[ANN][BLC] Blakecoin Blake-256 for GPU/FPGA With Merged Mined Pools Stable Net

[dreamwatcher]

The Blakecoin explorer on www.cryptocoinexplorer.com has been updated to CCE 3.5.

There are more features to be added to CCE 3.5, but the current build give one an idea of where it is going.

Be sure to check out the Electron and Photon explorers as well.

[1714193017]

1714193017

[1714193017]

1714193017

[1714193017]

1714193017

[1714193017]

1714193017

[1714193017]

1714193017

[1714193017]

1714193017

[nicred]

That game looks sic!!! - will you be able to earn blake based coins by playing?

[mogrith]

Wow looks very nice, easy to use also.  PHO background did make it a little hrder to read.

The Blakecoin explorer on www.cryptocoinexplorer.com has been updated to CCE 3.5.

There are more features to be added to CCE 3.5, but the current build give one an idea of where it is going.

Be sure to check out the Electron and Photon explorers as well.

[sha0lin40]

Hi. Im having issues updating the payout threshold on la.blakecoin.com Here is the message i get:
Failed to update your account: Failed to update your account:BatZsM7E2MnMfvALpmhE3bSwPCMBK6HbLh | BghgLPALo9hUgfBZcZTV4KmQfMU6awBYK8 | 2guBb7my4agdXN5QPxevgJ45N5pqdakeCiX | dEX4jTyFGSGrnkRBQGfVAwfCVFUcfhsZed | | | unused1 | unused2 | Duplicate entry 'unused1-unused2' for key 'coin_address_mm4'

Any help is much appreciated.

Thanks

[dreamwatcher]

The Blakecoin explorer at blc.cryptocoinexplorer.com has been updated to the latest build of CCE 3.5

Changes:

The top 100 balance list has been replaced with the "rich" page. The new rich page displays the top 1000 balances and has an owners field. The owners field is a future update that will allow people to claim an address by verifying ownership with a signed message.

The coin information page now includes the genesis block time-stamp message.

A navigation button has been added to the main CCE home page.

[BlueDragon747]

Hi. Im having issues updating the payout threshold on la.blakecoin.com Here is the message i get:
Failed to update your account: Failed to update your account:BatZsM7E2MnMfvALpmhE3bSwPCMBK6HbLh | BghgLPALo9hUgfBZcZTV4KmQfMU6awBYK8 | 2guBb7my4agdXN5QPxevgJ45N5pqdakeCiX | dEX4jTyFGSGrnkRBQGfVAwfCVFUcfhsZed | | | unused1 | unused2 | Duplicate entry 'unused1-unused2' for key 'coin_address_mm4'

Any help is much appreciated.

Thanks

bug in front end just enter all wallet addresses for BLC,PHO,BBTC,XDQ,ELT,UMO (leave unused 1/2 as they are)

looks like you have not entered ELT or UMO wallet addresses thats why it throws an error, empty wallet address = duplicate

[gaalx]

hi. what drivers for AMD GPU for Blake the optimum?

[BlueDragon747]

AMD 14.4 drivers are what I use but 14.7 is reported to also work well not sure which is best or if other versions work better?

[Phantas]

I have:

Gigabyte ATI - 7870 2 GB - driver 14.7 - 1660 Mh/s
MSI ATI - msi r9 280x gaming 3g - driver 14.7 - 2670 Mh/s

[rupy]

Hey, what about a blake hash coin based on http://cryptonote.org? Or is that for CPU mining only?

[BlueDragon747]

Hey, what about a blake hash coin based on http://cryptonote.org? Or is that for CPU mining only?

its not same 8 round Blake-256 as far as I know so it is incompatible 

Best to ask the cryptonote devs and not here as they have never contacted me!

