Hi all, Unfortunately I have to announce that MasterPool will shut down its service on the end of February. All information about why this is nessecary and when this will happen can be found on the MasterPool blog. Please have a look there: http://blog.masterpool.eu/2012/01/masterpool-will-shut-down-its-service/ Like always if you have any questions or feedback please use this forum, or the comment section on the blog. Thank you all for your time, effort, feedback and support |
|
|
|
As announced before the pool was switched to PPLNS this night. The next solved blocks will be rewarded using the PPLNS system.
In retrospect, are you glad you made the change to PPLNS? Did you anticipate a higher hash rate? I guess it depends on your point of view. In terms of hashrate it was a success in getting rid of the sudden peaks in hash rates. The hashrate however is (as expected) much lower in comparison to proportional. The last days we see a very slow increase in hashing rate due to about 1-3 new users a day. But IMHO this is not due to PPLNS but more because of the increasing BTC prices. I got very positive feedback from some users regarding their now more constant overall income. Furthermore the payouts increased slightly for constant miners in comparison to proportional payout scheme. However this is feedback from miners who were eager to change to PPLNS thus this may be a one sided view. Personally I'm quite satified with PPLNS. The biggest difference for me speaking as a pool operator is, that I have the possibility to interact with users giving them hints in order to optimize their mining setup. We achieved several improvements on the pool and on their setups which is very rewarding in a small community. This was not possible with pool hoppers. However please keep in mind, that MasterPool is no "business". It's a spare time project and fortunately there is no nessecity for me to make profit. My main focus is to build a rewarding community. Having this in mind I have to say: " Yes I'm glad with changing to PPLNS". However this does not mean, that it's the best option for all pools. If I wanted to make profit I guess it would've been better to stay with proportional. |
|
|
|
@doublec: Didn't have a look at the sources. I remember vinced reduced the number of possible randomized IRC channel names for bootstrapping on namecoin. Perhaps we have a similar problem with i0coind. The number of possible IRC channels might be too much for a few nodes on testnet.
I don't bother with 'official' testnets. I create my own isolated test networks by not connecting to irc, dns, etc and manually bring up nodes connected to each other. It makes it easier to control. Thank you for your feedback. Can anybody confirm if or if not there is an "official" testnet for i0coin? If yes could you please provide IP addresses of seed nodes? Would be greatly appreciated. |
|
|
|
Some users on MasterPool showed interest for i0coin support ( https://www.masterpool.eu/jumble/comment/71). ATM I'm catching up with the latest news on i0coin. My biggest problem ATM is that I'd like to testdrive merged mining with i0coin as AUX chain but I'm unable to bootstrap on testnet and thus can't fire up alpha.masterpool.eu with i0coin support. Neither DNS nor IRC seed seems to be working  @doublec: Didn't have a look at the sources. I remember vinced reduced the number of possible randomized IRC channel names for bootstrapping on namecoin. Perhaps we have a similar problem with i0coind. The number of possible IRC channels might be too much for a few nodes on testnet. |
|
|
|
Who are the namecoin developers? I am frustrated with it seeming to go nowhere for months, I think there needs to be fresh blood contributing it.
Vinced is the developer. However some other persons (including khalahan and me) have write access to the repository. So if you are interested or know anybody who wants to improve the code just leave a thread on dot-bit.org forum. |
|
|
|
Just stumbled across this post. For those people not too tech savvy MasterPool.EU provides a very easy step by step procedure to get a firefox .bit enabled: https://www.masterpool.eu/proxy. For those of you who are already using Foxy Proxy and don't want to overwrite your existing configuration just add http://proxy.masterpool.eu:8080/ for .bit Domains. But please keep in mind, that MasterPool Proxy is ONLY proxying .bit domains. Thus the use of something like FoxyProxy which chooses proxies by RegEx or String is nessecary if you still want to browse ICANN Domains  Hope this helps. |
|
|
|
