Seems like something is wrong with the server at the moment. I've had about a half hour of constant idles & disconnects. Also my stats page was down and couldn't login. I guess I'll switch to btcGuild until this has stabilized...
Eligius is also (the original) SMPPS, which is what Ars uses for rewards, FWIW. Eligius was actually the first pool I started with but it constantly gave me poor earnings. Like little more than half expected for days on end. Back when it was proportional, there might have been variation like this, but not with SMPPS  Hint: To have any kind of meaningful statistics on non-PPS pools, you need to average it over a few months at least. |
|
|
|
Seems like something is wrong with the server at the moment. I've had about a half hour of constant idles & disconnects. Also my stats page was down and couldn't login. I guess I'll switch to btcGuild until this has stabilized...
Eligius is also (the original) SMPPS, which is what Ars uses for rewards, FWIW. |
|
|
|
|
Ports 80 and 8332 are back.
|
|
|
|
Did the pool shutdown this virus mining user account?
We don't have user accounts. |
|
|
|
i am just curious: as far as i see they did a test on testnet and have one pool ready. i thought they have released their proxy? The test stuff never worked for me at all. It rejected all the blocks. I'm not willing to sacrifice Bitcoin mining stability, so I won't be using their proxy or bitcoind modifications. I've tested my own implementation of the tie-ins over the past few months (that's what the prayers were testing). |
|
|
|
|
New DDoS threat apparently. Ports 80 and 8332 are temporarily down until I have more time to get a better workaround for it.
|
|
|
|
|
Eligius has planned to support merged mining for a while, but actual implementation has been extremely slow due to lack of anything remotely usable from the Namecoin side.
|
|
|
|
Requesting that the following wallet address be investigated for suspicious activity: It's already a confirmed botnet. See my reply here. |
|
|
|
|
Feel free to try to shutdown the botnet. I suggest reporting it to your local authorities. In most jurisdictions, computer intrusion is a crime and the operator can go to jail. Please feel free to pass on my email to any authorities with an offer to provide assistance in any way I can.
As for blocking it at Eligius (which I operate), there is not much I can do. I could certainly block the address, but the botnet operator could easily change to another unidentified one. I figure it's better to leave the identified botnet address functional than to have it unidentified. Plus, banning a botnet would be like asking for another DDoS-- I have enough of those to deal with already without inviting them.
|
|
|
|
Here's a coffeescript-free merge-free commit count: 110 Ehud Ben-Reuven
116 m0mchil
121 Artefact2
133 Matt Corallo
140 Patrick Strateman
152 Patrick McFarland
246 Daniel Folkinshteyn
304 John Tobey
323 Nils Schneider
324 Jeff Garzik
327 Pavel Karoukin
354 davux
365 Luke Dashjr
371 David FRANCOIS
396 Gavin Andresen
441 Kiba
443 Satoshi Nakamoto
500 Amir Taaki
736 Con Kolivas |
|
|
|
Which is why your results are wrong (missing every contribution not part of that client). Here are my results over 100 without merges counted (Pieter Wuille falls off with only 95): 110 Ehud Ben-Reuven
116 m0mchil
121 Artefact2
133 Matt Corallo
140 Patrick Strateman
152 Patrick McFarland
158 satyr
176 Michael Ficarra
246 Daniel Folkinshteyn
304 John Tobey
323 Nils Schneider
324 Jeff Garzik
327 Pavel Karoukin
354 davux
365 Luke Dashjr
371 David FRANCOIS
396 Gavin Andresen
441 Kiba
443 Satoshi Nakamoto
500 Amir Taaki
736 Con Kolivas
1699 Jeremy Ashkenas Who is Jeremy Ashkenas? O.o Edit: Looks like someone added CoffeeScript to BitGit. I don't see how it's Bitcoin-related and it was added with a typo'd name and non-valid email, so I'm deleting it... |
|
|
|
Looks like someone did that and it now includes people who didn't contribute a single line of code to the satoshi client (which the little box is all about).
hmm, perhaps the Bitcoin article should be renamed to Bitcoin client to reflect that it is about the client and not about Bitcoin? -or- split the article into two, one about the satoshi client and another about Bitcoin in general? That should prevent confusion regarding names of people since there are many separate developments for bitcoin in which all such developments are developed by developers. Actually, the article probably should be about the concept/protocol/network, and not the client. What makes the Satoshi client notable? Pretty sure all the notable sources talk about Bitcoin itself, not some client. |
|
|
|
has there been issues with the pool? been getting a lot of stales, unknown work, unkown user stales the past 24 hours. 2.17% Stales... ewww! Someone apparently decided to exploit a bug in bitcoind to crash our hub node multiple times over the past few days, resulting in watchdogs restarting the pool while I wasn't there to look into it myself. I tracked down and fixed the bug, and it seems to be stable since, but there seems to still be another attack vector being used. I am looking into this one as well, and hope to have it solved ASAP. I recommend joining IRC for the latest updates on these DoS attacks. |
|
|
|
List of authors of over 100 bitcoin patches, sorted by patch count (most patches first): - Con Kolivas aka "conman"
- Gavin Andresen
- Amir Taaki aka "genjix"
- "Kiba"
- Satoshi Nakamoto
- Jeff Garzik
- David FRANCOIS
- Luke Dashjr
- Pavel Karoukin
- Nils Schneider aka "tcatm"
- "davux"
- John Tobey
- Daniel Folkinshteyn
- Patrick McFarland
- Patrick Strateman aka "phantomcircuit"
- Matt Corallo aka "BlueMatt"
- Pieter Wuille aka "sipa"
- "m0mchil"
- "Artefact2"
- Ehud Ben-Reuven
|
|
|
|
Could you adjust the payout line displayed on the stats graphs to reflect this? Was nice to see yourself approaching that line =)
Already did  |
|
|
|
|
Per poll results, the minimum payout is now 400 TBC (~0.67 BTC).
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum payout is now 400 TBC
|
|
|
|
|
Bump! Last chance to vote. Unless poll results change significantly, the new minimum payout will be changed to 400 TBC (~0.67 BTC) sometime tonight.
|
|
|
|
Latest DiabloMiner sends X-Mining-Extensions header as "longpoll rollntime switchto". This is not recognized by eligius and rollntime is disabled for this miner. Last I checked, DiabloMiner had bugs in its rollntime implementation, and Diablo-D3 stubbornly denied they existed (thus refusing to fix them), so I blacklisted it from using it. Specifically, with rollntime enabled, DiabloMiner is somehow confusing its work and when it expires, and sending shares against work older than 2 minutes, even after it has received new work. If Diablo-D3 has fixed this, and someone is willing to do some real-time testing to confirm it (on IRC), I'd be glad to remove it from the blacklist... That bug never existed and I repeatedly confirmed that the bug is in your pool. The only thing you confirmed was that your logs were reporting things sanely. The actual on-the-wire packets confirmed you were sending me dead shares. If this is your stance, I might have to end up adding code to detect eligius and force reenable it. If Eligius doesn't tell you it's allowed, it isn't: forcefully rolled shares will be rejected outright. |
|
|
|
|
Ideally, there should be a simple script that scans all the Bitcoin repositories, tallies them up, and writes a static file for the webpage, put in a cronjob maybe once a week.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
