Vertcoin - First Scrypt N | First Stealth Address - Privacy without mixer

[styxical]

VTC RIGHT AFTER BTC & LTC IN VOLUME ON COINMARKETCAP.COM!!!!

1    Bitcoin   $ 7,099,236,235   $ 565.76   12,548,050 BTC   $ 17,346,048   -0.91 %   
3    Litecoin   $ 421,271,393   $ 15.71   26,814,854 LTC   $ 6,325,487   +0.57 %   
16    Vertcoin   $ 5,130,116   $ 1.82   2,814,850 VTC   $ 884,099   +30.42 %   

but obviously you guys don't know how to hold! Total marketcap $5M, traded $0.8M! Shame on you!

I made > 200 coins trading today. Shame on me all you want. 

[MinerP]

i have two 6 card r9 270 rig. the gpu that has the connected monitor on it crashes all the time... the other gpus work perfectly. i have two r9 270 rigs with different motherboards and both have the same problem. I have used stock settings 1000 core 1400 mem even went down to 900 core. it seems anything over intensity 13 crashes the GPU with the monitor.. also have 8 gigs of ram. please help!

[pjr77]

This might help
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fn_cz9em6HA&feature=youtu.be

Alternatively check our settings thread

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=416572.0

[BorisTheSpider]

SECURE THE NETWORK

In the name of being diplomatic and not making a fuss, I've held back on saying anything about this for a while, but now we need to talk about it.

While we've achieved fantastic things in terms of p2pool, and Vertcoin has the highest proportion of p2pool mining of any chain I'm aware of, we do have an issue with one or two pools, as Verters great work has revealed at http://www.verters.com/block-analysis

Namely, bitcrush and vertco.in are both rather too big. I have no doubt they are good pools (after all, so many of you wouldn't be there if they weren't) but that's not the point.

Some of you may believe, because it's called a 51% attack, that you need 51% of the network hashrate to do it. Not so - it's just that if you have 51% of nethash you can _ALWAYS_ do it. If you have less, you have a smaller probability of accomplishing it, in proportion to how small your hashrate is (ie. it's incredibly unlikely, but you could in theory do it with 1kh/s).

Let me put some figures on this for you:

With 25% of nethash (which is what bitcrush and vertco.in both have at present), the probability of an attacker successfully orphaning the commonly used 6 confirmations is about 5%. It rises exponentially though, and if these pools grow to 30% of nethash, they would have a 13% chance of accomplishing that attack. Let them get to 35% of nethash and it's a 28% probability.

On the flip side however, it doesn't take a massive reduction in their hashrate to vastly reduce that probability - for example, with 20% of nethash a pool has only a 1.5% probability of accomplishing such an attack, and at 15% of nethash it's down to a much more acceptable 0.2% probability.

The other issue is, two big pools could in theory collude. I am personally satisfied this is no issue here, because I know that Bushido runs vertco.in and is not about to attack his own coin, but it still is an issue, and we shouldn't need to trust anyone here - the whole point of this is to make things trustless and secure by design.

I'm very proud of the way we've managed to get the p2pool adoption in VTC so strong, but let's not rest on our laurels - there is still much work to be done. Please consider moving if you're on bitcrush or vertco.in, preferably to p2pool.

Remember fees are lower on p2pool generally, payouts are higher and you're helping the network - http://p2pool.vertcoin.org/ will show you all the p2pool nodes that can be detected and selecting one close to you geographically is best (also setting one or two others as failover in your miner config) - the advantages of p2pool are manyfold, including that the pool operator cannot lose or steal your coins either through malice, incompetence or getting hacked, because they never hold the coins (they are paid directly to the miner), also, if the p2pool node you are on fails, you still get paid your shares because they are distributed on the sharechain, and not stored on any one node to be lost due to a failure.

If you don't wish to use p2pool, at least try to join a smaller pool. Ideally I'd love to see everyone using p2pool but that's not realistically going to happen and it's actually not ideal for very small (ie. less than one modern GPU) miners, but even if we could get all the traditional pools down to at most 15% of nethash, that would be a very significant achievement.

[TheCoinFinder]

The other alternative is get another two or three pools to the same size as the top two. Alongside P2pool, this would effectively stop this from being an issue.

