Wow, what a failed fork. Difficulty FUCK-UP, no blocks in the last 20+ min... universal-pool not compatible ....
FUCKING AMATEUR DEVS!!!
Right on schedule, Primer-! Over 50% of the net hash has been cut off, universal-pool requires modifications in order to work. THIS WAS NOT COMMUNICATED to the pool owners. INCOMPETENT DEVELOPERS!!! Blocks are being found and the hash rate is only down 20% as expected by smooth in the speculation thread. How do you expect anybody to take you seriously when you cry wolf? I hate people who pull numbers from their ass ... Smooth you idiot. 1009852 60 to go 1621258227 7750098e01c2c457c5e90639883b6be73decb1442931a3bdc018244c6cf75e60 3/23/2016, 7:05:24 PM 83%
1009849 57 to go 1618724176 f20dfbe79664394d9b9920ea7095f516a24b5693f9166a10dbfe63f7db1ddf82 3/23/2016, 6:52:46 PM 84%
1009845 53 to go 1613905042 4977c235f696284b55a42207933c4f045f647ea73efce1e2c280370d0754fc24 3/23/2016, 6:41:44 PM 79%
1009843 51 to go 1621581315 a4a02510f2f376dff190c59486b370a022f01d45683b62bda83a4708bccdf36e 3/23/2016, 6:26:49 PM 48%
1009833 41 to go 1609202846 a937fead88d2a438e11eeaf0e8596dc0cb92a028831104a02406d9734dbb3718 3/23/2016, 5:48:13 PM 94%
1009831 39 to go 1602611350 65b2b5031e39702b8c5130d6254653cd00fbc7fe1bfd0b6be2664ac98776f09a 3/23/2016, 5:43:46 PM 84%
Way more than 20% of hash got cut off otherwise i would not be finding so many blocks with only 350kh/s... Crypto-pool.fr got booted off for the first 12 blocks or so, but they are finding blocks again now. |
|
|
|
I hate people who pull numbers from their ass ... Smooth you idiot. 1009852 60 to go 1621258227 7750098e01c2c457c5e90639883b6be73decb1442931a3bdc018244c6cf75e60 3/23/2016, 7:05:24 PM 83%
1009849 57 to go 1618724176 f20dfbe79664394d9b9920ea7095f516a24b5693f9166a10dbfe63f7db1ddf82 3/23/2016, 6:52:46 PM 84%
1009845 53 to go 1613905042 4977c235f696284b55a42207933c4f045f647ea73efce1e2c280370d0754fc24 3/23/2016, 6:41:44 PM 79%
1009843 51 to go 1621581315 a4a02510f2f376dff190c59486b370a022f01d45683b62bda83a4708bccdf36e 3/23/2016, 6:26:49 PM 48%
1009833 41 to go 1609202846 a937fead88d2a438e11eeaf0e8596dc0cb92a028831104a02406d9734dbb3718 3/23/2016, 5:48:13 PM 94%
1009831 39 to go 1602611350 65b2b5031e39702b8c5130d6254653cd00fbc7fe1bfd0b6be2664ac98776f09a 3/23/2016, 5:43:46 PM 84%
Way more than 20% of hash got cut off otherwise i would not be finding so many blocks with only 350kh/s... Crypto-pool.fr got booted off for the first 12 blocks or so, but they are finding blocks again now. |
|
|
|
So currently monero hides both addresses in a transaction but the amount is visible? And is this mathematically proven anonymity or is it more of a mixing type anonymity?
It has some attributes of both. With ring signatures it is mathematically proven (see white paper) that it is impossible to determine which of the possible spenders (outputs) is the real one. It is like mixing in the sense that each input has a finite set (generally 2-5 in practice though higher mix counts are allowed) of possible outputs and this ends up having a mixing-like effect on the entire blockchain. It is unlike mixing in that the coins being "mixed" don't need to be spent at the same time (like coinjoin) nor do their owners need to take any active steps to mix (like most mixing systems), nor is there any coordinating central coordinating system that can either steal your coins (like centralized mixers) or serve as a point for tracking and logging (like most if not all coinjoin-based implementations). Thanks for explaining! So what advantages will RingCT bring and is there a rough idea on when that will be implemented? See: https://lab.getmonero.org/pubs/MRL-0005.pdf& http://weuse.cash/2016/01/09/tying-up-loose-ends-with-ringct/There is no specific ETA, somewhere this year is my guess. |
|
|
|
|
3 biggest pools (moneropool, crypto-pool.fr and dwarfpool) + primer of course :-) are finding blocks currently.
|
|
|
|
I wish I knew enough about this stuff to understand whether there's any danger to the chain.
