|
The concept of renting unused GPUs is very interesting. However having actually used AWS for some limited mining, the main problem is getting an image that works.
|
|
|
|
EWBF, as the developer to the miner do you feel that you've reached the limit for NVidia miners or is there still optimization room?
This algorithm is complex and consists of many parts, which gives many opportunities for its improvement. i think that at this moment a couple percents of improvements are still possible. And i think that after that some opportunities is still be here, and if the developers don't see them today it absolutely does not mean that tommorow will be the same. Well i hope i gave you the answer  You did a great job and I don't even mind your 2% dev fee. I say this sincerely since I've written several miners and I have a good sense in what is involved. For this one the hashing is simple but tracking, finding and handling the collisions quickly isn't so easy. |
|
|
|
Cryptocurrency trading isn’t easy, but there are many people who have honed the art of trading bitcoins and altcoins on a daily basis.
Interestingly enough, most people don’t realize that many cryptocurrency traders use trading bots to execute trades faster and more
efficiently, and sometimes even in their sleep.
They are called bots because the programs execute trades like humans do, but they do it autonomously and can operate continuously
without having to rest. Trading bots or algorithmic trading is a technique that uses pre-programmed software that analyzes market
actions, such as time, price, orders, and volume.
There are bots that are free of charge and can be downloaded online. Some people have also designed their own bitcoin trading bot
software. Then, there are trading bot services you have to pay for, offered by various trading engine and programming companies.
Would you use a Bitcoin trading bot instead of you?
OP will do the forum a whole lot of good if he can give out links to these FREE bot sites he mentioned. That said, bots are called robots in Forex Trading and are auto-pilot driven devoid of emotion which is the killing point of trading, be it forex or crypto trading. So, I would say yes I will use a bot if I know it has a great result. I agree that giving out the links to the bots with source is useful. Personally I don't like bots I can't debug or modify. I've written several of my own simple bots in the past. While they did great, when a huge move occurred they often failed. I think that is a real problem with bots in general. I found BTC too prone to sudden moves to really be that profitable with simple trading strategies. |
|
|
|
Just for trying I'm CPU mining on Minergate with minerd
minerd -a cryptonight-lite -o stratum+tcp://aeon.pool.minergate.com:45690 -u mylogin_email -p x -t 2
Yet according to my own dashboard I'm not mining.
Any idea?
Thanks in advance
I switched from Minergate because it seemed the AEON I was making was less than 1/2 what I should have made. In fact after switching to https://aeon.kryptopool.com/ I started making more than double what I was at the same hash rate. I tried to inform Minergate support but they just told me everything at their pool was correct. I don't believe it for a second. For the same amount of hashing you should only see less than a 5% difference between pools. I personally believe someone is stealing coins at the Minergate pool. |
|
|
|
Lol, first of all your logo is absolutely disgusting. Secondly what the hell? Your ICO schedule is to sell your tokens for 0.001% of bitcoin's price in the beginning and then sell the tokens for 70% at the end for the investors? Like come on man, it's not hard to figure out that it's obviously a scam that you're running here. this thread should be deleted by administator, Scam for sure.
Admins don't delete likely scams, it's up to the community to decide. The scammer also posted a fake png of a wallet address. That is why I marked the account with negative trust. Anyone that uses a png for a blockchain address instead of not posting a link or just the address can't be trusted. |
|
|
|
EVERYONE JUST NEGATIVE REP this asshole
Why haven't you done that? |
|
|
|
|
What are the four different solvers? So far I'm not seeing any difference in performance.
EDIT solver 3 seems pretty bad, 0,1,2 seems fine
|
|
|
|
What's going on here?
Purely Scamming people. Moderators must have a look on this!
Actually it looks like a fake image of the blockchain address was created. Someone please double check my link. Don't trust the png file!!! Why would someone post a png file of a blockchain address? Seems like a lie. |
|
|
|
right..as long as we are bringing wck up to speed, the other narrative has been the 'we must have a healthy fee market now because block rewards are going to diminish later' narrative. So they have been saying 'high fees are good!'
