v0.11.1 - InstantX Release

drkhouse said:
this isn't litecoin
Click to expand...

Do you prefer our competitors and their puppets to have ammo ?
If you visit BCT now you will see some retarded bagholders of other coins who staying in our thread to pay attention on them and eventually someone to recognize their dying projects.
Imagine the times when DRK had forks and the trollfests was a daily routine.
Personally I prefer our competitors to look weak in their childish attempts to highlight problems that don't exist.
The DRK project is miles ahead of the competition and some more time to tune the engine will not harm.
 
JGCMiner said:
Just worked for me. It took about 5 seconds. :smile:
Also, the sender side also showed "verified by Instantx" just like the receiving end.
Click to expand...
Actually in my post the receiver shows a successful InstantX but the sender shows the opposite, that was what I should have asked for an answer.

And yes, I've had more successful InstantX transactions than the failed ones. But as Evan said on the OP of this thread, there's still a small percentage when we get a failed IX transaction:
  • InstantX is designed to work nearly all of the time. I expect it will work on about 98%+ of transactions in it’s present form. If it fails, the transaction will simply fall back to normal proof of work.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
whocares said:
Do you prefer our competitors and their puppets to have ammo ?
If you visit BCT now you will see some retarded bagholders of other coins who staying in our thread to pay attention on them and eventually someone to recognize their dying projects.
Imagine the times when DRK had forks and the trollfests was a daily routine.
Personally I prefer our competitors to look weak in their childish attempts to highlight problems that don't exist.
The DRK project is miles ahead of the competition and some more time to tune the engine will not harm.
Click to expand...
Version ZERO DOT ONEONE DOT ONE DOT TWOFIVE

It's under heavy development. There are going to be many changes still to come that will make this idea of yours a waste of time.

I know you want the price to go to the moon, but wasting dev time on chart voodoo is not what DRK does. Your idea will make more sense once the feature set is done being added. The feature set is a bit open-ended, so it might be a while...

People who invest based on charts don't get far... DRK is about tech that blows away anything else in crypto, and keeps getting better every day. Of course there are fumbles when inventing new stuff that has never been done before.

Let the haters hate and baghold their shitcoins. Buy moar DRK. They wouldn't be talking shit if they had anything of substance to present, they'd be presenting substance. But they don't have anything like that, eh? Crappy people are not hard to understand. Figure it out and make moar money.
 
Darkuopm said:
Where do I make that link? Directly in the .conf file or else where on my PC?
Thanks
Click to expand...

Let's say you have the icon of darkcoin-qt.exe somewhere on your desktop.

Right(!)-click with your mouse on it and select from that context-menu "Properties".

In the properties, there's a line "Target" which shows the complete path to your darkcoin-qt.exe, e.g. "C:\Program Files (x86)\Darkcoin\darkcoin-qt.exe"

Append to this line " -conf=c:\path\to\darkcoin.conf" (note that there's a space between the exisiting path and your addition).

The final "Target" should look something like this:

"C:\Program Files (x86)\Darkcoin\darkcoin-qt.exe" -conf=c:\path\to\darkcoin.conf
 
Darkuopm said:
Where do I make that link? Directly in the .conf file or else where on my PC?
Thanks
Click to expand...
Ahh.. I'm not 100% correct with windows terms - link=shortcut :wink: so create shortcut to darkcoin-qt.exe, right-click, properties, add -conf=c:\path\to\darkcoin.conf to target there.

EDIT: thanks crowning :smile: and I should refresh page before posting after I've been away for a while :grin:
 
camosoul said:
I know you want the price to go to the moon, but wasting dev time on chart voodoo is not what DRK does. Your idea will make more sense once the feature set is done being added. The feature set is a bit open-ended, so it might be a while...
Click to expand...

I already saw the moon and despair and this didn't reflect on my decisions about the project cos I had the opportunity to recognize Evan's work in very early stage and had all the time to understand the fundamentals clearly.
So your concerns about my vision for the project are completely wrong but I'll stop here :wink: cos that's not the place.
 
whocares said:
your concerns about my vision for the project are completely wrong but I'll stop here :wink: cos that's not the place.
Click to expand...
I didn't give you the 'both barrels' approach that I usually do because I sensed this.

There's just no reason to button up the project when it's only 3/4s done. Do you start sewing the heart transplant patient back up before you put the new heart in? Mop-up time is for when the project is done. There is one hater in particular that keeps hounding on the "code be all sloppy an' sheeit." Let him keep trumpeting. The more people see it and realize what a fool he is, the better. If they can't figure it out, they can always baghold LTC or DOGE. Survival of the fittest. If you're not mentally fit, you'll baghold a shitcoin. Working as intended. It's a feature, not a bug, etc...
 
