I'll just leave this here... .... Damn, that's slow. Seems to scale almost perfectly with hardware memory bandwidth when comparing with Claymore's AMD miner. R9 290X has 3.7x theoretical memory bandwidth compared to 750 Ti and does around 600 H/s. Surprise, 600 / 3.7 comes to around 162. Same story with 270X and it's rougly 2x mem bandwidth. Guess that's not entirely unexpected since there's a whole lot of global memory access going on with the cryptonight algo. Still poking at it but I doubt it'll improve much without C&C level voodoo magic and that's well beyond my skillset  Is this something you're coding on your own, then, or has Christian given you early access to his Cryptonight code? I'm guessing the former. Anyway, I've got some NVIDIA laptops as well as a GTX 770 and GTX 780 I could run it on to see how it scales if you're interested. Waiting with baited breath for this.... :-) |
|
|
|
I'm still trying to figure out how the Proof of Stake rewards are being calculated, as I can't find any place in the code that appears to scale the reward amount. I can see things where it appears to be 15% annually, so take the number of coin days divided by 365 and multiply by 15%. But the rewards I've personally seen don't match up with that amount, so somehow PoS difficulty is dropping the rewards by a huge amount right now. You know that little lightning bolt that shows your stake weight and the network stake weight? It would be nice if that would update to show the expected reward if you get a PoS block. Actually, what would really be nice is if this crap of scaling the PoS rewards went away. When something says "15% annual interest" I think people are going to be pretty upset when they end up getting around 0.75% annual interest instead.
A related question on this staking business: is coin age relative to the minimum staking age, or is it relative to the last time the coins were moved? So if I have 3 PIGGY that were moved into a wallet at 12:00 AM, at eight hours they become eligible for staking. Now if they stake eight hours later (at 4:00PM), is the total coin age two days (sixteen hours * three coins) or is it only one day (eight hours * three coins)? |
|
|
|
Piggy dead?
i think yes  You guys really nees to calm down with this false allegations. Atm I'm not home since I need to prepare for finals but I've been out like what? 2 days now? and people are already saying the coin is dead? I don't usually ask for much bur please cut me some slack, lol We've been working on this project (I say we because I have a lot of people helping me) for 3 months now, it's not because I took a 5 day trip to study for the most important exam of my life that this coin is dead. I'm watching the thread and I know all your complaints/suggestions. I'll pick all them up when I get home. Coins being "alive" or "dead" is all a matter of perspective. Most coins continue to go on with mining, but I think we can all agree that 10-5, PANDA, FLAP, GPUC, GTC, and dozens of other coins are now "dead". What really makes a coin alive or dead long-term is whether or not it's being used, and whether or not it's listed on an exchange. If bittrex, poloniex, swisscex, and coinader all decided to delist PIGGY, it would require something amazing to keep everyone interested. Of course, of those four only bittrex and poloniex are doing even a small amount of volume (3 BTC combined roughly), and if even one decided to delist PIGGY it would be catastrophic I think. I'm still trying to figure out how the Proof of Stake rewards are being calculated, as I can't find any place in the code that appears to scale the reward amount. I can see things where it appears to be 15% annually, so take the number of coin days divided by 365 and multiply by 15%. But the rewards I've personally seen don't match up with that amount, so somehow PoS difficulty is dropping the rewards by a huge amount right now. You know that little lightning bolt that shows your stake weight and the network stake weight? It would be nice if that would update to show the expected reward if you get a PoS block. Actually, what would really be nice is if this crap of scaling the PoS rewards went away. When something says "15% annual interest" I think people are going to be pretty upset when they end up getting around 0.75% annual interest instead. Good luck with finals, and don't worry too much about the little PIGGY. After all, the market will largely decide without you whether or not PIGGY lives or dies.  |
|
|
|
|
A couple of comments on this for Claymore:
1) Have you noticed that this miner works better on AMD platforms than on Intel platforms? Maybe there's something else at play, but I have three FX-8320 rigs with 3x280X in each, and they all get around 1350 H/s. Then I have one rig with i5-4670K (which is often a bit faster on mining than the AMD rigs) and it only gets ~1100 H/s. The GPU usage also fluctuates a lot, like from 80% to 95% where the AMD rigs are all pretty consistently at 97-99% load.
2) It seems you've focused pretty much exclusively on performance with GCN cards. Is that because the older 6900 and 5800 series cards suck at the required calculations, or is it just a lack of time/hardware/whatever? My 6970 cards will do 500KH/s on Scrypt, which isn't that far off of the 600KH/s I get with a 7950; X11 hashing is a similar ratio. With the CryptoNote miner I get 200 H/s per 6970 compared to around 350 H/s with 7950. It would be nice to see improved performance on older GPUs like the 6900 series, but I understand if that's not possible.
