BiblePay | 10% to Orphan-Charity | RANDOMX MINING | Sanctuaries (Masternodes)

[capulo]

dont know, but if i compare my results with canopus's results, then i did not hit any block for ~ 3 days on 3x dual xeons. he hit 4 block in 2 days with similar setup

[1714507657]

1714507657

[1714507657]

1714507657

[bible_pay]

check canopus´s screenshot in discord 

we are staked on 27945?

I havent seen the screen shot, but Im sure the inner contents of the block will say POL Weight: 0.  Thats because the feature is still in testnet.

All I released in Prod in 1086 was a feature where we create a .01 bbp transaction in order to 'attempt' to make the block template unique (remember when we were trying to get the pool to solve more blocks?).  That is being handled with a narrative in the UI as "proof-of-loyalty" simply because it looks to the wallet like the future coinstake transaction it knows is coming in the future, but I can assure you nothing is in it except .01 cent from yourself to yourself with zero weight. 

The feature is turned off in prod with a switch, and on in testnet (fProofOfLoyalty=false in prod) etc.

It cant go live til we have a mandatory and of course still needs tested more.

I posted the screenshot on the BiblePay forum:

http://forum.biblepay.org/index.php?topic=89.msg1274#msg1274

It seems that it has PoL weight > 0 in the contents of the block?

Thanks!  Sorry about that, thats very misleading.  Ill disable it tonight for the next leisure release in prod.


So whats happening is the 1087 feature that adds the .01bbp coinstake for distinct block templates is also stamping the POL weight (of 522) on the miners transaction, but its still not being signed, not propagating to vout[0], and in general is not being viewed by Biblepay as a hybrid POW+POL transaction.  In addition, Prod is not checking POW+POL's so even if someone were to falsify one biggie POL in prod, the block check would fail (as we dont check for POL adjusted blocks in Prod yet).

[SEO_Account]

regarding the state of the pool I believe the only long running problem it has ever had is the subsidy system. this is now badly abused. all you have to do is double-click on a record in the 'block distribution' tab on the pool site. look at the top ten miners there. some are mining fairly with serious hash but many have split  their (still considerable) hash into over a hundred very small workers to maximize their return. this has at least two serious effects.
1. it actually dilutes the benefit that genuine small miners receive
2. it is the largest disincentive to putting a decent amount of hash on the pool as a large percentage now simply enriches people with more hashpower than you yourself!

another effect is that no-one really knows how much their hash contribution is really worth. i have no idea whether i would be a net donator or a net receiver of subsidy, i suspect the latter. Either way i believe the current situation is both unfair and unjust.

ps no-one is mining 'against' the pool. people are just mining.

Its enjoyable when speaking to an individual who asserts oneself with authority on a subject, and quite another when one talks surely and appears to be incorrect about every facet.

Im sorry if I sound scathing, but, if the pool payout system was that crooked, I dont think anyone would pool mine.  And the very first requirement to writing a pool is paying a distributed amount per contribution relative to others.

So you are saying that large miners have an advantage?  Everyone else is saying small miners have an advantage.

The pool pays out in variable hardness shares.  Clicking on a large miners row and seeing how many physical machines only tells us how many physical machines they decided to spend money on.  It does not show any "advantage" - from what I can see.  Where do you get that "guess"?

Uh, yes, all those guys are mining "against" the pool.  They are not solo mining.  Why do you "guess" that?  PS they are against the pool because they are mining fractional shares.  And getting rewarded for them.  

How do you not know whether you are a donor or not when we have detailed pool reports?  Donor sounds like a blood delivery system.

=-=-=-=




Slovakia, lets let SEO tell us his two day results compared to pool first.  

I took my miners off solo after about 16 hours and 0 blocks. Sorry. 

