Just a quick drive by: ~60 POW blocks in a row without a single PoS (up to 17520). Nice! (I say junk PoS altogether anyway  ) NEGATIVES: Last 20 blocks have all paid out to one of the two following address: AN6vSMzWTrABMBGbwxHApZDVJrofV2EGbG Aaqf4sB9Sdwhur3r7bvTrZAVhX2hxei41Q With NO inputs from the pools forming outputs to miners in any of those block transactions. NONE! ONLY THIS Input Scripts 2:6444 4:8ac0d753 8:07ff...0000 13:2f6e...6d2f Output Scripts 33:03be...9c39 CHECKSIG DUP HASH160 20:4c02...6ca6 EQUALVERIFY CHECKSIG DUP HASH160 20:9309...f647 EQUALVERIFY CHECKSIG DUP HASH160 20:4f80...094e EQUALVERIFY CHECKSIG Didn't have time to check more. I'm on the run and out of here. Keep on plugging away, and good luck with the troubleshooting. http://columbus.aidbit.net/chain/AidBit (for anyone else who's interested in following along a little more closely) |
|
|
|
After taking a *quick* look at the blockchain and payouts, it looks like nothing was included in the vast majority of transactions - for the overnight period mentioned in previous posts - other than the immediate payout addresses (official pools and solo miners?).
As I see it, the bulk of the payouts went to
ASDq1mZJxs4jfehJyD3urMatjn3sXrT6Lq
AcULqP2whKAkftM7NFddPB4Mb115vGFSg4
ALaMiJPfYvoy2tM8364uVScvCcvzeQMqYV
and
solo miners?
AYGUtsEt1DhQio5AcsU4Cn6QQCamoDpZkY
AM1fKbamsSzecrnmDLedW1nnCtyWr5FkJk
?
I'm sure there are more with direct payouts; mine was a *quick* look as I said to begin with.
As I said, there are no 'sub'-transactions forwarding on individual payouts to be seen in the vast majority of transaction entries over that time period being discussed.
lol That was extremely informative. Care to explain what is so funny? Or enlighten us a bit? Are you laughing at my post, or at AidBit? Just trolling, or is there something of substance behind your "lol"? I for one would love to know. Add: is one of those solo miners you?  (not that that has anything at all to do with anything at all . . . other than possibly cause one to chuckle) This is an example of a transaction with what I referred to as 'sub'-transactions showing the primary payout and the subsequent individual payouts (you need to scroll down). Similar block transactions are extremely difficult to find during the period in question. http://columbus.aidbit.net/block/13a03bcaa97c6739176c44bcc8b5dba3986a29e7c8f9ca116e1b2b90f14edef0Here's another one: http://columbus.aidbit.net/block/9f6faef5994494b68baf60f44cf30ee8376b01e4fed06b001d5497f6f7641cf2What's even stranger is that these are marked as PoS!These are perfectly normal. In this block you can see inputs from the pool which form outputs to miners. Okay. I was thinking that POW would stay limited to POW blocks, but there's no real reason why that has to be so. The real issue, and what's really strange, is that those inputs from the pool which form outputs to miners don't show in 99.99% of the blocks for last night and early this morning (the time period I was working with - I don't know if they have begun to show up again or not). Out of time for today. Maybe I'll be able to take it up again later this evening. Good luck all. |
|
|
|
 MANDATORY UPDATE:Updated AidBit Wallet v1.0.2.0.Fixes: - Extended POS Target Spacing to 10 minutes POS blocks were causing problems on the network, so we had to implement the fork at block 17300. Please update your clients as soon as possible.Sorry, for such short notice, but we are really getting impatient here. www.aidbit.net/downloadThank you! AidBit Last 9 PoS blocks in a row from 17244 to 17252 in 10 minutes time with no POW at all.  |
|
|
|
Okay, I don't hide the fact that I'm not a coder, and that I'm a relative neophyte when it comes to blockchains and the lot, but I'm at a complete loss with this. These are all proof of stake blocks, and when you go directly to the block via the block explorer, you don't see anything that corresponds to this 'triple entry' ledgering (other than the initial value itself). (You can find examples of this all over the place, and 'double entries' even more . . . but that would be more logical . . . if this is normal . . . is it?). Is this some kind of double debit and then credit?  |
|
|
|
After taking a *quick* look at the blockchain and payouts, it looks like nothing was included in the vast majority of transactions - for the overnight period mentioned in previous posts - other than the immediate payout addresses (official pools and solo miners?).
