[ANN] Zettelkasten - ZTTL, New Algo: BurgerHash V6 🍔, CPU-SOLO-mineable

[q5503162]

wait for the pool
and for the cpu more than 32 cores

[Aris_Eng]

Like what you are trying to do, but 10 hours in and you have 33MH/s network hash rate, when a typical i5 will give about 100kH/s, so either there are about 300 individual PCs mining or you didn't account for botnets and farms.

Also, running my CPU at 80-90% utilization is not great.

Will come back if this becomes GPU mineable, until then, you're in the hands of the cpu farms my friend.

[zettelkasten]

Like what you are trying to do, but 10 hours in and you have 33MH/s network hash rate, when a typical i5 will give about 100kH/s, so either there are about 300 individual PCs mining or you didn't account for botnets and farms.

Also, running my CPU at 80-90% utilization is not great.

Will come back if this becomes GPU mineable, until then, you're in the hands of the cpu farms my friend.

I don't think CPU farms (or in the future GPU farms) are to be blamed.
They are just part of nature.
And good for them to achieve that high hash rate.
That's not the problem.

The real problem I see while looking through the IP-addresses of 500 connections (4 full nodes each fully occupied with 125 incoming connections) is that such CPU farms let each of their computers make a separate connection with an outside full node, so I often see 5 times, 6 times.... 8 times the same IP (but with different port) within the same full node using up available connections that could serve many more people instead.

That's the reason why so many complain about not being able to sync.
Because that is what takes away much needed open connections from everyone else,
and it also doesn't even really serve the CPU farms themselves.
They could just as easily have similar results by having all their local nodes in a local network and connect all of them with just one full node (well-connected to the outside) and still achieve the same results regarding block propagation and hash rate. This kind of local centralization might even help them reduce orphan generation (all their sub-nodes will know at the exact same time that work of a new height has to be calculated).

So I think I'm going to try the following:

I will add some functionality that will allow full node operators to set a limit to how often the same IP is allowed to have incoming connections with them.
Full nodes will then be able to automatically deny incoming connections from IPs they already have a set amount of connections with.
Something like...

Code:

setmaxconnectionsfromIP=2

Hmm.... let's see if something like this is already hidden in the code somewhere... those bitcoin devs have lots of stuff lying around in there... lol

[nimbuscl]

more than 6 hours mining and zero balance whats wrong 

[cryptonomicon25]

more than 6 hours mining and zero balance whats wrong 

What's your hashrate? The network hashrate is over 60 MH/s, even with a high-end CPU you'd likely find only a few blocks a day.

[SpinningTruth]

more than 6 hours mining and zero balance whats wrong 

In your wallet -- in the mining tab I believe -- you should see an estimate of your time between blocks.  On my 6-core 3.6GHz ryzen running 12 threads my estimate is over 3 hours between blocks now.  There are several hundred computers mining this now.  My dual-core 3.8GHz skylake has about  7 hours of mining so far without any blocks.  

Chalk it up to the mixed blessing of an attractive and mineable fair coin launch!

[cryptonomicon25]

Like what you are trying to do, but 10 hours in and you have 33MH/s network hash rate, when a typical i5 will give about 100kH/s, so either there are about 300 individual PCs mining or you didn't account for botnets and farms.

Also, running my CPU at 80-90% utilization is not great.

Will come back if this becomes GPU mineable, until then, you're in the hands of the cpu farms my friend.

I hardly think this has been taken over by farms at this point. The dev mentioned that he has hundreds of connections and this thread has been seen by over 1000 people, so it's not unusual that so many individuals have started mining this. It's a popular launch. When the network hashrate reaches 1 GH/s then you can complain about farms. Until then it's still possible to find blocks even with an average PC.

[sunk818]

You seem knowledgable about hash rates. SpreadDoubleKetchup. How does it compare to Bitcoin SHA256 algorithm? Do you think it is maybe 1/4th the hashrate of SHA256 using same CPU?

I hardly think this has been taken over by farms at this point. The dev mentioned that he has hundreds of connections and this thread has been seen by over 1000 people, so it's not unusual that so many individuals have started mining this. It's a popular launch. When the network hashrate reaches 1 GH/s then you can complain about farms. Until then it's still possible to find blocks even with an average PC.

[zettelkasten]

I hardly think this has been taken over by farms at this point. The dev mentioned that he has hundreds of connections and this thread has been seen by over 1000 people, so it's not unusual that so many individuals have started mining this. It's a popular launch. When the network hashrate reaches 1 GH/s then you can complain about farms. Until then it's still possible to find blocks even with an average PC.

It's probably a mixture of everything, but your guess is as good as mine.

IP clusters point to some concentration in the hands of mid-sized farms,
then there are certainly many little guys because of the popularity,
and last but not least there is the distinct possibility that some GPU dev has already created a miner and is probably hashing away at 20 MH/s on a single GTX 1080 Ti (my estimation).

If you exist, GPU dev, I salute you!

But all that doesn't bother me, what is more important is the connection issue and that all those in-wallet-CPU miners of the CPU-farms are eating away connectivity.
I'm eager to find a solution to that.

[FerrisWheel]

How SpreadDoubleKetchup is better than other Algos?

[rossjamie]

more than 6 hours mining and zero balance whats wrong 

What's your hashrate? The network hashrate is over 60 MH/s, even with a high-end CPU you'd likely find only a few blocks a day.

