[CLOSED] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees+NMC, Stratum, VarDiff, Private Servers

[Joshwaa]

I think that's one of the main reasons I picked BTCGuild when I first started. The Front end was/is clean, inviting, and professional. Plus everyone loves graphs!

[eleuthria]

I think that's one of the main reasons I picked BTCGuild when I first started. The Front end was/is clean, inviting, and professional. Plus everyone loves graphs!

Just wait.  Once some of the other projects die down, there's a chance at a much more modern looking (but still very clean) interface coming.  I'm doing a lot of work behind the scenes right now to optimize pool servers in case BFL actually delivers anything remotely close to their claimed ASIC specs.

[AndrewBUD]

That would be cool... I would be willing to dish out some ca$h on one of them dealies whats the ETA? 2015?

[eleuthria]

That would be cool... I would be willing to dish out some ca$h on one of them dealies whats the ETA? 2015?

They claim October...but I'm extremely skeptical.  I know quite a few people that are involved in hardware design/engineering who have dealt with ASICs in the past.  Not one of them believes BFL could possibly deliver the specs they're claiming (especially the ~2 watt 3.5 GH/s chip).

However, even if the end specs are only 10-20% of the claimed speed, it's still a massive leap forward in the hash rates that we'll be seeing on the network.

I'm looking at some alternative pool server software and running a lot of benchmarks to see where the choke points are.  Hopefully that'll get everything ready in time so we don't come crashing down under the weight of terahash miners.

[eleuthria]

Yet another poll added [yes, I've had a lot of ideas floating and I'll soon have the time to implement them].  The new poll is an option for anonymous mining [no registration, just use a payout address].

Anonymous mining will work as follows:
  1) Begin mining with a bitcoin address at anonymous.btcguild.com
  2) Log into BTC Guild using your payout address [no password] to check stats.
  3) You will be able to set automatic payouts or request manual payouts as usual.
  4) NMC may not be available in this setup, still working on how that will get implemented.


As with previous polls, the purpose of the poll is not to determine whether or not the feature will be implemented, it is to determine the order in which they are added.  The current order of addons is as follows:

1) BTC Savings Accounts [may not be available to all users immediately]
2) Direct PayPal payouts

[BitMinerN8]

Yet another poll added [yes, I've had a lot of ideas floating and I'll soon have the time to implement them].  The new poll is an option for anonymous mining [no registration, just use a payout address].

Anonymous mining will work as follows:
  1) Begin mining with a bitcoin address at anonymous.btcguild.com
  2) Log into BTC Guild using your payout address [no password] to check stats.
  3) You will be able to set automatic payouts or request manual payouts as usual.
  4) NMC may not be available in this setup, still working on how that will get implemented.


As with previous polls, the purpose of the poll is not to determine whether or not the feature will be implemented, it is to determine the order in which they are added.  The current order of addons is as follows:

1) BTC Savings Accounts [may not be available to all users immediately]
2) Direct PayPal payouts

Just throwing it out there, but if you going to go Anonymous, see if you can hook up TOR access as well.

[rjk]

Slush already does Tor, but I'm not sure how many people actually use it?

EDIT: Looks like 19 Tor workers currently connected, but not sure of the hash rate.

[BitMinerN8]

Slush already does Tor, but I'm not sure how many people actually use it?

EDIT: Looks like 19 Tor workers currently connected, but not sure of the hash rate.

I guess I'm just saying, if your going to go Anonymous, go all the way. We're all pretty smart individuals here, we know how this works with respect to running servers, logs, etc. It seems like logging in with just your payout address will not get you what you seek from an Anonymous standpoint. Anyone that has spent time digging through blockchain.info will understand.

[AndrewBUD]

Sounds pretty cool. Keep up the good work

[eleuthria]

Good point on TOR.  I will definitely look into adding that to the anonymous mining server as an OPTION [not a requirement].

'Anonymous' mining is a bit of an awkward term, since even regular BTC Guild accounts are anonymous for the most part [don't require any email/contact info].  A better word would be account-less mining.  Adding TOR would make it anonymous though .

