[ANN][DCR] Decred - Community Governance | Bitcoin Devs | Lightning Network

[edmundduke]

which exchange(s) are Decred likely to be on initially?

https://bleutrade.com referenced from here: https://forum.decred.org/threads/mainnet-launch-date.380/#post-5442

I am pretty sure that it will be added on many exchanges at launch. YoBit and Bleutrade will add it for sure and i have a feeling that a big exchange like Bittrex or Polo will be short to follow (if not added from the start). This project is big enough to catch the interest of the exchanges because there will be a lot of trading from the start and the exchanges would be stupid not to take part of it. My money would be on Bittrex, pretty sure it will be added there.

[feeleep]

Hi,

My pool is up and running on testnet right now - it will be switched to mainnet once its live

https://www2.coinmine.pl/dcr/

cheers,
feeleep

[CrypticTrader]

Hi,

My pool is up and running on testnet right now - it will be switched to mainnet once its live

https://www2.coinmine.pl/dcr/

cheers,
feeleep

What do I mine with?

[feeleep]

Hi,

My pool is up and running on testnet right now - it will be switched to mainnet once its live

https://www2.coinmine.pl/dcr/

cheers,
feeleep

What do I mine with?

Same as on suprnova pool - for now: https://github.com/ocminer/cgminer-decred but already pull requests are pending on official cgminer: https://github.com/decred/cgminer

[CrypticTrader]

Hi,

My pool is up and running on testnet right now - it will be switched to mainnet once its live

https://www2.coinmine.pl/dcr/

cheers,
feeleep

What do I mine with?

Same as on suprnova pool - for now: https://github.com/ocminer/cgminer-decred but already pull requests are pending on official cgminer: https://github.com/decred/cgminer

Is it worth mining with PC (no fancy gpu)

[feeleep]

Hi,

My pool is up and running on testnet right now - it will be switched to mainnet once its live

https://www2.coinmine.pl/dcr/

cheers,
feeleep

What do I mine with?

Same as on suprnova pool - for now: https://github.com/ocminer/cgminer-decred but already pull requests are pending on official cgminer: https://github.com/decred/cgminer

Is it worth mining with PC (no fancy gpu)

probably at the beginning when diff is low... everything depends

[CrypticTrader]

Hi,

My pool is up and running on testnet right now - it will be switched to mainnet once its live

https://www2.coinmine.pl/dcr/

cheers,
feeleep

What do I mine with?

Same as on suprnova pool - for now: https://github.com/ocminer/cgminer-decred but already pull requests are pending on official cgminer: https://github.com/decred/cgminer

Is it worth mining with PC (no fancy gpu)

probably at the beginning when diff is low... everything depends

cheers for the answers

[ocminer]

Nice, a pool is already up. Rented some hashes to test but pool (suprnova) doesn't seem to work. Probably because it's some new algo, right? It's hard for a pool to implement new features, but i'm sure you will get it done before launch.

You cannot rent hashes for this algo yet.

Suprnova is working perfectly fine

[Gunther]

Very interesting project, unfortunate that Nvidia miners are not getting the same love as AMD

Do we need to crowd fund to get something valid released?


Maybe we just do not have enough Nvidia miners to Justify our existence.

Really, you're not being as picked on as it seems - CUDA is great when it comes to more complex algos, or algos that can benefit from Nvidia-specific optimizations that the compiler is unable to find by itself, but this is not the case for Decred. Really, you're talking about a minor bump I would guess, at most. The algo is dead simple - I've made the miner a few percent faster on AMD - but we're talking single digit percentages... and low digits. The Nvidia OpenCL compiler would really have a hard time fucking it up.

@wolf I tried the cgminer & ccminer both & they give me

970 1.52 GH/s on ccminer & 1.11GH/s on cgminer
750ti 530MH/s in ccminer & 431 MH/s on cgminer

so there is 75-80% loss in hashrate. Also as i remember, ccminer was running at much lower TDP% as shown in Afterburner, ~80% while cgminer was using 98-100% power. Considering all this i think there is a big disadvantage & some potential for optimizing ccminer for decred, unless the modification required for decred somehow lower the hashrate. But i guess ccminer devs are too busy taking potshots at each other, so we will have to make do with what we have or wait for decred team to release something.

Dude, of COURSE there is. That's 8 round Blake, this is 14 round Blake. Try to understand what the PoW is before benchmarking.

Since 14 is 75% more than 8... you're DEAD ON.

Customer is king. If he wants more hashes, give him more hashes. Let that cunt aim the original cgminer at some Blake256 scamcoin and he'll get more hashes.

