errkal
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 16
Merit: 0
|
 |
July 12, 2014, 06:02:19 PM |
|
And back below 1PH  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bitcoin software, network, and concept is called "Bitcoin" with a capitalized "B". Bitcoin currency units are called "bitcoins" with a lowercase "b" -- this is often abbreviated BTC.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sconklin321
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 543
Merit: 250
Orjinal üyelik ToRiKaN banlanalı asır ol
|
|
July 12, 2014, 07:36:58 PM |
|
Wow did someone big just join the network? We're up to almost a Petahash currently.
I was just going to say... it has been jumping from 800th to 500 th back to 900 th down to 450 th and now 1 PH...? And my payouts are dropping big time Well we when your payouts drop like that the payout frequency corrects it, because at 1 PH we were at an 18-19 hr expected block time, not 1d 7hr. So in the end you make the same. Larger and less frequent, or smaller and more frequent, I'd actually vote for smaller and more frequent as that lowers variance. So each share would get 3-4 payouts, not 2-3. |
|
|
|
bryonp
Member
Offline
Activity: 85
Merit: 10
|
|
July 12, 2014, 08:08:38 PM |
|
Wow did someone big just join the network? We're up to almost a Petahash currently.
I was just going to say... it has been jumping from 800th to 500 th back to 900 th down to 450 th and now 1 PH...? And my payouts are dropping big time Well we when your payouts drop like that the payout frequency corrects it, because at 1 PH we were at an 18-19 hr expected block time, not 1d 7hr. So in the end you make the same. Larger and less frequent, or smaller and more frequent, I'd actually vote for smaller and more frequent as that lowers variance. So each share would get 3-4 payouts, not 2-3. Yes I see that and would like to see it .......... |
|
|
|
|
|
raskul
|
|
July 12, 2014, 08:10:41 PM |
|
anyone using a neptune on P2Pool? what is your stability like? shares OK?
|
tips 1APp826DqjJBdsAeqpEstx6Q8hD4urac8a
|
|
|
|
Hunterbunter
|
|
July 12, 2014, 11:02:02 PM |
|
The 51% on p2pool would not be an issue.
All that means is that they would get to pick the criteria for transactions included in 51% of the blocks found by the pool. If I'm PETAMINE I'm going to want the juicy transactions just like any other miner...
I'm just trying to understand the technical reason behind this. I've heard a lot of people say "the share chain is vulnerable to a 51% attack just like the block chain", as a reason not to put a lot of hashpower...is it just misinformation? |
|
|
|
|
sconklin321
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 543
Merit: 250
Orjinal üyelik ToRiKaN banlanalı asır ol
|
|
July 13, 2014, 12:15:16 AM |
|
The 51% on p2pool would not be an issue.
All that means is that they would get to pick the criteria for transactions included in 51% of the blocks found by the pool. If I'm PETAMINE I'm going to want the juicy transactions just like any other miner...
I'm just trying to understand the technical reason behind this. I've heard a lot of people say "the share chain is vulnerable to a 51% attack just like the block chain", as a reason not to put a lot of hashpower...is it just misinformation? Well lets follow eleuthria's example, lets assume someone has an absolutely horrible connection, solves a share just behind, or the same time as someone else, but their node hasn't received the new share to the chain. They now enter a race and the next share solved is the one that creates the chain and orphans the other share. They have a 50% or better chance of solving that share and forcing the network to accept their share as the valid one. Now this could result in them finding a higher share % than they would normally have. Now let's same someone is trying to do this intentionally, if they had 50% or better of the network hashrate, they could more or less reject all shares that aren't theirs, effectively increase everyone else's Orphan/DOA shares and taking a much larger % of the shares that were solved. Effectively, P2Pool is subject to all the downfalls of the bitcoin network, but it's a much smaller network, that if you could get all of the current hardware to work properly on, you could more easily take 51% or better of the network's hashrate since our hashrate is only 600TH/s. Let's say for instance cex.io wanted to hide their network hashrate, if they could get their miners to work on our network, they could effectively mine on P2Pool. Making the difficulty skyrocket and they could modify the code with the sharechain to only accept their shares, they rendering everyone else's work effectively useless, while making it impossible for the small to midsized miners to mine on it. |
|
|
|
sconklin321
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 543
Merit: 250
Orjinal üyelik ToRiKaN banlanalı asır ol
|
|
July 13, 2014, 04:17:25 AM |
|
Wow, aren't we lucky, scrypt updates and a fixed formatting in file. What an amazing update!!! It'd be nice to see some actual updates applied for bitcoin. Let's post a month ago crying about donations going down and then not support the group you just whined to at all. Glad I didn't decide to turn my donations back on and I won't until we get someone running this project that can actually do some meaningful updates.