As I see it, the bulk of the payouts went to
ASDq1mZJxs4jfehJyD3urMatjn3sXrT6Lq
AcULqP2whKAkftM7NFddPB4Mb115vGFSg4
ALaMiJPfYvoy2tM8364uVScvCcvzeQMqYV
and
solo miners?
AYGUtsEt1DhQio5AcsU4Cn6QQCamoDpZkY
AM1fKbamsSzecrnmDLedW1nnCtyWr5FkJk
?
I'm sure there are more with direct payouts; mine was a *quick* look as I said to begin with.
As I said, there are no 'sub'-transactions forwarding on individual payouts to be seen in the vast majority of transaction entries over that time period being discussed.
lol That was extremely informative. Care to explain what is so funny? Or enlighten us a bit? Are you laughing at my post, or at AidBit? Just trolling, or is there something of substance behind your "lol"? I for one would love to know. Add: is one of those solo miners you? (not that that has anything at all to do with anything at all . . . other than possibly cause one to chuckle) This is an example of a transaction with what I referred to as 'sub'-transactions showing the primary payout and the subsequent individual payouts (you need to scroll down). Similar block transactions are extremely difficult to find during the period in question. http://columbus.aidbit.net/block/13a03bcaa97c6739176c44bcc8b5dba3986a29e7c8f9ca116e1b2b90f14edef0Here's another one: http://columbus.aidbit.net/block/9f6faef5994494b68baf60f44cf30ee8376b01e4fed06b001d5497f6f7641cf2What's even stranger is that these are marked as PoS! |
|
|
|
It's really beyond me why the old website is still being run the way it is.
...because the original dev bailed and all you got are his bitcointalk credentials to change the OP and occasionally post posing as 8bitcoder ? That moron 8bitcoder did not do any development work for MYR since the launch. What a fucking douche. He's somewhere else with more control now? |
|
|
|
|
After taking a *quick* look at the blockchain and payouts, it looks like nothing was included in the vast majority of transactions - for the overnight period mentioned in previous posts - other than the immediate payout addresses (official pools and solo miners?).
As I see it, the bulk of the payouts went to
ASDq1mZJxs4jfehJyD3urMatjn3sXrT6Lq
AcULqP2whKAkftM7NFddPB4Mb115vGFSg4
ALaMiJPfYvoy2tM8364uVScvCcvzeQMqYV
and
solo miners?
AYGUtsEt1DhQio5AcsU4Cn6QQCamoDpZkY
AM1fKbamsSzecrnmDLedW1nnCtyWr5FkJk
?
I'm sure there are more with direct payouts; mine was a *quick* look as I said to begin with.
As I said, there are no 'sub'-transactions forwarding on individual payouts to be seen in the vast majority of transaction entries over that time period being discussed.
