Search results

v17 working much better for me than recent previous builds. Only issue I've noticed is the progress bar getting to 100% way too soon, but the process carries on and pretty close to your specified amount end up anon'd. Had two 0.1 charges in the course of anon'ing 1700DRK.

Tor has an advantage over Darkcoin, it's openly funded by the NSA - I would expect any legal action against it or its support infrastructure to be, ah, short lived. :eek:

Linux 64 QT showing v0.10.17.15-beta in GUI but getinfo reports 101716. MN updated, local client mining and mixing. edit: This was a protocol bump? I had to restart MN manually, but the MN list already has 48 entries. Was everyone else really that fast?

The masternodeprivkey already 'includes' the address with the 1000DRK vin I thought? I assumed that was w Heh, if you wanted to you could turn every wallet with a 1000DRK vin into a Masternode, whether they liked it or not. :confused:

MN centralisation, while certainly something that needs to be addressed, is I think less of a problem than mining centralisation. If MNs get taken down, it will either slow or halt use of DS and IX, but won't affect already anonymised coins, regular blockchain tx's, coin minting etc. It will be...

Yeah, sorry, forgot we weren't supposed to use it as a currency and actually buy stuff with it. Wont happen again! :oops:

One of mine missed a payment last week, but has since been payed several times, I'm not worrying about it. :smile:

Little you can do with DRK? Among other things, I just bought 10 1oz silver crocs via www.bitgild.com, with Darkcoin, with my last month's MN earnings, no fiat involved anywhere. I buy plenty of stuff direct with DRK, or with DRK via BTC. And if someone wants me to work for them, I accept DRK...

How even less financially viable might it have been it every Darkcoin wallet out there had a one-click Start Mining button right in the overview tab? Or if the wallet was set to mine by default, at some low % of CPU/GPU Iif available) power? People want the benefits of decentralised security...

Yeah it doesn't prevent large solo farms. BTC last time I investigated has 3 people with about 10% each individually. Still better than 2 pools with over 50% and 5 pools with 90%, which is our current situation. I think something like Spreadcoin's approach with a much easier to use mining GUI...

It's actually not too bad:

He can call it what he likes if it gets rid of centralised pools. :grin: It seems to work, I'm test-mining it now solo (along with all the other beautiful, useful, decentralised solo miners) on my laptop.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=715435.msg8754610#msg8754610 This is as far as I have read the Spreadcoin thread on BCT so far, but it seems this guy has come pretty close to making solo-mining de-rigeur. Pardon my French. If Darkcoin could be made truly decentralised it would have...

Thanks for the interest guys but I'm looking to buy people out myself. :wink:

Ubuntu 64 14.04. I'm deleting the wallet.dat now and trying with a fresh one, as it had grown to 143MB due to my spamming tx's yesterday. Each tx seems to add about 70kB or something to the wallet filesize, which seems excessive. edit: mem usage looking about 140MB better already... :grin...

Huh, your RAM must be better quality than mine then. :sad: Just rebooted and restarted, 3 mins later I'm maxed out on cpu and mem:

I can still run 'masternode list' multiple times in a row...?

v17 died of RAM deficiency in about 30 mins. Is this only happening to me?

I hope the RAM usage is lower, or it's pushed out with a "Make sure you have 1GB RAM or swap space enabled!" warning. Here's how long my MN lasted this time: Mainnet v16 for comparison:

My testnet MN is crashing regularly, I think because it's running out of RAM and I didn't bother to set up any swap space. Peaks about 540MB according to the stats (on a 512MB instance.) Are other people seeing similar RAM usage? My v16 mainnet MNs are steady about 250MB. Stats since I...