In a couple posts you've questioned how to do something as inane as quoting text and changing font colors... Seriously? Why would anyone in their right mind trust you to be able to properly manage a pool if you can't even figure out the basics of how to utilize forum software?  |
|
|
|
So we all know what happened with Nexious, and a bunch of people got burned. We also know that it seems to be the latest fashion for newbie accounts to announce their own pools. Whether or not they are sincere, or are just trying to play the same scam Nexious did, I don't know. In light of this, I decided to open up my own pool. I figured I'd do the community a favor and offer my own. No frills, no BS. The pool is here for a simple reason: to give you a choice. The pool mines BTC. No merge mining. No alt coins. Straight up BTC mining. You can see my announcement here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104664.msg13126185#msg13126185I've actually updated the maximum difficulty since I wrote that to better manage large hash miners. Here are the current specs: Pool: Jonny Bravo's Mining Emporium Website: http://www.bravo-mining.comProxy: No Generation address: 14KxdJ7DfAPsxCYkpcDTcKotjeProcfRPo Coinbase signature: /bravo-mining/ Payout method: PPLNS Fee: 0.5% Pay Tx Reward: Yes Vardiff: starts at 1042. Range from 8 to 1048576. Local Work: stratum Pay Orphans: No Min Withdrawal: 0.001 Merge Mining: No Location: US I've actually held off making this announcement and soft launched the pool at the end of November. Well, now I'm making it public. The pool has already found its first block: https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/block/000000000000000003c3a6ee87941ea88ab99490e7774ae25dc48deb9aa2bf72Oh... and here's the important bit... the miners were paid for their contributions  . How to connect: ./cgminer -o stratum+tcp://stratum.bravo-mining.com:3333 -u Weblogin.WorkerName -p WorkerPassword
- You MUST register and use a valid email address because the pool requires you to validate
- PPLNS payouts with 5N share life
- MPOS front end running on NOMP stratum
- NO SPV MINING - we mine only on fully validated blocks
Currently we're averaging about 25TH; however, I regularly throw 500TH - 1PH rentals at the site (that's how we found our first block) so the hash rate varies considerably and is why I didn't put any value in the thread title. So, if you're looking for somewhere to point your hash, give us a try. You aren't going to get scammed, bamboozled, swindled or defrauded here. Proof is in the pudding: we've found our first block and miners were paid. For any support issues, you can reach me here on this thread, by PM, by email admin at bravo-mining dot com, or if you like to chat, I setup an IRC channel on freenode: #bravo-mining. Thanks, and I look forward to seeing some of you there. |
|
|
|
Congrats to 15X8ziBTCLEQCU2eUwWoQCYqJV7CoJSFoC for solving the block! And for confirming my pool payout transactions with that solve |
|
|
|
[2015-12-16 06:05:15.202] Possible block solve diff 101319884876.821548 !
[2015-12-16 06:05:15.583] BLOCK ACCEPTED!
[2015-12-16 06:05:15.584] Solved and confirmed block 388677 by 1EnFgD1z8Qhz5jLT2Dsqbf1w2pGkt5XZmD.0
[2015-12-16 06:05:15.584] User 1EnFgD1z8Qhz5jLT2Dsqbf1w2pGkt5XZmD:{"hashrate1m": "51.2T", "hashrate5m": "51.7T", "hashrate1hr": "51.9T", "hashrate1d": "25.7T", "hashrate7d": "37.3T"}
[2015-12-16 06:05:15.584] Worker 1EnFgD1z8Qhz5jLT2Dsqbf1w2pGkt5XZmD.0:{"hashrate1m": "51.2T", "hashrate5m": "51.7T", "hashrate1hr": "51.9T", "hashrate1d": "25.7T", "hashrate7d": "37.2T"}
Holy Crap!!! I woke up to see I hit a block!!! and it was a BIG ONE!!! I love this pool!!! Congrats on hitting! |
|
|
|
|
Um... no, the blockchain most certainly does not compensate you. It also doesn't care that a dusty old S1 is too power hungry to be turning a profit. The blockchain is nothing more than a distributed ledger that records transactions, which are grouped into blocks and verified by proof of work.
|
|
|
|
Block 388647!
Avocado dip worked! Is there anything that avocado and chicken can't do? I tried plugging a network cable and 12v power supply into an avocado, but it did not produce any valid shares.  Maybe I'll try again with a chicken! LOL! I don't care who you are, that's funny right there  |
|
|
|
And that is precisely why SPV mining is bad. One bad actor - in this case a single node - relayed a block that never should have been included in the first place, and wouldn't have been if it was properly validated. Then it got compounded because the other pool saw the block, also didn't bother validating it, then built a block on top of it. |
|
|
|
All miners connected to the pool are mining for the pool. So if anyone finds a block the block will belong to the pool (gets paid out to the pools address).
Just a quick correction here... not all pools mine to a central address and then distribute payouts - although most do (including my own pool). P2Pool and Eligius split the 25 BTC up in the coinbase transaction itself so when the block is found, the miner gets virgin coins. |
|
|
|
Well, the discussion goes to SPV Mining.
F2Pool is improving, as I can see it, so it is fair to say the message come through and they try their best.
AntPool still produce 0 Blocks. They do nothing, just counting their income.