3) Any chance of a BBR (Keccak Wild) miner, or is that not possible right now?
|
|
|
|
Well I wasn't getting much stake either, but I had a lot of transactions, and I think each one stakes differently. So as an experiment, I transfered all my coins to an exchange and then back to me. Now all my coins are on the same block, and tomorrow I should know if things are working correctly. Because I should be getting 100x the amount of coins I am getting right now/day. And truthfully I don't care if the staking is not 15%/year, because that is just an inflationary zero sum game. I would much rather the stake be 1.5%/year like a bank or cd, as long as it is fair and everyone has the same chance at it depending on their amount of coins of course. But I can see right now people are expecting the advertised 15%/year, doing the math, and not getting it, I will try to report back tomorrow.
On another note, piggy is cheap right now and a great coin, dev, and screaming buy.
But what piggy really needs is marketing and P.R. The logo is a piggy bank and the pigs
look like angry birds pigs, so this is a very relatable coin that people of all ages will like.
Who didn't have a piggy bank like that when they were a kid, or played angry birds?
We just need to go viral, everyone get the word out, get people buying some piggy on
the exchanges, etc. With only 500M coins and such a low price / market cap of $75,000,
this coin could skyrocket with the right advertising and marketing behind it. The dev did
a fantastic job with the coin, now it is done (unless staking issue), and I think he should fully
focus on advertising and marketing the coin to get it to go doge viral.
Interesting idea, please keep us updated, I might follow your footsteps. I had all of my coins on the pool until yesterday and pulled them all at once, so I have one big transaction and it has staked twice. The first staking gave me 2 PIGGY when it should have been more like 42 PIGGY based on the math. But I'm going to go poke around in the source some more and see if I can find something that scales to staking reward. (And as an aside, I think the amounts I'm seeing with staking in other coins is equally low.) |
|
|
|
I have purchased 500,000 Piggys. Transferred to my wallet for POS.
I was expecting at 15% annual rate POS to make some decent number of Piggys everyday.
I am only getting 4 or 5 piggys per day instead.
Is this is how it is supposed to be!!!
Thanks in advance
I also am only getting a few pigs every day instead of the 100's i should be getting every day... what is up dev? From what I am gathering lately its not entirely about your percentage. The PoS blocks do come with a difficulty. when PoS first started I had around 100k piggy. I was gaining more per day then! I got a PoS block of 0.5-2.5 piggy every 20 minutes! Now the PoS difficulty has risen substantially! I have managed to get a few more piggy in my wallet sitting at almost double what I had before but I still barely collect PoS. The estimated time to stake went from 20 minutes to 44 minutes (with twice as much piggy). But now I dont even find blocks every 40 minutes, I generally find them every couple hours. If you look in the statistics page of the wallet there is a PoS difficulty. this is over 4x as difficult as it was a few days ago. More people are staking. The same amount of blocks are being found (one every xx seconds) so the more users who jump on the more difficult it will be to stake. After really looking into it stake is kinda still like mining. Instead of buying gpu your buying coins to have power. But for every person who buys a coin and stakes the difficulty increases. Making it more rare which is nice but not following the linear likelihood of gaining 15% or being able to mathmatically calculate your actual interest. I think referring to stake as interest is confusing. I think it should be referred to as "stake power level" or something to deter people from assuming they get the actual 15% per year because its very unlikely. Stake is weighted so theres always going to be fluctuation in how much you actually get. Hang on there... PoS difficulty I thought was just sort of left-overs from other code. A difficulty is standard for all blocks, so PoS blocks get it as well. Is that not correct? Everything about PoS says that if you hold a certain percentage of the coins (and they're past the minimum staking age), then you will potentially generate a PoS block. When that happens is sort of luck, similar to PoW, but the older your coins are and the more you have, the better the odds. But no one really explains anywhere that I can see what the "difficulty" for PoS means. I decided to do some digging in the source code, and so far I'm coming up mostly empty, but check this out: Let's say that the previous transaction was 100,000 coins and it happened one day ago (86400 seconds). Sorting through the source code, here's the relevant math:
//Piggycoin 2.0
// CENT and COIN are defined in util.h
CENT = 1000000;
COIN = 100000000;
// MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE is defined in main.h
nRewardCoinYear = MAX_MINT_PROOF_OF_STAKE = 0.15 * COIN = 15000000
// This comes from main.cpp, mostly from GetProofOfStakeReward (which calls GetCoinAge)
// nValueIn as far as I can tell is the value of the block transaction, so 100000 in our example
bnCentSecond += CBigNum(nValueIn) * (nTime-txPrev.nTime) / CENT;
// 100000 * 86400 / 1000000 = 8640
CBigNum bnCoinDay = bnCentSecond * CENT / (24 * 60 * 60);
// 8640 * 1000000 / 86400 = 100000
int64_t nSubsidy = nCoinAge * nRewardCoinYear / 365 / COIN;
// 100000 * 15000000 / 365 / 100000000 = 41.09589041 Nowhere does difficulty every come into play -- that's only part of whether or not you find a block. But I can confirm I'm getting much less than the expected returns from PoS as well, so I'm not sure what's going on. I may need to dig into this more, but if PoS doesn't pay the annual interest and instead pays a fraction of that based on PoS difficulty, all PoS coins would be completely irrelevant! Anyway, I transferred ~212K PIGGY into a wallet yesterday. Just under 12 hours later I got my first PoS returns, and it was 2.06 PIGGY. 200K * .5 days * 0.15 / 365 = 41. I should have received about 41 coins but instead generated just 2. 14 hours later I got another PoS block and only received 1.72 PIGGY. Something is seriously messed up, and perhaps not just with PIGGY! |
|
|
|
Here's my short analysis of Piggycoin, and I'll be honest: other than a somewhat interesting wallet I'm not seeing much here. Yes, a community can build a coin out of nothing, but with dozens of new coins each month it's getting harder to differentiate. Best of luck to the community, and it will be interesting to see how much my PIGGY are worth in a few months, or even a few years. If there are errors in the specs, let me know -- and if someone wants to fill me in on what's happening with the original PIG now, I don't have time to dig around for more information but it looks like people are trying to keep it going? Interesting idea...bound to fail IMO, but interesting nonetheless. :-) I guess he missed that PIGGY has a working web wallet, and an android wallet, and some PIGGY games, and a foundation, and a very active dev team, and a multipool, and an educative faucet ... and targets a niche unlike any other coin ... so yeah nothing interesting about PIGGY. Oh, wait... I mentioned every single one of those items. Yes: Every. Single. One. (Well, except the faucet and "games", but really, I can't say I care too much about either -- "get your free $0.001 by wasting two minutes of your time!"). Do you know how many coins have most of those items? And do you know how important most of them are? Besides a working wallet -- which is basically a requirement for any coin to do anything -- the games, foundation, etc. etc. do very little for a coin. Look at the price of PIGGY, and despite all the talk here among the "believers" it's not really doing much. Neither is DOGE, which is what... about 400 times the market cap of PIGGY. People might use DOGE for trading, sure, but I don't think anyone is now of the opinion that going long on DOGE would make sense. I basically advocate holding coins that seem to have a future -- well, at least if you want them to be worth something. VTC is barely holding on, and it was the first Scrypt-N. UTC, YAC, YBC, etc. have all basically gone nowhere despite being early Scrypt-Jane. Get some BTC and hold it, or DRK, LTC, and perhaps a few others and they will likely pay off long-term. But PIGGY? What's it have that's a first? Nada. It has a decent wallet, but if you want to know what drives price and adoption of a cryptocurrency it's really quite simple: volume. People complain about miners, pump and dumpers, coin developers, bloggers, etc. but without them, none of the new coins will really do anything noteworthy -- well, unless they're actually NEW coins and not just copies of other people's work. PIGGY is a copy of Scrypt, PoS, and X11 all rolled into a new wallet. Great. That's better than 95% of new coins. But given that 99% of new coins are destined to fail, the reasons to hold PIGGY are pretty questionable. Get the trading volume to spike up to 50 BTC in a day and people might take notice, and if you're lucky (and actually have the people to support and market the coin) you might even sustain that. But without hype and someone trying to pump PIGGY, it's going nowhere. 28 satoshis today, 14 next month, 7 the following... maybe that won't happen, but in five years -- heck, in TWO years! -- I will be truly shocked if anyone cares at all about PIGGY. Worst thing going for PIGGY: the devs already bailed on PIG when it didn't do as well as they'd like. They're looking for the "Next Big Thing", and when PIGGY doesn't meet their hopes they'll try again, mark my words. If I didn't know any better, I'd think perhaps some of the devs for PIG/PIGGY came from CAI/CAIx -- or they're envious of CAI/CAIx, which is perhaps worse. |
