Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2017, 11:43:45 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Multipool and Middlecoin - big profit, even bigger troubles...  (Read 14067 times)
skyhigh2004
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 201



View Profile
July 28, 2013, 04:41:33 PM
 #21

Can we defend some little coin if attacker has 3+GHs of power to attack it? Can we defend FTC? No we cant, someone is mining a hell out of it every time he wants to. Only acceptance of coin by many independent miners like LTC has can defend scrypt coin. So when and only when scrypt coin has over than 10GHs it can be resistant. Sorry for CAP being forked, but us small miners wont defend it by not mining on autopilot pools, when someone has the power to fork any time he wants to.

Awesome point.  Its free choice if you don't like it don't use it.

To the OP: Please quit spreading FUD about high hash rates causing forks.  No one and more so the dev of caps has no clue what caused the fork.  If you could OP please answer my question since you "know" according to the OP that the increase in hash rate caused the fork, explain how that actually happened?

BTC:157BZV5z5dEdEoE5KSr5D7CQGXamLpsZ7n  LTC:LYCf5PnQpXCCmpR4ka3mR8DFDe5hKhTdfc
MEC:MAgTT8QdhVCkgHTkUoKvs4w1TQvv3NU99v  DGC:D8Ubh9oYTpSe1HEBptY8wf6ZrPpj7bhkV5
FTC:6hb1VsGzkej4kSsssGA4FMnkCoVp7PLi8D  PXC:PqQwQKJoYxGSVrKtVfDa5aaJVL9Yevhb2b
1513035825
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513035825

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513035825
Reply with quote  #2

1513035825
Report to moderator
Goat says: "Bitcoin is NOT Illegal in Thailand. There is no law against Bitcoin in Thailand!"
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513035825
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513035825

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513035825
Reply with quote  #2

1513035825
Report to moderator
1513035825
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513035825

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513035825
Reply with quote  #2

1513035825
Report to moderator
flound1129
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854


www.multipool.us


View Profile
July 28, 2013, 05:16:34 PM
 #22

Can we defend some little coin if attacker has 3+GHs of power to attack it? Can we defend FTC? No we cant, someone is mining a hell out of it every time he wants to. Only acceptance of coin by many independent miners like LTC has can defend scrypt coin. So when and only when scrypt coin has over than 10GHs it can be resistant. Sorry for CAP being forked, but us small miners wont defend it by not mining on autopilot pools, when someone has the power to fork any time he wants to.

Awesome point.  Its free choice if you don't like it don't use it.

To the OP: Please quit spreading FUD about high hash rates causing forks.  No one and more so the dev of caps has no clue what caused the fork.  If you could OP please answer my question since you "know" according to the OP that the increase in hash rate caused the fork, explain how that actually happened?

Actually it should be pretty obvious what caused the fork, since there is really only one way to have a hard fork: the network was split into two, most likely because one side didn't have it's addnodes set up properly.

I don't blame the dev for not wanting to orphan BigVern's blocks, since if he did that Vern might remove C  AP from cryptsy.

Multipool - Always mine the most profitable coin - Scrypt, X11 or SHA-256!
CoinBuzz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476



View Profile
July 28, 2013, 06:13:15 PM
 #23

Let's be realistic

I believe there is two sides here: 1) Profit side , 2) Cryptocoin innovation side. One can be in each side

if you decided to be on profit side, there are 1001 reason to justify multipools and blame technology or even blame no one!

if you be on cryptocoin structure, you would be concerned about the future of coins, the future of cryptocoins and their effects on our world, so if you are in this side, we can brainstorming to find a solution.

one upon a time cryptocoin people had a problem called 'pool hopping', they gathered together and found a solution for it.

So, first lets decide if we have any problem or not? and then we can talk about it's solutions.

Do you think there is any problem in a big pool (or a big mining rig) targeting a new coin, take profit and leave when it's not profitable?

DrGoose
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 93



View Profile
July 28, 2013, 08:59:38 PM
 #24

...
Do you think there is any problem in a big pool (or a big mining rig) targeting a new coin, take profit and leave when it's not profitable?

Personally, I am concern about automating the mining/dumping part... with some synchronization at a large scale.

