what ever you did doublec,
it worked !!

till today i had about 15%+ stales

since restart of my miner today cause i finaly added ixcoin, i have done >300 shares with 0 stales !!!

great work, thank you!

Is this only cgminer related ?

I am getting about 15-20% stales using Phoenix miner (Version 1.6.2). Almost after every "LP: New work pushed" the first share send is rejected. Tried out the new Version (1.7.0) but it drops from 300 MHash down to 200 MHash and does not produce any shares. Read that the new Version seems to be still buggy.

Anyone else having that issue with Phoenix?

So guess i should change my miner, any prefered suggestions ? - Which is most appropriate miner for merged mining ?

I vote for the upper right logo, the one with the   I   in the middle of the   0   Symbol.

I think the = will overload it just a bit. I also like the idea of some relief (although i am for the keep it simple way), but not as intense as in the examples, maybe reduce it in numbers, like clock digits positions or just something on top and bottom.

The reason i like the I in 0 is, that it is saying:


"This is a BINARY currency!"

I would like to show you the over all hash rate increasing, since more and more people are installing the solidcoin client and start mining, but since i don't have a graph of it to do so, i just have to hope you can imagine it.

Just keep in mind the number of people / computers mining SC may have increased over the last hours, not only the difficulty.

No it does not. Solidcoin is designed to raise the difficuly slow (+ max 10% [Diff*1,1]) and lower it fast (- 75% [Diff/4]). The main design purpose in the beginning of SC was to make it "miner friendly". Or in other words: to get coins faster.
So if hash rate increases the difficulty will adapt slowly. And if hash rate decreases the difficulty will adapt faster.
And that is what happens now, difficulty started at very low (1). But the calculation power from start on was that high that with a difficulty of 1 the blocks are not generated evey 3 minutes but way faster. But instead of jumping to the correct difficulty (lets asume 2.500 [just an excample value]) it increases 10% step wise. So it will take a very long time till it reaches it's appropriate difficulty. And till then those people with high computing power / many CPUs will be able to get a lot of bitcoins in a short amount of time.

There is no hacking or anything like that, it is just the design of starting at difficulty 1 with a max increase of 10% each 240 Blocks (correct me if it was another number), coliding with a starting hash rate that is equivalent to a MUCH higher difficulty.

*wondering if his "i am out" has anything to to with his innitial statement that he has his computing "power" outside bussiness time.

So people are back at work and need their computer time now, so he can't keep on mining for some hours ?

did work,   THANK YOU

*just wondering why it needs upnp when i then can disable it ...

Tried to compile it, but it does not run through, telling something about problems with the "net.cpp" according the miniupnpc.
I am pretty new to compiling programs by myself so i would need some help.

First i thought i just forgot to install the miniupnpc but then i checked the debian package management and it sais miniupnpc 1.5-2 is already installed.

did:

make -f makefile.unix

later tried:
make -f makefile.unix >> compilefailure.log

to get the log to post it here, but it did write only the first line into the log file.

To the power outage, i can remember having heared something about a power outage in the news for that region. Not sure it it was same time or few days bevor, but could match.

To those claiming he just took the BTC and went along.

Please take into consideration the amount of BTC/SC traded on his site every day. With the fee of 0.2 or 0.4% for each transaction, he might over time have made a lot more BTC then by just taking the BTCs in his exchange at this early time.
So from my point of few just taking the BTC and scam all for the profit doesn't seem very likely. But maybe i overestimate the number of transactions done on his site every day and underestimate the BTC realy been transfered there.

Sorry kano, had some orthographic mistaces in it that made it confusing i guess.
Typed some things different now in hope to make my point more clear.

For those still not getting it:

The client will be the one telling you how many Mhash/s you are mining. So he will just be displaying a higher value than what he actually does.
Sure its not faster, but who realy checkes how many results realy be done, most people just check the displayed xxx Mhash/s. And there the hashs client claims to be done will be way higher for the CPUs than what they realy achive.

hope it's clear now

What is it you wonder about?

He said the mining will be done by his client. So the reason why CPU will be faster then GPU is easy:

displayey mining speed GPU = mining speed GPU
displayed mining speed CPU = 100x mining speed CPU

result: everyone can see it written on his screen that the CPU is very fast in hashing.



------
edit: corrected so its hopefully more understandable

I got a few questions:


Why the inflation of the version number?



This means over 100 ASCII signs have been changed in the sourcecode?



