No and no. Main chain and classic chain are totally independent, you can spend separately. But this is no 'attack' .. That's just how it is  |
|
|
|
ocminer how long do u need for the new pool?blockchain complete now? Nope, i'm at block 120.000 currently... Takes hours to sync even though I used the --fast option.. Should I stay up another hour and wait or just go to bed now? lol  yes tell us...this is what i want to know^^ It'll probably take more than an hour, go to bed and tomorrow everything will be up and running |
|
|
|
ocminer how long do u need for the new pool?blockchain complete now? Nope, i'm at block 120.000 currently... Takes hours to sync even though I used the --fast option.. |
|
|
|
There is missing EU pool OCminer ?  syncing the chain... 60% |
|
|
|
ETC being on Polo adds an interesting dynamic to the saga.
Hey jc congrats to legendary ETC (re-)earned my respect for doing this, it's a pretty good choice IMHO. Loading up the blockchain currently for a dedicated ETC pool |
|
|
|
has anyone got a miner working on OSX?
yep, the cpu-miner, but its not profitable now |
|
|
|
Guys I'll be closing suprnovas esp pool soon, please move over to the Remaining pools, thanks!
May I ask why? It's been working pretty fine for months. I donated a lot to the pool. The coin is worthless and a resource hog, I have to pay for the servers and all the fees and donations I made since I started the pool are about 5 $ .. Not to mention the work I had getting the algo integrated etc. It's like with investments.. At some point a decision has to be made I see. What about increasing the fee to 2% before giving up? Maybe some more people will donate now that they know the situation. Thanks for the offer, but I need the space for other coins. |
|
|
|
Guys I'll be closing suprnovas esp pool soon, please move over to the Remaining pools, thanks!
May I ask why? It's been working pretty fine for months. I donated a lot to the pool. The coin is worthless and a resource hog, I have to pay for the servers and all the fees and donations I made since I started the pool are about 5 $ .. Not to mention the work I had getting the algo integrated etc. It's like with investments.. At some point a decision has to be made |
|
|
|
|
Guys I'll be closing suprnovas esp pool soon, please move over to the Remaining pools, thanks!
|
|
|
|
@dev atleast fix the issue with @ocminers pool (suprnova) so that we all can mine to that as he's willing to keep it open...
As explained, the required fix is not something that can be done 100% in-wallet, adjustments to the pool's software is required, which ocminer doesn't have time for. We (HODL) can't fix something that is out of our control. LOL. You broke HOdl yet you blame @ocminer? You came up with the idiotic idea of not paying block rewards for 1 year. That is your own fault. Don't blame @ocminer. look, a change to network requirements was proposed and voted on. I didn't come up with the idea, nor did I write the code to implement it or even vote for it personally, but it got majority vote and has been implemented none the less. I'm certainly not blaming ocminer for that or anything else. It is the responsibility of 3rd party software to adhere to the new requirements of the network if they wish to maintain compliance and compatibility. I have been willing to work with pool operators on getting pooled mining back in order but have had little to no communication from them. ocminer has been the only one that has communicated any desire to support the network's new requirements, but part of that communication has been that he is busy with other projects. This is understandable and acceptable, but also means that it will delay the re-opening of HODL mining on his pool. There is nothing Freetrade, myself, or anyone else can do to patch ocminer's pool software for him. If any pool operator decides to cease support for HODL (or any other coin for that matter), that is their choice, not yours nor mine. They already play an under-appreciated role and owe it to no one to maintain operations for any coin. In short : They wanted pools to quit and now pools have quit |
|
|
|
IMHO "full" stratum is really not needed as entropy with the 64bit headers is more than enough, I see decent efficiency on https://sia.suprnova.cc (>99%) with my current implementation. It's not bitcoin, it's a more modern header and hashing algo, so why reinvent the wheel. We already see this high of an efficiency with getwork, as that's all your "stratum implementation" is... Why don't you keep your getwork then ? Why would we get rid of it? We will continue to support stratum and getwork "We" ? The borg ?  Good luck mate |
|
|
|
IMHO "full" stratum is really not needed as entropy with the 64bit headers is more than enough, I see decent efficiency on https://sia.suprnova.cc (>99%) with my current implementation. It's not bitcoin, it's a more modern header and hashing algo, so why reinvent the wheel. We already see this high of an efficiency with getwork, as that's all your "stratum implementation" is... Why don't you keep your getwork then ? |
|
|
|
So many forky Blocks with no reward WTF !!!!!!
Where is this? maxminers pool and pool.mn i don't know what you are talking about my miner found , find blocks but no rewards, not shown in the dashboard or so i dont know whats wrong Haha i also had that, found like 1 block every 10 seconds at suprnova, but it was not a reall block, dont know why he say that. When i took some ''good'' shares he said: block found. Also with 1k shares. Ofc i tought also: why the hell i dont see the blocks at the dashboard from suprnova  It can never,ever be that i get 1 block every 10 seconds, it just cant... IF u look at the hashrate from the blockfinders, i've just got 1% from that hash speed. It's some mistake from the sgminer, he show that u find a block, even if you didnt. He say you find a block when u took some higher shares (like 1k shares and he say: block found!, ofc that's not a block). Anyway we just need some updates for the miner, the miner work but can be optimised, bugs can be deleted etc. No worry, because this is a ''new'' algo. The miner is fine - the pool lies about nBits. Good to know! Does the pool operators know how to fix this? Because suprnova op knows about nothing? And the pool operators say it's the wallet? xd Thanks for the compliment, my friend, I will have a look and fix it for you |
|
|
|
So many forky Blocks with no reward WTF !!!!!!
