Bitcoin Forum
December 12, 2017, 06:38:10 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: The YACoin Superfun Premine Thread  (Read 8794 times)
WindMaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 347


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 06:02:37 AM
 #121

Anyone else notice this?

...

    static MapCheckpoints mapCheckpoints =
        boost::assign::map_list_of
        (     0, hashGenesisBlockOfficial )
        ( 15000, uint256("0x00000082cab82d04354692fac3b83d19cbe3c3ab4b73610d0e73397545eb012e"))

Pocopoco added a checkpoint via a GitHub pull despite not saying anything at all over here, and at block 15,000 no less.  Why?

I noticed pocopoco's git pull about a half hour after he did it.  I would guess that all (or a substantial portion) of his own mined blocks are before block 15,000, and he wanted to be sure no one could 51% Yacoin with enough CPU power (or GPU power) to rewrite the blockchain to a point early enough to impact his own coins.  Just my guess.
"I'm sure that in 20 years there will either be very large transaction volume or no volume." -- Satoshi
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513060690
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513060690

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513060690
Reply with quote  #2

1513060690
Report to moderator
1513060690
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513060690

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513060690
Reply with quote  #2

1513060690
Report to moderator
tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484



View Profile
May 10, 2013, 06:03:37 AM
 #122

Pocopoco added a checkpoint via a GitHub pull despite not saying anything at all over here, and at block 15,000 no less.  Why?

To mitigate 51% attack, no?

Possibly, it's hard to tell.  He might also be locking in blocks that are his own if he mined a bulk of them in the first 15k blocks.

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
jomay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 167


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 07:17:23 AM
 #123

I don't think the Dev has a GPU miner nor do I think he has a server farm, if he did no one else would've won any blocks when the binaries were posted. However if 6000 cores only constitutes 15% of the hash then something is fishy, the alts forum doesn't have 20,000 people reading it. Regardless the coin was doomed from the start, six second block times are fine if you're the Visa network paying for your storage, but at 35mb a day you can't very well tell gramma to send you money but "oh, it'll take you a week to download the block chain".

I already turned mine off. 500 watts an hour isn't worth it for 16 cents worth of coin.

Minor nitpick, but since it appears to be based on my report of the hash rate contribution from my 1560 server mining farm experience, it was quite a few more cores than 6000.  800 of the servers were IBM HS21 blade servers containing two Xeon E5450 processors which each have 4 cores, so each server had 8 cores, so 6400 cores for the main server farm.  A Xeon E5450 is pretty similar to a Core2 Quad but with significantly more cache memory tacked on.  The Amazon c1.xlarge instances have 8 cores worth of Xeon E5-2650's, though are shared servers.  Generally the 760 c1.xlarge instances performed at about 2/3 the hash rate of the dual E5450 servers, so we can probably call those equivalent to 2/3 of a dual E5450 server.

So, more accurate estimate would be that around 10450 cores (equivalent to Xeon E5450 cores) constituted about 15% of the hash rate at the time that I stopped mining when difficulty reached 0.1.

You are funny. But it gets on my nerve when people are not telling the truth.

1) I mined very successfully with a hexacore Intel i7 up until difficulty 0.1-0.2. From the number of blocks generated I estimated that I was 1/1000 - 1/600 of the network. Check my posts, I posted that when it happened, not when I felt bitter about not getting enough coins or in need to disprove you. Maybe your setup was wrong.

2) You show a pic of 1 blade rack on a table (!) and want us believe you have access to a whole blade center consuming >200kW power and hence costing 1000$ in power alone to operate per day? How much you'd have to sell your YACs for to be profitable?

3) Did you lose your job already? Seriously if you did what you claim you did, you should be worried! Blade centers like this are operated by companies with >>1.000-10.000 employees. I could have tried to use my employers compute blades (20x2x8 xeon cores). Your Infrastructure team must be morons if they have not seen the traffic/CPU etc and acted upon it.

4) you install possibly harmful software on company resources?!? And possibly disrupt company operations? For a few coins? WELL DONE DUDE!

BTC 1NoV8NFSB7eiuK2aABFtBTdUdXhbEdG7Ss
LTC LaFyWSfzKY7CKwwmbxhyf8S2iJvfT7JFtL YAC YKKwR5B64Z9ww971J42vEGVPaema623Tz6
jomay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 167


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 07:36:38 AM
 #124

Pocopoco added a checkpoint via a GitHub pull despite not saying anything at all over here, and at block 15,000 no less.  Why?

To mitigate 51% attack, no?