|
|
|
Here's my short analysis of Piggycoin, and I'll be honest: other than a somewhat interesting wallet I'm not seeing much here. Yes, a community can build a coin out of nothing, but with dozens of new coins each month it's getting harder to differentiate. Best of luck to the community, and it will be interesting to see how much my PIGGY are worth in a few months, or even a few years. If there are errors in the specs, let me know -- and if someone wants to fill me in on what's happening with the original PIG now, I don't have time to dig around for more information but it looks like people are trying to keep it going? Interesting idea...bound to fail IMO, but interesting nonetheless. :-) |
|
|
|
I sent about 10.4 QCN to Poloniex yesterday as a test -- so verify I could transfer the coins properly, basically. Unfortunately, all has not gone well and while their support apparently looked into things and credited one of the deposits, the other six are still missing. Wait, seven deposits? Oh, yeah... I couldn't send one bigger transaction due to the old "too many inputs" problem. So I split it up into seven transactions (I just pressed the up arrow to repeat the last command, though I did generate a new payment ID after the first transfer). Here's the list of commands I used in the wallet:
I think it is risky to change the payment id while payments are still to be processed, are you sure Poloniex can handle that? They may only store one payment id per account/coin. Also, I wouldn't use an exchange transfer to cleanup dust, those transfers take longer and it just makes everything harder to track. Such a large transaction for such a small amount could sit around for a while before being included in a block, and may eventually be rejected and returned to your wallet. I clean up small inputs by sending the coins back to the same wallet first, or a second wallet used for spending (the first used only for mining). Don't mine for pools where you are a tiny fraction of the pool hash (<1%), find a pool more suitable for your hash rate, until the pools have sorted out a solution for the dust problem. Mining for pools where you are more than 1% can be rather difficult, and despite all the talk of decentralization it's actually provably less profitable to mine at a small pool than at a large pool. If it's not, then why doesn't everyone just stick with solo mining forever? Because you'll likely never find a single block that way, just like a small pool will only find blocks infrequently. A pool with 3% of the hash rate for example is likely to find about 2.7% of blocks in my experience, while a pool with 1% might only find 0.5% of the blocks. And a pool with 35% of the hash rate might find 37% of blocks. But that's a topic for discussion elsewhere. I'm mining a decent amount of coins right now, which is of course generating tons of small payouts over time. What's the best way to consolidate those so I can do one or two larger transfers to an exchange? Do I just run: transfer 0 [My Address] [Amount] And do that multiple times until I can send larger transactions of 10 to 100 coins without having the wallet balk about having too many inputs? I guess I'd have to wait for confirmation on the transfers as well, but better than than ending up with vaporized coins. LOL |
|
|
|
So why exactly did no one think to add Crypt to the list of X11 coins? Seriously, PIGGY vs. CRYPT should have been pretty easy to guess. PIG didn't even do that well, so why should a reboot as PIGGY suddenly fly?
Crypt just turned out to be a lucky pumped coin, which will be dumped hard soon. Have you even explored Piggy's website and downloaded their new wallet? It is some of the most professional and polished stuff I have ever seen from any coin. And the dev, team, and community are passionate and behind it. There is 500M coins and the vast majority of them will be held and staked. I like to mine and sell profitable coins, get the occassional lucky pump before I dump, and also have a few losers. It is very rarely that I like to hold a coin long term, and all I can say is right now I am only holding BTC, LTC, and PIGGY. I think the CRYPT claim to fame is that they're working on anonymous transactions (in a different manner than DRK, presumably), they've got PoS, and they're also talking about integrating a trading platform into the wallet by the end of the month. If CRYPT can actually get integrated trading working, that could be a killer feature and we could see the price double or even more in once again. The thing is, during the past month or two IPOminer has had a ton of turkeys -- WC and AC started out okay and then had problems, but BLU, OC, YC, SHIBE, DOYE, etc. are all basically the same darn coin and yet they all got added, not to mention some complete failures like HOC and LION. WEST, MAST, DRK, HIRO, LIMX, LOL, VOOT, PIGGY, FRAC, KIWI, SYNC are all in the X11 pool (or have been), but CRYPT didn't make the cut for some reason. I'm not saying those are all