I haven't actually done an IX on mainnet yet... The 1K (1K + fee != allowed) limit stopped me from pumping MN VINs with it, and I didn't have any reason to send less... How's it going?

We get any Gas Stations of Fast Food joints on it yet? :p I think ChargePoint might be more receptive, if not totally useless... Really, anything retail should be interested in instant.

I lobbed the idea, kinda as a joke, at a few strippers. None were smart enough to computer, much less crypto... The "most people are dumb as shit" barrier is not one you can always lower yourself to...
 
I tried InstantX twice (both times from a live wallet to a cold address), and InstantX failed in both instances. The transactions confirmed through normal PoW. So I have a dumb question. For InstantX to work, do the sending and receiving wallets need to be online simultaneously? I recognize that this scenario is the most logical for using InstantX, but I wasn't sure if it was an absolute requirement to have sender and receiver both online.
 
HinnomTX said:
I tried InstantX twice (both times from a live wallet to a cold address), and InstantX failed in both instances. The transactions confirmed through normal PoW. So I have a dumb question. For InstantX to work, do the sending and receiving wallets need to be online simultaneously? I recognize that this scenario is the most logical for using InstantX, but I wasn't sure if it was an absolute requirement to have sender and receiver both online.
Click to expand...
Yes, I believe that it is the case.
My experiences on mainnet led me to that conclusion.
 
TaoOfSatoshi said:
Yes, I believe that it is the case.
My experiences on mainnet led me to that conclusion.
Click to expand...
Odd, you'd think a TX could be locked without a wallet being online... It POWs to an address without comms... This suggests a comms link between them. I don't think that's the case, but it deserves exploration.
 
crowning said:
No, the receiver doesn't need to be online. Only a sender and some Masternodes are needed.
Click to expand...
So in a POS type sale environment, a person would IX their funds to buy an item but would need to effectively leave the wallet open for the tx to remain via IX and not revert to regular POW? The second they close their wallet, the tx becomes regular POW and the merchant is in the same place as they were if the person never used IX to begin with? Just trying to figure out the logistics here because then the merchant is still at risk of closing out of their wallet, no?
 
oblox said:
So in a POS type sale environment, a person would IX their funds to buy an item but would need to effectively leave the wallet open for the tx to remain via IX and not revert to regular POW? The second they close their wallet, the tx becomes regular POW and the merchant is in the same place as they were if the person never used IX to begin with? Just trying to figure out the logistics here because then the merchant is still at risk of closing out of their wallet, no?
Click to expand...

No, when you send via IX the receiver immediately gets 5 confirmations, and with the next POW block gets the transaction fully confirmed, no matter whether you close your sending wallet or not.

The only difference on YOUR side is that as long as your wallet is open the transaction is displayed as IX-transaction with 5 confirmations. When you close it and re-open it it has 'forgotten' that the transaction was send via IX and shows it as a 'normal' transaction with 0 confirmations.
The wallet only sees what's already in the blockchain.
 
crowning said:
No, when you send via IX the receiver immediately gets 5 confirmations, and with the next POW block gets the transaction fully confirmed, no matter whether you close your sending wallet or not.

The only difference on YOUR side is that as long as your wallet is open the transaction is displayed as IX-transaction with 5 confirmations. When you close it and re-open it it has 'forgotten' that the transaction was send via IX and shows it as a 'normal' transaction with 0 confirmations.
The wallet only sees what's already in the blockchain.
Click to expand...
So that's why, when you open the receiving wallet immediately after sending the transaction, it's not there in the transactions yet? I thought that it should show right away.
 
Ok so I'll post as well. When I add recipient to send to more than one address in one tx the txs don't get broadcasted. Need to reopen with zapwallettxes to get the coins resent as single payments and this way work perfect. I resynced from bootstrap and has the same result.
 
HinnomTX said:
I tried InstantX twice (both times from a live wallet to a cold address), and InstantX failed in both instances. The transactions confirmed through normal PoW. So I have a dumb question. For InstantX to work, do the sending and receiving wallets need to be online simultaneously? I recognize that this scenario is the most logical for using InstantX, but I wasn't sure if it was an absolute requirement to have sender and receiver both online.
Click to expand...
I tried 3 times and all 3 were fine(with 1 as darksend combined), both wallets online always, the wallet block times took from 1 min 27 sec to 2 mins 52 secs to assert in the main darkcoin blockchain and give 6 useable wallet confirmations (after 1 average confirmation time)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top