|
where you see the diff target aside from in the miner? there is an easy way to tell?
|
|
|
|
no jonald
Mining centralisation is entirely a result of the companies selling miners taking advantage of their specialist manufacturer status. It's too expensive for a regular entrepreneurs to compete with these outfits, and even if they could, they need access to another limited resource: processor fabrication plants (which is also a politicised just oligopoly like the Bitcoin miner business is)
Miners aren't to blame, the mining monopolists are. The only way to break that monopoly is to change the technology so that the mining market becomes easy to enter. We must change the PoW algorithm to something that can't be easily made into a specialist processor, to lower the barrier to entry in the mining market.
this si a bit hard to do, any coins with a marketcap of bitcoin, will eventually attract asic, like bee to honey, hard memory algo can be a good deterrent but eventually they will make an asic for that too so the only solution here is to change the algo constantly before the next asic come like vertcoin did, but changing the algo so many times mean everytime an hardfork, perhaps a bit too much... |
|
|
|
|
the second rule, no matter what virus you want to talk about, is to not download anything from the internet which look shady
the first rule is to set a machine and don't even try to browse on the internet, you will be as secure as it need to be with your coins
besides only a idiot would not notice that the address changed the last second, before sending, i always double-triple check everything...
|
|
|
|
|
i can't understand why bitcoin can not change pow, without remaining bitcoin an being seen as an alt? if this is what is needed to fix the upcomign issue why not?
changing the pow don't broke the fundamental law of bitcoin, like changing the 21M supply which would kill the way the deflation inflation rate work
i'm all for changing the pow, i was sad when asic coe and destroy the profit for the average miners, bit coin mining was too centralized anyway, let them take their asic-chain, cough BU cough away... who care about that
also remember that the exchange are with us, so BU have already lost from the beginning, no matter what they do
|
|
|
|
And crypto will be better off because of it. Ethereum has a better network with more utility (contracts) and can do currency just like BTC.
I wonder how many users have actually taken ETH off exchange and stored it in their own wallet. Try downloading the full blockchain. Is the same size as BTC with less history, takes 5 times as long on an SSD and uses a lot of disk I/O. In my opinion, it is not an efficient payment processor. It should be used as the distributed computing platform it was designed for. So why is Ethereum a better network? No regular user download the full blockchain nowadays, Bitcoin users don't download the Bitcoin blockchain neither. There's probably nearly a million Bitcoin users, and only a few thousand full nodes. ETH actually has more full nodes than Bitcoin atm. are ETH full node rewarded for their job? otherwise what is the reason for them to have a full node? the only oen that i can think of is that ETH full node are less expensive to run anyway altcoin ar enot better network, people already forgotten the ETH problem, and are only in pnic mode because of the hard fork of bitcoin And crypto will be better off because of it. Ethereum has a better network with more utility (contracts) and can do currency just like BTC.
I wonder how many users have actually taken ETH off exchange and stored it in their own wallet. Try downloading the full blockchain. Is the same size as BTC with less history, takes 5 times as long on an SSD and uses a lot of disk I/O. In my opinion, it is not an efficient payment processor. It should be used as the distributed computing platform it was designed for. So why is Ethereum a better network? it has nothing to do with that, people just are unsecure when something like this happen and now they are storing their funds in the altnetwork hilarious isn't it, when you fear that you lose fiat money you stotre on bitcoin, when you fear that you lose bitcoin money you store in the altcoin... |
|
|
|
|
the money are in the altcoin now, you have the same btc as before if you hold soem of those alt that are increasing, in fact if you mine you earn more than before despite bitcoin being cheaper
if it keep going down miner will risk their revenue, i don't think they are that stupid to destroy their own business, abut maybe yes because they are the one causing this by supporting BU...
|
|
|
|
|
actually i like the idea, bitcoin might have more chance to be decentralized, because everyone finally can jump and mine a bit, until the diff go high again with gpu, but gpu the diff will never be as high as high, they are not so efficient
you need million if not billions of gpu to replace current network hashrate, and this is not feasible, there is the chance that BU become the big sha256 alt, and core with segwit will change algo and be the real btc
|
|
|
|
let's look into the history, we had bitcoin lower than $200, but to the best of my knowledge,
relating that to the electricity costs, mining will become a loss instead of profit
but to my knowledge we didn't see the 51% attack..
