Exactly...the "plans" are not healthy plans of how to develop a solid project as much as means of manipulating the market.  Yes you can manipulate the market by setting up buy/sell walls and accumulating coins to limit supply or counter other people's actions, but none of this makes a normal healthy market that is dictated by supply and demand.   The idea that you don't want to be manipulated by whales is understandable, but you're collectively acting like a whale yourselves.  The techniques that are being discussed are obvious attempts at manipulating the market.  Even if you don't have malicious intent it is still manipulation.

Well part of the issue is that a masternode doesn't lock anything in.  If the coins were actually time locked and couldn't be withdrawn at any time then MAYBE the coin supply could be constrained and raise the price, but that isn't the case with Chaincoin.  You will lose your masternode if you withdraw the coins from the wallet, but you are free to do so at any time.  I'm not at all saying Max isn't legit or he doesn't believe his cause, but there are some serious flaws in his logic when it comes to market forces.  This idea that a masternode makes you profits is only if you sell the coins it is producing which is going to dilute the price, the very thing you are trying to prevent.   If there is enough market cap that income can be a decent return over time, but only if the price stays stable with new investors.

Electra tried to play tricks with supply to show up #1 on the coinmarketcap site by trading 45 coins supply for a few months and then opening a super bonanza mining that released 20 billion new coins onto the market and they expected the $120 price to immediately shoot them up to $240 billion market cap.  Unfortunately things don't work that way and it failed.  The coin has some minor trading going on, but I doubt it will go much beyond where it is right now.  The same will be true of chaincoin, it has seen some minor celebrity being the top volume for a week or so, but unless it can continue to maintain its hype the coin will die out.

There needs to be a reason that people want to use this coin over another and right now that seems to all be related to either hype or riding the coattails of the Dash masternode idea.  The difference is Dash already had a big enough following behind it to make it viable.  Maybe chaincoin will make it in a few years, but certainly not unless a lot of people buy it up, forget they have it, and yet still work tireless day after day encouraging other investors.  Fact is though that in the end when you sell those coins for your profit, you are taking someone else's money and running with it.  Whether you do it now or later is up to you.  None of these coins are creating new actual value, they are only holding a piece of an already existing pie.  Some would say that pie has been held by the rich too long and crypto is clawing some of that wealth back, but small coins like these are likely just cannibalizing the people that are trying to get a piece and not the ones already holding the pie.

It seems to be the nature of the Timetravel algorithm.  It seems like it won't accept any shares for a bit and then all of a sudden submit a ton of low difficulty shares all at once.  I don't think this is a pool problem because I've seen the same behavior on other pools I've tried Timetravel on as well.

Setting a fixed difficulty also doesn't seem to change this behavior much.  This leads me to believe it is something with how the shares are calculated or intended to be accepted by the pool.  It might be something with how it is coded in ccminer, but I'm not sure.  As for the difference between local and pool hashrate that is all up to the luck of which of your shares are being accepted.  If you're not seeing errors about shares being rejected then it is likely just unlucky hashing that has it down.  Overtime it will average out.

The coin was essentially a dead coin for 2 years.  The recent hype was community driven and continues to be so.

If you look at the github the development completely stopped on it and it went dormant.  Zedomax decided to pick a coin and create a community push to try and get the coin moving again.  There really isn't a huge amount of technology in this coin that isn't represented anywhere else in the cryptosphere so it looks to be mostly hype driven.  This is an admitted "experiment" by the HODLer community to see if they can get the coin the traction it needs to make some money longterm, but only time will tell if that happens.  There has been some signs that the devs will come back to develop on the coin if it continues to have support, but again time will tell.  There are many nay-sayers as well that seem to want to see the coin fail or at least are pointing out the fact that there is little incentive to using this coin over another.  Although this hasn't stopped other coins from being multi-million dollar coins either.  Just look at something like Dogecoin which only really exists because of some Reddit hype and it continues to trade significant volumes or even more so the crazy coin ICO's that aren't even real products yet that are garnering tens or hundreds of millions of dollars just for the promise of something in the future.

The question is whether the masternode idea of limiting the supply of the coin will be enough to attract and keep money in the coin.  All the cryptomarkets will rise as the seas of people continue to flood into the cryptosphere and maybe keeping the coin slightly higher than the dredges at the bottom might be enough to keep it afloat over time and see it rise.  Then again it very well could be another pump and maybe not malicious dump, but at least dump due to lost interest.

