Bitcoin Forum
August 19, 2018, 05:54:44 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.2  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 [1055] 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 ... 1145 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool  (Read 4340033 times)
VeritasSapere
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 20, 2015, 10:31:13 PM
 #21081

I suggest that everyone should read Mike Hearn's article on why we should fork. This is a crossroads in history and I hope that we collectively will make the right decision. So think carefully and please be rational and apply reason and decide for your self what kind of a Bitcoin you want.

https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1534701284
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534701284

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534701284
Reply with quote  #2

1534701284
Report to moderator
chek2fire
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1045


Ιntergalactic Conciliator


View Profile
August 21, 2015, 10:27:02 AM
 #21082

I dont want to be part in this BitcoinXT nonsense and after 3 years i have drop machine from this pool. All the people that didnt support the fork of Bitcoin and the destruction of this cryptocurrency revolution must stop mining in slush pool asap

http://www.bitcoin-gr.org
4411 804B 0181 F444 ADBD 01D4 0664 00E4 37E7 228E
larry12
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 220
Merit: 100


View Profile
August 21, 2015, 01:30:28 PM
 #21083

me too, half of my hash is there, i dont wanna give a chance to XT so my miners are not there right now, bad move Slush....

#Bitcoin The future is here.
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 683
Merit: 501


View Profile
August 21, 2015, 02:09:15 PM
 #21084

Can you both read?
By default your hashrate is a vote for Core/QT not XT.
If you want to support XT, you need to change your miners to different port.

Mega Crypto Polis - www.MegaCryptoPolis.com
BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
VeritasSapere
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 21, 2015, 04:53:00 PM
 #21085

Can you both read?
By default your hashrate is a vote for Core/QT not XT.
If you want to support XT, you need to change your miners to different port.
Indeed Slush just gives us the choice, that is a good thing. Also hard forks like this are sometimes necessary for Bitcoin to remain free and decentralized, so it is good that Slush supports it. The ability to hard fork in this way represents the check that we have against the power that a core development team could hold. If you think that we should never hard fork it is the equivalent of saying that the core developers have absolute power over the development of the Bitcoin protocol. Or as Mike Hearn said "they believe that the only mechanism that Bitcoin has to keep them in check should never be used".

https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1
chek2fire
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1045


Ιntergalactic Conciliator


View Profile
August 21, 2015, 04:58:15 PM
 #21086

Can you both read?
By default your hashrate is a vote for Core/QT not XT.
If you want to support XT, you need to change your miners to different port.
Indeed Slush just gives us the choice, that is a good thing. Also hard forks like this are sometimes necessary for Bitcoin to remain free and decentralized, so it is good that Slush supports it. The ability to hard fork in this way represents the check that we have against the power that a core development team could hold. If you think that we should never hard fork it is the equivalent of saying that the core developers have absolute power over the development of the Bitcoin protocol. Or as Mike Hearn said "they believe that the only mechanism that Bitcoin has to keep them in check should never be used".

https://medium.com/@octskyward/why-is-bitcoin-forking-d647312d22c1

and to be against the power of the core developer team the solution is to give the power to only one developer Tongue Ok.. yeah..  Huh

http://www.bitcoin-gr.org
4411 804B 0181 F444 ADBD 01D4 0664 00E4 37E7 228E
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
August 21, 2015, 05:09:58 PM
 #21087

and to be against the power of the core developer team the solution is to give the power to only one developer Tongue Ok.. yeah..  Huh

One can be right amongst a crowd, let alone a "team" of five, but that is besides the point (and the choice offered by slush). That debate, though, belongs to another thread.

