Linux is a much better OS than windows in terms of security and stability, in addition to many, many more things. In terms of privacity I really don't know, since the attack vector to PCs is nowdays the web browser. To use linux for mining requires a real knowledge of it (time), and honestly most of mining software is designed for windows, not linux. So, I guess you have more chances to be more profitable in windows than in linux in case you manage to run windows stable.
 

what are the technical requirements  to run a znode, like bandwidth, storage, uptime, cpu, etc?.

I dont' think is unrealistic. I posted a comment in MPH thread complaining about the huge mismatch between them and  ccminer. On the other hand,
suprnova is not very good either in that regard, but it is not reporting a consistent hashrate below my miner as MPH does.

Edit: the different between block finding is so large between both pools that as I commented before to make a more reliable comparsion I should run
suprnova for quite a lot of days to average fluctuations. But those are the date I've got so far and I report them.

well at the end of the day are the coins that matter. Here goes my short test:

miningpoolhub:
begin  --> sep 19 11:28:44 CEST 2017 --> 0 zcoin
end     --> sep 21 13:57:33 CEST 2017 -->  0.47537101 zcoin
** Average: 0.2635 Zcoin/day
 


Suprnova:
Begin --> sep  21 13:55:53  CEST 2017 --> 0 zcoin
Current -> sep 23 17:28:20 CEST 2017 --> 0.59912859 zcoin
** Average: 0.279 Zcoin/ day

Conclusion (what I suspected): Suprnova  looks  better. This is true specially taking into account (i) the  larger granularity at suprnova and (ii) how the test in suprnova has been done after MPH with larger global HR.  Ideally, one should run in suprnova much, much longer to do a more accurate average due to the lower share of this pool, but I think results point to suprnova as a better option in spite of the issues commented these days.

I don't know what to do.

1. Last block found on suprnova: 09/22/2017 09:48:04   that means my, at least, last day of mining has been useless.

2. Discrepancies in MPH between reported hashrate are miner hashrate are too large to ignore.

Anyone can advise a reliable pool for Zcoin?.

How many Zcoins are you getting with the 1080 ti and what pools are you using?.

My 1080ti is running fine, stable with high hashrate, but results in MPH and Supernova are being dissapointing, nothing to do with whattomine estimate.

ufff   I just saw sgminer is for AMD, now I uderstand why it didn't work for me :-/

[/quote]

thanks, I'll check your recommendation. However, I tried once sqminer, but I was unable to make it work in ubuntu.  I'll try again.

I use same OS as you and I discarded that miner because it was very slow. I'm using the typical tpruvot fork, compiled with cuda 8.

I'm getting 2950 Kh/s with an OC aourus  waterforce 1080 ti.

what happens with xzc.suprnova.cc?. I'm minning there and  I just saw that this pool has disappeared!. Even the pool hashrate at the main page is 0H/s!.

I'm suspicious on  Zcoin in mph, but if suprnova stops working I'll lose my coins and I won't be able to compare both pools.

I'm mining the last days lyra2z. My card hasrate  is   about 2900 kh/s, I can send logs. However, at the dashboard never, ever, appears a hashrate above 2000, or at the worker page in zcoin I never get above 2000k either.  If I check at whattomine (coin's tab) I  should be getting about 0.01230 BTC/day, and I'm not even getting half that.

What's going on here?. I'll continue to min a bit more to avoid any block finding effect, if things continue like that and I don't find an explanation I'll move somewhere like suprnova or whatever.

for the Strix, which is now the only working with  ewbf:

nvidia-smi -q -d  CLOCK  -->

Driver Version                      : 384.69

Attached GPUs                       : 1
GPU 00000000:01:00.0
    Clocks
        Graphics                    : 1999 MHz
        SM                          : 1999 MHz
        Memory                      : 5508 MHz
        Video                       : 1797 MHz
    Applications Clocks
        Graphics                    : N/A
        Memory                      : N/A
    Default Applications Clocks
        Graphics                    : N/A
        Memory                      : N/A
    Max Clocks
        Graphics                    : 1999 MHz
        SM                          : 1999 MHz
        Memory                      : 5505 MHz
        Video                       : 1708 MHz
    Max Customer Boost Clocks
        Graphics                    : N/A
    SM Clock Samples
        Duration                    : 7.44 sec
        Number of Samples           : 100
        Max                         : 2025 MHz
        Min                         : 1987 MHz
        Avg                         : 2011 MHz
    Memory Clock Samples
        Duration                    : 7.44 sec
        Number of Samples           : 100
        Max                         : 5510 MHz
        Min                         : 5508 MHz
        Avg                         : 5508 MHz
    Clock Policy
        Auto Boost                  : N/A
        Auto Boost Default          : N/A

yes, that's  because I prefer OC factory models.  Overclocking in linux, specially remote, is a pain, and I'm not always able to get it.

EWBF: I get about 750 sol/s with the Aourus Extreme Waterforce, and 780 with the  Strix.
            I'm unable to squeze any additional performance from the Aorus overcloking, however the extra OC allows  the Strix give the 780.

with equihash: -My  OC Strix supports +130 Core, +1020 Memony -
                     -My OC Aourus extreme  extreme water: +80 core, and really little OC in memory

   

                     

Why hasrrefinery?,  miningpoohub has higher  hash rate and more miners with  equal fee.  I understand that zpool's 2% or nicehash 3% could be worse options because of the fee, but on paper I don't understand the advices on hashrefinery.