|
jamesc760
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 02:11:28 AM |
|
Why is that Chinese English font so damn ugly? Every time I visit some Chinese page - it's there. Do they know any better?
don't be a hater. pretty soon Chinese will own your country. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even if you use Bitcoin through Tor, the way transactions are handled by the network makes anonymity difficult to achieve. Do not expect your transactions to be anonymous unless you really know what you're doing.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
|
June 20, 2013, 02:32:00 AM |
|
Just got this emailed to me from Avalon. http://imgur.com/a/fqpMEFrom those pictures, any drop in network hash rate is only temporary. so where is the equipment to make the chips that they havent made yet? |
|
|
|
|
Smerks
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 0
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 04:59:17 AM |
|
Can someone possibly explain why I can no longer mine on Slush's pool, is this error related to the DDOS? Im using GUIMiner with these flags ( -v -w 256 -f 40 ) on my HD7970. I get the below then it just hangs, I can mine my backup fine but since earlier today I cannot mine slush.
2013-06-20 00:55:23: Listener for "Smerks Slush" started
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, started OpenCL miner on platform 0, device 0 (Tahiti)
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, checking for stratum...
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, no response to getwork, using as stratum
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, No JSON object could be decoded
2013-06-20 00:55:35: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:35, Failed to subscribe
2013-06-20 00:55:37: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:37, IO errors - 1, tolerance 2
|
|
|
|
|
Marduk
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 37
Merit: 0
|
|
June 20, 2013, 05:44:53 AM |
|
Can someone possibly explain why I can no longer mine on Slush's pool, is this error related to the DDOS? Im using GUIMiner with these flags ( -v -w 256 -f 40 ) on my HD7970. I get the below then it just hangs, I can mine my backup fine but since earlier today I cannot mine slush.
2013-06-20 00:55:23: Listener for "Smerks Slush" started
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, started OpenCL miner on platform 0, device 0 (Tahiti)
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, checking for stratum...
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, no response to getwork, using as stratum
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, No JSON object could be decoded
2013-06-20 00:55:35: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:35, Failed to subscribe
2013-06-20 00:55:37: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:37, IO errors - 1, tolerance 2
Don't use api2.bitcoin.cz:8332. I don't think that address is active anymore. Connect to stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333. |
|
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
|
June 20, 2013, 05:51:29 AM |
|
Can someone possibly explain why I can no longer mine on Slush's pool, is this error related to the DDOS? Im using GUIMiner with these flags ( -v -w 256 -f 40 ) on my HD7970. I get the below then it just hangs, I can mine my backup fine but since earlier today I cannot mine slush.
2013-06-20 00:55:23: Listener for "Smerks Slush" started
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, started OpenCL miner on platform 0, device 0 (Tahiti)
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, checking for stratum...
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, no response to getwork, using as stratum
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, No JSON object could be decoded
2013-06-20 00:55:35: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:35, Failed to subscribe
2013-06-20 00:55:37: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:37, IO errors - 1, tolerance 2
Why -f 40? isnt that knocking 20+mh/s off? also I dont believe -v does anything for 7x series cards direct ip's are below if your resolution is bad Name: stratum.bitcoin.cz Addresses: 54.225.117.74 95.211.52.40 54.215.3.101 |
|
|
|
|
Smerks
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 0
|
|
June 20, 2013, 05:54:24 AM |
|
The -f 40 is for when Im using the machine to make it more responsive. Can someone possibly explain why I can no longer mine on Slush's pool, is this error related to the DDOS? Im using GUIMiner with these flags ( -v -w 256 -f 40 ) on my HD7970. I get the below then it just hangs, I can mine my backup fine but since earlier today I cannot mine slush.
2013-06-20 00:55:23: Listener for "Smerks Slush" started
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, started OpenCL miner on platform 0, device 0 (Tahiti)
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, checking for stratum...