Where is this? maxminers pool and pool.mn i don't know what you are talking about my miner found , find blocks but no rewards, not shown in the dashboard or so i dont know whats wrong Haha i also had that, found like 1 block every 10 seconds at suprnova, but it was not a reall block, dont know why he say that. When i took some ''good'' shares he said: block found. Also with 1k shares. Ofc i tought also: why the hell i dont see the blocks at the dashboard from suprnova It can never,ever be that i get 1 block every 10 seconds, it just cant... IF u look at the hashrate from the blockfinders, i've just got 1% from that hash speed. It's some mistake from the sgminer, he show that u find a block, even if you didnt. He say you find a block when u took some higher shares (like 1k shares and he say: block found!, ofc that's not a block). Anyway we just need some updates for the miner, the miner work but can be optimised, bugs can be deleted etc. No worry, because this is a ''new'' algo. The miner is fine - the pool lies about nBits. The pool is fine the wallet lies about nBits |
|
|
|
So many forky Blocks with no reward WTF !!!!!!
Where is this? maxminers pool and pool.mn i don't know what you are talking about my miner found , find blocks but no rewards, not shown in the dashboard or so i dont know whats wrong Probably a false positive from the miner, it's a common thing. Whats your hashrate and whats your miner ? how many blocks did you find according to your miner ? sgminer, 50 mhs , 20 or more 2 rewarded , it works all fine Lol, I wish I could find 20 blocks with 50 mh/s too That is an issue of sgminer mate, I see that on my new sia pool too |
|
|
|
After finding out there are 3 current efforts for stratum mining, we'd like to propose a standard that works best for all miners and pool ops. We've outlined the specs here: http://Http://siamining.com/stratumMajor benefits include scalability and future proof protocol. Good to see you finally also believe that stratum or tcp based mining is necessary, however, there is already a stratum based protocol available which works fine on suprnova ( https://sia.suprnova.cc) with a recent version of sgminer: ( https://github.com/bitbandi/sgminer/tree/sia) and I don't see it necessary to rewrite or reinvent the wheel again. A compiled, good working windows version is available too: http://cryptomining-blog.com/wp-content/download/sgminer-5.4.0-sia-windows-x64.zipThe stratum based implementation already has all benefits it can have like vardiff, tcp based connections, low stales, low rejects and reconnecting to the last job after a connection failure etc. I've documented my implementation too and already posted it to several developers, if anyone has further interest, don't hesitate to contact me. Couple points: - VarDiff is independent of stratum. We already have it implemented with getwork. It's been available on our pool since day one.
- You point out that you have a working version of stratum based protocol that works with your pool. However it lacks features. If stratum is necessary for the long term success of pools and mining, then it is worthwhile to implement it properly. Our protocol is true to the intent of the original stratum. As it is miners who build the Merkle tree rather than the pool.
There is no way our protocol could be described as a "getwork over TCP", and if you do not agree we suggest that you re-read the specification. Our work is also publicly documented. Anyone can read it and criticize. I see no advantage over "true" stratum how you call it versus getwork over tcp until you have a mining farm of multiple Petahash running. Entropy is fair enough with my implemenation, pool efficiency is > 98% and I have reports from miners that they don't have any issues at all with duplicates or stales which they had on your pool. Also the miners are established and well tested.. Everyone knows and used sgminer before, everyone knows how to tune mining using the Intensity and worksize settings. GBT-TCP (getblocktemplate over tcp) would indeed be a real advantage and also something new which would improve things a lot, allthough there are also some disadvantages and security risks. I remember you saying in Slack that stratum is not necessary at all for Sia, so i'm a bit surprised about your sudden turnaround and the sudden fork of "my" sgminer and your custom stratum implementation. It would have been much, much easier to simply implement the already working stratum, work together and release it instead of going this way, however, some people seem to like to reinvent the wheel. However, technically I see no problem in supporting your stratum version too on a separate port, it will just be confusing for the miners who don't know which miner and port they should choose.. IMHO "keep it simple" is better I'll be releasing my stratum modules and MPOS mods to the public, there is already a second pool integrating and testing everything, when this is successful people can choose what they use and open their own pools too. |
|
|
|
After finding out there are 3 current efforts for stratum mining, we'd like to propose a standard that works best for all miners and pool ops. We've outlined the specs here: http://Http://siamining.com/stratumMajor benefits include scalability and future proof protocol. Good to see you finally also believe that stratum or tcp based mining is necessary, however, there is already a stratum based protocol available which works fine on suprnova ( https://sia.suprnova.cc) with a recent version of sgminer: ( https://github.com/bitbandi/sgminer/tree/sia) and I don't see it necessary to rewrite or reinvent the wheel again. A compiled, good working windows version is available too: http://cryptomining-blog.com/wp-content/download/sgminer-5.4.0-sia-windows-x64.zipThe stratum based implementation already has all benefits it can have like vardiff, tcp based connections, low stales, low rejects and reconnecting to the last job after a connection failure etc. I've documented my implementation too and already posted it to several developers, if anyone has further interest, don't hesitate to contact me. BTW: Currently there's a 20% Bonus per Block on https://sia.suprnova.cc :-) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
