Bitcoin Forum

tl;dr pretty much everyone running the Windows binaries from the onset was screwed.

I phucking knew that something was fishy from the begining and made a thread to document the orphan rate. Windows users had 90%+ orphan rate, linux users about 10-15%:

Releasing clients for windows with no UPNP support is the new premine

They will always find a way to have an advantage at release.

That's why they do not publish binaries until the actual release without notice. Anyway I predict that this thread will change nothing and this pre-mine scam will be forgotten in 10 seconds.

Also adding the addnode part from the first post on the official thread limited my connections to 8, and I didn't solve any blocks or get above 8 connections until I removed that code (after wasting 8 hours).

The same. Without adding some nodes. Win 7

Makes sense now you've collated those posts.. Feel foolish as I was one of those defending the lack of premine. The relatively small handful I've accumulated, due to lack of linux knowledge, now seems like an absolute pittance. I wondered why you'd taken an interest in the thread, but now I see you were trying to figure out the OP's game..

Nice find. How is the actual performance difference between linux/windows builds on a same hardware, 10x as suggested?

Let's make no mistake: some things are seriously wrong with the windows client...So wrong, in fact, I see no way it cannot have been intentional. As I see it, there are 3 specific issues that cannot be easily explained by 'oops'.

Anyways, it's a short amount of time (I would bet it has already been done) until the scrypt kernel is ready to roll out the (n,1,1). I will say this: at least the dev isn't foolish enough to pretend it cannot be done.

  

^^It's funny when some of the most outspoken linux users show their complete lack of understanding. Thanks for the contribution, buddy.  

This explain a lot fishy things to me, in other words it´s a selective pre-mine of the coin, windows user (90%) will screwed.

So some people have been affected by a bug in the windows implementation. Not convinced this is a wide spread problem nor that it was intentional.

 ;D

I used the windows binaries, I don't feel scammed at all.

another scam, good job we have some smart people who can detect this kind of behaviour. Let's hope this does not make it to an exchange.

Someone should put out a decent cpu only coin asap  because ppl will keep yacoin going because they can mine it at the same time as gpu mined coins.

Lets put it simple...

Windows client on my 2500K was getting about 60 khash/s with 8 conecctions, 90% of the people was using that, the result, for me, was 3 valid blocks, 27 orphans in about 16 hours.

Now, the same 2500K with the same client, BUT compiled on linux with AVX (that are NOT by default, you must add them), does about 300 khash/s and has 64 conecctions.

Tecnically is not premine, but you are screwing 90% of the people on launch...

+1
totally agree

they're all scams.

can we, as a community, create a coin that we all AGREE is fair terms?  like right from the get-go, a solution that works for all of us?

guess i'll better get a linux distro for any future coins before my 7950 arrives :)

You know, with all these new altcoins not even trying to sound serious and so many people downloading binaries, it's only a matter of time before a trojan uses the greed of miners to siphon their wallets or divert their mining power elsewhere.

If:

• it hasn't a git repository (preferably forked from a reputable coin) published weeks before the release so that developers can check the code for trojans
• you aren't compiling from this validated source

don't come whining when you find that all your wallets are empty (in particular if you solomine and can't easily move the wallets out of reach) or that you mined for someone else.

Actually if I'm not mistaken Freicoin is already doing this kind of trick: a substantial amount of the reward in a block goes to a "foundation" or something, this didn't seem to bother people mining it, so the next step is probably close.

Best thing to do would be to get the miners stable on YaCoin using it as a TESTNET, until we have stable miners for both Linux and Windows and to see if someone doesn't just bring out a GPU miner anyway.

Once it looks a fairly safe bet as a new coin we can just fork his git and start all over again with a fair race to the finish line.

How does this ^^ sound?

With the interest his thread has generated there is obviously a gap for a well thought out CPU only coin. With enough interest and support I don't even mind managing the project with full disclosure to ALL before mining begins. I'm here because I believe in crypto currencies, not because I see a get rich quick scheme. Unlike many around here it seems.

Its unfortunately true.  Everyone panicking to get the new binary the instant its created = everyone getting the virus at the same time = all your coins are stolen.

I usually wait for thread to reach 15-20 pages before downloading hoping some of zillion geeks here would already found out if there is something fishy.

Ok, i use 3 Xeons E7-4870, 2 FX-8 6350, in total 46 cores, whit windows client and I get 5 block´s in 12 hours, and I fell screwed.

I remember when it was IXC and then I0C...
so... maybe a "Y0Coin" with fair and the same rules for Win/Linux from the beginning ;)

I like the idea of everyone banding together on a CPU coin, everyone waiting with guns blazing at the starting line. 

You know how they "reset testnet"?  How does that work?  If you have a bunch of coins on there, and there are like 1000s of people connected, and they reset testnet.. do your coins just vanish?  That might be the key. 

So what we do is make it so that we have everyone ready and hashing away at a coin, let's say YaCoin, and let the difficulty build up to the appropriate level.  Then once it is at the satisfactory level, "reset" the coinbase, and then let the games begin.  Everyone is mining at the same time, at the appropriate difficulty, no bitching, no scam.

Yeah the problem with that is that by page 2  99% of the coins have been hoovered up the gpu farms and the developer. :(

It's same for me, I don't have any special mining equipment, I don't really mine so 2nd or 20th I can't get anything  ;D

Excellent conspiracy theories in this thread.  You guys continue to entertain me.  The reality is that you had to be there for the launch.  I was browsing the forums at 1AM PST and saw the launch of it, downloaded, and profited big time.  All you guys who were hours late and got caught out by the massive zerg rush can continue QQ'ing.

So basically there will be a pre-race to buy the biggest cloud farm possible before launch and orphan everybody else.

So which version of windows do you run?

What makes you think we even tried to mine it? I certainly didn't.

I mined around 400 on win 7 with i5 3570k oc'ed to 4.5Ghz

I was even late to party and running it in a sandbox for a few hours

So windows mining was differently possible

I think the biggest problem was/is network latency.

