I agree with you guys too. If we think of the situation further, it is complicated and the problem could be contradicted one to another. In a simple word, it is because magi intends to stay at low hashrate that makes chances for single person to plugin such a miner. According to prior discussions, I am not yet to see a chance to make simple algo switch to disable a super hashrate miner; for example, what if he owns a CPU mining farm, then there is no way to get rid of it with whatever algos. We could go for huge amount hashrate allowed by the network, like the bitcoin and then the hash of the current one is trivial; but I don't think this would be good to go.

Of course he could mine with GPU or FPGA too as people talked earlier. Certainly I'd like to work on this situation in whatever approaches we can take to deal with it, allow me some time to take serious look at it, but I've learned that this isn't that easy to make changes that disable them at all. But wait if one takes miners leaving as a killing (surely it sounds like very disappointing situation), that might be too earlier to say about that. Well this needs a must work.

There came up a warning again about checkpoints "WARNING: Checkpoint is too old. Wait for block chain to download, or notify developers." This warning won't affect anything so just warning.  I'll take care of it at some time.

He'll make blocks stop to generate coins; I hope miners stay mining.

Thanks for the pool; this is very nice and the logo is awesome. I noticed the download for linux minerd isn't linked properly which is now with the name m-minerd-32-linux.tar.gz on the page:

http://www.coinmagi.org/files/m-cpuminer/

goldlabel, Many thanks for the party and having some activities for magi, this is very nice.

Thanks. Also I'd like to see the idea of magi being forwarded to all people, and about any deficiency in the methodology.

I guess I've to buy a FPGA at some point to get a feeling about it.

I am curious about the discussion of  FPGA; it's pretty impossible for me to make FPGA working on magi's algo. It needs to implement seven hash functions along with floating computation. Other than FPGA, there are many possibilities to have a huge amount of hashing, and you might not realize what's out there. I recalled NOBL got hard forked because people throw a GPU farm hash into a pool (you might know how high hash over the rest of network is needed to get hard fork) (and then they decided to go with pure PoS, so no one can ever mine it), and there are CPU farm too (it was the case when magi is launched, people try to manage a number of CPU cores in mining, like a farm), or a botnet which is not unlikely as well. I am guessing too, only cc90cc knows what testcc90cc meant and the intention.

In my view, the block system worked. Ideally the reward should get back to the higher value right now to benefit the normal miners. This needs to be improved; the much varied difficulty basically makes the adjustment out of expectation in some conditions. What I can see is that, coins mined with big hasher are 10 times less than that without big hasher (it's like the network stops to generate coins); in other words, the majority of coins are shared among the normal miners. I think this is a good merit to the system overall, and helps stabilizing the price too.

Obviously dropped down back to normal values.. This was a nice test...

In my opinion, this isn't a good direction to go (I remembered pure PoS posts before back a few pages). PoW & PoS is most energetic imo.

Your suggestions are appreciated. Unfortunately I burned my time a little bit, I'll try to work on it as soon as I can.


We do have a maximum right now; or you're speaking of other approaches for the limiation I'm not aware of?



I'm afraid there is a concern by switching to this; we'll end up at huge network hash by the time, and people would not be able to use handy devices to mine. Bitcoin is an example.  



I have no clue of setting maximum for individual, it is only the network hash that is seen.

0 is wrong, it should be below 1; check here: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/xmg. The reason is that block adjusted based on difficulty which is very much varying from time to time. The block is designed to be sensitive to difficulty in a situation like for now, so that once the big miner quit, we'll hit somewhat big block. The essential reason is the very much varied difficulty.

Well I guess this is probably a must situation we'll come across, if not now, it will be likely in the future. Let's see how the things are going..

NeedIfFindIt, would you like to have VPS to host your stuffs? I'm not sure how I'll go with my VPS, but if you like this option, I'll try to make it happen.

Edit, the official site also have space to host if this an option too.

@LordCoder and all others:

I'd like to bring up this post -

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=735170.msg12724060#msg12724060

If one cares about mining from day to day, it does make sense to have a mining calculator around; something like http://www.coinwarz.com/cryptocurrency would be a good one. Committing in magi won't get you something in a straight way than mining and selling immediately to maximize yield imo, as I did quite long time ago by switching mining coins from one to another.

There are no EFFECTIVE way to overcome the situation without compromising some important features of this coin as discussed in the above post.

If you're casual miners or don't care much about the short-term returns by investing mining few / tens of dollars per month (if you're committing hundreds then I guess not), I recommend staying mining as usual. This is an "EFFECTIVE" methodology I'd think right now regarding the situation.

I'm open to any ideas / questions / suggestions.

Keep it up. 

Thanks, nice work, I'll check it out.

This is nice too. I've been after hash monster with some investment on that which turned out nowhere smart.