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, no response to getwork, using as stratum
2013-06-20 00:55:25: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:25, No JSON object could be decoded
2013-06-20 00:55:35: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:35, Failed to subscribe
2013-06-20 00:55:37: Listener for "Smerks Slush": api2.bitcoin.cz:8332 20/06/2013 00:55:37, IO errors - 1, tolerance 2
Why -f 40? isnt that knocking 20+mh/s off? also I dont believe -v does anything for 7x series cards direct ip's are below if your resolution is bad Name: stratum.bitcoin.cz Addresses: 54.225.117.74 95.211.52.40 54.215.3.101 |
|
|
|
|
|
Tamis
|
|
June 20, 2013, 08:19:57 AM |
|
Just got this emailed to me from Avalon. http://imgur.com/a/fqpMEFrom those pictures, any drop in network hash rate is only temporary. Very impressive setup ! |
|
|
|
|
|
PrintMule
|
|
June 20, 2013, 08:35:10 AM |
|
Why is that Chinese English font so damn ugly? Every time I visit some Chinese page - it's there. Do they know any better?
don't be a hater. pretty soon Chinese will own your country. I hope they start to use some other font by the time that happens |
|
|
|
BTCvFiat
Member
Offline
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
|
|
June 20, 2013, 09:17:30 AM |
|
Why is that Chinese English font so damn ugly? Every time I visit some Chinese page - it's there. Do they know any better?
don't be a hater. pretty soon Chinese will own your country. I see your funny money and raise you with the dictionary. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/nationalizationedit. Back on topic please? |
Tips? Reply/PM or send coins to:
BTC: 17hVfLh3AUWWqxzo2UeVDmevntSfpc2wqB - LTC: LTbyb2dPBsPMbs1sXT5db1wainGuJ61xSV - WDC: WjEvTJtj5QGNHzXSJCJLcRYJeHzaRhRGtM
|
|
|
threedrules
Member
Offline
Activity: 102
Merit: 10
|
|
June 20, 2013, 12:27:21 PM |
|
how come block 242334 is invalid?
does this happen often?
|
|
|
|
|
EasyQuest
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 198
Merit: 100
Brony Bitcoin, Litecoin Miner
|
|
June 20, 2013, 12:54:34 PM |
|
how come block 242334 is invalid?
does this happen often?
Not has much as it uses to be. this happens when we "found" a block and another pool found the same block and beats us to it, but orphan blocks are rare on slush. |
|
|
|
|
|
bspurloc
|
|
June 20, 2013, 01:25:47 PM |
|
how come block 242334 is invalid?
does this happen often?
in simplest terms.... if u want a more exacting reason just hold on I'm sure someone would love to say no I'm wrong its this. when a block is found it needs to be communicated it was completed, when delays occur to do that another may complete it also, causing 1 of them to be invalid. 1 or 2 a week seems the norm more than that means it should be looked at more closely. |
|
|
|
|
|
digital
|
|
June 20, 2013, 01:30:43 PM |
|
how come block 242334 is invalid?
does this happen often?
in simplest terms.... if u want a more exacting reason just hold on I'm sure someone would love to say no I'm wrong its this. when a block is found it needs to be communicated it was completed, when delays occur to do that another may complete it also, causing 1 of them to be invalid. 1 or 2 a week seems the norm more than that means it should be looked at more closely. Basically right on the money. I would just word it differently. When a block is found, it has to be reported to the network. Even though that reporting is very quick it still takes time. And in rare instances, another pool/miner will think they found that same block in the time between the original pool/miner finding it and the network getting the report. When that happens, the second pool/miner to find it will get it marked as invalid. |
If I help you out: 17QatvSdciyv2zsdAbphDEUzST1S6x46c3
References (bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=): 50051.20 50051.100 53668.0 53788.0 53571.0 53571.0 52212.0 50729.0 114804.0 115468 78106 69061 58572 54747
|
|
|
|
trasla
|
|
June 20, 2013, 01:42:39 PM |
|
Actually, if i got right how it works, the time when the block is found does not determine which one is invalid.
It depends on which block will have the next one based on it.
Lets say one pool finds block 17a and one finds 17b. This has to happen in a small time frame, because if either pool had known about the 17 block, it would have stopped working on nr 17 and started working on 18. But it does not matter which one was found first. Both pools relay the found block, so we have some nodes who get notified about 17a first, and disregard messages about 17b cause they already know a valid 17 block, and some the other way round. Some nodes (pools) now work on 18 based on 17a, some work on 18 based on 17b.
As soon as a node finds 18, others get notified and start working on 19. This chain contains either 17a or 17b, the one contained is valid, cause the chain with the other one will not get any longer, cause pools will not work on a 18 based on it, but on a 19 based on the longer chain.
That said, the statistics page on slush pool probably just counts down the block numbers for the number of confirmations needed.
In theory, one could check whether the block is actually contained in the longest chain and display "invalid" way before the 100 has counted down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
digital
|
|
June 20, 2013, 02:07:33 PM |
|
Actually, if i got right how it works, the time when the block is found does not determine which one is invalid.
It depends on which block will have the next one based on it.
