I just received mine today. So I can report that doublec is following through on his commitment.

Thanks doublec!

rnuQEMxFs1e3kExgVf2vdzkHKQ45VWZZin

rnuQEMxFs1e3kExgVf2vdzkHKQ45VWZZin

3.9GH (a mix of 13 GPUs in 5 systems, wish I could justify FPGAs)

Looks good now, thanks!

From BTC stats:

9665    2011-12-28 15:04:18    1:02:26    1025518    0.16221904    0.76167915    159551    53 confirmations left
9664    2011-12-28 14:01:48    2:32:25    2379799    0.17081438    none    159547    49 confirmations left
9663    2011-12-28 11:29:19    0:03:35    60187    0.13084748    0.19946604    159534    36 confirmations left

Given NMC stats:

6923    2011-12-28 14:01:48    0:01:53    35286    41 confirmations left
6922    2011-12-28 13:59:53    0:00:50    35285    40 confirmations left
6921    2011-12-28 13:59:01    0:12:07    35284    39 confirmations left
6920    2011-12-28 13:46:52    0:19:17    35283    38 confirmations left
6919    2011-12-28 13:27:33    1:58:09    35280    35 confirmations left
6918    2011-12-28 11:29:19    0:03:34    35265    20 confirmations left

Should namecoins for BTC 9664 be none?

My bad, thanks for the correction. I'm getting my stats messed up, different pools, etc. Is there a historical perspective on how many shares I got per block?

I see I have a few (very few) shares on my backup pool so some of the shares probably shifted over there but what seems strange is that I was getting about the same shares per minute and yet the reward was so different:

Duration   Total shares   Shares/Minute   BTC reward    Block #
0:55:03    824609         14984               0.18219482    157529
0:46:21    711990         15367               0.01990589    157519

I haven't seen this kind of difference before so I'll just keep an eye on it to see how things run in the future. Thanks for looking into it.

I can't see what it was at the time of block 157519, but typically (like right now) it is about 0.18284650 BTC.  When I compare the two blocks listed in my post, I see that duration and shares between the two are proportionately closer than BTC reward. I thought I should see something more like 0.18 not 0.019.

Should BTC for bock 157519 be recalculated?

#   Block found   Duration   Total shares    BTC reward    NMC reward    Block #
9376    2011-12-14 20:03:48    0:55:03    824609    0.18219482    0.28743400    157529
9375    2011-12-14 19:08:40    0:46:21    711990    0.01990589    0.03148287    157519

EDIT: Fixed block number in question

@broken, thanks for the link. I was anticipating more were using the pool. I really like the idea of p2pool, seems like others should too. Especially after recent attacks on pools. Hopefully the hash rate will go up so blocks can be found faster. Or, maybe difficulty will continue to go down and make solving blocks easier...

@forrestv, thanks for explaining the stales. I'd would probably leave if I saw them without that explanation. I'll take one of my machines and see how it goes, perhaps next weekend.

I'm ignorant about p2pool but thinking about trying it out. I'd like to be able to see some stats (at least current p2pool hash rate, graphs over time would be great). Are such stats visible to outsiders anywhere?

I'd also like to know if I should expect more stales and if so, how many more are typical?

I'm seeing this too. I've got a confirmed reward of 35.90265622 NMC with a send threshold of 10.0. But, perhaps I don't understand the payout mechanism. Do long blocks like the one we are currently in play a role?

Thanks Slush, my miners are doing much better.

Anything new to report?  I'm hoping things can get back to normal soon but as of now am still unable to mine using slush's pool.

I'm getting connection problems using GUIMiner v2011-08-24. After doing ipconfig /flushdns I've tried "slush's pool" and other with both api.bitcoin.cz and api2.bitcoin.cz.

I've got two systems with i7-2600Ks (3.40  GHz). I have 3 GPUs in these systems so am mining TBX with 7 threads (instead of . Each thread is getting about 1 khash (7 khash per CPU). I've got two other miners that have only semprons in them. I'm wondering if I should upgrade those systems to use 6 core Phenom IIs...

Seems stuck. It is not showing any updates since:

12 hours and 13 minutes ago    147,603   00000000000001b77b706b389df3ddfa9f161b66402092abc941e4dcd3f61cbc    4532 bytes    DeepBit    Scores

Am I the only one having connection problems? (I'm able to mine in Slush's pool)

Assuming this is to be a departure from recent history and all... Would it also make sense to let the open source sit out in the open for review for a period of time prior to launch too?