Bitcoin Forum
May 20, 2022, 06:23:54 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 23.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »
1  Bitcoin / Mining / Re: Miners vs Hardfork on: April 03, 2017, 11:24:28 AM
The problem comes with transactions that take an inordinate amount of space in the block to represent them, because their inputs are from many tiny individual transactions.  Miners tend to sit on their coins until the price goes up.  Then they rush to send their coins to an exchange to sell all at the same general moment in time. 

Since miners tend to be paid in many smaller payments across time, when they attempt to send their coins to an exchange (or anywhere for that matter), the transaction ledger that is created has to represent each and every one of those input transactions.  It's NOT simply saying "Send X BTCs from wallet Y to wallet Z."  If the miner has a total of 3 BTCs that he's sending to the exchange, which came to the miner from 1,000 individual mining payouts of 0.003 BTC, that 3 BTC send transaction will need to contain the transaction IDs of each and every one of those 1,000 individual mining payouts.  That is what EATS UP SPACE in the block.

Once those coins are consolidated into a single transaction ID again, it actually makes it easier to send (smaller # of bytes required) payments from that consolidated transaction ID.

So rather than wait until the price gets to where you want to sell, miners should be consolidating their wallets during non-peak times.  If you have those 3 BTCs already in a single transaction ID, when you go to send BTC to someone next time, the # of bytes required to represent those 3 BTCs will be minimal since it will only reference the single consolidated transaction ID (rather than the thousand in my example above). 

Some of this problem has been handled already somewhat by the pools where they were paying daily but now pay weekly, for example.  But still, if you are trying to send 2 years of mining payouts (from a pool that pays out weekly) to an exchange, your transaction will need to include 104 different inputs, and will eat up significant space in the block.  Send to yourself during off-peak times, paying a minimum fee, and decrease your block footprint. 
2  Bitcoin / Mining / Re: Miners vs Hardfork on: March 26, 2017, 10:37:02 AM
Those people who are cheap asses and don't want to pay ~1% fees can still pay less and have their blocks confirmed during off-peak hours.  And if that seems to be bad to you -- it's likely because you don't run a mining rig and pay for electricity to do so.  A $1400 Antminer S9 is about 1500watts.  A month of operation will run typically $120-$150ish in electricity costs in the USA.  The fact is, there's a cost involved in hashing.  And hashes are what secure the network.  You can't have your cake and eat it too.  You can't have a network that is as secure with far fewer hashes.  And you WILL have far fewer hashes if you make it impossible for miners to recoup their electricity costs.

As the mining subsidy halves every 4 years, miners will be relying more and more on the fees rather than that subsidy to recoup their costs.  By screwing them out of the mining fees (by removing competition for quick inclusion in the chain) it will make it impossible for them to recoup even their electricity fees, let alone their equip costs.  And that spells disaster because it means that they will either shut down the hashing or send their hashes to a competitor coin thereby making bitcoin less secure.  

As you can see from this graph, the subsidy has already mostly disappeared....and every four years, it keeps halving... That is built-into the system. It was expected that as the subsidy was removed, the miners would get paid by the fees as the network became more popular. Now you want to remove the vast majority of fees as well....not too smart AT ALL.

3  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Pools (Altcoins) / Re: iSpace SHA256 Mining Pool Support Thread on: March 17, 2016, 03:36:04 AM
According to their Twitter page (https://twitter.com/iSpacePools):

4  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Pools (Altcoins) / Re: iSpace SHA256 Mining Pool Support Thread on: March 16, 2016, 11:33:42 PM
What's going on with the site? It's been entirely dead for a while now.