[cinnamon_carter]

cryptonote is a totally different based system unrelated to blake 256
 (not a fork of bitcoin at all and uses a totally different system)

if you want to make a cryptonote coin , fork their repo and follow thier clone guide
you will need at least 2 large servers to run the seed nodes/daemons with a lot of ram.

note it has no gui and is not for noobs, their work seems pretty good but is quite a way from being used by anyone other than an advanced user

a better idea is to mine the coins of the blake 256 family , you can merge mine 6 coins at one time and everything is open source

we have a strong development team and many future things in development

the technology is certainly on our side and miners are available for cpu, gpu , fpga so if you loo at it the blake 256 system offers the most of any alt coin  or set of coins right now, apologies to bluedragon for floating off topic here but to a casual observer I think it prudent to point out these things.

Hey, what about a blake hash coin based on http://cryptonote.org? Or is that for CPU mining only?

its not same 8 round Blake-256 as far as I know so it is incompatible 

Best to ask the cryptonote devs and not here as they have never contacted me!

[rupy]

I just want to use my zTex 1.15x for coins that try to evolve crypto currencies as diversification and hedge.

[BlueDragon747]

I just want to use my zTex 1.15x for coins that try to evolve crypto currencies as diversification and hedge.

You are welcome to get Xilinx ISE and build it yourself based on Krambles FPGA project getting a good high fmax design to bitstream is no easy task and the 14 rounds used by cryptonote for Blake will make it slower and harder to do as it will be larger and use more power and resources on chip!

also note that 14 rounds will never be as good hash/watt as using 8 and for a PoW system I see no advantage to using more than 8 as it gives minimum of 2²⁰⁰ best attack and 2²⁵⁶ for brute force  

*14 round is also the final submission of the Blake-256 algo to NIST for SHA-3 which it did not win because they wanted the sponge function, why the increase in rounds for Blake-256 was due to others saying Blake-256 was too fast but in a PoW system we want fast and less resources hence why I reduced it from the 10 rounds(round 1 Blake-256 SHA-3 candidate code was faster/better than final imho) to 8 rounds while keeping same security for brute force as SHA-256D (2²⁵⁵) vs 8 round Blake-256 (2²⁵⁶)

here is the independent proof of the security of 8 Round Blake-256 by one of the best academic teams in the world to show that I did not just make this up it is provable with academic papers about if you care to read them

"Best results on BLAKE so far, by Xiaoyun Wang et al. http://eprint.iacr.org/2013/852"

*Other result and papers were about earlier than this but not specifically about 8 round Blake-256 I had estimated a figure of 2¹⁹² but it seems I was a little too pessimistic and actually 8 round Blake-256 is better than I first thought  

a Boomarang attack is not so relevant for a PoW based wallet where we are doing a brute force and for brute force Blake-256 is better than SHA-256D as that is a double SHA-256 and thus has an extra collision, to get length extension resistance with the Merkle–Damgård construction method Bitcoin used a double sha-256 but Blake-256 uses the HAIFA construction method that does not need a double hash to have same resistance to a length extension attack

also remember that the algo runs in wallet on CPU for regular function of receiving and checking of blocks, so faster and more efficient is better hence why Blake-256 was used for more than PoW in the Blake 256 Family of coin wallets then on top of the already extremely efficient system you should take into account the extra efficiency gained by merge mining 6 coins+

*yes the pool server can run more wallets due to the efficiency gained on the same server hardware/specification  

I personally think on a technical point view its hard to beat as 7 round Blake-256 is no good and only 2-3 other algos that are also academically provably secure and faster than 8 round Blake-256 are avalible and no one is using them as far as I know  

[rupy]

ok, then it would be interesting if kramble could have a look at just adapting CryptoNote to the zTex?

I think it would make sense even if the synergies are lost between blakecoin and cryptonote!

[BlueDragon747]

ok, then it would be interesting if kramble could have a look at just adapting CryptoNote to the zTex?

I think it would make sense even if the synergies are lost between blakecoin and cryptonote!

