2 litoshi
That's what I wrote above already. A good opportunity for a cheap buy-in. |
|
|
|
Cryptsy at 2/3 Litoshi. A whale could make the deal of his lifetime ...  |
|
|
|
How can Keccak in a NIST5 chain turn in a faster performance than when running alone?
Is it? Do you have some charts/data for that? The graphic above only shows temperature and wattage, right? |
|
|
|
It's not me  |
|
|
|
I think, you did not understand what I meant. I wasn't referring to the overall hashrate of the whole clevermining-pool including all users, but the single hashrate of one user.
Why is it dropping, if you count each and every submitted share even of the previous mined coins, after the pool switched? If it was like this, the hashrate could not drop from let's say 80 MH/sec to 60 MH/sec. for some time (sometimes 5 minutes or more), right?
Then I think you don't understand what is “hashrate reported by the pool”. Let me explain. The pool doesn't know your hashrate. It can only estimate it based on number of shares which your miner submits, so what the pool shows is only an estimation. You miner knows your exact hashrate because it knows how many hashes it calculated. But it only sends to the pool hashes that meet required difficulty (they're called shares) and the pool estimates your hashrate based on these submitted shares (based on knowledge than it takes X MH/s to find one Y-difficulty share per second). But number of shares which your miner finds varies wildly as mining is a kinda-random game. Sometimes you find 10 shares in a minute, sometimes you won't find even a single share in a minute. If you look at 5-minute values then your hashrate estimated based on shares submitted can jump between 60 and 80 MH/s and even more. The shorter the timespan the bigger the variance. Just like in throwing a dice. If you throw a dice three times and look at each result individually then you can get 1, 3 and 6. If you throw 30 times and take 10-throw averages then you can get 3, 3.6, 4.1. If you throw it 300 times and take 100-throw averages then you can get 3.4, 3.5, 3.6. It's the same with checking 5-minute, 1-hour and 24-hour mining averages. What you want to compare is 24-hour average, anything less is just too vulnerable to variance. Nothing new here to me. I'm talking about the reported hashrate over at least 24 hrs. On other pools 80 MH/sec. out of the miner means ~79 MH/sec. reported at the pool side. On your pool it means ~76-78 at best, caused by the massive break-ins (presumably when the coins switch?) and times when the hashrate drops seriously (sometimes even below 70 MH/sec. for a longer time). Wafflepool is the best example on how to use the hashrate the most effective - at least for switching pools (on P2Pools with only one coin the miners output is 82-84 MH/sec. and yields 80-82 net/pool-side hashrate, only to mention it). Aside from the problem, that they only have a reported profitability of ~72% for Scrypt-coins at the moment. But that's another story and not related to the difference between submitted and paid-for hashrate (I hope so, at least ...). Edit: Just tested your US-server for several hrs, but the result seems to be worse (of course, presumably because of the longer latencies, but you never really know in advance and have to test it), so now switched back to your EU-one. |
|
|
|
Development of MOON seems to be stuck at a stand still, serious efforts to revive it need to be taken asap.
Did you vote on https://www.coinpayments.net/vote ? If not, the development is in fact at a stand still, because this is something the developer cannot improve - even with any changing of everything. I am selling off half of my holdings on coinedup and investing in more promising PoS coins.
Sorry guys I can't hold on forever with no chance of even getting ROI from MOON in sight.
Why don't you sell everything instead and never come back? Maybe you should invest into LTC, which is at the same stand still (in respect of a working coin). Or DOGE, with its massive price drop. Sorry, but I cannot see any real problem other than impatient investors that are only complaining, instead of being a creative part of the community. Again: Have you voted on Coinpayments? Thanks! Sorry to be some kind of rude, but we as a community have to fill the coin with life. --> Edit: See the Supermoon: http://www.welt.de/wissenschaft/weltraum/article130099824/Supermond-erleuchtet-das-Kap-Sounion.htmlTo Da Moon - nearer than ever ...  |
|
|
|
Which of which? Couldn't find anything regarding a giveaway-voting behind your link. And why don't you post that in that BLZ-thread? |
|
|
|
Important:Have you all already voted for getting Mooncoin to Coinpayments.net? If not, please do so here: https://www.coinpayments.net/voteRemember: it is of highest importance to USE the coin. And using the coin is done by spending it. And since we need a coin-processer for merchants, so that they can accept Mooncoin for payments in their shops, please vote! Even if you are "only" an investor, you should vote there, because if the coin is being USED, it is worth more, so the price can rise - which, I think, will be good for you. Thanks to you all! BTW: Please spread the word about voting for MOON. Need 0.001BTC. So you really want to tell us, that you cannot spare 0.001 BTC, which equals ~0.6 USD? If BTC as such is the problem, you can also donate in LTC or DOGE. So if you own some Mooncoin, you could exchange them for DOGE or LTC and then vote for our coin on https://www.coinpayments.net/voteRemember: The donation is a charitable contribution, as described on the site. Thank you! |
|
|
|
Important:Have you all already voted for getting Mooncoin to Coinpayments.net? If not, please do so here: https://www.coinpayments.net/voteRemember: it is of highest importance to USE the coin. And using the coin is done by spending it. And since we need a coin-processer for merchants, so that they can accept Mooncoin for payments in their shops, please vote! Even if you are "only" an investor, you should vote there, because if the coin is being USED, it is worth more, so the price can rise - which, I think, will be good for you. Thanks to you all! BTW: Please spread the word about voting for MOON.
