Thanks for compiling this! Has anyone tried with R9 380 or R9 380x cards? What are the best settings?
Not sure about AMD, I only have an RX560 on hand for testing. Outside input is greatly appreciated, but since it seems to support the old HD cards, so I think the other R series cards should be supported. ... Thanks for doing this! And I can help with the recommended settings for an RX 560 with 16 Compute Units (ie - not the RX 560D, which has 14 CU). I get the best results with two threads per GPU, intensity of 416, worksize of 8, affine to cpu false and strided index 1. So, for example, the relevant section from my amd.txt file looks like the following: "gpu_threads_conf" : [
// gpu: Baffin memory:1395
// compute units: 16
{ "index" : 0, "intensity" : 416, "worksize" : 8, "affine_to_cpu" : false, "strided_index" : 1, "mem_chunk" : 2, "comp_mode" : true },
{ "index" : 0, "intensity" : 416, "worksize" : 8, "affine_to_cpu" : false, "strided_index" : 1, "mem_chunk" : 2, "comp_mode" : true },
],
I have 4 cards on that rig and the above section is repeated for each of them except index is incremented by 1 (ie - "index" : 1 for the 2nd GPU; etc.). When everything is humming I get right around 500 H/s for each GPU using the Adrenalin 18.2.3 drivers on Win 10. EDIT - oops, I just noticed that you have the RX 560, and the person you were responding to was looking for help with settings for older cards... alas, I can't help with that, either. I'll leave my post as is in case someone else is looking to tweak their RX 560. |
|
|
|
I hope that DERO will consider forking to v7 as soon as possible. DERO could fork again to their own custom POW once it is ready. The nethash is up over 100MH/s, one person, or at least a small group of ASIC owners are getting the lion share of mining rewards released. The ~37,000 DERO released daily is enough to completely annihilate the buy orders of both exchanges. ASIC owners will only be interested in recouping their investment costs as soon as possible. Whoever is getting all of the DERO released cannot sell all of their rewards as the price would plummet.
I would assume that a fair amount of DERO is being put aside from these miners for future sale at a more opportune time. This could significantly thwart DERO's future momentum in the market.
Well said, well said. Someone give this guy a merit because I am all out! |
|
|
|
just received...
Yikes - there's not much left to mine that hasn't been forked, and of those coins that are still using the original CN algo - like ETN - profitability sucks; you can make 7x more per day mining Monero than Electroneum, for example. |
|
|
|
That's why I said it had to be x number of different members, where x is greater than 1 (and less than, say, 10), and that the temp-ban could be appealed in meta - if a moderator/admin looks at the offender's post history and sees that they are not, in fact, shitposts/scams/etc. then it would be those who unfairly reported the posts that get the ban. I still don't think this would work. There are a number of members with large numbers of alt accounts who could still easily abuse this, and mods are busy enough as it is without having a bunch of fake bans to review. Okay, so you don't like my suggestion but didn't suggest an alternate approach yourself... Forgive me if I don't take your rebuttal too seriously, then. Providing an alternative is not a requirement for disagreeing with someone's point of view, and not providing an alternative does not make my argument any less valid. Your system is too open to abuse and manipulation. No, providing an alternate solution isn't a requirement - and I didn't say it was - but if you do provide one (and, even better, the reasoning behind such) it certainly makes me pay more attention to what you have to say. As of now your argument is merely that members with lots of alts could "take down their enemies" by reporting posts maliciously, and that relying on admins to police this abuse would add to their workload. I agree that both are possible, I just don't think that this kind of abuse would happen often enough. But I'll allow that I might be putting too much faith in my fellow man to act responsibly. |
|
|
|
Did you tried to place DERO to tradeogre.com?
Thay have DOGEE, GRAFT, IC, MONERO ... so on
I think this issue has already been addressed: - The devs want to wait to have Dero listed on quality exchanges; in the meantime, one or two small exchanges is sufficient - The devs want to wait until Dero is mostly ready for prime time use before the wider world (the bigger exchanges) get to know about it. I am a Dero investor and I had to think about it for a while, but I am now in full agreement with this policy. You'll find most folks on here are in for the long haul (several years I would expect). Bear in mind that the Golang code is still very much in alpha/testing mode and the devs haven't even started yet on the main payload of Dero, which is the smart contracts (correct me if I'm wrong, devs). Yep, I am in this for the long haul and don't really want DERO to get listed on more exchanges before the core feature of private smart contracts is in beta testing. Rushing to get your coin listed before anything else certainly didn't do Intensecoin any favors, for one example. *** Please report posts like that of segotiwul to help the mods root out the sig campaign spammers and other shitposters that plague the forum these days. |
|
|
|
That's why I said it had to be x number of different members, where x is greater than 1 (and less than, say, 10), and that the temp-ban could be appealed in meta - if a moderator/admin looks at the offender's post history and sees that they are not, in fact, shitposts/scams/etc. then it would be those who unfairly reported the posts that get the ban. I still don't think this would work. There are a number of members with large numbers of alt accounts who could still easily abuse this, and mods are busy enough as it is without having a bunch of fake bans to review. Okay, so you don't like my suggestion but didn't suggest an alternate approach yourself... Forgive me if I don't take your rebuttal too seriously, then. |
|
|
|
...