Good question.  Something likely died on them or they are being DDOSd.  It doesn't seem like they would just pack up their bags, and skip town.  I noticed it over 12 hours ago when my miners tried to switch their rotation.  They were mining on the failover server, so I looked closer.  It was then that I found that not only are their pool servers down, but also their HTML (web page) servers as well.  
5  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][WKC] WANKCOIN - Shop Anonymously, Accepted at over 100+ HD sites! on: March 04, 2016, 01:09:37 AM
ispace reopen pool http://sha256d.ispace.co.uk/coindetails/?coin=wkc wallet sync ok

nodes

66.254.125.98:9336 or ispace.co.uk
64.210.140.249:9336 or node1.wankcoin.com
64.210.140.250:9336 or node2.wankcoin.com

"difficulty" : 294542.68399159

last block 3 hours ago

There was some kind of bottleneck or something with the MPOS system at the official pool.  I was finding blocks, but they were not showing up on the MPOS blocks page.  And with the temporary delisting at iSpace, I think lots of people weren't opening their wallets anymore.  So I decided to let it continue for an hour or so with my S7, and it did finally break through whatever the logjam was.  Either that, or someone finally read (but didn't respond to) my emails/inquiries.  Or maybe it's a really slow system that only updates after a large # of blocks, to conserve cpu cycles...  

I have still not received any sort of response back from the official pool -- even though I sent out emails from within the system, as well as an email to the support@domain and even the admin email registered with whois.  So I am quite happy to find out that iSpace has added it back in.  At least they answer email.  

Thanks for your reply, by the way.  It's appreciated.

6  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][WKC] WANKCOIN - Shop Anonymously, Accepted at over 100+ HD sites! on: March 03, 2016, 02:52:38 PM
Any ideas what's going on with the wallet syncs right now?  Mine is stuck at 4 days remaining.  I know ispace dropped the coin.  So I moved my mining to the wankcoin pool's stratum.  But now my wallet won't sync.  And my log is full of messages of various IP that haven't been seen for 4 days.  I have the addnode=node1.wankcoin.com, and addnode=node2.wankcoin.com both in the conf.

Has someone hijacked it?  Or trying to?
7  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] AsicCoin (ASC) | SHA256 - The coin for ASIC Mining! | No Premine on: February 25, 2016, 04:47:58 AM


The problem with that image as it pertains to BTC is that most of the 'gold' is already mined.  And another payout halving is scheduled to occur in the middle of this year too.  So that's a 50% decrease instantly in new coin supply.  Over time, the only thing the miners will get is their portion of the fees -- as the 'subsidy' amount will eventually become inconsequential.
8  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Unitus (UIS): 1st Multi-Algo Merge-Mined on: February 21, 2016, 12:28:54 AM
The number of blocks on the site http://unitus.nutty.one/network (Recent Blocks) and site http://explorer.unitus.nutty.one/ is not the same.

Yea, there is definitely some mismatch here -- not something I would necessarily expect from across the same domain name.  But it just tells me that something broke on his site about 3 days ago. 

http://explorer.unitus.nutty.one/block/0699d5de6dd25cfacc2ce4d50d06f0c67b20690274ad0f11f80041cf20e72013

For example, that's showing in the last blocks solved -- yet shows up as the 17th.  3 or 4 days ago. 

9  Economy / Service Announcements / Re: [ANN] NiceHash.com - sell & buy hash rate cloud mining service / multipool on: January 25, 2016, 06:56:37 AM
I am still going through the scrypt coins at ispace.co.uk, but by in large, it seems NiceHash needs to tweak their scrypt settings to allow for their miners to actually get established and mining.  Far too many of these coins are failing because the target difficulty at the pool is too small.  Well, as best as I can tell, iSpace requires about two full minutes of hashing before it settles on an average for the work difficulty.  And by then, NiceHash turns the window red -- disconnecting from it, which then restarts the whole process of negotiating a work difficulty.  It'd be nice if iSpace would figure out a difficulty sooner than a full 2 minutes.  But it'd also be nice if NiceHash was a little more forgiving on the slow ramp up speed for these more obscure scrypt coins.  And for my testing, I always used the lowest speed -- 0.1 GH/sec, or 100MH/sec. 

10  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Californium |CF| |Sha256| |2,510,000 CF|Bittrex-Yobit|Mac/Window Wallet| on: January 22, 2016, 06:58:41 PM
Any addnodes that I can use?  I've tried all that are listed in the threads, and it's not syncing. 