i am guessing the 'difficulty' implemented by mr nakamoto is a great filter for this kind of situation,
when there are no miner, the diff will go down, much much down even your android phone can do the mining..
and when the diff go down, a miner or two will start their miner to snap the profit as much as they could, automaticaly this will give the 'decentrilized network state',
thus preventing the 51% attack
but we never had an hard fork debate that will eventually turn real in few week, like this one, in case of an hard fork the bigger fork, have all the reason to kill the small one to destroy its competitor if the diff go too much down, it will be even more easy to do a 51% because any entity that have a low hash could do it, do you think the random dude care about supporting the bitcoin network, the majority only want more fiat money.... |
|
|
|
A NVIDIA miner would be great. The new cards rock I have gtx 1070's and they mine Equihash at over 500 sols each. nice cards.  what miner give over 500 sol for a 1070, that's impossible currently... |
|
|
|
That another nvidia thread got flooded (  ) so I will ask here: 980ti. I don't care about power, heat, noise just pure hash/ €. I have very limited time to test os/miner/algo combinations. Dualmining, equihash, lbry maybe? Good answer and I will send some ethbeer. NVIDIA CAPACITY FOR SECONDARY COIN IS GOOD-- With Claymore's miner, if you turn the intensity up for the secondary coin it can increase the yield of the secondary coin a significant amount, at least 2X compared to default intensity values. The primary coin is not affected a great deal; you will need to experiment. If energy and heat are not a concern, you can really increase your earnings. Short answer, and off topic. Epsylon3 likes a clean thread. --scryptr how much you can do with eth+pascal as hashrate? |
|
|
|
I don't think the profitability now will last long , it will decrease again until it reaches the what i call mining support point which is $1/card seems like the avarege electricity prices worldwide keep this support point from getting lower , the only thing that can break this $1/card/day is newer hardware getting out to the market...
it depend, last time mining was far less profitable not because there are many gpu, but because all coins were dumped, the diff can't keep with the value if investors go serious, like they are doing now and this is nothing, if for example 1B people invest in crypto, you would see crazy high value, and no matter how many rig you buy it would not compete whit the pump that would happen |
|
|
|
Trying TSIV's version of ccminer (ccminer-cryptonight-0.17) with the cryptonight i get the below when trying to compile.....seems i just have no luck with this..... it would be fabulous if i could find an RPM or something for nivida and cuda that would mine monero...... Not sure where to go from here...
gcc -std=gnu99 -g -O2 -pthread -L/usr/local/cuda/lib64 -o ccminer ccminer-cpu-miner.o ccminer-util.o ccminer-sha2.o cryptonight/cryptonight.o cryptonight/cuda_cryptonight_core.o cryptonight/cuda_cryptonight_extra.o ccminer-cryptonight.o crypto/ccminer-oaes_lib.o crypto/ccminer-c_keccak.o crypto/ccminer-c_groestl.o crypto/ccminer-c_blake256.o crypto/ccminer-c_jh.o crypto/ccminer-c_skein.o crypto/ccminer-aesb.o -lcurl compat/jansson/libjansson.a -lpthread -lcudart -fopenmp -lcrypto -lssl -lcrypto -lssl
cryptonight/cryptonight.o:(.eh_frame+0x12): undefined reference to `__gxx_personality_v0'
cryptonight/cuda_cryptonight_core.o:(.eh_frame+0x12): undefined reference to `__gxx_personality_v0'
cryptonight/cuda_cryptonight_extra.o:(.eh_frame+0x12): undefined reference to `__gxx_personality_v0'
USE TPRUVOT V-2.0RC OR KLAUST'S CCMINER-- TPruvot finally rolled KlausT's CryptoNight work into his latest release, along with a few other algorithms. --scryptr the speed is slower though... |
|
|
|
rx470 rig gives about 8-9 mh/s, rx480 9-10, solo is working btw
How it is possible?! I have rig with 6 x RX480 and I have 5.7 Mh/s . Got there easy. It's not much more profitable to benefit more time tinkering with. So maybe higher speeds are possible with different clocks/drivers.  Where did you get the sgminer nicehash xevan build? I wrote it - sold it to the devs for 0.1 BTC. Damn, good performance. Would my RX480 with your miner gave so much (1.5 Mh / s)? Now I have 0.97 Mh / s per RX480 with 1200 MHz for GPU? Perf isn't great; it could be better, but the algo is fuckin' huge. Hm, how Chup has 1.5 Mh / s and I just 0.97 Mh/s with 1200 MHz GPU or 1 Mh / s with 1342 MHz GPU? btw, block reward for mining is only5, not 25, as amph said, he don't know what is saying as usual... hi bensam, not my fault if the block explorer report 25 per block still at 180 sec block time, there is an emission of 0.1 per day, if you get 1/5 of the net you are doing 0.02 per rig, which is good |
|
|
|
Can someone post recommended online minning sites and online cryptocurrency exchangers
you are talking about cloud mining it's not recommended, it's better to buy your gear and mine with that, because cloud are never profitable, in the only case they are it require you to trade your hahs, which is the same as trading with less margin... exchange that are good for both alt and bitcoin, are poloniex and bittrex, now cryptopia start too look not bad too in my view |
|
|
|
I think that the price will decline. Until the world economy will demonstrate stable growth expected growth from bitcoin not necessary.
