Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 341 results by Zoella
Re: [NEM] Do you want to have asset exchange token before the official launch ?
hes got a bid for 40 stakes at 10k nxt each? your shitting me? he wants 1% of the currency... and when someone wants that much they very much intend on getting it! this should drive the price way way up!
not 40 stakes, this are 4 stakes ....!!!
1 full stake are 10 quantity
No, it is not. These can be sold in tenths. 1 stake = 1 token = 1,000,000 NEM. 0.1 stake = 0.1 token = 100,000 NEM.
so its 4 stakes for 400k nxt? thats unreal!!!! im actually gob smacked!
No, it's 40 stakes.
EDIT:
He's offering 10,000 NXT per "nemstake token". Each token is worth one full stake of 1,000,000 NEM. You can buy or sell these tokens by the tenth (0.1). Every tenth of a token is worth 100,000 NEM.
ya wasnt on the AE.. just saw 1000 tokens and thats how many people can claim stakes so coppd it then... top bid is 2 stakes for 36k nxt... this is astonishing! before even a white paper, alpha, logo, client or marketing.. seriously... WOW
1.3 BTC per stake? Yeah, I'm tempted!
EDIT:
Although if NEM reaches 1/10 the value of NXT, that's 7 BTC. Maybe I'll hold on a little while longer.
Re: [NEM] Do you want to have asset exchange token before the official launch ?
hes got a bid for 40 stakes at 10k nxt each? your shitting me? he wants 1% of the currency... and when someone wants that much they very much intend on getting it! this should drive the price way way up!
not 40 stakes, this are 4 stakes ....!!!
1 full stake are 10 quantity
No, it is not. These can be sold in tenths. 1 stake = 1 token = 1,000,000 NEM. 0.1 stake = 0.1 token = 100,000 NEM.
so its 4 stakes for 400k nxt? thats unreal!!!! im actually gob smacked!
No, it's 40 stakes.
EDIT:
He's offering 10,000 NXT per "nemstake token". Each token is worth one full stake of 1,000,000 NEM. You can buy or sell these tokens by the tenth (0.1). Every tenth of a token is worth 100,000 NEM.
Re: [NEM] Do you want to have asset exchange token before the official launch ?
hes got a bid for 40 stakes at 10k nxt each? your shitting me? he wants 1% of the currency... and when someone wants that much they very much intend on getting it! this should drive the price way way up!
not 40 stakes, this are 4 stakes ....!!!
1 full stake are 10 quantity
No, it is not. These can be sold in tenths. 1 stake = 1 token = 1,000,000 NEM. 0.1 stake = 0.1 token = 100,000 NEM.
Re: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive ASICMiner Cube Setup [now in HD!]
Actually, the issue I was having was not IP reuse. I enter DHCP reservations for all my devices, and all static IP are assigned in outside of my DHCP range.
I don't think this is an IP reuse issue.
See my previous updated post for the link the the Android DHCP issue. Wondering if your problem is different with the same solution. I probably mis-stated the issue.I don't think this is an IP reuse issue.
Gotcha.
Updated my post. There is definitely something other than IP reuse going on. Since my DHCP range is different from my static range, IP reuse isn't possible.
Re: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive ASICMiner Cube Setup [now in HD!]
Well, I just got the messed up Android issue.
By simply not sharing the same subnet (no multicast I'm assuming), my cubes are fine again.
Yes, all that is needed is a separate subnet, it can even be on the same ethernet cable. Thus the `Droids don't reuse expired IP addresses that conflict with the IP addresses used by the miners.By simply not sharing the same subnet (no multicast I'm assuming), my cubes are fine again.
Actually, the issue I was having was not IP reuse. I enter DHCP reservations for all my devices, and all static IP are assigned in outside of my DHCP range.
I don't think this is an IP reuse issue.
EDIT:
- My DHCP range started at .50, and continued for 162 addresses. This takes me through .212.
- The new Android devices were set with DHCP reservations of .169 & .170, with several dozen other DHCP reservations in use up to .211.
- The cubes are static addresses starting at .221, while the RPi Minepeon has a reserved DHCP of .201.
- My logs and activity showed no IP address overlap. All devices showed their correct IP addresses at all times.
Re: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive ASICMiner Cube Setup [now in HD!]
