|
I personally wouldn't trust any web wallet with significant amount of money worth of coins long term.
|
|
|
|
|
The importance of market cap is highly overestimated or sometimes even misunderstood.
Market cap alone really doesn't tell anything even remotely important about a coin.
I think liquidity and distribution are what people should start looking at first when trying to gauge a coin, but that's just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Full PoS with ICO. Who needs mining for better distribution and to create a floor price, it's much more fun when a value of a coin is completely artificial and solely depend on pretty graphics, right?
|
|
|
|
Seems that way. This thread might have some more info. |
|
|
|
Danila from ipominer is botneter!
Becouse.... Google it "Danila ipominer"
I found that he uses cpu miner x64 on maybe torrents like crack or something like this....
Thats why he got unreal amount of hashing
You're right: http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/virus-removal/remove-cpu-minerI thought botnet owners are pointing the hashrate to their own stratum proxy and point that to whatever pool they want. |
|
|
|
ipoMiner has been the largest VTC pool since early February, and our percentage of hashrate has been steadily growing since then. We've had both small and large miners mining Vertcoin with us since then, and we're excited to see VTC regaining popularity and more widespread interest in the past few weeks.
Of course, we want to support and encourage VTC as much as possible. Having a single pool with large hashrate isn't actually a direct problem, but it does create concerns over 51% attacks. To help encourage diversification of mining hashrate on the network, I've notified all the Vertcoin miners at ipoMiner that the VTC ports will be shut down within the next 48 hours.
That's admirable but I don't think that's necessary. The problem is not with your pool, it's the fact that one user single handedly having ~70% of the network hashrate. If anything, your pool helped uncover the issue. |
|
|
|
So if this is legit, then 1 user is having close to 70% of the network hashrate daily mining ~15 BTC worth of coins. That is either thousands of GPUs or FPGAs even with 200-300% faster private miners. Or ASICs or an exploit. Either way, it's ugly.
The currently available Lyra2RE kernel runs at about ~1% GPU efficiency. The authors themselves wrote on their paper (note that I had to copy this by hand as the authors are douchebags and didn't let me copy paste from the pdf) - 60: such performance penalty is most likely due to latency ... since GPUs are optimized for delivering high throughput rather than low latency.
This is false in general. GPUs have worked on hiding latency since bumpy-shiny shader was demonstrated back on NV10 days. - 60: in practice they later elaborate on it by writing
latency ... can usually be masked by the GPU ... - 61: ... the throughput provided in our tests is still 4.5 times lower than ... CPU
Only? It should be at least double digits. - 61: confirming again they cut it short
... hindering an attacker's ability to take full advantage of ... latency hiding capabilities of commercial GPUs.
There was also another statement about latency, very indicative. But due to the PDF being full of rubbish I haven't been able to find it. You know the drill. GPUs right now are slower... but not even all that much. And they're running at 1%. The private miner could as well be 10x-20x (1000%). Your observations about FPGA bandwidth is correct but your conclusion is not. That bandwidth is peak and most likely block write/read. That's disappointing but thanks. |
|
|
|
RELEASE 1.53--
I get 10.45Mh/s on my GTX 960 SSC mining quark. This is with the intensity at 24, and an overclock of +80/240, core/mem. Intensities of 24.1 or higher fail on launch, and most often crash the driver.
I was getting 10.6Mh/s with -i 23.7, and OC of +100/300, core/mem, but it became unstable in the last few versions.
