Tried to compile the latest

n file included from /home/delegate/Sparkle/tests/dev_tests.cpp:3:0:
/home/delegate/Sparkle/tests/dev_fixture.hpp: In instantiation of 'void chain_fixture::produce_block(T) [with T = std::shared_ptr<bts::client::client>]':
/home/delegate/Sparkle/tests/dev_tests.cpp:55:25:   required from here
/home/delegate/Sparkle/tests/dev_fixture.hpp:231:59: error: 'struct bts::blockchain::full_block' has no member named 'nonce'
       while( b.difficulty() < SPK_MIN_DIFFICULTY ) b.nonce++;
                                                           ^
make[2]: *** [tests/CMakeFiles/dev_tests.dir/dev_tests.cpp.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [tests/CMakeFiles/dev_tests.dir/all] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2

Quote from: sparkles on December 04, 2014, 04:32:20 AM
I am starting a new test network with a new mining algorithm based on ECC signature. 

Your wallet must be unlocked to mine with the private key.  This is designed to maximize decentralization and eliminate mining pools.

All blocks from the prior chain will be honored as well as the new chain.

Difficulty adjusts every 20 blocks and is rate limited to +/- 2%

Excellent.  Will it still be at https://github.com/sparkle5/Sparkle?

I am starting a new test network with a new mining algorithm based on ECC signature. 

Your wallet must be unlocked to mine with the private key.  This is designed to maximize decentralization and eliminate mining pools.

All blocks from the prior chain will be honored as well as the new chain.

Difficulty adjusts every 20 blocks and is rate limited to +/- 2% 

Quote from: turtletastic2 on December 03, 2014, 08:04:43 PM
The dampen difficult adjustment hack is probably not what you want to solve the difficult problem. (commit 7c649ebdbaf6fa378a9c25023d531986e1745484 @ github)

There is a reason bitcoin adjusts after a number of blocks, the time between two single blocks is not a very reliable indicator of network strength.

There should be one block every minute and hours went by again without one. Right now, the network will never compensate for that. There could always be an unlucky sequence of two blocks being very close after each other (just some miliseconds) and difficulty would shoot to the moon. Damping it 10x is still a very naive way of solving this improbable but very much possible outcome and eventually the blockchain will still get stuck like it has now.

Do it as bitcoin does it, adjust after a number of blocks. Have some kind of moving average over the last n blocks, as all alt-coins do it that adjust every block. Don't just base the difficulty equation on the difference of two single blocks alone, that is just asking for trouble.

The code doesn't adjust after 2 blocks, it uses the average of the last 1000 blocks.   

The dampen difficult adjustment hack is probably not what you want to solve the difficult problem. (commit 7c649ebdbaf6fa378a9c25023d531986e1745484 @ github)

There is a reason bitcoin adjusts after a number of blocks, the time between two single blocks is not a very reliable indicator of network strength.

There should be one block every minute and hours went by again without one. Right now, the network will never compensate for that. There could always be an unlucky sequence of two blocks being very close after each other (just some miliseconds) and difficulty would shoot to the moon. Damping it 10x is still a very naive way of solving this improbable but very much possible outcome and eventually the blockchain will still get stuck like it has now.

Do it as bitcoin does it, adjust after a number of blocks. Have some kind of moving average over the last n blocks, as all alt-coins do it that adjust every block. Don't just base the difficulty equation on the difference of two single blocks alone, that is just asking for trouble.

Quoteplease can you provide windows binaries, though?

+5%

Looking forward to being able to try this out myself once the difficulty bug is fixed - please can you provide windows binaries, though?

Quote from: iHashFury on December 01, 2014, 06:43:32 PM
is this correct?

Code Select Expand

  "blockchain_head_block_num": 6277,
  "blockchain_head_block_age": "24 hours old",
  "blockchain_head_block_timestamp": "2014-11-30T18:35:45",


I think so.

is this correct?

  "blockchain_head_block_num": 6277,
  "blockchain_head_block_age": "24 hours old",
  "blockchain_head_block_timestamp": "2014-11-30T18:35:45",


Quote from: iHashFury on December 01, 2014, 10:29:55 AM
Hello

My mining account is empty?  My bad used vote_all with my stash. Hopefully the next block will sort it out.

Has the test net stopped or is it slow blocks?

I'm still mining, and I think more people are, but the difficulty is so high right now that even if a block will be found it'll still be a long time until we find another.

Hello

My mining account is empty?  My bad used vote_all with my stash. Hopefully the next block will sort it out.

Has the test net stopped or is it slow blocks?

QuoteHello

No windows binary available ?

any news ?

Haven't you considered SHA2 merged mine? That may thrive adoption a little, without Proof of Wasting.

Is there not any pool yet? Hehe.

Quote from: ffwong on December 01, 2014, 01:24:46 AM
How many connections are needed for mining? I got 11 to 12 connection. But seems nothing happen. I probably miss something.

Difficulty is too high now, the last block was 7 hours ago.

How many connections are needed for mining? I got 11 to 12 connection. But seems nothing happen. I probably miss something.