Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 48 results by BitJock-e
Re: [ANN] [PMC] Premine! - 100% Premine / 100% Distribution - Mining TX fees only
There is some post about it several pages back, the exact location is unknown. The problem appears to exist in all coins. I have tested the anomaly under a number of different parameters and the result is the same. There is a mathematics error in the code where essentially the mining rewards continue to reduce by half even beyond the 8th decimal. IE: even after the mining reward is cut in half down to 0.00000001 it continues to half even though the result cannot be seen. Eventually this causes a script error, and causes the block rewards to start over from the beginning. The easiest fix is a manual entry to tell the network to never produce coins after BLOCK # "X" ("X" will vary based on how the coin is set up.) I believe this error will effect most (if not all) current bitcoin / altcoin forks.
That was an interesting find.
Thanks for the prompt reply.
Re: [ANN] [PMC] Premine! - 100% Premine / 100% Distribution - Mining TX fees only
So any word on what the problem was? was it a bug that will effect bitcoin as well in a few years? or was it a change made after the fork from bitcoin?
No, it was a bug of my own doing. I believe it is patched, and I'm testing it on an isolated blockchain. I believe everything is ok, But i want to mine more blocks on my testnet before I release the software.
Sorry to bump this from last month, but I have not kept up with the latest events.
What was the bug that allowed more coins to be mined?
Was there a detailed explanation in some post?
Please link of available.
Thanks!
This is great!
All these high end GPUs are going to be bought up by the uninformed.
They will get home, plug them in, start mining, and quickly realize that they made a big mistake.
This means I will be able to buy myself some very nice 2nd hand graphic cards on Ebay very soon!
All these high end GPUs are going to be bought up by the uninformed.
They will get home, plug them in, start mining, and quickly realize that they made a big mistake.
This means I will be able to buy myself some very nice 2nd hand graphic cards on Ebay very soon!
I think you should just do it without his consent.. That's what Colbert would do!
Thank you for your feedback, but no, he would not do that.
The entire point here is to make this a collaborative project with The Colbert Show.
Quote
Asking permission is a sign of weakness.
This is not a military operation, this has nothing to do with showing strength or weakness.
Yes, we are leaning towards script.
So far we have some good submissions for a mock up of a store and some other great ideas.
Keep the ideas coming guys!
Contact me via PM here or through the site.
So far we have some good submissions for a mock up of a store and some other great ideas.
Keep the ideas coming guys!
Contact me via PM here or through the site.
I'll give it two weeks before they get a cease and desist on using "Colbert" and his image on the coin.
Its easy to do this completely anonymously with no point of contact and let it run, but that is not the goal here.
Its going to be hard to get his or the producers blessing without anything backing the coin. I think the best course of action is make the best coin you possibly can and prove you has some value/worth to entice colbert and his show to use it.
There are potential legal hurdles here, I want this to be a smooth release on both the software and legal side.
GREAT MINDS THINK ALIKE!
Lets get in touch this week and put our heads together, this is going to be a fairly big undertaking.
Send me a PM and we will take it from there.
That said, I do like the idea of a colbertcoin for publicity purposes IF the developer can get a Colbert endorsement
Exactly right.
In efforts to set a good example, we are not simply grabbing the Colbert name and slapping it on a coin. We have reached out to the producers and will bring them in on this.
If they say no, then its off.
If they want to proceed with this experiment, then its full steam ahead.
I will need the assistance of good devs, so if any of you have some experience or have contacts, send them through.
Hey bitjock, any updates?
If we are making a coin using somebodies name, they deserve to know and have a say in it.
Sure, we can just run with it and go ahead anyway, but that is not the path I want to take here. This is uncharted territory and we want to makes we we set a good example.
If the Colbert side comes back and says no-go, then its off.
If they get back to us and want to give this a go, then we will work hard to make sure this is done right and becomes the best damn altcoin it can be!
Except nothing proposed accomplishes that. LollipopCoin creator can copy/paste search/replace LiteCoin code, and then meet just make sure he/she meets the following:
We have not set any parameters or guidelines yet, its all being discussed right now.
