Luke-Jr
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
|
|
October 06, 2014, 06:44:14 PM |
|
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 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1223
Merit: 1006
|
|
October 06, 2014, 07:47:13 PM |
|
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
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
|
|
October 06, 2014, 07:50:00 PM |
|
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 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1223
Merit: 1006
|
|
October 06, 2014, 08:41:37 PM |
|
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
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
|
|
October 06, 2014, 08:45:27 PM |
|
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
|
|
October 07, 2014, 05:49:44 PM |
|
- 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 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1223
Merit: 1006
|
|
October 07, 2014, 05:54:02 PM |
|
- 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
|
|
October 07, 2014, 10:23:07 PM |
|
- 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 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1223
Merit: 1006
|
|
October 07, 2014, 10:45:00 PM |
|
- 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
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
|
|
October 07, 2014, 11:39:55 PM |
|
- 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
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1638
Merit: 1001
|
|
October 08, 2014, 04:32:24 AM |
|
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
|
|
October 09, 2014, 01:29:38 PM Last edit: October 09, 2014, 02:27:13 PM by 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
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000
Dark Passenger Bitcoin miner 2013,Bitcoin node
|
|
October 09, 2014, 03:46:37 PM |
|
Have you tried stratum+tcp://stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334 +btc address
|
Please tip the Node 1MPWKB23NsZsXHANnFwVAWT86mL24fqAjF; KO4UX THAT NO GOOD DO GOODER BAT!!!
|
|
|
Ermak
|
|
October 09, 2014, 04:27:44 PM |
|
captain obvious (stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334) )))))try does not work
|
|
|
|
mavericklm
|
|
October 09, 2014, 06:41:50 PM |
|
i use stratum+tcp://stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334
|
|
|
|
Ermak
|
|
October 09, 2014, 08:01:57 PM |
|
BE200 Jet Stratum Miner V 5.47 programa controller does not see such lines as settings (stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334)
|
|
|
|
|
dexX7
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1026
|
|
October 10, 2014, 09:15:54 AM |
|
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=524512That's disappointing.
|
|
|
|
mavericklm
|
|
October 12, 2014, 01:29:04 PM Last edit: October 12, 2014, 04:01:43 PM by mavericklm |
|
the site is down!?!?!? LE: it's back!
|
|
|
|
noobtrader
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
|
|
October 12, 2014, 02:38:08 PM |
|
the site is down!?!?!?
mining is still working, maybe just the website.
|
"...I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism...", satoshi@vistomail.com
|
|
|
|