SECURE THE NETWORK

In the name of being diplomatic and not making a fuss, I've held back on saying anything about this for a while, but now we need to talk about it.

While we've achieved fantastic things in terms of p2pool, and Vertcoin has the highest proportion of p2pool mining of any chain I'm aware of, we do have an issue with one or two pools, as Verters great work has revealed at http://www.verters.com/block-analysis

Namely, bitcrush and vertco.in are both rather too big. I have no doubt they are good pools (after all, so many of you wouldn't be there if they weren't) but that's not the point.

Some of you may believe, because it's called a 51% attack, that you need 51% of the network hashrate to do it. Not so - it's just that if you have 51% of nethash you can _ALWAYS_ do it. If you have less, you have a smaller probability of accomplishing it, in proportion to how small your hashrate is (ie. it's incredibly unlikely, but you could in theory do it with 1kh/s).

Let me put some figures on this for you:

With 25% of nethash (which is what bitcrush and vertco.in both have at present), the probability of an attacker successfully orphaning the commonly used 6 confirmations is about 5%. It rises exponentially though, and if these pools grow to 30% of nethash, they would have a 13% chance of accomplishing that attack. Let them get to 35% of nethash and it's a 28% probability.

On the flip side however, it doesn't take a massive reduction in their hashrate to vastly reduce that probability - for example, with 20% of nethash a pool has only a 1.5% probability of accomplishing such an attack, and at 15% of nethash it's down to a much more acceptable 0.2% probability.

The other issue is, two big pools could in theory collude. I am personally satisfied this is no issue here, because I know that Bushido runs vertco.in and is not about to attack his own coin, but it still is an issue, and we shouldn't need to trust anyone here - the whole point of this is to make things trustless and secure by design.

I'm very proud of the way we've managed to get the p2pool adoption in VTC so strong, but let's not rest on our laurels - there is still much work to be done. Please consider moving if you're on bitcrush or vertco.in, preferably to p2pool.

Remember fees are lower on p2pool generally, payouts are higher and you're helping the network - http://scanner.etyd.org/ will show you all the p2pool nodes that can be detected and selecting one close to you geographically is best (also setting one or two others as failover in your miner config) - the advantages of p2pool are manyfold, including that the pool operator cannot lose or steal your coins either through malice, incompetence or getting hacked, because they never hold the coins (they are paid directly to the miner), also, if the p2pool node you are on fails, you still get paid your shares because they are distributed on the sharechain, and not stored on any one node to be lost due to a failure.

If you don't wish to use p2pool, at least try to join a smaller pool. Ideally I'd love to see everyone using p2pool but that's not realistically going to happen and it's actually not ideal for very small (ie. less than one modern GPU) miners, but even if we could get all the traditional pools down to at most 15% of nethash, that would be a very significant achievement.

[Kalizar]

SECURE THE NETWORK

In the name of being diplomatic and not making a fuss, I've held back on saying anything about this for a while, but now we need to talk about it.

While we've achieved fantastic things in terms of p2pool, and Vertcoin has the highest proportion of p2pool mining of any chain I'm aware of, we do have an issue with one or two pools, as Verters great work has revealed at http://www.verters.com/block-analysis

Namely, bitcrush and vertco.in are both rather too big. I have no doubt they are good pools (after all, so many of you wouldn't be there if they weren't) but that's not the point.

Some of you may believe, because it's called a 51% attack, that you need 51% of the network hashrate to do it. Not so - it's just that if you have 51% of nethash you can _ALWAYS_ do it. If you have less, you have a smaller probability of accomplishing it, in proportion to how small your hashrate is (ie. it's incredibly unlikely, but you could in theory do it with 1kh/s).

Let me put some figures on this for you:

With 25% of nethash (which is what bitcrush and vertco.in both have at present), the probability of an attacker successfully orphaning the commonly used 6 confirmations is about 5%. It rises exponentially though, and if these pools grow to 30% of nethash, they would have a 13% chance of accomplishing that attack. Let them get to 35% of nethash and it's a 28% probability.