I have observe the effect of this on CAP for days. The sell orders are constantly filled, so both price and difficulty get into a cycle of reduction. It remains profitable from a miner standpoint, but it stink from an investor/speculator perspective. On long term, that can't be good for everyone.

I am not as much concern about the size of a given pool (and the fork thing which might be another matter). More automated service will be created and it is now becoming easier to collectively target the same coin. Coinchoose was just the tip of the iceberg.

Solution?
======
Making newly minted coin "special" may address the issue fairly. It will not matter if being produced from a large automated pool or not... it is all about making it harder to profit from mining/dumping systematically.


flound1129
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854


www.multipool.us


View Profile
July 28, 2013, 09:59:20 PM
 #25

...
Do you think there is any problem in a big pool (or a big mining rig) targeting a new coin, take profit and leave when it's not profitable?

Personally, I am concern about automating the mining/dumping part... with some synchronization at a large scale.

I have observe the effect of this on CAP for days. The sell orders are constantly filled, so both price and difficulty get into a cycle of reduction. It remains profitable from a miner standpoint, but it stink from an investor/speculator perspective. On long term, that can't be good for everyone.

I am not as much concern about the size of a given pool (and the fork thing which might be another matter). More automated service will be created and it is now becoming easier to collectively target the same coin. Coinchoose was just the tip of the iceberg.

Solution?
======
Making newly minted coin "special" may address the issue fairly. It will not matter if being produced from a large automated pool or not... it is all about making it harder to profit from mining/dumping systematically.

If you want the price of a coin to go UP, you need to give people something to do with the coin other than dump it for BTC.

Ensuring profits for speculators is not a miner or pool operator's priority and really should not enter into our concerns in any way.

Multipool - Always mine the most profitable coin - Scrypt, X11 or SHA-256!
DrGoose
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 93



View Profile
July 28, 2013, 11:24:21 PM
 #26

If you want the price of a coin to go UP, you need to give people something to do with the coin other than dump it for BTC.
True, but I think the discussion here is to protect the coin against issue (e.g. bearish pressure) coming from its own mining process. Finding ways to make the coin go UP on the market is a whole other subject.

Ensuring profits for speculators is not a miner or pool operator's priority and really should not enter into our concerns in any way.
Who will keep buying a given coin in large quantity if speculators have no room left to operate?

Please don't kill the goose  Wink

I understand most are not to be concern about this on short term. I just hope a coin developer is observing and willing to try to experiment about this. It might make a difference on long term.
erk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


View Profile
July 28, 2013, 11:38:47 PM
 #27

The coins don't have appropriate error handling for sudden changes in hash rate.  That needs to be added to every coin. The original BTC code lacked this, and everything else has evolved from that.

There needs to be minimum time between blocks, at the moment there is not, and the network will happily accept blocks at any old rate, even injected by an attacker.

This is what I suggested in the DGC thread the other day if you could comment:


Quote
My solution to the hash rate burst problem is simple, reject blocks that try to be added to the chain faster than a predetermined rate. So you are introducing a minimum gap between blocks.

Say a DGC miner finds a new block and want's to submit it to the block chain, the digitalcoind would check the current time against the timestamp on the newest block of the chain and if less than 15sec had elapsed, it would not submit the block.  Also the copies of digitalcoind peering, would not accept any blocks to be added to the chain unless their timestamp was at least 15 higher than the highest timestamp in their copy of the block chain, but not higher than the current time. (to avoid cheats)   For ARG you would probably make it a 25 sec minimum gap between blocks.


You would need to calculated difficulty slightly differently, it would be based on the ratio of blocks that were submitted exactly at the 15sec mark rather than the 20sec target. Some testing and tuning would be requited. 15secmin between blocks might be too long for a good difficulty calculation, perhaps 10sec.

The idea would be to make the client software delay blocks for network submission until the minimum next timestamp had elapsed. Someone with a hacked client would have their too rapid block injection rejected by the rest of the network.




flound1129
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854


www.multipool.us


View Profile
July 29, 2013, 12:16:49 AM
 #28

If you want the price of a coin to go UP, you need to give people something to do with the coin other than dump it for BTC.
True, but I think the discussion here is to protect the coin against issue (e.g. bearish pressure) coming from its own mining process. Finding ways to make the coin go UP on the market is a whole other subject.

