Is there any mining calculator for darkcoin?
I wish we could be on coinwarz but they only have scrypt and sha-256 But though I don't know of a calculator, I can offer you this formula: Your hash rate = not enough coins  It's pretty much true for everyone  This formula working for you? Not really, it just shows me that I'm turning into an @ss which means it's time for bed, LOL Waiting for my graphics driver to install on my laptop, and it's taking forever! TanteStefana, you make this thread so much more enjoyable to read. @avanda, I don't know of a mining calculator, but the official pool gives this payout estimation at the current difficulty: kh/s: 50,499 drk/day: 81.416 You can extrapolate from there. Around 1.6 DRK / kh / day. Thanks, I like the people on this thread too  The @ss in me needs to correct you though, LOL, it's 0.0016 DRK/kh/day. Remember my formula? Your hash = not nearly enough? Your estimate is much closer to enough  |
|
|
|
Is there any mining calculator for darkcoin?
I wish we could be on coinwarz but they only have scrypt and sha-256 But though I don't know of a calculator, I can offer you this formula: Your hash rate = not enough coins It's pretty much true for everyone This formula working for you? Not really, it just shows me that I'm turning into an @ss which means it's time for bed, LOL Waiting for my graphics driver to install on my laptop, and it's taking forever! |
|
|
|
Is there any mining calculator for darkcoin?
I wish we could be on coinwarz but they only have scrypt and sha-256 But though I don't know of a calculator, I can offer you this formula: Your hash rate = not enough coins It's pretty much true for everyone |
|
|
|
Btw, TanteStefana,
I fixed the estimates, they should reflect a more real estimate on the new server :-)
awesome I started up my Ubuntu again, but I'm still the smallest miner  |
|
|
|
I know that it spilts each transaction up into certain decimals. But the amount an individual sends and receives can still be tracked.
Yes, but there is more to it than that, only I can't explain it. You should join the testing, it's always open to anyone. And my dreams are a bit tongue in cheek, having fun I really don't know exactly how it all works, but it seems to work in testing and fast! I'm wondering if mined coins are included? There doesn't seem to be any delay in the combining of the amounts before they go out again. |
|
|
|
i bought it with darkcoins :-)
Awesome, good times! I'm seriously hoping for a new roof on the house, LOL My plan is sell some at $200 and fix the roof Sell at $1200 and add to retirement fund, LOL. but lets face it, if it goes that high, could I get myself to sell? I'm not that strong or wise...  |
|
|
|
agreed Hey, maybe tomorrow hot heads will cool Good luck! |
|
|
|
I've read in several places that Darkcoin uses "X11" as a proof-of-work algorithm.
I don't understand if merely mean 11 different hash functions combined, or whether it is it a recognized / defined technology, or something else?
I'd love to read more about it and learn. If anyone can reffer me by posting some links or an answer about this, i'd appreciate. thnx.
It's 11 different algorithms that the developer named X-11 hence the original name of this coin, Xcoin. A good cpu computer can still hold it's own in the mining of this coin. Check out the first page, he lists them thnx! I will sound stupid here, but in regards to - "A good cpu computer can still hold it's own in the mining of this coin", i tried mining on my PC, and it said that it does not support 32-bit. Should I just drop the thought as being too under-developed, or is there a workaround? thnx again. If your hardware can do 64 bit, you could duel boot into Ubuntu (or any Linux distro) and mine from there? But really, on slightly older machines, I'd say maybe just buying some coin would be your best bet, always knowing it could be a failed coin, and you could lose your money! only use your disposable income! I mean, I'm mining with my cheaper ATI 5XXX series graphics card and free, single gpu amazon e2 LOL, I get VERY little coin, not even 1 a day now. I doubt it's worth the electricity I'm throwing at it, but my computer is on anyway and I use it at he same time it's mining, so might as well, eh? |
|
|
|
A good cpu computer can still hold it's own in the mining of this coin. Check out the first page, he lists them well, the ebay seller i bought my blade server from, has promised me, that i will get it delivered tomorrow... then we will see what it can do :-p New toys!! I think I love hardware as much as any guy, LOL Maybe I'll be able to buy some with my dark someday |
|
|
|
I've read in several places that Darkcoin uses "X11" as a proof-of-work algorithm.
I don't understand if merely mean 11 different hash functions combined, or whether it is it a recognized / defined technology, or something else?
I'd love to read more about it and learn. If anyone can reffer me by posting some links or an answer about this, i'd appreciate. thnx.