Possibly, it's hard to tell.  He might also be locking in blocks that are his own if he mined a bulk of them in the first 15k blocks.

This is getting more and more bizzarre. Do you argument the same way for checkpoints on the BTC and LTC networks? You don't like a checkpoint because of what? Because it prevents people to attack the network and steal coin? I would think this a very positive thing.

This is a young coin, so the fear of a 51% attack is real. Why would it be good if someone could do that?

BTW, pocopoco did announce the checkpoint in his original thread here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=196196.msg2083242#msg2083242. I rest my case. Stop being bitter if you feel that you've missed out.

If anything you can complain that the starting diff was too low (and that you were not online then, see my posts on "fairness"). There are ~2.34 Mio coins out by now. That still is much less than FTC (6.5 Mio) and CNC (5 Mio).

BTC 1NoV8NFSB7eiuK2aABFtBTdUdXhbEdG7Ss
LTC LaFyWSfzKY7CKwwmbxhyf8S2iJvfT7JFtL YAC YKKwR5B64Z9ww971J42vEGVPaema623Tz6
WindMaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 347


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 08:41:01 AM
 #125

You are funny. But it gets on my nerve when people are not telling the truth.

I suspect you're guessing here.  Do you have first-hand knowledge of my data center?  Edit - I had "1000 YAC is yours if you can even correctly guess which US state it's in" here, but then I posted a screen-shot which makes it obvious which timezone I'm in, which significantly cuts down on the number of states I could be in.


1) I mined very successfully with a hexacore Intel i7 up until difficulty 0.1-0.2. From the number of blocks generated I estimated that I was 1/1000 - 1/600 of the network. Check my posts, I posted that when it happened, not when I felt bitter about not getting enough coins or in need to disprove you. Maybe your setup was wrong.

Well, good for you and congratulations on your mining success.  I hope you profit greatly from your YAC fortune.  If my setup was wrong, I would've seen a significant number of orphaned blocks and/or would have achieved significantly lower hash rates than avg 300kH/sec per HS21 blade server and 200kH/sec per Amazon c1.xlarge instance.  The reality is, apparently I had very nearly the lowest orphan rate of anyone that has weighed in so far?  I bet that wasn't the result of misconfiguration, and instead happened because I tweaked the client source to form a low-latency mesh amongst my own servers forming a significant portion of the Yacoin network nodes and jacked up the outbound connection count.  Ami right?  :-)

I would imagine you started mining sooner than 8 hours after the launch of the coin, and didn't make your estimate based on your block generation rate right when difficulty reached 0.1.  Otherwise, if you were 1/1000th of the network hash power, you would've been successfully mining between 2 and 2.5 non-orphaned blocks per hour on your 6-core i7 at that point in time.  Or if you were 1/600th of the network hash power, you would've been successfully mining between 3 and 4 non-orphaned blocks per hour.  Is that your claim?  Or did you actually mean that from the coin launch until difficulty reached somewhere between 0.1 and 0.2, you mined between 1/600th and 1/1000th of the "moneysupply" mined by the client?  I would consider that quite possible if you started early, but that's significantly different than what I claimed was occurring when difficulty reached 0.1.


2) You show a pic of 1 blade rack on a table (!) and want us believe you have access to a whole blade center consuming >200kW power and hence costing 1000$ in power alone to operate per day? How much you'd have to sell your YACs for to be profitable?

Where is the table (!) in my photos?  It sure looks to me like I have the BladeCenter chassis visible in the photos very obviously mounted in a standard 19" rack.  Did you not see the other 3 photos?  It sorta sounds like you only saw the last of the 4.  If your point is that I did not share a photo showing 58 loaded BladeCenter chassis in a row of racks, you are correct, I did not share such a photo.  And I took the photos with such a ridiculously narrow depth of field.  I must be hiding something pretty interesting in the background that I wasn't willing to share with the world.  Guilty as charged, the depth of field is intentionally narrow and I won't be posting photos of the whole data center.  You'd have no way of knowing I didn't just lift someone else's data center photo off Google Images anyway, unless I went around scribbling silly YAC-specific messages on everything with a Sharpie to prove otherwise.

Your numbers are close, but a bit off, an IBM HS21 w/ 2x E5450's consumes 210W at full load on all cores, taking into account the 92% efficiency of the standard 2000W BladeCenter power supplies.  Each 8677 chassis consumes ~500W to operate the dual fans, AMM and two Ethernet switch modules:

58x 8677 chassis base load:    58 x 500W = 29kW
800x HS21 blades w/ E5450's:  800 x 210W = 168kW

Not including the additional blades used as file servers for all the other blades to network boot from, we're talking about 197kW.  It's >200kW if we count cooling however (62kW more, for 60 tons of HVAC).

