Ugh, that sucks. I sent a pm a couple days ago and have been waiting since I can't do anything until he fixes whatever's wrong, =/.
It works for me. You could go to this link: " https://bitads.net/?p=edit-adspace&id=new&pid=ID", if you know your ID. I can see the creation screen and all, but when I submit/create it, it shows this: "Your adspace could not be created. Please contact a staff member" |
|
|
|
Group by domain should be on by default. Some sites have more than a page worth of ad spaces, most of them having no bids.
Done Group by domain should be on by default. Some sites have more than a page worth of ad spaces, most of them having no bids.
+1 Also, show the average of views and clicks, because I could place 3 or 4 adspaces on the same page and have 4x the views.I presume you crossed this out as you saw that it only shows the top views from the site and not the combined?  Hey, you're here! Read my pm please. I can't create ad blocks and haven't been able to for a couple days. It just says to contact the admin. He just went to bed. You will have to wait ;p Ugh, that sucks. I sent a pm a couple days ago and have been waiting since I can't do anything until he fixes whatever's wrong, =/. |
|
|
|
Group by domain should be on by default. Some sites have more than a page worth of ad spaces, most of them having no bids.
Done Group by domain should be on by default. Some sites have more than a page worth of ad spaces, most of them having no bids.
+1 Also, show the average of views and clicks, because I could place 3 or 4 adspaces on the same page and have 4x the views.I presume you crossed this out as you saw that it only shows the top views from the site and not the combined? Hey, you're here! Read my pm please. I can't create ad blocks and haven't been able to for a couple days. It just says to contact the admin. |
|
|
|
//Code Here
I guess that you will have to alter the style of the iframe's a bit to match with your website.
Thank you, sir! It works great like that, . I'm a newbie to JS, lol. So here's the update! My site: Old Load Time: 4480 MS New Load Time: 553 MS Your site: Old Load Time: 2900 MS New Load Time: 1330 MS This is a MAJOR jump. There is a downside, though... your *total* load time has increased: Yours is from 2900 MS to 15350 MS (5x increase). Mine is pretty much where it was before. For some reason it's taking your site up to 14s to pull the Bitads. Well I do not mind the total load time. I prefer to have my webpage visible and ads still loading then that people have to wait for both. I'm 100% with you on this. I just don't get why it takes Bitads so long to load, :p. A-Ads takes less than 40ms on average... |
|
|
|
There is no practical difference between sending an anonymous person on the internet "confidential" materials and posting it online for all to see. Trust of non disclosure is a prerequisite for confidential transactions, and unless you know the person you're dealing with, you have no expectation of non disclosure. Then again, if you already knew the person you're going to end up dealing with, you wouldn't have to post publicly asking for everyone to chip in - so either you have no personal friends with sufficient funds to lend to you whom you can trust (or who trust you), or you are trusting strangers to keep your secret from other strangers without compensation. As it was already stated, it only takes one person asking you for more details before it's "public" when they decide to just repost it here.
Might as well get it all out in the open now.
Even with an NDA, there's still problems too. Most people aren't going to pass around copies of their ID and bank records (for address verification) just so they can see someone's idea. Even if they did, it may not be theirs. Because of this, unless he was to fully vet people out to prove beyond a reasonable doubt they are who they say they are, an NDA would be worthless because he would have no way to pursue them in any type of recourse should they break the agreement. |
|
|
|
Sending a few hundred BTC here (because I know you'll need extra). Don't worry about telling me what it's for, either. I understand you need to keep your secrecy!
Excuse me for sparing us all from the mockery of weed smoking teenagers but releasing confidential information publicly to be indexed by Google and viewed by competitors doesn't seem like a good idea. This is a gambling related business that can repay the investment in full within 5 months based on estimations. Feel free to send me your prospectus. But I beg you not to be like many others here and claim "my gambling site will be earning x amount in the first month. Just look at (other site name here)!" If you have an actual plan with data to back it up, I'll definitely look it over. |
|
|
|
//Code Here
I guess that you will have to alter the style of the iframe's a bit to match with your website.
