[ANN] ⛏️ Soloblocks.io - 0.4% SOLO Mining Pool with Provable payouts.

[jack3rror]

So, let me see if I understand. I never mined so I don't know the process of connecting a miner to a pool.

You should try only one time in your life by plugging some hashrate from nicehash. Its cheap now

Don't know how it looks like.
Users with miners/farms doesn't even need to register a user account in your pool? How does that happens? I'm just curious, btw!

Users and farm uses a bitcoin address as a login. With farms, I can define a password to access data.
You simply connect using yourbitcoinaddress.workername and you use your bitcoin address on the front page to get access to statistics, shares, and graphs.

Code:

 ./minerd -a sha256d -o stratum+tcp://soloblocks.io:3333 -O 3LzaP3iNz5n9mM7edi6eHGyLGY5Yk31SE8.Workername:x -D -P

[kano]

0.4 % fee Anonymous solo bitcoin mining just opened.

Anonymous mining, SOLO mining, Payment in the coinbase, no registration (just enter your bitcoin address)

Um, not sure where you got the false idea your pool is anonymous.

e.g. the only extra information required to be provided to my pool is an email address, which is easy to get.
(and everyone logged in here had to provide an email address to use bitcointalk ...)

However, in your case their BTC address is publically available, and also being transferred back and forward over the internet to the miners every 3 seconds, whereas it isn't on my pool.

False advertising isn't really the best way to create trust.

While 'that' other solo pool lies about this, copying them doesn't make it true.

------------------------

...
Not new, Analpaper did mention this years ago ...

Probably not the best thread to bring up the name of someone who ran a scam solo pool that found a block and the finder got nothing of it.

[jack3rror]

0.4 % fee Anonymous solo bitcoin mining just opened.

Anonymous mining, SOLO mining, Payment in the coinbase, no registration (just enter your bitcoin address)

Um, not sure where you got the false idea your pool is anonymous.

e.g. the only extra information required to be provided to my pool is an email address, which is easy to get.
(and everyone logged in here had to provide an email address to use bitcointalk ...)

However, in your case their BTC address is publically available, and also being transferred back and forward over the internet to the miners every 3 seconds, whereas it isn't on my pool.

If miners want a login without email address, they can ping me. If miners don't want to publicly advertise their address, they can change at every mined block.

False advertising isn't really the best way to create trust.

I have proved mathematically that you can trust jobs I send.

Read the topic and don't trust solo mining pool that cannot prove that jobs sent are legit and paid to the right person.

[DaCryptoRaccoon]

0.4 % fee Anonymous solo bitcoin mining just opened.

Anonymous mining, SOLO mining, Payment in the coinbase, no registration (just enter your bitcoin address)

Um, not sure where you got the false idea your pool is anonymous.

e.g. the only extra information required to be provided to my pool is an email address, which is easy to get.
(and everyone logged in here had to provide an email address to use bitcointalk ...)

However, in your case their BTC address is publically available, and also being transferred back and forward over the internet to the miners every 3 seconds, whereas it isn't on my pool.

False advertising isn't really the best way to create trust.

While 'that' other solo pool lies about this, copying them doesn't make it true.

------------------------

...
Not new, Analpaper did mention this years ago ...

Probably not the best thread to bring up the name of someone who ran a scam solo pool that found a block and the finder got nothing of it.

Kano go back to your cave man..

Why you always bashing people on here.. His pool is more anonymous that yours because it dose not require a sign up or email to be given.

Yes the address is on chain but so is everyone's I think what the OP means is no personal info is required to mine with him.

Glad to see another solo pool trying to launch I really think Bitcoin as a whole needs more pools tbh.

OP did you per chance get a copy of the "full solo" pool that was released then deleted by CK.

He only posted the full solo code for a short time then deleted it I have a copy if you require it.

[jack3rror]

Kano go back to your cave man..

Why you always bashing people on here.. His pool is more anonymous that yours because it dose not require a sign up or email to be given.

Yes the address is on chain but so is everyone's I think what the OP means is no personal info is required to mine with him.

Lol "go back to your cave man", poor Kano (I take the critics and try to improve though).