Thanks, I missed a lot in two years. The current high fees is a bit putting the cart before the horse. 20 years from now when the mining reward is less than 1 BTC / block, then maybe it will be all about the fees. It sure isn't about technology limits anymore. I have a transaction stuck because I only paid 50 satoshi per byte. I'll just have to wait a few days because it isn't important enough for me to double spend to cancel out the transaction in a hurry. I just sent another transaction to cover it. It is absurd that one has to use something like https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ to figure out what a reason fee might be. If SegWit goes through my gut tells me the fees will be still be high. That is really the reason for not allowing a larger block size. |
|
|
|
What I don't understand is why blockstream is so bullheaded. They could easily provide a block size increase and still get their lightning network. Yea it wouldn't be worth as much up front but it would be better than getting nothing.
They are incentivized to stall on chain scaling as long as possible so that the LN gets a competitive advantage. One of their primary tactics to achieve this stalling has been to create a narrative that hard forks are bad (even if there's wide consensus). That makes sense and also explains the hard fork nonsense. Having gone through a number of hard forks with altcoins it is pretty clear they don't end up destroying the coin. |
|
|
|
|
Scammer had to come up with a new account name .... That probably took all the available energy ... Hence no scan improvments
bitereum <=== WAS this
biterium <=== NOW this, changing the 'e' to an 'i' is really hard for some ...
|
|
|
|
do you even know what core is?
core is 2 things. 1) master of bitcoin 2) slave of blockstream  What!?! I just looked at the blockstream site. Most or all of the "core" devs seemed to be employed by blockstream. Wow! Huge blatant conflict of interest. I'm even more out of touch than I realized. I didn't realize that Bitcoin was being hijacked. look deeper down the rabbit hole about the new drama of segwit getting into litecoin names to look out for charlie lee - litecoin master.. employed by coinbase bobby lee BTCC pool (charlies brother) now check out http://dcg.co/portfolio/#bblockstream BTCC http://dcg.co/portfolio/#ccoinbase even another drama event of bcoin made by purse.. http://dcg.co/portfolio/#ppurse all the segwit news buzz http://dcg.co/portfolio/#ccoindesk the 'economic majority in favour of segwit' http://dcg.co/portfolio they are all under the dcg VC list. yep blockstream are IN DEBT to a tune of $70m+ and they are really needing segwit to be pushed to get controlling interest in bitcoin so that the debts can be repaid via trading and LN hub fee's (how else do you think blockstream will relay the "loan") then ask yourself with segwits release in october. BTCC was first to jump on the band wagon without even giving themselves a couple weeks to even review the code. they jumped in full on instantly. and are now pushing the same for litecoin. and let us not forget the unpaid spell check interns hoping to kiss ass by being blockstream loyal, for the dream of getting a blockstream job.. funny part is they think its a $70m pocket of money ready to hand out. reality is blockstream are in DEBT to a tune of $70m if they cant get control and lastly. if you think that novembr 2017 would be a give up and try somhing different and accept no mean no if not activated by then. pfft. blockstream will just ignore the pool/user abstaining and just cause another year of delays and doing nothing more then re-pushing segwit as it all the way upto the end of 2018 so dont expect the drama to end this year http://www.uasf.co/Can BIP148 be cancelled?
Yes. In the event that the economic majority does not support BIP148, users should remove software that enforces BIP148. A flag day activation for SegWit would be the next logical steps and require coordination of the community, most likely towards the end of 2018. please note all links and quotes are pulled from the sources of blockstream/DCG. they are not random opinions from unknown reddit script writers or just propaganda wrote by random people Amazing and I thought the Trump drama was deep. Maybe the best thing would be for BIP148 to be activated with too little mining power to pull it off. Let them rot with with their own worthless chain. What I don't understand is why blockstream is so bullheaded. They could easily provide a block size increase and still get their lightning network. Yea it wouldn't be worth as much up front but it would be better than getting nothing. |
|
|
|
|
Give the retarded scammer a break! It takes a lot of time and effort for them to move from the retarded scammer rank to the stupid scammer rank. Plus this scammer is probably malnourished since is likely the scammer is living off of cash stole from their mother's purse. Also you can only do so much work from a public library computer. Maybe the scammer will do a better job on the third release of this scam.