Lets say one pool finds block 17a and one finds 17b. This has to happen in a small time frame, because if either pool had known about the 17 block, it would have stopped working on nr 17 and started working on 18. But it does not matter which one was found first. Both pools relay the found block, so we have some nodes who get notified about 17a first, and disregard messages about 17b cause they already know a valid 17 block, and some the other way round. Some nodes (pools) now work on 18 based on 17a, some work on 18 based on 17b.
As soon as a node finds 18, others get notified and start working on 19. This chain contains either 17a or 17b, the one contained is valid, cause the chain with the other one will not get any longer, cause pools will not work on a 18 based on it, but on a 19 based on the longer chain.
That said, the statistics page on slush pool probably just counts down the block numbers for the number of confirmations needed.
In theory, one could check whether the block is actually contained in the longest chain and display "invalid" way before the 100 has counted down.
I've never heard it described that way before. And if that's true, then the chain forks after every block found.... |
If I help you out: 17QatvSdciyv2zsdAbphDEUzST1S6x46c3
References (bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=): 50051.20 50051.100 53668.0 53788.0 53571.0 53571.0 52212.0 50729.0 114804.0 115468 78106 69061 58572 54747
|
|
|
|
trasla
|
|
June 20, 2013, 02:15:14 PM |
|
Why should the chain fork after every block?
If a block is found, nodes get notified about it, stop working on the block they were working on and start working on the next one. With enough time between new blocks found, a fork would never occur.
A fork does only occur, if any node finds a block and another nodes finds the same before getting to know about the first.
Though the first block is not necessarily the one who wins, probability is on its side, of course, because if its found earlier, more nodes might hear about that one first, and thus more pools will be working to expand the chain based on the early block instead of the later one. But if a node with fast connection to the one who found th later block heard about it first, and gets a (lucky) quick hit with the next one, the early block will be invalid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
digital
|
|
June 20, 2013, 02:20:09 PM |
|
Why should the chain fork after every block?
If a block is found, nodes get notified about it, stop working on the block they were working on and start working on the next one. With enough time between new blocks found, a fork would never occur.
A fork does only occur, if any node finds a block and another nodes finds the same before getting to know about the first.
Though the first block is not necessarily the one who wins, probability is on its side, of course, because if its found earlier, more nodes might hear about that one first, and thus more pools will be working to expand the chain based on the early block instead of the later one. But if a node with fast connection to the one who found th later block heard about it first, and gets a (lucky) quick hit with the next one, the early block will be invalid.
Yeah, I didn't actually mean every block found, but with every invalid block anyone ever finds, the chain forks. Even if it's only for a short while. interesting |
If I help you out: 17QatvSdciyv2zsdAbphDEUzST1S6x46c3
References (bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=): 50051.20 50051.100 53668.0 53788.0 53571.0 53571.0 52212.0 50729.0 114804.0 115468 78106 69061 58572 54747
|
|
|
|
trasla
|
|
June 20, 2013, 02:28:42 PM |
|
Yes, every invalid block is a fork, thats why it is invalid - it is not part of the longest chain. Those forks are usually just one block long, though. The chance for both sides of the fork to grow longer at the same time again is quite low. There is a picture illustrating this on wikipedia: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin#Block_Chain |
|
|
|
|
n0creativity
Member
Offline
Activity: 65
Merit: 10
|
|
June 20, 2013, 03:13:35 PM |
|
Just got this emailed to me from Avalon. http://imgur.com/a/fqpMEFrom those pictures, any drop in network hash rate is only temporary. And it's back... Oh well. On another note, I love how when slush starts finding blocks the hashrate jumps by 1,000 or more. I see it in my head like the idiots at the casino who watch someone hit jackpot on a slot machine and stand in line to play it because they think its "hot". I'm the guy who goes over to the machine they just lost on for an hour and make some quick money while the machine evens its payout ratio. |
|
|
|
|
|
desired_username
|
|
June 20, 2013, 03:15:27 PM |
|
Just got this emailed to me from Avalon. http://imgur.com/a/fqpMEFrom those pictures, any drop in network hash rate is only temporary. And it's back... Oh well. On another note, I love how when slush starts finding blocks the hashrate jumps by 1,000 or more. I see it in my head like the idiots at the casino who watch someone hit jackpot on a slot machine and stand in line to play it because they think its "hot". I'm the guy who goes over to the machine they just lost on for an hour and make some quick money while the machine evens its payout ratio. This. I can imagine how much time they waste monitoring pools all the time  |
|
|
|
|
|