|
|
|
|
I think I mined 5000 AID for 24hrs with 65mh
I was solo mining and was getting very unlucky (and the diff was staying relatively high) so I pointed this "test" machine averaging 10 MH/s to maya.aidbit.net around midnight my time last night. It's now 9:30 AM and I've only seen one payout, that's right, only one, for 18.83912107 in that entire time (about 3 hours ago around 6:30 AM - so it's not like I'm waiting on rolling shares). Going back to solo mining.  BTW, with the current diff of 64.8681 showing in Mining Information, the estimated network hashrate should be around 5.8 GH/s. Is that really possible? Really realistic? The total of the aidbit pools is around 1.5 GH/s. All the third party and P2Pools are down, so that would mean we've got around 4 GH/s in solo mining going on?  Remember that the reward depends on the lucky of the pool. Perhaps you have too much power working and getting more rejections. Try to lower the power of the GPU, you're not going to lose much hashrate and you work a lot more stable and fresh. GPU-1100=11.5mhs -3mhs in rejected= 8.5mhs working. GPU-950 = 10mhs -0,5mhs in rejected= 9.5mhs working. 9 hours with only one payout on a pool with more than a third of total network (known) hashrate would be such bad luck that you'd have better chances of hitting the lottery! My configuration on this machine is optimized to the hilt, and proven on various groestl coins (with AidBit as well before the fork) and nothing's been changed - no need to, it's a performer. That having been said, my solo mining last 24 hour stretch was bad luck indeed. It's currently mining MYR while we're updating, and pulling them down just as scheduled. Your ideas and suggestions are good, but, in my case, with the care I've taken with setup and documentation, I don't think the issue is local.  with 4.8mhs in felix.aidbit.net That timeframe is eerily similar to the timeframe I was referring to - my only payout from midnight to 9:30 was around 6:30 too with a completely dry spell before and after. You are on UTC+2 (Europe), correct? Add: payouts did continue throughout that entire time period as witnessed by the charity address activity http://columbus.aidbit.net/address/ANhmhMCxJZkV7M5nmBMaXZWVfRuba79B3mBe patient; it takes a while to load. Also, remember every end user needs to adjust time stamps from UTC to their particular timezone. |
|
|
|
I think I mined 5000 AID for 24hrs with 65mh
I was solo mining and was getting very unlucky (and the diff was staying relatively high) so I pointed this "test" machine averaging 10 MH/s to maya.aidbit.net around midnight my time last night. It's now 9:30 AM and I've only seen one payout, that's right, only one, for 18.83912107 in that entire time (about 3 hours ago around 6:30 AM - so it's not like I'm waiting on rolling shares). Going back to solo mining. BTW, with the current diff of 64.8681 showing in Mining Information, the estimated network hashrate should be around 5.8 GH/s. Is that really possible? Really realistic? The total of the aidbit pools is around 1.5 GH/s. All the third party and P2Pools are down, so that would mean we've got around 4 GH/s in solo mining going on? Remember that the reward depends on the lucky of the pool. Perhaps you have too much power working and getting more rejections. Try to lower the power of the GPU, you're not going to lose much hashrate and you work a lot more stable and fresh. GPU-1100=11.5mhs -3mhs in rejected= 8.5mhs working. GPU-950 = 10mhs -0,5mhs in rejected= 9.5mhs working. 9 hours with only one payout on a pool with more than a third of total network (known) hashrate would be such bad luck that you'd have better chances of hitting the lottery! My configuration on this machine is optimized to the hilt, and proven on various groestl coins (with AidBit as well before the fork) and nothing's been changed - no need to, it's a performer. That having been said, my solo mining last 24 hour stretch was bad luck indeed. It's currently mining MYR while we're updating, and pulling them down just as scheduled. Your ideas and suggestions are good, but, in my case, with the care I've taken with setup and documentation, I don't think the issue is local. |
|
|
|
|
Got some good 24 hour readings (without ‘gibberish’ data mixed in the middle) for the charity address.
From 2014-07-28 07:20 to 2014-07-29 07:22 the charity account increased by 19,164 AidBit.
That means that total payout would be 10 times that amount, or 191,640 AidBit.
It also means that average network hashrate should be around 1.47 GH/s with daily payout per 10 MH/s running somewhere around 1300 AidBit (if there’s been no change in the subsidy calculation). Average diff should be somewhere around 21-22?
Do these calculations look better to anyone?
Very different numbers than those generated by sgminer. But I’ve also been closely watching Mining Information in the wallet itself, and I see lots of discrepancies there too. Why the conflicts? Lots of questions to answer (like how you can mine on maya.aidbit.net all night and only get one payout – and from reading previous postings, that doesn’t look like an anomaly).
Are these issues some of the issues being caused by PoS?