Well, I just got the messed up Android issue. No problems running with CM 11 (Galaxy Nexus), EOS 4 (Moto Xoom), or Droid Bionic. Added a couple of new HTC One M8's last weekend and everything went to hell. Running a Cisco Linksys E3000 for my main gateway and multiple WRT54GT bridged. Was able to resolve by adding an additional WLAN virtual interface to my E3000 and forcing the new HTC One M8 units to connect to that WLAN only. If anyone else is using dd-wrt and has the android problem, I highly recommend this route. I used the following guide...
http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Multiple_WLANs
I just followed the GUI method. I did not have to restrict access to the virtual WLAN at all. By simply not sharing the same subnet (no multicast I'm assuming), my cubes are fine again.
http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Multiple_WLANs
I just followed the GUI method. I did not have to restrict access to the virtual WLAN at all. By simply not sharing the same subnet (no multicast I'm assuming), my cubes are fine again.
Zoella, rocks, etc:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=522866.msg5807344#msg5807344
i.e. try the latest 0.91-dev branch if you can, with your problem wallets (make sure you rebuild).
You need 500+ outputs per transaction to trigger this.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=522866.msg5807344#msg5807344
i.e. try the latest 0.91-dev branch if you can, with your problem wallets (make sure you rebuild).
i've not tried a split that large but i have constructed up to 10 outputs w/o a hitch.
You need 500+ outputs per transaction to trigger this.
Just wanted to repeat in this thread, fix seems to work great. Highly recommend this upgrade to anyone with speed issues.
Heavy testing? Can you take 10 transactions like this? http://blockchain.info/tx/e3aea19a966d103c4520530f6a8f9486b03d4cbe46deeeb56c4e72730fe83f2f
I couldn't on any rig.
I couldn't on any rig.
The point is that these transactions have identified an inefficiency in Armory that will have to be fixed. However, I believe that most users do not have such transactions, and it is only now that we've been able to identify that as the cause for a lot of these reports. Because no one on our team has a wallet with such transactions in it. Those types of transactions simply do not exist in many use cases, and thus many people will not experience any such problems.
Please do not misinterpret my statement as blaming it on the user, or saying it's unimportant. I'm simply identifying that you have fallen into a gap that many users do not, and thus will not have those problems. Now that we've identified it, we'll try to get a fix into 0.91.1. Fixing it will require a bit more work than we can put in for 0.91.
Do you still need a watching only wallet? I've transferred everything out of mine and plan to retire it. Let me know how to send one if you need it.
Absolutely. Without it we'll have to manually hack together a wallet that exhibits the problem. It would be much easier if we had one we already know causes problems.
FYI we're stirring up our support email channel, so I'm not sure if a simple email with attachment will work. Please try it and we'll find another way to get it if doesn't work (just support at bitcoinarmory dot com).
Sent, let me know.
Heavy testing? Can you take 10 transactions like this? http://blockchain.info/tx/e3aea19a966d103c4520530f6a8f9486b03d4cbe46deeeb56c4e72730fe83f2f
I couldn't on any rig.
I couldn't on any rig.
The point is that these transactions have identified an inefficiency in Armory that will have to be fixed. However, I believe that most users do not have such transactions, and it is only now that we've been able to identify that as the cause for a lot of these reports. Because no one on our team has a wallet with such transactions in it. Those types of transactions simply do not exist in many use cases, and thus many people will not experience any such problems.
Please do not misinterpret my statement as blaming it on the user, or saying it's unimportant. I'm simply identifying that you have fallen into a gap that many users do not, and thus will not have those problems. Now that we've identified it, we'll try to get a fix into 0.91.1. Fixing it will require a bit more work than we can put in for 0.91.
Do you still need a watching only wallet? I've transferred everything out of mine and plan to retire it. Let me know how to send one if you need it.
2. Not sending pooled funds into Armory. I send them every once in a while when it's as much as feel comfortable leaving in a web wallet.
Unfortunately this won't work on many switching pools. Middlecoin and WafflePool both payout on a daily basis. You can't hold it. These are the two primary pools that I believe are killing my wallets.
It worked for me and it sounds like we mine on the same pools.
Ahh, gotcha. An intermediate wallet would make sense.
Armory reporting 9 minutes left to scan. Crossing my fingers!!! Will update soon.
No love with 3-beta.Trying to see if the disable comments fix will resolve the sweep issue now. Will report back in about 45 minutes or so.
So there may be no short-term solution for 0.91-beta for these types of wallets. We will move forward with 0.91 as-is, and plan to get a wallet with lots of these transactions and fix this issue in a point-release, 0.91.1.
Personally I think the bootstrap is a significant enough upgrade to warrant a release. Great feature. I'll have an update on the sweep operation in a little bit. I really hope this works so that I can empty the wallet and send it to you for testing. If not, I'll send you a watching only version.
2. Not sending pooled funds into Armory. I send them every once in a while when it's as much as feel comfortable leaving in a web wallet.