Quote
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 193.27.209.100:44252 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 108.61.10.90:60559 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 212.204.164.23:54937 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 216.99.113.116:56527 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 195.154.146.221:42376 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 31.181.238.182:50960 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 24.154.82.240:34637 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 24.138.157.36:56709 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 104.238.132.171:49122 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 95.84.240.160:50248 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 110.170.30.222:2277 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 178.214.174.209:62980 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 178.62.199.175:39975 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 90.219.100.31:50322 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 46.105.118.15:60399 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 108.250.162.155:53689 lastseen=375969.1hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.6hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
trying connection 108.61.10.90:44252 lastseen=375969.2hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 193.27.209.100:44252 lastseen=375969.2hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=375969.2hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 108.61.10.90:60559 lastseen=375969.2hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 212.204.164.23:54937 lastseen=375969.2hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 216.99.113.116:56527 lastseen=375969.2hrs
connection timeout
trying connection 54.149.30.199:44252 lastseen=101.7hrs
11  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Discussion (Altcoins) / Re: Cryptsy was hacked - lost 13,000 BTC & 300,000 LTC on: January 18, 2016, 04:07:18 PM


Okay, It's been some time since I had to deal with coding of this tricky nature.  But I just now was able to present that snip to someone who codes extensively/daily for a living, and he confirmed what I said.  "Read and send" (NOT write!!!).  For those more familiar with linux, it's like a remote kind of 'cat' command.  It dumps text files to the screen or output pipe.  Presumably directory structure as well (if readable/owned by same user), as they're files too.  All this exploit would do is put a backdoor into the infected wallet client such that someone knowing the backdoor existed could start looking around on the hard drive of the infected client for files that were set readable by the same user account that was running the infected client.  

So on a multi-user system, this should not have happened as Cryptsy said -- unless cryptsy was doing some incredibly negligent stuff regarding their server allocation and file permissions thereon.  They would have had to have global read permissions set on all their wallet files, either at the system or group level.  OR, they were running all the clients (including the bitcoin client) under the same username/account -- which then gave each and every one of the clients the ability to read the files created by all of them.  Again -- INCREDIBLY irresponsible, and unbelievable.  And it still doesn't explain why they'd be running them on the same physical or virtual machine that had wallet files containing keys protecting access to $6.6+million dollars (price of btc on the date of the alleged hack was ~$582).

This would have been a firing offense for anyone at any modern corporation.  I can assure you.  And anyone who has real-world experience would know better than to have made the mistakes that would have had to have been made if Cryptsy's account is true.

If you had $6.6 million sitting in a wallet.dat file on a computer, would you download strange unknown executables onto that same machine and run them?  Give me a break...
12  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Discussion (Altcoins) / Re: Cryptsy was hacked - lost 13,000 BTC & 300,000 LTC on: January 16, 2016, 12:10:28 AM
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=935898.msg10259625#msg10259625


Without more familiarity with the code, my reading of this code is that it would, at most, have allowed the hacker to push the contents of some file (ONLY if said file/directory is set readable by the username executing the irc server and/or infected client program!) back to the person (and others) who put it in place. In short, it would explain how an attacker could pull a wallet.dat file off of an infected machine (which, assuming the wallet was password protected/hashed, would make the brute-force much MUCH easier). But it doesn't explain why the IRC server or wallet client progrm was running on a server which also had the filled wallet.dat files!!!!   And it sure as hell wouldn't explain the stupidity of running an irc server or infected client as root or however else we're expected to believe this happened.

Furthermore, it wouldn't grant more access to the user running the irc server or infected client than he had been given by root. And if the wallets were not owned and not readable at the OS level by the user account running the irc server or infected client, then this little exploit would NOT be able to read the wallet.dat file!!  The OS itself would have blocked it!!  Each and every coin's client, as well as the irc server itself, should have been running under its own separate username account that ONLY had, at most, access to an empty wallet file owned (so far as the OS is concerned) by that same username account.  User Bitcoin (or something appropriate) should have been running the bitcoin client, with another user like user Litecoin running the Litecoin client, etc., etc.  This would have limited the reach of any infected clients.  A separate or virtual machine for each coin would have been even better!

