What is the price of a premium package and what do we get?

A few things we should look at:

1.Contact BTC38, BTER and other Asian exchanges to add DGB. Would provide additional exposure and liquidity.

2.Let's retweet the DGB news to Wall Street Journal, TechCrunch and other major news outlets outside of the alt world.


YC

Why so similar to spark? Why is this a clone of a coin that got forked because of bad code? Hope dev doesn't abandon this but 3 days POW, 40 GH/s I think we all know how this will end

Nope that's not what this is. If you check the road map on the main post thats what is coming up soon, we want Nanite to have real world use and value and once the PoW phase ends the Marketing and tools start

All the coins are on exchanges! The coin is working fine. People with coins in wallet need to start it and start staking to get the network moving! If no one doing this, c-cex or trex needs to do it! If no one does it there's only 1 word left to say: REKT!!!!!!

43 deposits equaling 14499.19442

If the new devs wants to figure out how to reconcile that, we'll move over to the new fork and re-open the market.  Please cut us a ticket via our support channels and we can work through this.

Thanks
richie@bittrex

Can we add instamine coins to cover the difference?  Last i looked, we were 26-27k short.  I'm about to take the new build and see where we end up.

Thanks
richie

I actually am in contact with ryan from bittrex on that case and get to bter c-c and vaultex asap, to get info on their status...
...I guess, as things are moving further quite good, we're getting a good picture pretty soon

Sorry, I probably didnt make it clear in my last post, but 10041 was the "bad" block, the forks appear to deviate after 10042, glad others corroborate that.

Unfortunately I think Bittrex are on the minority chain which we probably dont want to switch back to as the PoW phase isnt complete yet, and we'd have a load of miners upset about losing 4000 blocks worth of PoW mining. How that will affect Bittrex probably depends on how soon they suspended trading after block 10041

Unless someone comes up with a good reason not to I think I will see about releasing an updated wallet later that will definitely sync with the majority chain, as the current version on Github (and I assume the Windows download, I havent tested it yet) will not.

i would say it was indeed around 10042. i was monitoring the entire network and basically witnessed the fork. getting on the bittrex fork is not possible due to the invalid block on that fork which was most likely a result of 51% attack or POS staking beginning early on some wallet. both reasons mean that the invalid fork with the invalid block at 10042 cannot be used or repaired due to blockchain encryption. attempting to repair it is like trying to hack the blockchain which will not be possible. there will be only 2 options.

repair the github and rollback the blockchain to block 1000 (will not sit well with anyone)
discard the illegal fork and move forward with our current pos network.

the working fork has no corrupt blocks and you cant patch a corrupt block to move forward. it means that the working fork as i said from the start is the only legitimate fork. and that is the suchpool/supernova fork.

Bit more info for you, I've managed to get the latest build of the Linux wallet to compile after some effort (issues with my system rather than with the code) and have been looking at the peer info - there are definitely two forks in existence currently, one is around block 12750 and the other is at block 15000. Looks like the major part of the PoW hash went on one fork but somehow the other one continued and got well behind in blocks whilst the difficulty was adjusting down to the reduced hashpower.

I've been digging a bit more though and its a bit peculiar, with my new daemon it will only sync on the 12750 chain and rejects PoS blocks from the other chain. If I set the conf file so it only connects to nodes on the 15000 blockchain and try resyncing it gets to block 10041 and then just rejects PoS blocks.

As I mentioned before, I'm a tinkerer not a coder, and I don't know the PoS stuff that well but from what I've seen so far I have a suspicion that the dev accidentally released two different versions of the daemon, if you look at this commit from around when the coin was launched there are a couple of key PoS changes made: https://github.com/RentaMouse/Spark/commit/71d360fdbb18aacf9c49179e0be882f0b9fac289 - the PoW endpoint in the PoS code is changed from 10000 to 14000, and the PoS key is changed. Pre-change daemons could have mined a PoS block after 10000, post change versions wouldnt accept it.

On GitHub there are actually two release versions, 1.0.0 and 1.1.0, looking at the peer info from my daemon there are a few nodes on 1.1.0 but none of those are on the 15k blockchain, which backs up my theory. I suspect Bittrex are running 1.1.0 because they would have compiled from Github and they added the coin later than most....

At the moment its too late for me to decide whether its actually a really bad thing, although I suspect it explains the disappearance of the dev, he may just be running from his backers cos he realised his error a week ago Quite possibly its not the end of the world as I suspect all the pools will be on the old code, so no miners should lose out on a load of coin, and Bittrex stopped their trading pretty quickly.

What I'm pretty sure of is that I can release an updated version of the wallet which will work properly with the 15000 chain so everyone can get in sync with that.

Discuss away, I'll be back in a few hours....