Nice, a pool is already up. Rented some hashes to test but pool (suprnova) doesn't seem to work. Probably because it's some new algo, right? It's hard for a pool to implement new features, but i'm sure you will get it done before launch.

You cannot rent hashes for this algo yet.

Suprnova is working perfectly fine

I remember us having a beef about your pools. Lets hope you don't fuck up this time ok chap?
And please provide rentals else it's unfair to the people without GPU-rigs.

[ocminer]

Very interesting project, unfortunate that Nvidia miners are not getting the same love as AMD

Do we need to crowd fund to get something valid released?


Maybe we just do not have enough Nvidia miners to Justify our existence.

Really, you're not being as picked on as it seems - CUDA is great when it comes to more complex algos, or algos that can benefit from Nvidia-specific optimizations that the compiler is unable to find by itself, but this is not the case for Decred. Really, you're talking about a minor bump I would guess, at most. The algo is dead simple - I've made the miner a few percent faster on AMD - but we're talking single digit percentages... and low digits. The Nvidia OpenCL compiler would really have a hard time fucking it up.

@wolf I tried the cgminer & ccminer both & they give me

970 1.52 GH/s on ccminer & 1.11GH/s on cgminer
750ti 530MH/s in ccminer & 431 MH/s on cgminer

so there is 75-80% loss in hashrate. Also as i remember, ccminer was running at much lower TDP% as shown in Afterburner, ~80% while cgminer was using 98-100% power. Considering all this i think there is a big disadvantage & some potential for optimizing ccminer for decred, unless the modification required for decred somehow lower the hashrate. But i guess ccminer devs are too busy taking potshots at each other, so we will have to make do with what we have or wait for decred team to release something.

Dude, of COURSE there is. That's 8 round Blake, this is 14 round Blake. Try to understand what the PoW is before benchmarking.

Since 14 is 75% more than 8... you're DEAD ON.

Customer is king. If he wants more hashes, give him more hashes. Let that cunt aim the original cgminer at some Blake256 scamcoin and he'll get more hashes.

Nice, a pool is already up. Rented some hashes to test but pool (suprnova) doesn't seem to work. Probably because it's some new algo, right? It's hard for a pool to implement new features, but i'm sure you will get it done before launch.

You cannot rent hashes for this algo yet.

Suprnova is working perfectly fine

I remember us having a beef about your pools. Lets hope you don't fuck up this time ok chap?
And please provide rentals else it's unfair to the people without GPU-rigs.

?? ?

I don't provide rentals, I only provide pools. Working pools. And the "beef" was the same story like this time, you're misunderstanding quite a lot about Pools, POW/POS, Algos, rentals etc.

[sambiohazard]

Very interesting project, unfortunate that Nvidia miners are not getting the same love as AMD

Do we need to crowd fund to get something valid released?


Maybe we just do not have enough Nvidia miners to Justify our existence.

Really, you're not being as picked on as it seems - CUDA is great when it comes to more complex algos, or algos that can benefit from Nvidia-specific optimizations that the compiler is unable to find by itself, but this is not the case for Decred. Really, you're talking about a minor bump I would guess, at most. The algo is dead simple - I've made the miner a few percent faster on AMD - but we're talking single digit percentages... and low digits. The Nvidia OpenCL compiler would really have a hard time fucking it up.

@wolf I tried the cgminer & ccminer both & they give me

970 1.52 GH/s on ccminer & 1.11GH/s on cgminer
750ti 530MH/s in ccminer & 431 MH/s on cgminer

so there is 75-80% loss in hashrate. Also as i remember, ccminer was running at much lower TDP% as shown in Afterburner, ~80% while cgminer was using 98-100% power. Considering all this i think there is a big disadvantage & some potential for optimizing ccminer for decred, unless the modification required for decred somehow lower the hashrate. But i guess ccminer devs are too busy taking potshots at each other, so we will have to make do with what we have or wait for decred team to release something.

Dude, of COURSE there is. That's 8 round Blake, this is 14 round Blake. Try to understand what the PoW is before benchmarking.

Since 14 is 75% more than 8... you're DEAD ON.

Nope that is for 14 round blake. On 8 round blake i get 2.5GH/s & 920 MH/s. I am mining VNL right now. I am a noob but not that much.

[Bitcoin_Delivery]

Nice Java GUI wallet beta released by SG-O, for those that don't like to work in command line
https://forum.decred.org/threads/java-gui-wallet.382/

Some of features implemented are:
- Show balance
- Show a certain number of transactions
- Lock and unlock wallet
- Sending Decreds to an address

This version has only been tested on Windows 7
Tanks to SG-O for the effort, users community rocks and i'm already loving this coin 

[sambiohazard]

Very interesting project, unfortunate that Nvidia miners are not getting the same love as AMD

Do we need to crowd fund to get something valid released?