[exyacminer]

regarding the state of the pool I believe the only long running problem it has ever had is the subsidy system. this is now badly abused. all you have to do is double-click on a record in the 'block distribution' tab on the pool site. look at the top ten miners there. some are mining fairly with serious hash but many have split  their (still considerable) hash into over a hundred very small workers to maximize their return. this has at least two serious effects.
1. it actually dilutes the benefit that genuine small miners receive
2. it is the largest disincentive to putting a decent amount of hash on the pool as a large percentage now simply enriches people with more hashpower than you yourself!

another effect is that no-one really knows how much their hash contribution is really worth. i have no idea whether i would be a net donator or a net receiver of subsidy, i suspect the latter. Either way i believe the current situation is both unfair and unjust.

ps no-one is mining 'against' the pool. people are just mining.

Its enjoyable when speaking to an individual who asserts oneself with authority on a subject, and quite another when one talks surely and appears to be incorrect about every facet.

Im sorry if I sound scathing, but, if the pool payout system was that crooked, I dont think anyone would pool mine.  And the very first requirement to writing a pool is paying a distributed amount per contribution relative to others.

So you are saying that large miners have an advantage?  Everyone else is saying small miners have an advantage.

The pool pays out in variable hardness shares.  Clicking on a large miners row and seeing how many physical machines only tells us how many physical machines they decided to spend money on.  It does not show any "advantage" - from what I can see.  Where do you get that "guess"?

Uh, yes, all those guys are mining "against" the pool.  They are not solo mining.  Why do you "guess" that?  PS they are against the pool because they are mining fractional shares.  And getting rewarded for them.  

How do you not know whether you are a donor or not when we have detailed pool reports?  Donor sounds like a blood delivery system.

=-=-=-=




Slovakia, lets let SEO tell us his two day results compared to pool first.  

whew! i didn't know i could be that misunderstood..but thanks for replying.
1. i did not say the system was crooked, i said it was being badly abused
2. i did not say large miners get an advantage, i said large miners get an advantage if they split their hash into many, really many, much smaller miners. this is obvious!
3. the top of the block distribution page contains examples of this
i don't understand the math of the subsidy system, so i dont know whether i, with 14*750 and 6*650 hashes would be subsidising others, or receiving a subsidy from others. I do not wish to receive a subsidy from anyone!

i wish this project nothing but good, it is the only witness to Christ in an ocean of wishful thinking.
Peace in Him

[remtiwk]

My machines just found another block. That's 4 blocks total now on solo mining across 3 machines, in around a week.

[SEO_Account]

My machines just found another block. That's 4 blocks total now on solo mining across 3 machines, in around a week.

how much hps?

[joelles]

regarding the state of the pool I believe the only long running problem it has ever had is the subsidy system. this is now badly abused. all you have to do is double-click on a record in the 'block distribution' tab on the pool site. look at the top ten miners there. some are mining fairly with serious hash but many have split  their (still considerable) hash into over a hundred very small workers to maximize their return. this has at least two serious effects.
1. it actually dilutes the benefit that genuine small miners receive
2. it is the largest disincentive to putting a decent amount of hash on the pool as a large percentage now simply enriches people with more hashpower than you yourself!

another effect is that no-one really knows how much their hash contribution is really worth. i have no idea whether i would be a net donator or a net receiver of subsidy, i suspect the latter. Either way i believe the current situation is both unfair and unjust.

ps no-one is mining 'against' the pool. people are just mining.

You do realize us 'big' miners have invested heavily into hardware and have many monthly costs for electricity/datacenter bills? Sometimes it doesn't even cover the costs and/or initial investment. Not here to become millionaires, we are here for a good cause. Also I would like to have a MN someday and heavy mining is only option.
Also keeping up with this many machines is very time consuming, it is not 15min day job to keep everything running

[exyacminer]

regarding the state of the pool I believe the only long running problem it has ever had is the subsidy system. this is now badly abused. all you have to do is double-click on a record in the 'block distribution' tab on the pool site. look at the top ten miners there. some are mining fairly with serious hash but many have split  their (still considerable) hash into over a hundred very small workers to maximize their return. this has at least two serious effects.
1. it actually dilutes the benefit that genuine small miners receive
2. it is the largest disincentive to putting a decent amount of hash on the pool as a large percentage now simply enriches people with more hashpower than you yourself!

another effect is that no-one really knows how much their hash contribution is really worth. i have no idea whether i would be a net donator or a net receiver of subsidy, i suspect the latter. Either way i believe the current situation is both unfair and unjust.

ps no-one is mining 'against' the pool. people are just mining.