You can have a SUPER fast computer, but if your net is slow with high latency you will never get those solved blocks accepted since someone with better network latency already got their block accepted before you..

Windows 8 64-bit.

Ahh, It's always the same....  A small bunch calling premine and crying about being late.

In 2 hours time there will be 10 new altcoins launched and new folks to whinge about those.

So. Fair play, but this ain't going to spoil YacCoin.

It certainly was possible to mine on windows.  I for one was mining fine on this terrible OS.

However one of my friends was not (as I've said in another thread).  So, it seems some small fraction of people have got pissed of because some kind of bug or incompatibility with some version of windows.

Who knows...

Like I said... no point crying over spilled milk---  Oh, look another altcoin has just launched!

This. Latency is the biggest factor, at low difficulty it doesn't matter whether you're putting out a couple hundred kH/s faster than the other guy if he's on a better network as his shares will get accepted before yours.

Windows it´s not guilty of this, i mine other coins in windows and I don’t have this particular problem.

At the end of the day, we will find out what happened.  Either a large group of small-time individuals mined coins OR a smaller group of superpowers got the coins.  Time will tell.


Actually, cannot this be determined by looking at the block chain?

the fair term is premining, lol

I vote on relaunch. ;)
YACoin start was really suspicious. Anyway the idea of coin for CPU miners looks attractive. So I say lets clone it, but make a fair one.

BTW. Y0Coin is maybe even better name than YAC. Like: Yo man, got some change? ;D

lol well i do have 2 pc's with 7950 but it takes forever for me to get it set up and running, since it took me ages to realise i was not meant to be putting that yac command into cgminer, even when i found out it was meant for the windows cmd box i didnt know you had to cd to the directory of the prog before running it.

Anyway was fun learning, and people on this forum are quite cool they are pleased to give a hand to others.

After i found out what to do it was great starting to mine solo, until i was told my next issue was my latency would ensure no blocks being accepted.

House is for sale, moving to a place somewhere nearer a town or a place with decent internet connection. My top speed is 1-2mb line here and ping is pretty bad too.

I got 3 blocks of yacs after a day but then stopped mining when i jumped out of bed today to see all the blocks i must have mined over night, sadly .......not even 1 additional yac. Switched off the miner in disgust.

I did better on cnc, bobs pool was cool.  For now i'm just collecting lots of different coins. I like to have a selection. Even snagged a bitbar chunk or 2. That was cool.

how do you remove this code?

Well some of us WERE there for the launch... and it didn't launch ;)

--Tom

Look around for gosh sakes, there are still, and have always been, several chains you can mine very very nicely with even just a single-core CPU.

Look at BBQcoin now, it is now in the phase where all the people who mined it with CPUs for months or a year or more are getting paid handsomely, and meanwhile now that BBQcoin is too high difficulty for CPUs their CPUs are still mining any of several other coins that, just like BBQcoin had been for so long, they are glad the big miners are ignoring.

The payoff for a rig with GPUs and CPUs, with the CPUs mining low difficulty chains where CPUs can get lots of coins, has been much much higher for the CPUs than the GPUs. Those CPUs made more money than the GPUs.

The CPUs have turned out to be far more profitable than the GPUs because although in both cases there are only so many coins available per day, most of the chains the GPUs work on divide up those coins among more actual human beings on any given day than the chains the CPUs are working on.

So while you as a GPU miner might be one of a thousand or ten thousand or more miners divvying up the coins of a high difficulty chain, you as a CPU miner can often find chains where you are one of only a hundred or less people divvying up the coins on any particular day. (A lot of CPU miners seem to just pick up some number of coins of each chain that they feel is enough to give them a nice payoff when the chain comes back into the limelight, instead of dedicating cores long term like a person with a huge GPU farm would be likely to do if they bothered to put their GPU rigs' CPUs to work.)

So basically if your CPUs have not been raking in more money over the long term than your GPUs that is not due to lack of special anti-GPU hashing systems, it is simply due to your failure to put your CPUs to profitable work.

-MarkM-

To be clear though, I immediately modified the client after I pulled it from git (8 hours past launch because I slept through it, grrr) to increase the maximum number of outbound connections, all 1560 servers had public IP's so inbound connections were possible, and all 1560 servers also had tweaks to the source so they all connecting with each other to form a large interconnected low-latency mesh within the Yacoin network.  Those factors probably significantly helped with my orphan rate.  Still, I was 8 hours late to the party and a single PC at the right time early on would've mined much more than I did.  But I still think it was probably a fair fight 8 hours in.

To be fair I made two separate posts querying what the starting difficulty would be in that topic and to my surprise not a single person responded or picked them up.

Everyone forgets the 'scam' claims in the run up to a coin launching and conveniently stop caring, because they hope they are going to get rich from it. As soon as they don't get rich, out come the pitchforks.

Possible alternative, everyone that didn't immediately start figuring out how to port the scrypt chacha code and (relatively slowly changing) variable N to the cgminer GPU kernel were actually screwed from the onset regardless whether they were running Windows or Linux?  From experience running a substantial server farm mining YAC yesterday, and looking at the difficulty and block solving rate today, I'm pretty skeptical that CPU mining accounts for most of the apparent hash rate.

So far the fairest really seem to be the ones that even right now you can rake in lots of coins of using just a CPU or a single GPU.

They are fair because everyone has had years to mine them and thus everyone has had plenty of time to pick up pretty much however many coins they want.

Some of them have even been handed out free on the side to Bitcoin miners by merged mining pools, so even if the miners were too short sighted to care about the coins themselves their pool operator nonetheless gave them their fair share so that come the payoff the miners will not be  looking back saying "it is so unfair, all those years I could have picked these things up for almost nothing and now that everyone appreciates their value they are going to cost me a fortune to buy!"