Unfortunately this won't work on many switching pools. Middlecoin and WafflePool both payout on a daily basis. You can't hold it. These are the two primary pools that I believe are killing my wallets.
Armory reporting 9 minutes left to scan. Crossing my fingers!!! Will update soon.
No love with 3-beta.Trying to see if the disable comments fix will resolve the sweep issue now. Will report back in about 45 minutes or so.
Just an update, I was able to completely sweep another key last night. There may be other issues with the sweep function though (unless it is simply the batch transaction issue again), but I can only do one key at a time, and I have to restart Armory in-between attempts. For some reason, I have not been able to succeed at sweeping multiple keys in a single go, nor any keys after a successful sweep. Hopefully I can finish up today though, thanks for all the help!
Did you try using the "Multiple Keys" sweep option at the top? It was designed for this
If you don't mind doing one test for us, I just pushed the disablecomments branch to the BitcoinArmory repo. I removed all the logic I think is slowing you down. If our hypothesis is right, this will work. This is the best I can do without getting your watching-only wallet.
P.S. --
I really appreciate you being so patient! Seriously, thanks. Hopefully, as we go back through some other support requests, we'll see that most of them are due to this. Admittedly, I don't do any mining, or have any enormous tx like this in my ledger (and apparently no one on our team, either). Also, this did come up 18 months ago, and I made a huge efficiency fix that was supposed to fix it. But apparently not efficient enough...
I did try the multiple keys, but everything just always timed out/crashed.
I can confirm there are still problems with the sweep (before your disablecomments update). I know my blockchain is up to date, but another address is failing to grab all transactions.
https://blockchain.info/address/1JkP7cCqA9bxRfzYGLLi6qTvSnQ8sx8PRm
When I try to sweep this address, Armory only sees .08330224 BTC. This is several transactions behind again, even though I know I have a sync'd chain.
I will download the update and see if that helps!
BTW, other than this one issue (which for me is an admittedly big issue), Armory is hands down my wallet preference. Hopefully a solution can be had quickly. Once I've swept the remaining coins I'd have no problem giving you the old wallet for testing if you want it, since it should still have all the old transaction issues.
Ugh, looks like it worked, but your blockchain wasn't fully up to date. The 0.4 left is the last three outputs received by that address.
Also, I can see that you did fall into this category I asked about (users don't always know if they are in this category). Each transaction received by that address has tons of outputs. The first one has 1,400 TxOuts of which you are only one.
Armory has a known inefficiency when it comes to transactions that huge, and you have a wallet full of them, so that's as bad as it gets. The good news is most of the processing that's slowing it down turns out to be non-critical (it's for associating address and tx labels with the rows in the ledger), but still important. We might see if we can find a way to disable it on wallets in this category, of if maybe we can just find a more efficient way of doing it.
For now, sweeping should work as long as Armory is fully synchronized. Scanning the blockchain to sweep the addresses should work at "normal" speed, it's just populating the main window ledger that takes forever and Armory trips over itself while it waits.
Also, I can see that you did fall into this category I asked about (users don't always know if they are in this category). Each transaction received by that address has tons of outputs. The first one has 1,400 TxOuts of which you are only one.
Armory has a known inefficiency when it comes to transactions that huge, and you have a wallet full of them, so that's as bad as it gets. The good news is most of the processing that's slowing it down turns out to be non-critical (it's for associating address and tx labels with the rows in the ledger), but still important. We might see if we can find a way to disable it on wallets in this category, of if maybe we can just find a more efficient way of doing it.
For now, sweeping should work as long as Armory is fully synchronized. Scanning the blockchain to sweep the addresses should work at "normal" speed, it's just populating the main window ledger that takes forever and Armory trips over itself while it waits.
If I understand your statement correctly, you are saying that Armory is a bad wallet choice for mining pool participants who are paid out in batches.
I guess it depends on what mining pool. My wallet that collects my Eligius payouts has been OK (but I will have to import and check again). The addresses I'm having problems with in this wallet are scrypt coin switching pools (PoolWaffle, Middlecoin, etc.).
I would definitely think resolving this would be a priority since so many of these types of pools have popped up recently. Then again, it may just be my bias reflected by me being caught in the situation. Definitely not fun.
Just an update, I was able to completely sweep another key last night. There may be other issues with the sweep function though (unless it is simply the batch transaction issue again), but I can only do one key at a time, and I have to restart Armory in-between attempts. For some reason, I have not been able to succeed at sweeping multiple keys in a single go, nor any keys after a successful sweep. Hopefully I can finish up today though, thanks for all the help!