Good job figuring things out, but either wikipedia lied or you looked at the GT 720 which indeed seems to be compute 3.5 while the GT 720M is 2.1 according to https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-gpusUnfortunately some of the ccminer X11 kernels need compute 3.0 to work, therefore you're SOL. Short version: no go. Well, bollocks then. I'll fire up sgminer on a 270 rig.  |
|
|
|
I also think is unreasonable to expect big pools to disappear or to enforce something into the coin that will exclude them, in my opinion, free market should be king. I don't think anybody disagrees that having a larger percentage of hash power coming through p2pool is a worthy cause. Not everybody agrees on the apocalyptic view on big pools though, so looking to enforce something at the protocol level is not a good strategy for your cause in my opinion.
So, just because a loophole in Satoshi's system allows blockchain security to be thrown away, we should just shrug and not do anything about it at a protocol level, to fix it? Just hope for the best, eh? p2pool is already easier to use, but hardly anyone does. One more guide on how to do something that's already simpler than using most pools isn't going to have any effect. |
|
|
|
Is there something to stop botnets from mass mining this coin?
There's nothing to stop botnets, besides basic security practices, from ransacking GPU rigs all over the world either. I know people it's happened to. |
|
|
|
p2pool is already easier to use than centralised pools are.  No registration or setting up workers, just point your miner at the nearest p2pool node with your Darkcoin address as your username and password anything. Added bonus that the pool op can't run off with or lose your money, plus lower fees. Anyway, solo-mining is a better option IMO, avoids the p2pool dust problem, and the Spreadcoin solution seems to work perfectly so far, and Spreadcoin is based on Darkcoin, just uses a slightly modified X11 algo to get rid of the centralising parasites. My pool needs no registration, DRK wallet for your worker name and anything for password and 5+ months of consistent payments speak for itself. Not to mention you can use SHA & Scrypt asic's to earn DRK. I can understand your passion for P2P but it isn't the be all end all. Cheers Your pool is kind of a special case. I am concerned about blockchain security, not miner income, because that's what users and investors will be concened about too. Nobody is going to put serious money into a currency that depends for security on 2 or 3 poolservers. Not ever. If DRK and other PoW coins don't address this they will remain nothing but toys. |
|
|
|
you are linking to an unsafed message ?! Croutons Campaign for Basic Organisational Skills continues! Corrected, thanks tungfa!  Are you going to project manage P2Pool 2.0 and make the interface granny proof? p2pool is already easier to use than centralised pools are. No registration or setting up workers, just point your miner at the nearest p2pool node with your Darkcoin address as your username and password anything. Added bonus that the pool op can't run off with or lose your money, plus lower fees. Anyway, solo-mining is a better option IMO, avoids the p2pool dust problem, and the Spreadcoin solution seems to work perfectly so far, and Spreadcoin is based on Darkcoin, just uses a slightly modified X11 algo to get rid of the centralising parasites. |
|
|
|
you are linking to an unsafed message ?! Croutons Campaign for Basic Organisational Skills continues! Corrected, thanks tungfa! |
|
|
|
Trying to compile the nvidia miner, getting this error on make: /bin/bash: nvcc: command not found
make[2]: *** [cuda_util.o] Error 127
I haven't edited the NVCC_GENCODE = -gencode=arch=compute_50,code=\"sm_50,compute_50\" line in Makefile.am as per the readme as I don't know what I should change it to. I have a 720M in my laptop, can anyone help? (I usually mine on AMD cards, never tried with anything nvidia before.) edit: wikipedia suggested my GPU was compute 3.5, so after installing NVIDIA CUDA toolkit and changing the above line to NVCC_GENCODE = -gencode=arch=compute_35,code=\"sm_35,compute_35\" it is continuing to compile, hurrah! edit2: OK, after creating a spreadcoin.conf and adding this: rpcuser=me
rpcpassword=meme
rpcallowip=127.0.0.1
listen=1
server=1
daemon=1
I restarted the QT client and ran the miner: ./spreadminer -o http://127.0.0.1:41677 -u me -p meme
*** Spreadminer 0.1 - a SpreadX11 miner for nVidia GPUs ***
based on ccminer 1.2 Copyright 2014 Christian Buchner, Christian H.
based on pooler-cpuminer 2.3.2 (c) 2010 Jeff Garzik, 2012 pooler
SpreadX11 additions by tsiv
[2014-12-02 14:47:11] 1 miner threads started, using 'spreadx11' algorithm.