-MarkM-

I was mining with near 200 Xeon cores (13 servers), they were running Windows. when it was 1M coins total, I had 10K - 1% , it is really good for small cluster. My servers are in USA and I even couldn't open port ! so I don't think that windows clients are 2 times slower.

Supposedly Linux isn't great at Scrypt, some have said to use Windows for that.

For example I can get 405 or so MHashes of SHA256 from a 5870, but fiddle with it all I want (using Fedora core 17) I don't seem to be able to get more than 255KHashes of Scrypt. Yet people claim one should get 1/1000 as many Scrypt hashes as SHA256 hashes out of one's GPUs.

-MarkM-

Didn't do too badly on the launch 2 days ago with just a few systems, even just Windows (I don't have the fancy Xeon servers or EC2 instances or whatever that you people have). Then again, I only found about the thread and got in at block #200 (difficulty 0.0002) just because I was doing work way past my bedtime and happened to see the thread.  

No, the big problem is insanely low initial difficulty.

The latency "problem" is only even noticeable because the blocks are too insanely easy to solve.

If the number of miners who were able to get up and running within the first few pages of the thread had been too few to even have solved the first block in that tiny amount of time, then by the time there were enough miners aboard to have a decent chance of getting the first block solved the blocks would have come faster and faster and faster until within just an hour or two after launch there would have been enough miners to have blocks being solved at about the target speed and even then chances are high that within another few pages they would have been solved faster than the target speed, but hopefully by then a retarget would be coming soon enough to keep adjusting back to the target speed fast enough to keep latency from ever being a noticeable problem.

-MarkM-

if the init diff is high, then many small computing people won't be able to get anything. It will need the mining pools being set up at the beginning.

In any case, those with big rigs will always have big advantage, no matter what we do about it.

This is pretty likely.  If I can pull 400 kh/s on a 2700k, my guess is that a 7970 could pull several mh/s at the current difficulty/N.

I'm not complaining, I have lots of them.

There does seem to be need for a good clear step by step manual walking coin developers through the changes that p2pool will need, so that as they decide each thing they are changing to make their coin they can make the corresponding change to a pull for p2pool.

So far no one seems to really know what some of the strange hashes or coded strings in p2pool are let alone how to generate them or where to obtain their values for your new coin.

But yeah it makes sense that if thousands of machines will be mining, the chance of any individual one of them solving a block in the target time has to be one in the number of machines, thus that if several thousand cores will be mining it should take any individual core thousands of times the target time, on average, to find a block.

-MarkM-

YAC's failure to launch at the announced launch time was a breach of trust. This business with the binaries makes matters worse.

At this point I'm comfortable lumping it in with all the other pre-mined coins.

I joined at 9 minutes with 40 blocks mined, and my cheap single i5 2500k Linux rig held for quite a while with ~10% of all coins (I kept checking it, cos it was the first coin I joined since the start and wanted to see how the minting rate was). It ended making 20k YACs throughout the day. So basically anyone who pointed a common Linux desktop to the network would have got a substantial share of the early coins.

Definitely there weren't big guys around with huge rigs from the start, maybe because nobody was expecting a CPU coin. It took a little while for people to react and set up their farms.

How to spot a SCAM COIN:

Launched at non-peak forum hours with no, little or faulty launch time.
Convoluted design for the purpose of discouraging public mining in early blocks.
Quickly dropping block reward to reward 'prepared' miners (aka. inner circle)
Very low starting difficulty that quickly increase (also to reward inner circle and pre/instaminers)
Ultra fast time to market. aka. Appears on trading solutions within a few days. To enable early miners fast and profitable exit.
LOTS of forum PR (spamming altcoin forums)

Feel free to add to this, comment, criticize etc. I would love to build a common definition that people can learn from.

Wrong. The coin was pre-annouced. It was only the launch time that was instant. 100% that the developers and their 'friends' were ready with a few amazon instances.

It will not be forgotten, but of course it will be ignored by LOTS of people that are waiting just waiting to launch the next 'Big Thing'. I project 4 new altcoins over the weekend. Guessing at least one 'ultra rare' (BTB was a super successful scam) and 2-3 new SHA256 coins, probably with fucked up block reward system.

And somehow they failed to mine more than 40 blocks before several forum members joined the network.

I'm just wondering, which coin wasn't premined?

So, your theory is that it is super hard to organize a few JR members to also prep and share the profits with them? I am amazed more people don't get how the new altcoin scam works. The entire approach requires you to have a group of forum members to 'validate' your coin anyway (and spam sale/buy ads 20 min after mining starts. Email spam bter.com etc) and why be super greedy when you can make a few 100 BTC and have a group of 'forum friends' make another few 100 BTC.

In my opinion it is not the premine itself that is 'scammy'. It is many factors that weight in. But if a coin is premined, has rigged block reward and makes it to a marketplace in 48 hours... well. It it walks like a duck...

Maybe window was rigged.. I was getting alot of orphans too out of like 60-70 blocks 11 were accepted, rest were orphans

By these definitions, bitcoin and especially litecoin are also scams (except for probably #1, which really depends what timezone you live in).

In time, the market will decide what is, or is not, a scam.

Windows 7 64-bit from 1 hour after launch until 8 hours ago. 62 blocks - 59 of them where orphaned.
Linux Ubuntu 64-bit from 1 hour after launch . 270 blocks - 31 of them where orphaned.

The same was with Litecoin. Almost everyone was mining on unoptimized miner until pooler published his optimized version. Scams everywhere.

Either all of them (bitcoin, litecoin included) are scams, or none are scams.

/petition to restrict the word "scam" to define actual scamming (i.e. send coins to newbie member, don't get anything back).

Are you kidding me?  I was one of the first Tenebrix and Litecoin miners, and I mined with an AMD cluster.  Artforz just had trouble optimizing for Intel, so for a while AMD and Intel were neck and neck until pooler did some tricks with cache access and assembly to finally get the performance out of intel GPUs that everyone was expecting from them.  End of the day, a few months after Tenebrix was released you could finally mine with 60 KH/s on your Intel CPU as compared to 40 KH/s with Artforz' original code.  Whoop-de-doo, a 50% improvement.