The vote offered by slush is an inspired one on many levels, given that there are options available to the one peddled by the "majority core dev team" (and known to the entire bitcoin world). By the looks of it, more hashes than not seem to agree with the "minority of 2" in the bitcoin core developement "team" (pool rate is now past 17PH and growing ..... not to mention improving luck!).

chek2fire
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1045


Ιntergalactic Conciliator


View Profile
August 21, 2015, 05:12:51 PM
 #21088

One to rule them all. this is not bitcoin. You just describe something else. If you dont like how bitcoin works why you dont create an altcoin with your rules and isntead of that you try to capture and hijack bitcoin?

http://www.bitcoin-gr.org
4411 804B 0181 F444 ADBD 01D4 0664 00E4 37E7 228E
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2548
Merit: 1052


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
August 21, 2015, 11:46:38 PM
 #21089

There are only 3 "XT blocks" in the last 500 - all 3 slush - and only slush.
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/blocks/1

Edit: well actually it is 2 (as I first posted) the 3rd one is just outside 500 Smiley

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
VeritasSapere
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 22, 2015, 03:16:12 AM
 #21090

One to rule them all. this is not bitcoin. You just describe something else. If you dont like how bitcoin works why you dont create an altcoin with your rules and isntead of that you try to capture and hijack bitcoin?
That is how Bitcoin works, actually being intrinsically against a hard fork is more like trying to capture and hijack Bitcoin. Furthermore increasing the block size is more in line with the origonal vision of Satoshi Nakamoto so it would be more accurate to say that the Core developers should create an alt coin instead. The ability to hard fork ensures that the development can ultimately be decided on by the users and the miners of Bitcoin.

I support BIP101 because I think that bigger blocks are better then being “forced” to rely on third party payment processors, which is what not increasing the block size would lead to.

To put it simply, if we do not increase the block size it will be more expensive and less people will be able to use it, that is to transact on the main chain directly. It would be better to keep the network as inclusive and inexpensive as possible from the users perspective since it would be more important to increase mass adoption before developing a fee market, since the block reward is still high and adoption is still relatively low.

However if we increase the block size then it will be less expensive and more people will be able to use it. I think that increasing the block size is the most decentralized option, even if full nodes will only be able to be hosted on powerful computers, since miners do not run full nodes, the pools do. I do not think that confining Bitcoin to the role of a clearing house so to speak would necessary provide enough incentive for mining far into the future if we want Bitcoin to be the largest and therefore the most secure proof of work blockchain. So think carefully and please be rational and use reason and decide for your self what kind of a Bitcoin you want.
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
August 22, 2015, 05:11:02 AM
 #21091

There are only 3 "XT blocks" in the last 500 - all 3 slush - and only slush.
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/blocks/1

Edit: well actually it is 2 (as I first posted) the 3rd one is just outside 500 Smiley
Moot point (and offtopic).
There are many more (bigger) 8MB blocks, and not many from slush, actually none from slush. (now go spam somewhere else!)

Jake36
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 331
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 22, 2015, 05:46:36 AM
 #21092

and to be against the power of the core developer team the solution is to give the power to only one developer Tongue Ok.. yeah..  Huh

One can be right amongst a crowd, let alone a "team" of five, but that is besides the point (and the choice offered by slush). That debate, though, belongs to another thread.

The vote offered by slush is an inspired one on many levels, given that there are options available to the one peddled by the "majority core dev team" (and known to the entire bitcoin world). By the looks of it, more hashes than not seem to agree with the "minority of 2" in the bitcoin core developement "team" (pool rate is now past 17PH and growing ..... not to mention improving luck!).

Is there a break down some place on the pool as to where that increased hash is pointing to?  Like 10PH voting yes, 7PH voting no?
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
August 22, 2015, 05:49:23 AM
 #21093

Is there a break down some place on the pool as to where that increased hash is pointing to?  Like 10PH voting yes, 7PH voting no?

Not that I am aware of, but it could be there.

kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2548
Merit: 1052


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
August 22, 2015, 07:55:10 AM
 #21094

There are only 3 "XT blocks" in the last 500 - all 3 slush - and only slush.
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/blocks/1

Edit: well actually it is 2 (as I first posted) the 3rd one is just outside 500 Smiley
Moot point (and offtopic).
There are many more (bigger) 8MB blocks, and not many from slush, actually none from slush. (now go spam somewhere else!)
Sigh - so you don't even understand what that means?

Slush is the only pool voting for XT.

The format the other pools are using for the blocksize is the BIP100 format.

BIP100 gives block size control to miners and pools by vote - changeable as votes change over time - go read up about BIP100.

XT - BIP101 - gives block size control to Hearne and Gavin - not to the pools and miners.

So basically you are voting to give control to those two, rather than the bitcoin network.