Maybe we just do not have enough Nvidia miners to Justify our existence.

Really, you're not being as picked on as it seems - CUDA is great when it comes to more complex algos, or algos that can benefit from Nvidia-specific optimizations that the compiler is unable to find by itself, but this is not the case for Decred. Really, you're talking about a minor bump I would guess, at most. The algo is dead simple - I've made the miner a few percent faster on AMD - but we're talking single digit percentages... and low digits. The Nvidia OpenCL compiler would really have a hard time fucking it up.

@wolf I tried the cgminer & ccminer both & they give me

970 1.52 GH/s on ccminer & 1.11GH/s on cgminer
750ti 530MH/s in ccminer & 431 MH/s on cgminer

so there is 75-80% loss in hashrate. Also as i remember, ccminer was running at much lower TDP% as shown in Afterburner, ~80% while cgminer was using 98-100% power. Considering all this i think there is a big disadvantage & some potential for optimizing ccminer for decred, unless the modification required for decred somehow lower the hashrate. But i guess ccminer devs are too busy taking potshots at each other, so we will have to make do with what we have or wait for decred team to release something.

Dude, of COURSE there is. That's 8 round Blake, this is 14 round Blake. Try to understand what the PoW is before benchmarking.

Since 14 is 75% more than 8... you're DEAD ON.

Nope that is for 14 round blake. On 8 round blake i get 2.5GH/s & 920 MH/s. I am mining VNL right now. I am a noob but not that much.

*facepaw* VNL is 8 round.

@wolf exactly 8 round blake on VNL is giving me 2.5 GH/s & 920 MH/s and 14 round gives me 1.5GH/s & 520MH/s on ccminer. What is facepalm about it? still cgminer is 80% less than what i get on ccminer for 14 round blake. Also 14 round blake is 60% of 8 round blake on ccminer so there is some room for improvement if as you say it should be 80% of 8 round blake. Dude you totally taking me for a moron or am i really missing something here?

[favdesu]

Nice Java GUI wallet beta released by SG-O, for those that don't like to work in command line
https://forum.decred.org/threads/java-gui-wallet.382/

Some of features implemented are:
- Show balance
- Show a certain number of transactions
- Lock and unlock wallet
- Sending Decreds to an address

This version has only been tested on Windows 7
Tanks to SG-O for the effort, users community rocks and i'm already loving this coin 

Source? Github? x Be careful @everyone!

[Bitcoin_Delivery]

Nice Java GUI wallet beta released by SG-O, for those that don't like to work in command line
https://forum.decred.org/threads/java-gui-wallet.382/

Some of features implemented are:
- Show balance
- Show a certain number of transactions
- Lock and unlock wallet
- Sending Decreds to an address

This version has only been tested on Windows 7
Tanks to SG-O for the effort, users community rocks and i'm already loving this coin 

Source? Github? x Be careful @everyone!

I'm not the developer....
The source refer to a thread on the Official Decred Forum, where is possible to read also a comment from one of Decred developers....
If the source of the wallet was untrastable, i think the developer had locked thread or warned users....instead he say thank to the user for the contribution
By the way...everyone is free to use at his own risk

[sambiohazard]

Very interesting project, unfortunate that Nvidia miners are not getting the same love as AMD

Do we need to crowd fund to get something valid released?


Maybe we just do not have enough Nvidia miners to Justify our existence.

Really, you're not being as picked on as it seems - CUDA is great when it comes to more complex algos, or algos that can benefit from Nvidia-specific optimizations that the compiler is unable to find by itself, but this is not the case for Decred. Really, you're talking about a minor bump I would guess, at most. The algo is dead simple - I've made the miner a few percent faster on AMD - but we're talking single digit percentages... and low digits. The Nvidia OpenCL compiler would really have a hard time fucking it up.

@wolf I tried the cgminer & ccminer both & they give me

970 1.52 GH/s on ccminer & 1.11GH/s on cgminer
750ti 530MH/s in ccminer & 431 MH/s on cgminer

so there is 75-80% loss in hashrate. Also as i remember, ccminer was running at much lower TDP% as shown in Afterburner, ~80% while cgminer was using 98-100% power. Considering all this i think there is a big disadvantage & some potential for optimizing ccminer for decred, unless the modification required for decred somehow lower the hashrate. But i guess ccminer devs are too busy taking potshots at each other, so we will have to make do with what we have or wait for decred team to release something.

