There is no bug shown in Windows 2008 VPS, just stop the cpu limitation after some hours then the cpu limitation is not working after re-started again. Afterall, I'm not dare to try again because I might be kicked off if overloaded the cpu.
As I see the CPU usage in NeedIfFindIt's version is calculated based on block reward. I guess we might need to add maximum CPU limit (any situation). True. In 0.96/0.97 if the hashrate /blockvalue is at the targeted 22MH/s /12XMG/Block it will run at 100%. (and it happens pretty often in the morning EU time)Today I got some time to finish the 0.98 Changelog:- added ability to set your own target for Network hash rate.
- added ability to set your own target for Block Value.
- added ability to set Min & Max CPU usage.
- just 2 miners included (special thanks to Spexx & Wolf0).
- now it shows the % in reverse way (90% becomes 10% etc.).
 Website:http://xmg.makejar.com/P.M. Me if you get any issues  Still an awesome job NeedIfFindIt! The sweetspot miner is the BEST. I have an 8 core AMD and I keep my miner set on a block target of 10 XMG with a minimum cpu usage of 10% and a maximum of 30%. It seems to make my cpu run more stable if I keep the settings low, but even on 30% I still have a higher hashrate than my old i5 processor. What I think would be a really cool improvement to the sweetspot miner would be to make it work with the magi multipool https://multi.magipool.info/. What it could do would be to switch to mining a different algorithm when the block reward falls, and make the miner more XMG then they could make continuing to mine with low block rewards. I think this would be a very good thing for the small miner, and would also produce some buy support for XMG from mining other coins when they are more profitable. The only that comes to my mind is to name the other miner something different than "minerd.exe". Start the other miner, make it "Low Priority" from the "Windows Task Manager". Make the magi "minerd.exe" "Below Normal" priority. That way when the magi miner needs more power it will push the other miner down. But this will work only when you want do dedicate 100% of the CPU to mining. To use less than 100% you will have to limit the number of threads. You can check the "Set Affinity" option in "Prio" http://www.prnwatch.com/prio/ (free for non-commercial use) to lock the threads to the CPU cores. If I add similar option to SweetSpot (if possible at all) it will become too sluggish. |
|
|
|
Hi guys.
I've read the last 3-4 pages of this topic seeking for a solution regarding the bot issue.
This month I had serious issues with bots on my faucets and because of that I didn't fund them anymore, as I was only losing BTC to those botters...
I've tried switching the captcha systems and for a while I thought that AreYouHuman captchas can't be botted, but I proved to be wrong.
Anyway, I am looking for any temporary or stable fix, if there's any, so I can continue with my two faucets...
What are my alternatives right now? Lower the rewards, so it's unprofitable for the botters (but lose a large percent of my users too)? Or implement some scripts/update faucetbox to that experimental version?
Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.
Honeypots is the best solution against bots. Hide your old input-field for BTC-Address with left:top:-1500px; left:-500px; position: fixed; Now, add a new one input-field with a new id/name (better are dynamic IDs/Names) Next, replace all ID from the old field with the ID from the new field in your index.php All users they filled the old field are bots, these address can you put into your database / blacklist. here an example from me. Two are hidden honeypots. All are dynamic and rotate with each new refresh <input class="form-control input-lg" type="text" name="b709f5d4c223d7981ac59a0108d5b2e54d446f08" id="b709f5d4c223d7981ac59a0108d5b2e54d446f08" value="" placeholder="Bitcoin address"/> <input class="form-control input-lg" type="text" name="399285f387fa7c3a2814338290df011878803daf" id="399285f387fa7c3a2814338290df011878803daf" value="" placeholder="Bitcoin address"/> <input class="form-control input-lg" type="text" name="76ff31465544d3189ccb1c4e7f902b223fd2f4db" id="76ff31465544d3189ccb1c4e7f902b223fd2f4db" value="" placeholder="Bitcoin address"/> </div> Can you please post detailed instructions on setting up these honeypots? Thanks for your help. Make sure the "old field" don't get populated by the browser's cookie. Otherwise you will ban wrong addresses too. |
|
|
|
guys
cloud2b.de is down for me, what happened.
