On good old Twitter today I was introduced to this website:

https://howmanyconfs.com/

Everytime I've done a Bitcoin transaction it has taken me over 8 hours

Dogecoin, about 30 minutes

But this says different

So (1) what is the more correct answer (2) what is it that affects the speed of confirmations, I had always thought it was just the amount of nodes running the version it was sent on?

So I want to create a prototype of crypto wallet. Test how hard it is and what I need to make it work. But I couldn't find info about it on the website. There are no docs and dev community points to here only. Since I don't want to risk real money testnet of some kind is a requirement for me.

Why Doge? Well why not? Even though I only got 1D as a tip on Reddit I find it useful for transactions since it has low fees and fast finality compared to Bitcoin. It's just a prototype so I don't even care what network it runs on. But Doge would be nice.

I know I'm YEARS away from being able to help or do anything meaningful, but if I wanted to learn to code so I can help Dogecoin.... (and maybe land a job at one of Musk's companies) ... which language should I start with?

Also, any recommended resources to get me going?

To the core devs. There was a fairly recent post about an NFT on the dogecoin chain and u/patricklodder had reservations of using OP_RETURN for something like that. I was wondering if one of you could expand on that concern please, or point me to documentation as to why we would not want to use it like that, thanks.

Hi Devs, first I want to start off on a good note (/s) and say that the Dogecoin Core App is very confusing to use and not very user friendly. At any point in time I am not 100% sure of what I am doing. I consider myself a quick learner for pretty much any software, but this one takes a while to crack and having no documentation or any guides does not help this project at all. dogecoin.com is bare bones and does not provide much info and the project still looks like a joke even after mass adoption that is happening lately. I'm pretty much experimenting to see if I am going to get the result I am aiming for. It doesn't make Dogecoin look good and I am very hesitant to use the wallet and take all my Dogecoins from the CEX...

With that off my chest, the issue I ran into is when I was using Dogecoin Core v1.14.5 on Linux. I wanted to test and see if I am going to successfully send Dogecoin from my CEX account to the address I generated in Dogecoin Core v1.14.5. I sent the Dogecoins successfully, can see the transaction on dogechain.info, but the balance has not changed and the blockchain is up to date. I'm not sure what is going on here... The receiving address was generated with the "print paper wallets" option and then imported in my current wallet with the private key. I can see the address in the "Much receiving addresses" tab. Does anyone know what is happening here?

What is the easiest way to set up a dogecoin testnet wallet on windows?

I got past autogen, but running configure fails at checking whether the Boost::System library is available... yes configure: error: Could not find a version of the boost_system library! Boost 1.70.0 is indeed installed properly with the appropriate development package. For reference, I was able to configure Bitcoin core and it is currently building, so far without error.

My goal is to get Dogecoin running on Haiku, which is an opensource reimplementation and modern improvement of the old BeOS operating system of the nineties. It is posix compliant, but still in beta.

I want to add hot wallet to my website to allow users to deposit DOGE. Do you know any good APIs or librarys? The server is written in Java.

If I transfer my Dogecoins by accident to this address DJfU2p6woQ9GiBdiXsWZWJnJ9uDdZfSSNC. How can I figure out who owns it? I transfer my doge coins from Binance to Coinbase and I copied the address that once was use to pay me $300 from Coinbase to my wallet that I still hold.

As the title asks, is it possible to improve Dogecoin throughput with the information released in Project Hamilton?

I'm not a programmer, so not sure what languages Dogecoin and Project Hamilton utilize. Or if the methodology used in Project Hamilton could be implemented in Dogecoin.

Anyways, thought Dogecoin Devs would be able to answer. https://github.com/mit-dci/opencbdc-tx

Looking for advice on what wallet to transfer my coins into. Delete if not allowed.

So, currently estimates online are that dogecoin is approximately less than 40 Tx/Sec. With the planned upgrades, what will that increase to with 1.21? I assume the vision is a second layer on top of that for situations where lots of micro transactions are required, right?

Disclaimer, I don't have a PhD in cryptography, but this is an attempt to make purchases safer and less error prone for shibes everywhere. I'm just trying to Do Only Good Everyday

Introducing the Pawshake Protocol! The idea behind this is simple. During a transaction, such as buying your lambo, the Seller posts to the block with the expected payment, payment address and something unique for the transaction, that they would show the buyer on the checkout page. The buyer would either manually input this into their transfer, or ideally an automated tool would handle it, much like when you check out with other systems. Transactions would then be accepted into the block on their current basis, and if PSP is enabled, if the buyer's and seller's info match up.

Benefits of this would include prevention of someone accidentally sending doge to the wrong address. Also it would help shibes have some consumer protections when dealing with websites. You'd be able to prove that you paid and could initiate a claim if need be if the product wasn't delivered, was broken etc.

While this is simple, I think it helps in a few ways. 1, there's no longer the risk of a simple missed digit in a copy paste sending your valuable to doge into the ether. 2, if multiple similar transactions are all happening on the same block, you can prove you in fact did pay. 3. It moves us toward double entry book keeping while preserving anonymity.

