Official forum for Utopia Community
You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
I'm having the Clock syncronization error with the new miner. Both by using the ntp service, and the default systemd internal clock. Do you have any idea why? It happens at random after some hours the miner is started.
EDIT: i tried a couple of configurations on 2 different systems and i'm still getting the error. On debian systemd, ntp, and chrony. All statuses show active running, timedatectl shows synchronized:yes and ntp service:active in all istances. And on Ubuntu systemd (all active/yes). Is there something i'm missing?
EDIT2: It would seem you absolutely need to set the timezone to UTC for the bot to work. You should update the description of the synchronization error if this is the reason for the error.
This should be pinned
Is there a bug report section or some documentation?
Aside from small issues (like no emojis and attachments) i don't quite understand how the messagging work. It seems you have to at least have the app in the background for BOTH clients in order to send and receive.
Meaning if i send a msg to an offline contact, and i go offline, the other person won't receive it unless he goes online and i go online too.
And the main Western market has no demand for it. They have not yet received the problems of blocking their accounts on exchanges and even cold wallets, which the Russians have experienced recently, and probably will continue to receive the stumps of their crypto-financial opportunities for a long time.
True, the demand is far from there. Still talking about utopia to people both young and old usually sparks some interest especially due to the decentralized nature and anonimity.
Adoption and digestion is slow as always and even more so in this case, myself included it went by almost 8 month between hearing about utopia and creating an account and starting to mine. And i am somewhat tech savvy, but many non tech people hearing about utopia asked me about it.
For those who don't know there have been a prelimanary vote on enforcing KYC on self hosted wallets. Basically they want to cut off any bridge between FIAT and non-KYC Crypto.
Freedoom is going down the drain fast and while i may rejoice in seeing a bright future for utopia, the future is grim for the people.
What i want to propose that the team may consider is a P2P marketplace with the escrow system. I know its a big undertaking, but givin people a way to bridge cryptos to the real world, and MAYBE also INSIDE the Utopia app could be a really nice thing.
I'm not saying now, its just an idea/reminder for the team to consider.
Humble opinion: The sentiment is that this will punish further small time miners dedicated to the project and legit VPS miners who pay for the service. AWS still account for 50% of the nodes online and if the rumors are true they won't be scathed by this adjustment.
I still believe the fastest and most effective fix for this issue would be to require an amount of CRP to be staked for each online miner.
People who believe in the project hold anyway and big miners wouldn't be able to flood the market. This would also create stability in the future so no-one could just flood the market and the network without a sizeable investment before hand.
The requirement could also be logarithmic in brackets:
* 0-10 miners no requirement
* 10-30 20 crp per miner
* 30-100 40 crp per miner and so on.
The amounts are just an example
EDIT: well as the halving worked great, with the threads approaching 80000 you can plan another one just to kick out all the legitimate remaining miners and directly rebrand to Utopia powered by AWS (The most centralized crypto! The only Rival to Binance)
70000 threads i wonder where they come from. I repeat myself whether its true or not the RUMOR circulating right now is that those bots are from hacked accounts. How good it would be a headline like this on some crypto news outlet :
"The UTOPIA ecosystem, the crypto where block validation is done through Amazon hacked server accounts"
Whooo i'm gonna definitely buy that shit. Get a grip on reality, project have sunk for much less
This charade DOES NOT look good. The decentralized p2p project that has 50% of its network running on AWS. Miners Ran by people who doesn't care less for the wellness of the ecosystem. Let's imagine whats happens IF adoption increases, more people use the network, network load increases then for whatever reason those miners go down----->> the network shits the bed because i already saw ripple effects of node overload on my miners.
Those 35000 threads that now accounts for 50% of the network have larger uptime swings than a 13 yrs teenage girl.
Good work in reporting the salient points of the discussion about it. IMHO they all have at least some validity. While it may be unfair to for example block a VPS provider for the action of a single individual if it preserves the health of the ecosystem it may be a viable option. Ofc when the network scales and it grows drastic measures can be revoked. But a single person owning 50% of the network is not healty, moreso if there is suspicion it's through stolen credit cards this would put in a VERY BAD light the project even if its nobody fault. These claims are unverified but just rumors spreading about it are a very bad publicity. By nature Utopia is already open to attack as a harbour of malicious individuals for its privacy features, and the UUSD while its one of its greatests strenghts right now it surely is a major attack vector for a potential smear campaign.