I mine with laptop with 120 kH/s and get 2 blocks in 4 hours, but I get 3 blocks in 4 hours with my server with 80kH/s Speed, it depend on luck

[zettelkasten]

How SpreadDoubleKetchup is better than other Algos?

Can other Algos do those fart-noises like when you squeeze Ketchup out of a bottle?

No?

There you go.

[lucky168]

can you open pool,from this time,PC CPU is hard to get block,because the hashrate are more than 55MH/S.

[cryptonomicon25]

can you open pool,from this time,PC CPU is hard to get block,because the hashrate are more than 55MH/S.

No one can open a pool until the stratum miners are modified to support this new algo.

[phucdigan]

From my experience, for those who use windown. After opening your wallet, please wait patiently for about 30 minutes (or more) then wallet will begin to sync. 

[RogerFun]

Like what you are trying to do, but 10 hours in and you have 33MH/s network hash rate, when a typical i5 will give about 100kH/s, so either there are about 300 individual PCs mining or you didn't account for botnets and farms.

Also, running my CPU at 80-90% utilization is not great.

Will come back if this becomes GPU mineable, until then, you're in the hands of the cpu farms my friend.

I don't think CPU farms (or in the future GPU farms) are to be blamed.
They are just part of nature.
And good for them to achieve that high hash rate.
That's not the problem.

The real problem I see while looking through the IP-addresses of 500 connections (4 full nodes each fully occupied with 125 incoming connections) is that such CPU farms let each of their computers make a separate connection with an outside full node, so I often see 5 times, 6 times.... 8 times the same IP (but with different port) within the same full node using up available connections that could serve many more people instead.

That's the reason why so many complain about not being able to sync.
Because that is what takes away much needed open connections from everyone else,
and it also doesn't even really serve the CPU farms themselves.
They could just as easily have similar results by having all their local nodes in a local network and connect all of them with just one full node (well-connected to the outside) and still achieve the same results regarding block propagation and hash rate. This kind of local centralization might even help them reduce orphan generation (all their sub-nodes will know at the exact same time that work of a new height has to be calculated).

So I think I'm going to try the following:

I will add some functionality that will allow full node operators to set a limit to how often the same IP is allowed to have incoming connections with them.
Full nodes will then be able to automatically deny incoming connections from IPs they already have a set amount of connections with.
Something like...

Code:

setmaxconnectionsfromIP=2

Hmm.... let's see if something like this is already hidden in the code somewhere... those bitcoin devs have lots of stuff lying around in there... lol

while i support the idea, you will essentially block some VPNs here. which I guess is okay. we should move this to telegram or discord though.

[Margary]

Help! Can you provide some nodes to add? Wallet don't sync at all 

I think, there is not everything in order with the internal functions of the wallet.
it seems to be about to change soon and there will be no more problems.

[Sam67]

Wallet not synh. Whay add node ?

[johntwo]

Like what you are trying to do, but 10 hours in and you have 33MH/s network hash rate, when a typical i5 will give about 100kH/s, so either there are about 300 individual PCs mining or you didn't account for botnets and farms.

Also, running my CPU at 80-90% utilization is not great.

Will come back if this becomes GPU mineable, until then, you're in the hands of the cpu farms my friend.

I don't think CPU farms (or in the future GPU farms) are to be blamed.
They are just part of nature.
And good for them to achieve that high hash rate.
That's not the problem.

The real problem I see while looking through the IP-addresses of 500 connections (4 full nodes each fully occupied with 125 incoming connections) is that such CPU farms let each of their computers make a separate connection with an outside full node, so I often see 5 times, 6 times.... 8 times the same IP (but with different port) within the same full node using up available connections that could serve many more people instead.

That's the reason why so many complain about not being able to sync.
Because that is what takes away much needed open connections from everyone else,
and it also doesn't even really serve the CPU farms themselves.
They could just as easily have similar results by having all their local nodes in a local network and connect all of them with just one full node (well-connected to the outside) and still achieve the same results regarding block propagation and hash rate. This kind of local centralization might even help them reduce orphan generation (all their sub-nodes will know at the exact same time that work of a new height has to be calculated).

So I think I'm going to try the following:

I will add some functionality that will allow full node operators to set a limit to how often the same IP is allowed to have incoming connections with them.
Full nodes will then be able to automatically deny incoming connections from IPs they already have a set amount of connections with.
Something like...

Code:

setmaxconnectionsfromIP=2

Hmm.... let's see if something like this is already hidden in the code somewhere... those bitcoin devs have lots of stuff lying around in there... lol

while i support the idea, you will essentially block some VPNs here. which I guess is okay. we should move this to telegram or discord though.

+1 I support the idea of limiting IP connections.  People with CPU mining farms behind a single router will lose out, and maybe there will be other stuff to complain about.  But think about this:

Right now, in crypto, you can only get value from being DIFFERENT.  Obviously we cannot predict if limiting connections from an IP is good or bad, but you have almost nothing to lose from trying it.  Maybe it will prove to be a big solution to stopping concentration of mining power.

[adorid]

more than 6 hours mining and zero balance whats wrong 

What's your hashrate? The network hashrate is over 60 MH/s, even with a high-end CPU you'd likely find only a few blocks a day.

I mine with laptop with 120 kH/s and get 2 blocks in 4 hours, but I get 3 blocks in 4 hours with my server with 80kH/s Speed, it depend on luck

I have ryzen 1700 one on windows who get arround 200khs and second on linux with 300khs. Tested with server who has 2 cpu and that easy get 600-700khs so i can say 60mhs is rly low diff for this coin.