Yet the Windows build gave me 60 KH/s while my Ubuntu build gave me 400 KH/s with my 2700K -- totally different story.

Anyway, who wants to buy some YAC?

and the fact there were no clear instructions on how to CPU mine. The instructions were made more clear later on. I didn't realize you just had to run the wallet with a few switches to start mining. Also all those pictures posted a couple of days ago of people eating popcorn was a signal some people were raking in the coins.

Well. I may be wrong and that was unintentional.

You might be thinking of the GPU mining code -- no one knows if Artforz was able to get a GPU miner for Litecoin running after he realized that the TMTO issue with scrypt allowed for faster mining by GPU.  It's still a possibility; Artforz mined privately with his GPU miner when he implemented it for the Bitcoin chain, then only gave out the source code later.

I recall an issue related to the chosen parameters (1024, 1, 1). This set of parameters leads to degeneracy of the algo (in mathematical sense), making it's easier to create GPU mining soft.

Possibly this is more an issue of people forgetting the past, back when CPU mining BTC was common.  I'd tend to say it wasn't a flaw of the YAC launch, just that a lot of people had forgotten how to CPU mine with the client itself, or entered the cryptocurrency scene and went straight to GPU mining without having ever attempted CPU mining.  Otherwise, the "gen" parameter to enable CPU mining in the client seems to be a long-term legacy dating to the original Bitcoin client and wasn't any sort of revolutionary or undocumented feature specific to Yacoin.

That wasn't the problem (although the author of this coin is trying to use that to sell you on it).

Regardless of the value of N, the GPU will likely be faster until you hit some value in the hundreds of megabytes that requires all of the 8-16 GB of RAM available on a modern computer.  The reason for this is because you can adjust the amount of memory usage in exchange for number of ALU cycles (this is exactly what the "lookup_gap" variable does in reaper/cgminer).  But at a value of N large enough to prohibit faster GPU mining, a single hash is measured in seconds to minutes.  This makes it impossible to use for a blockchain hash and was detailed in the memcoin thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=122256.0) I created a long time ago.  Most of the ideas for YACoin came from the specifications for that coin, which were later revealed (to my chagrin) to make no sense.  This is one of the reasons that the YACoin chain makes no sense itself, because it eventually intends to use values of N in the gigabyte range.

Indeed, at the time someone immediately called out ArtForz about the choice of scrypt(1024,1,1) in pretty much the very next forum post.  I believe the wording was something along the lines of "are you joking?" and "don't you know anything about OpenCL?" when ArtForz suggested it would be GPU resistant.

Artforz logic was that the L2 CPU cache would be fast enough that it could compete with a GPU implementation.  I spoke with him myself around the time of the release of Tenebrix; the numbers he gave me for his naive GPU implementation were in line with those when running reaper with lookup_gap = 1 (which offers at most a 200% advantage).

I meant scrypt(1024, 1, 1) should be set to something like scrypt(1024, 128, 1)*. Setting the second parameter to "1" means that IT'S NOT GPU RESISTANT. Artforz fucked a lot of guys with his set of parameters.


* scrypt(CPU cost, memory cost, parallelization cost)

Won't people be mainly mining PoS by the time Scrypt PoW uses more memory than a cheap home computer can hold? At worst it's just a kill switch for PoW to try to make it economically unfeasible to use specialized hardware.

Sad part being that he knew this VERY well as it was pointed out early in development. Then again, why fix something that you can profit off?

N isn't CPU cost, it's CPU and memory cost.  And even at that, there's little different between using N or r to increase memory usage past a certain point because you become very quickly memory bandwidth limited.  You're welcome to test it out with scrypt-jane if you want to, though.  You'll see that when memory consumption is equivalent with either N or R being used to increase it the time to get a hash is about the same past 128 KB or so of memory usage.

400 KH/s?
I'm getting merely 200-400kH/s on my Intel hexacore. That said I cannot use the AVX optimisation as it runs inside Virtualbox. However, I don't see how this is a totally different story -- we have the same with ASICs for Bitcoin, GPUs that arrived for Litecoin etc.

YAC might not be more "pure" than other coins. But at least it is a new concept and not a simple clone such as FTC and CNC. I have my doubts whether it is the right concept. But only time will tell.

I also find it hypocritical to ask for a "fair" coin. What is fair? Fair, so that everybody can profit? Fair, so that "I" can profit enough and in particular more than the other guy that I'm envious of? Fair, so I can dump it onto buyers and cash out?

Is anybody even remotely thinking about the original motivation of a coin? To make digital payments easy and secure. Mining surely was more of a necessary evil (consuming Megawatts and 100k$/day) than a wanted aspect of the network. I could think of a strategy that should limit the required mining power.

No, because suddenly you have blocks that are worth 100 coins because the difficulty is so low and no one can mine quickly.  The difficulty algorithm in the code increases block reward with decreasing difficulty.

Unfair is when I make lots more than everyone else for no greater effort -- which is what I've done repeatedly.  Like I said, I got a bunch of YACs.  But I figure people not into the crypto p'n'd' scene will fail to see the value of something that has ponzi-scheme like distributions in the first week that it's out.

 :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o

Copy-Paste from yacoin-qt:


Copy-past from the first postin official YAC thread:

No clear instructions? Can you read?  Are you 6 years old?

And yes, there are some gifs with people eating popcorn. And what? Do you have a problem with that?

Please don't make from you a bigger idiot than you are and STFU...

ps: If your message was a joke,then HAHA,you got me...

pps: Sorry guys, but I spent all day helping people with yac mining, mostly answering 10 times the same question, and I just can't stand the ignorance of some people. Why do you do something you have 0 knowledge about? First - learn (read, use the search button, ...). Then ask. And even at this point, there is 90% chance your question was already answered. If I could do it through without asking, anyone can too...