You do realize us 'big' miners have invested heavily into hardware and have many monthly costs for electricity/datacenter bills? Sometimes it doesn't even cover the costs and/or initial investment. Not here to become millionaires, we are here for a good cause. Also I would like to have a MN someday and heavy mining is only option.
Also keeping up with this many machines is very time consuming, it is not 15min day job to keep everything running

I understand joelles, i've made an investment/taken a risk too. but what if everybody, or just most, did it your way? what would happen to the size of the subsidy you receive then? and r u really happy taking from others in such a way?

[bible_pay]

My machines just found another block. That's 4 blocks total now on solo mining across 3 machines, in around a week.

I took my miners off solo after about 16 hours and 0 blocks. Sorry.  Sad

Thank you both for your candidness.

See we have two live examples, one on each end of the spectrum, showing the volatile nature of solo mining.

[bible_pay]

whew! i didn't know i could be that misunderstood..but thanks for replying.
1. i did not say the system was crooked, i said it was being badly abused
2. i did not say large miners get an advantage, i said large miners get an advantage if they split their hash into many, really many, much smaller miners. this is obvious!
3. the top of the block distribution page contains examples of this
i don't understand the math of the subsidy system, so i dont know whether i, with 14*750 and 6*650 hashes would be subsidising others, or receiving a subsidy from others. I do not wish to receive a subsidy from anyone!

i wish this project nothing but good, it is the only witness to Christ in an ocean of wishful thinking.
Peace in Him

This is what I mean my friend - Abused infers the pool system has no integrity.  You provide no evidence of abuse, but instead evidence of larger miners mining against the pool, but that is obvious.

I do not desire to run a system that can be abusive either to small or large miners.

On #2, What you are saying is that small feeble nodes make more BBP per hour than large nodes.  But that has nothing to do with the pool.  I contend that those small solo miners would continue to make more coins in solo than in the pool.  Therefore: This has nothing to do with the pool.

On #3, The subsidy system is derived by:  Taking a sum of the entire HPS2 of the active winning block in the pool, dividing the block subsidy by the Grand Total HPS2, arriving at a PaymentPerHPS.  Then multiplying each rows HPS2 * PPH.  This gives the payment per row. 

You have to realize the Shares found each 15 minutes by both small and large miners are what drives the HPS2 reading.

[SEO_Account]

regarding the state of the pool I believe the only long running problem it has ever had is the subsidy system. this is now badly abused. all you have to do is double-click on a record in the 'block distribution' tab on the pool site. look at the top ten miners there. some are mining fairly with serious hash but many have split  their (still considerable) hash into over a hundred very small workers to maximize their return. this has at least two serious effects.
1. it actually dilutes the benefit that genuine small miners receive
2. it is the largest disincentive to putting a decent amount of hash on the pool as a large percentage now simply enriches people with more hashpower than you yourself!

another effect is that no-one really knows how much their hash contribution is really worth. i have no idea whether i would be a net donator or a net receiver of subsidy, i suspect the latter. Either way i believe the current situation is both unfair and unjust.

ps no-one is mining 'against' the pool. people are just mining.

You do realize us 'big' miners have invested heavily into hardware and have many monthly costs for electricity/datacenter bills? Sometimes it doesn't even cover the costs and/or initial investment. Not here to become millionaires, we are here for a good cause. Also I would like to have a MN someday and heavy mining is only option.
Also keeping up with this many machines is very time consuming, it is not 15min day job to keep everything running

I understand joelles, i've made an investment/taken a risk too. but what if everybody, or just most, did it your way? what would happen to the size of the subsidy you receive then? and r u really happy taking from others in such a way?

Having more workers doesn't give you more shares. I consistently get more shares than people with 2 or 3 times the amount of workers I have.