(2) It will now prompt you for the wallet address that you are attempting to restore (the wallet address starting with "iz"). Enter that in.
...
Step two does not work. He doens't recognize file and wants to create new one. I am feeling real Intense right now. PANIC! HELP!
Do you not understand what you are doing here? You are creating a new wallet with a new name but using the old address and secret view/spend keys. Note that you need to extract the 256 character key from the old wallet (ie - 1.4.2) and separate it into 4 x 64 character keys in the order you are instructed to create the public/private spend/view keys. You have to jump through all of these hoops because the file format for the new wallet is not backwards-compatible. A bit of a pain, yes, but not impossible. |
|
|
|
The forum is wall-to-wall shitpositng but I don't think this is the solution. Simply banning the crapcoin campaigns that do nothing but pay for any old broken English spam would go a long way and is the bare minimum we should be doing but if we were to charge for anything it should be for a signature.
...
Hah, my suggestion to charge for sigs has taken hold subliminally!  Not quite. I've been suggesting we remove signatures from ranks for years. Hence the overly-smiley emoticon... I didn't think that suggesting charging for sigs (or avatars, etc.) was terribly original, either. such offenders be automatically temp-banned if, say, x different members mark any of offender's posts as "shitposts."
This would be abused. People would just report or bot people's posts they don't like. That's why I said it had to be x number of different members, where x is greater than 1 (and less than, say, 10), and that the temp-ban could be appealed in meta - if a moderator/admin looks at the offender's post history and sees that they are not, in fact, shitposts/scams/etc. then it would be those who unfairly reported the posts that get the ban. That said, I have long since grown weary of "free" services/sites on the internet. How is that Facebook doesn't charge any of its is >2B users yet still brings in >$12B in revenue each quarter? Well, that's because you are the product... Honestly, I would much rather pay for a service like that rather than exchange all of my privacy for the proverbial beads and trinkets; same applies here - it is undoubtedly costly to host this site and paying an annual membership and/or to unlock various accessories/accoutrements would not only be fine by me, it would be preferable. |
|
|
|
It is difficult to decipher but I'm going with his question makes no sense because he may have quoted the whole OP but he didn't bother reading it. He probably gave his alt friend the one and only sMerit he got in the initial distribution and doesn't know he isn't getting any more.
I think I understood what he means... which makes me worry about myself lol Maybe he wanted to send more than 1 merit to his friend but for some reason he could only send 1. Looking at his profile he seems to have sent only 1 merit. I was not a Member rank when this system striked us like he is and I was not given free Merits, therefore I'm not sure how many sMerits he'd have. Nah, I wouldn't worry until you start to understand posts like the following: this is a quality topic that we can understand. easy in the clear.karna now for m
get merit more difficult. because merid can not be bought with altcoin / eth.kemampuan us to get his reward, because this is a new rule. in bitcointalk forums. I think this is a good rule.
But yeah, I suspect you and TheQuin nailed it - he inherited 1 sMerit, gave it away, and wondered why he doesn't have any left. |
|
|
|
So do I need 1.4.2 version or the Monero?
Please read more of the thread than just your own posts. This has been covered extensively in the last several pages. You need the new 2.0.0 "Monero rebase" wallet, not 1.4.2 (old wallet) or a "Monero" wallet. I don't understand this. I thought I had time till May 14, this is messed up. Again, read the last few pages and you will see that the hard fork was moved up because someone launched an attack on the network that sucked up all of the blocks, and the devs decided to roll back the blockchain to invalidate these ill-gotten gains. Personally, I think what the devs did is precisely right, not messed up... |
|
|
|
The forum is wall-to-wall shitpositng but I don't think this is the solution. Simply banning the crapcoin campaigns that do nothing but pay for any old broken English spam would go a long way and is the bare minimum we should be doing but if we were to charge for anything it should be for a signature.
...
Hah, my suggestion to charge for sigs has taken hold subliminally! I did think there might possibly be some merit to charging a fee for posts that varied inversely with rank, but upon further consideration I now think this is unavoidably regressive/centralizing. Dedicated spammers/scammers will figure out a way to game any system so I am starting to warm up to the idea - which is not at all original - that such offenders be automatically temp-banned if, say, x different members mark any of offender's posts as "shitposts." A possible implementation would be to scan for keywords in a moderation report such as, shitpost, bot, spam, scam, off-topic., etc. Temp-banned users could appeal via a single thread in meta - same as now - which only non-bots would attempt. If the same user is auto-banned three times then make the ban permanent. |
|
|
|
Maybe I missed this part -- but when will we have a 2.0 GUI Wallet ?
Not available yet - the 2.0.0 command line wallet was hastily issued to deal with the emergency fork, is the impression I gathered from @valiant1's posts. |
|
|
|
Anyone know why so few people have migrated to Southxchange?