Not if exchanges/merchants are on the right version, which they are. Drop in hashrate of course is detrimental to security. |
|
|
|
|
I am not sure that hashrate is reporting right. Currently dwarfpool, moneropool and primer are finding blocks.
|
|
|
|
Wow, what a failed fork. Difficulty FUCK-UP, no blocks in the last 20+ min... universal-pool not compatible ....
FUCKING AMATEUR DEVS!!!
You do realize that there are now only half as much blocks per time and with that the variance in time got bigger? + there were 4 blocks pushed out in 4-5 minutes. Can you fucking read ? POOL SOFTWARE (UNIVERSAL) REQUIRES MODIFICATION OTHERWISE IT STOPS WORKING... 50% of net hash has been cut off! Someone please stick a Fork in primer, I think he is done. i didn't do a damn thing to my private pool software and it seems to be running fine. Last block found 10 - 25 minutes ago is a bug thats been around forever because someone is timestamping the blocks wrong. Monerohash.com reports 12.81 MH/sec , and my daemon reports 13.44 Mh/sec (probably because the pool software divides by 1024). primer, just stop. Go find some other profitable CPU mineable coin for your bonnet. Oh wait there is none. He is right, some pools that are running "old software" are/were booted off. |
|
|
|
Wow, what a failed fork. Difficulty FUCK-UP, no blocks in the last 20+ min... universal-pool not compatible ....
FUCKING AMATEUR DEVS!!!
You do realize that there are now only half as much blocks per time and with that the variance in time got bigger? + there were 4 blocks pushed out in 4-5 minutes. Can you fucking read ? POOL SOFTWARE (UNIVERSAL) REQUIRES MODIFICATION OTHERWISE IT STOPS WORKING... 50% of net hash has been cut off! Someone please stick a Fork in primer, I think he is done. He found "the block", so I guess we should thank him. |
|
|
|
Wow, what a failed fork. Difficulty FUCK-UP, no blocks in the last 20+ min... universal-pool not compatible ....
FUCKING AMATEUR DEVS!!!
You do realize that there are now only half as much blocks per time and with that the variance in time got bigger? + there were 4 blocks pushed out in 4-5 minutes. Can you fucking read ? POOL SOFTWARE (UNIVERSAL) REQUIRES MODIFICATION OTHERWISE IT STOPS WORKING... 50% of net hash has been cut off! I read that yes, I was merely pointing out that variance will increase. |
|
|
|
Wow, what a failed fork. Difficulty FUCK-UP, no blocks in the last 20+ min... universal-pool not compatible ....
FUCKING AMATEUR DEVS!!!
You do realize that there are now only half as much blocks per time and with that the variance in time got bigger? + there were 4 blocks pushed out in 4-5 minutes. |
|
|
|
I seem to get stucked with a miner on Block 1009828 reporting [P2P5]IP 183.230.9.217 blocked. Which data can i delete to refresh the Node pool. p2pstate.bin or poolstate.bin  p2pstate.bin. |
|
|
|
http://moneroblocks.info/ looks good. But, as Primer pointed out... maybe there's still some issue even with 0.9.1 wallets and mining.... try to upgrade to 0.9.3 and resync? or maybe your pool was linked to a peer that submitted and old style block? not sure if version exclusions were added to the code without looking at it.... for some reason moneroblocks.info shows double the HR I noticed that as well... it doubled at 1009827. I'm assuming it's an error? Yes, this is reporting the right hashrate: https://monerohash.com/#networkAlternatively, you can query the daemon for the hashrate. Just use "status". |
|
|
|
5 blocks until the fork... hold on to your butts.
Edit: Aaand we're good. Did the hashrate just double?
No, some block explorers aren't reporting it properly. This shows the right hashrate: https://monerohash.com/#network |
|
|
|
Ok, now that everyone got their fork done... can we talk about this please? I'll shoot NoodleDoodle a PM about it. |
|
|
|
WTF, my pool just died, before the fork block :
Error: Failed to parse block
at Object.BlockTemplate.nextBlob (/cryptonote-universal-pool/lib/pool.js:120:23)
at Object.Miner.getJob (/cryptonote-universal-pool/lib/pool.js:297:41)
Which pool are you mining on? |
|
|
|
Ninja fork. I'm expecting a big diff. decrease. Two big private Chinese botnet pools have not upgraded (3.7MH/s total hash), I have a feeling there are many more. Approximately 20% of the hash rate has not upgraded, so yes there will likely be a difficulty decrease over the next 24 hours, depending on how long those miners take to upgrade. I was expecting more, around 40%. Are you saying 20% have not upgraded looking at the last how many blocks, 100 or 1000 ? Very early versions of botnet miners included the daemon (miners posted on chinese forums less than 6 months ago have a daemon included, version 8 ). I'm expecting at least 10% of hash not to come back online. Measured over 10080 blocks. This botnet will probably drop off: http://cryptmonero.com/#pool_blocks |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