The Lyra2 perfomance really puzzles me, though. It should run faster than a 750ti. --scryptr
Does the memory overclock help at all? |
|
|
|
I was just checking how this coin was doing and it went from this:
What pool is that on? Because looking at the live blocks.. .that doesn't seem to be the case. You're most likely looking at the wrong forkwow, that's ~6000-7000 vga (r9 290x). or botnet...  I doubt it's a botnet, you'd need a shitton more computers to achieve that hashrate. Considering Lyra2RE is all about memory access (afaik) and that there are FPGA'd with GPU level memory bandwidth I'm thinking highly optimized FPGAs: The FPGA-to-memory bandwidth is measured as 64.5 GB/s in total |
|
|
|
I was just checking how this coin was doing and it went from this:
What pool is that on? Because looking at the live blocks.. .that doesn't seem to be the case. You're most likely looking at the wrong forkFair enough. They won't show in the block stats because each block is sent to a new VTC address (annoyingly) So if this is legit, then 1 user is having close to 70% of the network hashrate daily mining ~15 BTC worth of coins. That is either thousands of GPUs or FPGAs even with 200-300% faster private miners. Or ASICs or an exploit. Either way, it's ugly. |
|
|
|
Another thing, in mining Lyra2 my GTX 960 cards mine more slowly than a 750ti. I don't understand it. I think there may have been another post on this 10-20 pages back, but this thread is getting long.  --scryptr It seems lyra2 is memory bound. Unless the 960 has more memory I wouldn't expect a big increase, but I wouldn't expect a decrease either. It seems to be memory bandwidth bound, not memory amount bound:  Although a 960 should surely be faster than a 750 Ti. |
|
|
|
I was just checking how this coin was doing and it went from this:
What pool is that on? Because looking at the live blocks.. .that doesn't seem to be the case. You're most likely looking at the wrong fork |
|
|
|
Sadly no im not using NOMP, im running a LAMP server on ubuntu 13.10, mysql, apache2, MPOS, and twistd stratum. So my setups are either, stratum (config.py), stratum-mining(config.py), or MPOS (global.inc.config). Although if NOMP allows the multi port so easily i may just switch over eventually. Thank you for your quick and concise response <edit> As far as you know, are there any other benefits to using a MPOS/NOMP combo? (I enjoy the MPOS frontend, and have alreday customized it too my liking lol) </edit> I see. Sadly I don't know anything at all about the differences and the reason I went with the MPOS/NOMP combo is because a detailed guide I found happened to use them. |
|
|
|
|
I can setup pools with some heavy googling so I'm no expert but for 1) I assume you use nomp and if so adding more ports can be done with the coinname.json located in nomp/pool_configs/.
Example (bold being fixed diff ports):
"ports": {
"3032": {
"diff": 32,
"varDiff": {
"minDiff": 8,
"maxDiff": 512,
"targetTime": 15,
"retargetTime": 90,
"variancePercent": 30
}
},
"3256": {
"diff": 256
},
"3257": {
"diff": 512
}
},
|
|
|
|
I was just checking how this coin was doing and it went from this: Block distribution - Remember to spread hashrate! to this:  |
|
|
|
hiring gpu dev: foraging and hunting is a plus
Oh man, almost spilled my coffee.  "The position provides required business equipment, such as company laptop, a spear and a basket."Anyway, I think if there was a group of very talented coders creating some amazing miners they wouldn't sell it publicly. Setting up their own farms or selling it to one or two huge farm owners would probably yield more profit long term. Also less risk of the software leaking or DRM being circumvented. |
|
|
|
Hello
What is your opinion on this subject ?
Do you think that every dev should provide all of his personal infos, such as driving license, payment bills, etc. ?
Because if you look at bitcoin case, we don't know who is Satoshi Nakamoto... Also a lot of other serious coins which are in the top 10 of the biggest capitalizations have been developed by anonymous dev's...
Bitcoin is crumbling right now because of Satoshi's madness. I think developer identity is paramount. If Satoshi had zero Bitcoins then would people really care? BTC has been open sources for ages, hashes match and anyone been able to comb through it and find out whether it had backdoors or not. I think the problem here is Satoshi is alleged to have mined up to a million bitcoins. Use whatever word you want from skepticism, to envy or jealously but the man on the street isn't going to buy something where 5%-10% of the total supply rests in the hands of some totally anonymous dude. Actually that very same reason is why most alternates are screwed in the long run too. That's a problem of distribution and has nothing to do with anonimity. |
|
|
|
Hello
What is your opinion on this subject ?
Do you think that every dev should provide all of his personal infos, such as driving license, payment bills, etc. ?
Because if you look at bitcoin case, we don't know who is Satoshi Nakamoto... Also a lot of other serious coins which are in the top 10 of the biggest capitalizations have been developed by anonymous dev's...
Definitely no. I think anonimity in crypto is as important as decentralization. There are a lot of crazy people out there. Besides, it's not like scamming others is tied to anonimity (eg. Josh Garza). |
|
|
|
For the time being, it is better to buy used 7970 cards, undervolt and under clock to mine Quark. You can reduce the memory speed to very long, around 300MHz to save electricity. Quark mining does not require memory bandwidth. It is profitable for perelectricity price up to $0.2 per kWh. I do not know how long the profit will last as it depends on the price of single coin (Shark coin, SAK). If SAK price collapse, then there is no profitable mining for most people with high electricity price.
What hashrate and power consumption (preferably at the wall) do you get? VCore = 0.94V, core/memory = 820/250MHz, Hash = 78 MH/s. System Power from wall = 810W. This is alomost as efficient as the GTX970 when GTX is in the low hash range. See the GTX card discussion: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1091755.0That's pretty good actually, thanks. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