the price is already declinign but not for the reason you think, it's entirely on the hard fork debate, which look day by day to be a real thing people are worried thta it might kill bitcoin and are panic selling, despite every exchange is in agreement to see BU as an altcoin, the sellers pressure is too strong would not surprise me if the sellers are those supporting BU just to cause panic and buy cheap coins again... |
|
|
|
|
core all the way, segwit is not my taste but i prefer it over BU which has even two bug, and while they might be solved already i don't trust their dev like i trust core dev
also exchange are all with core dev, it's another reason to not choose bitcoin unlimited, a part form this the best solution for me would be a dynamic block i said this many times, downsides can't be worse than segwit or bu
|
|
|
|
Maybe a good fist fight 51% attack IS the only way for this to be resolved..
Maybe everyone having their say, big or small, and seeing what's left at the end of the ensuing carnage is the only FAIR way of proceeding..
Yes - it's dangerous, yes - could kill bitcoin, yes - we could be kissing a million dollar bitcoin goodbye.
but maybe not.
WE ALL WANT A WORKING BITCOIN.. we just have different opinions about how to get there.. and maybe that's enough for 'something' to 'emerge'.
I hope it is.
(If nothing else we'll learn a lot from the experience, a $20Billion lesson.. better be good)
it's funny how the most dangerous thing about bitcoin is the only way now to solve this issue, with a 51% we can also change the pow and get rid of chinese dictatorship the problem is that chinese is holding 70% of the net, so unless core do fork their own coins called bitcoin core again, and leave chinese with the old chain that will become BU, there is nothing we can do |
|
|
|
For one thing, a seeming majority of users wanted bigger blocks a long time ago
No they haven't. Users were given the opportunity to support the XT and Classic blocksize forks. And users didn't want that, both were rejected by users. Creating an echo chamber of sock puppets is not a real majority, jonald Miners are not trying to destroy Bitcoin, they are trying to scale it.
My opinion. Your opinion is wrong, and so is that of the bigger blocks miners. If transaction rate increases 1:1 with blocksize increases, that's not scaling by definition. You cannot refute this, because it's an unimpeachable fact isn't that true with any method you want to implement for scaling? otherwise how do you "scale" by your definition i mean it's clear that the number of transaction will eventually catch the limit, that the point, to have more room.. well maybe a solution is to have always the block size needed +"1", so you don't have ever the 1:1 ratio |
|
|
|
|
nothing really hard to know about bitcoin unlimited, it's just a fork of the currenct chain, with no limit on the block size, which is currently set at 1, this in theory cna allow bitcoin to scale better but it has plenty of downsides
segwith offer the same scalability on a minor scale with less trouble, still both way have their holes, but we can't do nothing as there is no other perfect option, and bitcvoin surely need to fix the high tx fee and scale better
|
|
|
|
|
we are not the one that decide(unless oyu are a miners), segwit or BU is only in the hand of miners and exchange that can force miners to choose path instead of another, especially investors who in the end are the one that buy bitcoin
consensus mechaninc is there for a reason, but it would have been better if it was extended to nodes too, i don't like how full node are almost pointless as they ar enow...
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