On the flip side however, it doesn't take a massive reduction in their hashrate to vastly reduce that probability - for example, with 20% of nethash a pool has only a 1.5% probability of accomplishing such an attack, and at 15% of nethash it's down to a much more acceptable 0.2% probability.

The other issue is, two big pools could in theory collude. I am personally satisfied this is no issue here, because I know that Bushido runs vertco.in and is not about to attack his own coin, but it still is an issue, and we shouldn't need to trust anyone here - the whole point of this is to make things trustless and secure by design.

I'm very proud of the way we've managed to get the p2pool adoption in VTC so strong, but let's not rest on our laurels - there is still much work to be done. Please consider moving if you're on bitcrush or vertco.in, preferably to p2pool.

Remember fees are lower on p2pool generally, payouts are higher and you're helping the network - http://scanner.etyd.org/ will show you all the p2pool nodes that can be detected and selecting one close to you geographically is best (also setting one or two others as failover in your miner config) - the advantages of p2pool are manyfold, including that the pool operator cannot lose or steal your coins either through malice, incompetence or getting hacked, because they never hold the coins (they are paid directly to the miner), also, if the p2pool node you are on fails, you still get paid your shares because they are distributed on the sharechain, and not stored on any one node to be lost due to a failure.

If you don't wish to use p2pool, at least try to join a smaller pool. Ideally I'd love to see everyone using p2pool but that's not realistically going to happen and it's actually not ideal for very small (ie. less than one modern GPU) miners, but even if we could get all the traditional pools down to at most 15% of nethash, that would be a very significant achievement.

I honestly was kind of skeptical on using a P2Pool because of what was required to make a server. After reading further into it and realizing I can pick a node in P2Pool based on the ping, fee, and uptime. I picked one with a low ping, .5% fee, and uptime of over 30 days for my primary mining pool. You simply just copy and paste the address into your mining config for cgminer/vertminer, like you typically would.

Compared to using a pool it seems I get paid more coins and exceed my profits from using a pool. It also feels nice to have my coins directly put into my wallet and see exactly how many confirmed/ immature(freshly mined) coins I have

At this point, if you are still pool mining Vertcoin (VTC) on a regular pool, you are only sacrificing profits, decentralization of mining power, and a chance of leaving the blockchain susceptible to an attack.

[rapsac]

I honestly was kind of skeptical on using a P2Pool because of what was required to make a server. After reading further into it and realizing I can pick a node in P2Pool based on the ping, fee, and uptime. I picked one with a low ping, .5% fee, and uptime of over 30 days for my primary mining pool. You simply just copy and paste the address into your mining config for cgminer/vertminer, like you typically would.

If you switch to a p2pool pool try lowering your intensity by 1 or 2, you will get much less rejects resulting in a higher hashrate.
If you are running a single thread/card (-g 1) try this
7850 normal -I 18  p2pool -I 16
7950 normal -I 18  p2pool -I 17
270 normal -I 18 p2pool -I 17 or -I 16
290(x) normal -I 20 p2pool -I 18 or -I 17
So slower cards need to lower intensity more. Why the 290 needs a lower I i don't know though.

[BBristow79]

I tried p2p a while back and never got paid out a single coin. At a pool at the time I would have made 50-60 coins.

I asked around a bunch talked to the pool made inquiries but never got them. I likely would have gone back with my 3.5 Mh/s but it left a bad taste in my mouth. Seems like it's improved since then though...

[mooncake]

Why has VERT been going north for the past few days? 

[Kalizar]

I tried p2p a while back and never got paid out a single coin. At a pool at the time I would have made 50-60 coins.

I asked around a bunch talked to the pool made inquiries but never got them. I likely would have gone back with my 3.5 Mh/s but it left a bad taste in my mouth. Seems like it's improved since then though...

That's strange. Make sure you are putting your VTC Wallet address as your user parameter in vertminer. About 10-15 minutes later I started getting confirmations. I have a 3 MH/s rig.

[jacknb1ack]

The other alternative is get another two or three pools to the same size as the top two. Alongside P2pool, this would effectively stop this from being an issue.

SECURE THE NETWORK

...