Ensuring profits for speculators is not a miner or pool operator's priority and really should not enter into our concerns in any way.
Who will keep buying a given coin in large quantity if speculators have no room left to operate?

Please don't kill the goose  Wink

I understand most are not to be concern about this on short term. I just hope a coin developer is observing and willing to try to experiment about this. It might make a difference on long term.


We only mine coins that people are willing to buy.  If people stop wanting to buy a coin its value and profitability will go down and we won't mine it anymore.  See PXC.

Right now there are many competing coins and many speculators who want to diversify into them.  The cream will rise to the top, the dregs will fall to the bottom, just like any free market system.

Multipool - Always mine the most profitable coin - Scrypt, X11 or SHA-256!
BitJohn
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826

@Bit_John


View Profile
July 29, 2013, 12:30:11 AM
 #29

If you want the price of a coin to go UP, you need to give people something to do with the coin other than dump it for BTC.
True, but I think the discussion here is to protect the coin against issue (e.g. bearish pressure) coming from its own mining process. Finding ways to make the coin go UP on the market is a whole other subject.

Ensuring profits for speculators is not a miner or pool operator's priority and really should not enter into our concerns in any way.
Who will keep buying a given coin in large quantity if speculators have no room left to operate?

Please don't kill the goose  Wink

I understand most are not to be concern about this on short term. I just hope a coin developer is observing and willing to try to experiment about this. It might make a difference on long term.


We only mine coins that people are willing to buy.  If people stop wanting to buy a coin its value and profitability will go down and we won't mine it anymore.  See PXC.

Right now there are many competing coins and many speculators who want to diversify into them.  The cream will rise to the top, the dregs will fall to the bottom, just like any free market system.

The CAP fork seems to be a perfect storm scenario starting with the bottlecaps pool having to much hashrate then suddenly hanging up stopping 90% of the miners on CAPs most didn't know for quite a bit. Then around the same time frame multipool coming online with CAPs and then throwing a massive Sh*t ton of new miners at it some 760MH's at one point I'm told. All the while this is happening as the first Proof of Stake blocks started to be minted so who knows what that threw into the mix. And folks with bad peers and un-upgraded wallets never help.

I know the bottlecaps devs are working on it and I'm told a new release should be out very soon. As far as which chain yes someone will lose coin from the chain they were mining on or trading on its an unfortunate thing its not the first time and definitely wont be the last time. Best course for these scenarios is know what it is your mining understand what it is your trading and pay attention to events that take place folks noticed a possible fork a bit back. Continuing to mine a forked chain is well a risk probably 50-50. I don't blame the multipools and I think some of the ideas on how to prevent coins from these sorts of things are what all these altcoins are about a grand experiment to figure out what combination, features additions work best.
fenican
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672


View Profile
July 29, 2013, 01:21:30 AM
 #30

MANY of these small coins have had pools, sometimes Vern's, controlling >90% of the hash rate.  Few people complain.

Why is it an issue if a multi-pool, running a legitimate client, throws a ton of hash at a coin?  So long as the pool is not malicious it should not cause any serious issues.
limbaugh
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302



View Profile
July 29, 2013, 03:10:21 AM
 #31


Why is it an issue if a multi-pool, running a legitimate client, throws a ton of hash at a coin?  So long as the pool is not malicious it should not cause any serious issues.

It's certainly not the responsibility of the multicoin pools to accommodate turdcoins. I know it's cool to villainize miners as profiteers but like it or not miners incur substantial expenses and many will dump your favorite turdcoin for BTC. The are a few exceptions but for the most part it's not worth the risk for miners to hold mined coins in this currrent environment.

Frankly I've made 10x the profits trading securities than my rigs have made mining alts this year. It's almost not worth the trouble maintaining GPU rigs as my ASICs are much easier and profitable to operate.

So instead of whining about your coin getting stomped on and calling miners puppy killers - release a coin worth keeping. Bunch of damn babies....

-Tin foil hat off-

tl;dr Dump them into oblivion gents!

Cryptos2go
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 81


View Profile
July 29, 2013, 06:23:01 AM
 #32

There is so much irony in this subject it's hard to know where to begin.

This discussion actually appears to be somewhat productive despite the sensationalist title.