Thx for the additional info. There is no Google tracker, no Personal Info required.
I don't need additional info, I've got only IP from miners (for temporary ban in case of ddos on stratum port) and ... pure share processing

OP did you per chance get a copy of the "full solo" pool that was released then deleted by CK.

He only posted the full solo code for a short time then deleted it I have a copy if you require it.

I don't have this code at all, I'm sorry for you, and soloblocks did not inspired from CK's code at all.
I've manually implemented it from scratch, starting from bitcoin core's getblocktemplate.

[DaCryptoRaccoon]

Kano go back to your cave man..

Why you always bashing people on here.. His pool is more anonymous that yours because it dose not require a sign up or email to be given.

Yes the address is on chain but so is everyone's I think what the OP means is no personal info is required to mine with him.

Lol "go back to your cave man", poor Kano (I take the critics and try to improve though).

Thx for the additional info. There is no Google tracker, no Personal Info required.
I don't need additional info, I've got only IP from miners (for temporary ban in case of ddos on stratum port) and ... pure share processing

OP did you per chance get a copy of the "full solo" pool that was released then deleted by CK.

He only posted the full solo code for a short time then deleted it I have a copy if you require it.

I don't have this code at all, I'm sorry for you, and soloblocks did not inspired from CK's code at all.
I've manually implemented it from scratch, starting from bitcoin core's getblocktemplate.

You built this from the ground up?  Impressive.

Will keep eyes on this might throw some hash on it give it a test.

[NerdyN]

I have proved mathematically that you can trust jobs I send.

Thanks for providing the detail to validate your statements. I have pointed 315TH at your pool.

[NerdyN]

Would be good to know the highest share submitted per worker.

[paid2]

Hello

I would like to say thanks for what you are doing, and bravo as I read that you did your own code. Quite impressive to me.

Anyway, with all the due respect, I won't point my hashrate personally here for now, just because a BTC block represents a life-changing amount in my country (even with the actual BTC rates)   I must stay on long-established efficient pools, I think I will probably have 1 block before the end of my life, and cannot imagine lose it because of (for example) a technical issue of pool.
I notice you proved your good faith, and gives us a way to verify that you are not scamming people. Thanks for that, some other pool operators should take it as an example.
 I still have some doubts about the part of your pool is able to manage/operate fine when a block is solved. After some blocks confirmed found by your pool, I will definitely jump into it. It is 100% selfish, I know that if every miner is doing the same as me, your pool wouldn't be able to prove that she is working fine, But my personnal hashrate is too small and actually difficulty too high to take the risk. I hate to think like that, but I really don't have the choice now.

Kind of dilemma when we talk about life changing amount.

Thank you, sincerely for what you are doing, I love solo mining principe, and you are contributing to keep it alive. Unfortunately, at a personnal scale I cannot allow myself to risk my chance now, I would love to be enough wealthy to not consider as a tragedy a orphan block, a lost one or everything else you surely know what I mean.

Will keep an eye on your work, and before your pool found a or two blocks, would love to support you financially if you send a BTC address you own, When your pool will prove she handle block correctly, you can count on me and my few ASICs.

If you are able to prove that I am not in the right way thinking like that, I would be really interested to read it and would consider it seriously


Best regards

[jack3rror]

I have proved mathematically that you can trust jobs I send.

Thanks for providing the detail to validate your statements. I have pointed 315TH at your pool.

Awesome <3 Thank you for your trust and hashrate. We are going to make one block.

Would be good to know the highest share submitted per worker.

Per worker ? Okay. It seems easy to do, i'll publish something as soon as it's done.

[jack3rror]

Hello

I would like to say thanks for what you are doing, and bravo as I read that you did your own code. Quite impressive to me.

Anyway, with all the due respect, I won't point my hashrate personally here for now, just because a BTC block represents a life-changing amount in my country (even with the actual BTC rates)   I must stay on long-established efficient pools, I think I will probably have 1 block before the end of my life, and cannot imagine lose it because of (for example) a technical issue of pool.
I notice you proved your good faith, and gives us a way to verify that you are not scamming people. Thanks for that, some other pool operators should take it as an example.
 I still have some doubts about the part of your pool is able to manage/operate fine when a block is solved. After some blocks confirmed found by your pool, I will definitely jump into it. It is 100% selfish, I know that if every miner is doing the same as me, your pool wouldn't be able to prove that she is working fine, But my personnal hashrate is too small and actually difficulty too high to take the risk. I hate to think like that, but I really don't have the choice now.

