BTC, LTC, DOGE - PoW coins
PPC - PoS coin

BTC, PPC - SHA-256
LTC, DOGE - Scrypt

BTC was the original crypto currency by Satoshi
LTC was created as an alternative to BTC using a different PoW algorithm
DOGE was initially created based on the inu shiba meme that stormed the scene in 2013
PPC was the first proof of stake coin

If you followed the instructions, you should have backed up the original when you installed the patched one.  If you didn't, just re-flash the miners with the official Bitmain binaries.  Then, install Con/Kano cgminer binaries.

Ok, so you've been giving miners a nice bit of bonus coin.  I can only assume that you're hoping giving miners 160% instead of the 200% they've been getting will cause some of them to leave and thus alleviate your 51% problem.  Do you have any further plans to mitigate the 51% problem should this approach fail to have the desired effect?

Where will that extra 20% go, exactly?  Your own coffers will be quite nicely filled with DOGE until people move their miners.  If you're concerned about the 51% problem, you need to reduce the hash rate.

I'm confused why OP believes it necessary to open port 8333 to sync up the core software.  Yes, opening the port makes you a better citizen of the Bitcoin ecosystem, but it isn't required.

A ton of ideas have been thrown around but none of them have proved to be implementable.  The problem is in the concept of the share chain.  In effect it really is nothing more than a relatively low difficulty coin that you are solo mining.  The solution, which contains things like payout information, gets added to the share chain.  If that share also happens to solve a block of BTC, the block award gets distributed according to the payout information in the share that solves the block.

Because of this construct there's no easily implemented solution to the problem of variance.  OgNasty and Nonnakip have come up with a very interesting approach which puts ckpool on top of the p2pool backbone.  The tradeoff is that by choosing to mine there you are bound by the same constraints as a typical centralized pool.  For example, mining on a typical p2pool node, you can failover to any other p2pool node and none of your work is lost.  Not so with their implementation - no other standard p2pool node has any concept of work you've done because you don't have any individual shares on the chain.  You sacrifice the completely trust-less decentralized nature of p2pool for variance reduction.  It's a nice step forward and I've had a couple S3s pointed to OgNasty's pool (both standard p2pool and NastyPoP) since November of last year.  You can see my long-running thread about it here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=891298.0

If there were a viable solution, it could be implemented.

Just use the cyclic action of the bolt to power a small generator.  The more rounds you fire the more juice it generates... Lol

Unless they've proven they actually have hardware the chances of them being a scam is pretty high.  As with everything else invest wisely and only what you can afford to lose.

You can't include the share difficulty of the shares that are orphaned/dead that solve blocks because those shares are never transmitted to the p2pool network.  Furthermore, even standard orphaned/dead shares can't ever be counted for the same reason - they aren't transmitted.  The only thing you've got is what can be gleaned from the share chain itself, which would only ever be accurate if absolutely there were no orphans or dead... which you're pretty much guaranteed to never have happen .

In effect, any calculation of luck is ALWAYS going to be higher than actuality because of orphaned/dead shares that never make it onto the share chain.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that the share chain doesn't keep record of all shares, so there is also the possibility that some shares drop off the chain between block finds.  So unless you're recording every share that is submitted (which you certainly should be if you're trying to capture luck) your calculations will be off from there as well.

Oh this thread... LOL.  Brings back some memories

P2Pool is definitely a good way to go - especially if you're running your own node, which is how it is intended to be done.

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking, but here's the breakdown in general:

PPLNS - ramp up / ramp down period.  You get paid for your last N submitted shares.  I don't know how long "N" is here.
PPS - you get paid for every share you submit, less a 2.5% fee.
SOLO - if your miner finds the block, you get 24.75BTC (25BTC minus 1% fee).  You don't find a block, you don't get anything.

No... you didn't make a good deal.  Even IF that Uranus miner was real...

SP35 is $2235 (retail, but no longer produced you'd have to purchase used) for 5.5TH/s
Uranus (if it was real) is $3299 for 6TH/s

You've paid up front $1064 for an extra 500GH/s.

OK... let's examine this.  Assuming a $0.10 per kWh cost, current difficulty and $230 per BTC ...

SP35 is $8.76 per day to operate
Uv1 is $3.84 per day to operate

SP35 would expect to make $13.37 a day, minus operating costs is $4.61 daily
Uv1 would expect to make $14.58 a day, minus operating costs is $10.74 daily

This means the Uv1 currently makes $6.13 a day more than the SP35.  To recover the upfront difference in cost you'd need 59.5 days assuming all things remain constant.

Too bad that miner isn't real.

If you're getting free electricity, why bother with the thing at all?

The only use case where solar/wind/water/whatever power is viable is when you've already got it installed, and you're currently generating a surplus of energy that you sell back.  In this case if the value of the coin you mine is more than the value at which you sell your power, then by all means use that excess power to drive some miners.

That question is far too vague to provide you with any meaningful answer.  How much hash rate would you have?  Where would you point that hash?  What hardware would you use?  How much does power cost you?

You can see my writeup of OgNasty's pool here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=891298.0.  I've been running a test since November of 2014, with weekly results.  OgNasty and Nonnakip have done a really nice job putting this pool together and it matches up with your diagram.

I've just gotten back from a much needed vacation where I had virtually zero access to anything online.  Unfortunately, I didn't capture the luck values, but here are the numbers for the past two weeks:

5/22 - 5/29
NastyPoP - 0.04249927BTC
NastyP2P - 0.03263267BTC
Expected - 0.0307BTC

5/29 - 6/5
NastyPoP - 0.03711295BTC
NastyP2P - 0.03414086BTC
Expected - 0.0312BTC

Both NastyPoP and NastyP2P beat expectations over the past two weeks, and the NastyPoP payout method has now beaten the standard p2pool payouts for the past four weeks.

OP updated.

He's referring to the actual number of shares submitted vs the expected shares submitted to find a block.  Since p2pool has no real knowledge of any miner's actual hash rate and submitted shares like ckpool does, the best we could do with p2pool is to evaluate how many share-chain shares we'd expect it to take to find a block vs how many share-chain shares were actually submitted to find it.

The problem is the number of expected shares is constantly changing on p2pool because the share difficulty constantly changes, unlike the BTC network where it's static for 2016 blocks.  The best you're ever going to get is just an approximation of luck using the expected vs actual figures, so I see no real reason to change the calculations you're currently using, since they're providing an approximation as well.

Small, easily repeatable, need to execute tons of times... sounds like something you'd expect from a program... Why would a human do it for pennies?  They probably wouldn't.  Write a script to do it for you so you just click a button and walk away?  You bet somebody's going to do it.

If you don't want the process to end when you shut down your terminal session, start it with nohup:


If you built from source, you can run:

This will copy the relevant executables into a systemwide accessible location that is already in a user's path by default.  Of course, you could certainly do as you mentioned and export $PATH to include the path to the binaries in the src directory from the build.

You and me both.  My daughter just turned 18 a few days ago.

@thedreamer, you certainly did deliver as promised.  I'm sure that girl has all the boys eating right out of her hand .