I no longer see the option to withdraw the NMC I mined before. I can't see my balance or manual payout, but NMC still shows on the automatic payout page. How do I withdraw?
NMC is hidden by default. It was only shown briefly by default during the dashboard updates. You can turn on the display of NMC in your Settings page. |
|
|
|
I have only tried two pools. Slush's and BTCGuild. I only tried BTCGuild for about 24 hours and while they both have different "earning" systems, I make much more at slush's pool even though blocks are found much, much less often. I am a noob so don't quote me on anything, it is just my personal experience. I think the massive amount of hashing power left me in the back at BTC Guild. I am sure someone on here could give a much better referral to either pool.
Edit to add: The interface over at BTC Guild is pretty damn nice.
For the last month BTC Guild has paid out *significantly* more than Slush (~6% better luck, not counting bonus NMC income). 24-hours is not even remotely long enough to compare earnings between pools due to variance. BTC Guild by default will beat slush on even luck (NMC + paid orphans is worth more than a 1% fee difference). Does it take more than 10 shifts to get your max earnings? I was at first concerned. I only earned only a fraction during my trial run is why I ask. Also, if you don't mind me asking, don't you have right at 50% of the total mining power atm? Or is that just some smoke post that I read, I know everything you read isn't fact. Like I said I am still new, but shouldn't hashpower be somewhat evenly divided? I haven't really read in to it to much. What do you think a fair run trying your pool out would be? My hardware is only getting older by the second so I wasn't to keen on a whole lot of trial and error. That's why I stated how much time I did put in, just what I had experienced. I know I am kind of running off on to something else, sorry about that. Responding in PM just to get it out of slush's thread. EDIT: Will answer the first one publicly. BTC Guild has -never- had 50% of the HASHRATE. When it was at ~42% at it's peak (April 2013), it would have lucky days where it solved over 50% of blocks. That is not the same as 51% *hash rate* which is the point where you're guaranteed to be able to control the blockchain if you wish to do evil. However, BTC Guild is currently only 25-28% of the network hash rate. |
|
|
|
I have only tried two pools. Slush's and BTCGuild. I only tried BTCGuild for about 24 hours and while they both have different "earning" systems, I make much more at slush's pool even though blocks are found much, much less often. I am a noob so don't quote me on anything, it is just my personal experience. I think the massive amount of hashing power left me in the back at BTC Guild. I am sure someone on here could give a much better referral to either pool.
Edit to add: The interface over at BTC Guild is pretty damn nice.
For the last month BTC Guild has paid out *significantly* more than Slush (~6% better luck, not counting bonus NMC income). 24-hours is not even remotely long enough to compare earnings between pools due to variance. BTC Guild by default will beat slush on even luck (NMC + paid orphans is worth more than a 1% fee difference). |
|
|
|
Anyone? Can you tell me what the advantages are pooling with Slush compared with someone like Bitminter? These two seem to be the leaders.
Not sure what you mean by leaders. Neither of them are even in the Top 3 by hashrate/users. They're both good pools, just really curious what you actually mean with "leaders". |
|
|
|
I'm running 42 Block Erupters. They have a theoretical hashing rate of 13.96GH/s. In practice, I'm getting a little less than that, right around 13.8GH/s.
My question is, why do I get so much variance from hour to hour? I'll get a full shift at, say, 14.7GH/s, and turn in 0.00101% of the shift. Then I'll get a shift that's closer to 13.2GH/s for 0.00088% of the shift. This +/- 10-12% range has been consistent from the get-go, but why?
I'm not asking because I think there's something wrong with the pool, or even because I think this is pool-related—rather, what is it about the hashing and distribution process that results in such variance from hour to hour? Also, is it specific to this hardware, or do the larger rigs also see that sort of variance?
Thanks in advance.
Your contribution to the shift is based on your % of the pool, and a little bit of share variance. +/- 5% isn't that uncommon over the course of an hour. Over the course of a day it does average out. Also, the pool has fluctuated about 7-8% in speed during the day. We have a user at roughly 100 TH/s that has gone on and off more than once today, which would affect your contribution percentages. |
|
|
|
I do not understand why it took so long to restore everyone's balance? Shouldn't there be some backup copy of the database?
(I only have about 0.01 btc there, not a lot compared to others here)
It's 'taking so long' because they aren't making any attempt to do so. It's been a month since they last made any announcement/post. Nobody should be expecting them to return at this point. |
|
|
|
|
Fixed the Rankings page. After the pool updated to a negative value I changed a bit of the Hall of Fame updating code. Looks like I made an error and it was just frozen instead. This meant the pool speed at the top was also stuck since it uses the rankings page to get the hourly average.
|
|
|
|
|
On average, there is still way more than enough space in blocks even at 250KB. The problems arise during the feeding frenzies on exchanges, or when the network has bad luck (30-60 minutes with no blocks). That's when occasionally we get a backlog even on paying transactions. BTC Guild *tries* to help with this by using a 150KB *minimum* size. This at least helps clear out transactions that other pools won't because their minimum size is under 50 KB, so when we do need bigger blocks to hit the network there isn't quite as much backlog.
|
|
|
|
Just can't have too many threads on this subject. At least this one is a question as opposed to a demand.