bad coins, but if we're putting other rather questionable coins into the rotation, why did CRYPT get bypassed? And while we're at it, toss in SUPER and WAVE... and for X13 we could have had CLOAK, SnakeXCoin, Burnercoin, etc. Unless the idea is to only mine coins that aren't really being mined by the bigger pools, but if that's the case we're really just praying for luck. So if CRYPT was "just a lucky pump", the same goes for all the rest. On a different note: are there any stats collected for the past month or two showing what IPOminer was mining and how many coins you would have mined (per MH)? That would be a really useful feature to add, unless of course most of the coins are complete crap and profitability for mining and holding them is essentially zero. But just one or two real success stories (VRC comes to mind, and SC did pretty well -- both had to be sold at the right time, of course) can cover a multitude of mediocrity, which is basically what I have been collecting of late. |
|
|
|
I sent about 10.4 QCN to Poloniex yesterday as a test -- so verify I could transfer the coins properly, basically. Unfortunately, all has not gone well and while their support apparently looked into things and credited one of the deposits, the other six are still missing. Wait, seven deposits? Oh, yeah... I couldn't send one bigger transaction due to the old "too many inputs" problem. So I split it up into seven transactions (I just pressed the up arrow to repeat the last command, though I did generate a new payment ID after the first transfer). Here's the list of commands I used in the wallet: [wallet 1VmHEJ]: transfer 0 1VQpANF1pcKHPRAsZpeyG4jLDd1kbPn32YMeXkr9n8jNFvf8aaJdecB3FyAvo7X1DWJDQt3nii9eUTP5kJSfRpL5AwT72FM 1.434445242462 6fa3b62aaee7d3cbe881f52305273383030e4b06ad2bfb687d94712b80392ae9
Money successfully sent, transaction <0bef9c21aa0532c90969a669b9557f810b315d1088924d1e1c7205a637003c5d>
[wallet 1VmHEJ]: transfer 0 1VQpANF1pcKHPRAsZpeyG4jLDd1kbPn32YMeXkr9n8jNFvf8aaJdecB3FyAvo7X1DWJDQt3nii9eUTP5kJSfRpL5AwT72FM 1.434445242462 818e395099f31d65e4166ee167511ffb812fc849df175b54b0c86e56aba29f52
Money successfully sent, transaction <30b865d16e7944965273e1d66ac112dfd49fb06068b7061e7b7299ca9879cbc3>
[wallet 1VmHEJ]: transfer 0 1VQpANF1pcKHPRAsZpeyG4jLDd1kbPn32YMeXkr9n8jNFvf8aaJdecB3FyAvo7X1DWJDQt3nii9eUTP5kJSfRpL5AwT72FM 1.434445242462 818e395099f31d65e4166ee167511ffb812fc849df175b54b0c86e56aba29f52
Money successfully sent, transaction <0f91c5fe9109dae34608cc6160800917627d7f27b501986211df41bfb5b23c64>
[wallet 1VmHEJ]: transfer 0 1VQpANF1pcKHPRAsZpeyG4jLDd1kbPn32YMeXkr9n8jNFvf8aaJdecB3FyAvo7X1DWJDQt3nii9eUTP5kJSfRpL5AwT72FM 1.434445242462 818e395099f31d65e4166ee167511ffb812fc849df175b54b0c86e56aba29f52
Money successfully sent, transaction <4c974596b3670b88ee9cf54712e248312a6a772b1873cf89a35697fc3cb4d25d>
[wallet 1VmHEJ]: transfer 0 1VQpANF1pcKHPRAsZpeyG4jLDd1kbPn32YMeXkr9n8jNFvf8aaJdecB3FyAvo7X1DWJDQt3nii9eUTP5kJSfRpL5AwT72FM 1.434445242462 818e395099f31d65e4166ee167511ffb812fc849df175b54b0c86e56aba29f52
Money successfully sent, transaction <a442d51602c693c73536dd6b8cb04c7d036b93a4a71a160bb9575cf9338836b0>
[wallet 1VmHEJ]: transfer 0 1VQpANF1pcKHPRAsZpeyG4jLDd1kbPn32YMeXkr9n8jNFvf8aaJdecB3FyAvo7X1DWJDQt3nii9eUTP5kJSfRpL5AwT72FM 1.434445242462 818e395099f31d65e4166ee167511ffb812fc849df175b54b0c86e56aba29f52
Money successfully sent, transaction <e69144a25ba7c7ed73eff9980c1529851369c2048427a8aa2c166bc13904ffdf>
[wallet 1VmHEJ]: transfer 0 1VQpANF1pcKHPRAsZpeyG4jLDd1kbPn32YMeXkr9n8jNFvf8aaJdecB3FyAvo7X1DWJDQt3nii9eUTP5kJSfRpL5AwT72FM 1.434445242462 818e395099f31d65e4166ee167511ffb812fc849df175b54b0c86e56aba29f52
Money successfully sent, transaction <a017a05da2bb9317c07bef8db4becd1c1547d120f511a422b5af571720503c3f> That's a bit of a mell-of-a-hess as my mom liked to say, so let me just focus on the transactions: 0bef9c21aa0532c90969a669b9557f810b315d1088924d1e1c7205a637003c5d
30b865d16e7944965273e1d66ac112dfd49fb06068b7061e7b7299ca9879cbc3
0f91c5fe9109dae34608cc6160800917627d7f27b501986211df41bfb5b23c64
4c974596b3670b88ee9cf54712e248312a6a772b1873cf89a35697fc3cb4d25d
a442d51602c693c73536dd6b8cb04c7d036b93a4a71a160bb9575cf9338836b0
e69144a25ba7c7ed73eff9980c1529851369c2048427a8aa2c166bc13904ffdf
a017a05da2bb9317c07bef8db4becd1c1547d120f511a422b5af571720503c3f So here's where I get confused: all of those transactions were sent between blocks 28452 and 28455 as far as I can tell (I'm looking at the simplewallet.log and quasarcoind.log files). None of those transfer amounts shows up in the block explorer around those blocks, but I believes that's the point of the whole anonymous transactions thing, right? After a few hours and no QCN on my Poloniex account, I opened a ticket with most of the above information. This morning I now see a balance of 1.43444524 QCN in my account, and in my wallet when I refreshed I saw the following: Height 29142, transaction <0f91c5fe9109dae34608cc6160800917627d7f27b501986211df41bfb5b23c64>, received 0.000007000000
