June 18, 2019, 06:49:03 pm

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Stouse49

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 32
1
Android App Support / Re: Android Wallet Synchronization Problm
« on: November 23, 2018, 03:44:36 pm »
I'm working on this issue to find a solution.

สล็อตออนไลน์ ฟรีเครดิต

This was resolved years ago with DNS seeders.  Now certian locations will not have access to the seeder, then there is a problem to be fixed.

2
Anxious to test out the Linux client!
For now the Linux clients are available by compiling the source.  We are working on the gitian build system that builds everything.

3
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: March 16, 2018, 11:26:45 pm »

4
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: March 16, 2018, 03:27:51 am »
For my changes thus far:
1.  Send as zero-fee transaction is hidden.  The code is still in the app with all the translations that we have in case we want to use it later.
2.  The edit field for the fee can be lowered to 0.00000000 and the transaction is sent as zero fee.
3.  The "total at least" radio button was not removed.  This is only activated if Coin Control is used.  Not sure why.  This sets a minimum fee that will be paid in the transaction. 

For example.  you set it to 0.001, so your transaction will have a fee of at least 0.001.  If the "per kilobyte" is set, then the fee could be lower than 0.001 depending on the transaction size.

another example.  We are sending 10 GLD and the transaction size is 0.5 kB.
(x) per kilobyte fee: 0.00050000
(x) total at least fee:  0.00100000

For transactions greater than 1kB, this "total at least" option is no different than the per kilobyte version in how fees are calculated.  Perhaps we don't really need this option after all.

5
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: March 13, 2018, 11:32:27 pm »
After looking at the code, I think there is a way to the second option, which the user enters 0.00000000 for the fee.

Currently, that will still result in the minimum fee being paid.

6
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: March 12, 2018, 01:53:20 am »
Here are some comments about "Send as zero-fee transaction if possible":

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1369764.0

7
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: February 28, 2018, 02:27:15 am »
Ok. 
Just got "error:  couldn't connect to server:  timeout reached (code 0)
(make sure server is running and you are connected to the correct RPC port)

Slow means paint the front of your house slow, not the whole house!  Mining is much faster with other software, but is more complicated to set up.

This error means that the client may have been shut down, while the miner was trying to mine.  Given how the 51% defense works, this mining program probably will be very ineffective.

8
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: February 28, 2018, 02:25:14 am »
I think it should be like in the latest release but make the text;
Send as zero-fee transaction, if possible (read the tooltip)

And add a tooltip explaining this 1Kb transaction size.

Agree on hiding all the extra sliders and text by default if the recommended fee for a fast transaction confirmation is the same as the Required Fee.

Thanks for your feedback, we will see if others comment on this before making further changes.

9
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: February 27, 2018, 03:06:04 am »
I think you will end up with a lot less headaches from user complaints (that their transaction didn't happen) as long as the user is forced to check the box for a free transaction.  The location point is sort of moot, but others may disagree.

The location isn't moot because it replaces a redundant line of operation within the client which then makes the custom settings less complex, easier to understand, and logical (while currently they are not). Eg. It's impossible for a "zero fee" and a "required fee" to exist simultaneously.

The Zero Fee function will only work if the Transaction size is less than 1 Kb (a default value that can be changed by the developers, if we want).  If the size is larger than 1 kb, then the settings from the Required Fee or Recommended Fee will be used.  That is why the original text said, Send as Zero Fee Transaction, if possible, as I copied this from another client.  The "if possible" has to do with the constraint (< 1 kb), though that is not stated explicitly.

Recommended Fee will be based on historical activity (low volume = 0.001, higher volume could be higher).  My recommendation is that we hide all the extra sliders and text if the recommended fee for a fast transaction confirmation is the same as the Required Fee (0.001).

Custom:  per kilobyte: 0.001 (the minimum value here is same as the Required Fee, but this can be increased, but not lowered)
Required Fee:  0.001 (the minimum allowed by the client, if paying a fee) <-- This could be hidden if the Recommended Fee is the same as the Required Fee, other wise we could show it.

Send as Zero Fee:  Will send as 0.000 fee, unless size > 1Kb, then uses the above fee.  We could put a tool tip here regarding side effects of this.

10
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: February 27, 2018, 02:48:33 am »
Thanks for this feedback.  We welcome pull requests for these changes!

Design Positive Feedback:

-  First time run popup warning to be smaller.
-  Pending balance having an estimated time until its available balance.
What is the warning?

