now back to only 105% ?
Yeah. Interested in this as well. I'm back at 105% too. A few hours ago I was still at 115%. |
|
|
|
I have a few family members that are willing to let me run cpuminer on their computer as long as they don't have to look at it and i'm afraid if i let it run as is they might accidentally close it, is there any way to run it in the background?
It can be done with some very simple VBS... I don't remember where I found it, I'll search for it when I'm back to my home PC tomorrow. |
|
|
|
Yeah it's the old tasty argument of "SolidCoin is centralized Bitcoin isn't" . Like the trust nodes in SolidCoin somehow make it sooooo much different than deepbit and btcguild controlling Bitcoin. Might as well call deepbit trust node 1 and btcguild trust node 2. Because you are trusting them to not attack Bitcoin..  Not that I'm saying deepbit or btcguild will do an attack but if you can't see Bitcoin users are TRUSTING these two pools not to then you can't argue any centralization aspect against SolidCoin with a clear conscience. Miners actually give the pools their trust when they mine on that pool. If the pool misplaces that trust, miners will leave the pool. This is similar to voting a politician into office to represent the people in a democracy. Just look at the miners that left Eligius when Luke-Jr used it to attack CoiledCoin. Granted since this wasn't an attack on Bitcoin, most of the miners didn't care and stayed with Eligius. If deepbit, or any other pool tries to attack Bitcoin, you can bet that they will lose their hashrate immediately. I wouldn't be that sure. There might well be a large bunch of clueless people who just mine there without really caring. If they did care they wouldn't mine in a pool which has enough power to kind of veto the network. |
|
|
|
Now can someone help me figure out a good hardware rig to get started using Windows 7?
What brand/specs should I be looking for in a CPU? Is there a thread or web page that has more info? Seriously, just don't get a 500 bucks CPU just for Litecoin. Get what you'd get for your other uses, and then just run the miner on it. It used to be worth 0.01+ BTC, look where it is now. As for CPU brand, well, the miner has regularly been optimized, which often changed what brand or model was best. Now as far as I understood, it seems that miner performance is globally comparable to generic bench performance, so Intel > AMD in absolute performance, not sure about perf/price ratio though. Finally, how do I find out what the potential hash speed is for my current PC... just by running the scryptmining software? That, or by checking the miner thread: some people reported their hash speeds their, that may give you an idea. On a Phenom 2 X4 955 @3.6GHz I'm getting about 25kh/s. On a Phenom 2 X4M N930 @ 2GHz I'm getting about 13 kh/s. |
|
|
|
Firstly the source code to SolidCoin was released What you don't seem to understand is that the MIT license doesn't even require you to share the source.  You just need to include the original license.... No, the SolidCoin license is non-free. Free software means the freedom to run, study, modify, and distribute (even for a fee). No Bitcoin is not free because it doesn't allow me to not include a copyright text Ah, we're making progress already finally about that copyright text. Might want to have a read at the reason why the copyright text has to be included. |
|
|
|
Heh that's pretty funny . You say "SolidCoin ripped off Bitcoin" then immediately follow with "Ok the license allows what SolidCoin did but it's still ripping it off! Guys! Come on...."
Many people took this stand against SOPA yet they make a hero of a guy who :-
1) robbed many people of Bitcoins and CoiledCoins
2) Has 51% attacked a chain using mtgox/eligius resources.
3) Filed fake DMCA claims to try to silence/censor something they don't like.
4) Likely culprit in other attacks on other coins
Well, with those sorts of morals I'm not sure what else to expect from some here. Flip... flop. Can't have it both ways you heroes. It doesn't even matter if you don't like SolidCoin, to step down to the filthy level of Luke-Jr is telling how desperate some have become. If anyone wonders how some awful crap gets passed by our governments look no further than the behaviour shown by a few here to get their "Revenge" on something they don't like. Dude, just learn to understand the license. It allows "ripping off" BUT it doesn't allow removing the license text. You use the copyright tools to lock your source, and then you complain that other guys use those same tools just to protect their credit (the properly included license note). I'm not calling Luke-Jr a hero, just on this point he's damn right. It's not as if the license required you to pay 2 billion dollars to reuse the source, you just had to include the MIT license properly, is that so hard? |
|
|
|
Again I am not defending Solidcoin (obviously) or any of it's supporters.