It's 11 different algorithms that the developer named X-11 hence the original name of this coin, Xcoin. A good cpu computer can still hold it's own in the mining of this coin. Check out the first page, he lists them |
|
|
|
I'm sad, nobody has even noticed my libertarian commentary imho, 1. put the text in white background below the pic. When the text is on the pic itself, it is not readable. 2. change "Darkcoin, because privacy matters" to- "Privacy matters." followed by the darkcoin logo and name. 3. I think the pic gives a sense of someone buying drugs more than buying lunch. This makes the coin less legitimate. Perhaps change the pic. 4. Well done for the effort. Imho it's a good start  Thank you so much for looking, it made me happy. I agree it's sloppy, just was my sentiment about how the government is intruding into our lives, now they want to tell us what we can and can't eat, etc... McDonnalds being the most vilified of course. Wasn't supposed to be much more than that, I'm not good at graphic art, lol. Thanks again for looking!  |
|
|
|
Found a couple of explanations here, so just forwarding the quotes: In reply to: http://www.reddit.com/r/DRKCoin/comments/1yit1a/using_coinjoin_for_anonymity_is_errorprone/I'm posting this here, for everyone's benefit. Thanks! Hi, I am Gnosis, the Anoncoin developer working on implementing Zerocoin. First of all, I think it is excellent that there is so much interest in developing a fully anonymous currency. I am not just a developer but also a user, or I will be when an anonymous currency exists! When coin creators compete, the coin users win! However, CoinJoin has been around for a while, and it has not seen much use for anonymity. There's a good reason for that: it's not very anonymous. Quoting my bitcointalk post: CoinJoin has questionable anonymity compared to Zerocoin. The reason is that with CoinJoin, two or more users must somehow partner up and forge a transaction together. They communicate over a secure channel to do this. The coins are only mixed among these "partners." Picking partners you can trust is a significant obstacle: how can you know that your partners will "forget" the mixing that happened? One may try to repeat this 10 times with randomly chosen partners, but how can you know that your partners are not all just sock puppets of one malicious entity (on an anonymous network, it is trivial to create as many fake users as you want )? If that is the case, then your efforts are in vain.
Compare this with Zerocoin, where you put your coins in an accumulator, and they are mixed with the coins of all users who have put coins into that accumulator, since the beginning of Zerocoin. There would be a different accumulator for different denominations of Anoncoins (1, 5, 10, 50 ANC, etc.).
To put it simply, the more users' coins your coins are mixed with, the more anonymity you have.
I cannot speak to Darkcoin's implementation (or planned implementation) of CoinJoin since I cannot seem to find any specs or code on their Github or their site. If anyone knows, please point me to them. I look forward to a practical and secure solution for anonymity from the DarkCoin devs! First off, these are fantastic questions. The answer to implementing this in such a way where it is very difficulty to exploit is by adding cost and verification. Here’s the gist of how I envision DarkSend to work in the long run. Some of what I’m going to mention is done, some of it I’m working on currently. I’d love some ideas on possible attack vectors on my implementation, so we can make it as bulletproof as possible. PoolsDarkSend adds various extensions to the Bitcoin protocol for implementing transaction pooling. Like normal Coinjoin the pools take transactions in stages. The stages currently are: POOL_STATUS_IDLE POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_INPUTS POOL_STATUS_ACCEPTING_OUTPUTS POOL_STATUS_SIGNING POOL_STATUS_TRANSMISSION So the users relay these items throughout the network as the stages happen. After all items are gathered into the pool, the transactions are merged together into one, remotely signed and then broadcasted. MastersTo defeat propagation problems, master nodes are elected each new block. They are responsible for being the authority of what goes into the joined transaction each session. This is done in a tamperproof way, but I think it’s not important to the discussion. So what is the cost? There must be a cost to using this anonymous network, otherwise like you say there will be issues with millions of accounts popping up. I’m not dead set on which solution(s) to implement, but here’s a couple ideas: Burnt IdentitiesHigher difficulty shares to the current block would be mined and then stored in the blockchain permanently. Multiple of these would be used for each transaction and would be “burnt” when misused, causing the attacker to have to mine them again. Verification? To use the pools it will require unique unspend outputs, someone that wants to mess with the system would have to have a large pool of funds in many addresses. So to attack a pool with 100 slots, you would require funds dispersed to 99 addresses, on 99 nodes working in common. Other possible fee-less solutions? There is interesting research on protecting against sybil attacks that lends itself really well to a decentralized ledger, such as this paper: http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/Workshops/InformationSecurity/slides/gamesandreputation.pdfThe idea is to build a social graph of the inputs and outputs of each entry and they should all know different people. If 99 of them all have the same “friends” that they associate with, then they’ll have to enter a different pool. Which will ensure the pool is not full of the nodes belonging to the attacker. An application for machine learning? I’m been making models for trading equities for over 7 years now. I ran a financial firm that sold the signals for a few years and I have experience with natural language processing using classifiers. So, I could make a classifier and actually embed it into Darkcoin to determine which pool a node should use, to separate out nodes that seem to be in common. Other ideas? I’m open to ideas on how to provide the best security to the network. I would love to hear what people have in mind. I’ve been working on DarkSend about a month and we’ve already fixed the decentralization and propagation issues, this is just another bridge to cross in the future. Thanks! Is it possible to implement 3 solutions to work side by side? Or would that conflict or slow things down too much?? I like repetition I think that's what the end result will be and it shouldn't slow down anything |