This is what I got 9 days ago: Dear ***,
Hi, miningpool.cc will stop all services within the next few days. Please payout all left coins from your account to your offline wallet. Stratum services will stop in the next few hours. Thank you for being part of miningpool.ccI suppose cloud2b.de=miningpool.cc |
|
|
|
While we are on the subject of wallet addresses (or at least we were a while back) I noticed that some people have "vanity" addresses for their XMG wallet. One or two clever people have patched the Bitcoin Vanity address code and adapted it for XMG. That's a neat trick. Does anybody have a version for public consumption?
Little bit late, but today I got some time to play with a vanitygen (I don't know if one existed before). If someone wants address like: 9Magi9bbCJiT3xmP6G5cMdR5Mu2SjtBBvDHe can try: https://github.com/makejar/vanitygen/use command -M for Magi Sorry, no windows binaries. It was easier for me to install a linux in a VM than to play with Visual Studio. |
|
|
|
i have a problem with the faucetinbox API. Error connecting to FaucetBOX.com API. Either your hosting provider doesn't support external connections or FaucetBOX.com API is down. Send an email to support@faucetbox.com if you need help. This is the plumber diagnostic , http://www.refbackptc.com/plumber-diag-tool-fb.phpPlumber FB Diagnostic Tool 0.9b by NeedIfFindIt PHP Version: 5.5.13 OPENSSL Version: OpenSSL 1.0.1g 7 Apr 2014 allow_url_fopen: Success DNS Response: 198.41.206.176 --- Trying FSOCKOPEN - HTTP --- Success --- Trying FSOCKOPEN - HTTPS - IP method --- Fail: (0) SSL negotiation failure --- Trying FSOCKOPEN - HTTPS - gethostbyname method --- Fail: Banned. Solution: - Contact support@faucetbox.com--- Trying FSOCKOPEN - HTTPS --- Success If you are unable to help yourself please kindly post all the content above at: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=844119.0;allDon't forget to delete this file. can anyone tell me what is wrong or how solve it , thanks. The plumber diagnostic tool is outdated. It will always fail with IP and Gethostbyname (cloudflare made it impossible some time ago). But I think: --- Trying FSOCKOPEN - HTTPS ---
Success
means that everything (at least using fsockopen method) is fine. Is the FB script not working? |
|
|
|
Did somebody tested the Magi standalone payment gateway yet? Think some feedback would be nice.
I think it will be a lot faster than 1 hour.
But we only know after trying this.
So if somebody did pls share some results!
The last time I tested (about 3 months ago) it was taking 3-6 minutes to get IPN message. And up to 10 min to get the coins confirmed in your address. Unfortunately there were some random issues with SSL or table locking or something else. Currently when I try to call a box I get "ERR_EMPTY_RESPONSE" ... Hope Joe will get back to us soon  |
|
|
|
|
The best way is to log all the 4 points:
- GET requests (if you have access log you already have them).
- POST requests and their parameters.
- All the claims.
- All the cashouts.
There is no way for him to escape.
Ofc. changing the API key before you restart paying is a must.
This is all I can help without a look at the code.
Edit: I think this could be a bot. Yesterday someone posted a link to my website in a forum discussing "a bot not working anymore" (probably because some faucets got dry).
Putting some randomness in the faucet functionality may complicate their lives.
|
|
|
|
So.. I have a general question about mining pools, specifically what happens when the number of shares is considerably higher or lower than expected.
For example, let's say for a block a pool expects 100,000 shares but it only took 10,000 shares in order to generate the block (10% of expected work). Does this mean that the rewards per share are greater for each of the 10,000 shares? If the share reward was the same there would be a surplus of block reward as only 10,000 or the 100,000 expected shares would be paid.
Similarly, let's say a pool takes a long time to find a block and there are 1,000,000 shares when 100,000 were expected (10x or 1000x expected work). In this case each share has to be less valuable because there won't be enough coin to honor the expected share payout.
Is my understanding of this correct ?
