Bitcoin Forum
May 04, 2015, 03:04:20 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.10.1 [Torrent] (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 ... 228 »
401  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: ROCKMINER ASIC miner official thread on: June 21, 2014, 02:21:03 AM
Rockxie - has anyone on the team looked at bluetooth integration for future designs?  Would save the pain of crossing 10's of wires (idk, maybe 100's for some of the more enthusiastic out there) and could be a value-add to the design.
Personally, I think it'd be pretty cool if someone did a 6lowpan miner Smiley
402  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: BFGMiner 4.2.0: modular ASIC+FPGA, GBT+Strtm, RPC, Mac/Lnx/W64, RockMiner R-BOX on: June 21, 2014, 01:13:29 AM
nwoolls huge thanks for this!  I'll give it a try tomorrow on my 7 Blizzards and let you know how it works out.

One more thing, I noticed in GitHub you've got what looks to be a newer branch:  https://github.com/nwoolls/bfgminer/tree/feature/zeusminer-support-cleaner

Is this the latest one I should test?  Or should I try the one you've provided in your post above?
Please test the "zeusminer" branch in my GitHub repo.
This is nwoolls' latest code with some minor cleanups (and a fix for big endian).
Windows builds here
403  Other / Bitcoin Wiki / Re: Some users that need to be blocked now on: June 19, 2014, 11:46:13 PM
I keep forgetting which scam accusations are confirmed or only suspected and/or potentially technical trouble.

Thoughts on having a page that lists suspected and confirmed scams, that we can just redirect these pages to when confirming?
404  Bitcoin / Mining support / Re: How to start your own mining pool using bitcoind + eloipool. on: June 19, 2014, 09:28:18 PM
This guide has helped me the most at getting my solo pool up and running.  My only problem is not being about to get the pool to use var diff.  All of my miners return diff 1 shares.

In my config.py I've got

ShareTarget = 0x000000000ff.........
DynamicTargetGoal = 6
DynamicTargetWindow = 120


Am I missing another setting somewhere?
I don't think you enabled it?
405  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: A solution to centralised pool ownership of the blockchain on: June 19, 2014, 07:41:24 AM
No, the proposal here doesn't really solve 51% issues at all.

Explain? If the pool is not in charge of the block's contents - then how does it not fix the issues associated with having 51%?
All you've done is move the issue to another, new kind of pool.
Which could BTW be under the same control as the person running the current pool.
It also means the current-pool selects which new-pool to use, so net effect: ZERO.
406  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [6600Th] Eligius: 0% Fee BTC, 105% PPS NMC, No registration, CPPSRB (New Thread) on: June 19, 2014, 05:36:15 AM
It seems I received a partial payment of my total due balance. Didn't lose the unpaid portion, it stayed in the total due.  Never noticed this before...anyone?
Stats link?
407  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: A solution to centralised pool ownership of the blockchain on: June 18, 2014, 11:40:46 PM
This is just a roundabout and centralised way to do getblocktemplate...
Seems pretty pointless.
Completely the opposite. GetBlockTemplate would require the pool to verify every transaction is valid, and that the block itself is entirely valid, just to be able to credit a share - as I understand it, it is a computational nightmare.
No, pools don't have to check every transaction at all, just the coinbase.
Sure, someone could make an invalid block this way, but they could also do block withholding for the same effect.

The miners and pool software would not have to be fundamentally altered to such a large degree, but the resultant change of control would solve every problem of 51% ownership.
No, the proposal here doesn't really solve 51% issues at all.
408  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: A solution to centralised pool ownership of the blockchain on: June 18, 2014, 01:38:46 AM
This is just a roundabout and centralised way to do getblocktemplate...
Seems pretty pointless.
409  Other / Bitcoin Wiki / Re: Enable user javascript? on: June 17, 2014, 09:00:06 AM
Everything contributed is Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licensed.

Text, yes, but not images (or at least, that's how it should be). The strong majority of images are fully copyrighted and haven't been released under a free license; they should either be tagged as being used under fair use, or deleted if the wiki's policy is to only accept free images (which wouldn't make sense, considering that the nature of most articles requires copyrighted images, such as website screenshots, logos, etc.).

Pretty much every wiki runs this way; their text is freely licensed, but images are independently licensed as needed.
I don't see any exception for images.

Pretty sure website screenshots aren't copyrightable.
Similarly, logos may be trademarked, but I don't think copyrighted.
410  Other / Bitcoin Wiki / Re: Enable user javascript? on: June 16, 2014, 09:04:20 PM
Everything contributed is Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licensed.
411  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: BFGMiner 4.2.0: modular ASIC+FPGA, GBT+Strtm, RPC, Mac/Lnx/W64, RockMiner R-BOX on: June 16, 2014, 07:34:16 PM
Thanks for the quick reply!! The lowest diff I can set on the page is 4 which means I'll have to ssh and try to set it manually.