|
|
|
|
The primary claims are couched in classic marketing-speak “The Groestl algorithm is possibly the single most GPU-efficient algorithm implemented in any cryptocoin on the market.” “A comparison between many different algorithms shows that it has the lowest power consumption, heat, and noise of the array of newer ones being implemented in cryptocoins.” I prefer more more traditional promotional vacuities: “The Groestl algorithm: farm fresh and quality assured.” I'm particularly keen to see a balanced discussion. Thus far, all the discussion has been about changing the coin's economics to better suit the objectives of the miners. Basically, this one-sidedness is increasing the risk that the tilt in favour of miners, already noticeably acute, will become even more angled away from the non-miner and with billions of MOON to be generated, the only way this coin can survive is by embracing the community of coin-users that gave the currency the velocity that was assumed in the original formulation and who now, after much Mooncoin inaction, understandably have found other interests to pursue.
I'm also of the opinion that we need to focus on what the average Joe-Moonie needs. In my opinion it is relatively irrelevant, on which algo a coin is based. If you get attention of the normal users first, the coin will gather importance. If it gathers importance, the price will rise. If the price rises, the miners will get their rewards and are content (edit: btw, if you look at www.cointweak.com, Mooncoin is not doing bad already in terms of mining-profitabilty, compared to all the other Scrypt-based coins, including DOGE - just sayin'). So we have to focus what we want: Do we wanna please the miners or the users of the coin? If we wanna please the miners: Do we wanna please those with big machines (ASIC-monsters) or do we focus on the next best algo, that has to be switched again after the next best ASIC-monster-developer finds a way to create a miner, that can mine this multi-criss-cross-double-special-algo-mixer-miracle ...? |
|
|
|
I'd also say, that this is the main problem.
It works like this:
The miner is working on a coin, while the pool already switched to another coin. The miner submits the done work to the pool and the pool answers: "Don't give me these results, they are no longer valid, because we are already working on another coin", throws it into the bin, and the submitted work is not counted for your REAL hashrate (the "pool-hashrate"). That explains the difference between what the mining-software shows and what the clevermining-website displays.
This isn't the case at CleverMining. When we switch to a new coin, all old work for previously mined coins is still valid and will be accepted (until there is a new block at these other coins which will obviously invalidate the work). This is the reason why you should never use --no-submit-stales at coin-switch pool. We do things the smart way and always accept work for previously mined coins. (if we didn't, rejected percentage would be an order of magnitude higher). OK, if it works like you describe, why are there massive break-ins in the hashrate from time to time, which causes a really severe lowering of the overall hashrate? On other pools, that don't switch, it doesn't occur. If all submitted work counts, a drop in hashrate should not even be the case, when the pool switches to the next coin. Because some users are switching between coin-switch pools if temporary pool results/luck is lower than usual, while people mining at a single-coin pools don't do this. Some people don't understand that even coin-switch pools have their variance and good/bad luck and it's best to pick the best pool based on long-term results (or other features/qualities you like) and stick to it. (because if the pool has good results in the long term, then a worse than average period will be followed by better than average period and you will be fine in the long term if you stay. If you switched away after worse than average period you will miss the better than average period and your total results won't be as good as if you didn't switch away) I think, you did not understand what I meant. I wasn't referring to the overall hashrate of the whole clevermining-pool including all users, but the single hashrate of one user. Why is it dropping, if you count each and every submitted share even of the previous mined coins, after the pool switched? If it was like this, the hashrate could not drop from let's say 80 MH/sec to 60 MH/sec. for some time (sometimes 5 minutes or more), right? |
|
|
|
To the coin Dev'sWhat is the status of coin development? Without active development and reports interest will continue to fall. Why the F**k am I still holding coins  PoS need to be implemented for bagholders At the moment the coin just works. So what is the REAL problem? |
|
|
|
Any idea, why your Pool does not show up in the node-scanner-list? Normally it finds each and every P2Pool-node, that is setup as a public one. Could you check with the NOMP-developer on how to set it up to be found? Would be nice. |
|
|
|
Hello,
Is mooncoin dead?