Where you're real far off is on power cost:
259kW x $0.065/kWh x 24 hours = $404/day.

We're only talking about an 800A 208V 3-phase service entrance feeding my cluster.  I've seen much larger 3-phase service entrances in warehouses, industrial spaces, even offices.  Nothing particularly exciting or out of the ordinary, no?  Half the homes in my area have 400A 1-phase 120/240V service entrances, and that's already a capacity of apprx 96kW, for an everyday residence.


3) Did you lose your job already? Seriously if you did what you claim you did, you should be worried! Blade centers like this are operated by companies with >>1.000-10.000 employees. I could have tried to use my employers compute blades (20x2x8 xeon cores). Your Infrastructure team must be morons if they have not seen the traffic/CPU etc and acted upon it.

That's a bit presumptuous.  You've assumed that I do not own the data center and server cluster.  Where exactly are IBM's qualification requirements that restrict sales of BladeCenter components to only "companies with >>1.000-10.000 employees"?  Hell, you can even hop on eBay and snag used BladeCenter chassis all day long for $175/ea shipped and HS21 or HS21 XM blades w/ 2x E5450's and 8GB of ECC RAM for $100/ea to $140/ea shipped.  Zero of my blade servers, chassis and related components were purchased directly from IBM, the whole cluster was built for minimal cost from surplus components.

If such amazing technology as used 4-year-old Xeon blade servers are simply not available to companies without 1000-10000 employees, how did I post a photo showing 14 of them powered on, then another photo with an obviously YAC-specific message written with a Sharpie across the heatsinks of one of the blade servers?  By your logic, this should not have been possible.  Unless I Photoshopped it?

If you're actually curious, my cluster is rented out for large 3D render jobs for film projects.  If I'm between render jobs, I'll certainly do with my hardware as I please.  And I guess my "infrastructure team" will have to just continue twiddling their thumbs watching my bandwidth consumption (wow, a whopping 18Mbps, the world is ending and my dual-homed fiber connections just can't cope with that kind of extreme pressure!).  If you've had any experience with the BladeCenter platform, you may be aware that this hardware doesn't fail particularly often (I can count hardware failures in the last year on one hand) and managing an 800 server cluster is a 1 person job.  Particularly if the entirety of the cluster (other than 2 blades) all network boot the exact same Ubuntu image off the file server blade for batch rendering.  I sure as heck wouldn't hire any network admin that couldn't achieve this simple task..


4) you install possibly harmful software on company resources?!? And possibly disrupt company operations? For a few coins? WELL DONE DUDE!

I'll be sure to remind myself not to install possible harmful software on my own hardware in the future.  Thank you for your concern, however.  I guess for now I'll have to just rely on the fact that I can read and understand everything that the code is doing and can run a diff between pocopoco's code and the NovaCoin source.  Come back and talk when you're no longer a slave to your employer and have achieved a level of IT experience where you are able to pursue your own career path and ambitions.

Given that I have all the correct numbers on power consumption and HVAC heat load for a cluster of this size, perhaps that's sufficient to draw your own judgement.  If not, well, sorry, I have nothing for you.

Are you next going to suggest that there's no way I could have possibly launched the additional 760 c1.xlarge spot instances between the 8 Amazon data centers?  It would've been 800 if the Sao Paulo data center hadn't run out of spot instance availability and set the spot price to whatever amount I was bidding.
YipYip
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574



View Profile
May 10, 2013, 09:19:17 AM
 #126

Sure Fire way to kill a coin has been demonstrated in this coin

Tacotime has found you dogs out so its bye bye to another piece of junk

Ltc was crusing on ~ 4 cents for over a year and it had a smallish group who wanted to make it a true alt coin to btc and it has now demonstrated this

Instant death is any pre-mine/scams which has now been proven...I understand that who cares ..just after a fast buck ..so lets not pretend there is any other motivation to any defenders of this junk coin...ALl the lies where always going to be found out !!

Like to see how much your YAJunk coins are worth in 24 hours let alone a month

Good bye and So Long Rubbish Coin and your Scammy Launchers

OBJECT NOT FOUND
bitdwarf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


The cryptocoin watcher


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 09:41:52 AM
 #127

I would imagine you started mining sooner than 8 hours after the launch of the coin, and didn't make your estimate based on your block generation rate right when difficulty reached 0.1.  Otherwise, if you were 1/1000th of the network hash power, you would've been successfully mining between 2 and 2.5 non-orphaned blocks per hour on your 6-core i7 at that point in time.  Is that your claim?