It's arguable.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11126315/what-are-optimal-scrypt-work-factors

EDIT: Btw, the time has proven that Litecoin is NOT GPU resistant. This lets us suspect that my point of view is more correct than urs. :)

thats not going to happen

I don't think the Dev has a GPU miner nor do I think he has a server farm, if he did no one else would've won any blocks when the binaries were posted. However if 6000 cores only constitutes 15% of the hash then something is fishy, the alts forum doesn't have 20,000 people reading it. Regardless the coin was doomed from the start, six second block times are fine if you're the Visa network paying for your storage, but at 35mb a day you can't very well tell gramma to send you money but "oh, it'll take you a week to download the block chain".

I already turned mine off. 500 watts an hour isn't worth it for 16 cents worth of coin.

Hah, I love looking at your uninformed posts. Truly hilarious. Post less, read more.

Time has proven that Artforz wasn't aware of the TMTO tradeoff (http://www.openwall.com/lists/crypt-dev/2013/03/21/1) that he later tried to address with TMTO defeaters that weren't released to public (because he eventually defeated them again himself, at which point he gave up).

There is not a simple, magical solution to this problem and it remains at the forefront of crypto research.

Now you're just arguing on the internet...

"Through disagreement, we approach consensus". Yes, a zen-like thing to say, but that in a nutshell is how markets work.

May the best cryptocurrency win. Or all of them can fail.

Who's left holding the bag at the end?

He is right. U should follow ur own advice.

No, he's wrong as tacotime made very clear to you.... 'U' should 'ur'..something? There have been false accusations made against both ArtForz and coblee. Every single accusation is based only on circumstantial 'evidence' that is demonstrably false.

You've made far too many posts to be so uninformed and apparently disinterested in facts.

I don't believe Artforz didn't know about TMTO. It's like having driving license without knowledge what a break for. Anyway, end of the discussion.

This!.. Add cheap transactions to that one as well.. Sick of Visa/Mastercards/Banks eating the few profits I have on my online store.

If electric and hardware cost is higher than PoW/day reward at that point, then PoW dies regardless of the difficulty and block reward and all mining happens by PoS. Ultimately, reward could be infinite and difficulty zero, if my hashing rate is zero I won't get any coins.

It won't be zero, just really really slow -- so diff 1 or 2.  At difficultly 1, every other hash you make gets a block statistically.  Increasing the amount of resources required to mine (and thus decreasing the difficulty required to solve a block out of necessity) is completely counterintuitive to the energy efficiency model proposed by PPC and later by NVC in their reward adjustment algorithm.

So instead of safely and securely mining the 5% yearly PoS, they would spend a lot of money in energy and hardware and hope the god of the random numbers doesn't yield a wooping total of zero profit. Risk has to be priced in too.

Your definition of fairness is socialism: making as much as everybody else, adjusted for effort. Oh, and of course making as much as everyone else at the cost of someone buying all these coins. Hmm, not quite socialism then. ;)

I'll give it another twist: it is unfair by your definition that you have mined LTC a long time ago where difficulty was low, stashed it away and then sold it for a much higher value than anybody else who sold it after mining it? FRC with demurrage would be more fair by that definition. However, I believe what most people mean by "fair" is that it should make everybody equally rich, quickly and easily.

And here is a last twist: you speak of people seeing or not seeing the value of a crypto. Again, what is the value of a crypto? I'll offer some ideas:
- entertainment (hobby and way to spend time)
- educational (learning about computers, crypto and programs)
- whatever the other guy is willing to pay $$$ (covers speculation and investment)
- a tax efficient way for gambling (BTC trading is the cheapest "lottery" I know of)
- payment processing (yawn, boring)

Unfair is when you intentionally compile a windows client with variables or 'features' that only hinder performance. A similar instance can be seen with intel compilers and their odd performance characteristics when you spoof a "GenuineIntel" vendor ID string....

I honestly believe the dev went out of his way to make the windows version less than optimal and github should be able to provide the necessary evidence.

I see a lot of crying unfair in this thread.

I think a l lot of it has to do with the fact that many people have not solo mined before especially within wallet style.
I got in maybe an hour after launch and got plenty of coins.
I had no special inside info.
I just used what was available to me in the initial thread.
 tl:dr solo mining a fast moving new chain is hard!

Minor nitpick, but since it appears to be based on my report of the hash rate contribution from my 1560 server mining farm experience, it was quite a few more cores than 6000.  800 of the servers were IBM HS21 blade servers containing two Xeon E5450 processors which each have 4 cores, so each server had 8 cores, so 6400 cores for the main server farm.  A Xeon E5450 is pretty similar to a Core2 Quad but with significantly more cache memory tacked on.  The Amazon c1.xlarge instances have 8 cores worth of Xeon E5-2650's, though are shared servers.  Generally the 760 c1.xlarge instances performed at about 2/3 the hash rate of the dual E5450 servers, so we can probably call those equivalent to 2/3 of a dual E5450 server.

So, more accurate estimate would be that around 10450 cores (equivalent to Xeon E5450 cores) constituted about 15% of the hash rate at the time that I stopped mining when difficulty reached 0.1.

I'm still trying to find a point why would someone who apparently mined loads of coins on paid cluster service spend so much energy talking about it in the thread that pretty much has a tone of devaluing coin itself.

Shouldn't such guy have interest in maintaining a low profile, both personal and coinwise to bank most from his effort. Unless he already dumped his mined coins but I haven't see close to that volume being traded here.

Lot of stuff being talked here is legit and I don't have illusion that someone makes a coin without having intention to bank from it on one or other way, that's pretty Mr. Obvious  :D but I can't see logic in windmaster's contribution to it and asked him about it privately but from some reason he decided to ignore me.

...not sure if serious.

I could mine a block at N=2^20 and diff 1 right now, it'd just take a little while to calculate.

Can we close this thread?

MODS!!!

