scraped but that is of course not ideal).
With gjhiggins' ACME (or more precisely: with his real-time queryable RDF blockchain) these queries are possible, but as far as I understand it is still not ready for the URL of the query interface to be shared. CMC would make queries relatively often so it should consume some resources on ACME, I guess.
The problem is that there is currently no web service that provides that number or even the burn address balance in a machine-readable way (slimcoin.club or bchain.info could be web-scraped but that is of course not ideal).
With gjhiggins' ACME (or more precisely: with his real-time queryable RDF blockchain) these queries are possible, but as far as I understand it is still not ready for the URL of the query interface to be shared. CMC would make queries relatively often so it should consume some resources on ACME, I guess.
So it's fixable in some not so extended future? ) Cool.
By the way, Slimcoin is pretty old coin, been around for a long time, I see some addresses with last tx about 3 years ago. I wonder how many coins out there. A couple of millions are probably lost. If so it would mean only ~13M supply.
SLM was listed on BTER originally. I assume many of SLM are there lost, because people did not want to bother to withdraw coins
@dzarmush: The operation to obtain the "Circulating Supply" is easy - simply they would have to rest the balance of the Burn Address from the available supply.
The problem is that there is currently no web service that provides that number or even the burn address balance in a machine-readable way (slimcoin.club or bchain.info could be web-scraped but that is of course not ideal).
With gjhiggins' ACME (or more precisely: with his real-time queryable RDF blockchain) these queries are possible, but as far as I understand it is still not ready for the URL of the query interface to be shared. CMC would make queries relatively often so it should consume some resources on ACME, I guess.
The problem is that there is currently no web service that provides that number or even the burn address balance in a machine-readable way (slimcoin.club or bchain.info could be web-scraped but that is of course not ideal).
With gjhiggins' ACME (or more precisely: with his real-time queryable RDF blockchain) these queries are possible, but as far as I understand it is still not ready for the URL of the query interface to be shared. CMC would make queries relatively often so it should consume some resources on ACME, I guess.
So it's fixable in some not so extended future? ) Cool.
By the way, Slimcoin is pretty old coin, been around for a long time, I see some addresses with last tx about 3 years ago. I wonder how many coins out there. A couple of millions are probably lost. If so it would mean only ~13M supply.
Update: I'm not staking at all. 
The reason is that that on the console it says that "Reserve Balance: 1,000,000 SLM". Since I have fewer than 1M coins, nothing is staking. It's not reading the configuration file I tried to set up (where I tried to set that to zero).
The reason is that that on the console it says that "Reserve Balance: 1,000,000 SLM". Since I have fewer than 1M coins, nothing is staking. It's not reading the configuration file I tried to set up (where I tried to set that to zero).I found the problem. In configuration file, I had written reservEDbalance instead of "reservebalance." Looks like it's going to be OK now.
Update: Minting has begun to happen!!!
Update: I'm not staking at all. The reason is that that on the console it says that "Reserve Balance: 1,000,000 SLM". Since I have fewer than 1M coins, nothing is staking. It's not reading the configuration file I tried to set up (where I tried to set that to zero).
The reason is that that on the console it says that "Reserve Balance: 1,000,000 SLM". Since I have fewer than 1M coins, nothing is staking. It's not reading the configuration file I tried to set up (where I tried to set that to zero).
There will be some cpu usage time to time like 10-20% from slimcoin wallet proccess in task manager, or at least should, this is mac so i dont know it, just my experiance from Windows.
I won't know if it's staking until I receive a minted coin. The only indication I have it might be staking is that the wallet is now unlocked and the message at the bottom of the console that said it couldn't mint because it was locked has vanished. So I guess that unlocked = staking.
Ok I forgot to add - you must go to debug window -> console -> type: help -> there will be all available commends with description as I remeber you must type: walletpassphrase 'password' 'amount of seconds you want to unlock wallet' (like 9999999999 - would be enough), of course without quote mark.
I got it to work!! Thank you! It required me to put double quotation marks around the password.
Jump to: