first off all im not here to pun, i like this coin and i bought some but yesterday at this time i put 2 machines with 6 gpus to mine this coin and didnt find any blocks in last 24 hours is this coin become to hard to mine for small miners or i was just to unlucky again this is about 5th time i tried to mine and i set up everything alright but didnt found even one block. I think it should be better for small miners that this coin start to make some official pools for small miners lets say 10 mhs max per same ip/miner so that small miners can have some chance to get some coins 2  . 1) Calculate average time for finding a block. Net hashrate/your hashrate = average time in minutes. If you have no blocks in more then, let's say, x2 of this time, you can start to worry that you're doing something wrong (or you're very unlucky). 2) I guess you CAN use testnet with ONE gpu for SHORT time to see if you get any blocks whatsoever so your config is OK. But I can't say that for sure... MAYBE that's a bad idea... Maybe we need yet another testnet for miners testing their rigs actually mine some blocks... Hope I don't give an idea for some of our haters and trolls... currently nvidia miner doesn't work on testnet. AMD miner works fine. |
|
|
|
(...)
The use of giant red letters does not help your argument.
He actually has no argument. All those issues were addressed and clarified publicly, several times, but he does not want answers, he wants to spam. This is tiresome... |
|
|
|
(...)
What you are trying to prove by writing all in red.
Do not help him spam the thread by quoting his red letters. Please edit them out while quoting, this helps everyone (even him, he would have a way better impact if he did not use red letters). |
|
|
|
Update, we have 348 MNs with 69 unelected ones, so 279 active MNs. So close....  We just need 21 of those 48 MNs over 300 to finally get elected!  have you counted them by hand or do you copy and paste the table into a spreadsheet or something? by hand, I am a human scanning machine. Sadly it's not possible to export or copy the data. You can select the table cells, but no possibility to right click or anything. YET! so, new feature request, heh? "export to CSV"  I guess the easier way would be to have this done by a CLI/RPC command like "mnlist" that would output the results of the table as json code, than we can process it electronically. |
|
|
|
Update, we have 348 MNs with 69 unelected ones, so 279 active MNs. So close.... We just need 21 of those 48 MNs over 300 to finally get elected! have you counted them by hand or do you copy and paste the table into a spreadsheet or something? |
|
|
|
And just so that everyone understand:
1- are pools possible? YES
2- are there already any pools? YES, private ones, at least one
3- are big pools possible? Maybe, but they are not economical.
4- Why? because anyone can steal the block found, so in practice, it is equivalent to solo mining.
5- since the restriction are economical and not technical, isn't there an economical work around for making pools possible? maybe, but no one has thought of them yet.
6- what happens if someone think of them? We, as a community, and Mr. Spread as the main dev will have to outsmart them and come up with new economical restrictions to pooling.
I am cool with that #6 - nothing lasts forever. My personal opinion, and i make it clear here that this is an opinion, not a fact, is that we will never see an workaround for the economical restrictions for two main reasons: 1- no one fucking cares 2- they are based in very strong and longly established game theory concepts (mainly, iterated prisoner's dilema) |
|
|
|
|
And just so that everyone understand:
1- are pools possible? YES
2- are there already any pools? YES, private ones, at least one
3- are big pools possible? Maybe, but they are not economical.
4- Why? because anyone can steal the block found, so in practice, it is equivalent to solo mining.
5- since the restriction are economical and not technical, isn't there an economical work around for making pools possible? maybe, but no one has thought of them yet.
6- what happens if someone think of them? We, as a community, and Mr. Spread as the main dev will have to outsmart them and come up with new economical restrictions to pooling.
|
|
|
|
Hey guys, I think we can fix pool mining!!
I just need to know how the hashing works (like, what gets hashed and in which order). Can someone please tell me?
Bump. you should take a look at the code, but it goes roughly like this: 1- the whole block is hashed with double sha2. 2- the header, except for the hash above is signed with the private key and the least significant 5 bits of the nonce 3- results from 1 and 2 are appended to the header 4- the header is hashed with X11 5- compare with target, publish if it was reached, start again if not. |
|
|
|
I'm sure this won't make any difference, some folks only read what they want to.
Do we have a pool? Yes.
It's merely a pool server we setup to solo mine to nothing more, we just so happened to let a couple of other small hashrate users in to help out a bit. Is it a risk? Of course it is.
Mr. Spread has done quite a good job at keeping this coin a solo mineable, that doesn't mean that it will always be that way, there a lot of smart folks around here and if there is enough $ involved then one should expect that there will be others trying to get in on the action in some form or another.
I hear you. Your arguments were always reasonable. We will see what the markets will tell and what the programmers will innovate. true, i was looking for the "like" button, to like his comment, but it was not available |
|
|
|
I think that many of us need to stop mining tspr. Unless you are setting up nodes we might as well stop. Let those working towards creating more nodes get tspr.
Well, it doesn't really matter if you mine or if you ask for coins from those who mine, there needs to be a constant mining in the testnet so that we can keep the testnet alive for the masternodes. No need to use big hashrates, though. a single core from your VPS or home computer will suffice. |
|
|
|
(...)
Well, if Mr. Spread wasn't banned, maybe he could change it. Ever thought about that? bitman008 is a troll, please ignore him. We can address real issues with real people and leave the trolls talking alone... |
|
|
|
As already explained, several time, the feature of "no pools" does not mean that it is impossible to maintain a pool, but rather that they are not economically viable, since anyone can steal the coins form them [...]
Would be somewhat easy to secure by moving coins to a separate wallet as soon as they confirm and make the payouts from there. The only problem I'd see is if a miner would move the coins before the pool does. that's an arm race, with a 50-50 chance for each one to win, so the pool owner can make it profitable by rising the fees and paying the other users from his revenue, but then... it is risky... another solution might be that the pool owner charges a "deposit" from the miners, and if the miner steals something, the deposit is held and the miner banned. But i don't see this growing into large scale. Thats an experiment worth making. |
|
|
|
As already explained, several time, the feature of "no pools" does not mean that it is impossible to maintain a pool, but rather that they are not economically viable, since anyone can steal the coins form them [...]
Would be somewhat easy to secure by moving coins to a separate wallet as soon as they confirm and make the payouts from there. The only problem I'd see is if a miner would move the coins before the pool does. that's an arm race, with a 50-50 chance for each one to win, so the pool owner can make it profitable by rising the fees and paying the other users from his revenue, but then... it is risky... |
|
|
|
Why are so many people mining tspr? Once you have your masternodes setup shouldn't you quit mining? Unless you are trying to get enough to hand out.
i, for one, am mining to create new MNs, everytime i reach 100 tspr i create a new MN (so far, only one created from mining) |
|
|
|
(...)
Where is your proof?
please, do not quote the big red letter trolls. just ignore him... |
|
|
|
Yea rite.. I looked the other day and a single spread address controlled over 25% of the network, get your facts straight.
Wether it's pools or single miners, I tend to think the latter is worse. At least pools have accountability in which they have to obey to the network policies up to some point to ensure their miners get paid. I'd rather have 25% of a network in the hand of a pool op having 500 users behind vs a single farmer.
Do you have a way to disprove my opinon? How can mine be fud and your's not?
Edit; also large pools is just a question of time as the "solo" edge of Spreadcoin has been flawed, hence I saw it had it's purpose beaten.
Large pools are not a question of time, the larger the pool, the easier it is for miners to steal from it, so pools, if they ever arise (aside from individuals testing by themselves), will keep small, within a group of trusted friends. Unless you come with a way to avoid the stealing of coins (and no one has yet), you opinion is flawed. About being FUD, think of it: you are a pool owner, posting in an announcement thread for a coin that avoids pooling by enabling users to steal from them, quoting spammers that write in big red letters in an aggressive, accusatory tone, based on non existent facts and made up data. Well, you might call it opinion, but that's a hell of a misplaced opinion. Last time I checked I didn't own any pool anymore.. what's you point.. Is there pools on spreadcoin? Yes Is there mining centralization? Yes Is Spreadcoin's purpose totally flawed at the moment? Yes My point is totally valid.you know that to be valid you need evidence to support it, right? As far as the centralized mining going on I didn't keep a screenshot of what was going on the other day. However for the pool it's pretty simple and you know where to find it (Nonce-Pool) My point still goes... Spreadcoin's main "feature" (no pools) is flawed. Kthx. As already explained, several time, the feature of "no pools" does not mean that it is impossible to maintain a pool, but rather that they are not economically viable, since anyone can steal the coins form them, If you don't get that, which is written EVERYWHERE, then, you are seriously flawed! It's as if i said: it is not economically viable to buy macdonalds burgers and sell the for half the price, and you just open a shop that does that just to prove your point. Well, you may prove your point, but you will go bankrupt prooving it, and macdonalds will get richer (and thank you greatly for the extra proffit)! |
|
|
|
Yea rite.. I looked the other day and a single spread address controlled over 25% of the network, get your facts straight.
Wether it's pools or single miners, I tend to think the latter is worse. At least pools have accountability in which they have to obey to the network policies up to some point to ensure their miners get paid. I'd rather have 25% of a network in the hand of a pool op having 500 users behind vs a single farmer.
Do you have a way to disprove my opinon? How can mine be fud and your's not?