Are we really expected to believe that Cryptsy had a wallet.dat file with pub/priv keys that controlled $4mil or so on the same physical machine as one running an infected Lucky7coin client?  Sorry.  That's gross negligence if true.  And I for one do not believe it for a second.
13  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Discussion (Altcoins) / Re: Cryptsy was hacked - lost 13,000 BTC & 300,000 LTC on: January 15, 2016, 09:39:46 PM
Looks like someone took the gox script and made very tiny edits to the facts.  We have someone of a privileged position coming in through a hidden back door.  We have coins sitting without being accessed.

Do we also have creditors that needed paid first?  Employees that needed paid?  Credit lines that were extended when there was no competition, which never should have been extended?

How is this NOT a cryptocoin shakedown?  Give us ~$4million, or Cryptsy dies...

We deserve to see Cryptsy's books... Perhaps in a court of law.  Were they operating profitably these past years?  Or were they enriching themselves off of funds that were meant to be deposits?

Put more simply:  How do we know that isn't a little after-prison nest egg put there by someone inside Cryptsy?  I'm not seeing the PROOF of Lucky7coin's involvement.  For all I know, they concocted that proof because they know the creator of Lucky7coin died in a car crash recently.  I'm not saying he did die in a car crash...but only that they may have another reason for choosing him to be the fallguy.  But they'd be in a better position to know his identity than most anyone else.  And just WHY have they not released his name?  Do they REALLY think he'll be more likely to return the coins if they don't reveal his identity?  Or are they just SAYING that?

Has Cryptsy fired anyone over this?  Or was there conveniently no point?  SMH  Not even the idiot who would have had to put the cold storage coins onto the same machine as an IRC server for this to have happened?

Maybe Cryptsy felt they weren't getting enough from those they are laundering for?  And this is a way to put the squeeze to them...

A blog without any incriminating time-stamps....  I wonder if they let archive.org hit that blog? (re: http://blog.cryptsy.com/ )

What were they intending to do for this period of time that has passed since they discovered the loss of coins?  I think they said a year and a half.

Were they planning for a year and a half on eating the loss from their future profits?

And now they realize suddenly that they CAN'T?!!!?!!!?


They were letting people pay bitcoin to temp ban others in chat!  THe more you paid, the longer the ban!

That screams they're hemmoraging money!!

``I'd love for them to point to the timestamped github repo for the coin and say lines XXX-YYY is the malicious code, and here's what makes it malicious.``

Not my words, so I will put them in quotes.  If he wants to claim them, he's welcome to.  But I agree.  I want to see this little bot that goes in and drains wallets like they said.  I want to see how they hooked this irc bot into the lucky7coin client, as they claim.  Because what I do find in that blog is remarkably free of what I would consider proof positive.  It's an accusation and a wallet address with a LOT of coins in it.

I have some history of compiling IRC servers and playing around with IRC bots in the early 90s.  And this sounds rather far-fetched to me.  And more importantly, he has to know he has not given us PROOF -- proof that it happened AS HE CLAIMS.  And what one calls a malicious bot, another calls a hole in the irc server.  He seems with that blog post to be insisting that his irc server just couldn't have been to blame...  pffftt...  What version of the IRC server were they running at the time, and how obsolete was it at the time?  If it looks like a smokescreen, it may well be...
14  Economy / Exchanges / Re: *WARNING* Coins-e.com is MTGox'ing users?? on: January 12, 2016, 12:13:02 PM


It definitely seems defunct.  But I got such a kick out of this that I had to share.  It seems my account was being hacked before I even created it.  lol

15  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: [Stratum Cycle beta] - automatic pool switcher on: December 29, 2015, 03:24:56 AM
I Know i  used to load in 5 or 6  pools using SSH with the balance command on my S3 and have the same issue some pools just didn't work, even tried one time to add more to UI in the S3 by using that S1 guide didn't happen .

Then this program came a long i use it from time to time but it doesn't do enough for me etc or much is being done with it because of why or what you said , I'm being nice or tiring to.