Single i5 2500k:



𝖄𝖆𝖈: YF3feU4PNLHrjwa1zV63BcCdWVk5z6DAh5 · 𝕭𝖙𝖈: 12F78M4oaNmyGE5C25ZixarG2Nk6UBEqme
Ɏ: "the altcoin for the everyman, where the sweat on one's brow can be used to cool one's overheating CPU" -- theprofileth
WindMaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 347


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 10:06:57 AM
 #128

Single i5 2500k:

Unless I'm mistaken, the block reward was not ~56.43 YAC at the moment the difficulty reached 0.1.  In fact, the block reward was already lower than that when I *started* mining at around difficulty 0.008 to 0.009.  Your screenshot isn't showing the timeframe we're talking about.
bitdwarf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


The cryptocoin watcher


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 10:13:15 AM
 #129

The launch was at 9 am UTC+2. 9 + 8 = 17.

𝖄𝖆𝖈: YF3feU4PNLHrjwa1zV63BcCdWVk5z6DAh5 · 𝕭𝖙𝖈: 12F78M4oaNmyGE5C25ZixarG2Nk6UBEqme
Ɏ: "the altcoin for the everyman, where the sweat on one's brow can be used to cool one's overheating CPU" -- theprofileth
WindMaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 347


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 10:13:45 AM
 #130

Single i5 2500k:

Single HS21 blade server (2x Xeon E5450) when I was first setting up the image to distribute to the remainder of the server cluster.  These were the first Yacoins I mined when I first got going:



As you can see, the block reward was already lower than what you showed in your screen-shot, and I was landing significantly more blocks than you were, with just 1 server.  Thus, your screen-shot was definitely not at difficulty 0.1.

Additionally, our computers are set to timezones 9 hours apart.  Nifty!
bitdwarf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


The cryptocoin watcher


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 10:18:57 AM
 #131

Well, it's 8 hours after start. This is the post that was posted, make sure your forum timezone settings are correct.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=196196.msg2068842#msg2068842

𝖄𝖆𝖈: YF3feU4PNLHrjwa1zV63BcCdWVk5z6DAh5 · 𝕭𝖙𝖈: 12F78M4oaNmyGE5C25ZixarG2Nk6UBEqme
Ɏ: "the altcoin for the everyman, where the sweat on one's brow can be used to cool one's overheating CPU" -- theprofileth
WindMaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 347


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 10:22:14 AM
 #132

Well, it's 8 hours after start. This is the post that was posted, make sure your forum timezone settings are correct.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=196196.msg2068842#msg2068842

Regardless of whether I had servers commencing mining at 8 hours or 8.5 hours after the coin launched, the discussion is about the block rate and network hash rate at the time the difficulty passed through 0.1, not 0.008.  That happened many hours later than your screen-shot.  As you can see, at difficulty 0.008, I was landing many more blocks than you were, with a 2x Xeon E5450 server prior to turning up the rest of the server cluster.
procrypto
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


Shitcoin Maximalist


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 10:24:35 AM
 #133

Epic response! There is even a semi yak-like blue plastic part on that board Grin


Amusing images to suggest that I was indeed mining YAC on an IBM BladeCenter server farm:



Balthazar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268


BTC-e Divine Overlord, ask cryptodevil for details


View Profile WWW
May 10, 2013, 10:30:10 AM
 #134

Of course I believe, compilation with -O0 flag it's just an accidental bug Cheesy

novaco.in | EtherMine.ru (65 GH/s, DGM 0.5%) | EtherDig.Net (18GH/s, PPS 1.5%)
฿: 1QJ8RFiRKsJKmY8ZAjxfCUeBZXmjthK4Pk: 4RgnHWtnJWEyMhqhDdazW3Hdr7cx5ybF6i ETH: 0x5B475Febb3018f41d0Ac3C2f1A864bd102ab5a2E
bitdwarf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


The cryptocoin watcher


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 10:31:30 AM
 #135

the discussion is about the block rate and network hash rate at the time the difficulty passed through 0.1, not 0.008.

Point taken.



I was using 3 cores by then, I don't have proper cooling. Undecided In the evening I throttled it down with cpulimit, that was like 25% of each core.

