Since this pool doesn't really have the concept of "workers" should I use a different bitcoin address for each machine. You can use ADDRESS_WORKERNAME to setup workers. It doesn't matter either way from the pool's perspective, though. I think this might be necessary because I'm guess the pool dynamically adjusts the difficulty of the shares. This would make the shares for the FPGA way too difficult if they all share the same account (bitcoin address). Doesn't matter, since they'd all be one collective. It might make for poor statistics locally, but that's it. If you don't like that, use a different worker on the same address. |
|
|
|
are the call fails to adl a possible windows bug? More likely a driver bug. |
|
|
|
Hi wk! Excellent work going on here. Thanks for your continued efforts on THE best BTC pool. Question - how can we log into Eligius site to review order status in the store? Placed an order for a few of the Eligius USB Erupters with Canary. Order confirmation page gives link to check order status, but requires authentication to access the page. How can one log on to access this? I don't see anywhere on the site?  Followed up with Canary via dm, but curious to log on anyway... advice? Thanks! -- ronin The whole storefront thing is very much still a work-in-progress. We just wanted to get it online ASAP since Canary has stock to sell  Unfortunately, it may be a few weeks before all the functionality works right, as Gateway is pretty busy with some paid work lately. |
|
|
|
-S all I think doesn't work at all on Mac but I really should take a look at the bfgminer code and see if that's something easily fixed. It should work fine. Just autodetect won't work (ie, without any -S). My report logs suggest you're right, but the guy who posted his other thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=255065.msg2715334#msg2715334said it didn't work till he specified the device. Does the fpgautils.c check /dev/cu.*? That was 3.1.1; I'm pretty sure I fixed it in 3.1.2 |
|
|
|
-S all I think doesn't work at all on Mac but I really should take a look at the bfgminer code and see if that's something easily fixed. It should work fine. Just autodetect won't work (ie, without any -S). |
|
|
|
any news on the bfgminer?
I ported Chemisist's optimizations, and fixed a nasty bug making it do the same work over and over. Working very well on unmodified primecoind testnet-in-a-box now. |
|
|
|
You have a reputation as a selfish, rude, abrasiveness, and odd person, who is a constant source of conflict. You seem a bit confused here. This forum is not the community. It is a nest of trolls that the community only barely interacts with as necessary. My reputation is quite well in the Bitcoin community. Trolls and scammers may hate me, but I'm fine with that. |
|
|
|
Sounds like this crowd is showing their true colours....
Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
And no, getwork won't work. It's been deprecated for a long time before Primecoin was even announced, I don't know why Sunny included it or why people expect it to work.
GBT, on the other hand, works fine without primecoind modification.
You have yet to explain why you believe primecoin is a scam. I am not here to argue with anyone, but you have no sound reasoning at this time. Unless you are just very nonchalantly trolling  Except all the times I already explained why in the main Primecoin thread. |
|
|
|
|
Sounds like this crowd is showing their true colours....
Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
And no, getwork won't work. It's been deprecated for a long time before Primecoin was even announced, I don't know why Sunny included it or why people expect it to work.
GBT, on the other hand, works fine without primecoind modification.
|
|
|
|
What's the difference between primecoind mining and this miner in terms of perfomance?.
About 100x. |
|
|
|
Also, you are underestimating the new fundamental advantage of Primecoin: it will be very hard to implement it in GPU to be faster than CPU, unlike other coins. The advantage to mine with only CPU, gives many people a chance to mine, taken away from them by specialized GPU mining monsters. That's a bad thing. For starters, mining exists to serve the users, not vice-versa. Cryptocurrencies aimed at appealing to miners are fail by default. Insofar as POW works in general... you cannot stop ASICs, period. It simply is impossible. With SHA256d, the availability of GPUs and FPGAs made it so the leap from CPUs to ASICs was bearable, and did not compromise Bitcoin's security. Without the step of GPUs and FPGAs, this leap is almost certainly to be deadly to any cryptocurrency. In the meantime, before ASICs make sense financially, you have a system that gives criminals (computer crackers) the ultimate authority. So, to conclude, GPU-resistant is very bad for proof-of-work systems. |
|
|
|
|
I did not publish this for people to use, but rather for developers to play with.
It is not production-quality code, and without understanding the code you probably will not be able to get it working.
Since it is also only used by a probable-scamcoin at this point, I'd also like to express my preference that others not encourage/help non-developers use it for now, outside of improving the code/documentation in git.
