Bitcoin Forum
April 27, 2024, 06:58:50 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 [334] 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 ... 425 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [CLOSED] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees+NMC, Stratum, VarDiff, Private Servers  (Read 902902 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.
xzempt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 500


View Profile
April 12, 2014, 10:13:45 PM
 #6661

btcguild has been my favorite for sometime... but the bad luck is killing me.....


any idea who owns the unknown mining thats taking up 31% of the network?
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
eleuthria (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007



View Profile
April 12, 2014, 10:26:12 PM
 #6662

btcguild has been my favorite for sometime... but the bad luck is killing me.....


any idea who owns the unknown mining thats taking up 31% of the network?

I know a lot of it is KNC.  organofcorti's weekly posts include an *actual* breakdown of mining capacity.  I think the "unknown" amount for his reports is down to something like 5-7%.


As for luck:  All I can say is "that's luck for you".  You had about 6 months in a row paying above 100% by a few % each month, and now the last month and a half has been quite a bit below 100% (enough below to nuke the 3m/6m figures, if you shifted those figures back one month they'd still be above 100%).

RIP BTC Guild, April 2011 - June 2015
HellDiverUK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 501



View Profile
April 13, 2014, 08:19:02 AM
 #6663


Yes, quite a few Eligius users have BTC Guild for their failover.  I know they've been under attack a lot recently, though for the last few weeks it hasn't affected the mining pool itself. 

Eligius has been suffering a DDoS for weeks now, mostly on the stats server.  There was also an issue where the NMC payouts were hijacked, so no-one's been getting NMC payouts for a few months.  The pool itself is stable, but the stats which so many rely on are a bit broken.
ManeBjorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1004



View Profile
April 13, 2014, 07:05:58 PM
 #6664

I really do not get why so many people stay with Eligius with all the issues they have.
I am not bashing them it just does not make sense.
It sucks all the people going to ghash.  That I do not like to see at all.
One friend of mine will not mine anywhere but there and he has over 15 th/s.  He says the steady luck is the reason why.



Yes, quite a few Eligius users have BTC Guild for their failover.  I know they've been under attack a lot recently, though for the last few weeks it hasn't affected the mining pool itself. 

Eligius has been suffering a DDoS for weeks now, mostly on the stats server.  There was also an issue where the NMC payouts were hijacked, so no-one's been getting NMC payouts for a few months.  The pool itself is stable, but the stats which so many rely on are a bit broken.

eleuthria (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007



View Profile
April 13, 2014, 07:53:48 PM
 #6665

I really do not get why so many people stay with Eligius with all the issues they have.
I am not bashing them it just does not make sense.
It sucks all the people going to ghash.  That I do not like to see at all.
One friend of mine will not mine anywhere but there and he has over 15 th/s.  He says the steady luck is the reason why.



Yes, quite a few Eligius users have BTC Guild for their failover.  I know they've been under attack a lot recently, though for the last few weeks it hasn't affected the mining pool itself. 

Eligius has been suffering a DDoS for weeks now, mostly on the stats server.  There was also an issue where the NMC payouts were hijacked, so no-one's been getting NMC payouts for a few months.  The pool itself is stable, but the stats which so many rely on are a bit broken.

If they had graphs of luck like we do per shift, you'd see a LOT spikier luck because their N value is stupidly low.  They frequently have shares go entirely unpaid since they're only eligible for payment for about 35 minutes.

RIP BTC Guild, April 2011 - June 2015
ManeBjorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1004



View Profile
April 13, 2014, 09:32:22 PM
 #6666

That is just bad news all around. 


I really do not get why so many people stay with Eligius with all the issues they have.
I am not bashing them it just does not make sense.
It sucks all the people going to ghash.  That I do not like to see at all.
One friend of mine will not mine anywhere but there and he has over 15 th/s.  He says the steady luck is the reason why.



Yes, quite a few Eligius users have BTC Guild for their failover.  I know they've been under attack a lot recently, though for the last few weeks it hasn't affected the mining pool itself. 

Eligius has been suffering a DDoS for weeks now, mostly on the stats server.  There was also an issue where the NMC payouts were hijacked, so no-one's been getting NMC payouts for a few months.  The pool itself is stable, but the stats which so many rely on are a bit broken.

If they had graphs of luck like we do per shift, you'd see a LOT spikier luck because their N value is stupidly low.  They frequently have shares go entirely unpaid since they're only eligible for payment for about 35 minutes.

eleuthria (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007



View Profile
April 14, 2014, 06:23:43 PM
 #6667

Applied a small fix to the wallet validation code to support P2SH addresses for your withdrawal address.

RIP BTC Guild, April 2011 - June 2015
MoreBloodWine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001


View Profile
April 14, 2014, 11:13:29 PM
 #6668

Applied a small fix to the wallet validation code to support P2SH addresses for your withdrawal address.
P2SH ?

To be decided...
eleuthria (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007



View Profile
April 14, 2014, 11:40:08 PM
 #6669

Applied a small fix to the wallet validation code to support P2SH addresses for your withdrawal address.
P2SH ?

Something that was implemented long ago but not used much.  It's something a few online (and offline?) wallets have started using.  P2SH allows for M-of-N escrow style transactions.

RIP BTC Guild, April 2011 - June 2015
MoreBloodWine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001


View Profile
April 15, 2014, 12:19:36 AM
 #6670

Applied a small fix to the wallet validation code to support P2SH addresses for your withdrawal address.
P2SH ?