... I just haven't gotten around to trying SouthXchange, despite that I actively loathe South.Exchange (if for no other reason than the constant CloudFlare DDoS checks... like, do those idiots really think I am going to log in to my account THEN launch a DDoS attack?) But I do like me some hot arbitrage so I might have to get off my lazy butt and finally try SouthX. |
|
|
|
So do I need 1.4.2 version or the Monero?
Please read more of the thread than just your own posts. This has been covered extensively in the last several pages. You need the new 2.0.0 "Monero rebase" wallet, not 1.4.2 (old wallet) or a "Monero" wallet. |
|
|
|
I want to ask more about how to give merit, because I want to give my friend a little bit of merit. But I only gave it once.
Why ?
Why did you (and many others like you, it seems) quote the entire first post? Your question makes no sense, otherwise - why did you give your friend merit only once? Uh, probably because you only gave it once...  |
|
|
|
If i have monero rebase wallet 2.0 and can see my coins on balance - i m good with migrating?
Nothing more to do?
But sync is not full, it s stuck on 166k and say final block is 174k.
Same thing happened to me so rather than repeat my last few messages in this thread I will summarize and let you do the work of finding them: 1. Go to the folder where the new wallet files were unzipped and run the command 'intense-blockchain-import --pop-blocks 2000' four times to delete the last 8000 blocks (why 4 x 2000 instead of 1 x 8000 - well, because the latter wouldn't work for me for some reason; maybe insufficient memory on the laptop?) 2. Find post by @YaStaer on previous page or so with list of --add-exclusive-node to use; run the intensecoind with those 3 nodes specified. See previous posts by me or @valiant1 with how to use these nodes if unsure. That should solve the problem. It did for me, anyway. |
|
|
|
The daemon exploded when it hit block 167k. The official pool was rolled back 400 blocks and is mining again. I'll try to update our Discord announcement post as other pool owners get their pools updated to fix the broken daemons, but in the meantime, the only pool that you can mine is http://intensecoin.com/pool . For more information, see https://github.com/valiant1x/intensecoin/issues/67#issuecomment-382936780It looks like the network is totally fubar - no block found on the official pool in over an hour and the hashvault pool also reporting effort on the current block exceeding 1300%. Well, we were warned to mine at our own risk...  Also, the instructions I was given earlier to use the --add-priority-node switches to sync the daemon didn't work; I had to use --add-exclusive-node instead, as reported by @YaStaer. Once synced, the balance from my 1.4.2 wallet showed up, but not the most recent mining payments from today. So, my recommendation - worth price paid - is to stop mining until things get well and truly sorted out. Apologies for the headaches, Magic. Thanks for your patience. No problem since you did warn us that mining would be extra risky at the time. I just restarted the daemon with the 3 exclusive nodes and it synced up fine; the 2.0.0 wallet client also found my most recent mining payments, so looks like I've successfully made it over the hard fork hurdle. I also resumed mining on pool.intensecoin.com about 30 minutes earlier, but that may have been a bit premature because as of now no block has been found in about an hour, once again. I suppose I'll let it run for another 30 minutes or so to see what happens. UPDATE - still no blocks found in the entire network so I've stopped mining once again. |
|
|
|
It looks like the network is totally fubar - no block found on the official pool in over an hour and the hashvault pool also reporting effort on the current block exceeding 1300%. Well, we were warned to mine at our own risk... Also, the instructions I was given earlier to use the --add-priority-node switches to sync the daemon didn't work; I had to use --add-exclusive-node instead, as reported by @YaStaer. Once synced, the balance from my 1.4.2 wallet showed up, but not the most recent mining payments from today. So, my recommendation - worth price paid - is to stop mining until things get well and truly sorted out. |
|
|
|
...
Something of note though, when I run derod I get audio cracks whenever I play a video (VLC/Youtube/Twitch). This has never happened on this PC for the 6 years of its life.
...
I also reported that the new daemon appears to be very resource-hungry while syncing. It dramatically reduces CPU/whatever use when it does finally get all caught up, however. |
|
|
|
The reddit guide is still 100% valid
The blockchain should automatically reorganize. It will definitely happen when the v4 chain exceeds the v3 chain. If your v3 (pre-fork) chain was synced to be longer than the current v4 chain, and you're having troubles syncing the current v4 chain, use `intense-blockchain-import --pop-blocks 7500` to manually discard 7500 blocks from your chain.
Yep, I'm seeing the daemon report being ever more behind in blocks at around the 7460 mark so I'll try the blockchain import command. EDIT - how long does this command usually run for, and how do you know it is done? EDIT 2 - well, I got an answer to the above question - it terminated "after throwing an instance of 'boost::exception_detail::clone_imp<boost..." something or other which is way too tedious to type because I run wallets on an isolated laptop, not the desktop I am typing this post on. So I left the daemon up after discarding the last 7500 blocks as instructed earlier and it did, appear, to start from 7500 blocks earlier but the daemon once again seems to be stuck at block 166391 which may or may not be okay. I would like to resume mining, but I would also very much like to ensure coins will make to it my wallet. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
