Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
|
|
Currently using the GUI version of poclbm with long polling. (The new one) I have actually gotten 4 stale shares since using it, when before long polling I never got one. Just wondering how normal that is?
Edit: Just checked the console, seems there were some "long poll exceptions". I suppose it could have been because of these?
|
|
|
|
|
Font size increase was mostly good. Only the payments section seems to be adversely affected with the date causing it to "double line" the table. But not a big deal so overall the change was good.
|
|
|
|
Just use the wonderful metric system and stop worrying about this subject.
I don't think most people will have a probably with mBTC, uBTC, etc.
Metric sucks, and would fail without explicit government advocacy and support. Case in point, most Americans grew up learning American Standard (very close to Imperial, but not quite) because all the adults used it, and also learned Metric in school, because the government wanted people to use it. Most everyone, if they have a choice, prefer American Standard in regards to the kinds of useful metrics lay people use; i.e. miles for traveling distances, feet/yards for sight distances, and inches and fractions of inches for fine distances. The fact that an adult can convert traveling distances (km) into sight distances (meters) in their head is generally a useless feature, because people rarely have any reason to do so. American here, confirming Metric does not suck, and is in fact superior to that of the American Standard. Neerus sucks, too. And I would like to see where you got your information on "Most everyone, if they have a choice, prefer American Standard".
Look around you. Unless you are an engineer or some kind of scientist, the majority of people who are around you at this very moment have been educated in both systems, and continue to choose American Standard for daily functions. They can do so because they are free to do so. Their local, state and federal governments have to deal in whatever metric that the pubic insists on using. Also, the fact that every other country in the world has adopted the Metric System seems to contradict that statement.
Edit: Ok, most counties have. Myanmar and Liberia appear to be exceptions.
I hope you realize this is not an argument in favor of the free choice of the Metric Standard, since in most (if not every) cases, the public must deal in Metric because either their governments refuse to deal in any other system, Metric is the only system of measurements taught to children, or more likely both. I can understand how Metric was better in Europe than the differing standards that were similar to Imperial, but different than the nation-state next door. But that is not the case in the US, as we have been using the same standard across a land and culture vastly more intertwined than anything Europe could replicate before the European Union, but the Metric Standard was a great leap forward for interoperability and clear communications. Not because it was a base 10 standard, but simply because it was a cross-border standard. As far as consistency, American Standard is broken. But it's never really been about consistency, but utility. And for Americans, being the only significant population taught two different standards of measurements, the utility remains decidedly on the side of the American Standard. Brokenness aside, American Standard is mostly a base 2 (or base 4) standard based on fractions, which is easier for lay people (and particularly those who are math illiterate) to understand intuitively. For example; Gallon (1/1), Half-Gallon (1/2). Quart (1/4), Pint (1/8), Cup (1/16), Gill (half-cup, 1/32). Beyond either end of the range of that example, things get broken, but this range alone covers most of the useful range (utility) for everyday measurements of liquid volume. We do the same thing to all other units less explicitly, but we do it. Half-mile, Quarter-mile, half-inch, quarter-inch, half-pound, ounce (1/16th), dram (1/256th lb), etc. The greatest advantage Metric had that led to it's adoption in Europe, and most of the former colonies of Europe, was it's cross border interoperability. Metric did not have an advantage over American Standard in this regard, so it has never gain common usage outside of professional fields. The fact that Metric doesn't dominate in a large society free to choose it is evidence that it was not superior enough for a free public to choose it over what they already used. The fact you have to use a personal attack shows you obviously can't back up what you say. You have nothing but opinions and logical fallacies. Show me proof of what you claim instead of just assuming you know what every one in the world thinks and feels.
|
|
|
|
Just use the wonderful metric system and stop worrying about this subject.
I don't think most people will have a probably with mBTC, uBTC, etc.
