Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 22 results by padre999
1. why so high a price in the sale? You guys are expecting a ~$17 price per NIM?
-$300 ETH value gets 175 NET ($1.714/NET)
-Then on exchange/conversion would have 17.5 NIM ($17.14/NIM)
$17.14 NIM seems crazy when (under your beta) I can get 5 NIMs in under a day to start. Even assuming the reward rate drops very quickly, I think I could make this up with way less than $17 in energy costs per NIM early on. You guys have a fantastic idea that I'd be happy to support in a sale, but the value terms are not making sense to me.
-$300 ETH value gets 175 NET ($1.714/NET)
-Then on exchange/conversion would have 17.5 NIM ($17.14/NIM)
$17.14 NIM seems crazy when (under your beta) I can get 5 NIMs in under a day to start. Even assuming the reward rate drops very quickly, I think I could make this up with way less than $17 in energy costs per NIM early on. You guys have a fantastic idea that I'd be happy to support in a sale, but the value terms are not making sense to me.
I am wondering the same thing. What is the expected price range when NIM hits the market? Is the token sale just some kind of charity event that should deter whales? Or is there some (small) financial incentive for token buyers?
Re: [ANN] MemoryCoin 2.0 (MMC) - Emergency Fork - Block 607 - 0.8.54
That's it, I'm not going to smell this coin again. It stinks badly! Not that it all started poorly with all the premined coins, 6% of mined coins going to developers, software crashing, blockchain not syncing correctly, had fubar difficulty targeting,... Well, now it's official that (most likely) one of existent protoshares pools started mining, if not one of developers. I wouldn't be surprised if they (PTS pools and developers) are tightly connected.
http://www.chainbrowser.com/memorycoin/address/MAWa8jwrpvg87dZCv9KAajCmMY62xJfrKY
lol that wallet has been deleted hes already filtered the coins out to other wallets to hide the fact hes getting 80% of the blocks
http://www.chainbrowser.com/memorycoin/address/MAWa8jwrpvg87dZCv9KAajCmMY62xJfrKY
lol that wallet has been deleted hes already filtered the coins out to other wallets to hide the fact hes getting 80% of the blocks
I'm outta here too. So much hassle, no reward. May the big guys eat up themselves.
Re: [ANN] MemoryCoin 2.0 (MMC) - Emergency Fork - Block 607 - 0.8.54
On my second machine that was stuck at 608 I did the following:
- made sure I have the latest wallet running: v0.8.54.0-unk-beta
- closed the wallet
- deleted folder ./memorycoin (!!! but beware not to delete your wallet if you got some MMCs!!! If so make a backup before!!! )
- restarted the wallet
- did "addnode 180.183.155.90 add" and "addnode 103.11.49.151 add"
- waited until blockchain was downloaded from scratch
all synced now
Thanks - you might get away with just deleting peers.dat - this will force your client to re-evaluate the nodes on the network.
Thanks! I guess this is the more sophisticated version of what I did
Will try deleting peers.dat now and see if it does the trick. But it gets a bit tedious doing this for every block. Is that due to too many outdated nodes?
Oooppps... patience did it again
Re: [ANN] MemoryCoin 2.0 (MMC) - Emergency Fork - Block 607 - 0.8.54
"blocks" : 609,
"difficulty" : 0.00002268,
Is that correct?
"difficulty" : 0.00002268,
Is that correct?
blocks" : 609
difficulty" : 0.00000185
This is the correct one.
Thanks. On desktop #1 I'm on the correct fork, but on desktop #2 I'm on the wrong one. Both are using the same operating system (W7 x64) and both have the latest client version ("version" : 85400,). They also have the same nodes in the config file.
How can I get on the right fork on desktop #2?
This problem is also occurring on my linux VPS's.
I'm not too sure about this but you could restart the wallet with the -reindex to check the blockchain. See if it helps.
- made sure I have the latest wallet running: v0.8.54.0-unk-beta
- closed the wallet
- deleted folder ./memorycoin (!!! but beware not to delete your wallet if you got some MMCs!!! If so make a backup before!!! )
- restarted the wallet
- did "addnode 180.183.155.90 add" and "addnode 103.11.49.151 add"
- waited until blockchain was downloaded from scratch
all synced now
... but wondering now why block 609 takes so long...