wie bereits angekündigt bin ich nun nachdem viele Features im Pool implementiert wurden auch mit der deutschen Übersetzung von masterpool.eufertig geworden. www.MasterPool.eu war der erste Pool, der Merged Mining implementiert hat und der einzige, der bereits in der Testphase im Testnet lief. Er startete bereits Mitte Juli zunächst als Namecoin Pool. Mit der Einführung von Merged Mining kam neben der Namecoin auch die Bitcoin Blockchain hinzu. Da es sich um einen Proportional Pool handelte beschwerten sich nach einiger Zeit loyale Miner über die massive Menge von Pool Hoppern und das Auszahlungssystem wurde in PPLNS (Pay Per Last N Shares) umgewandelt. Der Pool ist erprobt und stabil und hat bei Peaks bereits über 350 GHash/s locker weggesteckt. Mit dem Verfall des Bitcoin Preises gingen auch viele Miner. Ich hoffe jedoch, dass der Preis nachdem er vorsichtig die drei Dollarmarke erklommen hat wieder etwas steigen wird und die Miner zurückkehren. Mit dem heutigen Tage wurde das Webinterface ins deutsche übersetzt. Ich würde mich sehr freuen, Euch bei uns begrüßen zu dürfen. Hier noch einige Details zum Pool: - PPLNS Auszahlungssystem
- Keine Mininggebühren. Stattdessen gibt es Auszahlungsgebühren
- Automatische Nächtliche Auszahlungen (1% Gebühren)
- Sofortige Auszahlungen (2% Gebühren)
- Mikroforum auch in deutsch für Feedback, Vorschläge und Smalltalk
- JSON Statistiken für den Pool und Deine Miner
- Englischsprachiger Thread hier im Forum: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=42667
|
|
|
|
Ich würde, denke ich, soweit möglich die englischen Begriffe nutzen, da diese in dem Zusammenhang BTC meiner Meinung nach eher als "International" anzusehen sind, als als "Fremdwörter". Klar, es sind englische Begriffe. Aber "Arbeiter" und "Blockkette oder -reihe" oder "Schürfprogramm" hört sich einfach extrem komisch an  Ja, nach einigem probieren habe ich diesen Entschluß auch gefasst. Ich verwende die Begriffe aus dem Englischen, wie du vorgeschlagen hast. Spätestens, wenn ich die deutschen Begriffe in den Text eingestreut habe kam es mir irgendwie merkwürdig vor. Ich hatte den Eindruck eines Beamten- oder Telekomdeutsch auf Speed  |
|
|
|
|
As announced before the pool was switched to PPLNS this night. The next solved blocks will be rewarded using the PPLNS system.
|
|
|
|
Blockreihe vielleicht auch. Kette klingt für mich so nach Kettenbrief.
Ja, das klingt auch nach meinem Sprachempfinden deutlich besser. Obwohl dadurch die Assoziation des "ineinandergreifens" und somit "verzahnens" der einzelnen Blöcke verloren geht Andererseits kann man vermutlich ohnehin davon ausgehen, dass alle, die sich für BTC und NMC interessieren zumindest ansatzweise verstehen, wie es funktioniert. Für API könnt man Schnittstelle sagen, wenn's sein muss.
Hier besteht natürlich das Problem, dass es manchmal eine Übersetzung in gleicher Länge geben sollte um das Layout nicht zu sprengen. Schon komisch, das wir in Deutschland hierfür keine Entsprechung haben. Ich denke, ich werde wohl bei API bleiben. |
|
|
|
Haven't been able to login to my dashboard for a couple of days. Is there a fix coming?
Yeah must be quite a couple of days It seems you face a problem with some cookies we had last month: Have a look at this Jumble. This should fix it: https://www.masterpool.eu/jumble/comment/52Thank you for being that patient. However please don't hesitate to post on the Forum, Twitter, or Jumble if you experience such problems. Furthermore you can always contact support@ via email. There is no need to wait a couple of days for problems to get fixed. Just drop a line and I'll try to sort it out. |
|
|
|
Ich übersetze momentan meinen Pool ins deutsche. Wie so häufig steht man hier vor der Frage, wieviele Anglizismen man übernimmt und was man am besten übersetzen sollte. Zwanghaftes eindeutschen klingt oftmals krampfig. Andererseits macht es vielleicht Sinn einige Begrifflichkeiten zu Übersetzen. Für einige Begrifflichkeiten gibt es auch bereits eine "innoffizielle" deutsche Übersetzung, die man manchmal hier im Forum oder auf deutschen BTC Seiten liest. Einige davon finde ich sehr ansprechend andere wiederum nicht. Wie seht Ihr das? Was spricht Euch eher an? Nutzt Ihr auch im deutschen die englischen Begriffe? Bisher bin ich über folgende Begriffe gestolpert:
Blockchain - Blockkette (Irgendwie assoziiere ich Fahrrad damit )
Share - Anteil (Sehr allgemein. An was denn?)
Miner - Schürfprogramm (Analogie zum Goldwaschen. Hier im Forum mal gelesen. Fand ich ansprechend)
mining - schürfen
Pool - Pool (Als IT-ler finde ich, man kann es so stehen lassen. Was meint Ihr?)
Confirmations - Bestätigungen
Worker - Arbeiter
Userbar - ? (Gibt es eine deutsche Entsprechung für diese Poolimages, die man in seine Signatur packt?)
