Bitcoin Forum
April 25, 2017, 06:42:01 PM *
News: If the forum does not load normally for you, please send me a traceroute.
 
   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 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [14000Th] Eligius: 0% Fee BTC, 105% PPS NMC, No registration, CPPSRB  (Read 873804 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.
klondike_bar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470

ASIC wannabe


View Profile
September 13, 2015, 02:33:38 PM
 #4421

i have moved from this pool.

been mining 3 months i bearly got 1btc in that time feels like something is wrong.
Looking at the address in your signature with Eligius's stats (16evXY9azcbYtLdKCAn1SeNN7gGxcRGRi6) you've earned 0.89838518 BTC by mining sporadically over a several month period at a max of about ~2.4 Th/sec.  The BTC earned reflects nearly 98% shares rewarded (better than any other pool after considering fees and orphans).

So basically, you've earned exactly what you were supposed to based on what you've contributed.  If you would have mined continuously for 3 months at 2.4 Th you would have earned roughly 2 BTC (estimating, since I don't feel like doing the math for all of the difficulty values for the past 3 months).  But you didn't.  Your average hashrate at Eligius for the past 90 days was no where near 2.4 Th.

It was 1.07 Th/sec.  1.07/2.4 = ~44.6%.... 44.6% of ~2 BTC = 0.89166666 BTC.... hrmmm... looks suspiciously like exactly how much you've earned.

In summary, you don't know what you're talking about and I would appreciate it if you would actually understand how these things work (or ask maybe?) instead of accusing the pool of scamming you.
-wk

sm-sm-sm-SMACKDOWN!!!

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

24" PCI-E cables with 16AWG wires and stripped ends - great for server PSU mods, best prices https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563461 also selling 6" M-F-M PCIe splitters and PCIe-PCIe
No longer a wannabe - now an ASIC owner!
1493145721
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493145721

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1493145721
Reply with quote  #2

1493145721
Report to moderator
1493145721
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493145721

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1493145721
Reply with quote  #2

1493145721
Report to moderator
1493145721
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493145721

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1493145721
Reply with quote  #2

1493145721
Report to moderator
"You Asked For Change, We Gave You Coins" -- casascius
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
wizkid057
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1198


View Profile
September 13, 2015, 02:34:48 PM
 #4422

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)
p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
September 13, 2015, 02:40:28 PM
 #4423

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

+1

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

Activity: 728


View Profile
September 14, 2015, 05:23:28 AM
 #4424

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

Activity: 574



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

The Americans take our data privacy concerns seriously. - Hans-Peter Friedrich (German Federal Minister of the Interior)
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142



View Profile
September 16, 2015, 01:05:21 AM
 #4426

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: 728


View Profile
September 16, 2015, 06:49:20 AM
 #4427

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
 #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.
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
*
Online Online

Activity: 1385


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

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. 

All your #NecessaryHashtags are belong to us
Biomech
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176


Anarchy is not chaos.


View Profile
September 18, 2015, 12:30:13 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.

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: 2142



View Profile
September 18, 2015, 02:47:34 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.

Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142



View Profile
September 18, 2015, 02:49:19 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.
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: 2142



View Profile
September 18, 2015, 02:43:14 AM
 #4433

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: 2058


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 18, 2015, 05:42:42 AM
 #4434

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
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
 #4435

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
 #4436

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
*
Online Online

Activity: 1385


View Profile
September 18, 2015, 05:29:43 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.

All your #NecessaryHashtags are belong to us
ProfMac
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826



View Profile
September 18, 2015, 08:14:13 PM
 #4438

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
*
Online Online

Activity: 1385


View Profile
September 19, 2015, 02:26:43 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.

All your #NecessaryHashtags are belong to us
Biomech
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176


Anarchy is not chaos.


View Profile
September 19, 2015, 03:37:38 AM
 #4440

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.
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 »
  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!