p2pool: i like it. but it has failed.
Care to elaborate at what p2pool has failed? I'm pretty satisfied with it myself and I monitor actual payouts vs expected payouts quite closely... last time i used it my payouts where not close to expected (but this is about half year ago). and i had a problem because i got so many small payouts that i have to pay a huge fee whenever i wanted to send out the bitcoins (ok, i could use mtgox wallet to avoid that) i would consider p2pool a success if they have about 40% of the network - but i dont know if they even have a solution to handle that situation. |
|
|
|
...my bfl asic...
Looks like you care about decentralized mining, but don't care about centralized manufacturing of miners, which is much bigger risk for bitcoin network  <sarcasm/> LoL, your point  |
|
|
|
This is a freedom of a choice. If you don't like stratum, don't use it. I'm pretty sure you're not using any current pools, so there's no change for you - you can already use another existing solution which fits your needs.
you're right... as soon as i get my bfl asic i'll take eligius as i like functional programming its a natural choice anyway. |
|
|
|
I'm thinking ,
can the proxy estimate hashrate when pool enable dynamic difficulty.
yes, but it is more complex as the proxy has to track the origin of each submitted share good proxies already do this (eg bithopper did it - dont know if its still in there though) |
|
|
|
|
my (only) problem is that stratum does not support decentralized mining.
i just hope that new inventions support the core idea of bitcoin (which is IMHO power to the miners to reduce 51% risks)
as stratum is easier to implement from pool side and decentralized mining is not well understood by miners - i dont like that stratum will succeed.
this could have been a chance to reduce the risk from pools to bitcoin itself.
|
|
|
|
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=110152.0<@pirateat40> Hello * pirateat40 sets mode: +m <@pirateat40> Q: What's going on? A: In short, one of my largest clients decided they would make things difficult for me. In the heat of the moment I made a move to secure the USD backing the coins when they were not returned and has made things much more difficult. <@pirateat40> Q: Where have you been? A: I realize not having information is annoying and somewhat concerning. I’ve stopped responding publicly until hard information was available due to some legal concerns that developed. Once the attorneys (both mine and my clients) got involved, everything slowed down while everything was sorted out. <@pirateat40> Q: When will we get our coins? A: As of today the earliest estimated time that coins can begin moving is Friday, Oct 12th. I can only keep you updated on this date as I have more information. <@pirateat40> Q: Why did you require PPT operators to submit their account holders information? A: There’re a few reasons for doing this. The largest of which was to remove the PPT operators from the added risk of their users claiming they were not paid once the main account was paid. The other reasons can not be disclosed. <@pirateat40> Q: What is going to happen with bond issuers? A: Since bonds can be traded and have taken a large hit due to the closure of BTCST, I’ll be working with the bond issuers to find a solution that best suits their investors. <@pirateat40> Also... <@pirateat40> Those looking to file a suit against me or BTCST will not be eligible for repayment. <@pirateat40> GPUMAX has never been associated with BTCST nor have any of it’s partners. GPUMAX shared a wallet with one of the BTCST operating wallets for security and is now running it’s own secured wallet which is no longer associated with BTCST. <@pirateat40> Threats are taken seriously by myself and my attorney. A few of you will find out how serious I mean. <@pirateat40> That’s all for now, I’ll be providing updates here when more information is available. Thanks * pirateat40 sets mode: -m <@pirateat40> http://pastebin.com/e3gGFC37What does this mean for Bitcoinmax? nothing pirateAt40 does not have an attorney. dont fall for his lies... |
|
|
|
w p2pool: i like it. but it has failed. miners are greedy - thats the reason i want a way to force them to do the right thing.
I see this is major difference between us. I'm not here to force people to do right thing. If I want to do so, I can get quite nice job in my government. we could argue long if thats the right thing other way around: why is code in bitcoind to disallow double-spends? because its the right thing to do. as i see it the same goes for "who builds the block": a) pools build the block: huge (possible) risk that they do some nasty stuff b) miners build the block: risk is reduced if its possible why dont just use the way which is better for the whole network? that way anyone will profit from it in the long run |
|
|
|
a) I don't think it's feasible to run bitcoind on every mining machine, in mid-term and long term.
b) Validating custom-built PoW on pool side is *insanely* difficult, from the view of CPU resources.
a) atm its not a problem. if it gets one there may be centralised bitcoind services (e.g. blockchain.info and so on) which solves that - this would be better than the current pools as it is more easy to switch your bitcoind service (as it does not affect your payouts at all) b) yes its more load on the server. but how much more? maybe luke-jr should eloberate on this. p2pool: i like it. but it has failed. miners are greedy - thats the reason i want a way to force them to do the right thing. btw. i could just use getblocktemplate with eligius since a few month now...and archieve the same as i would use p2pool (except for the different reward scheme). |
|
|
|
the biggest argument is: getblocktemplate gets the power of mining back in the hands of the miners.