If PPLNS is OFF then when a new block is found by your pool you get BlockReward/TotalNumberOfShares*NumberOfYourShares-PoolFee%-Donation% If PPLNS is ON then it is calculated little bit differently to discourage pool jumpers. "expected shares" is just a reference value. Aha, ok.. what is PPLNS out of interest? Pay per last N shares ... just google for PPLNS to get details how it works. Not very useful for Magi, but I think some pools use it. |
|
|
|
So.. I have a general question about mining pools, specifically what happens when the number of shares is considerably higher or lower than expected.
For example, let's say for a block a pool expects 100,000 shares but it only took 10,000 shares in order to generate the block (10% of expected work). Does this mean that the rewards per share are greater for each of the 10,000 shares? If the share reward was the same there would be a surplus of block reward as only 10,000 or the 100,000 expected shares would be paid.
Similarly, let's say a pool takes a long time to find a block and there are 1,000,000 shares when 100,000 were expected (10x or 1000x expected work). In this case each share has to be less valuable because there won't be enough coin to honor the expected share payout.
Is my understanding of this correct ?
If PPLNS is OFF then when a new block is found by your pool you get BlockReward/TotalNumberOfShares*NumberOfYourShares-PoolFee%-Donation% If PPLNS is ON then it is calculated little bit differently to discourage pool jumpers. "expected shares" is just a reference value. |
|
|
|
No worry. The world is full of PPL trying to prove something. Just yesterday someone has turned 5 BTC (1200+$) into dust clogging the BTC network for good 3-4 hours. Everything starts here ... and continues in 15k txs. https://blockchain.info/address/1AnM5CxNa4TCsPGuok67F4DHQqGs26MTHnAnd all of this to get at top of the list (for 1 day) https://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-busiest_by_transactions-bitcoin-addresses.htmlWas he able to crash the BTC blockchain? - No ... but the bitcoin blockchain got at least 28MB of (stupidity) history. --- I'm sure sooner or later bulldozers will get bored since flooding the POW does not result in higher XMG price as expected ... so it is double loose for them (low reward + low price). In all other coins it would be exactly the opposite. |
|
|
|
One thing is for sure, working on your computer and mining with cpu costs you nothing compared to mining with a gpu. Because of course loading CPUs don't increase power consumption. If the block reward is lower than desired it cost you almost nothing (less than 2 extra Watts) while running at 10%. |
|
|
|
I didn't misunderstand you, but your persistence with missing the point is breath-taking.
A GPU hashing at 50 Mh/s is just as useless for XMG mining as a CPU farm doing the same thing. The block rewards will be next to zero either way. That's it. End of story. People either play the game as intended or get nothing. That does not mean that this coin or CPU mining is dead. That is a non-sequitur.
There is far more than just POW mining in any case. If people want to kill the POW mining then there is always the POS mining/minting/whatever you want to call it. I already said that there have been days when I got more rewards from POS than POW. Kill the POW mining, keep the coin rare. The less competition in POS the better from my point of view. Maybe we should do away with the POW altogether? That would solve a lot of problems in one fell swoop.
Anyway I am tired of this endless debate. The bulldozers have gone quiet again and the block rewards are rising again. I assume that we just have to get used to this daily annoyance from these ******* [expletive deleted].
Maybe it would be good to think about: - make the max POW reward in half (25 instead of 50) - increase the POS reward * 5 - decrease the blocks needed to calculate the POS block reward The coin will still be mineable but it make the botnet/gpu miners go somewhere else But actually XMG is good as is now. The bulldozer will go away as soon as XMG get under 5000 satoshi. Nobody is so stupid in wasting resources... even if he is using stolen resources. There are other coins that could bring him better profit with this amount of power... here the only to achieve is "low block reward for everyone" and since this affects the trust in Magi negatively... we see price drop (instead the expected price increase). As I said 100-200 pages before Magi is as good as gold because it is able to preserve wealth (it will never see real pump nor real dump). The other precious thing about Magi is the community, all of us working/sharing ideas for the better future of |
|
|
|
Too little hashrate or the cron is down. |
|
|
|
|
- XMG - interesting and future proof POW/POS reward system.