Let's not confuse empty blocks with SPV mining. F2Pool has definitely taken steps to reduce the number of empty blocks they produce. Since macbook-air made his post: KnC - 2 of 35 are empty bw.com - 2 of 34 empty AntPool - 13 of 81 empty Eligius - 1 of 10 f2pool - 2 of 110 That's a far lower percentage than is typical for them, so whatever changes they made have produced noticeable results. Having written this, the fact remains that f2pool, AntPool, etc continue to SPV mine. |
|
|
|
10 days is nowhere near a long enough sample size to make any determinations. I've been running a test for an entire year on p2pool - comparing standard p2pool payouts to OgNasty's/Nonnakip's NastyPoP implementation. That's a far better sample size . Take a look at kano's pool vs some of the others over the past year and you'll get an idea of how it fares. |
|
|
|
|
Eligius doesn't SPV mine... yes, they produce empty blocks on that pool, but it is a byproduct of the way the pool distributes work.
|
|
|
|
FYI, we have just updated the pool software to reduce the number of empty blocks. The effectiveness is yet to be evaluated, but I think it should help a lot.
Since this announcement, there have been 6 empty blocks added to the chain. None of which came from f2pool. BW.com - 2 of their 11 blocks were empty AntPool - 4 of their 21 blocks were empty f2pool - 0 of their 14 blocks were empty So, at least on the surface in the past 16 and a half hours or so, whatever f2pool did appears to have greatly reduced their empty blocks. It still doesn't excuse the SPV mining... but at least in this short timeframe it appears to be a step in the right direction. |
|
|
|
Kanos pool rocks  Now how can the chinese explain this: Height Age Transactions Total Sent Relayed By Size (kB)
388048 13 minutes 1 25.00 BTC F2Pool 0.26
388047 8 minutes 1494 27,450.82 BTC 21 Inc. 974.65Lol 2 blocks 5 minutes apart, and in that 5minutes they were unable to put even a single other transaction in the block other than claiming their 25 pieces of silver And there still is that 12k transactions pending lol _D Now that is either very very bad coding or done purposefully, 5 freaking minutes, you would think the slowest and lamest possible setup would be able to stuff some transactions in the block in 5 minutes.. Atleast kano.is stuffs em blocks proper.. The timestamp on the blocks is misleading, as should be evident by the fact it's reporting 048 older than 047 . I'm certainly not condoning the practice of mining empty blocks by any stretch of the imagination; however, if I look at my logs, I see those blocks reported only seconds apart: 2015-12-12 15:56:04 UpdateTip: new best=00000000000000000d8aea96e7533669d26afa88336d3306a9dd76ffc558d660 height=388047 log2_work=83.730241 tx=97301155 date=2015-12-12 16:01:37 progress=1.000003 cache=0.1MiB(0tx)
2015-12-12 15:56:07 UpdateTip: new best=000000000000000005a0ef1ce8303606ced29e26ee16f088a7bf1e4f485eaf8e height=388048 log2_work=83.730272 tx=97301156 date=2015-12-12 15:56:02 progress=1.000000 cache=29.2MiB(4765tx)
As you can see, for whatever reason, the date reported for block 388047 is later than the date reported for 388048. However, they were seen by my node 3 seconds apart from each other. |
|
|
|
|
LOL! The blockchain should compensate... hahaha!
|
|
|
|
Some number between negative infinity and positive infinity . In all seriousness, you need to provide a whole lot more information than you did for anybody to be able to provide you with some semblance of a reasonable guess. However, at the end of the day, even if you provided us with every minute detail, that's all the answer would ever be: a guess. Nobody can predict the future. |
|
|
|
I get those stats from running my own code to parse the blocks What can a small miner do? Easy - don't point your hash to those pools. Support other pools. For example, looking at my own mempool info on my pool, I can see plenty of transactions waiting to be included: bitcoin-cli getmempoolinfo
{
"size" : 5138,
"bytes" : 10033688
}
That's with limits on relay tx fees and setting my block size to be just shy of 1M. Looking at my logs, I can see the blocks the pool is trying to create are right up against that barrier: 2015-12-11 20:23:25 CreateNewBlock(): total size 998934
Kano's pool always includes transactions in the work. As a result, his pool has never once submitted an empty block. There are plenty of pools out there that don't behave badly . Unfortunately, they don't have huge amounts of hash. |
|
|
|
|
That's exactly what it means. They put absolutely no transactions in their blocks. It's possible because they create an empty block and pass that off to their miners. Eventually they put transactions in to the work and pass that along. That "eventually" depends entirely upon them.
|
|
|
|
|
Blocktrail shows the transaction just fine... blockchain.info just refuses to show it at all.
|
|
|
|
|
In the past 24 hours there have been 14 empty blocks:
BW.com - 3 of their 7 blocks were empty
AntPool - 7 of their 44 blocks were empty
f2pool - 4 of their 31 blocks were empty
|
|
|
|
|
Sure... you could certainly build a patch to exclude transactions from any address you wanted... you could also setup firewall rules to block any traffic from known IP addresses. This would have the effect of denying known dead pool miners from connecting to you, and you'd never allow a transaction from those pools to be included in your pool's work.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
