I do have a question about this. (I'm very very simpleton in crypto terms - so please don't eat me)
I understand in theory the blockchain shouldn't be an issue. Even cryptonote (I was reading about how the blockchain when it grew to BTC size would be 10X as big as BTC). But as a consumer downloading a 20GB database is a fairly big deal with my internet connection. (I understand I can use litewallets that sync with other servers)
But isn't the blockchain size fairly relevant to keeping decentralization in the sense that bitcoin was originally invented - to be duplicated across hundreds of thousands of consumer machines? Even at 20GB - with my internet connection I really don't want to download the entire blockchain ...
To even host a full node in a few years will likely consume terabytes to petabytes of data in a month -- this goes for Bitcoin, let alone any of the alts. If you can provide this bandwidth, you can be a full node. As it stands, without running dedicated hosts on corporate connections, most people will never be able to run full nodes, regardless of even their storage space. The real issue restricting centralization is bandwidth, and I doubt this will ever be solved, because you need all the block and tx data that is shipped out across the network. Gavin's latest proposal is a way to optimize it to perhaps 20-50% less bandwidth usage (aside from making syncing much more rapid), but the bandwidth issue still exists and is severe. So, basically, the idea of totally decentralized full nodes on any cryptocurrency that is even marginally popular is a moot point: it's never going to be the case that ever household in the US is sitting around running a Bitcoin full node because of the bandwidth usage. Perhaps there are ways to form miniature consensus networks on top of the Bitcoin network to address this, but I'm not exactly sure how. Gavin says 7 TB, certainly not petabytes, and he says his home internet connection could theoretically handle 45k transactions per second (though currently monthly bandwidth limits would prevent this -- in the future who knows). Scroll to the bottom: https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/e20c3b5a1d4b97f79ac2 |
|
|
|
But isn't the blockchain size fairly relevant to keeping decentralization in the sense that bitcoin was originally invented - to be duplicated across hundreds of thousands of consumer machines? Even at 20GB - with my internet connection I really don't want to download the entire blockchain ...
In the case where hundreds of thousands of people are wanting a copy of a 20 GB block chain we might imagine many possibilities such as: 1. Hundreds of thousands of people have faster internet connections than you, so they download the blockchain, even if you don't. 2. The blockchain comes preloaded on your computer. 3. You buy a 32 GB USB flash drive with the block chain on it. Current retail price for a 32 GB USB drive is $15-20. I''m sure there others. |
|
|
|
Don't be afraid to solo mine if you don't need the steady income. That is the absolute best defense for the network and as a bonus you are immune from pool DoS attacks.
A block of XMR is about 30 USD equivalent. If that is not something that will make or break you either way, you have nothing to fear from the variance of solo mining.
help please... can someone guide me or give a link on how to setup solo mining for 280x gpu's ? thanks in advance... I'm not sure if you can solo using claymore's miner. In not then just go ahead and use one of the smaller pools (ideally one that donates a good portion of its fees to development). thanks for your reply so solo mining is only for cpu's? and thanks again... From a brief look at the source code for tsiv's miner it looked like getwork support was still there meaning you could point it at your own daemon and mine with it. I haven't tried this. But like I said I have no idea if claymore's miner can do that. With CPUs (and only CPUs) you can use the miner that is built into the daemon. There has been some talk of merging the GPU miner into the daemon, but so far that is just talk. |
|
|
|
Don't be afraid to solo mine if you don't need the steady income. That is the absolute best defense for the network and as a bonus you are immune from pool DoS attacks.
A block of XMR is about 30 USD equivalent. If that is not something that will make or break you either way, you have nothing to fear from the variance of solo mining.
help please... can someone guide me or give a link on how to setup solo mining for 280x gpu's ? thanks in advance... I'm not sure if you can solo using claymore's miner. In not then just go ahead and use one of the smaller pools (ideally one that donates a good portion of its fees to development). |
|
|
|
It got really quiet in this thread. Did I say something sufficiently offensive, shocking, or motivational?  Here's a genuine Altcon Observation to discuss: XCN successfully moved to pruned mode, and its price spiked up ~27% from the deep support at 0.00001375. XCN cracks two hard nuts at once. Mini-blockchain is ultimate prunability (so a full node may run on your phone). And withdrawal limits on the account tree enable non-malleable zero-confirmation transactions. Like E=MC^2, scarcely two dozen people in the world grasp the magnitude of this technology's implications.  I'm not fully sold on the claimed advantages for reasons explained earlier nevertheless I find the current valuation attractive, at least short to medium term. There is enough potential to support the current price (something I most certainly did not believe at 10k sat or even 5k sat). |
|
|
|
|
Seeing a solid base form at 1350-1375 sat.
The successful switch to pruned mode is an important milestone.
The current price is a bit below my initial target of 1500, but that ended up being pretty close. I can definitely see upside from here and I'm a buyer at these prices.
The big early miner with 550k coins and unknown intentions is still an overhang but I don't see a huge risk of dumping, especially with the coin at current low prices and showing a lot of promise. Dumping the 550k at this price would only yield about 7 BTC. Whoever went to the trouble of mining all those blocks right away probably would like more than 7 BTC to show for it (and notably didn't sell even at 10k).
|
|
|
|
when The next block in half ? Whether in August 30? Who can answer?
