Bitcoin Forum
August 21, 2017, 12:22:56 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.14.2  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 [775] 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2401980 times)
Meuh6879
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
June 18, 2017, 12:42:08 AM
 #15481

i prefer an upgrade of the "package" (language ?) around the P2Pool installation ... before all others stuff.
P2Pool node (server) is really hard to install from a profane/rooky view.
And many links around Python (twisted ?) are old, too (ie. 64 bits instructions to keep the path).

I talk about this because many noobs in my part of the -french- forum don't really understand how to set a P2Pool node ... easly on all available OS.

I run a P2Pool node since 2015 with a full Bitcoin Core node.  Smiley

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1503318176
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1503318176

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1503318176
Reply with quote  #2

1503318176
Report to moderator
sawa
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 999



View Profile
June 18, 2017, 06:18:33 AM
 #15482

I started the thematic chat https://t.me/p2pool in the Telegram messenger https://telegram.org/
Join, share opinions, ask questions. Owners of nodes can publish addresses, exchange the source code of p2pools for different coins there.
Chat is multilanguage. Those who do not know languages, install the bot-translator http://telegram.me/ytranslatebot to the messenger

tubexc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 289


Coding Galaxians since 1981


View Profile WWW
June 18, 2017, 03:12:05 PM
 #15483

This problem of the existence of two P2pools is easily solved if forrestv issues a node warning for everyone to install the P2Pool version of jtoomim!!!
Meuh6879
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
June 18, 2017, 04:33:29 PM
 #15484

Pretty.


jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 680


View Profile WWW
June 18, 2017, 06:14:03 PM
 #15485

Looks like another nicehash miner with high DOA rates, but on mainnet this time. It's interesting to see how they drive the orphan rates down even as they drive the DOA rates up.

Hosting bitcoin miners for $65 to $80/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80


View Profile WWW
June 18, 2017, 08:26:02 PM
 #15486

This problem of the existence of two P2pools is easily solved if forrestv issues a node warning for everyone to install the P2Pool version of jtoomim!!!

Why would forrestv want people to use a p2pool fork which would only make it more centralized?

P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
tubexc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 289


Coding Galaxians since 1981


View Profile WWW
June 18, 2017, 08:30:29 PM
 #15487

This problem of the existence of two P2pools is easily solved if forrestv issues a node warning for everyone to install the P2Pool version of jtoomim!!!

Why would forrestv want people to use a p2pool fork which would only make it more centralized?

More lucrative for the miners who come here to complain, you wanted to say !?!
veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80


View Profile WWW
June 18, 2017, 08:32:38 PM
 #15488

This problem of the existence of two P2pools is easily solved if forrestv issues a node warning for everyone to install the P2Pool version of jtoomim!!!

Why would forrestv want people to use a p2pool fork which would only make it more centralized?

More lucrative for the miners who come here to complain, you wanted to say !?!

We can't force miners to care about decentralization. If they want centralized pools they can use them but that doesn't mean p2pool has to change.

P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
tubexc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 289


Coding Galaxians since 1981


View Profile WWW
June 18, 2017, 08:46:52 PM
 #15489

This problem of the existence of two P2pools is easily solved if forrestv issues a node warning for everyone to install the P2Pool version of jtoomim!!!

Why would forrestv want people to use a p2pool fork which would only make it more centralized?

More lucrative for the miners who come here to complain, you wanted to say !?!

We can't force miners to care about decentralization. If they want centralized pools they can use them but that doesn't mean p2pool has to change.

Anything
As long as this brings more blocks  Grin
Blocks where are you ?
jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 680


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2017, 04:47:44 AM
 #15490

Why would forrestv want people to use a p2pool fork which would only make it more centralized?
Maybe because my fork has lower CPU usage, lower memory usage, lower orphan rates, better fairness, and substantially higher revenue from tx fees? And maybe because your premise of that causing centralization is, I dunno, wrong?

Hosting bitcoin miners for $65 to $80/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2017, 11:43:07 AM
 #15491

Why would forrestv want people to use a p2pool fork which would only make it more centralized?
Maybe because my fork has lower CPU usage, lower memory usage, lower orphan rates, better fairness, and substantially higher revenue from tx fees?
That's because new shares aren't 1MB yet as your fork allows. Then again you advocate making Bitcoin's block size limit infinite...

P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
in2tactics
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
June 19, 2017, 12:17:09 PM
 #15492

... Then again you advocate making Bitcoin's block size limit infinite...
Satoshi never imposed a block size limit in the beginning. There was something like a 32mb network message limit, but that is it. What is your point?