Thank you, sir! It works great like that, . I'm a newbie to JS, lol. So here's the update! My site: Old Load Time: 4480 MS New Load Time: 553 MS Your site: Old Load Time: 2900 MS New Load Time: 1330 MS This is a MAJOR jump. There is a downside, though... your *total* load time has increased: Yours is from 2900 MS to 15350 MS (5x increase). Mine is pretty much where it was before. For some reason it's taking your site up to 14s to pull the Bitads. |
|
|
|
Can you please take a look at this and let me know what's wrong? I originally just added the bottom code and swapped out the ad sizes/id# but that didn't work (just showed blank) so I altered the code a little bit so each block is separate. I still have the same issue: it shows blank. <div id="footer-ad-1"><center>
<div id="bitads_loader"></div>
</center>
<script type="text/javascript">
window.onload = bitads_loader;function bitads_loader() {
javascript:document.getElementById('bitads_loader').innerHTML = '<iframe scrolling="no" frameborder="0" src="https://bitads.net/gimg.php?id=75" style="overflow:hidden;width:468px;height:60px;"></iframe>';
}
</script></div>
<div id="footer-mid-ad">
<center>
<div id="bitads_loader3"></div>
</center>
<script type="text/javascript">
window.onload = bitads_loader;function bitads_loader() {
javascript:document.getElementById('bitads_loader3').innerHTML = '<iframe scrolling="no" frameborder="0" src="https://bitads.net/gimg.php?id=37" style="overflow:hidden;width:468px;height:60px;"></iframe>';
}
</script>
</div>
<div id="footer-ad-2"><center>
<div id="bitads_loader2"></div>
</center>
<script type="text/javascript">
window.onload = bitads_loader;function bitads_loader() {
javascript:document.getElementById('bitads_loader2').innerHTML = '<iframe scrolling="no" frameborder="0" src="https://bitads.net/gimg.php?id=347" style="overflow:hidden;width:468px;height:60px;"></iframe>';
}
</script></div> |
|
|
|
--expiry|-E <arg> Upper bound on how many seconds after getting work we consider a share from it stale (default: 120)
I think setting this to 1 might be... bad..
What happens if you set it to 30 or 60?
Just set that up. I'll let them run for a while and see what happens (I left one rig at 1, set the other at 30, disabled no-submit-stale so I can see reject #'s, and restarted cgminer on both rigs). I'll report back in a little while with the comparison, . |
|
|
|
Seems you have no-submit-stales enabled. If you combine it with low scan and expiry then oh-golly we have a pickle  Check the settings. I enabled no-submit-stales about an hour prior to the image because I figured it'd help preserve bandwidth. On or off doesn't seem to impact the stale rate, it just increases/decreases the amount of time spent connecting and sending data. Prior to that, I had that option turned off and there was still the same flood of stales showing up all the time. |
|
|
|
|
Sending a few hundred BTC here (because I know you'll need extra). Don't worry about telling me what it's for, either. I understand you need to keep your secrecy!
|
|
|
|
|
What makes this site better to go with than Just-Dice, a site that already has the same system implemented? What are you doing that is better and fresh to bring in players? What benefits are you offering to investors that are above and beyond what Just-Dice already offers?
|
|
|
|
Can you post your cgminer config?
Here it is! About an hour ago I added the no-submit-stale just so I don't see the stales rising constantly. Difficulty is set at 16, the GPU's are 5x 7950's. Nothing's really jumping out at me.. Can you do me a favor and run a traceroute to the pool from your IP address? Maybe there's some kind of asymmetric route or something that's causing network issues. Here you go (note that with whatever coin it's on now, it's at 10% or so it looks like. It jumps up considerably on some though. I attached CGMiner to show the GF/RF's as well):  What's weird about your output is it doesn't say "stratum from pool 0 detected new block" before the stales.. So why are they stales? I have no idea on that one. Usually it does say a new block was detected. I'm not sure about the above though; that was something I noticed after the screenshot. I did have a few rejects that said they were below the target difficulty as well. As far as I can tell, all of them in the R pile in the image were from that. |
|
|
|
Can you post your cgminer config?
Here it is! About an hour ago I added the no-submit-stale just so I don't see the stales rising constantly. Difficulty is set at 16, the GPU's are 5x 7950's. Nothing's really jumping out at me.. Can you do me a favor and run a traceroute to the pool from your IP address? Maybe there's some kind of asymmetric route or something that's causing network issues. Here you go (note that with whatever coin it's on now, it's at 10% or so it looks like. It jumps up considerably on some though. I attached CGMiner to show the GF/RF's as well): |
|
|
|
Can you post your cgminer config?