I agree with you, except that 99% of real miners don't care. Switching over trusted pool is more optimized way for achieving diversity. Blockchain is public, so finding out malicious intent is as easy as inspect pool's blocks, so people who care can do this instead of overloading pools with more verbose protocols. I mean - hacking miners to report malicious behaviour and rejecting strange transactions is just for uber-geeks. The rest will just use miners in default configuration. With GBT, this makes major overhead for all participants - pool ops (handling higher loads on the pool), developers (supporting all features by the pools is more difficult) and miners (there's significantly higher network traffic all time). with your proposal its still the pools who could(!!!) do malicious things. in times of gpumax i know that i have to prefer getblocktemplate to guarantee a (long-term) healty network
Yes, they could. And still tons of people trust gpumax with their hashpower. It's a nice example how people don't care. Don't be naive that GBT mining over gpumax will improve *anything*. hi, thanks for your good answer, but i can't agree with you. when the miners dont care about network health i think the devs should come up with a solution which forces the miners to take care. i know that your protocol is superior in terms of size. but getblocktemplate could solve the 51% problem - imagine that every miner-software ONLY supports this protocol. how could a miner say "i dont care?" - he is just forced to do the right thing. and btw he does not have to do any hacking. afaik he needs his own bitcoind with (preferably) a good network connection - thats the only drawback i see for small miners. |
|
|
|
Yesterday I had a speech about Stratum on London conference. I think that it has been accepted by audience nicely. I was pretty surprised that nobody asked me for the difference between Stratum and getblocktemplate; I had many arguments in my sleeves :-).
Unfortunately I forgot to say many things which originally prepared for the presentation :-), especially the benefits for miners. It has been my first public talk, so hopefully I'll improve my skills for next time.
the biggest argument is: getblocktemplate gets the power of mining back in the hands of the miners. with your proposal its still the pools who could(!!!) do malicious things. in times of gpumax i know that i have to prefer getblocktemplate to guarantee a (long-term) healty network |
|
|
|
i personally do not think we should go after family members but we should go after pirate with lawyers... that is what i am working on now.
extortion and wire fraud has a good ring to it...
+1 i really feel ashamed that so many try to hunt down the family |
|
|
|
i'd forgive him if he would make a - even a small - payment to all his bet-takers
No you wouldn't. It wouldn't change your opinion of him in the least, nor would it change anyone else's, sine he would be doing this after the fact, and after being told to, not out of his own volition, and thus not because of his own "good moral" character. It would be about as useful and effective as having a kid say "I'm sorry" because his mom is standing there making him say it. i do always respect an apology as long as i do feel that the other party is honest about it. as i think it would hurt MNW to pay 10% (numbers are made up) to all his bet-takers i'd accept this as an apology. just because i am quite sure he only apologized because its important to him. i dont think this will happen though |
|
|
|
Don't get me wrong, as I don't defend his latest actions (the betting stuff) at all, but I'm just thinking, should we in the future forgive him ?
Not sure how old he is, but I guess we've all made some more or less stupid mistakes when we were younger.
i'd forgive him if he would make a - even a small - payment to all his bet-takers |
|
|
|
If you have some small amount of bitcoins, such as 200, and you need to put them someplace before moving them, it is good to put them on site like MT. GOX where you can remove them when you are ready. Otherwise, is best to control yourself.
mtgox is very fast when it comes to withdraw limits through aml. afaik its enough if you share an ip address with somebody else... i'd still recommend blockchain.info |
|
|
|
12 hours will alwáys be the best, its world wide ..
its not... my grandma dont know what am or pm means 24h is the best format |
|
|
|
yeah, i've used their wallet before but this was just a short stop before I moved my coins to be cashed out but then their webpage gave me an error while I was waiting for my coins to be validated...
AARRGH this is alot of money to be lost!
dont consider it lost right now... i've read through their thread and it seems not too bad. biggest problem seems to be that the owner did not communicate for some weeks. here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=87387.msg1095050#msg1095050 |
|
|
|
just posting here so that i will be able to post in the rest of the forums...
anybody use torwallet?
they took 200+ btc from me and the wallet page just shows database error!
the wallet page is through tor but i will post it if it helps or anyone can contact the torwallet people!
thanks!
never heard of it (which does not mean it is not legit) but i'd recommed blockchain.info's wallet.. |
|
|
|
This is actually a really great idea, I don't think the name registered fund is great, probably "transparent fund" would be more descriptive.
I'll have to add this to the list of changes for GLBSE
+1 |
|
|
|
I read that Kluge wrote off the debt and had no hope for JRO paying. Might want to check it, but time for scammers tag?
Okay, I haven't talked to Kluge, I just said what I remember reading. Well in that case, a scam tag would probably be appropriate as he doesn't seem to have any intention of paying back. //DeaDTerra That's unacceptable. Can someone PM me his contact information? I'll distribute it to other shareholders on demand. Suddenly shareholders unions make sense. Maybe GLBSE should support private boards for each asset that only shareholders can read/write. very nice idea. but i think it shouldn't be on glbse directly. a complete seperate forum would fit better (but how to proof you are only a share holder - just dont know) |
|
|
|
this seems to be a fpga. but i am very curious too and looking forward to my delivery |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