Hope you didn't erase something essential.

how do i get my stales down

at 1260 accepted shares i got 177 rejected, thats 14%.

Anyone else having those high reject rates or is it just me, if it's me how do i get them lower ?


Edit: seems i am not the only one, PiGames just posted while i was writing mine.

The basic intention of easy to remember is good, but at moment there is one thing missing.

If you give 3 people the same "paytome.coin" address, how will you know who was sending the transaction?

Now think of a store, where everyone sends to "storename.coin", with a lot of customers the storename has no idea whom to attach the transaction received to.

You will need to do something like "paytome.coin" + "purpose" where the purpose will have to have the ability and in case of shops need to be unique, what will lead again to difficult, hard to remember combinations of letters/numbers.
In case you just think of "hey can you send me some btc" you are right, easy to remember send to address is great. It think for bigger bussines its not enough.

you where supposed to open this thread at the 1st April

Well i was calculating with it with different prices that had been on the market over the time (all been considered as 'more effective' and neither was).

Actually the stale shares are another point that makes i0coin even more inefficient for me, cause at mining bitcoins i have ~1-2% stale, at SC and i0coin i got ~10% (same mining settings).
I till now blame it on the shorter time for new blocks which causes more often a share in calculation to be dropped and restarted cause there is a new block.

But maybe thats the difference of someone having running only 1 GPU compared to others mining in the x or even xx Ghash region, i don't know.



add:  I didn't say it is not more profitable at all i just said that even with the webpages saiing its 1,5 times more profitable, it for ME isn't.

And no it's not cause i trade those coins over at fast rates so that the fees will make > 1% and wait till price further drops over time. My basis was price and difficulty NOW at start, then checking after a period of time how much BTC / i0coin been mined and compared their 'would have been value' at the starting time. Cause if you wait longer usualy it becomes even more unprofitable for the old coins, cause the price drops further.

Actually his basic idea of doing a fix fee, and making it that 'high' was to get higher income to miners.

As the whole basic plan was:

- Shorter time for blocks
- lower increase in difficulty
- way higher difficulty drop than raise
- additional higher income through the fees (which bring way more once there are enough transactions)

This all was about being able to mine faster, get the coins faster and reach the coin max faster - which btw was lower so each mined coin would in the end be more worth.

What he then later realised that just by mining you don't make money, you NEED someone who is willing to buy them, cause either speculation or being able to use them for someting.
This was when he - at least he said he did - contacted ruxum and mtgox. Cause just by producing something you don't make money. And i realy hoped - after he realized that - that this will become some project with possibly perspectives for the future.

But in the end everyone should realize that all this was born out of the wish to maximize potential income through mining. All this "improvements" where miner focused!

coinotron does not fit for me.

had two miners running at same speed, one on bitcoin and one on i0coin when it said i0coin was 1.30 efficiency. After about 6-8 houres (don't remember for sure) i compared the btc value i mined with the i0coin exchanged to btc value. (not considering the fees comming up at that moment)
While the difficulty for i0coin in that time did slightly change, and while the whole mining time the efficiency was between ~1.30 and ~1.50 depending on the actuall trading price, i noticed that i had about 2 times the BTC mining bitcoins then mining i0coins and trading them.

So for me the "efficency" values definitely don't fit. Maybe that i had just "unlucky" shares, but the income in i0coins per time was at several tries much lower than it should have been according to difficulty / efficiency displayed.

thanks for your help wolftaur

By looking into the make-unix.txt and comparing it with the installed .deb packages i knoticed i had missing a lot of packages.

It now starts compiling - i think thats what it does,
but i still get some errors.

most of them according to

../obj/nogui/net.o net.cpp

like: net.cpp:1115: error: 'freeUPNPDevlist' had was not declared in this scope

are the linux binaries up already ?



Tried to compile by myself (have not done that ever yet) but it produces a failure.
I'm guessing it's cause some parts needed are missing on my computer.
Checked for this 'miniupnp' mentioned somewhere above, but could not find it on my system. Later found out it seems that debian hasn't included it in the 'stable' version. Guessing thats the problem why i can't compile myself? At least not do the 'make -f .....' part. Actually no clue what else to do after that then - sorry, totaly new to this and never got to the point: 'searching for a howto compile yourself for newbs' - and then read it.


Wonder if i still could use the 1.02 client to send transactions or if it will screw something up.