I'll let you know how it goes. Thanks again!
If you can compile, there's a hack on https://github.com/luke-jr/bfgminer/pull/456 you could merge to make it diff 16.
412  Bitcoin / Mining software (miners) / Re: BFGMiner 4.2.0: modular ASIC+FPGA, GBT+Strtm, RPC, Mac/Lnx/W64, RockMiner R-BOX on: June 16, 2014, 07:14:57 PM
Luke,

I'm using BFGminer to proxy a Dragon 1T miner & it seems to be working well except for the reported speed. The miner as well as the pool are reporting roughly 1TH while BFGminer is reporting 11.xx Gh. Kinda like the decimal is
two places to far to the left ...
I've heard Dragon miners are broken and require you to set the share difficulty on the device itself.
For BFGMiner's stratum proxy, the correct value is pdiff 1.
413  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: *** GHash.IO mining pool official page *** on: June 16, 2014, 05:29:28 PM
To that effect we are in the process of arranging contact to the leading mining pools and Bitcoin Foundation to propose a ‘round table’ meeting of the key players with the aim of discussing and negotiating collectively ways to address the decentralisation of mining as an industry. Our aim is to do this quickly with a possible date coinciding with the CoinSummit Conference in London.
This has been ongoing since 2012 on mailing lists and IRC.
Please join and participate.
GHash.io is the only major pool that has not been involved in inter-pool relationships.
414  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: ==== Eligius, please pay my 200+ BTC ==== on: June 16, 2014, 03:49:49 AM
I am not wrong no solo pool will be hurt  by the attacker.
Um, so you get the worst of both worlds?
Just solo mine for real.
415  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: ROCKMINER ASIC miner official thread on: June 16, 2014, 01:33:21 AM
BTW, if anyone else wants to implement ROCKMINER support, here are my notes from reverse engineering the protocol:
Code:
Device->Host:
32-bit nonce
4-bit status
4-bit command
0 = nonce found
1 = Task complete
2 = Get task
2-bit product id
0 = R-Box (4 chips, freq 200-270-290)
6-bit chip id
8-bit task id
8-bit temperature

Host->Device:
256-bit midstate
128-bit unused/zero
8-bit 0xaa
8-bit (MHz / 10) - 1
8-bit chip id
8-bit 0x55
96-bit datatail
416  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: ROCKMINER ASIC miner official thread on: June 16, 2014, 01:04:30 AM
Thanks for the fast replies.

I bought my R-Box from Canary along with the power supply, so I assume it is adequate.

IF the cause is an unstable pool, I am wondering why that problem doesn't happen to my Antminer U2's? I should have been more specific, that there are 3 devices (R-Box and 2 U2's) but the only one that dies is the R-box.
It was a driver-specific bug when it is starved for work (which happens when the pools are unstable).
417  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: ROCKMINER ASIC miner official thread on: June 16, 2014, 01:00:55 AM
My R-Box is "dying" after running a day or two. This has happened at least 3 times the first week I've owned it. I'm running with 2 Antminers U2's as well with the following command line

bfgminer.exe -S rockminer:all --set rockminer:clock=270 -S antminer:all --set-device antminer:clock=x0A81 -o <pool URL> -u <username> -p <password>

And it doesn't seem what frequency I run at, this is about all I can get. I've tried freq=270, 280, and 290. Running at lower frequency doesn't seem to help the stability. Am I doing anything wrong or is this typical?

RKM 0: 42.0C | 32.54/32.48/32.12Gh/s | A:13 R:0+0(none) HW:4/none

I think this can happen when pools aren't completely stable.
I've put some improvements in git to try to handle it better, and hopefully recover no matter what stops it.
418  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: ==== Eligius, please pay my 200+ BTC ==== on: June 16, 2014, 12:05:24 AM
Are you located in China? Is the selfish miner located in China?
He claims to be named LiYi, and located in GuangZhou, China.

Quote
2 - Individual miners may not have standing to sue the selfish miner. In a civil case (involving money/damages) you must prove that damages be caused, but also that he damages were against you. There is clearly a relationship between the miners and the pool (the miners provide work for the pool and in exchange for each unit of work the pool provides a maximum amount of payment, if payment is less then the maximum then when the pool can afford to pay more then the maximum the units that got paid less get paid more). The relationship between miners at the pool are not as clear. I am not an attorney, but I think a likely ruling would be if a miner tried to sue another miner at the same pool, the judge would say that their "beef" is with the pool operator, not the selfish miner. On the other hand if the pool operator were to sue a miner the damages are more clear, as the miner did not provide the work, the miner said they provided the work, and the pool operator paid for the work that was not done. There is clearly a fraud here.
Pools don't pay miners for work, merely coordinate cooperation between miners who pay each other.
This is especially clear-cut on Eligius, where most of the funds never pass through the pool operator's hands.
That may be how it is on a logistics standpoint, but is that how it is in the eyes of the law? If you were BTC Guild or ghash I would say defiantly no, as both of those pools have block rewards (and tx fees) paid to the "pool" wallet, and the BTC is then eventually transferred to miners' wallets via automatic payouts. Eligius is very different in that it pays the block rewards (and tx fees) directly to miners via a TX in the found block. Someone could argue what you are saying but they could also argue that since the pool determines who gets paid how much via the payout cue (this being embedded into the header of work provided by the pool - I think this is how it works) that the pool does really control the found blocks. Even a attorney could likely not answer this question with certainty, as I don't think this kind of dispute has been litigated before. The only person who can answer would be the judge that hears the case (and any appellate panel of judges that hear any appeals).
I know for tax purposes, other pools are using this same interpretation.