Pending Balance - the time is always 1 block or about 2 minutes.


-  The word "label" to be replaced with "message" or "note"
The word "label" is consistent with the Receive page and the File / Receiving addresses dialog.  "message" is a different piece of information.

Consider the following request made from the Receive page , which is based on BIP21.  Message and Label are separate fields.
Payment information
URI: goldcoin:muySJLBHA4JKz9cMKQbjCzySGoJtSTzP1z?amount=200.00000000&label=My%20Label&message=My%20longer%20message%20about%20this%20request
Address: muySJLBHA4JKz9cMKQbjCzySGoJtSTzP1z
Amount: 200.00000000 GLD
Label: My Label
Message: My longer message about this request

-  "Subtract fee from amount" sentence needs to be moved a little bit to the right
-  "Enter a Goldcoin address" box to be resized until it is symmetrical
What does the "Pay To:" field need to be symmetrical with?  It currently has the same width as the Label field when considering the three buttons to its right.

-  Once the "send as zero-fee transaction" box is ticked, the recommended and custom tickers/boxes get disabled (grayed out)
The recommended and custom boxes still have value because they will apply if the transaction size is greater than 1 KB as those values will be used as the transaction fee.  Transactions > 1 kb cannot be free, under the default rules.

  -  Remove hard to understand sentences (too much information going on at once) such as these:
   - "Smart fee not initialized yet, This usually takes a few blocks...)"
   - Remove the part from the "confirmation time target" with only the time, no block amount, the block amount doesnt matter to the casual user.
Will the casual user click the "Choose..." button to get more control over the transaction fee?  Most of these fields apply to a coin like bitcoin, which has a congested network.  We could simply hide all these extra fields unless they have non-default values based on transaction history.  The smart fee system looks at the recent block history and the fees for the transactions and comes up with estimates for confirmation times and fees.  In our testnet and in the goldcoin mainnet, there aren't enough transactions to trigger this to show recommended fees other than 0.001.

These sentences create confusion and isn't important to the casual user, if you feel like having more information about that option replace the sentence with a simple "?" box where the user receives a popup where they can read more about that following option.
- Jeroen
If the user wants a simple experience, then the "Hide" button works well.  Granted that most of the options in the transaction fees section are redundant and not necessary for a coin with a low transaction volume.

Keep in mind that changes (additions or deletions) to any words, sentences or phrases will require translation into the other languages and we don't have any translators or a system to get those translations.

My preference is to change as little as possible, partially because my expertise with C++ is the protocol and not the user interface (QT).




11
Technical Support / Re: Can't download Wallet.
« on: February 24, 2018, 12:03:15 pm »
What is your issue?
1.  Cannot download because the file is not found at the website?  404 error?
2.  Cannot download because the file might be deleted right away?
3.  Cannot install, because nothing happens when double-clicking the install .exe?
4.  Cannot install, because the setup process doesn't finish (it disappears)?
5.  Cannot install, because the window for setup disappears, but there is an icon for it still on the task bar?

By knowing what you mean by download, we can narrow down the issue find perhaps find a solution.

12
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: February 18, 2018, 11:43:12 pm »
https://github.com/Stouse49/Goldcoin-GLD/releases/download/v0.14.2.1-testnet2/Windows.GoldCoin.Core.0.14.2.1.TestNet2.zip

Update your new client here.  You can download this file and take the goldcoin-qt.exe file and place it in the folder from the previous version of the new client.   If you run from this folder (after extracting), then you will have a completely new wallet!


13
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: February 08, 2018, 03:09:11 am »
Yes, it does not work, too.

Thank you for confirming.  The old client will show that it tried to mine blocks, but they are not confirmed.  At one point the old client on my system had 3 blocks  that were confirming (but they were later orphaned). 

14
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: February 07, 2018, 09:52:09 pm »
Mining is no longer working with the old client, by design.  You can try to mine with the old client and let me know if any blocks are mined and accepted.

15
Project Development / Re: GoldCoin TestNet Round #2 for the New Client
« on: February 06, 2018, 09:24:43 pm »
Problem.

You are trying to mine with cpuminer and the new client.  This doesn't work and it only possible with the old client.

To mine with the new client, connect to the pool:  http://goldcoinpool.com or you must perform complicated instructions to mine solo here:  https://github.com/mikeghen/litecoin-solo-mining-tutorial

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 32