Cya

Correct.  The pools will work/rotate on my S7 if there are 4  (maybe 5) or fewer configured, if you ssh into the machine and change the config file manually.  It's just if you get past 4 (or 5...I can't remember which), one or more of them doesn't make it past the init stage.  You can pretty much tell from the miner status window which ones are going to fail when their time comes in the rotation -- the ones showing no work received from the pool at the very start...  So there has to be something more involved than just adding "rotate" : "xx" to the .conf when you have 5/5+ pools configured.  It's possible some bitmain script elsewhere could be tweaked to make it work, but I haven't found a solution anywhere on google.  And it's not for lack of trying.  All the pools beyond the 3 allowed in the config screen, if manually entered, do show up in the antminer's miner status window just fine.  Whether or not the bitmain processes/scripts running in the background expect status results for so many additional pools beyond 3 is another matter, I think...

At least with this automatic pool switcher, I can do what I want (mostly) without any need to ssh and change stuff using vi editor inside the miner.  I can queue up 5+ pools of the same or different sha256 coin types, set their mining duration separately, and I get a nice little status window that scrolls by as it works.  I would donate if the author provided rotation in minutes rather than whole number hours, as well as a save/reload config option.  Internal logic that checked difficulty and profitability (perhaps of those in a savable list which are check-boxed active), and rotated based on that....well, I would donate quite a bit more.  =]

16  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: [Stratum Cycle beta] - automatic pool switcher on: December 29, 2015, 01:52:50 AM
Changing the code in the antminer is cumbersome and tedious.  A script that rotates like this is quite useful, and not 're-inventing the wheel'  Shocked.  I found his comment rather rude and discouraging, without taking the time to see just exactly how it could be useful.  I doubt he has an Antminer from the sound of his comment.  And more than likely not an S7.  

http://sha256d.ispace.co.uk/

With this program, I can enter in all of those sha256 coins (minus any I don't like), and have it rotate without needing to ssh into the antminer to change a thing!  That, alone, is worth something.  Furthermore, as I said, for whatever reason, if you manually enter a rotate configuration by sshing into the machine (you can't do it through antminer interface), it pukes and gives dead miner time if you put in more than 5 or 6 pools.

I clearly did get more than 3 pools configured by bypassing the normal interface panel, which is how I know what it does when you put in '5 or 6 or more'.  As best as I can tell from looking at the interface panel while it's doing it, the pools that don't successfully test alive and receive a work share from the pool at the init will fail and beep with dead mining time when their rotation cycle comes up.  My guess is that it's cloudflare handshaking routine interference, but it's only a guess.  I don't put much faith that this will ever be fixed by Bitmain, so...

I find this pool switcher software quite useful.  And I find it also quite sad that it has not seen a revision since the 0.0.1.  Instead of encouraging other authors to write code, the author of cgminer seems to have taken personal offense at the very suggestion that his own software isn't the be-all end-all for everyone regardless of skill level or overall objectives he pretends it is.  It's a shame he didn't spend that time productively adding logic within his own cgminer to allow it to load balance different coins of the same type at the same time, instead of presuming they're all working on the same coin (eg. load balance/queuesize a dozen different sha256 coins).  Although, even if he does (or has), it's not likely Bitmain is going to see it as important enough to include in a future firmware upgrade.  =[
17  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: [Stratum Cycle beta] - automatic pool switcher on: December 29, 2015, 12:10:47 AM
the antminer s5 lacks support for cycling through different pools (correct me if I am wrong)
The antminers use a variant of cgminer which I created.

The pool strategies include a strategy of switching called "rotate" which I put in the code in Jul 20 2011.

You are recreating the wheel and adding an extra tool to do what cgminer already does.


Antminers tend to fail when you configure too many pools in the .conf, and you get dead time mining on those pools that don't pass the initial connection test (eg. getting a packet lost to cloudflare ddos protection) -- which, in order to even consider doing, you have to do manually by SSHing into the machine (an S7 in my case).  My S7 has room for 3 pools in the Bitmain interface, and no way to choose the rotate option, except for manually SSHing into the machine and adding it to the .conf file myself.  If I use too many pools (eg. 5 or 6 or more, manually configuring), the S7 tends to invariably not connect to one or more of them, and gives that dead mining beeping for the entire duration of the rotate.