Height 29142, transaction <0f91c5fe9109dae34608cc6160800917627d7f27b501986211df41bfb5b23c64>, received 0.000020000000
Height 29142, transaction <0f91c5fe9109dae34608cc6160800917627d7f27b501986211df41bfb5b23c64>, received 0.000800000000
Height 29142, transaction <0f91c5fe9109dae34608cc6160800917627d7f27b501986211df41bfb5b23c64>, received 0.004000000000
Height 29142, transaction <0f91c5fe9109dae34608cc6160800917627d7f27b501986211df41bfb5b23c64>, spent 0.000001000000
..... (There are 245 lines of magenta text for the spents, four lines for the receives, all on block 29142 and with the same transaction.) So what's going on? That block 29142 has one of the seven transaction codes from above, but it came about 685 blocks after I sent the transaction. Prior to that block, I can't find any record of the payment ID or transaction code. Sure, I feel like the seven transactions are quite anonymous, but they're also anonymously lost right now. Does Poloniex need to somehow manually receive those other six transactions for them to show up? (That seems unlikely.) Or what exactly has happened that things are not working as I would expect? Any input/suggestions would be welcome -- heck, donations are welcome as well! Maybe I can recover my lost 9 QCN. Hahaha.... 1VmHEJ8TDcx4wQ9DTUgiogVDejzPrUJ6VT7FKeQZCNoThYsM5TC6Md2U58W6NgBeTKGsVWitGX16mZy RR6SwtbG5JKUQxoB Edit: PS, I also notice that when I type balance in my wallet now, I get the following: balance: 0.793321787690, unlocked balance: 0.652022415308 There's a difference of 0.14 QCN, give or take, and it has been like that since I sent the seven transactions. Again, confusing would be an appropriate term for what's going on. It seems like each transaction included some "dust" coins, and when the transaction is processed by the receiver I got that dust back. I can see that prior to the above my "unlocked balance" was 0.647195415308, and if I add the four "receieved" lines to that I end up with the current 0.652022415308. |
|
|
|
|
So why exactly did no one think to add Crypt to the list of X11 coins? Seriously, PIGGY vs. CRYPT should have been pretty easy to guess. PIG didn't even do that well, so why should a reboot as PIGGY suddenly fly?
|
|
|
|
I posted this on Craigslist as well, but perhaps one of my fellow Bitcoiners would be interested in negotiating a trade: my car for your BTC! Local offers only, but I'll be happy to meet you at a parking lot and treat you to lunch while waiting for the BTC transaction to confirm. Yes, I'll take cash as well, but BTC would be preferred. The car is a 2004 Chrysler Sebring Touring with leather interior, power driver seat, power windows/locks, and a V6 2.7L engine. I'm looking to upgrade to a minivan -- yup, my family is too big for a sedan these days. PM if you're interested. |
|
|
|
Linearcoin
Every day on this forum, a new alt-coin is created offering little change in innovation and merely re-brand the coin it was based off of. A fair number of these coins are scams that are extremely pre-mined. This enables the developers to artificially inflate the value of their coin and make a large profit. These coins are completely worthless offering nothing new to the community. Except today...
I am proud to announce, LinearCoin [LNC]
What is linearcoin?
Linearcoin is a new crypto-currency featuring a block reward that decreases in value in a linear fashion after each block. With block 0 starting at 50 Coins, the reward will gradually decrease linearly by 0.00005. The gradual reduction of reward will help mitigate inflation and Pump/Dump schemes. Panic and other chaos can be completely avoided as the coin never halves, the reward gradually gets smaller, and smaller. This will ensure a constant stream of hashing power to the network, as the incentive to mine will always be there. The block reward will keep decreasing until the reward hits 0, creating a total of 25,025,025 coins! With new blocks being generated every 5 minutes, you'll have the opportunity to mine for ~9.5 years. This time will allow for steady growth of the coin and it's acceptance or destruction by the community.
When is linearcoin launching?
Linearcoin will officially launch on June 21st @ 16:00 GMT.
Countdown: https://www.altcoincalendar.info/coins/541-LNC
and here: http://altcoinherald.com/altcoin-launch-calendar/
and here: http://www.cryptolaunch.net/linearcoin.html
Technical Specs
No IPO, No POS, < 0.001% Premine, No worries!
POW Algorithm: X11
Total Coins: 25,025,025 Coins
Block Time: 5 Minutes
Confirmations: 6
Block Maturity: 60
Difficulty Re-target Time: Every Block (KimotoGravityWell)
Halving Rate: Decreases 0.00005 Coins every block
Mining Window: ~9.51 years
P2P: 9553
RPC: 9552
Updates:
6/15 - We have 5 pools ready to begin mining on launch!
6/14 - Only 7 days left until launch!
6/12 - Added yet another pool!
6/11 - 3 Pools are now ready to mine Linearcoin.
6/10 - ATTENTION POOLS: Make sure you note the change in block maturity and confirmations.
Bounties
I'm looking at you pools and exchanges.