|
|
|
|
|
IYFTech
|
|
July 13, 2014, 09:05:36 AM |
|
Wow, aren't we lucky, scrypt updates and a fixed formatting in file. What an amazing update!!! It'd be nice to see some actual updates applied for bitcoin. Let's post a month ago crying about donations going down and then not support the group you just whined to at all. Glad I didn't decide to turn my donations back on and I won't until we get someone running this project that can actually do some meaningful updates.
Exactly - this is what I said when I saw the "updates"  Great. More alt-coins that can't be mined....... Really, wtf is he doing faffing around with alt-coin additions when there are far more urgent things to be done? Concentrate on the btc side of p2pool - there are plenty of forks for alt-coins already, ffs. Waste of time & space. |
|
|
|
windpath
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
|
|
July 13, 2014, 02:23:31 PM |
|
Petahash predictions
With the network running at roughly 140 petahashes per second, moderator Jez asked the mining panel how much hashing power they foresee by year’s end. Here’s what they had to say:
Timo Hanke: 600 PH/s.
Naveen Sherwani: 350-400 PH/s.
Dave Carlson: 350-400 PH/s.
Marc Aafjes: More than 600 PH/s. http://www.coindesk.com/coinsummit-day-two-mining-superpowers-51-challenge/ |
|
|
|
|
|
PatMan
|
|
July 13, 2014, 02:29:56 PM |
|
Petahash predictions
With the network running at roughly 140 petahashes per second, moderator Jez asked the mining panel how much hashing power they foresee by year’s end. Here’s what they had to say:
Timo Hanke: 600 PH/s.
Naveen Sherwani: 350-400 PH/s.
Dave Carlson: 350-400 PH/s.
Marc Aafjes: More than 600 PH/s. http://www.coindesk.com/coinsummit-day-two-mining-superpowers-51-challenge/And none of it usable with p2pool due to lack of compatibility....... |
|
|
|
windpath
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
|
|
July 13, 2014, 02:46:38 PM |
|
Petahash predictions
With the network running at roughly 140 petahashes per second, moderator Jez asked the mining panel how much hashing power they foresee by year’s end. Here’s what they had to say:
Timo Hanke: 600 PH/s.
Naveen Sherwani: 350-400 PH/s.
Dave Carlson: 350-400 PH/s.
Marc Aafjes: More than 600 PH/s. http://www.coindesk.com/coinsummit-day-two-mining-superpowers-51-challenge/And none of it usable with p2pool due to lack of compatibility....... Pat, I get your frustration, but stating that "none" of it is compatible is just blatantly false. Spondoolies gear is working fine and Bitmain has assured us S3s will be compatible... There are many other pieces of mining hardware that work just fine on p2pool... In fact the only 2 pieces I'm aware of that don't work as expected are the S2 and BitFury, and that stinks, but it's hardly all encompassing... |
|
|
|
|
mdude77
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 13, 2014, 03:01:59 PM |
|
Petahash predictions
With the network running at roughly 140 petahashes per second, moderator Jez asked the mining panel how much hashing power they foresee by year’s end. Here’s what they had to say:
Timo Hanke: 600 PH/s.
Naveen Sherwani: 350-400 PH/s.
Dave Carlson: 350-400 PH/s.
Marc Aafjes: More than 600 PH/s. http://www.coindesk.com/coinsummit-day-two-mining-superpowers-51-challenge/And none of it usable with p2pool due to lack of compatibility....... Pat, I get your frustration, but stating that "none" of it is compatible is just blatantly false. Spondoolies gear is working fine and Bitmain has assured us S3s will be compatible... There are many other pieces of mining hardware that work just fine on p2pool... In fact the only 2 pieces I'm aware of that don't work as expected are the S2 and BitFury, and that stinks, but it's hardly all encompassing... The silence from Bitmain makes me skeptical the S3s will work with p2pool. Especially since the requests to them came very late in their development, if not at the end. Personally, I'll believe it when I see it. M |
I mine at Kano's Pool because it pays the best and is completely transparent! Come join me! |
|
|
windpath
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
|
|
July 13, 2014, 03:07:24 PM |
|
Reserved for updates and FAQ
FAQ
1. Will S3 support p2pool?
The simple answer is we will. Bitmain has a very sincere interesting with p2pool, and we have invest human resource into this area. Sadly our firmware may not be able to give you a firm yes that we support p2pool right now, but we promise we will contribute much more to the p2pool mining idea than most of those who support p2pool mining well already.