Re: [ANN] MemoryCoin 2.0 (MMC) - Emergency Fork - Block 607 - 0.8.54
same here, one machine on 607, the other at 608 while 609 is already out.
try
addnode 180.183.155.90 add
tryed that? still on 607
Try my node 103.11.49.151
Binaries available.
v0.8.53.0-unk-beta at http://www.memorycoin.org/downloads/memorycoin.zip ?My miner is not working anymore with newest code. I get:
Code:
EXCEPTION: N5boost16exception_detail10clone_implINS0_19error_info_injectorINS_6system12system_errorEEEEE
context: unable to load ssl2 md5 routines
memorycoin in AppInit()
context: unable to load ssl2 md5 routines
memorycoin in AppInit()
Anyone else seeing this?
Are you getting this error when you start the wallet, or only when you start mining?
I added some more memory cleanup code a short time ago - might be related.
Quote
tterminate called after throwing an instance of 'boost::exception_detail::clone_impl >'
what(): boost::thread_resource_error: Resource temporarily unavailable
what(): boost::thread_resource_error: Resource temporarily unavailable
does anyone getting this error in the deamon?
me too ,10 servers ,same error,and other errors
My miner is not working anymore with newest code. I get:
Code:
EXCEPTION: N5boost16exception_detail10clone_implINS0_19error_info_injectorINS_6system12system_errorEEEEE
context: unable to load ssl2 md5 routines
memorycoin in AppInit()
context: unable to load ssl2 md5 routines
memorycoin in AppInit()
Re: [ANN] MemoryCoin 2.0 (MMC) - Fork Code Available Within 24hrs
same, after 30minutes > VIRT = ~40g and keeps rising (16 core xeon)
so actually the difficulty is even higher with this leak? maybe a good moment to start mmc 3.0 after all what happened
so actually the difficulty is even higher with this leak? maybe a good moment to start mmc 3.0 after all what happened
uuppss
same here on linux, bitcoind using up 61g of VIRT after some hours of mining (i5 laptop)
using the recent source from sometime yesterday evening (which was supposed to address a memory leak, no?)
EDIT:
Here memory usage of bitcoind is mentioned:
http://jbcrawford.us/2013/your-very-own-bitcoin-pool/
Quote
Now that we have bitcoind installed, lets talk about why its going to be a big maintenance headache. When bitcoind runs, and especially when it is initially downloading blocks, its memory usage will increase steadily until it is extremely high. Once it gets high enough, your machine will likely run out of memory and kill the process to recover. This seems to happen especially frequently if you are in a paravirtualized environment (e.g. OpenVZ) where the hypervisor is particularly careful about memory usage.
Sounds familiar, no? He uses ulimit to limit memory usage.
Re: [ANN] MemoryCoin 2.0 (MMC) - Fork Code Available Within 24hrs
wish mod would have built a better more stable coin 10hpm nothing over the course of 24 hours but a burned up rig....
If your rig burns down it's a problem with your rig, not with the coin.
Re: Cloud Mining Guide - MemoryCoin 2.0 (MMC) - Get your miners up in the cloud!
Keep in mind Digital Ocean limits you to 5 instances for Crypto mining. They actually DO NOT want you to Crypto mine on their servers.
You are lucky with 5 droplets, I was explicitly limited to 1 droplet by DO support. Due to mining that is.
The developers seem to be aware of the situation:
https://bitmessage.org/forum/index.php/topic,2964.0.html
https://bitmessage.org/forum/index.php/topic,2964.0.html
Received one of those messages from the same sender as well, to an address of mine which I published only on Facebook to "my friends".
Each of the included links is unique as you probably noticed. So I guess this is actually a big orchestrated effort to somehow link BM addresses to IP numbers. Very odd.
I wonder where they get the addresses from, and if there is some malicious script on the linked site.
... just as I type, one of those messages arrived on another address of mine which I only shared via email to very few people...
ODD!!!
Each of the included links is unique as you probably noticed. So I guess this is actually a big orchestrated effort to somehow link BM addresses to IP numbers. Very odd.
I wonder where they get the addresses from, and if there is some malicious script on the linked site.
... just as I type, one of those messages arrived on another address of mine which I only shared via email to very few people...
ODD!!!