I thought that I will send a SegWit transaction to an address that starts with 3.
Those addresses are P2SH nested addresses. Armory will make those in the next version which will have those enabled. What are nested addresses? What is the difference? Sorry, but I couldn't find anything about this on a quick search. Every day you learn something new about bitcoin  |
|
|
|
How do I generate P2WPKH address?
You can't. Such addresses don't exist yet. I thought that I will send a SegWit transaction to an address that starts with 3. |
|
|
|
|
How do I generate P2WPKH address? I assume that the lack of an address makes the option P2SH-P2WPKH to be disabled when trying to send to a self address.
What is P2SH-P2K? Pay to public key?
|
|
|
|
I did, but nothing happens. Even when I rebuild the database. Will add more Otherwise let me see your logs. Additional blk files were required. Thank you! |
|
|
|
I did, but nothing happens. Even when I rebuild the database. Will add more |
|
|
|
I thought I have this, but I'm not. I need help. I'm starting ArmoryDB.exe -datadir=<path to Armory DB> --satoshi-datadir=<path to Core DB> Then I'm starting ArmoryQT.exe with the same arguments. I turn off "Let Armory run Bitcoin/Core in the background" and I wait. But apparently Armory is stuck at block 472XXX and it's not updating no matter how I move the blkXXXXX.dat files files followed by a Rebuild Database option. What am I doing wrong? |
|
|
|
Is this the only version working with BCH chain?
Yes. Thank you! |
|
|
|
|
Is this the only version working with BCH chain?
|
|
|
|
Something else that helps serve as a marker:
If you have a good magnifier you will see that the wiper (the part that turns, has the tiny cross in it) also has a short flat area. That flat is in line with 1 arm of the phillips screwdriver cross.
Anywho, to run my sticks @ 200MHz I have that flat up at the top (top being the USB plug) and tipped just slightly past the horizontal maybe 5 degrees.
edit: looking at that clock pic on mine the flat would be a line from the 11:15 tick to the 1:15 tick marks.
Great info. Thank you. Works great and easier on the eyes.
Where from? |
|
|
|
Hi all, i have used ewbf's cuda zcash miner since its inception, but recently Kaspersky identified the 0.32b version as having a Trojan:Win32 Skeeyah.A!bit. This seems strange because it is a miner, why wouldn't it detect it as crypto miner and a trojan instead?
Seems like a false positive. it's not a trojan in any way. Not throwing any accusations, but how do you know without the source code being available? |
|
|
|
|
Hello. What is the maximum speed if I plug it in a normal USB port from my PC?
|
|
|
|
Russians are going big with Bitfury and up to $100mil investment ($10mil into chip dev), want to challenge chinese and get up to 30% of all mining. 20 megawatts power at 1.3c/kwh.
Do you know what nm will they target? |
|
|
|
Yes you are, clock those guys up  I have 3 Sea Hawks @ +175 Clock +590 Mem (unsure of the exact figures, cannot check right now unfortunately) and 75% power (sure). They pull 180-190W and get 690-730 Sol/s at a brisk 42-46 degrees  Efficiency is around 3.8, my energy is very expensive. Good luck! Good advice. Cooler mining. |
|
|
|
I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume nothing's changed in the last four days. Or, to quote myself, No marked progress since the last update, hence no update.
Thank you. I was just trolling Keep up the good work! |
|
|
|
|
Hi. What's current status of the BF16 project?
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for the voluntarily hard work!
|
|
|
|
I think this is an over simplified presentation of the current situation.
Another simplified(!) presentation will be: Bitmain and other big blockers in the eco-system are opposing the consensus change that SegWit is bringing, without additional measures to ensure future growth of layer 1. Bitmain is being attacked into submission.
We need to find a path forward. Those attacks don't help.
As a regular user I oppose big-blocks without additional measures that fees aren't artificially raised like mining empty blocks because of subjective reasons. And we can go on like this forever. Also there is no logical reason to believe that there are no additional measures to ensure future growth of layer 1. From what I saw most of the Core developers agree that we will need to raise the block size eventually and I think that most of the services in the ecosystem believe the same thing. It's only a matter of time and to believe that after SegWit the layer 1 will be completely ignored is either bad intended with a purpose or simply illogical. A different approach is definitely possible, but I don't see then trying too much. All I see is anger and greed from BITMAIN side while from Core side I see voluntarily work, openness and a usable system for new features which isn't used by most of the SegWit blockers. So yes, I will stick to Core until the others learn how to treat those that don't directly benefit them and that consensus will benefit all of us much more than greed can ever do in the long term. |
|
|
|
I think all those attacks (ASICBoost, leaked chats, AntBleed) are harmful to Bitcoin and the ecosystem.
They are not productive towards a peaceful resolution to the conflict.
Guy
Also trying to change the rules of a system as a miner (aka no technical skills and pretending to control stuff when in fact you are just providing a service) for own well-being is bad for the ecosystem, but that is more subtle than the ones you have mentioned and they are easily ignored. |
|
|
|
It's not an "issue". At the time that it was initially done, it was to be a service available to let you remotely monitor and control all of your rigs from 1 central location (and was part of the selling point of S7s for some people). Multiple desktop apps were created that allowed you to do the same thing, so Bitmain abandoned the idea but never removed the code. Years later, new ill-informed donkeys arrive on the crypto scene, discover the remnant code, and claim there's something nefarious about it.  FFS, the S7s still even have a tab for it (even though it was never publicly activated).  So is it possible or not to remotely shut down a BITMAIN miner due to their sloppiness and un-professional attitude? I'm not sure that I understand what are you stating. |
|
|
|
Because adults know that minerlink stuff was added to firmware way back in 2015 and that there's not much removed from the S9 fw, just added to it. So everyone bought the miners knowing this issue? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