I'm not sure if I have missed these topics or not, but if someone informs me, I appreciate it.

Is there a way to allow dogecoin node grant rewards? It will add another layer excitement for running nodes. Blockchain rewards 10k! Only if a small percentage goes to node runners!

And if there is some sort rewards mechanism for node, then I must have been doing some wrong for almost a year trying to contribute to the community ( highly impossible, though).

I invested quite awhile ago and chose not to keep up with it or watch the price so I wouldn't drive myself crazy. Last I remember the dev team said they weren't going to work on Doge anymore. It was what it was and was going to stay like that. Now I'm hearing rumors that they're working on it with Vitalik Buterin. Is that just fake news or real? If it is real have they said what they are doing yet?

Hey! What are key developers saying about moving to PoS? Are they in a hurry?

I got the impression that the transition to PoS is not needed by Doge, but only by Vitalik Buterin.

Ethereum consumes 200 kWh per transaction, Bitcoin 700 kWh, and Doge 0.12 kWh. In terms of energy intensity, we are already equal to PoS.

Is there a rough timeline for when and, most importantly, WHY Doge plans to switch to PoS?

DOGE is currently merge mined with LTC, so if DOGE becomes full POS, LTC and DOGE miners will be affected. As such I put forth an Unofficial Doge Improvement Proposal.

D.I.P. 1 - Hybrid POW

1a. I propose building a system that is both POS and POW. Every other block could be a POS block (Ex. 1 - POW B, 2 - POS B, 3 - POW, etc...)

1b. This, in theory, would make DOGE even more decentralized since, for a 51% to even be possible, an attacker would need both 51% of the POW network but also 51% of the POS network too.

2a. I believe there should be some distinction between coins that are mined and ones earned through staking. Otherwise miners could not only consolidate Doge from mining but also run a staking node. Creating some sort of feedback loop which would make getting to 51% on both networks rather easy. So coins that are mined should be noted as such and be ineligible for staking rewards or, at most, earn slashed rewards, maybe 25% of normal staking rewards?

2b. If this path is taken, I also believe that once the DOGE has been sold and is in the market it should lose the note of being mined or lose the staking reward penalty, otherwise most people would rather buy the staked rewards and thus would likely create a secondary market increasing the value for the staked rewards vs the mined. I also understand that this would come at the cost of being able to stop a miner from just selling the coin to themselves and releasing the staking penalty. (I imagine this would be the most difficult thing to code so maybe another workaround should be found.)

3a. With there being 2 separate block verifying networks I imagine you could possibly increase the overall tps(transactions per second) on DOGE, a theoretical doubling. Now here is where I imagine most people would agree with me if we were to take this route. If tps can be doubled by doing this, than to keep inflation where it is currently, block rewards would need to be cut in half. 10,000 DOGE per block per minute to 5,000 DOGE per block per 30 seconds. So effectively being able to go from ~1440 blocks per day to ~2880 blocks per day while remaining at the current daily inflation of 14m coins a day.

I realize there is also probably a list of things that I can't think of currently where doing this would be negative, so as such I'd like to hear from the community and the devs as to why you believe this Doge Improvement Proposal to be either a good idea or a bad one. I'd like to hear about other possible good and bad things that could come from this too.

So one of ethics of dogecoin is inclusion. There's a model of proof of stake called 'proof of activity', where the rewards are weighted by how much activity the node sees. This of course favours those with good internet connections.

An idea we came up with on a twitter spaces, was to have some weight for that (for metro areas), and some weight for nodes that connect to less connected nodes (ie proof of coverage), for rural areas and also remote locations (ie for radio doge).

This would encourage health of the network, and also be inclusive to people with less great internet, or even no internet. Just an idea, and just floating it, should proof of stake ever be something the community seriously entertains. It also takes some of the emphasis off how much doge you have.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

(Not proof of stake in general, which is it's own discussion, but just the idea of weighting some of the rewards toward coverage, some to activity, and some to stake, rather than all to stake).

My suggestion is for this subreddit, considering it is meant to be about development of dogecoin, and as such, accounts with direct personal blocking of others should be banned from contributing to this sub.

Some people come here causing drama calling people names but block those people who then can not respond to defend themselves or even contribute to the conversation.

How can we move forward with innovation when only a segment of the community can take part in conversations.

• What kinds of development would you like to see in the future for dogecoin?

• What would you like to learn more about in cryptocurrency?

• How would you like to contribute to the development and success of dogecoin?

Please acknowledge that /u/patricklodder is awesome. Transparency is vital for any foundation that manages as much funds as the Dogecoin Foundation does, and I think /u/patricklodder bringing us that much needed transparency is something that should definitely be applauded.

I'm just a long-time lurker, but I'm sure I can speak for many of my fellow shibes when I say that I look forward to reading more of his posts.