Simply cut n pasting Litecoin does not make you legit.
If a new user with 3 posts starts up an altcoin "OMGAMAZINGCOIN - litecoin clone!!"
And then we see a rush of newly created users signing up saying
"Great coin!"
"Nice idea!
"I love it!
"This will do well!"
Yeah, guess what? This is not getting the stamp of approval.
Not that the dev will care, they can keep on with the charades, but they will not be getting the nod of approval from the committee.
Crap coins can meet these standards, no?
How does this prevent someone copy/pasting search/replacing to create a coin---and then following whatever procedures FairCoin produces to be labelled 'fair'?
We are not looking to prevent anybody from starting a coin.
The purpose here is to let newbie0872, who just joined yesterday, know that there is a difference between litecoin and lollipopcoin.
Now, I believe that this outlines a plan for a very "fair" cryptocurrency. In fact fairness is one of my *PRIMARY* intents in creating it. But I also believe that because it works differently from the expected model, it is very unlikely to meet any set-in-stone criterion of "fairness" based on the usual set of expectations.
Therefore I ask that whatever else you decide here the committee should remain free to exercise human judgement as to whether a new issue is fair, rather than merely interpreting narrow rules.
Therefore I ask that whatever else you decide here the committee should remain free to exercise human judgement as to whether a new issue is fair, rather than merely interpreting narrow rules.
Great feedback here so far!
I think the term "fair" should be swapped with "safe".
Fair is a relative term, its the safety of the novices coming in here every day that is the main objective.
I sent the Colbert facebook a message as well as posted on their wall about the coin.
Thanks again boomer!
Predictably and sadly I can see lots of miners giving push back because they
have the most to lose. They are the ones who create the scam coins, build the hype,
sell them overpriced to the coin threads, and then dump them on the exchanges.
Let's do this!
This community needs to make a decision, keep going down this current path, or start regulating itself.
I have been running online communities since the late 90's and there always comes a time when you need to lay down the law, or you fall into complete chaos.
Lets settle on the name via PM, Ill get a site up and running.
I love this idea, but with so many shitcoins already on the market and so many shitcoins being created all the time, there have to be other criterium.
I think a huge obstacle is going to be getting an exchange on board. Cryptsy and CoinedUp keep adding new shitcoins. BTC-e hasn't added any new coins in some time. While a huge obstacle to tackle, any foundation is going to have to either a) promote an exchange that uses ONLY FairCoin approved coins; or b) create an exchange that ONLY adds approved coins.
I think a huge obstacle is going to be getting an exchange on board. Cryptsy and CoinedUp keep adding new shitcoins. BTC-e hasn't added any new coins in some time. While a huge obstacle to tackle, any foundation is going to have to either a) promote an exchange that uses ONLY FairCoin approved coins; or b) create an exchange that ONLY adds approved coins.
Creating an exchange would be the best solution, it would be an elite club that only coins of the highest standards will be permitted to trade upon.
This would obviously be a large undertaking, but not impossible.
So should we just refer to it as the FairCoin Committee?
we can also refer to it as FairCoin Association, Union, Trust, Council, Commission, Group, or Board.
we can also refer to it as FairCoin Association, Union, Trust, Council, Commission, Group, or Board.
FairCrypto, FairCurrency, FairCryptocurrency as not all cryptos are coins, but yeah committee or similar.
You are onto something.
Drop the "coin" part of the name completely so it does not sound like YACC (yet another cryptocoin).
We should discuss the finalize the name over PM to avoid squatters.
Get it released and successful first...gotta walk before you run 
You need to have a destination when going on a journey.
This project is more than just creating yet another coin, but rather to educate people about bitcoin.
When you launch please don't F it up. Windows wallet. Fair launch. Advance notice... etc.
Don't give too many coins too fast. 1% per day or less of coin generation of total existing coins is a good rule of thumb.
You don't want to end up like DOGE. Every day with them is still almost 4% more coins per day. Look what
that did.
And yes - getting the person's blessing is a good idea.
Yes, wallets for all OS on launch already a prerequisite.
Our team will make this a priority.