 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »
|
|
41
|
Other / Meta / Re: Bitcoin.org page -> someone with rights please fix
|
on: July 20, 2011, 01:57:33 AM
|
Much as I like this forum I think the StackExchange site (link in my sig) will be much more useful, assuming we can get it off the ground. Too much politics, advertising, scamming and slander here; doesn't put the best spin on bitcoin unfortunately.
We had implemented a "smite/like" button or something like that a few months back but it was quickly disabled for some reason. A "points" system telling us who to listen to would be much better than the current system (post count). All the whackos rack up massive post counts overnight anyways by making 50+ posts per day. (Yes, some people post that much!) |
|
|
|
|
45
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: BTC/NMC merged mining available for testing
|
on: July 19, 2011, 06:25:02 PM
|
TeraPool is correct. Merged mining does not pollute the Bitcoin block chain with Namecoin data. The only addition to the chain is a single hash in the coinbase transaction - ie, an additional 33 bytes per block. It isn't significant. This is the whole point of having split chains that share work.
And just to re-iterate. That "addition to the chain" is only in the namecoin blockchain. Bitcoiners will be none the wiser unless they switch to a pool that is helping them mine namecoins as well. In which case the bitcoin blockchain is still completely unaffected. |
|
|
|
|
47
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: BTC/NMC merged mining available for testing
|
on: July 18, 2011, 11:48:51 PM
|
you are polluting the bitcoin blockchain with useless namecoin data and vice versa. So you are increasing the size of the blockchain that everyone has to store for this purpose. This has a non-trivial cost on the whole network. Anybody can still run bitcoind and be none the wiser about namecoin. This will not affect bitcoin's blockchain at all as far as I know. Second, you are tying the generation of namecoins to the generation of bitcoins. This leads to the value of namecoin being tied to the value of bitcoins. In the end, you are just effectively doubling the number of bitcoins from 21 million to 42 million. That is for the market to decide. The current price of NMC to BTC is roughly that of it's generation difficulty now because both currencies are virtually worthless in terms of spending power. Once namecoins can be (well) used for domain name creation, and bitcoin for buying goods, the market will create it's own prices for both blockchains. I see no reason why difficulty should play a hand in value, it doesn't for bitcoins at least. |
|
|
|
|
49
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: BTC/NMC merged mining available for testing
|
on: July 18, 2011, 08:06:22 PM
|
So there would be just 1 instance of pushpoold running? And 1 instance of namecoind running? Along with a proxy patch of some sort?
You have a patched bitcoind (and its blockchain), a namecoind (and its blockchain) the merged-mining-proxy that know how to connect to both daemons and the pushpoold that connects to merged-mine-proxy.
How would pushpool tell the mysql databases that it received a valid bitcoin solution or namecoin solution?
As it stands, pushpool simply reports "Y", "Y" for it's "upstream_result" and "our_result" mysql columns. So how would I know that I have mined a namecoin?
Perhaps from the "version" field of the valid solution?
You don't have to rely on any information from the proxy. You could for example let pushpoold write the shares to the database and monitor the blockchains for generated blocks. Calculate how much valid shares each miner delivers between two blocks for each blockchain. Or you could patch both blockchain daemons to deliver those information. Both is common amongst current pools Thanks for that. So what exactly must I do to bitcoind in order to start merged mining on my pool? Are there any instructions to install this? https://github.com/vinced/namecoin/tree/namecoind-mergedmine |
|
|
|
|
50
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: BTC/NMC merged mining available for testing
|
on: July 18, 2011, 07:55:19 PM
|
Why pick an arbitrary block so far in the future to change namecoind? Why not work until development is through then just give a fair amount of notice that clients will need to be upgraded before date x or blocks might get rejected? Better yet just pick a block much closer to actual release date. 24k is a long way off...
Because if you upgrade the clients too soon and not everybody upgrades... then you will risk splitting the blockchain iirc. And don't forget that NMC will be up to block 18,000 or so within the week I would guess once the difficulty drops to 22k. |
|
|
|
|
53
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: alternative cheat-proof method?
|
on: July 18, 2011, 03:48:38 AM
|
Second, by only mining at the end of the round, the pool hopper will be paid most of what he would have been paid by mining for the entire round. That doesn't matter. There's no way a pool hopper can ever know that a particular share is more or less likely to be near the end of the round. Agreed. You guys have obviously never played roulette  Pool hopping is not cheating and it never will be. |
|
|
|
|
56
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Base58
|
on: July 18, 2011, 02:53:53 AM
|
|
Who is "Cyde" to say that it is not worthy encyclopedic material.
It's not like we're making the wikipedia encyclopedia too heavy to ship or anything.
If somebody wants information on Base 58, they should be able to find it.
If they have no idea what Base 58 is, they shouldn't really mind that wikipedia has an article on it.
|
|
|
|
|
57
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: BTC/NMC merged mining available for testing
|
on: July 18, 2011, 02:25:40 AM
|
|
I am working on creating a bitcoin pool right now but would like to implement this feature, or at least get started testing it.
So there would be just 1 instance of pushpoold running? And 1 instance of namecoind running? Along with a proxy patch of some sort?
How would pushpool tell the mysql databases that it received a valid bitcoin solution or namecoin solution?
As it stands, pushpool simply reports "Y", "Y" for it's "upstream_result" and "our_result" mysql columns. So how would I know that I have mined a namecoin?
Perhaps from the "version" field of the valid solution?
|
|
|
|
|
60
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Isnt it a fatal flaw that bitcoin can be manipulated by someone with 51% of MHs
|
on: July 18, 2011, 12:37:54 AM
|
But we haven't really seen (as far as I know), a dramatic decrease in global hash rate, have we? I understand the difficulty would then go down, but would that happen only after a block was found, or is there a timeout for when the Difficulty automatically decreases in the event that the difficulty is so high compared to the hash rate?
It's worse than that, it would only happen after enough blocks have gone through to recalculate difficult - under normal circumstances that's every ~10 days. If you could command 2/3rds of the hashing power to leave the network immediately, that could stretch out to 30 days of really really painful mining, and waiting a long time for transactions to confirm. Joel: Sure, but if I were in charge of a government program (haha) to kill Bitcoin, I'd put a bunch of my hashing power in the different pools and whatnot too. Make it look like the pools are all collapsing as well and I bet the number of people who think "fuck it, I'm back in" would be vastly outweighed by the number of people finding something better to do. Correction. Under normal circumstances that is exactly 14 days. (2016 * 10)/60/24 = 14 |
|
|
|
|