In theory he paid good money for this equipment.
Supposedly he made it all himself.
That means his primary cost is electricity (actual chips and PCBs do not cost very much to produce).

As far as I can tell he has done this to multiple pools. Do you think it would be possible to modify mining software so that only the stratum shares are sent back to the pool with the correct header, but the other shares could use a different header (one that pay out to another address)? Do you have a way to determine when he withheld a block from the pool? If so can you compare that to other blocks found around that time, is there any consistency as to who found the blocks? I know that it has previously been determined that you cannot modify block headers to make a found block payout to your own address as the hash would be invalid, but someone who has the resources to have millions of dollars worth of mining equipment might have the resources to make this happen.
It's not possible. I don't understand this part of your post entirely.
419  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: ==== Eligius, please pay my 200+ BTC ==== on: June 15, 2014, 10:44:54 PM
You previously said that eligius lost ~400 BTC, based on $571 for 1 BTC that comes out to ~$228,400 that was stolen. Your largest mining address lost ~$14,850 from the selfish miner. If you look at your number 5 mining address they only lost ~$3,300 from the selfish miner. The point is that the amounts of individual miners are relatively small and probably would not be worth hiring an attorney over, also attorneys would probably want to be paid by the hour for a case with that much is dispute. If you were to hire an attorney to bring a case trying to recover the entire $228,400 (400 BTC) then there would be a better chance that an attorney would work on a contingent basis (agree to only get paid if they win and the payment would be taken out of the settlement/judgment).
Probably right. Which would mean it'd have to be a class-action case (if there even is such a thing in China).
As far as I know, nobody ever wins in class-action lawsuits... Sad

2 - Individual miners may not have standing to sue the selfish miner. In a civil case (involving money/damages) you must prove that damages be caused, but also that he damages were against you. There is clearly a relationship between the miners and the pool (the miners provide work for the pool and in exchange for each unit of work the pool provides a maximum amount of payment, if payment is less then the maximum then when the pool can afford to pay more then the maximum the units that got paid less get paid more). The relationship between miners at the pool are not as clear. I am not an attorney, but I think a likely ruling would be if a miner tried to sue another miner at the same pool, the judge would say that their "beef" is with the pool operator, not the selfish miner. On the other hand if the pool operator were to sue a miner the damages are more clear, as the miner did not provide the work, the miner said they provided the work, and the pool operator paid for the work that was not done. There is clearly a fraud here.
Pools don't pay miners for work, merely coordinate cooperation between miners who pay each other.
This is especially clear-cut on Eligius, where most of the funds never pass through the pool operator's hands.
420  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: ==== Eligius, please pay my 200+ BTC ==== on: June 15, 2014, 07:50:11 PM
Quote
In regards to the proof holding up in a criminal case it is important to understand how complex Bitcoin is. You need to be smart to understand even much of the basics as to how Bitcoin works. I would be surprised if you could explain to a jury (made of up "average" people, most of which likely would not have any technical background) how a pool works or how miners work in enough detail that would allow you to explain the evidence.
I don't think courts usually require a full explanation of the technical details, just expert witness testimony that such and such is fact.
If you were to testify, the defense attorney would ask what you think he did. Your response would be something along the lines of he withheld blocks that he founds while mining on our pool (you would explain what mining, pools are and what with holding blocks mean). The next thing he would ask is "how do you know" you would respond by saying something along the lines of "I looked at our pool records and saw x y and z" The defense attorney would ask to see the records and for you to explain what they mean. Having the records in a presettable format may be the difference between guilty and not guilty or 400 BTC or 0 BTC
Perhaps. But should criminal charges be filed, the prosecutors probably have a budget for discovery, which I presume would include doing this kind of organisation of data.

In regards to should he be paid if he is withholding blocks, if it appears that he withheld three blocks (for example) then 76 BTC (I would be aggressive with TX fees) should be withheld from his payment, at the very least. This is regardless if he was doing this intentionally or not and is especially true for such a large mining farm.
Unfortunately, even after withholding the ~200 BTC, he still owes us like ~400 BTC. Sad
If you could find out his identity with relative certainty you could pursue civil charges against him. Assuming he was not mining via tor finding his identity shouldn't be more difficult then filing a lawsuit against the alias, then sending a subpoena to the ISP, data center until you can connect the dots to his identity.
Yes, but arguably it should be some high-loss miner who would file these charges.
I think wizkid057 is prepared to provide IP addresses to assist in any such lawsuit.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 ... 228 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!