Something that was implemented long ago but not used much.  It's something a few online (and offline?) wallets have started using.  P2SH allows for M-of-N escrow style transactions.
So not something your average user such as my self would need to be concerned with.

To be decided...
os2sam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3578
Merit: 1090


Think for yourself


View Profile
April 15, 2014, 12:41:29 AM
 #6671

Applied a small fix to the wallet validation code to support P2SH addresses for your withdrawal address.
P2SH ?

Something that was implemented long ago but not used much.  It's something a few online (and offline?) wallets have started using.  P2SH allows for M-of-N escrow style transactions.
So not something your average user such as my self would need to be concerned with.

Considering the HUGE rush and conflicts implementing it caused you would think everyone in the world would be screaming to use it.

But, no its not really anything to be concerned with, I agree.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
MoreBloodWine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001


View Profile
April 15, 2014, 02:41:57 AM
 #6672

Applied a small fix to the wallet validation code to support P2SH addresses for your withdrawal address.
P2SH ?

Something that was implemented long ago but not used much.  It's something a few online (and offline?) wallets have started using.  P2SH allows for M-of-N escrow style transactions.
So not something your average user such as my self would need to be concerned with.

Considering the HUGE rush and conflicts implementing it caused you would think everyone in the world would be screaming to use it.

But, no its not really anything to be concerned with, I agree.
For my own curiosity could you please elaborate on this ? It's more of a curiosity than anything else.

The curiosity is just how it would benefit anyone in regards to a pool. What sorta confuses me is the way eleuthria responded...

--- It's something a few online (and offline?) wallets have started using.  P2SH allows for M-of-N escrow style transactions. ---


To be decided...
eleuthria (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007



View Profile
April 15, 2014, 05:26:01 AM
 #6673

Applied a small fix to the wallet validation code to support P2SH addresses for your withdrawal address.
P2SH ?

Something that was implemented long ago but not used much.  It's something a few online (and offline?) wallets have started using.  P2SH allows for M-of-N escrow style transactions.
So not something your average user such as my self would need to be concerned with.

Considering the HUGE rush and conflicts implementing it caused you would think everyone in the world would be screaming to use it.

But, no its not really anything to be concerned with, I agree.
For my own curiosity could you please elaborate on this ? It's more of a curiosity than anything else.

The curiosity is just how it would benefit anyone in regards to a pool. What sorta confuses me is the way eleuthria responded...

--- It's something a few online (and offline?) wallets have started using.  P2SH allows for M-of-N escrow style transactions. ---

Users weren't able to enter a P2SH style wallet address (they start with a 3 instead of a 1, and my script used to validate an address didn't properly validate them), so they couldn't use an address that required multiple signatures in order to spend the funds, which is the point of an M-of-N type transaction.  One example scenario for an M-of-N style address is your funds can't be spent unless both your PC and your phone sign the transaction to send coins somewhere, effectively adding 2 factor authentication to the address itself.  I'm not familiar with how it has been implemented in client implementations or web wallets, it's not something I've ever found a need for personally.

P2SH itself had a bit of a history about 2 years ago, where miners (mostly pools even back then) had to "vote" by including /P2SH/ in the coinbase before rules enforcing stricter requirements for p2sh transactions came into effect.  You can get a little information on the background of it (BIP 16) here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0016.mediawiki

RIP BTC Guild, April 2011 - June 2015
ak49er
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672
Merit: 250


Buy, sell and store real cryptocurrencies


View Profile
April 15, 2014, 08:37:19 PM
 #6674

User stats under Rankings, are for a single user?  (Or more obviously a single user account.)

431474   2,070,560.62 GH/s

That's a lot of hash!

iglasses
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 15, 2014, 09:04:01 PM
 #6675

Holy crap balls..... 1,100 THs jump in an hour?

I only have a signature because I'm allowed.
DevonMiner
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 471
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 15, 2014, 09:08:46 PM
 #6676

Holy crap balls..... 1,100 THs jump in an hour?

Damn, yes I noticed that ... oh well ... there goes my reduced share % ... Hopefully a pool hopper ... so HOP OFF!

eleuthria (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007



View Profile
April 15, 2014, 09:43:20 PM
 #6677

Holy crap balls..... 1,100 THs jump in an hour?

Damn, yes I noticed that ... oh well ... there goes my reduced share % ... Hopefully a pool hopper ... so HOP OFF!


Why would you want the pool to shrink?  Higher speed = less variance.  You'd get less per block but more blocks.

RIP BTC Guild, April 2011 - June 2015
ManeBjorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1004



View Profile
April 15, 2014, 09:55:07 PM
 #6678

9500+ th/s now.
Pretty cool.


Holy crap balls..... 1,100 THs jump in an hour?

Damn, yes I noticed that ... oh well ... there goes my reduced share % ... Hopefully a pool hopper ... so HOP OFF!


Why would you want the pool to shrink?  Higher speed = less variance.  You'd get less per block but more blocks.

DevonMiner
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 471
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 15, 2014, 10:33:37 PM
 #6679

Why would you want the pool to shrink?  Higher speed = less variance.  You'd get less per block but more blocks.

OK ... I understand the maths ... my spreadsheet will tell me longterm, for everyone to benefit will be good.

abyssmu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 13
Merit: 0


View Profile
April 15, 2014, 11:03:22 PM
 #6680

431474   2,013,437.42 GH/s

Wish I could afford to jump a Petahash. >.> Me and my meager 7 Gh. Sad
Pages: « 1 ... 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 [334] 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 ... 425 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!