Edit; also large pools is just a question of time as the "solo" edge of Spreadcoin has been flawed, hence I saw it had it's purpose beaten.
Large pools are not a question of time, the larger the pool, the easier it is for miners to steal from it, so pools, if they ever arise (aside from individuals testing by themselves), will keep small, within a group of trusted friends. Unless you come with a way to avoid the stealing of coins (and no one has yet), you opinion is flawed. About being FUD, think of it: you are a pool owner, posting in an announcement thread for a coin that avoids pooling by enabling users to steal from them, quoting spammers that write in big red letters in an aggressive, accusatory tone, based on non existent facts and made up data. Well, you might call it opinion, but that's a hell of a misplaced opinion. Last time I checked I didn't own any pool anymore.. what's you point.. Is there pools on spreadcoin? Yes Is there mining centralization? Yes Is Spreadcoin's purpose totally flawed at the moment? Yes My point is totally valid.you know that to be valid you need evidence to support it, right? |
|
|
|
Yea rite.. I looked the other day and a single spread address controlled over 25% of the network, get your facts straight.
Wether it's pools or single miners, I tend to think the latter is worse. At least pools have accountability in which they have to obey to the network policies up to some point to ensure their miners get paid. I'd rather have 25% of a network in the hand of a pool op having 500 users behind vs a single farmer.
Do you have a way to disprove my opinon? How can mine be fud and your's not?
Edit; also large pools is just a question of time as the "solo" edge of Spreadcoin has been flawed, hence I saw it had it's purpose beaten.
Large pools are not a question of time, the larger the pool, the easier it is for miners to steal from it, so pools, if they ever arise (aside from individuals testing by themselves), will keep small, within a group of trusted friends. Unless you come with a way to avoid the stealing of coins (and no one has yet), you opinion is flawed. About being FUD, think of it: you are a pool owner, posting in an announcement thread for a coin that avoids pooling by enabling users to steal from them, quoting spammers that write in big red letters in an aggressive, accusatory tone, based on non existent facts and made up data. Well, you might call it opinion, but that's a hell of a misplaced opinion. Last time I checked I didn't own any pool anymore.. ok, i can correct it: About being FUD, think of it: you are a former pool owner, posting in an announcement thread for a coin that avoids pooling by enabling users to steal from them, quoting spammers that write in big red letters in an aggressive, accusatory tone, based on non existent facts and made up data. Well, you might call it opinion, but that's a hell of a misplaced opinion. |
|
|
|
Yea rite.. I looked the other day and a single spread address controlled over 25% of the network, get your facts straight.
Wether it's pools or single miners, I tend to think the latter is worse. At least pools have accountability in which they have to obey to the network policies up to some point to ensure their miners get paid. I'd rather have 25% of a network in the hand of a pool op having 500 users behind vs a single farmer.
Do you have a way to disprove my opinon? How can mine be fud and your's not?
Edit; also large pools is just a question of time as the "solo" edge of Spreadcoin has been flawed, hence I saw it had it's purpose beaten.
Large pools are not a question of time, the larger the pool, the easier it is for miners to steal from it, so pools, if they ever arise (aside from individuals testing by themselves), will keep small, within a group of trusted friends. Unless you come with a way to avoid the stealing of coins (and no one has yet), you opinion is flawed. About being FUD, think of it: you are a pool owner, posting in an announcement thread for a coin that avoids pooling by enabling users to steal from them, quoting spammers that write in big red letters in an aggressive, accusatory tone, based on non existent facts and made up data. Well, you might call it opinion, but that's a hell of a misplaced opinion. |
|
|
|
Burying your heads in the sand doesn't change the fact that SPR is cracked by pool now ,soon multi-pool.Constant dumping will come from multipool and FPGA farmers. no comment about this issue? We all know you're full of FUD - there is no issue, except you. He's somewhat right about it.. I remember crouton complaining in Darkcoin about a few major pools having a bunch of hashrate.. we now see the same on SPR except it's private miners with no accountability to anyone versus pools that do have some accountability, at least to their users. IMO Spreadcoin's only particular feature is flawed and got it's purpose defeated. All the other "features" are copied from other coins. Not sure what you mean by that. It's purpose is to avoid hashrate concentration in pools. Pools have no accountability whatsoever, as individual miners don't. So no difference in that. But pools lead to much more concentrated hashrate, as all the graphs shown by the trolls, and the rich list from spread tend to show. We have someone with at most 11% of the hashrate, while on BTC and DRK some pools have more than 30% of it. HOW is it a flawed feature with it's purpose defeated? I understand that you have interest in FUDing this coin as you are purposefully quoting someone that writes in big red letters, but please, get your facts straight! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