Auto switching pools *could prove to be one of the best things to ever happen to crypto.



 
keithron
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 58


View Profile
July 29, 2013, 06:50:57 AM
 #33

Quote
If you want the price of a coin to go UP, you need to give people something to do with the coin other than dump it for BTC.

Ensuring profits for speculators is not a miner or pool operator's priority and really should not enter into our concerns in any way.

Or...you need to NOT have altcoin exchanges trading alt coins literally DAYS after they are released.  Give them atleast 1 month of release time before listing them.  There needs to be some more stringent requirements to list altcoins at places like coins-e or cryptsy.  Each individually altcoin needs not any regulation (they are all self policing for the most part), but the altcoin exchange market as a whole needs to get together and put some sort of laws or rules in place.  Else this niche market is all the way to the ground.
CoinBuzz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476



View Profile
July 29, 2013, 06:56:00 AM
 #34

I agree that multi pools can be blamed for what they are doing.

What we suggest here is to developers, to change their code to be resistant for sudden increase in hash rates.

As someone else said, the big Bitcoin has this problem too and there is not any system to protect it from these situations.

So is there any coin developer seeing this thread? What is your opinion?

MaGNeT
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260


Waves | 3PHMaGNeTJfqFfD4xuctgKdoxLX188QM8na


View Profile WWW
July 29, 2013, 11:03:21 AM
 #35

If you want the price of a coin to go UP, you need to give people something to do with the coin other than dump it for BTC.
True, but I think the discussion here is to protect the coin against issue (e.g. bearish pressure) coming from its own mining process. Finding ways to make the coin go UP on the market is a whole other subject.

Ensuring profits for speculators is not a miner or pool operator's priority and really should not enter into our concerns in any way.
Who will keep buying a given coin in large quantity if speculators have no room left to operate?

Please don't kill the goose  Wink

I understand most are not to be concern about this on short term. I just hope a coin developer is observing and willing to try to experiment about this. It might make a difference on long term.


We only mine coins that people are willing to buy.  If people stop wanting to buy a coin its value and profitability will go down and we won't mine it anymore.  See PXC.

Right now there are many competing coins and many speculators who want to diversify into them.  The cream will rise to the top, the dregs will fall to the bottom, just like any free market system.

This is not in any way a topic against Middlecoin or Multipool. If something is possible and creates a 10-20% extra profit, it will happen anyway, sooner or later.

Question is, like back in the days of "poolhopping", how do we protect ourselves against it.
This will be fixed by one or more coin developers, question is how and when.

Expect it to happen.

Unofficial Waves topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2142722   |   My Waves address alias = magnet
MaGNeT
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260


Waves | 3PHMaGNeTJfqFfD4xuctgKdoxLX188QM8na


View Profile WWW
July 29, 2013, 11:08:06 AM
 #36

I agree that multi pools can be blamed for what they are doing.

What we suggest here is to developers, to change their code to be resistant for sudden increase in hash rates.

As someone else said, the big Bitcoin has this problem too and there is not any system to protect it from these situations.

So is there any coin developer seeing this thread? What is your opinion?

Good one Smiley

Unofficial Waves topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2142722   |   My Waves address alias = magnet
coinerd
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
July 29, 2013, 11:21:33 AM
 #37

We explore the true depths of a zero trust system when the coins have to defend against miners.

Kill the goose indeed.

fenican
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672


View Profile
July 29, 2013, 12:20:14 PM
 #38

The more general problem:

1.  There are, conceptually, an infinite number of coins

2.  The dollar average value of these coins will approach zero (finite amount of dollars / N as N approaches infinity)

3.  The average hash rate of these coins will approach zero (finite amount of hash / N as N approaches infinity)

So the end state:

-> Most coins will be highly vulnerable to attack

-> Most coins will trend toward a value of zero

-> Most speculators will get wiped out


cosmoo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 473



View Profile
July 29, 2013, 06:38:29 PM
 #39


Why is it an issue if a multi-pool, running a legitimate client, throws a ton of hash at a coin?  So long as the pool is not malicious it should not cause any serious issues.

It's certainly not the responsibility of the multicoin pools to accommodate turdcoins. I know it's cool to villainize miners as profiteers but like it or not miners incur substantial expenses and many will dump your favorite turdcoin for BTC. The are a few exceptions but for the most part it's not worth the risk for miners to hold mined coins in this currrent environment.