I have one gaw fury that i not use right now, Is it wise to let my Gaw fury mine only mooncoin?
The more interesting question is: Why do you have a GAW Fury that you "don't use right now"? A friend (running the technical stuff, mentions we could use this miners to mine a dying coin for fun. What is the sense of this? Keep in mind, that the Coinwarz-calculator does not work, because it assumes a BTC-market, which is not existent for Mooncoin at the moment. The better choice for comparing Mooncoin is www.cointweak.com$0,95 a furry each hour seems a bit optimistic, other hand difficulty is all time low.
We have 6 fury`s for this small extra project. Maybe start a private pool?
See the posting above regarding Mooncoin-P2Pool. Would be a good choice. But only if you prefer a living coin. For a dying one, look elsewhere ...  |
|
|
|
Hello,
Is mooncoin dead?
I have one gaw fury that i not use right now, Is it wise to let my Gaw fury mine only mooncoin?
The more interesting question is: Why do you have a GAW Fury that you "don't use right now"? |
|
|
|
I'd also say, that this is the main problem.
It works like this:
The miner is working on a coin, while the pool already switched to another coin. The miner submits the done work to the pool and the pool answers: "Don't give me these results, they are no longer valid, because we are already working on another coin", throws it into the bin, and the submitted work is not counted for your REAL hashrate (the "pool-hashrate"). That explains the difference between what the mining-software shows and what the clevermining-website displays.
This isn't the case at CleverMining. When we switch to a new coin, all old work for previously mined coins is still valid and will be accepted (until there is a new block at these other coins which will obviously invalidate the work). This is the reason why you should never use --no-submit-stales at coin-switch pool. We do things the smart way and always accept work for previously mined coins. (if we didn't, rejected percentage would be an order of magnitude higher). OK, if it works like you describe, why are there massive break-ins in the hashrate from time to time, which causes a really severe lowering of the overall hashrate? On other pools, that don't switch, it doesn't occur. If all submitted work counts, a drop in hashrate should not even be the case, when the pool switches to the next coin. |
|
|
|
No guts, no glory.
Why not invest a little in a coin that (psychologically) can fill the need for super tiny micro payments on the Net? the underrated Dogecoin sister.
This crypto thing has barely even started. Just think of the possibilities if it would ever enter into a phase similar to the days of the Internet boom. Exciting....
Most people will see this as beating a dead horse by now. It would have been different if the coin is one of a kind but there are like hundreds of alt coins out there with new ones coming almost everyday. I admire your persistence though, I wish you good luck in your investment strategy. "Most people" also think that Bitcoin is a dead horse by now. Because it was the first Cryptocurrency, ready to be overtaken by another. Then came Litecoin, that was celebrated as ASIC-resistant, the worlds best feature at all. But not anymore ... Now there are n-scrypt, X11, X13, Groestl etc. pp, all with new features and - of course - "one of a kind", exactly like Bitcoin and Litecoin, like Vertcoin, and so on and on ... So why would anyone buy into any cryptocurrency at all? Why is there more than one car brand in the world? Why is there not only one smartphone manufacturer or only one wheat producer? Why is there not only one "world-currency"? Please explain, why people are buying into all those different "dead horses" ...  |
|
|
|
Hello, I'm a new noob, but i'm interresting into Mooncoin. It's a good thing to see developper Still working on this coin, for improving it. I've Just Downloaded the wallet, Could i have some Moon to try please ? 2ZmWoxQ2TpYGwvKyfAjPYcTzVit66DRKuE Just sent you 10000. |
|
|
|
Now i have 6billions ijijiji And this week i'll buy again at 5 litoshi and 6 litoshi There is a lot of them Good idea. Mooncoin is really underestimated. A good time to buy, for sure. And it is even a good time to mine, if you look here: http://cointweak.com/MOON above most of the other Scrypt-based coins, in terms of profitability (at least if you have cheap electricity OR an ASIC-miner). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