Active... 2x AntMiner S7-LN and 5x AntMiner U1
Collecting Dust... 2x ASICMiner Block Erupter Cube, 4x AntMiner S3, 4x AntMiner S1, GAW Black Widow, and ZeusMiner Thunder X6
Coin Interests... BTC, LTC, DOGE
veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2017, 12:26:08 PM
 #15493

... Then again you advocate making Bitcoin's block size limit infinite...
Satoshi never imposed a block size limit in the beginning. There was something like a 32mb network message limit, but that is it. What is your point?
Satoshi also:


P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 680


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2017, 04:48:30 PM
 #15494

That's because new shares aren't 1MB yet as your fork allows. Then again you advocate making Bitcoin's block size limit infinite...
New shares are already as big as they're going to get in the absence of explicitly malicious behavior or Bitcoin blocksize increases.

Do you mean in the sense that nobody has attacked the p2pool network with large, difficult-to-propagate shares, as an adjunct to doing a selfish mining attack, because somehow that's easier than just renting a bunch of hashrate on Nicehash and 51% attacking p2pool?

Or intentionally creating large shares with the intent of forcing low-bandwidth miners off of p2pool and onto other pools because somehow there's an incentive for someone to want to do that?

Keep in mind that with a 1 MB block size limit, the only way to have shares that require 1 MB of network traffic is to create block templates that use transactions that nobody has heard of before (i.e. transactions you created yourself). This also requires hacking p2pool so that it does not notify peers of transactions when they're first seen (i.e. disabling the have_tx p2p message). Normally, shares require only 2 to 32 bytes per transaction when transmitted regardless of the transaction size, but the 50 kB/1 MB limits apply to the total summed size of the transactions (e.g. 500 bytes).

Even to the extent these attacks are possible, they wouldn't be very effective. If you want to DoS someone, there are much easier ways than mining big shares.

Hosting bitcoin miners for $65 to $80/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
KorbinDallas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 48


View Profile
June 19, 2017, 11:17:28 PM
 #15495

I think I know exactly what would make everyone in this discussion feel better - Both P2pool chains hit a block!
KorbinDallas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 48


View Profile
June 19, 2017, 11:19:45 PM
 #15496

Just some humor for perspective... Smiley 
Digital consensus is the easy part, the human part is far more difficult to obtain.  We are all P2Poolers, and discourse to improve the software is going well.  Perhaps we should use more formal improvement channels, such as GitHub?  Just a thought. 
tubexc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 289


Coding Galaxians since 1981


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2017, 11:56:14 PM
 #15497

I would say that the part of the commissions is the most difficult to obtain  Wink
in2tactics
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
June 20, 2017, 04:30:52 AM
 #15498

... Then again you advocate making Bitcoin's block size limit infinite...
Satoshi never imposed a block size limit in the beginning. There was something like a 32mb network message limit, but that is it. What is your point?
Satoshi also:

That is a red herring of an argument at best. For those who believe Satoshi is a god as you so finely put it, you missed the clear and obvious argument that it was Satoshi that introduced the 1mb block size limit. However, "who" introduced the change has nothing to do with my argument. The fact is that it is an arbitrary limitation that only constrains things and does not really solve the flooding problem. It only limits it.

Active... 2x AntMiner S7-LN and 5x AntMiner U1
Collecting Dust... 2x ASICMiner Block Erupter Cube, 4x AntMiner S3, 4x AntMiner S1, GAW Black Widow, and ZeusMiner Thunder X6
Coin Interests... BTC, LTC, DOGE
jtoomim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 680


View Profile WWW
June 20, 2017, 05:07:14 AM
 #15499

Perhaps we should use more formal improvement channels, such as GitHub?
Been there, done that.

I think the proper response to our little flamewar is to bring popcorn.

veqtrus makes some good technical comments and observations at times, and I value his contributions. However, when he trolls me on how my fork is gonna doom p2pool to a centralized future, I think the proper response is to troll him back, laugh it off, and move on.

I'm not very good at trolling, though. Maybe I should ask Kano for a lesson.

Hosting bitcoin miners for $65 to $80/kW/month on clean, cheap hydro power.
http://Toom.im
veqtrus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80


View Profile WWW
June 20, 2017, 08:17:26 AM
 #15500

The fact is that it is an arbitrary limitation that only constrains things and does not really solve the flooding problem. It only limits it.
Indeed, the solution is to reserve the blockchain mostly for higher value transaction which can afford higher fees and move low value transactions which don't require the security of the blockchain to off-chain systems, preferably decentralized ones like LN.

P2Pool donation button | Bitrated user: veqtrus.
Pages: « 1 ... 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 [775] 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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!