If I fired up a server farm right at the moment the coin was released and mined 6 figures worth of coins, I probably would indeed be keeping a low profile.  But I started 8 hours after launch, and made about as much YAC as, apparently, other posters in this thread who just had a single PC running right from the start.  It's not like someone is going to point the "ohh, that evil person was premining the heck out of Yacoin" finger at me for starting 8 hours in.

To be clear, I mined this coin for fun and entertainment and to make 1600 Xeon processors feel less bored for a while.  8 hours in before starting to mine, it's pretty obvious this wasn't going to be a get-rich-quick opportunity.  I had a data point that pointed toward the network hash rate being a particular number at a certain point in time (when difficulty reached 0.1), and it clearly didn't jive with only CPU power being at play, so I shared that data point.  Looking at the exchange rates in the Google Docs spreadsheet doesn't suggest that the YAC I hold is worth all that much at the immediate moment.  Now, if it hits an exchange and things get more interesting, who knows, maybe I'll sell some.  If I were at risk of, say, paying off my house with the mined YAC, while everyone else just got orphaned blocks, then sure, I might not be particularly vocal about it in the forums.  That doesn't appear to be what's going to happen here though.

I still have all the coins I mined, to answer the private message you sent.


Or, I stepped away for a bit to tend to business (people with >800 blade servers might be a bit busy from time to time, no?) and only then checked my Email when I returned, finding the notification of your private message.  Doesn't take long to spark a conspiracy theory, eh?  What possible motives could I have for taking 3 hours before noticing you sent a private message, I must totally not be legit!

To be clear, your private message didn't actually ask a question, unless you were just asking if I sold off my mined YAC already.  What was the response you were seeking?

best use of jackiechan ever

Not at all, couldn't care less if you sold them or not, it was just kinda strange. It still is a bit but yeah, you put some effort in the explanation, it's fine to me.

Roger that, perhaps I misread the tone of your private message and the post above.  My apologies.

Amusing images to suggest that I was indeed mining YAC on an IBM BladeCenter server farm:

https://i.imgur.com/oaCU8mc.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/ArAI3mw.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/DIizYMW.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/QSlZiCD.jpg

Anyone else notice this?


Pocopoco added a checkpoint via a GitHub pull despite not saying anything at all over here, and at block 15,000 no less.  Why?

YACoin was not launched honestly.  I downloaded it on windows and found out as well very quickly.  Taco is speaking truth.

Should be "YAscamCoin."

In some ways this was worse - because of the pretentious air of fairness and the deception employed.

Everyone knew FTC and CNC were what they were and could hop on or not.

To mitigate 51% attack, no?

This thread has to be closed.

MODS??!?!?

I noticed pocopoco's git pull about a half hour after he did it.  I would guess that all (or a substantial portion) of his own mined blocks are before block 15,000, and he wanted to be sure no one could 51% Yacoin with enough CPU power (or GPU power) to rewrite the blockchain to a point early enough to impact his own coins.  Just my guess.

Possibly, it's hard to tell.  He might also be locking in blocks that are his own if he mined a bulk of them in the first 15k blocks.

You are funny. But it gets on my nerve when people are not telling the truth.

1) I mined very successfully with a hexacore Intel i7 up until difficulty 0.1-0.2. From the number of blocks generated I estimated that I was 1/1000 - 1/600 of the network. Check my posts, I posted that when it happened, not when I felt bitter about not getting enough coins or in need to disprove you. Maybe your setup was wrong.

2) You show a pic of 1 blade rack on a table (!) and want us believe you have access to a whole blade center consuming >200kW power and hence costing 1000$ in power alone to operate per day? How much you'd have to sell your YACs for to be profitable?

3) Did you lose your job already? Seriously if you did what you claim you did, you should be worried! Blade centers like this are operated by companies with >>1.000-10.000 employees. I could have tried to use my employers compute blades (20x2x8 xeon cores). Your Infrastructure team must be morons if they have not seen the traffic/CPU etc and acted upon it.

4) you install possibly harmful software on company resources?!? And possibly disrupt company operations? For a few coins? WELL DONE DUDE!

This is getting more and more bizzarre. Do you argument the same way for checkpoints on the BTC and LTC networks? You don't like a checkpoint because of what? Because it prevents people to attack the network and steal coin? I would think this a very positive thing.

This is a young coin, so the fear of a 51% attack is real. Why would it be good if someone could do that?

BTW, pocopoco did announce the checkpoint in his original thread here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=196196.msg2083242#msg2083242 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=196196.msg2083242#msg2083242). I rest my case. Stop being bitter if you feel that you've missed out.

If anything you can complain that the starting diff was too low (and that you were not online then, see my posts on "fairness"). There are ~2.34 Mio coins out by now. That still is much less than FTC (6.5 Mio) and CNC (5 Mio).

I suspect you're guessing here.  Do you have first-hand knowledge of my data center?  Edit - I had "1000 YAC is yours if you can even correctly guess which US state it's in" here, but then I posted a screen-shot which makes it obvious which timezone I'm in, which significantly cuts down on the number of states I could be in.



Well, good for you and congratulations on your mining success.  I hope you profit greatly from your YAC fortune.  If my setup was wrong, I would've seen a significant number of orphaned blocks and/or would have achieved significantly lower hash rates than avg 300kH/sec per HS21 blade server and 200kH/sec per Amazon c1.xlarge instance.  The reality is, apparently I had very nearly the lowest orphan rate of anyone that has weighed in so far?  I bet that wasn't the result of misconfiguration, and instead happened because I tweaked the client source to form a low-latency mesh amongst my own servers forming a significant portion of the Yacoin network nodes and jacked up the outbound connection count.  Ami right?  :-)

I would imagine you started mining sooner than 8 hours after the launch of the coin, and didn't make your estimate based on your block generation rate right when difficulty reached 0.1.  Otherwise, if you were 1/1000th of the network hash power, you would've been successfully mining between 2 and 2.5 non-orphaned blocks per hour on your 6-core i7 at that point in time.  Or if you were 1/600th of the network hash power, you would've been successfully mining between 3 and 4 non-orphaned blocks per hour.  Is that your claim?  Or did you actually mean that from the coin launch until difficulty reached somewhere between 0.1 and 0.2, you mined between 1/600th and 1/1000th of the "moneysupply" mined by the client?  I would consider that quite possible if you started early, but that's significantly different than what I claimed was occurring when difficulty reached 0.1.