Slightly off topic: you know, I’ve always openly questioned the efficacy of PoS, and more so in the early stages of any coin – it has lots of unknowns and weaknesses, and its benefits are extremely limited . . .
|
|
|
|
I think I mined 5000 AID for 24hrs with 65mh
I was solo mining and was getting very unlucky (and the diff was staying relatively high) so I pointed this "test" machine averaging 10 MH/s to maya.aidbit.net around midnight my time last night. It's now 9:30 AM and I've only seen one payout, that's right, only one, for 18.83912107 in that entire time (about 3 hours ago around 6:30 AM - so it's not like I'm waiting on rolling shares). Going back to solo mining. BTW, with the current diff of 64.8681 showing in Mining Information, the estimated network hashrate should be around 5.8 GH/s. Is that really possible? Really realistic? The total of the aidbit pools is around 1.5 GH/s. All the third party and P2Pools are down, so that would mean we've got around 4 GH/s in solo mining going on? |
|
|
|
Any team that sticks with their coin this long in this current environment is worth a lot of praise and patience (imho). Regarding mass adoption, all a coin really needs is to leverage their brand/tech. for a specific valuable purpose or service, it becomes a vehicle for proper use and your coins (shares) become a valuable piece of that system. It's a pipe-dream for daytraders and used by BS artists with scam coins to make BTC, but it does and will continue to happen. Let BTC be mass adopted, but if you were to assume the ZETA case were real (another can of worms) then it is easy to see where particular technologies may very well end up in the years to come. DGB seem to be taking that path and have remained professional all year. They've proven they can dev. and adapt and have stuck with DGB through all the shit 2014 has thrown at altcoins. Use it like the rest to yoink some BTC it's an unfortunate reality, but if they continue and find a place or service to slot their brand/coin into then you have a longer term winner. It seems they aren't going anywhere, and I'm sure they will continue to evolve until they are just right for their place on the board. You also can't underestimate the relationships they continue to solidify. This isn't even me shilling. I won't lie much earlier in the year I wanted DGB out of the equation (they are a tough, stubborn and respected competition despite their market cap), but after so long of Jared and his team remaining polite and doing what they can in this environment I now watch and support DGB developments from the side. TLDR: Multi-algo fork must be a tough gig and it's hard to agree upon which algos. I like DGB and good luck.  Its posts like Rofo's that give me hope good, solid coins will survive. There are some great communities, teams, and developers working hard to survive this altcoin holocaust we are experiencing. It would be nice if people showed more consideration instead of panic when prices fall. Most coins have taken a big hit in recent months and DGB has weathered it well compared to many. I used the term "cancer" to describe what I thought would lead to this "holocaust" back in April. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557086.0My thesis remains the same. Granted, there still would have been winners and losers, good teams and non-existent teams, etc., but the end for many might not have been so dramatic. And it seems that the best relative performance in crypto prices is linked to good teams, good ideas, and an active response to the "cancer" (seems that the three go together since where we see the biggest losses, we also see an ineffective and/or inept response, an abandonment of good ideas, and floundering teams). |
|
|
|
|
I pulled these stats earlier and then got busy with something else, and now I’m too lazy and too tired to re-do it.
For the 24 hour period between 14:00 GMT yesterday and 14:00 GMT today, sgminer stats indicate a total POW block count of approximately 2000 blocks, with an average diff of 39.627872, a mean of 34, a high of 121, and a low of 7.
If we were to do a rough 8 * dDiff we’d come up with 634,679 coins mined.
If we were to do the same thing with a 6.8:1 ratio (something closer to what I more consistently see, it’d be 541,858.
If we were to arrive at a payout by dividing the charity payout by 10%, we’d come up with an approximate 577,920 total coins mined, with approximately 497,000 staying in miners hands.
If the average network hashrate was around 2 GH/s, the “divvy” would come out to be around 2,480 AidBit a day for every 10 MH/s.
2,480 AidBit a day for every 10 MH/s that you’ve got on it. How does that jive with what you’re getting?
Add: I think I've really low-balled that network hashrate estimate - I think the average network hashrate was closer to 3 GH/s than 2, 3.2 GH/s to be more precise, netting around 1,550 AidBit a day for every 10 MH/s.
That's one hell of a network hashrate!
What are you getting? What numbers are closest to yours?
|
|
|
|
No, just a Wiki would be nice. Or a github Read Me. Documentation is not one of the crypto world's strong points. Documentation, what we all hate to do, but we all urgently need when issues arise (even when it's something we did ourselves . . . years before). Check this out: http://we.lovebitco.in/bitcoin-qt/command-reference/Very cool. Bookmarked! Thanks! |
|
|
|
What's the best way of finding out what the last 24 hour's actual total payout was?