[2014-12-02 14:47:11] GPU #0: GeForce GT 720M, 7952 khash/s
[2014-12-02 14:47:11] GPU #0: GeForce GT 720M, 3554812 khash/s
And that's all it outputs. Nvidia settings app reports GPU temp up to a steady 51C and fan is whirring but there's no further console output, is this normal? |
|
|
|
I understand your desire to have choices, but comparing DRK to Apple is fighting talk.  Default on in the QT client benefits all DS users and doesn't do anyone any harm, if you want to use Darkcoin transparently (say you're just interested in IX and don't care about privacy) you could click a button and do so. Seems reasonable to me? What seems odd to me is having it OFF by default. It suggests a lack of confidence in the process. Like buying a V10 Ferrari and having to go out of your way to fire up the other 9 cylinders. Crypto will never be as big as Apple whilst the majority of Linux developers call the general public "stupid" for not being able to run a computer via a command line. It requires a complete paradigm shift that's going to take a while to set in. Apple are there already, which is why they are the worlds most valuable company  Apple's paper marketcap is bigger than every traded company in Russia combined - ie, it's hugely, vastly, ridiculously, comically, hideously overinflated. |
|
|
|
EDIT: a transition to an 8 chain default would seem to have a negative impact on user experience based upon this analysis. Waiting 24hrs seems excessive.
Not neccessarily true. On testnet DRK is cheap, we play with lots of it, for a user on mainnet with say a few hundred DRK, the process could be very swift. And if DS was on by default it would be very swift indeed. |
|
|
|
 well that just happened on my first bet on 19. My lucky numbers are 10 and 19....10 came out when I was playing odds/even...so I'm like...what the heck...let's see if 19 comes out next. Put in a 1DRK bet and won! Too bad I didn't have more balls to do higher haha. Is that roulette with a standard 36+0 layout? Because at 100-1 payout I see a viable system... |
|
|
|
Devs, you need an exchange in India where you can but direct in rupees, or buy with phone credit or whatever.
Forget cryptognat crooked bullshit like bittrex/cryptsy etc., they're worthless to you, concentrate on your target market.
We are trying to do this, there are a few exchanges we are in contact with from asia. Im sure it will happen. cheers sir crouton bad idea, look at DEPO https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=729189.0 it failed. Crypto exchanges are needed ! Im referring to Crypto exchanges in asia, if some of them offer fiat then its their choice. BTER is a good start, but I don't know any Indian crypto exchanges ! Anyway you need bittrex/Cryptsy or C-CEX too. +1 Guys, we need best exchanges for this coin! I want customers buying and using Bollywoodcoins. Bollocks to useless daytraders. If an exchange wants to add it then fine, but putting effort or money into getting any exchange to list it is a waste of that time and money. Bring the coin to its intended users so that they can use it, that's how actual value is created, everything else is secondary. The only way to get a value associated with bollywoodcoin is via supply and demand. else these coins would be worth nothing. Also for those who are not mining , the only way to access it is via an exchange. Yep. In India and amongst the target demographic. With a simple fiat/Bollywoodcoin exchange. What about a wesellbollywoodcoins website? |
|
|
|
I'd be for that but not sure how that would work with exchanges and pools.
QT client default ON, darkcoind default OFF. Then you wouldn't be able to say it's automatic or mandatory if there would still be an option for those to get around having to do it from the start. I think just having DS on by default in the QT client would greatly speed the mixing process. How many regular users are going to mess about with it or run the daemon instead? Why would they? DRK is a private coin, if you don't care about privacy there's BTC. i like to have choices and the way Darksend is setup right now it gives me choices. What yr proposing (or whats being proposed) is basicly converting Darksend into an Apple rolemodel with very few choices... i dont like it. I understand your desire to have choices, but comparing DRK to Apple is fighting talk. Default on in the QT client benefits all DS users and doesn't do anyone any harm, if you want to use Darkcoin transparently (say you're just interested in IX and don't care about privacy) you could click a button and do so. Seems reasonable to me? What seems odd to me is having it OFF by default. It suggests a lack of confidence in the process. Like buying a V10 Ferrari and having to go out of your way to fire up the other 9 cylinders. |
|
|
|
I'd be for that but not sure how that would work with exchanges and pools.
QT client default ON, darkcoind default OFF. Then you wouldn't be able to say it's automatic or mandatory if there would still be an option for those to get around having to do it from the start. I think just having DS on by default in the QT client would greatly speed the mixing process. How many regular users are going to mess about with it or run the daemon instead? Why would they? DRK is a private coin, if you don't care about privacy there's BTC. |
|
|
|
I'd be for that but not sure how that would work with exchanges and pools.
QT client default ON, darkcoind default OFF. edit: How much of a problem would it really be for exchanges anyway? Remember that exchanges have a disproportionate relevance in the speculative stage, which we're still in. They become less important as adoption and use increase. I don't see why exchanges shouldn't be anonymising their coins too, same as everyone else. All users would benefit. And I don't care about centralised pools, they're just parasites. |
|
|
|
The more the rounds, the deeper the anonymity. 2 rounds is already crazy good, 8 is like ultra-mode.
