headzoo
-
Posts
72 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by headzoo
-
-
7950's or....
It's a R9 270x.
-
Here are my exact command line settings.
I'm getting between 250-400kH/s.
-
The pool software says you have successfully mined some coin. So you must have everything setup correctly.
-
I think the guy who was making physical Bitcoins was told to stop by the secret service. Yeah, for some reason the secret service is actually in charge of currency. Anyway, once you create physical coins with value, and give them out, you cross into some legal grey area.
-
Don't forget to unlock the wallet first if you have it password protected. You do that from the console using the command "walletpassphrase <your_password> <number_of_seconds_to_unlock>". Example "walletpassphrase s3cret 30".
-
You need the private key for the wallet to recover the coins. Having an address alone is meaningless.
-
Can you give some more info about your mining pool setup? Which web front end are you using? Which stratum software are you using?
-
What ticker are you using? We need an official Mincoin ticker...
Ticker may have been a strong choice of words haha It's really just a static widget, which shows the current price of the coin in USD. This is the app I'm using:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.phauna.litecoinwidget&hl=en
It works with nearly every coin out there.
-
Try using this github repository instead. https://github.com/vipah/mincoin.git
It should report, "version" : 60500
That seems to have fixed things. Thanks!
-
Looked at the ticker on my phone today, and was surprised to see MinCoin at $0.72! Not too shabby.
-
Previous wallets were occasionally showing the LTC blockchain, but I thought the new wallet version fixed that issue. It's not really much of a problem overall, as it will get back on the proper chain with a restart, or on its own after a while, from my experience.
You might try to try restarting it occasionally to see if it gets synced up quicker (this is a common workaround for most wallets for the various currencies, not just MNC). Also, do the addnode additions to your mincoin.conf file to see if that helps:
I suppose you could try to delete your peers.dat file and restart, but I'm not sure that's really going to be of any benefit. If you choose that route, do this: Shut down the MNC wallet; delete peers.dat; edit your mincoin.conf file as per the above link; start up the MNC wallet and see how it goes.
Thanks for the tips. I think the wallet actually is in sync. The strange behavoir starts about 30 minutes after the wallet has been running. "Showing the LTC block chain" may explain the other error I've been having.
-
Im interested in everything about server/web/mining so i made one, its not hard if u have enought experience u can start it in 1-2 day. but finding miners who have no trust in u its closely impossible. check my pool, running 2-3 days ago 1-1 miner come rarely than leave, we found blocks and paid well//im not cheater// and still nothing.
Check it: http://newbiepool.szimre.net
This is the hardest part about setting up a pool. People won't join when the pool has limited hashing power, and the pool has limited hashing power because people won't join. It's a pain!
-
This is some of the log file while this is happening.
send version message: version 60002, blocks=288606, us=96.250.250.181:9334, them=203.100.1.50:9334, peer=203.100.1.50:9334 trying connection 178.78.63.209:9334 lastseen=2.4hrs Added time data, samples 5, offset -2 (+0 minutes) nTimeOffset = -2 (+0 minutes) receive version message: version 60002, blocks=288606, us=96.250.250.181:1688, them=203.100.1.50:9335, peer=203.100.1.50:9334 received block be4bbb46402efc63331f SetBestChain: new best=be4bbb46402efc63331f height=288607 work=1330488401807024 date=01/03/14 03:11:56 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED socket no message in first 60 seconds, 0 1 disconnecting node 54.218.140.11:9334 connection timeout Added 1 addresses from 173.160.57.9: 554 tried, 13262 new Flushing wallet.dat Flushed wallet.dat 8ms trying connection 213.29.218.142:9334 lastseen=0.9hrs Added 398 addresses from 68.34.99.87: 554 tried, 13205 new Added 461 addresses from 68.34.99.87: 554 tried, 13181 new Added 235 addresses from 68.34.99.87: 554 tried, 13172 new ERROR: FetchInputs() : 12dfaa0e0b mempool Tx prev not found 94643c5b5c stored orphan tx 12dfaa0e0b (mapsz 1) ERROR: FetchInputs() : 411e9954b0 mempool Tx prev not found 2c4881bfe8 stored orphan tx 411e9954b0 (mapsz 2) connection timeout ERROR: FetchInputs() : 1d39a70b2d mempool Tx prev not found 65afa050fd stored orphan tx 1d39a70b2d (mapsz 3) Added 482 addresses from 203.100.1.50: 554 tried, 13179 new trying connection 46.98.15.129:9334 lastseen=7.9hrs Added 471 addresses from 203.100.1.50: 554 tried, 13163 new Added 256 addresses from 203.100.1.50: 554 tried, 13176 new ERROR: FetchInputs() : e7aaf13b38 mempool Tx prev not found 6d910126b9 stored orphan tx e7aaf13b38 (mapsz 4) connection timeout ERROR: FetchInputs() : 16f3bc6faf mempool Tx prev not found 10eea3562a stored orphan tx 16f3bc6faf (mapsz 5) ERROR: FetchInputs() : 77216b3b50 mempool Tx prev not found 7aaa94a285 stored orphan tx 77216b3b50 (mapsz 6) ERROR: FetchInputs() : 6beb184c92 mempool Tx prev not found 619678527b stored orphan tx 6beb184c92 (mapsz 7) ERROR: FetchInputs() : 996966fd90 mempool Tx prev not found 399a9a400e stored orphan tx 996966fd90 (mapsz 8) ERROR: FetchInputs() : 3038e410aa mempool Tx prev not found 5d59b718bf stored orphan tx 3038e410aa (mapsz 9) ERROR: FetchInputs() : d5a698fdaa mempool Tx prev not found 0a77bdb66d stored orphan tx d5a698fdaa (mapsz 10) ERROR: FetchInputs() : 5cc474f0ac mempool Tx prev not found 2e11bd71c8 stored orphan tx 5cc474f0ac (mapsz 11) ERROR: FetchInputs() : 81fd70aaa6 mempool Tx prev not found c81dcb758b stored orphan tx 81fd70aaa6 (mapsz 12) trying connection 119.162.67.131:9334 lastseen=5.9hrs ERROR: FetchInputs() : d8aedd4c09 mempool Tx prev not found 7c37818d64 stored orphan tx d8aedd4c09 (mapsz 13) connection timeout trying connection 76.183.45.240:9333 lastseen=4.9hrs received block ce710c99880afd58cedb SetBestChain: new best=ce710c99880afd58cedb height=288608 work=1330502166201102 date=01/03/14 03:12:10 ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED Flushing wallet.dat Flushed wallet.dat 8ms connection timeout trying connection 198.27.80.205:9334 lastseen=3.9hrs connection timeout trying connection 66.169.156.148:9334 lastseen=4.8hrs connection timeout trying connection 86.163.160.12:9334 lastseen=0.9hrs Flushed 13729 addresses to peers.dat 91ms
-
So any time I start the desktop wallet in Windows, this starts happening about 30 minutes later:
The number of blocks went down by about 10 over the course of 4 hours. The strange thing is, I'm positive the most recent blocks have been indexed. I can see them being index through the log file. But this gets better! Now this is what I'm seeing:
I could be wrong, but I think the block chain has fewer than 300k blocks.