|
|
|
|
do you even know what core is?
core is 2 things. 1) master of bitcoin 2) slave of blockstream What!?! I just looked at the blockstream site. Most or all of the "core" devs seemed to be employed by blockstream. Wow! Huge blatant conflict of interest. I'm even more out of touch than I realized. I didn't realize that Bitcoin was being hijacked. |
|
|
|
Even if people know about Bitcoin it is simply too hard to use. Couple that with the current costs and small transactions are almost a joke. I've done 100's, maybe more than a 1000 successful Bitcoin transactions and I still got caught by the raising transaction fees. My wallet ended up only putting 50 satoshi per byte and now I'll have to wait a couple more days for the network to forget about that transaction. Currently one has to use something like https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ to figure out what to try and set for a transaction fee. Even then one has to know about a wallet details. While a lot of that can be fixed with a better wallet people will have to know about it. Finally even when you do get a successful transaction, the cost is currently running 0.4 mBTC, or about $0.48 USD. Seriously expensive for something like a small store purchase. While that cost probably will go down, it could also go up. So Bitcoin has lost a major advantage over credit cards for small purchases. |
|
|
|
It seems like you are really frustrated about ASICBoost being outed. I wonder why that is.  It is also undeniable that some central planning is good for the overall development of Bitcoin. The developers propose something then it is for the nodes and the miners to decide which ones they want or what they do not want. It is the centralization of mining or the possibility of miner collusion that is bad. They have gained much leverage on the network that now they have become like an enemy of the Core developers to impose what they want.
Decentralized planning doesn't work. Just use the plane analogy. Do you let you passengers decide the size and type of your engines? lauda, your showing little to no understanding of bitcoin but high understanding to blockstreams control. i wonder why. asicboost is no secret. in 2015 it was an efficiency boost. hardware and software was developed. MONTHS LATER blockstream decided "wait we could implement segwit using the anyonecanspend backdoor exploit" thinking blockstream can have a easy life adding in code without node veto and thinking buying the pools a free lunch gets them segwit by christmas 2016.. so a year after asic hardware is designed. sgwit code is ready for testnet. but the testnet tests are not thorough enough. months later segwit gets a public release and starts having a deadline. so thats a year of coding.. blockstream failed to realise their 2merkle backdoor version wouldnt be compatible with efficient hardware software. they released the code.. 5 months of having the release blockstream had no clue their backdoor (going soft) would have issues. then last month gmax hit the wall by realising that all the year and a half of trying to bypass node consensus by going soft would never have worked out right anyway. so now gmax is having a temper tantrum and blaming pools.
please do something before replying to defend blockstream. clear your mind of blockstream.. relax, take off the defender hat. and wear the logical thinking cap.
and imagine this. its 2011 ATI have this snazzy feature that Geforce doesnt. is called openCL. it gives ATI an advantage. now imagine 2012 some new bitcoin feature was needed, it was hoped to use some backdoor to implement it to not need full node consensus. you have done lots of tests using Geforce and ATI non-openCL hardware. near 2013 you realise your backdoor attempts hit a wall because openCL affects it. do you A. tell the world ATI is attacking bitcoin because of openCL B. be honest and tell the world the node consensus bypass backdoor would never have worked as expected but you only just found the problem C. do B but then raise your hands and say ok community, lets node consensus a new cleaner recoded version and this time lets include dynamics and other proper fixes. D. do A and double down threatening ATI and insinuating people should hate ATI with racial rhetoric while you try killing off anyone thats using openCL Thank you! I had no idea where the absurdity was coming from. |
|
|
|
Someone sent 2 ETH ...
Could be the OP himself. Oh, I didn't think of that. Very well could be. |
|
|
|
So you were giving away 10000 BTE and then you got some poor sucker to give you 2 ETH and you only give them 7255 BTE? That person sure got a good deal ... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