[broken]

I cant request any BTC or Namecoin payouts anymore. I get the message:

A payout request is already being processed for your account (you may have clicked the link twice).

I waited a few blocks and still the same. Also the Unpaid Rewards counter did not jump back to zero, after i clicked request payout. Can you take a look at this, please. My username is br0ken

This should be fixed now.  Earlier today the hot wallet ran low due to some bad luck last week paired with a large spike in withdrawals due to the price increase.  A few automatic payouts were also stuck due to the problem.  Those missing automatic payouts should be processed in 20 minutes with the next batch.

I can't make payouts. Hot wallet low again?

[bulanula]

Excuse my ignorance but what is the friken point of TOR mining ?

Tor has better uses than wasting bandwidth for your getworks.

Unless you are running a botnet and don't want to get behind bars ...

Can't wait for ASIC to come and SPAM to start resuming again because botnet miners are scum.

[eleuthria]

I can't make payouts. Hot wallet low again?

The hot wallet has plenty of funds at the moment.  Looks like bitcoind timed out and didn't respond with a txid when you requested your most recent payout [which causes it to lock your new payout requests since the previous one is still "processing"].  I've corrected the error on your account.

[broken]

thx

[eleuthria]

Small update to the site:  Worker speeds are now calculated more dynamically.  For regular miners this won't be too noticeable, but for anyone who turns on/off, your worker speeds no longer take 15 minutes to normalize.  It will begin showing speed estimates after about 2 minutes, and the time used to determine your speed will grow from there, resulting in a more accurate speed estimate as you continue mining.

If you notice any very odd speed estimates, please let me know so I can take a look.

[eleuthria]

Bug fix was made to the API.  It was "randomly" not showing all workers.  A counter variable in the speed averaging code was also being used by the loop that runs through all workers, which was causing unintended behavior.

[eleuthria]

Alright, not going to call the poll over yet, but I've been able to get a good gauge of which features to implement first.  Hopefully some of them are done soon, but there may be some delays.  I'm currently working very hard with a few others to write a new bitcoin mining protocol to prepare pools and mining software for the possibility (however remote it is, I still don't trust BFL) of ASIC mining.  Tonight we've nearly finished an outline for the new protocol, which should completely change the mining landscape.

Bandwidth will be significantly reduced for miners and the pool, and a miner should be able to support 256 TH/s+ with just one getwork/minute.  That number can be increased exponentially multiple times if the protocol needs to be extended, and the handshake will allow it to be dynamically increased if miner software supports it.

[bulanula]

Alright, not going to call the poll over yet, but I've been able to get a good gauge of which features to implement first.  Hopefully some of them are done soon, but there may be some delays.  I'm currently working very hard with a few others to write a new bitcoin mining protocol to prepare pools and mining software for the possibility (however remote it is, I still don't trust BFL) of ASIC mining.  Tonight we've nearly finished an outline for the new protocol, which should completely change the mining landscape.

Bandwidth will be significantly reduced for miners and the pool, and a miner should be able to support 256 TH/s+ with just one getwork/minute.  That number can be increased exponentially multiple times if the protocol needs to be extended, and the handshake will allow it to be dynamically increased if miner software supports it.

I have said this multiple times already.

The getwork protocol is rubbish and flawed.

No need to change size of nonce or some other stuff.

Get a new protocol in place is the best option here.

Make sure it is resilient to crappy network connections and does not overload cheap routers etc.

Good work eleuthria !

[eleuthria]

DE servers were having a few issues earlier.  Gave them a reboot (it's been about 4 months since they had one), and should be coming back up soon.

Not much news yet on the new mining protocol, other than the spec has been planned out and I'm now working on a proof of concept.  It'll be slow progress, but I'm hoping by August this thing can be released and people will see a massive boost in their efficiency if they upgrade to a miner that supports it.

[-ck]

In the meantime you can upgrade to cgminer 2.4.4 which I just released which should support massive hashrates anyway with a dramatic rise in efficiency. The faster the device, the higher the efficiency.