- BTC - connection between all of the alts.
- DOGE - WOW, widespread.
- CLAM - interesting way of distribution.
- XMR - you ask for 5, right?
|
|
|
|
...
I can't login ,why? Is is a real system or just a dummy demo? Are you trying to login from the registration form on the home page, try the "login" link top-right  |
|
|
|
Thanks for your opinion . We mostly get complaints about faucets and while we reject about 60% of them as groundless, your comment gives us a different perspective We're thinking hard about changing the whole FaucetBOX.com Faucets list. It just doesn't work out very well. We do our best, but still we can't stop all malicious faucets from ending up on our list and sometimes we're to strict about rejecting good ones. But with about a hundred of submissions to review every day it's just can't be avoided. We're now thinking about a democracy based list, where users as a whole would be responsible for moderating it. But there's a lot of issues to be resolved, so it won't happen anytime soon, unfortunately. Maybe it would be nice if you make XML list with all the submitted faucets (unapproved/rejected/approved) that way the other listers will have direct access to the new faucets and their owners will not need to spend money on advertising.  |
|
|
|
New machine, new client (cloned from github a couple of weeks ago), still experiencing the ORPHAN BLOCK 751 problem.  The client was off for a day or two, and was about 2500 blocks behind when restarted. It's been running for over 12 hours and it still hasn't synced. debug.log is full of this sort of thing: ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 3bfbb14d04d3233ad92f435fcebe5ae4410b8204379cfea95386f5c841f1aaca
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=2df7670737bede346ea3db14d4dffd3593eefe7f420dfa322fd3961c5adbfb59
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=8950cb42743e3e662559b5194eb2d9c184acc962b84edeed936a5b41495a81f1
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=ea350579a7263b93dfb48dd0ddbb6feb0920f760c08c2a03923c9c4dca38d75d
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=31ed0a21473469cc8432674cd0e0adc6d5ffa7df07073619327c0f167dfd4393
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=7f855e7d8e2966c52708ebe19dbfb33e540163789b5cc13fa0e6a1ec9ad79ab6
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 95b62c19857cb6965a1dcb00c2b7ca051d6b2aa13d9533f8014a0ab541997561
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=b8aa10a04aa0936ff48a2c5ff8afe2e9e22413a58fe37d7f1da9fc9fc9c7751a
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 915a4c8b1e1a66549b1aa8685c1f275e99b4f997abdbf5ddc2a757c8105666ad
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=9712a237318b877f383561662e6364c372e986486096234e526dba7d278512e2
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=a0bd31b2ddf60cc8326bc7c039e089c860145ef27dda3d5f442ba9c82c694228
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=96de730164caf6fc2e88f0e25698352cb70651470b2bf1923e0c8c6c43a8f711
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=d43ff39545640744c6dec4c5377db4f3a1735f00ed5ee801030463ef0211ae3e
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 8c5df9b0a99e4e4cdff6fbe2a598e6d1b305cd204c5733665f945acc45ad6386
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 4f5032c8e9c0630d27eea17e4a3e6c526ff3aa544a8dfb12338f9791c9f94a3b
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=95b62c19857cb6965a1dcb00c2b7ca051d6b2aa13d9533f8014a0ab541997561
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=3cd780252174a199f92364393ccdb7d487f3b72e983a06701b485cd04047d456
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=fea5d0a34197f9fd83e2cec812b20b1b7e31c0e1080f5bb31af53e9f910a1815
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 4349ded7e13ab50188e0fab3125822041e921578713f70471c436ff8729f759e
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=6429eedc53e33fba83b1da9d5c272421537e474fe28ec54a7409683bf73e0d08
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=4f1ddeef5eaba68fe6e1d5dcac951d6dc714aab96272064dc22eedb4bc9bc7c8
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=f21e4efeaf3ccddb864e9dc2ac6dd4b504c83ace0d83a2cd54cc386540dba734
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 2150ad9d4725a739a70ab5131d63bc03793af0c4827fe733744cb2c8fd374bf7
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 11f02f8abe0a970780d8a09bd36ecfb98be803a2f9b9724cc2b60a3b24d1b07a