(However, to be clear, I will also not hold any grudge or hard feelings against those who do.)
If any developers wish to work with or improve the code, perhaps even clean it up sufficient for merging into mainline BFGMiner, that is another matter entirely: I am more than willing to help/collaborate on this (but do expect me to ignore you if your questions suggest to me that you don't know the first thing about development!).
|
|
|
|
There is no "better" in any other coin I think you just proved my point here. |
|
|
|
Thanks Luke. Are there any gains from the new firmware?
Pretty sure this is the same firmware units have been shipping with for at least a month now. |
|
|
|
Bump. Still plenty of credits to give away...
My two cents worth of just sayin' here. You are a respected member of the developer community. You have credibility among rank and file, as well as at BFL. If people represent on a thread such as this that they are developing enablements for BFL chips to your satisfaction, then, on your say-so, BFL should send them one or a few sample chips right now. No coupon, no fifty bucks. Investment. Period. A free coupon to get a discount to buy a chip that might come ... when, who knows? to start development presents the risk of putting the point of critical mass of development of these devices so late in the competitive cycle as to crush it. Just sayin'. It hasn't escaped my notice that, at this point, a thread on BFL board development can't stay on the first couple of pages of this forum. I doubt it's escaped your notice, either. Unfortunately, all I have to offer is coupons. Keep in mind that BFL is effectively competing with themselves by offering chips for sale in the first place. I've heard BFL is sending free sample chips immediately, to people who have actually placed an order for chips, however. There's also the problem of people just taking the free samples and running with them to someone who offers to put chips on boards. Requiring a purchase before sending samples helps filter out freeloaders at least. If someone is going to invest their time in producing a board for the chips, they should be able to invest in the chips themselves anyway. I'm sure if someone is in a bad state financially, but can demonstrate having the necessary skills, BFL would probably be able to accomidate them in some way (maybe with employment?). But again, I am not a BFL representative, so this post above is entirely my speculation. |
|
|
|
If we flash to the new firmware are there any gains? Will it void the lifetime guarantee if we do flash it with stock 1.2.5?
At least under US law, it is illegal to void warranties unless you actually do damage to the device. Whether you're confident in your ability to modify firmware without damaging it or not, is up to you. Also note that overclocking (I'm not sure how to define this with BFL ASICs!) generally always does damage, even when it works. |
|
|
|
as I'm pretty sure Primecoin is a scamcoin Care to explain? There's no reason for people to adopt it. If the prime POW proves to be demonstratably better than SHA256d, it could be adopted by Bitcoin with a hardfork. Things like this (enhancement to a specific technical detail) should be done as testnet branches - as proposed changes to Bitcoin. Without a hope of adoption, Bitcoin and forks function in a pyramid: when people get tired of it, the ones stuck with the coins in the end lose out. Bitcoin is different because its innovation makes it possible to achieve a status quo where everyone wins (by having a usable decentralized currency). Any new system would need to have a viable way to compete with Bitcoin (ie, something Bitcoin couldn't just adopt as an improvement). Examples of altcoins that don't function as scams: - Tonal Bitcoin: Compatible with BTC, uses the same blockchain. Whether it succeeds or fails, nobody loses value so long as Bitcoin as a whole doesn't fail.
- Namecoin: Not a currency, but a domain name system.
- PPCoin: Uses proof-of-stake instead of proof-of-work; arguably this is so fundamentally different that Bitcoin could not adopt it. Note that last I heard, PPCoin was being used as a scamcoin despite this, however, and there were some major problems with centralization/security tradeoffs.
- Freicoin: Features demurrage, which trades the "why spend it?" problem for a new "why acquire it?" problem. It would violate Bitcoin's social contract to make an economic change like this.
|
|
|
|
Maybe I'm missing something but: What is the policy about IP logging, i.e. how long after one mines there and then stops these logs get deleted ? From http://eligius.st/wiki/index.php/FAQ it doesn't say. All shares submitted are logged in a database, and the row contains the username, IP, submitted share data, and some other related columns (accepted, was a block, difficulty, etc). This data, as of now, has never been deleted and is instead dumped, compressed, and archived periodically. This database is also replicated to the open-access web server, but without the IP column, so only myself and/or Luke-Jr would have access to the IP data. Although there is a policy to not disclose the information without due process of law (see FAQ for details). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
