you just prooved me right saying people don't want to read, else you might have read this
so there is actually no code at all for you to check, it's still done manually.

be patient.

people don't want to read, they want answers, now!


you missed something here, what about
[] - I'm waiting for block 98425 to mature, I'm still sending those payments manually.

which also explains why some people still missing a few payments
my guess is, that it adds up to exactly 50, because there is no more balance on the wallet.
if  from block 98425* accounting is handled differently and payments are sent automated by scripts, i'm sure you will receive your reward-balances too, like everyone else did so far.
not a single coin is lost so far, not even sub-cents (which might end up worthless on other pool systems, as we learned earlier),
they just haven't been sent yet.

if you can't even wait a few days, go try generating on your own, we'll see how you like that.
you will probably end up with zero coins for working and waiting months.

*11 confirmations left

that might end up not as nice as you might think.

here's why:

the big difference between the 2 public pool-systems we've seen is, how coins are "delivered".
in the first pool we all got our shares as soon as we found a block, it was the block-reward that was shared directly within the found blocks transaction, so everyone contributing immediately saw his generated share waiting to mature in his own wallet, as soon as the block itself was downloaded by the client.

the system slush uses puts the whole generated pot in one wallet, waits (>120blocks) until the single 50coin-transaction is mature and then sends rewards based on (client unrelated) accounts out to users (first manually, now or soon by scripts).

this method has good and bad sides.
a bad side is, that we need to trust the admin a bit longer (not sure if that even makes any difference),
a good side is, that noone will lose sub-bitcents and this is a real plus!

on the "doublec/puddinpop pool-system", users might "earn" 0.00****btc, but those sub-cents will be lost, not forever, but for you, the generator.

you might have noticed, that sending amounts below 0.01 currently would cause a sub-cent-transaction-fee of 0.01, so it makes no sense to send sub-cent-rewards at all, they will end up in tx_fees.
as long as they are not actual sub-bitcents though (no "real bitcoins"), but instead just a reward-balance on your pool-account, they can accumulate to >0.01 and then be sent for free, means without making a loss.

actually it saves "little guys" money, money that might have been lost using "the old and better method".

just my thoughts

a) it is working
b) in that snippet it has not found any "winning-hashes", so you've not earned a share yet

if it finds a "winning-hash" it will look like this

if you see a "yay!!!", you've earned a share, check your worker-stats.




i think coding is much more important than answering questions, especially when most have been answered already in earlier posts.
read the thread, it's long, lots of words but worth to read.
if you don't like it, just leave, you haven't lost anything, you might still get your leftover reward someday.


bitcoin == freedom of choice
take risks, or don't, trust people, or not. your life, your bitcoin, your choice.


Thank you slush, for doing what you do!

i guess it is, should have mentioned that earlier.

i tried -testnet, cuz i didnt want to wait a day or 2 to let it happen and it's the exact same invalid-floods as soon as the first hash is found (the first one even makes it to the wallet sometimes).

what's your threshold-setting, what's your reward so far, what's your share-/hash-count?
"Please clarify"

so far there seems nothing to worry about the honesty of slush,
i can confirm the which is the 3rd "reward" that i've got from contributing to the pool,
rewards add up nicely according to added GPUs, i've got nothing to complain.

except maybe for the still missing system stats on profil-pages, *poke
i still need to open 2 browser-tabs to check my share against the pool, but i can handle that. 

its not only the pool, its the same on local getwork-servers, aka mainline-clients.

well, i'm not exactly flooding, i'm just trying to hook up BOTH GPUs of my HD5970 to the pool and stumbled across some problems.
check m0mchils miner-thread and see what's "flooding" here. (and tell me if i'm still flooding, or if it's looking ok now).

have a nice day

just got a HD5970 and of course had to try all kinds of settings, drivers and sdk versions to see what works best for me and i came across some similar problems.


running poclbm_py2exe_20101218, or poclbm_py2exe_20101214 pre-compiled binaries (on XP64),
device=1 works fine as usual (<300M),
device=2 though, as soon as it finds the first winning hash, gets this
this only happens on device=2, no matter if device=1 is used or not, no matter what clock-speed, even below stock-settings device=2 floods its "invalid or stale"-msg


running device=2 (or both devices) on poclbm_py2exe_20101126 works perfect, both GPUs get <300M, find hashes, which are added to different "pool.Worker-shares" as expected, no troubles at all.

it seems something happened in between 20101126 - 20101214, which effects HD5970s, or multi-gpu-cards,
had no problems before running 2 single-gpu cards.

think i'll keep 20101126 running for now, or am i missing some new required features here?
don't need to know if any single hash has been accepted, as long as >95% are, but i need to run both GPUs, not just one. 

This is an even better list,
nice overview of all decent cards, showing expected Mhashes, Mhases/W, almost anything you need (except for the price).

yep, that's true, just like MtGox and MyBitcoin, all single points of failure and still not open, or "mirrored".

and i expect that over time slush will release the code anyway, cuz he got bored of people asking (or coding himself),
or other pools coming up using different code and other methods, maybe puddinpop improves his code, who knows?

of course it's nice to see for yourself, from the code, how it works
and it sure would be nice to have multiple developers working to improve it, some miner-devs to implement new features,
but it's still his choice.

anyway, i just take what i get.   

why do you want the source to be open?

one could say "security issues", but you have to trust the server-admin anyway, no matter what,
if he wants to cheat, he could change the code at any time, so there's actually no point in releasing the code.

i'm sure there's reasons to ask for it, but if you think about it, it wouldn't change anything,
it would just enable others to create new (and eventually cheating) pools, which is one of slush's reasons not to do it.

if he doesn't want to, that's ok to me, there's no need to know the code, cuz it wont proove anything anyway.

just my 2coins  


back to main-topic:

i just noticed, that one of my miners stopped working about half an hour ago,
no error, no msg, no nothing, it just stopped.
hashcount just froze like that.

the same thing happened once already yesterday on my 2nd pool-miner and never happened before on local getwork-servers.

check your miners more often, might happen to you too.

0.2.1 and no, i only use pre-compiled binaries.

no, there's no need to limit multithread miners to 1thread,
i just tested jgarzik's miner with 2threads and it runs fine/gets me shares.

and again, i just had 2 of 3cores @ 2400khash/s each running for about 15minutes and got 2shares/found 2 winning hashes.
that's not even close to your 19hrs.

yes, that's the one i use for testing CPUs on windows.

try using mining.bitcoin.cz, that might work.  

your 0.00237 BTC reward is leftover from the last round,
the reward for the current round will be calculated and added to your reward as soon as a new block is found,
so about 1.8 BTC is what you can expect, not what you already have.

correct me if i'm wrong.

who said that? i didn't.

but even if that would be the case, let's do the math:

L$66 for 50BTC = L$3300
L$3300 @ 264/$ = $12.5

in case of fees it shouldn't matter if you send moneybookers$ to me, or to virwox, it's free to send L$ from virwox2virwox,
$12.5 seems less to me than $13 or am i missing something here?

here's an option:
create an account at https://www.virwox.com/ load it with your moneybookers$ and buy/trade SLL (SecondLife Linden Dollar, also known as L$).
i accept (and sell) those SLL for bitcoins.

2 transactions received.
12.08btc contributing ~100Mhash/s, not that bad for a first day. 

guess it's been slush restarting the server,
my miners also stopped and i had to restart them.

feature request:
would be nice to have the system stats available on the profile-page too,
auto-refresh is not needed, but it would be nice to just open 1page, not 2, to check how big my share is.