𝖄𝖆𝖈: YF3feU4PNLHrjwa1zV63BcCdWVk5z6DAh5 · 𝕭𝖙𝖈: 12F78M4oaNmyGE5C25ZixarG2Nk6UBEqme
Ɏ: "the altcoin for the everyman, where the sweat on one's brow can be used to cool one's overheating CPU" -- theprofileth
WindMaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 347


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 10:41:43 AM
 #136



I was using 3 cores by then, I don't have proper cooling. Undecided In the evening I throttled it down with cpulimit, that was like 25% of each core.

Appears that's a different wallet than the above screen-shot though.  The mining addresses shown in the transactions are also interesting, as I've not observed multiple different mining addresses show up in the transaction list when solo mining on a single computer.  I did not closely examine that portion of the source code for the client however.  Anyone else know for sure why bitdwarf has multiple different mining addresses shown in this second screen-shot?
bitdwarf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


The cryptocoin watcher


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 10:46:47 AM
 #137

Mmh, does the address change when restarting? I fiddled a lot with the number of cores setting.

𝖄𝖆𝖈: YF3feU4PNLHrjwa1zV63BcCdWVk5z6DAh5 · 𝕭𝖙𝖈: 12F78M4oaNmyGE5C25ZixarG2Nk6UBEqme
Ɏ: "the altcoin for the everyman, where the sweat on one's brow can be used to cool one's overheating CPU" -- theprofileth
Hadez
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 23



View Profile
May 10, 2013, 10:53:51 AM
 #138

Meh this coin needs killing off and someone to start over, good ideas, very very poor execution.

Will any new crypto currency ever really take off when the launch is surrounded by such controversy and prejudice towards some users.


So I propose that we as a whole community start a new coin. We pick a date say 2-3 months in the future (with big countdown clocks, everything) and then the whole community sits down and works everything out, gets everything working and tested, gets to vote on all the intricate little things that make a crypto coin better than it's predecessor. When it has all been decided and tested thoroughly we wait for the predetermined date to start mining along with everyone else in the community.


I could do with someone with a good reputation around the community as the chair person/executor of the idea, someone that will be responsible for full disclosure of ALL details to do with the currency.

Anyone interested please PM me and we can start a ball rolling.

LTC: LTX85i4ZTV7bWEvQJrn59Qe1PBjftY1Mh5
BTC: Some long number that is on another computer and I must remember to copy it over =)
e521
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 11:52:50 AM
 #139

Meh this coin needs killing off and someone to start over, good ideas, very very poor execution.

Will any new crypto currency ever really take off when the launch is surrounded by such controversy and prejudice towards some users.


So I propose that we as a whole community start a new coin. We pick a date say 2-3 months in the future (with big countdown clocks, everything) and then the whole community sits down and works everything out, gets everything working and tested, gets to vote on all the intricate little things that make a crypto coin better than it's predecessor. When it has all been decided and tested thoroughly we wait for the predetermined date to start mining along with everyone else in the community.


I could do with someone with a good reputation around the community as the chair person/executor of the idea, someone that will be responsible for full disclosure of ALL details to do with the currency.

Anyone interested please PM me and we can start a ball rolling.

I guess you will be there to mine at time 0 this time, right?
What if I discover this new coin 1 year later? nobody told me I can make huge profit with it, can we relaunch?

The whole point doesn't make sense, get over it

WindMaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 347


View Profile
May 10, 2013, 12:17:41 PM
 #140

You are funny. But it gets on my nerve when people are not telling the truth.

1) I mined very successfully with a hexacore Intel i7 up until difficulty 0.1-0.2. From the number of blocks generated I estimated that I was 1/1000 - 1/600 of the network. Check my posts, I posted that when it happened, not when I felt bitter about not getting enough coins or in need to disprove you. Maybe your setup was wrong.

Maybe there's just a misunderstanding.  I never posted that I was bitter that I wasn't getting enough coins.  In fact, I was still raking in quite a bit of YAC at difficulty 0.1, and posted several times that I considered it a fair fight even though I got an 8 hour late start (or actually an 8.5 hour late start as someone pointed out in the meantime in this thread), in response to everyone posting "No fair, I wasn't mining 3 minutes after the coin launched so I missed out!".  Difficulty 0.1 is just the point where I said "Okay, that's enough YAC" and shut down the server cluster and terminated all my Amazon c1.xlarge instances.  And since right around that time, I arrived at a nice even multiple of 10,000 YAC mined, I thought, "Perfect for my random coin collection!"

At that point I made an estimate of what the overall network hash rate might be based on my hash rate vs. my block solving rate.  Did you read me posting something else somewhere, that I wasn't still raking in tons of YAC at that point?
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 »  All
  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!