All of the drastic measure are unjust and unfair but we also must consider the ecosystem is in its infancy and has to be protected. When it hopefully grows this would be if not a drop in the ocean and self-regulation should be automatic.
I repeat any drastic measure is against every principle Utopia stands for but letting it being undermined while its still in a vulnerable state is not a good course of action.
Other proposal by user:
[even later edit]
Someone came up with the idea of requesting 10 CRP in stake for every bot, on PK's feeding on more than one bot. This way, for 30K bots should have initial stake of 300 CRP. However, for only one bot, the stake would be zero.
Should be 30000*10=300k CRP And maybe its the fastest and easiest way to deter single huge farms with no actual interest in the project other that dumping it.
As i (we) don't really know as the network should first switch to the new miner to draw conclusions: i would say setting the requirements so high as to cut-off small miners is not the best course of action imho. If you want to encourage higher quality nodes it would be better to add some segmentation to the rewards/miners. So you have a lower entry bar with consequently lower rewards. Otherwise it encourage centralization of the network to big miners renting only VPS servers.
Thanks for the replies. Finger crossed
So theoretically if i was able to mine before after the whole network upgrades i should be able to mine as well or i shall give up all hopes?
It doesn't seem to work. Left it overnight and it didn't turn active even with enough connections. No rewards either
oh well thanks anyway then
i don't understand: if 1 VM with 1 UAM works with a bridged connection through the VM why wouldnt the dockers works through the same setup? If your guide ''solves'' the NAT problem for the dockers?
You say the second network has a NAT too, but why isn't that an issue if i use just 1 Instance of the miner without the dockers?
Is it because the UAM resolves the NAT mapping ports through the Upnp only once? So basically your guide adds a virtual Upnp in the linux enviroment and the UAM maps through it natively just as it maps through my router NAT with his Upnp?
So basically if the UAM goes thorugh the Linux NAT enviroment it can't get through my Router NAT enviroment again?
true decentralized and anonymous instant messagging on the phone; it could be huge
I'm sorry to bother you, but i tried following your guide and i can't get incoming connections to the docker.
I' am through a VM in Virtual Box (where a single instance of Ubuntu is able to mine correctly) and i tried your distro and a ubuntu one, and both don't work. If i start a docker with the --network=host the miner start receiving incoming connections so i guess the problem is with the miniupnpd.
The UAM says it detected Upnp and the node is switched on, but even after 1 hr i have no incoming connections.
EDIT: i was trying to see if i could make it work on the VM as a test. Eventually im in the middle of buying some hardware and make some dedicated servers for utopia. So this may be a non issue. But i would still gladly appreciate some feedback on the situation.
@Posi yes i'm mining through windows 7 with virtual box. Set up virtual box, installa linux as vm, remember to bridge the connection on the network settings in virtual box and you're pretty much ok to go. For a single machine it runs even on a HDD, except the small 5200RPM ones. For multiple machine i think its necessary and SSD or NVME. At the moment i'm running 6 Bots plus Another CPU miner on top. I can even play games while mining just utopia its pretty good.
PS: i have big problems with the last UAM so im using the older one. The new one crashes 90% of the time after 10 hrs of uptime.
wow thats super cool
All right yes it just needed some time. I was worried for nothing.
Maybe it will be useful for somebody else!
Hello i was messing around with my old pc too see if i can set up a bot.
I have enough incoming connections between 0 to 25. >3 connections are the condition for mining to be active.
I successfully set it up with an SSD, after 7 minutes of the node running the mining became active. I tried with a fresh install on a HDD and after 20 minutes the mining status is still Inactive. Even though i have enough incoming connection.
The thing i don't understand is that: i have another PC with 6 Virtual machines running utopia on a NVME. In order to test i cloned an existing and running Virtual Machine from the NVME to a HDD. And it started mining in an istant.
Is it just that i need to wait enough for the miner to catch up or something because its a fresh install on an HDD?
i would guess it was a pump (and a soon dump). the trading volume went from the usual <10000 to 150000. Unfortunately i don't know the figures of the total CRP available, but i read the NEW circulation of CRP was 4,5 million . So 150k trading volume seems a lot to me, as in a whale buying up all the order book.
but thats just my opinion, im not so good as a trader
Pages: 1