I don't think you need to give people the option for less than 8 rounds. People anon'ing their coins won't care if it takes a bit longer to go the additional rounds if it cuts the percentage down by a ton. After all, this is a privacy-centric coin at heart. Thing is, you could pause darksend as it reach's 4 rounds, use coin control to select the coins with 4 rounds and send those. Unless you made them undependable until they reach 8 rounds, which is bullshit anyway. Users can asses the risk involved and make a sound judgment on how many rounds are appropriate. I like the option of 1-8, infact why not 1-100? 1 is out of the question (3) and 100 is extreme (1.2676506e30). As for the rounds, you would remove the input factor leaving the start button. I see two viable pathways at this point, locks on the coins entering the round process to prevent them from being able to be spent (much like instantx locks coins) or disabling the ability to stop it once started. There is no reason why going 8 rounds has to take longer than a few hours assuming there are people darksending. I dream of a day when there is enough activity that 8 rounds would literally take 8 blocks. If this is out of the question, simply putting a table underneath the option of rounds setting specifying the percentage might be enough to show people to go 8 rounds. I'd go one further - 8 automatic and mandatory rounds. You can't spend until your coins have been anonymised. It would speed up mixing hugely. |
|
|
|
I'd argue the min MN chain should be at least 4 long.
Assuming (with medium paranoia settings) that the "bad guy" has a handle on 10%-20% of MN's (100-250 nodes), then with a 2 MN chain length the above numbers predict between a 1%-4% chance of a de-anonymization. This is far too high IMO.
There should be no option to select rounds... it should be 8 minimum with those that want added mixing to go above that. With no fees per round, it makes sense not to have less anon'd coins (those in which the user chooses less than 8 rounds). What are the drawbacks (if any) of increasing the number of rounds from a default of 2 to 8? EDIT: I guess it'll take longer but will this be mitigated by InstantTX? For that matter will DarkSend and InstantTX be compatible/interoperable (used simultaneously) Darksend is the process of coin anonymisation. You anonymise your coins before sending them, if you choose to. It has nothing to do with InstanTX, you can IX anonymised coins, or non anonymised coins, or both. IX will not speed the Darksend anonymisation process. |
|
|
|
Devs, you need an exchange in India where you can but direct in rupees, or buy with phone credit or whatever.
Forget cryptognat crooked bullshit like bittrex/cryptsy etc., they're worthless to you, concentrate on your target market.
We are trying to do this, there are a few exchanges we are in contact with from asia. Im sure it will happen. cheers sir crouton bad idea, look at DEPO https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=729189.0 it failed. Crypto exchanges are needed ! Im referring to Crypto exchanges in asia, if some of them offer fiat then its their choice. BTER is a good start, but I don't know any Indian crypto exchanges ! Anyway you need bittrex/Cryptsy or C-CEX too. +1 Guys, we need best exchanges for this coin! I want customers buying and using Bollywoodcoins. Bollocks to useless daytraders. If an exchange wants to add it then fine, but putting effort or money into getting any exchange to list it is a waste of that time and money. Bring the coin to its intended users so that they can use it, that's how actual value is created, everything else is secondary. |
|
|
|
If I was strategy commander for Darkcoin (which I'm not by the way ), I'd create some kind of contingency whereupon the mining majority could somehow protect the masternode majority in some kind of symbiotic dependency. i.e. to subvert the masternode population you'd have to subvert the mining population as well. You have that utterly arse backwards. 90% of mining goes through 5 pools. And you would need at most 3 of them to control or destroy the coin. Mining provides exactly fuck all security. I doubt it. I realise that it's fashionable right now to be maligning the idea of pools because of their "potential" to threaten the network. But the reality is that pools are still aggregations of decentralised mining power, Its subscribers are generally actors in good faith. You can't just "buy up" that kind of mining power. You don't need to buy up that much mining power, all you have to do is compromise one or two servers. Which defeats the whole point of having all that mining power in the first place. There is no such thing as an 'aggregation of decentralised mining power' - it's a fundamental contradiction in terms. |
|
|
|
edit: thelonecrouton, do you know some mathematical analysis, paper or something which shows why pool users gain more block rewards (pool finds more blocks statistically) than solo miners?
My assumption would be there is no difference at inifinite time
You're right, over a long enough timespan it would be the same. The advantage of pooled mining for miners is that when one miner in the pool finds a block, they all share the reward, so the income is steady. Great for miners, completely crap for blockchain security. If the blockchain were maintained solely by Masternode consensus, the system would be hundreds of times more secure than it is now, and hundreds of times more expensive to attack. Personaly I'd like a backup plan though, and if solo mining can be enforced (or heavily financially incentivised vs. pooled mining) at a protocol level then that would be great. And there are blockchain models that make that possible, if the will is there to adopt them. edit - example protocols: https://bitslog.wordpress.com/2014/06/19/theoretical-and-practical-nonoutsourceable-puzzles/http://hackingdistributed.com/2014/06/18/how-to-disincentivize-large-bitcoin-mining-pools/ |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