|
|
|
It appears the technical design of this DarkCoin is fundamentally flawed and can't be fixed.There must be some proof that senders sent transactions for all peers on the network to verify before they can accept the block and begin working on the next block solution. Such proof must exist otherwise balances could be stolen by rogue peers. Thus I must assume you are doing a CoinJoin-like proof for all senders that in that block. And I assume these proofs are transmitted with the block, even if you purge them later (using a proof-of-work chain such as in the mini block chain design). The problem is that CoinJoin is subject to denial-of-service attack in that if any sender fails to sign in the second step, then no senders can send. Thus CoinJoin can't scale to a larger number of senders joined. It works best with a few senders and the probability of denial-of-service (rogue sender) is low. Did you even read the CoinJoin thread carefully? There is a second insoluble flaw that CoinJoin does nothing to obscure IP address and thus you have no anonymity against powerful entities. P.S. I don't have time to read 300 pages of this thread to find out if you already addressed this issue. Please give me a link to any prior reply. Wow, it's that open eh?
Still, this example implies that one could still link up the amounts of the transactions to find the end users. How unique are transaction amounts, and how hard would it be to hide that level? Is there a breaking up of the payment so that the amounts are harder to compare or something? Or am I missing something due to the simplification of the explanation?
Yes, you could still use the transaction amounts to track money through the system. This combined with some logic to use common transaction amounts or some other logic like that in the wallet could definitely help. Even with the problems, having coinjoin implemented directly into the client is a huge step in the right direction. And timing analysis too. Hi, I don't want your question to go unanswered, but I'm hardly the person to answer. I'm doing two things at once here and can't look up the posts our developer made at the moment, it'll take a lot of digging to find them. However, our developer, I believe, works in bank security, and seems to know a lot about cryptography. He has explained things in semi simple to understand terms on this thread, and one thing he is not doing is a simple adaptation of coinjoin. I hope he sees your question, and answers it soon. Glad you are challenging him and I look forward to hearing what you have to say once you get the information Also, regarding ip addresses and other ways of detection, darksend was never said to be bullet proof, but to at least afford a person reasonable privacy. Nobody here, despite recent talk, ever condoned illegal activities with this coin, and doing such things with it would hardly be risk free. Those that don't understand that, I can't help. |
|
|
|
well, i do have one addition to the plan :-)
when this weeks lottery has been done, im going to put 200 drk in the lottery pool for the lottery after that...
OK, then, so I don't miss a day, I will have to take the ol Ubuntu and stop serving up games, the heck with the kids, LOL, and put it back to work mining darkcoin! LOL I worry with my little hash power that disappears from the radar will cause me to lose a lottery ticket day, LOL Besides, I need more coin.... Maybe I can serve the games up on my laptop?? LOL |
|
|
|
Not necessarily. This coin diminishes depending on the difficulty. It's smart, bcause if the coin loses miners because rewards aren't worth it, the difficulty will decline and the rewards will go up. Even so, it may still take 70 years to hit the cap. what real difference will it make if the cap weren't there? Almost none. The coin would still increase in quantity WAY slower than the user base will grow. Demand will outpace coin growth anyway.
But that assumes the coin is successful.
This coin will be successful.
There are 7 billion people in this world, crypto has the potential to help those not in the most stable countries the most. There is a lot of room for growth!
No, it's necessary. You see people don't value things in infinite quantity but they do value scarcity. There is nothing which is infinitely abundant and simultaneously expensive in real-life markets. If you want to make a better monetary system than the infinite-fiat bullshit type of money system, you have to be better at the fundamentals like inflation. But I do understand what you say about practical limit vs no-cap. I understand what you're saying, but a coin like that would still be scarce. Only so many over time. It's actually the same difference really. Just like the recent change (to repair an unintended consequence of adding KGW earlier) really makes hardly any difference in the foreseeable future to investors. Gold and diamonds are still being dug up out of the ground, yet their value continues to grow. They're still a rare resource. |
|
|
|
There's more at stake than daily mining or who gets what. It's about future-proofing the coin so that it can have a clear and frozen number of max issuance where everybody knows how the game will play out, along with a timeline that will allow for smooth operation over a large time frame. The second component is critical as a clone could come and say "we are more future proof then darkcoin". Any of your weaknesses can be improved upon and rebranded to something better, so, knowing this, you do your best - leaving very few margins for improvement to uninventive copycats.