Where is the table (!) in my photos?  It sure looks to me like I have the BladeCenter chassis visible in the photos very obviously mounted in a standard 19" rack.  Did you not see the other 3 photos?  It sorta sounds like you only saw the last of the 4.  If your point is that I did not share a photo showing 58 loaded BladeCenter chassis in a row of racks, you are correct, I did not share such a photo.  And I took the photos with such a ridiculously narrow depth of field.  I must be hiding something pretty interesting in the background that I wasn't willing to share with the world.  Guilty as charged, the depth of field is intentionally narrow and I won't be posting photos of the whole data center.  You'd have no way of knowing I didn't just lift someone else's data center photo off Google Images anyway, unless I went around scribbling silly YAC-specific messages on everything with a Sharpie to prove otherwise.

Your numbers are close, but a bit off, an IBM HS21 w/ 2x E5450's consumes 210W at full load on all cores, taking into account the 92% efficiency of the standard 2000W BladeCenter power supplies.  Each 8677 chassis consumes ~500W to operate the dual fans, AMM and two Ethernet switch modules:

58x 8677 chassis base load:    58 x 500W = 29kW
800x HS21 blades w/ E5450's:  800 x 210W = 168kW

Not including the additional blades used as file servers for all the other blades to network boot from, we're talking about 197kW.  It's >200kW if we count cooling however (62kW more, for 60 tons of HVAC).

Where you're real far off is on power cost:
259kW x $0.065/kWh x 24 hours = $404/day.

We're only talking about an 800A 208V 3-phase service entrance feeding my cluster.  I've seen much larger 3-phase service entrances in warehouses, industrial spaces, even offices.  Nothing particularly exciting or out of the ordinary, no?  Half the homes in my area have 400A 1-phase 120/240V service entrances, and that's already a capacity of apprx 96kW, for an everyday residence.



That's a bit presumptuous.  You've assumed that I do not own the data center and server cluster.  Where exactly are IBM's qualification requirements that restrict sales of BladeCenter components to only "companies with >>1.000-10.000 employees"?  Hell, you can even hop on eBay and snag used BladeCenter chassis all day long for $175/ea shipped and HS21 or HS21 XM blades w/ 2x E5450's and 8GB of ECC RAM for $100/ea to $140/ea shipped.  Zero of my blade servers, chassis and related components were purchased directly from IBM, the whole cluster was built for minimal cost from surplus components.

If such amazing technology as used 4-year-old Xeon blade servers are simply not available to companies without 1000-10000 employees, how did I post a photo showing 14 of them powered on, then another photo with an obviously YAC-specific message written with a Sharpie across the heatsinks of one of the blade servers?  By your logic, this should not have been possible.  Unless I Photoshopped it?

If you're actually curious, my cluster is rented out for large 3D render jobs for film projects.  If I'm between render jobs, I'll certainly do with my hardware as I please.  And I guess my "infrastructure team" will have to just continue twiddling their thumbs watching my bandwidth consumption (wow, a whopping 18Mbps, the world is ending and my dual-homed fiber connections just can't cope with that kind of extreme pressure!).  If you've had any experience with the BladeCenter platform, you may be aware that this hardware doesn't fail particularly often (I can count hardware failures in the last year on one hand) and managing an 800 server cluster is a 1 person job.  Particularly if the entirety of the cluster (other than 2 blades) all network boot the exact same Ubuntu image off the file server blade for batch rendering.  I sure as heck wouldn't hire any network admin that couldn't achieve this simple task..



I'll be sure to remind myself not to install possible harmful software on my own hardware in the future.  Thank you for your concern, however.  I guess for now I'll have to just rely on the fact that I can read and understand everything that the code is doing and can run a diff between pocopoco's code and the NovaCoin source.  Come back and talk when you're no longer a slave to your employer and have achieved a level of IT experience where you are able to pursue your own career path and ambitions.

Given that I have all the correct numbers on power consumption and HVAC heat load for a cluster of this size, perhaps that's sufficient to draw your own judgement.  If not, well, sorry, I have nothing for you.

Are you next going to suggest that there's no way I could have possibly launched the additional 760 c1.xlarge spot instances between the 8 Amazon data centers?  It would've been 800 if the Sao Paulo data center hadn't run out of spot instance availability and set the spot price to whatever amount I was bidding.

Sure Fire way to kill a coin has been demonstrated in this coin

Tacotime has found you dogs out so its bye bye to another piece of junk

Ltc was crusing on ~ 4 cents for over a year and it had a smallish group who wanted to make it a true alt coin to btc and it has now demonstrated this

Instant death is any pre-mine/scams which has now been proven...I understand that who cares ..just after a fast buck ..so lets not pretend there is any other motivation to any defenders of this junk coin...ALl the lies where always going to be found out !!

Like to see how much your YAJunk coins are worth in 24 hours let alone a month

Good bye and So Long Rubbish Coin and your Scammy Launchers

Single i5 2500k:

https://i.imgur.com/uRcpNb1.png

Unless I'm mistaken, the block reward was not ~56.43 YAC at the moment the difficulty reached 0.1.  In fact, the block reward was already lower than that when I *started* mining at around difficulty 0.008 to 0.009.  Your screenshot isn't showing the timeframe we're talking about.

The launch was at 9 am UTC+2. 9 + 8 = 17.