Dude, of COURSE there is. That's 8 round Blake, this is 14 round Blake. Try to understand what the PoW is before benchmarking.

Since 14 is 75% more than 8... you're DEAD ON.

Nope that is for 14 round blake. On 8 round blake i get 2.5GH/s & 920 MH/s. I am mining VNL right now. I am a noob but not that much.

*facepaw* VNL is 8 round.

@wolf exactly 8 round blake on VNL is giving me 2.5 GH/s & 920 MH/s and 14 round gives me 1.5GH/s & 520MH/s on ccminer. What is facepalm about it? still cgminer is 80% less than what i get on ccminer for 14 round blake. Also 14 round blake is 60% of 8 round blake on ccminer so there is some room for improvement if as you say it should be 80% of 8 round blake. Dude you totally taking me for a moron or am i really missing something here?

I don't get it - how are you testing an 8 round Blake-256 on ccminer when it's not implemented?

Its implemented for VNL for sure & i guess for blakecoin as well, although i am not sure, in tpruvot's ccminer fork. I am using that.

[theLosers106]

Very interesting project, unfortunate that Nvidia miners are not getting the same love as AMD

Do we need to crowd fund to get something valid released?


Maybe we just do not have enough Nvidia miners to Justify our existence.

Really, you're not being as picked on as it seems - CUDA is great when it comes to more complex algos, or algos that can benefit from Nvidia-specific optimizations that the compiler is unable to find by itself, but this is not the case for Decred. Really, you're talking about a minor bump I would guess, at most. The algo is dead simple - I've made the miner a few percent faster on AMD - but we're talking single digit percentages... and low digits. The Nvidia OpenCL compiler would really have a hard time fucking it up.

@wolf I tried the cgminer & ccminer both & they give me

970 1.52 GH/s on ccminer & 1.11GH/s on cgminer
750ti 530MH/s in ccminer & 431 MH/s on cgminer

so there is 75-80% loss in hashrate. Also as i remember, ccminer was running at much lower TDP% as shown in Afterburner, ~80% while cgminer was using 98-100% power. Considering all this i think there is a big disadvantage & some potential for optimizing ccminer for decred, unless the modification required for decred somehow lower the hashrate. But i guess ccminer devs are too busy taking potshots at each other, so we will have to make do with what we have or wait for decred team to release something.

Dude, of COURSE there is. That's 8 round Blake, this is 14 round Blake. Try to understand what the PoW is before benchmarking.

Since 14 is 75% more than 8... you're DEAD ON.

Nope that is for 14 round blake. On 8 round blake i get 2.5GH/s & 920 MH/s. I am mining VNL right now. I am a noob but not that much.

*facepaw* VNL is 8 round.

@wolf exactly 8 round blake on VNL is giving me 2.5 GH/s & 920 MH/s and 14 round gives me 1.5GH/s & 520MH/s on ccminer. What is facepalm about it? still cgminer is 80% less than what i get on ccminer for 14 round blake. Also 14 round blake is 60% of 8 round blake on ccminer so there is some room for improvement if as you say it should be 80% of 8 round blake. Dude you totally taking me for a moron or am i really missing something here?

I don't get it - how are you testing an 8 round Blake-256 on ccminer when it's not implemented?

Its implemented for VNL for sure & i guess for blakecoin as well, although i am not sure, in tpruvot's ccminer fork. I am using that.

See, when you say things like that, it makes me think you misunderstand. You see, VNL uses eight round Blake-256. Blakecoin uses 8 round Blake-256. Decred is the only one I know of using 14-round Blake-256, and it doesn't have a CCMiner implementation yet as far as I know, so I'm unsure as to how you've benchmarked it.

Not to pissed anyone.. but Wolf0, I'm assuming he is using this: https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer/blob/windows/ccminer.cpp#L1833 to benchmark..

[DanWalker]

Is there a executable windows wallet? Sry I don't know how to build.

[Bitcoin_Delivery]

Is there a executable windows wallet? Sry I don't know how to build.

At the moment the only windows exe wallet available is an unofficial java version, in some days (for sure before the official launch) dev's will release some resources that will make easier all the process.
You can refer to this thread or in the official forum https://forum.decred.org 

[sambiohazard]

Thanks Theloser106

Also, someone said that SFR has 14 round blake, i tested on that too & got similar results. and AFAIK sp_ also integrated 14 round blake in his rel78. He also posted some numbers on his thread.

EDIT: you asked me how i was testing 8 round blake so i told you i am mining VNL. I think you really meant 14 round blake back there.