Its an open source project why dont YOU port it, working with ISE its a PITA not fun at all

*you could even try to fit the tri core version for the Ztex and get a feel for what working in Xilinx ISE to get a high fmax bitstream is like and getting resource issues that during PAR make the design fail (weeks/months of running ISE to get designs built to bitstream is just not fun)

its not going to be easy and I feel sorry for anyone trying to do it would be lucky to fit a single core and the fmax will not be good

also as cinnamon pointed out its not same code base so may have other stuff in the way you mine with the wallet making the task quite hard work, maybe just for your gain from this as kramble does not have a ztex 1.15x as far as I know  

You should be asking the Cryptonote devs  

I think GPU's will be more suited to 14 round Blake-256 as its easier to change code than it is for FPGA but its still never going to be as fast on CPU/GPU/FPGA vs the 8 round version used for the merged Blake 256 Family of coins

[teknohog]

ok, then it would be interesting if kramble could have a look at just adapting CryptoNote to the zTex?

And why not have world peace and ponies while he's at it? If you refer to the Cryptonight hash that most Cryptonote coins use, it's a combination of a few different hash/encryption functions and it needs a couple of megs of fast cache. It might fit on one of those big-ass FPGAs that cost thousands apiece. Conversely, Blake is a single, relatively simple hash, which is why it's great for practical FPGA implementations. And as BlueDragon747 already pointed out, even that hasn't been quite trivial.

In the software world, it's easy to make bigger and bigger programs for the same CPU/GPU, as long as you have more memory. The CPU is only running a small part of the program at any single time. This is why we've seen crazy PoW solutions like X11/13/15. But when you're doing something in hardware, as in FPGA, you basically have to fit everything on the chip at once. That's why FPGA/ASIC projects run into hard limits more easily than software ones.

[kramble]

ok, then it would be interesting if kramble could have a look at just adapting CryptoNote to the zTex?

And why not have world peace and ponies while he's at it? If you refer to the Cryptonight hash that most Cryptonote coins use, it's a combination of a few different hash/encryption functions and it needs a couple of megs of fast cache. It might fit on one of those big-ass FPGAs that cost thousands apiece. Conversely, Blake is a single, relatively simple hash, which is why it's great for practical FPGA implementations. And as BlueDragon747 already pointed out, even that hasn't been quite trivial.

In the software world, it's easy to make bigger and bigger programs for the same CPU/GPU, as long as you have more memory. The CPU is only running a small part of the program at any single time. This is why we've seen crazy PoW solutions like X11/13/15. But when you're doing something in hardware, as in FPGA, you basically have to fit everything on the chip at once. That's why FPGA/ASIC projects run into hard limits more easily than software ones.

Cheers! Couldn't have said it better myself.  

Actually I'm pretty much finished with crypto on FPGA now. It is just not worth the investment of my time (and the frustration, see what Blue said about ISE). I did have a look at a couple of other algos (groestl, keccak) and got initial, rather poorly performing, builds working, but the GPUs perform far better. The only advantage for FPGA is power consumption.

As for X11/X13, I reckon it can be done on a LX150, but only via a soft-CPU optimized for hashing. A huge amount of work for a very poorly performing hasher. So I'm not going there.

Anyway, best of luck rupy.

[rupy]

Thanks for the explanations.

[cinnamon_carter]

Blue, you should be a teacher, your short to the point math breakdown was perfect,  would have taken me 3 pages to explain it and not near as good.
What he explained in simple and complex terms for those who understand the mathematics is why the blake 256 system is superior to all others presently available. 

As a curiosity i have fooled around with testing cryptonote code base and builds , test coin ect....  the ram necessary is really a lot. I am not saying it is a bad design just quite different from anything that is based off of bitcoin. 

While Kramble and others brought up the x11 x13 items i would like to point out a paper and some research that is often overlooked.

Somehow people got the idea that multiple hash algorithms are better than a single hash algorithm.

The truth is actually in reverse. They are less secure from a mathematical standpoint.   Ok I know the chance of a 'colission' is like less than being hit with an asteroid and a baseball at the same time ,......still who knows what future technology will bring.

Remember , in the 1980's 8 bit encryption was used (yes prime numbers 8 digits long) 

Today a smart kid with a rooted phone could crack 8 bit encryption like an egg.

We know not what future technology will bring but if we are to design systems that will out last us and go down in history we can at least pay attention to known facts.

So for those who think x11 x13 x23 x55 x99 is better see here please

http://ai.stanford.edu/~xb/crypto06b/blackboxhash.pdf