Eligius: 0% Fee BTC, 105% PPS NMC, No registration, CPPSRB

[Luke-Jr]

is it a good assumption the payout queue is down

Doing some maintenance

That last payout, seems to be taking a long time to verify, its only been seen by 1 peer after 4 hours.

Makes no sense since every Eligius payout is in a block. So, wherever you got that information from is providing useless info...

Could only part of the block take longer to confirm than other parts?

Nope.

Uhhh... yes?
Generation transactions always take >=100 blocks to confirm, while others are subjective to wallet/human decision on when they confirm.

[wizkid057]

is it a good assumption the payout queue is down

Doing some maintenance

That last payout, seems to be taking a long time to verify, its only been seen by 1 peer after 4 hours.

Makes no sense since every Eligius payout is in a block. So, wherever you got that information from is providing useless info...

Could only part of the block take longer to confirm than other parts?

Nope.

Uhhh... yes?
Generation transactions always take >=100 blocks to confirm, while others are subjective to wallet/human decision on when they confirm.

Everything in the block receives the same numbet of confirmations though,  which is what I was getting at.

[Luke-Jr]

is it a good assumption the payout queue is down

Doing some maintenance

That last payout, seems to be taking a long time to verify, its only been seen by 1 peer after 4 hours.

Makes no sense since every Eligius payout is in a block. So, wherever you got that information from is providing useless info...

Could only part of the block take longer to confirm than other parts?

Nope.

Uhhh... yes?
Generation transactions always take >=100 blocks to confirm, while others are subjective to wallet/human decision on when they confirm.

Everything in the block receives the same numbet of confirmations though,  which is what I was getting at.

Confirmation is a (fuzzy) boolean, not a number

[wizkid057]

is it a good assumption the payout queue is down

Doing some maintenance

That last payout, seems to be taking a long time to verify, its only been seen by 1 peer after 4 hours.

Makes no sense since every Eligius payout is in a block. So, wherever you got that information from is providing useless info...

Could only part of the block take longer to confirm than other parts?

Nope.

Uhhh... yes?
Generation transactions always take >=100 blocks to confirm, while others are subjective to wallet/human decision on when they confirm.

Everything in the block receives the same numbet of confirmations though,  which is what I was getting at.

Confirmation is a (fuzzy) boolean, not a number

I blame the core devs then for having a "confirmations" field in listtransactions RPC.

[Luke-Jr]

is it a good assumption the payout queue is down

Doing some maintenance

That last payout, seems to be taking a long time to verify, its only been seen by 1 peer after 4 hours.

Makes no sense since every Eligius payout is in a block. So, wherever you got that information from is providing useless info...

Could only part of the block take longer to confirm than other parts?

Nope.

Uhhh... yes?
Generation transactions always take >=100 blocks to confirm, while others are subjective to wallet/human decision on when they confirm.

Everything in the block receives the same numbet of confirmations though,  which is what I was getting at.

Confirmation is a (fuzzy) boolean, not a number

I blame the core devs then for having a "confirmations" field in listtransactions RPC.

I think that one is Satoshi's fault. :p

[IamNotSure]

• Standard transactions:
  • OP_RETURN: allow up to 80 bytes

Hello Luke-Jr

pardon my ignorance & my french

Does that mean that Eligius will allow counterparty-XCP transactions  (if encoded in OP_RETURN) or do you still plan to filter them out (I think you are treating them like spam because they're still multisig transactions) ?

[wizkid057]

• Standard transactions:
  • OP_RETURN: allow up to 80 bytes

Hello Luke-Jr

pardon my ignorance & my french

Does that mean that Eligius will allow counterparty-XCP transactions  (if encoded in OP_RETURN) or do you still plan to filter them out (I think you are treating them like spam because they're still multisig transactions) ? [/list]

OP RETURN would be appropriate.  Abusing multisig is not.

[praeluceo]

• Standard transactions:
  • OP_RETURN: allow up to 80 bytes

Hello Luke-Jr

pardon my ignorance & my french

Does that mean that Eligius will allow counterparty-XCP transactions  (if encoded in OP_RETURN) or do you still plan to filter them out (I think you are treating them like spam because they're still multisig transactions) ? [/list]

OP RETURN would be appropriate.  Abusing multisig is not.

So for those who aren't entirely sure what they're talking about (myself) what would constitute a violation of multisig? And how would this affect using a p2sh wallet? Or does this have nothing to do with p2sh wallets?

[wizkid057]

• Standard transactions:
  • OP_RETURN: allow up to 80 bytes

Hello Luke-Jr

pardon my ignorance & my french

Does that mean that Eligius will allow counterparty-XCP transactions  (if encoded in OP_RETURN) or do you still plan to filter them out (I think you are treating them like spam because they're still multisig transactions) ? [/list]

OP RETURN would be appropriate.  Abusing multisig is not.

So for those who aren't entirely sure what they're talking about (myself) what would constitute a violation of multisig? And how would this affect using a p2sh wallet? Or does this have nothing to do with p2sh wallets?

They're abusing multisig for arbitrary data storage instead of actual multisig transactions.

[Luke-Jr]

• Standard transactions:
  • OP_RETURN: allow up to 80 bytes

Hello Luke-Jr

pardon my ignorance & my french

Does that mean that Eligius will allow counterparty-XCP transactions  (if encoded in OP_RETURN) or do you still plan to filter them out (I think you are treating them like spam because they're still multisig transactions) ? [/list]

OP RETURN would be appropriate.  Abusing multisig is not.

So for those who aren't entirely sure what they're talking about (myself) what would constitute a violation of multisig? And how would this affect using a p2sh wallet? Or does this have nothing to do with p2sh wallets?

Multisig is fine. Hiding data by pretending it is multisig when it is not, is a problem.
The conclusive results do nothing to hinder P2SH multisig use.

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

Yeah, I have no idea what any of that means, but congratulations to whichever one of you got married or landed on the moon or whatever happened.

I landed on the Mun in Kerbal Space Program... does that count?

Did you see ArtForz?  He's a Master Engineer in Kerbal Interstellar.

[Ermak]

hi give advice))) can not run miner(ASICMINER Tube 800gh) used to run the line settings not run (stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334 (or http://gbt.mining.eligius.st:9337 mining.eligius.st:3334 ) please tell me the correct line settings

[sorry2xs]

Have you tried stratum+tcp://stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334 +btc address

[Ermak]

captain obvious  (stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334) )))))try does not work

[mavericklm]

i use stratum+tcp://stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334

[Ermak]

BE200 Jet Stratum Miner V 5.47 programa controller does not see such lines as settings (stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334)

[Luke-Jr]

BE200 Jet Stratum Miner V 5.47 programa controller does not see such lines as settings (stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334)

[Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive ASICMiner Tube Setup [HD]

[dexX7]

When we were talking about the special transaction handling policies related to Eligius you were saying:

Nor should you try to force core devs or pool operators (I think you really mean miners) to do your bidding against their will.

And I raised the concern:

Without transparency (e.g. published blacklists), I don't see how this is a choice made by miners.

You sort of assured to me it is public knowledge:

Eligius uses my public spam filter branch, and miners are capable of seeing what they are mining at any given moment in full detail using GBT

The policy discussion held last week indicates there was need for further discussion and clarification regarding this topic, but now I found out a similar patch was applied to the gentoo package of bitcoind/-qt:

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=524512

That's disappointing.

[mavericklm]

the site is down!?!?!?

LE: it's back!

[noobtrader]

the site is down!?!?!?

mining is still working, maybe just the website.