[exyacminer]

@SEO_Account & bible_pay

So what your are saying is if i had, or hired a server with say 4KHs capabilty and put it on the pool as one worker of 4KHs it would get as many shares for its single instance as 25 workers of 160Hs each. I have to say
that is not my experience. I hired a 6KHs machine from GTHosts for 1 day. It got about twice the shares that 1 of my 750Hs  got, but cost 30 times as much. No go there.

By integrity i understand you to mean that the system cannot be manipulated in the way i mean?

Thanks

[zthomasz]

Everyone agrees that it's in our best interests for BBP to be trading on several top quality exchanges.  We're in conversations with a few good candidates, so we'd like to be ready with our funds in place when an agreement is reached.

Please donate/loan BBP or BTC pr USD to the Exchange Fee Fund. All donations will be be refunded after the next superblock payout.

Exchange Fee Donation/Loan:  https://activara.net/exchange-fee-fund/

Thanks!

[zthomasz]

I just posted a proposal for several improvements to the BiblePay.org website.

Please take a look .. thanks!

http://forum.biblepay.org/index.php?topic=101.msg1277#msg1277

[capulo]

which exchange are we funding now?
and how many we have at 'pocket' ?

[zthomasz]

which exchange are we funding now?
and how many we have at 'pocket' ?

None in pocket yet, we're lining up funds in order to move quickly when the door opens.

Yobit - Is now questionable due to possible integrity issues that we're trying to verify or eliminate.

southXchange - They look good, told us we can be listed within a day. Now waiting for a response about how to access their listing application.

NEXT.EXCHANGE - This one also looks very good. znaffl is running an upvote campaign for a possible free (?) listing, but that could take a while to payoff. I suggest that if the listing fee is reasonable we should go with a paid listing to speed up the process. znaffl sent them an email yesterday requesting fee details, we're now waiting on a reply.

UPDATED: We currently have 283,000 BBP and $80 USD in the fund. That equals approx 0.13 BTC at current prices.

[exyacminer]

@SEO_Account & bible_pay

So what your are saying is if i had, or hired a server with say 4KHs capabilty and put it on the pool as one worker of 4KHs it would get as many shares for its single instance as 25 workers of 160Hs each. I have to say
that is not my experience. I hired a 6KHs machine from GTHosts for 1 day. It got about twice the shares that 1 of my 750Hs  got, but cost 30 times as much. No go there.

By integrity i understand you to mean that the system cannot be manipulated in the way i mean?

Thanks

Sorry i understand you're saying that the little miners would get more HPS2 but that this reflects their 'collective' performance as solo miners if they are not on the pool. But the difference seems to be very large in the pool.
If it were truly a large advantage in actually finding a block to have many small miners, perhaps we should be advising people with decent sized machines to split them up into many smaller workers?

[remtiwk]

My machines just found another block. That's 4 blocks total now on solo mining across 3 machines, in around a week.

how much hps?

My fastest machine is "hashps": 5853.199462096544

[zthomasz]

Hi
I would like to ask for advice. When I want to link up few mining machines together on the local network for one wallet. How should I configure the biblepay.conf file?
Thanks.

If you want to share a wallet.dat across 5 machines, just copy the wallet.dat to each node.
Nothing goes in the biblepay.conf to link them together.

Hi Rob
Thanks for answer. But I don't want only share wallet. I was trying to link up the hashpower together as well. Any advise? Thanks.

Is there a reason you don't want to share a wallet?  Really that is by far the easiest way to combine the machines.  I'm sure there might be a technical way to actually make all the machines truly work as one, but from most experiences, you're better off running several machines of lower power than one machine of higher power.  That may have changed over time, but there's no drawback I have seen to running one wallet on multiple machines that you control.  Could you elaborate why you don't want to do that?

SVK Noko may be trying link machines so they'll work together cooperatively like a pool does - to solve the block.

[harrisvan87]

My machines just found another block. That's 4 blocks total now on solo mining across 3 machines, in around a week.

Hi remtiwk,

I also wanna try solo a shot. can you help me the way how to config wallet in linux to solo mining ? Have any way to combine HPS for many machine as one ?