Total payout, meaning to everybody? You could maybe check our three pools addresses in BE for payouts. Will think more clearly tomorow, I am beat! That doesn't look easy.  To everybody, yeah. I'd also be interested in total coins in circulation/existance. . . . but it doesn't look easy . . . ATM anyway. console>getinfo "moneysupply" : 3884048.84235201 did You mean that, minus charity fund etc. You're so right. And I knew that. BTW, do you know where there's any good console documentation? If You mean some user guide, then no, it`s above my knowledge No, just a Wiki would be nice. Or a github Read Me. Documentation is not one of the crypto world's strong points. Documentation, what we all hate to do, but what we all urgently need when issues arise (even when it's something we did ourselves . . . years before). |
|
|
|
What's the best way of finding out what the last 24 hour's actual total payout was?
Total payout, meaning to everybody? You could maybe check our three pools addresses in BE for payouts. Will think more clearly tomorow, I am beat! That doesn't look easy. To everybody, yeah. I'd also be interested in total coins in circulation/existance. . . . but it doesn't look easy . . . ATM anyway. console>getinfo "moneysupply" : 3884048.84235201 did You mean that, minus charity fund etc. You're so right. And I knew that. BTW, do you know where there's any good console documentation? |
|
|
|
What's the best way of finding out what the last 24 hour's actual total payout was?
Total payout, meaning to everybody? You could maybe check our three pools addresses in BE for payouts. Will think more clearly tomorow, I am beat! That doesn't look easy. To everybody, yeah. I'd also be interested in total coins in circulation/existance. . . . but it doesn't look easy . . . ATM anyway. |
|
|
|
|
What's the best way of finding out what the last 24 hour's actual total payout was?
|
|
|
|
Actually, we've changed the protocol version and are ignoring the older versions. Unfortunately we're experiencing new forks and we're still investigating what is going on. Master Checkpoint Node is trying hard to keep everything together for now. You can connect directly to one of our pool nodes. #aidbit.conf
connect=maya.aidbit.net
connect=felix.aidbit.net
connect=kei.aidbit.net
This way you'll limit connection to other nodes. I know it's frustrating, but it's no better on this side. Regards, AidBit I was looking at the Litecoin Wiki looking for something else and came across the -checkpoints switch for the conf file which limits connectivity to only accepting the block chain matching built-in checkpoints. Master Checkpointing is already operational and should work much better then just built-in checkpoints... Thanks. I suspected as much . . . I'm still very low on the learning curve . . . trying to learn and be as helpful as possible in exchange . . . Question: Master Checkpointing is done from the Master Checkpoint Node? Working to keep everything in line? Question: -checkpoints is done from each individual wallet (that is so configured)? Working only to ensure that that particular wallet is indeed on the correct blockchain? Yes, correct! So each miner could "double up" their protection by including the -checkpoints switch in their own conf file? Also, another question, did you make some changes that went into effect after block 14898? |
|
|
|
Actually, we've changed the protocol version and are ignoring the older versions. Unfortunately we're experiencing new forks and we're still investigating what is going on. Master Checkpoint Node is trying hard to keep everything together for now. You can connect directly to one of our pool nodes. #aidbit.conf
connect=maya.aidbit.net
connect=felix.aidbit.net
connect=kei.aidbit.net
This way you'll limit connection to other nodes. I know it's frustrating, but it's no better on this side. Regards, AidBit I was looking at the Litecoin Wiki looking for something else and came across the -checkpoints switch for the conf file which limits connectivity to only accepting the block chain matching built-in checkpoints. Master Checkpointing is already operational and should work much better then just built-in checkpoints... Thanks. I suspected as much . . . I'm still very low on the learning curve . . . trying to learn and be as helpful as possible in exchange . . . Question: Master Checkpointing is done from the Master Checkpoint Node? Working to keep everything in line? Question: -checkpoints is done from each individual wallet (that is so configured)? Working only to ensure that that particular wallet is indeed on the correct blockchain? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