To be fair, at least this one is also asking about a value under 1MB as well. All the others are either asking for the full megabyte, or trying to urge us to hardfork to > 1MB. It also made me realize that only ~50% of the network is doing blocks over 250KB apparently. I thought more pools had at the very least moved to 400-600, if not the full meg. |
|
|
|
im going to say its due to the 3g connection. i tried it in the UK and struggled alot at getting gull speed. operators have a heavy limit of 3g connection and while mining dosnt require alot of bandwidth its constantly sending and receiving data which the automated system dosnt like
3G will not impact mining speed, especially locally reported speed. Mining over stratum protocols (which Guild uses) can be done even on a 56K. It uses less than 0.1 KB/s. |
|
|
|
regarding login procedure: is 2FA or CAPTCHA a thought which is worth to think about for security reasons?
thank you!
Captcha is just a pain in the ass for everybody, and there's no way to make it look good and fit with the interface the way the current login does. 2FA is something I've considered, but it's an extra layer I don't feel is needed. If your email is locked, you're safe unless your email is compromised and used to compromise your BTC Guild account. If your wallet is locked, you're safe even if your email and BTC Guild account are compromised. 2FA is a support nightmare when somebody loses/bricks/wipes their phone authenticator. It's bad enough dealing with people who formatted their hard drive and lost their locked wallet, I'm sure phones are formatted/bricked/lost a hell of a lot more frequently than that. What does locking your email and wallet actually do? If you have an email on your BTC Guild account, changes to your account (wallet/email/password) will go to your registered email. This means if you lock your email, nobody can change your password/wallet/email without also having access to your email. If you lock your wallet, this means nobody can change the payout address, even if they have your email. The only way to undo a wallet lock is to talk to me by email and then send a signed message using the private key of that wallet. Since the ability to do this would mean they already control any payouts you would receive anyways, there is no risk in unlocking it after the signed message is verified. |
|
|
|
Is ghosh.io really private ? Who are they I'm still wonder
They're not fully private, but they own roughly 1 PH/s worth of hardware, which is (approximately) 20% of the network. That's the "private 20% of the network" I was referring to. They are the largest single miner in the entire Bitcoin ecosystem. |
|
|
|
Did Slush stop NMC support?
Yes, Slush never added NMC to his stratum implementation. For a while getwork still mined NMC blocks, but since getwork shutdown Slush has not done any NMC merged mining. |
|
|
|
What about Slush?
Hmm...looks like slush is definitely still on the default 250K. |
|
|
|
Shouldn't all the major pools raise their soft cap to 500kB or 1MB. Just a thought. I think this would make room for the tremendous growth that we have seen this month. I wanna see what this puppy can do.  The only major pool that hasn't to my knowledge is ghash.io. BTC Guild, Eligius, and BitMinter are already on 500K or higher max size blocks. EDIT: Slush is definitely still on 250K on at least some of his nodes, if not all. |
|
|
|
|
Looking into it, that's a really odd calculation error.
Edit: All fixed. DB server was a bit lagged running the hall of fame update script due to the API server currently working as a replication slave. Looks like one of the speed scripts ran while the hall of fame was updating, causing it to get some awkward values for starting/ending share counts when calculating speed. The pool speed piggybacks on the hall of fame calculations, so it caused it to print out their weird negative number as overall pool speed.
|
|
|
|
|
Depends on which time frame you look at currently. Until more ASICs ship this will probably be the case though, hard to compete with a pool that personally controls roughly 20% of the network hash rate in their private farm.
|
|
|
|
The store is now on hiatus waiting for next gen tech to become available. I'll be focused on the API server all week. If anybody here writes a publicly used program that polls the API, please toss me an email ( webmaster@btcguild.com). I'd love to get any API-polling apps updated, as well as get input from developers for what they'd like to see made available. |
|
|
|
|
Bandwidth is a non-issue for modern mining (stratum or GBT). Even dial-up could mine at terahash levels using Stratum. GBT scales a little worse, but the same is probably true for GBT.
|
|
|
|
regarding login procedure: is 2FA or CAPTCHA a thought which is worth to think about for security reasons?
thank you!
Captcha is just a pain in the ass for everybody, and there's no way to make it look good and fit with the interface the way the current login does. 2FA is something I've considered, but it's an extra layer I don't feel is needed. If your email is locked, you're safe unless your email is compromised and used to compromise your BTC Guild account. If your wallet is locked, you're safe even if your email and BTC Guild account are compromised. 2FA is a support nightmare when somebody loses/bricks/wipes their phone authenticator. It's bad enough dealing with people who formatted their hard drive and lost their locked wallet, I'm sure phones are formatted/bricked/lost a hell of a lot more frequently than that. thank you very much! to prevent automated login attacks maybe the login procedure could be delayed if the username and password did not match 3 times. then it should not possible to login for a few seconds. and so on. just a thought. IPs are banned outright when too many attempts are failed. A new ban has also been added similarly for password reset attempts with even less tolerance for repeatedly trying to reset passwords on usernames that don't exist (fishing for valid usernames). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