Metric sucks, and would fail without explicit government advocacy and support. Case in point, most Americans grew up learning American Standard (very close to Imperial, but not quite) because all the adults used it, and also learned Metric in school, because the government wanted people to use it. Most everyone, if they have a choice, prefer American Standard in regards to the kinds of useful metrics lay people use; i.e. miles for traveling distances, feet/yards for sight distances, and inches and fractions of inches for fine distances. The fact that an adult can convert traveling distances (km) into sight distances (meters) in their head is generally a useless feature, because people rarely have any reason to do so. American here, confirming Metric does not suck, and is in fact superior to that of the American Standard. And I would like to see where you got your information on "Most everyone, if they have a choice, prefer American Standard". Also, the fact that every other country in the world has adopted the Metric System seems to contradict that statement. Edit: Ok, most counties have. Myanmar and Liberia appear to be exceptions.
|
|
|
|
There also 50 share bonus for lucky miner why solved block.
i don't get that, 50 what? if it's bitcoins, where do those come from? it might be % though, but % of what, of your 3-10% cut? Sounds to me like you get 50 more shares added to cut if you are the one to find the block.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm so use to Engineering Notation, when I first started and got my .05 BTC from the faucet, I thought, "Woohoo, 50 mBits!"
|
|
|
|
|
This is why I left it open ended on time, and said after it saw real world use. My idea was more of a long term idea. Just wanted to know if the system would allow for a new hashing algorithm in the future.
|
|
|
|
well, in the long run you'll get <7% more from proportional, that's what you can expect. no need to take your hashrate or any imaginary numbers into account.
I would say not true for those with lower hashrates, but could be wrong. Should be true for anyone. Then I stand corrected. Was thinking the chance to miss blocks with lower hash rates might make a difference. If you miss each one of two rounds, then you need ~twice more hashrate. Then you will have, possibly, one share in each round, which gives you twice the reward, just proportional to your speed. Makes sense, thanks.
|
|
|
|
Would it be possible to get the payouts listed in descending order? (Newest on top)
It's possible, but what is your reason for that ? Well, it's not a problem right now. But once there is quite a few transfers, it would be nice to just see the latest one sent without having to scroll to the bottom.
|
|
|
|
It is (in theory) possible to take an average hashrate (and from extension, average amount of shares of some time) and figure out how much you can expect to make in the long run using the different payouts.
well, in the long run you'll get <7% more from proportional, that's what you can expect. no need to take your hashrate or any imaginary numbers into account. I would say not true for those with lower hashrates, but could be wrong. Should be true for anyone. Then I stand corrected. Was thinking the chance to miss blocks with lower hash rates might make a difference.
|
|
|
|
It is (in theory) possible to take an average hashrate (and from extension, average amount of shares of some time) and figure out how much you can expect to make in the long run using the different payouts.
well, in the long run you'll get <7% more from proportional, that's what you can expect. no need to take your hashrate or any imaginary numbers into account. I would say not true for those with lower hashrates, but could be wrong. any imaginary numbers into account. No need to be snide.
|
|
|
|
|
Would it be possible to get the payouts listed in descending order? (Newest on top)
|
|
|
|
Looks like people are still confused with two existing reward distributhing modes, so now i'm working on third one. Hope you'll like it.
I kind of wish it would automatically select the option with the greatest payout based on your hash speed, although I suppose that would be less than ideal for the pool. My guess is that while if you are on the extremes of the speed it is easy enough to figure that out, but for those around the middle, it can be difficult to say which is better. there is no way, no matter what hashrate you have, to automagically switch to option with the greatest payout, except maybe if you own a time-machine, but i guess then you would have better stuff todo with it anyway. It is (in theory) possible to take an average hashrate (and from extension, average amount of shares of some time) and figure out how much you can expect to make in the long run using the different payouts.
|
|
|
|
Looks like people are still confused with two existing reward distributhing modes, so now i'm working on third one. Hope you'll like it.
I kind of wish it would automatically select the option with the greatest payout based on your hash speed, although I suppose that would be less than ideal for the pool. My guess is that while if you are on the extremes of the speed it is easy enough to figure that out, but for those around the middle, it can be difficult to say which is better.
|
|
|
|
|
Suppose more options are better. Interested in what this one will be. lol
|
|
|
|
Is there a solution to this problem? Do I have to create a new address for every new order?
Answered your own question.
|
|
|
|
|
When the SHA-3 winner is announced, and after some time in real use, would it be a good idea to switch to that?
|
|
|
|
|
Some people are behind a firewall (like at work) that blocks port 8333. If you have access to a proxy using socks4, then you can use that option to bypass the firewall. This allows the use of the bitcoin client even behind a firewall.
|
|
|
|
|
What if someone else (Eve) were to intercept the public/private keys. Email isn't the most secure method of communication. What if Bob decides not to accept, is there a way to get you bitcoins back? Redeeming your own key pair?
|
|
|
|
|
Personally I would say both sides should be advertised equally.
Without people using bitcoins, mining becomes pointless. Without mining, spending bitcoins becomes impossible.
|
|
|
|
|