500 Linearcoin: First Exchange
300 Linearcoin: Second Exchange
100 Linearcoin: Mac Wallet*
100 Linearcoin: Linux Wallet*
* source code to be released on launch date
Download
Need to store your savings? Put them in your wallet!
Coming 6/21 @ 16:00 GMT
Pools
If you plan on mining, here are a few pools to get started.
http://lnc.pool.mn
http://linear.suchpool.pw
http://linear.ssdpool.com
http://lnc.hashlink.eu
http://linear.cryptoday.info
http://eu-pool.mine.nu
http://xhash.net
Exchanges
Searching and searching...
[/center] How do you have a "<0.001% premine" (which would be 250 coins or less) while offering up at least 1000 coins in bounties? Are these bounties supposed to be paid by the pools? Or maybe the premine is actually 25,025 coins, which would be a "<0.1% premine"? I'm guessing the latter, as the 25025025 total coins with 1000000 blocks would make that work mathematically. Obviously, being off by a factor of 100 in your text is more than a bit concerning. If you can't do math properly, why should anyone trust you to make a proper cryptocurrency and keep it running for 9.51 years? |
|
|
|
|
So is it just me, or are there only three pools and the fastest of those pools is poking along at a rather pathetic 40MH/s or so -- which means it's only 2.7% of the total network hash speed, so at best it might hit 20 or so blocks per day. Extremepool is even worse at only 9MH/s or so, so 0.6% of the network hash rate and perhaps 4-5 blocks per day? I guess everyone is just solo mining or something, or maybe there's some secret pool not listed in the OP? Oh, and still no block explorer either. Ugh...so many things this coin still needs.
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone have a walkthrough for getting this running on an Amazon EC2 server? (And expected performance would be nice to know.)
|
|
|
|
|
I get periodic disconnects from mining, at which point I have to manually restart. It would be good if the software could be updated to detect this and automatically restart. Also, support for multiple pools (i.e. failover) would be helpful. Last but not least, optimizations to performance are almost certainly still available. Are there plans to open source this eventually? Or do we just need to wait for ccMiner and sgminer to create their own Cryptonight code?
|
|
|
|
Christian will give us a new toy soon. Suggest what is it? X13 ?? No no not something easy like that. It's even better. It's Cryptonight (MRO/QCN/FCN) nVidia-miner. It's ****ing genius. Any update on this one? AMD mining of Cryptonight is only "okay" -- basically around the same efficiency as a CPU in my experience. Still, given the poor performance of most other coins right now, it's something to look at. |
|
|
|
FWIW, it runs on 5870 as well, but not very fast. My initial testing shows about 80-90 H/s per 5870.  |
|
|
|
Having a terrible time getting this to work with many of the pools, at least if I try to do more than one algorithm. Maybe someone can help me out? Here's my conf file for a system with 2x7950 GPUs: {
"pools" : [
{
"name" : "NiceHash_Scrypt",
"url" : "stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:4333",
"user" : "19y5gGye7xj1zKS3vCuv6VdFuFQCzWKPBE",
"pass" : "d=64",
"pool-algorithm" : "zuikkis",
"pool-nfactor" : "10",
"pool-rawintensity" : "7168",
"pool-thread-concurrency" : "8192",
"pool-gpu-threads" : "1"
},
{
"name" : "NiceHash_Scrypt-N",
"url" : "stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:4335",
"user" : "19y5gGye7xj1zKS3vCuv6VdFuFQCzWKPBE",
"pass" : "d=32",
"pool-algorithm" : "zuikkis",
"pool-nfactor" : "11",
"pool-rawintensity" : "7168",
"pool-thread-concurrency" : "8192",
"pool-gpu-threads" : "1"
},
{
"name" : "NiceHash_X11",
"url" : "stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:4336",
"user" : "19y5gGye7xj1zKS3vCuv6VdFuFQCzWKPBE",
"pass" : "d=0.004",
"pool-algorithm" : "darkcoin-mod",
"pool-nfactor" : "10",
"pool-rawintensity" : "258048",
"pool-thread-concurrency" : "8192",
"pool-gpu-threads" : "1"
},
{
"name" : "NiceHash_X13",
"url" : "stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:4337",
"user" : "19y5gGye7xj1zKS3vCuv6VdFuFQCzWKPBE",
"pass" : "d=0.002",
"pool-algorithm" : "marucoin-mod",
"pool-nfactor" : "10",
"pool-rawintensity" : "258048",
"pool-thread-concurrency" : "8192",
"pool-gpu-threads" : "1"
},
{
"name" : "NiceHash_Keccak",
