The file from that link is sped up, but it looks like the sampling rate was left at 8000 Hz. Every other file in the sound folder that I checked has a rate of 22050 Hz.

Instead of speeding it up, you can change the sampling rate to 22050 Hz on the original and get something of similar length and sound to the file above, but not exactly the same.

I'll post this here for comparison if anyone's interested:

There's definitely some kind of file/data embedded in Space.mp4, with ffmpeg, I can do:


and out.mp4 will be about 2.1mb smaller, even though it contains the same two streams.


In addition, I think I found the original copy of the video file (before extra data was embedded into it):


This file contains the same video and audio streams found in Space.mp4. If extract using ffmpeg:

I get:


So I'm pretty sure that it's the original file before extra data was embedded.

So, now the interesting part, let's check the size in bytes of Space.mp4 and the original from YouTube:

9356135-7209006 = 2147129, which is the number found in Number.txt

So, there are 2147129 bytes of additional data besides the audio and video streams in Space.mp4


Edit: extract the extra data with this:
The sha256sum of the extra data is cbd47112ad2b9f3661e6506c7999afabd0f468b3a4acec81e0618ef98cb24bf3

someone on Reddit is working on an online wallet:
http://www.reddit.com/r/dogecoin/comments/1swkf2/it_has_arrived_online_dogecoin_wallet_currently/

Online wallets should be discouraged though (in my opinion), especially since it seems many Dogecoin users are new to crypto-currencies.

I was able to log in for a minute, but it looks like I'm locked out again...

I have the same problem.

It's a pain for me to convert BTC to fiat and I don't want to get fiat stuck in an exchange I can't withdraw from.

Call me lazy, but it's easier to just buy things with BTC.

Glad I could help!
Thank you for the BBQCoins!

I was thinking of making some paper wallets for BBQCoins the other day, now I have some!

Just a heads up, when I went to print 3 wallets per page (the default), the site logo image still showed up on the top of the printout and so only two wallets made it on the first page and the third got bumped to page two (I tested on Chrome/Ubuntu and Firefox/Ubuntu-Gnome). I simply changed the source to remove the image at the top of the site and I was able to print three per page. bitaddress.org hides the site logo on print; all that needs to be changed is add 'id="logo"' to the tag for the bbqaddress.org logo since the CSS media types are already in the code.
https://github.com/BBQCoin/bbqaddress.org/blob/master/bitaddress.org.html#L5874

(I need to get some more printer ink )

http://i.imgur.com/8j1qbtD.jpg

P8mATdxnEvFcju55NPi3KP4PF54hMnToGi

Thank you

That seems about right, unfortunately, based on the stake I've generated the last few weeks. I was thinking it was a bit less than it should have been...

Hashcash based coins? no
Coins based on some other proof-of-work? maybe

It wouldn't be possible to create something that can only be mined on NVIDIA hardware, but there could be some computational problems where NVIDIA hardware might have an advantage in (at least initially).

So, to answer your question, it *might* be possible.

The problem is, I don't think anyone putting in enough work to design such a coin (based on a different proof-of-work) would care about something like this. It really doesn't do anything to secure/decentralize the network. True, it might work at first since there are not any mining farms based on NVIDIA, but there are plenty of render/compute farms based on high end NVIDIA hardware (Tesla), so it wouldn't be something that would be advantageous to laptop/single-GPU users in the long run. Personally, I think it's often forgotten that crypto-currencies are not designed for miners, and mining just provides an incentive to expend the electricity needed to decentralize the system.

Triton, a moon of Neptune, is the largest moon in the solar system to have a retrograde orbit, meaning it orbits opposite of its planet's rotation.

F2tXt8yRDPiAzGtrco91bYW3x2UhzzNvae

Voyager; 4; 2.2; 1Jrd8zEm56dgkTsdvADdEeTu2rQexoezeP

https://blockchain.info/tx/30a8884b1f6a67d76899848f17d7a25178be1c5b3817cfad8bd43fdb75e3b31d

My CPU usage dropped below 100% during the block (each core was at about 30%), I was wondering if it stopped mining so I restarted. Maybe some miners stalled?

I just found a block on the testnet with the code optimizations posted a few pages back. This was on an Intel Atom getting about 46 PPS. For experimentation, I also changed the nMaxSieveSize to 250000 and still got a block. I'm not sure how this will influence things in the long run though. The lower sieve sizes do seem to increase PPS at the moment though.
Edit: found another on the testnet, I'm going to try this on the main network now.

I disagree.

What's wrong with someone optimizing the source code? They're taking a risk too.

Why should someone release an optimized binary? The source code is available, and tweaks have even been posted in this thread; it's just unknown right now if they'll make any difference. Several people are trying them on the testnet.

Also, it was not at all hard to mine. It took literally one command to start mining.

2 blocks. Block #12 and block #290.
I'm working with an i7-3770 and Xeon L5520. The i7 got both blocks.
I also got one orphan somewhere in-between those two.

About 200 on an i7-3770

Still haven't gotten any coins though.

I understand that all future launches will follow the same disaster as long as starting difficulties are 0, it sucks that all the launches are nothing but latency races now. This one surely won't be different at launch, there will still be just as many orphans. What I am interested to see is how the low starting reward works out. There have been several coins (BitBar, Mincoin) that started with a high reward that dropped quickly, so most of the coins in existence were mined right away when latency was the tie breaker, by the time mining was working right, the reward was nearly nothing. If the reward started low, shouldn't the result be that there aren't many coins mined total until the difficulty gets up to a reasonable level?

It could all be avoided with a higher starting difficulty though, like you've said many times.