There are ways to future proof the coin that won't hurt early adopters like this change. Set the reward algorithm so that it caps out at something reasonable, say 10M after a set number of years. It should be us early believers who should be rewarded, the people who are actively contributing to the success of Dark. Yes of course I agree it should cap but the period when this happens should be further in the future. Otherwise why would anyone mine after the capping? And if people don't mine, then how are you securing the network? You don't so you end up with a problematic network, unless the price is sooo large and transactions so many that miners can still make their expenses by mining transaction fees. That could happen, why not, but let's have everything covered either way. As for the number of coins, 84m is good but I wouldn't object to a 21m scheme either - like BTC with a dark spin If I were to make a coin like this, I would have made no cap, kept constant growth because I think future adaptation of the coin will give it a lot of value, and making the coin mineable, even forever, will guarantee it's longevity. The influx of coin into the system keeps it usable. But my idea would probably fail because early adopters wouldn't make as much money and others would see it as a non-rare commodity. But I think it would be more functional as a coin. (shrug shoulders) This developer has a pretty good balance in my opinion. There are many ways to skin a cat, none absolutely the best. This coin has very good balance IMO. Infinite/uncapped coins = bullshit coins. It's a no brainer. Just stick around and see what'll happen with EVERY SINGLE uncapped coin in a few months, including DOGE. Not necessarily. This coin diminishes depending on the difficulty. It's smart, bcause if the coin loses miners because rewards aren't worth it, the difficulty will decline and the rewards will go up. Even so, it may still take 70 years to hit the cap. what real difference will it make if the cap weren't there? Almost none. The coin would still increase in quantity WAY slower than the user base will grow. Demand will outpace coin growth anyway. But that assumes the coin is successful. This coin will be successful. There are 7 billion people in this world, crypto has the potential to help those not in the most stable countries the most. There is a lot of room for growth! |
|
|
|
Actually there is no more halving at all. After 5000 difficulty the block reward hits the minimum of 5 coins per block and that is supposed to be the reward until all 84 000000 are mined. Which @ 1 million a year will take a long time. In 10 years there will just a hit more coins than what bitcoin has now, so how about calming down for everyone who is saying it's not scarce anymore?
Exactly, precisely, genau, right on baby, genug! LOL |
|
|
|
I think I saw on the coins specs that the block reward is now halved at 2 years instead of 1
source? What is DarkCoin? DarkCoin is a lite version of Bitcoin using X11 as a proof-of-work algorithm. Super secure hashing algorithm: 11 rounds of scientific hashing functions (blake, bmw, groestl, jh, keccak, skein, luffa, cubehash, shavite, simd, echo) Block reward is controlled by moore's law: (11111 / (((Difficulty+51)/6) ^ 2)) CPU only mining Block generation: 2.5 minutes Difficulty Retargets every 576 blocks 84 Million Coins Max Block reward halving every 2 yearsEncrypted transaction network: Work In Progress Anonymous blockchain using coinjoin technology: Work In Progress Oh, I don't think he has updated that. |
|
|
|
There's more at stake than daily mining or who gets what. It's about future-proofing the coin so that it can have a clear and frozen number of max issuance where everybody knows how the game will play out, along with a timeline that will allow for smooth operation over a large time frame. The second component is critical as a clone could come and say "we are more future proof then darkcoin". Any of your weaknesses can be improved upon and rebranded to something better, so, knowing this, you do your best - leaving very few margins for improvement to uninventive copycats.
There are ways to future proof the coin that won't hurt early adopters like this change. Set the reward algorithm so that it caps out at something reasonable, say 10M after a set number of years. It should be us early believers who should be rewarded, the people who are actively contributing to the success of Dark. Yes of course I agree it should cap but the period when this happens should be further in the future. Otherwise why would anyone mine after the capping? And if people don't mine, then how are you securing the network? You don't so you end up with a problematic network, unless the price is sooo large and transactions so many that miners can still make their expenses by mining transaction fees. That could happen, why not, but let's have everything covered either way. As for the number of coins, 84m is good but I wouldn't object to a 21m scheme either - like BTC with a dark spin If I were to make a coin like this, I would have made no cap, kept constant growth because I think future adaptation of the coin will give it a lot of value, and making the coin mineable, even forever, will guarantee it's longevity. The influx of coin into the system keeps it usable. But my idea would probably fail because early adopters wouldn't make as much money and others would see it as a non-rare commodity. But I think it would be more functional as a coin. (shrug shoulders) This developer has a pretty good balance in my opinion. There are many ways to skin a cat, none absolutely the best. This coin has very good balance IMO. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