There is no halving on this coin. The block reward is reduced gradually by a tiny amount every block, by half about every 18 months. |
|
|
|
Don't be afraid to solo mine if you don't need the steady income. That is the absolute best defense for the network and as a bonus you are immune from pool DoS attacks.
A block of XMR is about 30 USD equivalent. If that is not something that will make or break you either way, you have nothing to fear from the variance of solo mining.
You'll need a consequent hash power to solo mine XMR these days Not really. It isn't that well understood perhaps that every bit of hash power, however small, has a proportionately equal chance to solo a block. Even with just one desktop (200 h/s) computer you have roughly a 50% chance to score a block in a month. You could even get lucky and score a few blocks. Or you could very well get nothing. But your risk there (compared to roughly what you would get pool mining) is about 15 USD. That is hardly a major risk for many people. If you want to help the network more than anything else, this the way to go. |
|
|
|
|
Don't be afraid to solo mine if you don't need the steady income. That is the absolute best defense for the network and as a bonus you are immune from pool DoS attacks.
A block of XMR is about 30 USD equivalent. If that is not something that will make or break you either way, you have nothing to fear from the variance of solo mining.
|
|
|
|
Most (but not all) malware hits on miner are false positives caused by malware that includes the miner as a component. I would not personally be concerned about yvg's miner as long as you are getting it from yvg's official download location (and nowhere else). |
|
|
|
What, in your opinion, would be the significance of that ? I would guess wanting to be a bit less conspicuous, probably to sell off some of them at some point without huge front running (ie. everyone sees coins from the big wallet finally move and sells ahead of him). If the intent is to keep them very long term (like Satoshi's Bitcoins) then I see no purpose for moving them. |
|
|
|
Can anyone help me? I`m mining XMR here - http://moneropool.com/My wallet has a status "Ready" and Connections "12 peers". In accordance with my stats at that pool I must receive 3.3+ XMR, but it is already second day and they are still not in my wallet. I`ve checked transactions here - http://monerochain.info by my wallet address and there is no transactions in direction of my address. How can that be? You can't look up transactions by payment address, that is one of they key privacy features. You need a txid. Get in touch with the pool (most of them are on IRC) and work with them on the issue of why you aren't receiving payments. |
|
|
|
Keep On monitoring the rest address, and see what happened to them. The new addresses are listed at the bottom of the page linked above. Those haven't moved yet. |
|
|
|
ring signatures used in coins like monero cause blockchain bloat making them unusable for mainstream adoption...so no...XC is what your looking for, read it and weep if your not invested already https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=630547.0  Can you explain a little about mainstream adoption and its compatibility problem with the ring signatures? Imagine 2 blockchains processing the same amount of transcations. Now Chain 1 is running with ringsignatures and Chain 2 is not. Now lets say that every year 500 GB of transaction data gets produced and no blockchain pruning and shrinking is available. After 1/2/3/4/5 years Chain 1: 750GB/1.5 TB/2.25TB/3TB/3.75TB Chain 2: 500GB/1TB/1.5TB/2TB/2.5 TB And this is under the best case scenario that ringsignatures only produce 50% bigger tx. This number can be higher! I don't really find it that bad. People will still be able to run nodes no problem and regular people can use thin clients. Assuming that standard Bitcoin style thin clients work with ring sig tech. I assume it does but I don't know. How do thin clients work? In general terms, you retrieve parts of the block chain you need from a node or server instead of storing the whole thing yourself. There are several different ways of doing that with a range of security and resource compromises. Most users of Bitcoin today are using lightweight wallets (or web wallets). |
|
|
|
Hi i just started mining monero.can i solo mine using gpu?if not..whats the best pool to use?
Solo mining is currently CPU only. See list of pools in first post of this thread. I tried solo mining monero overnight using this pool http://xmr.farm/ ,about 7 hrs, I dont get any xmr at all.Is this normal? Pending Balance: 0.000000000000 XMR Total Paid: 0.000000000000 XMR Last Share Submitted: about an hour ago Hash Rate: 0 H/sec Total Hashes Submitted: 4079880 The pool got no blocks (see Pool Blocks section on their web site). Nothing wrong with using small pools (when they do get a block you will get a bigger piece of it). If you want more steady income then you need to get onto a slightly larger pool. One getting about 5-10 blocks per day should be fine. |
|
|
|
One thing I noticed is Difficulty goes up even as hashrate goes down.
The difficulty is based on the block times over entire adjustment window. The hash rate estimate (you can't measure the hash rate directly, just estimate it from block times) is based on some shorter window. Thanks! I didn't know this. Is there a place I can read more about this, and perhaps a formula? Use the source luke. |
|
|
|
Hi i just started mining monero.can i solo mine using gpu?if not..whats the best pool to use?
Solo mining is currently CPU only. See list of pools in first post of this thread. |
|
|
|
Anyone is holding spartan mode until 0.01?
I have no intention of selling based on price until much higher than 0.01. Other developments might change my mind, but not price. |
|
|
|
One thing I noticed is Difficulty goes up even as hashrate goes down.
The difficulty is based on the block times over entire adjustment window. The hash rate estimate (you can't measure the hash rate directly, just estimate it from block times) is based on some shorter window. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