|
|
|
|
|
|
IYFTech
|
|
July 13, 2014, 03:28:13 PM |
|
windpath, I think we're all aware of what Bitmain said, it's what they do that's important. Better to post on their thread with the rest of us to keep the pressure on them rather than copying their posts here I think eh? Also, there is far more hardware that doesn't work with p2pool than there is that does work. Anything less than 200gh will very soon become obsolete with p2pool, if it isn't already. S1's, chilis & older asic hardware won't be worthwhile running - which happen to be p2pools backbone. The minimum requirement will soon be more like 500gh in order to get any kind of return. Maybe setting up a table of p2pool compatible hardware would be handy - the do's v the don'ts - as obviously the stuff listed on the p2pool wiki is wildly out of date - it was probably updated the last time p2pool was...... |
|
|
|
windpath
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
|
|
July 13, 2014, 03:59:29 PM |
|
Agreed on keeping up the pressure, have about six posts already in their various threads, I suspect we won't hear anything from them till they ship, hopefully the 14th...
I guess my point is they said they would make it happen and they have not let me down yet...
Hardware reaching EOL is a fact of mining, right now I see plenty of regular payouts @ the 40 GH/s level.
That number will continue to rise as the network rate increases...
But statements that "none" or "most" hardware is not compatible will do nothing but scare new miners away from p2pool, an accurate list of what works, what does not, and why would be a great resource...
|
|
|
|
|
bryonp
Member
Offline
Activity: 85
Merit: 10
|
|
July 13, 2014, 07:33:11 PM |
|
Hey Guys... A bit off topic... what wallet do you think is the best to hold coin? I was keeping everything in coinbase, but recently found that that is not that wise???
Thanks for anyones input...
Bryon
|
|
|
|
|
windpath
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1258
Merit: 1027
|
|
July 13, 2014, 07:42:03 PM |
|
Hey Guys... A bit off topic... what wallet do you think is the best to hold coin? I was keeping everything in coinbase, but recently found that that is not that wise???
Thanks for anyones input...
Bryon
There are a few great options, and I'm sure more opinions... I like Armory, and it does require bitcoind on the same machine: https://bitcoinarmory.com |
|
|
|
|
|
psahx
|
|
July 13, 2014, 08:09:32 PM |
|
Hey Guys... A bit off topic... what wallet do you think is the best to hold coin? I was keeping everything in coinbase, but recently found that that is not that wise???
Thanks for anyones input...
Bryon
There are a few great options, and I'm sure more opinions... I like Armory, and it does require bitcoind on the same machine: https://bitcoinarmory.comExactly. If you have enough space to keep the blockchain. If you have not got so much space or have bad connection, use MultiBit. But, again, I would recommend a wallet, that has a local blockchain copy. Use Armory if you can. |
|
|
|
|
bryonp
Member
Offline
Activity: 85
Merit: 10
|
|
July 13, 2014, 08:12:56 PM
Last edit: July 13, 2014, 08:55:14 PM by bryonp |
|
Hey Guys... A bit off topic... what wallet do you think is the best to hold coin? I was keeping everything in coinbase, but recently found that that is not that wise???
Thanks for anyones input...
Bryon
There are a few great options, and I'm sure more opinions... I like Armory, and it does require bitcoind on the same machine: https://bitcoinarmory.comExactly. If you have enough space to keep the blockchain. If you have not got so much space or have bad connection, use MultiBit. But, again, I would recommend a wallet, that has a local blockchain copy. Use Armory if you can. I appreciate the info... OK now ... I have Armory installed, but it wants to stop my core from running and thats what I am using on the p2pool service.... What is the appropriate thing to do? Put my wallet on a different computer? No really an option these days....... Thanks again for any advise... Bryon |
|
|
|
|
Carlton Banks
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3071
|
|
July 13, 2014, 10:02:07 PM |
|
I have Armory installed, but it wants to stop my core from running and thats what I am using on the p2pool service....
What is the appropriate thing to do?
Don't run your Armory wallet on the same machine as p2pool  There is a setting somewhere in Armory for it to use a running copy of Bitcoin Core instead of trying to run it's own copy |
Vires in numeris
|
|
|
|