"url" : "stratum+tcp://stratum.nicehash.com:4338",
"user" : "19y5gGye7xj1zKS3vCuv6VdFuFQCzWKPBE",
"pass" : "x",
"pool-algorithm" : "maxcoin",
"pool-nfactor" : "10",
"pool-rawintensity" : "258048",
"pool-thread-concurrency" : "8192",
"pool-gpu-threads" : "1"
},
{
"name" : "Drkpool",
"url" : "stratum+tcp://drkpool.com:3333",
"user" : "trogdorjw73.liteminer",
"pass" : "x",
"pool-algorithm" : "darkcoin-mod",
"pool-nfactor" : "10",
"pool-rawintensity" : "258048",
"pool-thread-concurrency" : "8192",
"pool-gpu-threads" : "1"
}
],
"vectors" : "1",
"worksize" : "256",
"lookup-gap" : "2",
"gpu-engine" : "1000",
"gpu-fan" : "40-85",
"gpu-memclock" : "1500",
"gpu-memdiff" : "0",
"gpu-powertune" : "20",
"gpu-vddc" : "1.067",
"temp-cutoff" : "99",
"temp-overheat" : "95",
"temp-target" : "85",
"auto-fan" : true,
"expiry" : "60",
"failover-only" : true,
"gpu-dyninterval" : "7",
"gpu-platform" : "0",
"log" : "5",
"log-dateformat" : "0",
"queue" : "1",
"scan-time" : "15",
"temp-hysteresis" : "3",
"shares" : "0",
"kernel-path" : "/usr/local/bin"
}I started the the sample conf file from Nicehash, and that didn't work well at all -- nonce errors, hw errors, sgminer exiting after 60 seconds, etc. Then I read through this thread and saw stuff about setting rawintensity instead of xintensity or intensity, so I tried that. I also tried using "algorithm" instead of "pool-algorithm" as another suggested. I also tried the 3xxx ports at Nicehash, and that didn't seem to work right either. Basically, none of the changes work. The current status is this: If I start with the above config, I'll end up with a "ckolivasTahitiglg2tc22400nf10w256l4.bin" file. WTF? It's using the wrong kernel, ignoring pool-thread-concurrency, and it runs at intensity = 8 (the default if you don't set anything). Pretty much all of the pool-specific settings are completely ignored! If I add a generic intensity, algorithm, and thread-concurrency, that gets used instead, but of course that only works with one algorithm so it's of no use. Help? Edit: Oh, and sgminer quits after 60 seconds right now. That seems to be my "scan-time" value, as changing that from 15 to 60 at least helped a bit. But scan-time isn't supposed to cause an exit from mining. Ugh.... Edit again: Nope, it's not "scan-time", but I still get 60 seconds before sgminer quits every single time I run it. Here's the error from the latest run I just tried: C:\Downloads\SGminer-multi2>sgminer --auto-fan --failover-only -T
[17:41:51] Started sgminer 4.2.1
[17:41:51] Loaded configuration file sgminer.conf
[17:41:51] Initialising kernel ckolivas.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[17:41:51] Initialising kernel ckolivas.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[17:41:51] Probing for an alive pool
[17:41:52] Switching to Drkpool - first alive pool
[17:41:52] Network diff set to 4.06K
[17:41:52] Initialising kernel darkcoin-mod.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[17:41:52] Initialising kernel darkcoin-mod.cl with bitalign, unpatched BFI, nfactor 10, n 1024
[17:41:53] NiceHash_X11 alive, testing stability
[17:41:53] Switching to NiceHash_X11
[17:41:53] Network diff set to 112
[17:41:53] New block detected on network before pool notification
[17:41:54] Accepted 36dfcc71 Diff 0.018/0.010 GPU 1 at NiceHash_X11
[17:41:54] Stratum from NiceHash_X11 requested work restart
[17:41:57] API running in local read access mode on port 4028 (30380)
[17:42:03] Accepted 2b303f06 Diff 0.023/0.010 GPU 1 at NiceHash_X11
[17:42:06] Accepted 045d341f Diff 0.229/0.010 GPU 0 at NiceHash_X11
[17:42:09] NiceHash_X11 extranonce change requested
[17:42:09] Network diff set to 1.25K
[17:42:09] Stratum from NiceHash_X11 detected new block
[17:42:10] Accepted 5cea28fd Diff 0.011/0.010 GPU 0 at NiceHash_X11
[17:42:14] Accepted 4fb1bd90 Diff 0.013/0.010 GPU 1 at NiceHash_X11
[17:42:15] Reconnect requested from NiceHash_X11 to stratum.nicehash.com:4336
[17:42:16] NiceHash_X11 difficulty changed to 0.010
[17:42:16] Stratum from NiceHash_X11 requested work restart
[17:42:25] Accepted 5aac5367 Diff 0.011/0.010 GPU 0 at NiceHash_X11
[17:42:42] Stratum from NiceHash_X11 requested work restart
[17:42:50] Accepted 45a922ce Diff 0.014/0.010 GPU 1 at NiceHash_X11
[17:42:52] thread was not cancelled in 60 seconds after restart_mining_threads |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