Kind of dilemma when we talk about life changing amount.

Thank you, sincerely for what you are doing, I love solo mining principe, and you are contributing to keep it alive. Unfortunately, at a personnal scale I cannot allow myself to risk my chance now, I would love to be enough wealthy to not consider as a tragedy a orphan block, a lost one or everything else you surely know what I mean.

Will keep an eye on your work, and before your pool found a or two blocks, would love to support you financially if you send a BTC address you own, When your pool will prove she handle block correctly, you can count on me and my few ASICs.

If you are able to prove that I am not in the right way thinking like that, I would be really interested to read it and would consider it seriously


Best regards

Hey iwantmyhomepaidwithbtc2.
Don't point your hashrate if you are not confident enough.
You can point your hashrate for just 15 minutes and plug back on a PPS pool don't worry =), the dashboard will tell you the odds of finding a block in the next 24h

I've found 1 block every few milliseconds on testnet on multiple addresses. It's multi threaded (via goroutines), you can trust the code

For the node, It is hosted on a 64Gb Memory, 1.19 Tb NVME and 1 Gibabyte connexion. I've never seen a bitcoin node with so much space available hahaha.

> If you are able to prove that I am not in the right way thinking like that, I would be really interested to read it and would consider it seriously

I'm not a marketer or a business man, do what your heart tells you to do It's solo mining so consider the payout scheme before plugging in.

You asked for the payout address : 3LzaP3iNz5n9mM7edi6eHGyLGY5Yk31SE8
This address is setup in the pool as payout address (you can verify directly in the jobs (step 5 of my tutorial)).

I'm from 2009 in Bitcoin and never bought a single Bitcoin, I have no money left from this period (mining gpu in 2011). All I have is euro to pay for this server, so every satoshi counts

[NotFuzzyWarm]

<snip>

I've found 1 block every few milliseconds on testnet on multiple addresses. It's multi threaded (via goroutines), you can trust the code

For the node, It is hosted on a 64Gb Memory, 1.19 Tb NVME and 1 Gibabyte connexion. I've never seen a bitcoin node with so much space available hahaha.
<snip>

Well, Kano's nodes (currently 7 of them spread around the globe) run more than that but still - certainly more than most folks run

About Testnet: Remember that it is running at a far lower difficulty so take the results you get with a grain of salt. For one thing with it running the much  lower diff, Testnet does not prove that your code works with the current diff - only monitoring the size of shares being returned from Mainnet can prove that. AFAIK if you eventually start to see some results > around 2/3 of current diff you should be good but others will have to chime in on the exact number. As I recall it has to do with making sure the code properly handles numbers that are over what 32-bit can natively use.

[jack3rror]

As I recall it has to do with making sure the code properly handles numbers that are over what 32-bit can natively use.

Hello. I use Big Rat (golang) from Header Hash to get the difficulty of the share. It can handle huge numbers for difficulty to compare shareDiff and networkDiff. I don't use int64 or int32.

[kano]

As I recall it has to do with making sure the code properly handles numbers that are over what 32-bit can natively use.

Hello. I use Big Rat (golang) from Header Hash to get the difficulty of the share. It can handle huge numbers for difficulty to compare shareDiff and networkDiff. I don't use int64 or int32.

1) That means all math calculations using that in go are exceptionally slow compared to the c-library

2) While this may give you digital accuracy to whatever level you require, it wont be infinite, so there must be some default setting you should check.
Bitcoin numbers are ridiculously large compared to most other things done in the world, so you better ensure the default setting is big enough.
e.g. a 256 bit number can count roughly 1/1000th of all the atoms in the entire universe.

When I start my current version of KDB I get it to do decimal place accuracy calculations on current difficulty vs expected answers, to verify there is always enough accuracy

I also added coded to cgminer last year (in the public git) to optionally verify the binary you generate can handle 32 to 240 bits of leading zeros on a hash correctly.
(the last 16 bits have a value in it for testing)
i.e. up to 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ffff

So while you say 'yeah this language will handle it', it is advisable to actually check that yourself
rather than just assume it's ok ...