I'm using MinCoin v0.6.5.0-g498f5d1-beta on Windows 8.1.
- CharlesSart and aabcuwok
-
2
-
Awesome! Thank you.
-
Just to add a bit of information, here is my output from getinfo:
{"version" : 60400,"protocolversion" : 60002,"walletversion" : 60000,"balance" : 18.44974475,"blocks" : 287474,"connections" : 6,"proxy" : "","difficulty" : 2.34968269,"testnet" : false,"keypoololdest" : 1387839431,"keypoolsize" : 101,"paytxfee" : 0.00000000,"mininput" : 0.00010000,"errors" : "Mandatory upgrade to Litecoin 0.8.6.1+. https://litecoin.org/upgrade"} -
This is a cross post from the Litecoin Talk forums which I thought might be worth discussing here, as MinCoin uses the same scrypt hashing algorithm as Litecoin.
The following I am going to quote is posted by a famous bitcoin developer, gmaxwell, he is one of the core bitcoin developers and suggest LTC should change it's proof of work function to avoid ASIC mining.
According to reports scrypt ASICs may soon exist, finally completely eliminating this feature distinguishing Litecoin from Bitcoin— at first LTC was supposed to be CPU only but that failed, then GPU only and thats failing.I never thought much of the goal here, but at least it was a distinction— if, IMO, a kinda dumb one. The thing I like least about alts is the lack of distinction and innovation they frequently suffer, and so being another asic mined coins but with different asics seems like such a waste to me.If the LTC community wanted it could change POW and the practice of being willing to change it would probably be a stronger protection for general purpose hardware than the use of any particularity or set of particular schemes could ever be. Though since (it seems to me) so much of the LTC community is miners the change would have to be to another CPU+GPU friendly one so the existing miners wouldn't be left out.There are a lot of options here— including different POWs already deployed other ALTs or something novel. What got me musing on this subject was the question of: If I threw out an alt that used ECDSA signature validation as its POW would someone write ultra fast GPU code for ECDSA (which would be very useful in helping to scale node performance, even in Bitcoin)?I suspect that if LTC doesn't change POW now that the introduction of fixed function hardware will mean that it never can. Perhaps its already too late, though I don't know: LTC has always advertised itself as being GPUASIC proof, and a violation of that is an outright bug, which arguably should be fixed no different than if it were possible to mine more than 84 million litecoins.Such a change could be made mostly seamlessly— a new version released, and a deadline for upgrade, not too unlike the Bitcoin 0.8 hardfork or the nversion=2 blocks. Existing miners could even use coinbase votes (indicating their ability to support the switch in the blocks they mine) to trigger the change so that it could be done in a way which is assured to not exclude too much of the existing hashrate (though, presumably, using a coinbase vote would fail if there are secretly large asic farms already). Miners would need to upgrade software, but they'd just have to update sometime before the switchover, no tricky synchronization would be required.I wonder what people think of this? Is this the sort of thing that could get near-unanimous consensus in the LTC community?The short and skinny of the discussion is the potentially negative effect ASICs have on Bitcoin, and the "arms race" they have created. ASICs have put the power into the hands of the rich and powerful, which largely defeats the purpose of crypto-coins. Every day people have lost the currency war when coins can only be mined using incredibly expensive hardware.
-
What MNC QT version are you running?
Technically I'm not using the QT version, as I'm running mincoin as a daemon on my web hosting server. I compiled from the sources on Github, which is linked from the main MinCoin website.
-
-
So I've noticed the MinCoin wallet/daemon is several versions behind the Litecoin software from which it was forked. It also appears no new commits have been added to the software in 2 months, and before that single commit it's been 9 months.
Now I'm seeing this error coming from the wallet, "Mandatory upgrade to Litecoin 0.8.6.1+. https://litecoin.org/upgrade". Which means:
* May not be applicable to MinCoin, and should just be ignored.
* Someone should change the error message to say "MinCoin" instead of "Litecoin".
* Is possibly a sign the software needs some critical fixes.
It's also not a good sign when the developers have disabled the Github issue tracker. It's a bit like hanging up a "Do Not Disturb" sign.
Little things like this really bring down the perceived value of MinCoin, at least among developers.
physical mincoins
in Mincoin Marketplace
Posted
That would be really cool. Real silver/gold coins.