Oh well.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
August 22, 2015, 08:24:26 AM
 #21095

There are only 3 "XT blocks" in the last 500 - all 3 slush - and only slush.
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/blocks/1

Edit: well actually it is 2 (as I first posted) the 3rd one is just outside 500 Smiley
Moot point (and offtopic).
There are many more (bigger) 8MB blocks, and not many from slush, actually none from slush. (now go spam somewhere else!)
<nonsense_snip> ...</nonsense_snip>
XT - BIP101 - gives block size control to Hearne and Gavin - not to the pools and miners.
So basically you are voting to give control to those two, rather than the bitcoin network.

Oh well.

Nope. You are wrong again and you've taken the opportunity to spam even more.
So, I'll draw a clean line and stop feeding this troll.

TheRealSteve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500

FUN > ROI


View Profile
August 22, 2015, 12:39:52 PM
 #21096

Is there a break down some place on the pool as to where that increased hash is pointing to?  Like 10PH voting yes, 7PH voting no?
Nope.  You could make an extremely rough estimate.  Block 370434 was their first BIP101 block.  Including that block they have since mined 31 blocks.  3 of which were BIP101.  That's 9.68%.  9.68% of the 15.93Ph/s currently shown on the site ~= 1.54Ph/s.  Statistically  (given the sample set) that's an optimistic estimate - could be lower, could be higher.

larry12
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 220
Merit: 100


View Profile
August 22, 2015, 05:02:17 PM
 #21097

Can you both read?
By default your hashrate is a vote for Core/QT not XT.
If you want to support XT, you need to change your miners to different port.


to read what?
i dont like XT idea, slush's pool support it so goodbye slush.....

#Bitcoin The future is here.
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 683
Merit: 501


View Profile
August 22, 2015, 05:34:26 PM
 #21098

Can you both read?
By default your hashrate is a vote for Core/QT not XT.
If you want to support XT, you need to change your miners to different port.
to read what?
i dont like XT idea, slush's pool support it so goodbye slush.....
He does not support it! He gives us the choice to (NOT) support it which is completely different ... Stay on the old port and vote against XT what more simple?!

I think that increasing the block size is the most decentralized option, even if full nodes will only be able to be hosted on powerful computers, since miners do not run full nodes, the pools do.

If you don't own/control your private key - you don't own your Bitcoins. You need your own full node or you need to trust someone's else full node, while Bitcoin's whole idea (under the word decentralised) is Trust no one

Mega Crypto Polis - www.MegaCryptoPolis.com
BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
RealMalatesta
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 826
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 22, 2015, 05:38:38 PM
 #21099

There are only 3 "XT blocks" in the last 500 - all 3 slush - and only slush.
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/blocks/1

Edit: well actually it is 2 (as I first posted) the 3rd one is just outside 500 Smiley
Moot point (and offtopic).
There are many more (bigger) 8MB blocks, and not many from slush, actually none from slush. (now go spam somewhere else!)
<nonsense_snip> ...</nonsense_snip>
XT - BIP101 - gives block size control to Hearne and Gavin - not to the pools and miners.
So basically you are voting to give control to those two, rather than the bitcoin network.

Oh well.

Nope. You are wrong again and you've taken the opportunity to spam even more.
So, I'll draw a clean line and stop feeding this troll.

Would you care to elaborate? I think it is an interesting question and do not see this as trolling.
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
August 22, 2015, 06:35:49 PM
 #21100

Would you care to elaborate? I think it is an interesting question and do not see this as trolling.

The vote on slush is, and I quote: Right now, every Slush Pool miner can vote for larger blocksize.
So clearly (and if you cared to have read the last couple of pages here), it is not about XT, BIP100, BIP101 or whatever. Just bigger block size, which can be achieved any of different ways, including XT.

And no, not all other pools mine bigger (than standard 1MB) blocks, though some (mainly Chinese) pools mine 8MB blocks. The troll would have you believe otherwise.

Additionally (and as far as I am aware), only slush has ACTUALLY offered the choice to users to vote for bigger blocks.

That much the troll knows, though he keeps trying to whip up some kind of negativity towards slush by attributing patently false aims to slush in a veiled attempt to get miners to elope to his his own pool.

Pages: « 1 ... 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 [1055] 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 ... 1145 »
  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!