Bitcoin Forum
September 26, 2017, 05:40:49 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 [222] 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [?Th] Eligius: 0% Fee BTC, 105% PPS NMC, No registration, CPPSRB  (Read 982604 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
wizkid057
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1206


View Profile
September 13, 2015, 02:34:48 PM
 #4421

any likelyhood that eligius will offer an XT-based pool in the near future? I considered moving to slush but dislike the need to make an account. mining with the payout address on eligius is a much smarter method

XT is not bitcoin and Eligius will not be supporting it.

Tips: 1LDQrLr6dPVqNJmpZm82eZVKqDFRk7ERW8
Operator of the Eligius Mining Pool - 0% Fee, SAPPLNS, GBT, Stratum, IRC+Phone Support, Share Market (coming soon), Generation payouts, and more.
Don't feed the trolls. Science Confirms: Internet Trolls Really Are Narcissistic, Psychopathic, and Sadistic (1)
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1506404449
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506404449

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506404449
Reply with quote  #2

1506404449
Report to moderator
p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
September 13, 2015, 02:40:28 PM
 #4422

XT is not bitcoin and Eligius will not be supporting it.

+1

Nice to hear.
mavericklm
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742


View Profile
September 14, 2015, 05:23:28 AM
 #4423

XT is an control tool over bitcoin and miners
it's exactly what is wrong in the world!
btcash
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 577



View Profile
September 15, 2015, 01:26:59 PM
 #4424

What BIP is Eligius going to vote for? You ruled out 101 so only 101 is left or do you wait for an updated/new BIP?
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2240



View Profile
September 16, 2015, 01:05:21 AM
 #4425

What BIP is Eligius going to vote for? You ruled out 101 so only 101 is left or do you wait for an updated/new BIP?
Miners have no say on hardforks, and it's not a vote.
Your question is a false dichotomy.

mavericklm
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742


View Profile
September 16, 2015, 06:49:20 AM
 #4426

where do i see my nmc balance? i have All time total payout: 15.31978878 BTC so there should be some nmc in there too

10x!
zoro1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
September 16, 2015, 03:42:11 PM
 #4427

What BIP is Eligius going to vote for? You ruled out 101 so only 101 is left or do you wait for an updated/new BIP?
Miners have no say on hardforks, and it's not a vote.
Your question is a false dichotomy.
unfortunatelly, miners think they rule bitcoin because they protect it and confirm its transactions!

https://storjtalk.org/index.php
storj:decentralized cloud and much more!
not.you
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1508


View Profile
September 17, 2015, 11:35:11 PM
 #4428

What BIP is Eligius going to vote for? You ruled out 101 so only 101 is left or do you wait for an updated/new BIP?
Miners have no say on hardforks, and it's not a vote.
Your question is a false dichotomy.

Not quite true though.  Pools can basically vote based on which software they run now that xt exists.  And miners can vote based on what pool they mine on. 

I'm a fan of self control, but only in moderation.
Biomech
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176


Anarchy is not chaos.


View Profile
September 18, 2015, 12:30:13 AM
 #4429

What BIP is Eligius going to vote for? You ruled out 101 so only 101 is left or do you wait for an updated/new BIP?
Miners have no say on hardforks, and it's not a vote.
Your question is a false dichotomy.

actually...

if you look at it in the light that miners drive the network forward, and if the miners decide that "x" hardfork simply isn't going to happen, then they do indeed have a say in it.

Given that at the moment, Bitcoin is centralized between a few large pools, then the syndicate indicated by a pool has a rather large vote in whether or not to accept a hard fork.

The question as stated is a false dichotomy, but your answer is a red herring Cheesy

Buy Bitcoins with Paypal, Credit card, or other methods. Send me a PM or a text to 208-451-2665.
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2240



View Profile
September 18, 2015, 02:47:34 AM
 #4430

What BIP is Eligius going to vote for? You ruled out 101 so only 101 is left or do you wait for an updated/new BIP?
Miners have no say on hardforks, and it's not a vote.
Your question is a false dichotomy.

Not quite true though.  Pools can basically vote based on which software they run now that xt exists.  And miners can vote based on what pool they mine on. 
No, pools/miners that use software producing or accepting invalid blocks simply cease to be Bitcoin miners.
It is literally no different than if they start mining Freicoin instead.

if you look at it in the light that miners drive the network forward, and if the miners decide that "x" hardfork simply isn't going to happen, then they do indeed have a say in it.
Depends on the hardfork...
Post-hardfork miners can indeed softfork-veto any rule removal by re-adding the rule, but some hardforks (particularly ones that add/remove PoW or equivalent algorithms) potentially redefine the set of miners.

Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2240



View Profile
September 18, 2015, 02:49:19 AM
 #4431

What BIP is Eligius going to vote for? You ruled out 101 so only 101 is left or do you wait for an updated/new BIP?
Miners have no say on hardforks, and it's not a vote.
Your question is a false dichotomy.

Not quite true though.  Pools can basically vote based on which software they run now that xt exists.  And miners can vote based on what pool they mine on. 
No, pools/miners that use software producing or accepting invalid blocks simply cease to be Bitcoin miners.
It is literally no different than if they start mining Freicoin instead.

if you look at it in the light that miners drive the network forward, and if the miners decide that "x" hardfork simply isn't going to happen, then they do indeed have a say in it.
Depends on the hardfork...
Post-hardfork miners can indeed softfork-veto any rule removal by re-adding the rule, but some hardforks (particularly ones that add/remove PoW or equivalent algorithms) potentially redefine the set of miners.
But that isn't relevant to the point: there is nothing positive miners can do to support a hardfork.

Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2240



View Profile
September 18, 2015, 02:43:14 AM
 #4432

What BIP is Eligius going to vote for? You ruled out 101 so only 101 is left or do you wait for an updated/new BIP?
Miners have no say on hardforks, and it's not a vote.
Your question is a false dichotomy.

Not quite true though.  Pools can basically vote based on which software they run now that xt exists.  And miners can vote based on what pool they mine on. 
No, pools/miners that use software producing or accepting invalid blocks simply cease to be Bitcoin miners.

if you look at it in the light that miners drive the network forward, and if the miners decide that "x" hardfork simply isn't going to happen, then they do indeed have a say in it.
Depends on the hardfork...
Post-hardfork miners can indeed softfork-veto any rule removal by re-adding the rule, but some hardforks (particularly ones that add/remove PoW or equivalent algorithms) potentially redefine the set of miners.

kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2212


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 18, 2015, 05:42:42 AM
 #4433

I don't think posting almost the same thing 3 times in a row will convince anyone ...

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
zoro1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
September 18, 2015, 02:33:55 PM
 #4434

I don't think posting almost the same thing 3 times in a row will convince anyone ...
heheheh Grin
i wonder what went wrong Grin

https://storjtalk.org/index.php
storj:decentralized cloud and much more!
Biomech
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176


Anarchy is not chaos.


View Profile
September 18, 2015, 05:02:26 PM
 #4435

What BIP is Eligius going to vote for? You ruled out 101 so only 101 is left or do you wait for an updated/new BIP?
Miners have no say on hardforks, and it's not a vote.
Your question is a false dichotomy.

Not quite true though.  Pools can basically vote based on which software they run now that xt exists.  And miners can vote based on what pool they mine on. 
No, pools/miners that use software producing or accepting invalid blocks simply cease to be Bitcoin miners.

if you look at it in the light that miners drive the network forward, and if the miners decide that "x" hardfork simply isn't going to happen, then they do indeed have a say in it.
Depends on the hardfork...
Post-hardfork miners can indeed softfork-veto any rule removal by re-adding the rule, but some hardforks (particularly ones that add/remove PoW or equivalent algorithms) potentially redefine the set of miners.

True enough. It's a rather complex subject with no simple answers. I personally think that larger blocks are both desirable and necessary, but the XT proposal was poorly thought out and the attempt to force the issue rather than taking the time to properly implement it just makes Gavin and Mike look like idiots. Neither of them really are, but they come across that way with this. Throwing a tantrum might be effective, but it's certainly not the way to conduct important business.

Buy Bitcoins with Paypal, Credit card, or other methods. Send me a PM or a text to 208-451-2665.
not.you
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1508


View Profile
September 18, 2015, 05:29:43 PM
 #4436

I personally think that larger blocks are both desirable and necessary,

I was initially inclined to agree with this but after reading more on the issue I think I agree with those who say that block propagation speed is one of, if not the most important factor in keeping bitcoin decentralized.  And with the internet infrastructure such as it is right now, smaller blocks are better.  There are already problems with block propagation at 1mb, moving up to something like 8 would be a huge push in the direction of centralization.  And centralization of either full nodes or mining are both potentially large problems, both of which would potentially happen with larger blocks.  When large blocks can propagate quickly then a switch to larger blocks would be more timely.

I'm a fan of self control, but only in moderation.
ProfMac
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 854



View Profile
September 18, 2015, 08:14:13 PM
 #4437

I personally think that larger blocks are both desirable and necessary,

I was initially inclined to agree with this but after reading more on the issue I think I agree with those who say that block propagation speed is one of, if not the most important factor in keeping bitcoin decentralized.  And with the internet infrastructure such as it is right now, smaller blocks are better.  There are already problems with block propagation at 1mb, moving up to something like 8 would be a huge push in the direction of centralization.  And centralization of either full nodes or mining are both potentially large problems, both of which would potentially happen with larger blocks.  When large blocks can propagate quickly then a switch to larger blocks would be more timely.

I assume this has been discussed a lot, but this is one of the only threads that I follow.  I think the original vision is that the fees have to rise to pay the costs of running the network.  Making structural changes, such as bigger blocks, so that no transactions are delayed or left out sabotages that transition.

One alternative is to trust the original design, and to let market forces push the transaction fees up for people who want faster block inclusion.

If there is a link to the blocksize discussion somewhere, I am willing to read it before I post more. :-)

I try to be respectful and informed.
not.you
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1508


View Profile
September 19, 2015, 02:26:43 AM
 #4438

I may be wrong but my impression is that most of the conversation is happening on reddit.  I have seen a couple threads here about it but not with very in-depth conversation.  I have an app on my phone that aggregates news stories and blog posts about bitcoin and I read those things all the time so that is mostly what has informed my opinion on the issue. 

In more relevent news, the Eligius website is a bit laggy tonight.

I'm a fan of self control, but only in moderation.
Biomech
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176


Anarchy is not chaos.


View Profile
September 19, 2015, 03:37:38 AM
 #4439

I may be wrong but my impression is that most of the conversation is happening on reddit.  I have seen a couple threads here about it but not with very in-depth conversation.  I have an app on my phone that aggregates news stories and blog posts about bitcoin and I read those things all the time so that is mostly what has informed my opinion on the issue. 

In more relevent news, the Eligius website is a bit laggy tonight.
so's the freakin' blockchain. 20 minute plus blocks again Sad

Reddit is a forum I simply can't stand, but it does seem to be where most of the technical discussion is going on.

Buy Bitcoins with Paypal, Credit card, or other methods. Send me a PM or a text to 208-451-2665.
RoadTrain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
October 03, 2015, 12:33:28 PM
 #4440

The pool has been pretty unlucky recently. I wonder if it's a simple statistical fluctuation.
Pages: « 1 ... 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 [222] 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 »
  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!