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=a2f0d4117301caa5b89d44201b637cce36845b3599a88b8e1a559276236b68ec
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=7fa2587cd2dba701b499c8ec43f21e9f14a0090c4a71e9396a312c0ef4460ea8
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 398b127ace5137d805a99be5391328c0b30edfd0b8635bd124da636eace14280
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=3759347ddc78429dc87e71c4974bdfa026a3a66a87674489dab967d6d865610b
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=c19dde16334c81610b0422bf94a3de9ab56efaced99fb1c814d27adefe2c4379
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=66544aa53979b96ee620db3b49cf8f779806cdb7c58e954abf1742a94b9f59f2
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=fc24a212b46224796226e08317a70e352a9e64a6382241290787f71cae2b9825
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 253abaea08bbb1780e8650a02ecc1abf40a996bc24bbe9b458477c7e6cda2040
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) b5cab51e120e0aae39acbf0d832952b4f664396a6759493c2127a8673f9020bd
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 1975ef3df7b8f27c825578d337c61c4ea5771afe7d70be64fbe67cdb89eedcb1
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=98dfe9d223da4d46e2f977b2d0789a838c4ae349b4a4770b3338907d79caed4c
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=cfd6096464e5be31998e71df024dc0c9594cdf20eaa29c200eeb6e4609efe0af
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 4dfc0628bfc070054171d8754944947c5fc6fa68997241bde3aceb0a20c3d143
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=45abb19a333d89bfda44f843b3bcc09db8e6b5b8489b56a2e5c273030a81c59f
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) da5acc7d083acb46de7e790a3bbca6f771cc602b354965a0acef1d29faf8ea48
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 52fd2e967a00f81fa21761b6a885bff5114245d41ba3928c5b8345b91d375b56
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=de87be6d999160f205b7989adb9035ee9fc4656e40f2e0b851fb7e5ea62acb3f
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 751, prev=5c52de11d6aeba3236dd94a5fba79c09de07a43af4199a890d748365f255c84c
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : already have block (orphan) 5ade171a63dfbdcdf2f3d8e9a592c7d442d92cdc7a0ea3265e27a96b0a6d4c2a
Seems to be caught in a loop - the string (for example) "5ade171a63dfbdcdf2f3d8e9a592c7d442d92cdc7a0ea3265e27a96b0a6d4c2a" (the last block from the above log snippet) appears 88 times in debug.log Here's my earlier experience with this issue (different machine, different OS) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=623147.msg9812672#msg9812672And this seems to suggest it's not specific to CLAM - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=746840.0 :::: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/4353edit: Tried connect=x.x.x.x to tie to a single peer, but it doesn't seem to have helped. After an hour, the block count has not advanced at all. In 14-15 hours it has only advanced about 80 to 100 blocks. Try maxconnections=3 if it does not work then try maxconnections=2 ... maxconnections=1 if it does not work then try http://www.memtest.org/ |
|
|
|
This coin community looks like very friendly, however, I would like to understand what make this coin technically different. I understood that total hash power is kept low to counter mining monopolies but how can you guarantee that network is safe (double spend) with a low hashrate ?
Also I wasn't able to find something like a graph showing inflation (POW + POS).
You can't do a 51% POW attack on a coin that is 60+% POS. There is no graph but there is a table with daily generated coins: http://xmg.makejar.com/xmg-per-day/ |
|
|
|
Did your earnings drop? If they did, we'll think about a solution.
Yeah, My earnings and stats are drop minimum 25-30%!!( This is problem for me( And I type here: alarm alarm!  Because the BTC price got down new higher paying faucets appeared resulting in 10-15% drop in the visits in older faucets and about 25-30% in earnings... |
|
|
|
NeedIfFindIt, thanks for the new version. But im afraid there are something wrong with this version. 1 of my pc have 70 khs with v0.99, but only 1-2 khs with v1.00, and although i use option max 100% and dont limit, but the cpu is only about 25-30% Can you make a screenshot of SweetSpot+Task manager? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