So I disagree strongly.  I find this switcher quite useful for the fact that I do NOT have to keep SSHing into the machine whenever I want to briefly mine some other coin.  Would it be better if Bitmain allowed us to enter more than 3 pools and had a rotate option in their config panel?  Of course.  But in the meanwhile....

I do, however, question why the author went with hours instead of minutes in the duration field, and provided no way to save config.  Minutes would be far more useful and far less restrictive.  And tying it in to some difficulty/exchangeprice listing to give preference to whatever coin makes the most sense out of a list would be even more useful.  If it allowed for minutes instead of hours, I may have considered sending in a donation.  But forcing hours seems a bit unnecessarily restrictive.  In any case, my $0.02 for what it's worth...
18  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive Bitmain Antminer S7 Setup [HD] on: December 17, 2015, 08:50:53 AM
Yes, it's sufficient for your router but only one S7.  It will get pretty warm but not hot with one router and one S7 on that 16 AWG extension cord.  I'm assuming your are using a PSU(s) that can also plug into 120V?

Okay.  I think I will be headed out and grabbing a 12 AWG rated extension cord or better.  'pretty warm' disturbs me.  I don't intend to run the router off of it.  It's fine where it is.  I'm just not able to feed power to the S7 from the same bedroom where the router is.  The S1s weren't a problem because they were wireless.  But since the S7 is a direct-line into the router, I sort of need to keep it close to the router with a long extension cord, or a bit further away from the router with a long CAT5 ethernet cable.  I definitely don't want it in the hallway making all that noise.  LOL  At least in the office (3rd BR) I can close the door on it. 

I have an old wireless router from Verizon.  If I can figure out how to turn it into a bridge, I may be able to stick the thing into the garage.  =]
19  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive Bitmain Antminer S7 Setup [HD] on: December 17, 2015, 08:36:13 AM
Here is a drawing I posted in another forum.  Maybe it will help you a bit.  I deleted most of the conversation but left a little of it remaining below:

A 240V outlet is simply connected to BOTH poles that have 120V each.

I have only shown double pole circuits for the large consumption appliances for the home, such as, Air Conditioning, dryer and stove top/oven.  I have not included a refrigerator, separate freezer [if you have one like myself], multiple televisions, lights, stereos, gaming stations, computers, exhaust and intake fans for getting out the heat from rigs, etc.  We have very easily maxed out this 200 amp breaker panel with what I have shown in the drawing without coming anywhere near the 32,000 watts of rigs mentioned in another post earlier.  Plus, we don't have the other things necessary in the house like I mentioned.

A 200 amp main breaker is rated at what it says, "200 amps."  Meaning, if we ever have more than 200 amps on either phase (pole), the main breaker will trip... period!!!


I'm not really worried about the main breaker.  Just the small one headed into the bedroom where the router was installed -- it's rated 15A and shared for both back bedrooms (other than the master BR which has its own 20A for itself).  We're using the 3rd bedroom as an office.  I think I may be running an extension cord from the hallway.  Do you think 16 AWG rated extension cord would be sufficient for a single S7?  
20  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive Bitmain Antminer S7 Setup [HD] on: December 17, 2015, 08:14:01 AM
``Rated Current   108A``

Why is it 108A and not 10.8A?  I don't understand that at all.  I see that bitmain also doesn't use the decimal:

Because its rating at 12V, not 120V. I don't know what mains system you're going to use, but I know you'll be using ~12V.

Okay.  I think I understand now.  On breaker boxes, do the breakers read for 220V or 110V?  I thought residentials get 220V, and it gets split/halved at the box or something.  I should have tried learning more about this stuff a long time ago.  I am assuming that 15A breaker is for 110V?  Is that correct?  It's normal USA wiring, as I understand it.  Built new in 2006.  A quick look at the breaker box shows 10s, 15s, 20s, 30s, and even a 40A.  And it looks like the 30s and 40 take up a double-slot in the breaker box.  So those are maybe 220V?

I have an S7 coming within the next 7 hours FedEx.  So I am trying to learn what I can as quickly as possible.  I could kick the fools who wired this house -- as the two back rooms are both on the same 15A breaker -- which is where the router comes in.  And the master BR is on a 20A for itself.  SMH  

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!