API (key) - ? (Wie übersetzt man API. Hört man häufig auch im deutschen? API-Schlüssel ist IMHO okay?!) |
|
|
|
As already announced we’ll change the reward system from proportional to PPLNS. This will happen on 26. Nov 2011 00:00 UTC. The first block on each blockchain solved after that date will be rewarded as PPLNS block. If you need some more information on PPLNS please have a look at the blog as I compiled some information there: http://blog.masterpool.eu/2011/11/pplns-facts-and-myths/If you are still missing some information don’t hesitate to discuss it on the blog, the forum or on jumble. |
|
|
|
Proportional pools still exist because the regular miners who are getting robbed blind want them.
I guess in most cases they are not well informed. Proportional is very easy to understand while other PPLNS or even the geometric methods are not as easy to understand. I have to admit that before some of my miners demanded to choose another reward system I was fine with proportional too. Only after I wrapped my head around PPLNS and pool hopping I saw its benefits. However I needed to explain it to some of the pool members in order to convince them ( http://blog.masterpool.eu/2011/11/pplns-facts-and-myths/). The other problem is that there is no benefit for pool operators to implement another reward system as long as the pool members are fine with its policy. It means more work, more testing, perhaps new errors. Thus pool operators will only move if miners put them under pressure by moving to non proportional pools. Fortunately I have some very insistent pool members which made me consider PPLNS Perhaps we need something in between Menis technical abstracts and my very simplified blog post on the forum and on the Wiki. At the moment even if you heard about PPLNS or geometrical you are not able to find easy to understand information which are suitable for the occasional miner. |
|
|
|
Yeah, I agree That's the reason why MasterPool is switching to PPLNS. Have a look at https://masterpool.eu/statisticsThis charts are averaged over 24 hours. After finding a block we have spikes of about 300 GHash/s. This is not a problem for the pool, but members opted for PPLNS in order to avoid pool hopping. It is implemented and will be activated within the next weeks. IMHO this started with BTC prices falling to $3. I can understand that most miners need to increase their income. But for the loyal pool members this is a problem  |
|
|
|
I wanted to give some quick updates on the PPLNS progress. PPLNS is up and running on https://alpha.masterpool.eu which is running on testnet. Feel free to register and play a bit, but keep in mind that it is still alpha We have a neat new feature which I called round explorer. Due to the design of PPLNS you will sometime be awarded for shares that was committed in previous rounds or you may loose shares if the round is very long. In order to keep the calculations transparent I'll introduce the round explorer. Here is an example: https://alpha.masterpool.eu/statistics/block/5ef6c40fab320bb1c08db96e924945d568ecc809241af8da8e32e114d3a2ad38Both blockchains on MasterPool alpha use a difficulty modificator of 2 at the moment. This may change before the new version is rolled out to production. If a block is found (difficulty * 2) previous shares are used to calculate the reward. On the round explorer above you'll find your real submitted valid and total shares but also your amount of shares that were used in order to calculate the PPLNS reward (if it was a PPLNS round). At the moment we have the funny situation, that NMC difficulty is twice as high as BTC difficulty on testnet, thus expect to get more NMC than BTC. This is not a bug but a feature Please feel free to come up with suggestions for improvement. |
|
|
|
your survey is invalid, 80% of those who didn't vote obviously do not want any changes otherwise they would vote, rest who voted are 54% vs. 46%
if you want a change - do it, but don't claim it was voted for, let's see what happen with those 80% that haven't voted, will they leave or stay?
From what I can tell most of those 80% who didn't vote were inactive for quite some time. For sure they didn't either respond to the invitation to the survey nor to the reminder send out after some time. Thus I guess they already left or they didn't care. Nearly 20% response rate on a customer survey with this preconditions is very good and quite representative. |
|
|
|
No that would mean he was lying about how hard it was to setup as he already had it done, totally eliminating the excuse he and others use for having done it in the dark without anyone's knowledge when he was doing it on the real chain.
This starts to become boring... Linking the relevant information for you: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=42667.msg566146#msg566146Yes, it was tested. Yes the binaries were ready at this time. Yes we already mined a bunch on testnet. BTC testnet had difficulty of about 500 something and NMC testnet difficulty was about 5 something. But no one has done merged mining on production net before NMC block 19500. It was impossible. Even if he would have done it his NMC would have been invalidated or ophaned. Furthermore no one had tested merged mining on a 2 THash/s pool infrastructure optimized for only one blockchain. If you have an optimized server it's not like installing an additional APP and there we go: "Merged mining is ready!". You have to recalibrate and rebalance your whole infrastructure. Honestly. I think most guys are not here to understand what really happened but want to spin some weird conspiracy theory. For that reason I'll unsubscribe this thread. Bye  Edit: Yeah sorry. I messed this up. It's late. Merged mining started on block 19200. Perhaps I should keep subscribed to that thread to see which spin it gets due to me revoking different information |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