Remember fees are lower on p2pool generally, payouts are higher and you're helping the network - http://scanner.etyd.org/ will show you all the p2pool nodes that can be detected and selecting one close to you geographically is best (also setting one or two others as failover in your miner config) - the advantages of p2pool are manyfold, including that the pool operator cannot lose or steal your coins either through malice, incompetence or getting hacked, because they never hold the coins (they are paid directly to the miner), also, if the p2pool node you are on fails, you still get paid your shares because they are distributed on the sharechain, and not stored on any one node to be lost due to a failure.
...

Actually i really like mining on p2pool, but with current sharerate is too high, is almost impossible to get share for little miner.

I'm sorry if this already asked, but is it possible to divide p2p network into two ? i mean, make another with less share spread but with lower sharerate so little miner can join p2pool too ? like the old p2p network if i remember correctly.

i don't mind getting pay less frequent but with high possibility to get share. Last time i try p2pool, only get 1 share /12h with my 280x ...

*i don't really understand how p2pool work, but it is possible to do this ?

[noerc]

The other alternative is get another two or three pools to the same size as the top two. Alongside P2pool, this would effectively stop this from being an issue.

SECURE THE NETWORK

...

Remember fees are lower on p2pool generally, payouts are higher and you're helping the network - http://scanner.etyd.org/ will show you all the p2pool nodes that can be detected and selecting one close to you geographically is best (also setting one or two others as failover in your miner config) - the advantages of p2pool are manyfold, including that the pool operator cannot lose or steal your coins either through malice, incompetence or getting hacked, because they never hold the coins (they are paid directly to the miner), also, if the p2pool node you are on fails, you still get paid your shares because they are distributed on the sharechain, and not stored on any one node to be lost due to a failure.
...

Actually i really like mining on p2pool, but with current sharerate is too high, is almost impossible to get share for little miner.

I'm sorry if this already asked, but is it possible to divide p2p network into two ? i mean, make another with less share spread but with lower sharerate so little miner can join p2pool too ? like the old p2p network if i remember correctly.

i don't mind getting pay less frequent but with high possibility to get share. Last time i try p2pool, only get 1 share /12h with my 280x ...

*i don't really understand how p2pool work, but it is possible to do this ?

In many pools it is required to set the difficulty manually for smaller rigs in order to get shares accepted. Have a look at: http://p2pool.be:9171/static/ for example. I even set slightly lower difficulties as suggested there and then I get a significant larger amount of shares. This has to be done for every worker.

[Shameless Beggar]

Can someone please tell me, if there are any fixed diff non-p2 pools? It's getting pretty annoying when pool keeps unintelligently raising my difficulty so I have zero shares across several blocks.

edit: well, I guess I'm gonna try the p2pool suggested by the previous poster. I was under impression that to join p2pool requires some crazy setup. Apparently not.

[Smooking]

P2Pool Located in EU

http://212.114.110.57:9171

Use Vertcoin Miner

Username = Vertcoin Wallet address
Password = Anything

-o 212.114.110.57:9171 -u VertCoinWalletAddress -p x

[BorisTheSpider]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=526315.0

[Coelacanth]

I honestly was kind of skeptical on using a P2Pool because of what was required to make a server. After reading further into it and realizing I can pick a node in P2Pool based on the ping, fee, and uptime. I picked one with a low ping, .5% fee, and uptime of over 30 days for my primary mining pool. You simply just copy and paste the address into your mining config for cgminer/vertminer, like you typically would.

Uptime doesn't matter. Node operators may restart p2pool to update to the latest git release. This resets uptime. Only thing you need a low latency and low fee node with backup pools configured in vertminer.conf

[georbitc]

Can anyone get the machine readable pages of the vertcoin block explorer to work?