You can mine directly to Cryptopia, but make sure you set a reasonable payout level on Suprnova to only pay out after several full coins.   The problem with mining directly are that the wallet can change and Cryptopia may not update immediately causing potential loss of coins, not likely, but possible.  Also if you deposit to little coins at once it is possible that it gets identified as "dust" and requires wallet maintenance to properly credit your account.  This is why they don't want people mining directly.

Well there is something to be said about limiting supply and creating hype around a coin.   That's all it really takes to get the ball rolling sometimes.  It doesn't even have to roll all that quickly to start, but if the volume is there and it looks like people are trading a coin it can generate even more interest.  Look at Litecoin it started as the coin that you just mined along side Bitcoin back in the day or look at Dogecoin the main use doesn't even exist anymore and started as a joke essentially on Reddit.  It just takes people believing that the coin can have a purpose to significantly raise its price and attract more attention.

As lijoe mentioned no one is even asking you to invest in the coin unless you believe in the cause.  This isn't your typical pump and dump.

That's a cool idea, didn't think about that.   I saw your batch script posted in the middle of some other post, but could never really find it again.  I used Nemo's batch version for a while until I switched to multipoolminer and got that running pretty solid.

One reason using the pool to direct things I'd expect is there might be some logic to moving when work is finished rather than one a 1 minute timer.

I wouldn't doubt it.  This guy is going to get taken for all his money by some "developer" that will promise to make what he is asking for.  The problem is much of this stuff is only kinda full written and none of the different pieces likely integrate with one another seamlessly.  I wouldn't doubt if there is a number of hacks and scripts that are written to kludge things together.

People just don't seem to realize how much you lose in all the different inefficiencies of the process.  The hashrate you see on your miner isn't really what you are getting on the pool because that's the nature of mining.  Which means your expected returns are at best a guess of what you can hope.  Then every time the miner switches between algorithms you aren't mining anything at all until your next miner can get up to speed.  30-60 seconds switching miners doesn't seem like a lot, but many times over 24 hours it really will add up to a good chunk of your earnings.  Those loss of efficiencies aren't measured in the estimates at all to my knowledge.   Add on top of that the likely loss of some earnings in conversion rates and price changes it is not at all surprising that you see 20-30% less than what you expect.  Then you get days like when Bitcore was going nuts and your earnings are through the roof for those couple of days and you wish things were like that every day.  The fact is everything is a moving target and if you just mined around on some different pools you'd see that generally speaking zpool pays out pretty damn good, especially for how easy it is and how reliably the payouts are.

If someone wants to make it much more efficient, hack up a version of ccminer that has the efficient miners of each of the algorithms and come up with a way to switch between them quickly.  Better yet a way to let the mining pool be able to shift you around to different algorithms automatically without having to cycle through multiple miners.   That's what multipoolminer tries to do from the miner side, but I bet there would be some gains if the pool could direct it especially for the harder to find blocks that might be highly profitable.  If the pool could coordinate all the miners together to go for the longer blocks the pay might be better at times, but when everyone goes in 155 different directions there is almost no chance of mining those things.  

I admit I've complained in the past and didn't understand how it all worked, not even a month ago, but I do understand now.  There will be more profitable places to mine than zpool when the markets are sideways, but not without effort paying attention to what is easy to mine vs how much it pays and dealing with getting it on and off the exchanges.  Even then things can turn south quickly and you may end up holding garbage or maybe you get lucky and hold gold, but if you want a steady paycheck zpool is about as good as it gets.

I'm LOLing pretty hard at this...

You can't solo mine a coin.  You can point it at an algorithm and ask to be paid out in a coin, but you are credited the mBTC value of the coin.  If the value fluctuates you will get less or maybe even more than you mined.  If you want to solo mine zpool is not the pool for you.  Mine on Yiimp.



First off Nemos miner is just a ripped off version of Aaronsace's Multipoolminer.  Its not even Nemo's code.  Get the real one and use that
https://github.com/aaronsace/MultiPoolMiner

Second the hashrate shown local on your miner is the rate of hashes being checked locally.  Not all those hashes are accepted by the pool.  The hashes that are accepted have a difficulty associated with them and that is what credits you with hashrate on the pool.  If you are lucky you will find high difficulty hash quickly and that can show your hashrate higher on the pool than your local or if you are unlucky you will find low difficulty hashes and your hashrate will be lower on the pool.  There is nothing you can do to change this luck other than to increase your hashrate and that will increase your average accepted shares.  Internet latency can also have a significant impact on your accepted shares because the longer it takes to get new work the less new work you can process.