What I am saying is that this DMCA take down is LAME AS SHIT, and goes against literally EVERYTHING we preach in these forums... SolidCoin ripped off the open source Bitcoin code to make it proprietary (okay, that's allowed by the MIT license but that's still ugly). I think it was already said somewhere earlier in this thread, but it's a clear case of "live by the sword die by the sword" there... |
|
|
|
@Goat: Much love and all, but please update this thread's title. Everytime I see "Hasing power" I want to come in here and post "Wtf is HASING POWER?". lol
Edit, lol fixed. I fail at letters, I'm good at numbers:P Took me a while too to realize what was wrong with this title... it's crazy how those things are true and can be verified on a daily basis: - "Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by itslef but the wrod as a wlohe." - "What the eyes see, what the ears hear, is what is already in the mind" |
|
|
|
True, but I was implying that the multi-GPU setups we see around here are basically little compact supercomputers in themselves. Yeah, but you can also mine decently enough with some APU or some $100 GPU. That's some cheap supercomputer  (and that provides much more value in BTC than some quad core CPU provides in LTC). |
|
|
|
Litecoin - You don't need a supercomputer to mine some! Actually, a supercomputer would still be more useful to mine LTC than to mine BTC (you just need a GPU). |
|
|
|
For whatever reason you seem to have the worst luck with us on reject and connections issues. Honestly I have no idea why:(
Is anyone else having abnormal connection issues today? My server is in the USA and I personally am connecting fine from Thailand :/ Connecting from Europe, no particular issue this morning. But still, for almost each other block I send a few shares to my backup pool... |
|
|
|
Reject rate over 5% in first 45 minutes -- not looking good...  That's weird, I don't have that many rejects, I must be around 1-2%... But I do have regular micro-downtimes where my miner falls back to secondary pool. |
|
|
|
|
Understanding all this things in details would take me too much time. As far as I understood, that /P2SH/ thing is going to break stuff... I say just keep it on the testnet long enough before making a decision about it then... As already said, it's not as if there was a deadline to release it...
|
|
|
|
Right, there was also a big giant header at the top of the page that said there will be errors during the update. And now that header says allow 2016 blocks to pass and then accuracy will be Sp0t on. Ah, well I didn't see the first one then (it's gone now), that's why. See how it says it has measured %0.10 of blocks? That means its basing that estimate off only 0.1 * 2016 completed blocks which means nothing. After a full cycle, it will equal to the elapsed blocks / 2016. Yeah that's the part I never understood, only about 40% blocks left but only 0.10% measured. That used to happen all the time, even before the update. Well, anyway, no issue then I guess, I thought maybe there was a bug or something... |
|
|
|
Major Update!
New scripts in place. I patched all 8 clients to output directly to the scripts so I no longer have to poll getinfo on the clients. So after 2016 blocks, all chains should be exactly accurate for diff estimates and chain speed. (No longer errors due to polling timestamps.)
I will be adding solidcoin back to the page. I had removed it primarily because it locked up with frequent polling, which is no longer necessary (not because its super-silly and centralized).
Note: gg estimates are still useless because of its tiny target and cycle length.
There is something weird going on with BTC: btc 162474 872M 2016 163296 822 0.10% 1250757.75000 4764791.42857 280.95% 1d 11hr 57m 45s A few hours ago it was rather in the +10%, as far as I remember. |
|
|
|
If Coinhunter hadn't attempted to restrict others from Solidcoin using Copyright law, I wouldn't have cared.
Live by the sword, die by the sword. Yup, exactly what I think of this: he uses copyright laws against us, we do the same. We're not all gandhis. |
|
|
|
|
Indeed a nice improvement again. From 5 khs to 6.5khs per core on my P2X4 955...
Edit: and I just noticed: my CPU, although still at 100% and with the above-mentioned hashrate gain, runs much cooler: 53°C instead of the previous 58°C!
|
|
|
|
It is called theft. If Microsoft stole the Bitcoin code, made it proprietary and then tried to commercialize it would you also say to not respond w/ legal action. Yup, not only he turns free software into proprietary one, but he removes the credits... That's a bit too much I think... The worst thing is, he then gives lessons about the spirit of open source... |
|
|
|
WOW!
From 3.04 to 5.23 @ Phenom X6!
That's weird, either you skipped a version, either the Linux version improved at a different pace than the Windows builds. I already have around 5.0/core on a Phenom X4 with the build of January ~5. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