Frankly I've made 10x the profits trading securities than my rigs have made mining alts this year. It's almost not worth the trouble maintaining GPU rigs as my ASICs are much easier and profitable to operate.

So instead of whining about your coin getting stomped on and calling miners puppy killers - release a coin worth keeping. Bunch of damn babies....

-Tin foil hat off-

tl;dr Dump them into oblivion gents!



This is pretty much the exact attitude that makes multipool as bad as it is... you say release a coin worth keeping? How can it even be kept when profit-hoppers beat it into submission the moment it gets on an exchange? There's no reason for people to be loyal to a coin if it's going to continually get gang raped and left with a high difficulty, not to mention the fact that it causes an abhorrent amount of orphans and risks a chain fork, which isn't good for ANYONE mining the coin.

But that's not the real problem i have with multipool users. What really makes me laugh sadly is the fact that most of those new coins are only 3-4BTC away from a 300% increase in profit. That's what happened with DGC, it had great beginnings and slowly grew with a loyal community behind it. An intelligent speculator sees this and decides to invest 5 btc in it, buying up all the sell orders, and then next thing you know it's #1 on coinchoose for all of two hours and the chain gets raped by multipool and profit hoppers who's combined hashpower is double the original. It's like watching a bunch of retarded chickens scurrying around for scattered BTC feed.

Just pick a damn coin and commit to it! There are decent coins out there that aren't just bullshit clones, profit-hoppers just lack the intelligence and foresight to make a smart investment and look further than the next 24 hours, so they commit their hashpower to a program that does the work for them, albeit poorly. They could actually increase their returns if they had the patience to mine a promising coin and wait for the price to increase instead of being ADD manchildren after an easy buck.

So yeah, whatever, if it's gonna happen it's gonna happen. Plenty of evidence in the world to suggest most people don't make wise decisions, I guess this is just another example.


██████████████████            ██████████
████████████████              ██████████
██████████████          ▄█   ███████████
████████████         ▄████   ███████████
██████████        ▄███████  ████████████
████████        ▄█████████  ████████████
██████        ▄███████████  ████████████
████       ▄██████████████ █████████████
██      ▄███████████████████████████████
▀        ███████████████████████████████
▄          █████████████████████████████
██▄         ▀███████████████████████████
████▄        ▀██████████████████████████
██████▄        ▀████████████████████████
████████▄        ████████████████▀ █████
██████████▄       ▀█████████████  ██████
████████████▄       ██████████   ███████
██████████████▄      ▀██████    ████████
████████████████▄▄     ███     █████████
███████████████████▄    ▀     ██████████
█████████████████████▄       ███████████
███████████████████████▄   ▄████████████





▄█████████████████   ███             ███   ███   ███▄                ▄███            █████            ████████████████   ████████████████▄             █████
███▀                 ███             ███   ███   ████▄              ▄████           ███████           ███                ███           ▀███           ███████
███                  ███             ███   ███   █████▄            ▄█████          ███▀ ▀███          ███                ███            ███          ███▀ ▀███
███                  ███             ███   ███   ███ ███▄        ▄███ ███        ▄███▀   ▀███▄        ███                ███           ▄███        ▄███▀   ▀███▄
███                  ███████████████████   ███   ███  ▀██▄      ▄██▀  ███       ▄███▀     ▀███▄       ████████████████   ████████████████▀        ▄███▀     ▀███▄
███                  ███             ███   ███   ███   ▀███    ███▀   ███      ▄███▀       ▀███▄      ███                ███        ███          ▄███▀       ▀███▄
███                  ███             ███   ███   ███    ▀███  ███▀    ███     ▄███▀         ▀███▄     ███                ███         ███        ▄███▀         ▀███▄
███▄                 ███             ███   ███   ███      ██████      ███    ▄███             ███▄    ███                ███          ███      ▄███             ███▄
▀█████████████████   ███             ███   ███   ███       ████       ███   ▄███               ███▄   ████████████████   ███           ███    ▄███               ███▄

|
|
CoinBuzz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476



View Profile
July 29, 2013, 11:19:33 PM
 #40

What it a coin does not change it's difficulty rapidly, maybe every 24 hours.

Is that going to help?

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »  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!