With that said the estimates you see on Multipoolminer is just an estimate of approximately what you could be getting if the hashing maintains a fixed level and the price stays the same until the coins are confirmed.  Also switching between algos costs time and therefore potential earnings.  If you have it set to 1 minute checks and it switches 100 times in a day that is likely going to be at least 100 minutes of mining time wasted doing nothing.  
None of these things are possible to predict and therefore it is an ESTIMATE.  It is more the ideal situation possible.  Take the same miner and point it towards Yiimp or another pool and you'll see fluctuations in the amount of payout you get there too.

Third mining is very much LUCK based.  Just like the pool hash to compete for finding blocks, not all those blocks are equal.  The blocks will usually pay out about the same amount per block found, but hte amount of hashing power to find each block can vary greatly.  This is just like the hashing I mentioned above.  So your ESTIMATES from your miner as just that.  Estimates.  If you download the latest pull from the actual Multipoolminer you will see that these estimates now have a margin of error associated with them, unlike Nemo's ripped off version.

Anyone know if mining solo is simply setting up the wallet with the fairly standard entries in the chaincoin.conf and then pointing your miners at it?

Typically you need the following:


Then for example ccminer you'd use the following:

ccminer.exe --algo=c11 -o http://127.0.0.1:11995 -u username -p password

Does that look right?  It seems to be working for my miners, but haven't found a block yet.   Just wondering if that looks right to everyone else.  Not sure if there is a way in the wallet to see that it is working or specify the coinbase address that coins should be sent too.

At least point to the real code.  Nemo is just a rebranded version of Multipoolminer.  Multipoolminer also works with zpool.

I'm not sure how much hash you need for the coins to see results, but usually you could rent a very small amount and see how it goes.

You guys are so impatient.   Things happen and you shouldn't expect the pool admin to be instantly available 24/7.  Always should have a backup pool if your main pool is showing problems.

Seems like people get pissed off when they aren't able to summon assistance immediately with a full explanation of what is happening.

And as expected the gloaters have come to gloat.  Nothing ventured, nothing gained.  It was a long shot, but no big loss, at least not for me.  I feel bad for the people who put serious money into this though.

I'm still waiting for those quotes of me cheerleading the site and not explaining how it works or wondering what a person has to gain by continuing to naysay something that is an obvious risk and should be treated as such.  Well that is other than to come back and feel good about yourself that you were "right" and "warned" people about things that were obvious risks.  A risk I never downplayed or denied.  Yet some how that is cheerleading.  

Congrats you get internet points for being right about the obvious!

Coiner you were still wrong about that $1000 Byteball price you were so convinced was coming, unless you're still thinking it will pump back up?

I'm not fighting anyone.  I'm simply responding to a obvious troll that I enjoy commenting back too.  There isn't anything to be done about CWM any more so than there was previously.  You either gambled and rolled the dice or you didn't.  Either way it just matters how much you value what you put into it.  Others seem to value their clicks on a site like this more than I do.  Whether I'm clicking something like this or replying to a troll is equally valuable to me.  I have plenty of time in my day for both and still earn more than a decent living.  That's why I was willing to take a gamble on it.

How's that $1000 Byteball price you were calling for working out?

Guess I'm not the only one who can be wrong.

I was never a cheerleader.  Please quote where I was cheering the site.  I explained how it worked that's all.

As I said the only thing you had to gain is to gloat when it fell apart.  What does that say about you?

I didn't put in anything that I wasn't willing to lose which is exactly what I said before.

You can't guarantee that.  When you rent hashing power you are renting a particular algorithm and hashrate that you will then point at the mining pool of your choice.  This would be just like if you had a miner of your own with the hashpower equivalent.  The results of the mining are still dependent on the same luck, fees, and payout of the pool you point Nicehash at. 

As you mentioned to determine if the price is worth it you'll need to use something like whattomine.com or coinwars and calculate the average returns for that much hashing power.  Even then there is some luck involved in what returns you will get.  Often times the renting price will be slightly higher than what you can expect to return usually because you are essentially paying a premium for someone else's hashing power.  It still maybe worth it if you expect the coins you mine to go up in price at some point in the future.  The benefit is you don't have to configure, maintain, or pay the power costs of said miners and still get the coins you want to mine. 

You cannot withdraw right now, I just tried and get the same error.