Here it is! About an hour ago I added the no-submit-stale just so I don't see the stales rising constantly. Difficulty is set at 16, the GPU's are 5x 7950's. --------------- {
"pools" : [
{
"url" : "stratum+tcp://pool2.us.multipool.us:7777",
"user" : "raptorak.1",
"pass" : "x"
}
]
,
"intensity" : "20,20,20,20,20",
"vectors" : "1,1,1,1,1",
"worksize" : "256,256,256,256,256",
"kernel" : "scrypt,scrypt,scrypt,scrypt,scrypt",
"lookup-gap" : "2,2,2,2,2",
"thread-concurrency" : "22400,22400,22400,22400,22400",
"shaders" : "0,0,0,0,0",
"gpu-engine" : "1050-1050,1050-1050,1050-1050,1050-1050,1050-1050",
"gpu-fan" : "0-85,0-85,0-85,0-85,0-85",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500,1500,1500,1500,1500",
"gpu-memdiff" : "0,0,0,0,0",
"gpu-powertune" : "10,10,10,10,10",
"gpu-vddc" : "1.174,1.174,1.174,1.174,1.174",
"temp-cutoff" : "95,95,95,95,95",
"temp-overheat" : "85,85,85,85,85",
"temp-target" : "75,75,75,75,75",
"api-port" : "4028",
"auto-fan" : true,
"expiry" : "1",
"failover-only" : true,
"gpu-dyninterval" : "7",
"gpu-platform" : "0",
"gpu-threads" : "1",
"hotplug" : "5",
"log" : "5",
"no-pool-disable" : true,
"queue" : "0",
"scan-time" : "1",
"scrypt" : true,
"temp-hysteresis" : "3",
"shares" : "0",
"kernel-path" : "/usr/local/bin",
"no-submit-stale" : true
} |
|
|
|
FWIW, I'm showing a profit of 0.021 for the last 24 hours with ~1.2MH. middle pays around 0.01 in 24hr if you get lucky with 600kh. So your figure is quite similar, they often pay less then that because of the high diff mixed with fast coins though you'd be ok with a faster setup maybe middle mines LTC afaik, right now they show block diff of 61m One of the highest diff they show and I believe that is because it is LTC They do. I've had a suspicion for a while that when LTC hits periods of low difficulty, the smaller pools get lower than expected returns while mining it. For LTC, could you proxy us into something like wemineltc.com? That should bring down variance considerably when we go for it. Also, oddly enough the pool2 with custom diff. is working now. My stale rate (going from diff. 64 to 16) has dropped from 70% down to around 20-25% it looks like. Are you going thru tor or something? No, lol. Pretty much what appears to be happening is when a block is found (for like Worldcoin/Digitalcoin since they are fast) I am losing anywhere from 4 to 20 shares as being stales. I get flooded with stale messages on those. When it moves to something else, like LTC, I get as low as 0.1% stales (and can sometimes get tens of thousands of submits with 0 stales). |
|
|
|
FWIW, I'm showing a profit of 0.021 for the last 24 hours with ~1.2MH. middle pays around 0.01 in 24hr if you get lucky with 600kh. So your figure is quite similar, they often pay less then that because of the high diff mixed with fast coins though you'd be ok with a faster setup maybe middle mines LTC afaik, right now they show block diff of 61m One of the highest diff they show and I believe that is because it is LTC They do. I've had a suspicion for a while that when LTC hits periods of low difficulty, the smaller pools get lower than expected returns while mining it. For LTC, could you proxy us into something like wemineltc.com? That should bring down variance considerably when we go for it. Also, oddly enough the pool2 with custom diff. is working now. My stale rate (going from diff. 64 to 16) has dropped from 70% down to around 20-25% it looks like. |
|
|
|
I'm currently looking at what it would take to get the LTC pool onto p2pool. That would lower the variance quite a bit for our LTC payouts.
That may help... I ran a split test between here and Middlecoin. After 12 hours, 0.027 was earned here and 0.063 earned at Middlecoin with the same hash rate. That's a pretty massive difference, and I have the feeling it's because of LTC. 12 hours isn't really a statistically significant time period.. Did you get your reject issue worked out? No, it's possible that this was the issue... on LTC I have little to no stales. Every time we go to the others like WDC though I drop down to 25-30% luck (with a massive amount of rejects, 70% or so). Which pool address are you connecting to? The pool1 multipool one. I also ran pool2 for a while (trying to lower difficulty to see if that helped) but it appeared to be on a static 64 regardless of settings. |
|
|
|
I'm currently looking at what it would take to get the LTC pool onto p2pool. That would lower the variance quite a bit for our LTC payouts.
That may help... I ran a split test between here and Middlecoin. After 12 hours, 0.027 was earned here and 0.063 earned at Middlecoin with the same hash rate. That's a pretty massive difference, and I have the feeling it's because of LTC. 12 hours isn't really a statistically significant time period.. Did you get your reject issue worked out? No, it's possible that this was the issue... on LTC I have little to no stales. Every time we go to the others like WDC though I drop down to 25-30% luck (with a massive amount of rejects, 70% or so). |
|
|
|
I'm currently looking at what it would take to get the LTC pool onto p2pool. That would lower the variance quite a bit for our LTC payouts.
That may help... I ran a split test between here and Middlecoin. After 12 hours, 0.027 was earned here and 0.063 earned at Middlecoin with the same hash rate. That's a pretty massive difference, and I have the feeling it's because of LTC. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