I can't

sample non machine readable

http://explorer.vertcoin.org/address/VpkQn9PuNi7mLpuQy7Qmcf4CyfQyMBmP1n

gives

"
Short Link: http://explorer.vertcoin.org/a/VpkQn9PuNi

Balance: 7.49186164 VTC
Transactions in: 9
Received: 7.49186164 VTC
Transactions out: 0
Sent: 0 VTC

"

but machine readable

http://explorer.vertcoin.org/q/addressbalance/VpkQn9PuNi7mLpuQy7Qmcf4CyfQyMBmP1n

gives

"
returns amount of money at the given address
/chain/CHAIN/q/addressbalance/ADDRESS

"

which is a description of what it should do but doesn't do.

for bitcoin the machine readable can be loaded into a php variable like this

$bitcoinaddressbalance = file_get_contents('http://blockchain.info/q/addressbalance/16M9iBxfJsLjR8hHY7zs1qnikS51mCTu5o');

so for vertcoin it should also be like

$vertcoinaddressbalance = file_get_contents('http://explorer.vertcoin.org/q/addressbalance/VpkQn9PuNi7mLpuQy7Qmcf4CyfQyMBmP1n');

but it doesn't work becuase the machine readable part of the vertcoin explorer doesn't work.

Can anyone get a machinereadable vertcoin explorer address value?

[Vertcoin]

Can anyone get the machine readable pages of the vertcoin block explorer to work?

I can't

sample non machine readable

http://explorer.vertcoin.org/address/VpkQn9PuNi7mLpuQy7Qmcf4CyfQyMBmP1n

gives

"
Short Link: http://explorer.vertcoin.org/a/VpkQn9PuNi

Balance: 7.49186164 VTC
Transactions in: 9
Received: 7.49186164 VTC
Transactions out: 0
Sent: 0 VTC

"

but machine readable

http://explorer.vertcoin.org/q/addressbalance/VpkQn9PuNi7mLpuQy7Qmcf4CyfQyMBmP1n

gives

"
returns amount of money at the given address
/chain/CHAIN/q/addressbalance/ADDRESS

"

which is a description of what it should do but doesn't do.

for bitcoin the machine readable can be loaded into a php variable like this

$bitcoinaddressbalance = file_get_contents('http://blockchain.info/q/addressbalance/16M9iBxfJsLjR8hHY7zs1qnikS51mCTu5o');

so for vertcoin it should also be like

$vertcoinaddressbalance = file_get_contents('http://explorer.vertcoin.org/q/addressbalance/VpkQn9PuNi7mLpuQy7Qmcf4CyfQyMBmP1n');

but it doesn't work becuase the machine readable part of the vertcoin explorer doesn't work.

Can anyone get a machinereadable vertcoin explorer address value?

https://explorer.vertcoin.org/chain/Vertcoin/q/addressbalance/VpkQn9PuNi7mLpuQy7Qmcf4CyfQyMBmP1n

[toxicwaltz]

It's happening.
I'm so glad I invested heavily on vertcoin more than on any other altcoins.

[georbitc]

I have no idea why it is done that way but it works so thank you!

Can anyone get the machine readable pages of the vertcoin block explorer to work?

I can't

sample non machine readable

http://explorer.vertcoin.org/address/VpkQn9PuNi7mLpuQy7Qmcf4CyfQyMBmP1n

gives

"
Short Link: http://explorer.vertcoin.org/a/VpkQn9PuNi

Balance: 7.49186164 VTC
Transactions in: 9
Received: 7.49186164 VTC
Transactions out: 0
Sent: 0 VTC

"

but machine readable

http://explorer.vertcoin.org/q/addressbalance/VpkQn9PuNi7mLpuQy7Qmcf4CyfQyMBmP1n

gives

"
returns amount of money at the given address
/chain/CHAIN/q/addressbalance/ADDRESS

"

which is a description of what it should do but doesn't do.

for bitcoin the machine readable can be loaded into a php variable like this

$bitcoinaddressbalance = file_get_contents('http://blockchain.info/q/addressbalance/16M9iBxfJsLjR8hHY7zs1qnikS51mCTu5o');

so for vertcoin it should also be like

$vertcoinaddressbalance = file_get_contents('http://explorer.vertcoin.org/q/addressbalance/VpkQn9PuNi7mLpuQy7Qmcf4CyfQyMBmP1n');

but it doesn't work becuase the machine readable part of the vertcoin explorer doesn't work.

Can anyone get a machinereadable vertcoin explorer address value?

https://explorer.vertcoin.org/chain/Vertcoin/q/addressbalance/VpkQn9PuNi7mLpuQy7Qmcf4CyfQyMBmP1n