Single HS21 blade server (2x Xeon E5450) when I was first setting up the image to distribute to the remainder of the server cluster.  These were the first Yacoins I mined when I first got going:

https://i.imgur.com/L8sGS2f.jpg

As you can see, the block reward was already lower than what you showed in your screen-shot, and I was landing significantly more blocks than you were, with just 1 server.  Thus, your screen-shot was definitely not at difficulty 0.1.

Additionally, our computers are set to timezones 9 hours apart.  Nifty!

Well, it's 8 hours after start. This is the post that was posted, make sure your forum timezone settings are correct.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=196196.msg2068842#msg2068842

Regardless of whether I had servers commencing mining at 8 hours or 8.5 hours after the coin launched, the discussion is about the block rate and network hash rate at the time the difficulty passed through 0.1, not 0.008.  That happened many hours later than your screen-shot.  As you can see, at difficulty 0.008, I was landing many more blocks than you were, with a 2x Xeon E5450 server prior to turning up the rest of the server cluster.

Epic response! There is even a semi yak-like blue plastic part on that board ;D

Of course I believe, compilation with -O0 flag it's just an accidental bug :D

Point taken.

https://i.imgur.com/kmnYv7k.png

I was using 3 cores by then, I don't have proper cooling. :-\ In the evening I throttled it down with cpulimit, that was like 25% of each core.

Appears that's a different wallet than the above screen-shot though.  The mining addresses shown in the transactions are also interesting, as I've not observed multiple different mining addresses show up in the transaction list when solo mining on a single computer.  I did not closely examine that portion of the source code for the client however.  Anyone else know for sure why bitdwarf has multiple different mining addresses shown in this second screen-shot?

Mmh, does the address change when restarting? I fiddled a lot with the number of cores setting.

Meh this coin needs killing off and someone to start over, good ideas, very very poor execution.

Will any new crypto currency ever really take off when the launch is surrounded by such controversy and prejudice towards some users.


So I propose that we as a whole community start a new coin. We pick a date say 2-3 months in the future (with big countdown clocks, everything) and then the whole community sits down and works everything out, gets everything working and tested, gets to vote on all the intricate little things that make a crypto coin better than it's predecessor. When it has all been decided and tested thoroughly we wait for the predetermined date to start mining along with everyone else in the community.


I could do with someone with a good reputation around the community as the chair person/executor of the idea, someone that will be responsible for full disclosure of ALL details to do with the currency.

Anyone interested please PM me and we can start a ball rolling.

I guess you will be there to mine at time 0 this time, right?
What if I discover this new coin 1 year later? nobody told me I can make huge profit with it, can we relaunch?

The whole point doesn't make sense, get over it

Maybe there's just a misunderstanding.  I never posted that I was bitter that I wasn't getting enough coins.  In fact, I was still raking in quite a bit of YAC at difficulty 0.1, and posted several times that I considered it a fair fight even though I got an 8 hour late start (or actually an 8.5 hour late start as someone pointed out in the meantime in this thread), in response to everyone posting "No fair, I wasn't mining 3 minutes after the coin launched so I missed out!".  Difficulty 0.1 is just the point where I said "Okay, that's enough YAC" and shut down the server cluster and terminated all my Amazon c1.xlarge instances.  And since right around that time, I arrived at a nice even multiple of 10,000 YAC mined, I thought, "Perfect for my random coin collection!"

At that point I made an estimate of what the overall network hash rate might be based on my hash rate vs. my block solving rate.  Did you read me posting something else somewhere, that I wasn't still raking in tons of YAC at that point?

...not as far as I know.  I messed with mine a lot and all my generation blocks have the same coinbase transaction.  It's possible that if you have multiple addresses in the wallet it might use them all, though.

As I said before, I didn't miss out and made a lot of coins myself.

 ;D

want!  :o

Started mining on two i5 2500k at block 12000 with windows 7. Mined a total of 8 blocks (320 coins), 7 on one pc and 1 on the other.

After reading through this and based on my experience mining this release, I'd give the YAC release a much higher grade than any of the other recent ones (I wasn't around for any prior to FTC).

Correct - I have mined 3-4 blocks in less than 2h. There was a new block every 2-4secs if I remember correctly, so 900-1800 new blocks per hour. I switched off yacoin-qt sometimes in between, so there are gaps.
https://i.imgur.com/z18Lwci.png

Photoshop? ;)

I didn't doubt you may have one rack with a few blades. I know that old blades are cheap on ebay, but are pretty power-inefficient, so usually sold off by large companies. Heck, even one of my colleagues had a rack server at home when I was doing my PhD.

Uh, I feel so bad, 3kW short! And that is for someone who is more into statistics than into building blade farms and didn't bother to google it. :D
The error in power costs is easy to explain: UK is more expensive.

Yes, that's interesting. It'd be a nice project to have people rent out their CPU cycles for a distributed renderer instead of mining coins... The upload bandwidth would be a bit shitty and introduce some render latency, but probably negligible.

Hmm, our infra team is a bit larger and we do have quite a few outages throughout the year. But then, we are actually running disks in them that fail, discover Redhat-Linux bugs along the way and monitor network latency very tightly.

Has anyone tried a raspberry pi for this? do you think it can work? How well?

Well been mining 5 hours. with i5 3570k Overclocked to 4400mhz and on i7 laptop. havent found anything. :( sniff sniff

Aaaaand the truth comes out.

..and at 13.5 hours to get it working by someone that really knows what he's doing. I'm guessing the gpu use on YAC is quite low indeed.

I'm truly a fan of your efforts on your coin Taco and I bow to your superior knowledge in all things crypto-currency but what is it with YAC that seems to be such a specific irritation to you?

Looks like over on the other thread, people are starting to weigh in with their own hash rate results.  Of the 4 that have weighed in so far with their own GPU implementation hash rates (me included), only mtrlt achieved really high hash rates.  So I'd say the barrier to entry for people to achieve a GPU implementation is probably still pretty high.  Or else the people with very fast implementations still aren't talking.

They will release it when the difficulty is high enough.