No it won't, It'll make it worse cos of the scalability problem. More hash power makes the problem worse, not better 

No bounty = no development = no fix.

I actually pointed a few S3's at my node because the rise in BTC made it worth a gamble, but if the hash rate gets too high I'll pull them off again - it's a crazy situation 

Hardly needs to be a hacker either - anyone can do it with the right software. Probably a few disgruntled customers unhappy with their double price hike......

~/run_p2pool.py --net unobtanium

Or just hook up to mine:

stratum+tcp://iyftech.zapto.org:9655  

It's alive - use the full string:

stratum+tcp://iyftech.zapto.org:9332

Edit: You forgot the i in iyftech btw   

    Great description 

This demonstrates the scalability problem perfectly, hash rate drops & blocks are found, hash rate rises & blocks go scarce again. The higher the network hash rate gets, the worse the problem becomes apparent. This is one of the reasons why p2pool will never grow beyond a certain size until the scalability issue is fixed. It's a crying shame & I still miss it, but as others have said, it's simply pointless throwing more hash at p2pool until a fix is found that cures the scalability & variance issues.

I hope it happens soon 

No.

Well, I guess you've got your answer then......if he had of answered your post, he would have been lying anyway 

Holy moly dude, never thought I'd see the day when you left p2pool - welcome to the self-destructing & boring world of centralized mining 


P2pool was brilliant work 2 years ago, which is pre-historic in software terms. Now it is just old, outdated & clunky abandonware. I don't think anyone is interested in playing the blame game here, many months of that have got p2pool absolutely nowhere & is why it is in it's current state.

Re-write & improve or die. Simple as that.

                                    EPIC FAIL!!!

As I suggested earlier, I think a minimum of 3 multi-signatories who should be trusted legendary members - and would like to suggest Ognasty as one of them, as he is also a p2pool user.

I'm no coder I'm afraid, so can't help out with the donation adjustment - maybe ck/kano can decipher it? We will also need someone to look after the git page of course, as well as the new p2pool thread. I'm not sure how JB would feel about this? He has the gift of words & how to lay them down..... This whole deal will require a massive amount of PR both here & on other outlets/forums in order to educate & persuade all node users to switch over to the honeypot'd code, so care should be taken to make sure everything is in place & ready.

There is much to do - but at least we are doing something. I like it. 

Nothing would change - p2pool would still be BTC only (even though forrestv added altcoin anyway, it can be dropped), it would be up to the altcoin p2pool devs to add it to their versions & voluntarily add their own altcoin bounty to the main p2pool thread 

Kano is in again......

You asked for a used device?

Well, I've been away from p2pool for a total of 7 days now & find that I have too much spare time on my hands. Mining at centralised pools is boring. It's just point & go - what to do with all this spare time? Even reading poop-dawgs lies spam posts has got boring 

So, I find myself thinking: what to do about p2pool? I miss it, but at the same time I know it's just not worth adding my hash power until it's been "fixed" - for want of a better word.

After mulling over it for some time, I came up with an idea - here's the basic gist of it:

1) Fork it & change the donation option to a new wallet address owned by at least 3 trustworthy legendary community members (0.25%?) Manual donations can also be added to the total at any time by anyone who wishes to do so, but withdrawals can only be done if signed for by all persons holding keys for the bounty.

2) Open a new thread linking to the new github download & headed by a ticker showing the honeypot amount that will be awarded to the dev who can do a) the rewrite & b) solve the variance/scaling issues. The thread should contain the reasons for this being done & describe what issues need to be resolved.

3) If/when the aims are achieved & the rewrite/issues are solved to everyones satisfaction (in either order, 50/50?), the bounty(s) are released by those key holders/multi-signatories

Nothing fancy, keeps it simple, 100% open & transparent, no disruption to mining/sharechain until the final code is approved & a hardfork is necessary, if at all. This way, users will be more inclined to use the standard donate function in the knowledge that funds are actually going towards development instead of nowhere. The higher the bounty gets, the more chance there is of someone stepping up to the mark & taking up the challenge. It also has the benefit of other altcoin address being added by devs who have modded the code (rav3npl - vertoe-drk etc) & are willing to merge it to theirs in an effort to raise the bounty with other coins - as any new development is of benefit to all p2pool users including altcoin miners.

This is just the basics & will of course need plenty of discussion as well as a few good men who are prepared to look after the git page, keep the bounty etc - but hey - it's a start right?

Just don't shout at me........my brain hurts 

All the crap pools then.......

Right. So after explaining the problems with large, badly coded centralized pools with virtually zero support - you choose probably the worst one of all to mine at.

All is lost 

Better get used to it, it is how it is I'm afraid.

There has been a false rumour of home mining being profitable for many months now, when in reality the ROI train left the station over 10 months ago & the profit boat sailed into the sunset around the same time. We now have a situation where most of the large (Chinese) pools are so badly coded that they splurge out more stale blocks than good ones while the other large-ish pools are skimming the tops off miners earnings in various different & devious ways, be it block withholding or waiting for diff increases before paying out (Yes, you know who you are & you should be BANned) or some other unethical, greedy behaviour. The saying "biggest isn't best" is especially true in Bitcoinland.

The few established & trustworthy pools who are left are having to pay the price, as are their miners. To cap it all off, the only truly decentralised & trust-less pool has been left undeveloped since the GPU mining days - what was supposed to be the last defence against centralization is now languishing in despair at the bottom of the pool table.

Only a year or so ago, every mining thread was full of how Bitcoin could replace the corrupt monetary system, giving the power of finance back to the people & away from a small group of "chosen ones". Now all I see in threads are so called "guides" giving paid for & misleading advice, with miners more concerned about how much of that terrible fiat currency (that spawned the birth of Bitcoin in the first place) they can get for their Bitcoins from even more corrupt & manipulative exchanges - greed & profit have taken over the original idea of Bitcoin, and it's only gonna get worse.

Some of us still believe in Bitcoin though, me included. The community just has to wise up a little & look at the bigger picture, instead of the short term quick (non) profit making chances that are no longer there. They gone.

Then skin up a blanger 

Yet more proof that Banks just don't have a clue about crypto......



Bank of England.........

Feast your eyes on this:


Shocking. Just.......shocking 

Normal service is resumed