[jack3rror]

As I recall it has to do with making sure the code properly handles numbers that are over what 32-bit can natively use.

Hello. I use Big Rat (golang) from Header Hash to get the difficulty of the share. It can handle huge numbers for difficulty to compare shareDiff and networkDiff. I don't use int64 or int32.

1) That means all math calculations using that in go are exceptionally slow compared to the c-library

2) While this may give you digital accuracy to whatever level you require, it wont be infinite, so there must be some default setting you should check.
Bitcoin numbers are ridiculously large compared to most other things done in the world, so you better ensure the default setting is big enough.
e.g. a 256 bit number can count roughly 1/1000th of all the atoms in the entire universe.

When I start my current version of KDB I get it to do decimal place accuracy calculations on current difficulty vs expected answers, to verify there is always enough accuracy

I also added coded to cgminer last year (in the public git) to optionally verify the binary you generate can handle 32 to 240 bits of leading zeros on a hash correctly.
(the last 16 bits have a value in it for testing)
i.e. up to 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ffff

So while you say 'yeah this language will handle it', it is advisable to actually check that yourself
rather than just assume it's ok ...

1 - It's an issue with golang yep, I'm looking to reimplement c-library into golang (in fact i wonder if btcsuite has the library)
2 - Going to check if I can change the comparison to a 256 bits number instead. But current max value of big rat is incredibly high
3 - I assume it's ok on current difficulty and for the next 40 years

[citb0in]

Would be good to know the highest share submitted per worker.

Per worker ? Okay. It seems easy to do, i'll publish something as soon as it's done.

This is months ago now, can we see some results? Currently I am trying soloblocks.io and in my dashboard I see nothing related to bestshare and bestever for my mining work. The whole solo mining is useless for me without these stats. Can you shed some light into, please?

thank you.

[jack3rror]

This is months ago now, can we see some results? Currently I am trying soloblocks.io and in my dashboard I see nothing related to bestshare and bestever for my mining work. The whole solo mining is useless for me without these stats. Can you shed some light into, please?

thank you.

Not yet. Working on the pool on my free time. Already implemented a provably fair job broadcasting, that had never been done in 13 years. Don't have enough free time these days for these cosmetic UI improvements such as bestShare in current block and bestShare ever, for just 10 Ths !

Give me time, I'm working a lot today to face the bear market and don't have time on my schedule for these tiny UI changes but will take some time around this month, sorry for that.

Stay connected, don't go to shady solo pools, here you can verify the jobs I send, it's fair enough better
 

[citb0in]

Stay connected, don't go to shady solo pools, here you can verify the jobs I send, it's fair enough better

I tried to verify the payout amounts and addresses that you configured on your pool. I am using cgminer in its latest version. Unfortunately it failed completely with your pool. With eg. cgminer you can easily check what happens in case of a block found by querying the pool and see the coinbase transaction it returns.

Here's an example with solo.ckpool.org with a correct and expected output:

Code:

Pool stratum+tcp://solo.ckpool.org:3333:
{
    "result": {
        "txid": "497ee53104c2840e3ac3bd41d534711a243537de8d7ee6bbe853f4dcc1390cb8",
        "hash": "497ee53104c2840e3ac3bd41d534711a243537de8d7ee6bbe853f4dcc1390cb8",
        "version": 1,
        "size": 219,
        "vsize": 219,
        "weight": 876,
        "locktime": 0,
        "vin": [
            {
                "coinbase": "03c29a0b0004995d5a6304a598bc0e0c890a198600000000000000000a636b706f6f6c112f736f6c6f2e636b706f6f6c2e6f72672f",
                "sequence": 4294967295
            }
        ],
        "vout": [
            {
                "value": 6.1784937700000002,
                "n": 0,
                "scriptPubKey": {
                    "asm": "OP_DUP OP_HASH160 06040de94c96094d379a25427510d4c3d83fd7aa OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG",
                    "desc": "addr(1YourPayoutAddressxxxxxxxxxteJhsz)#3wcn68cg",
                    "hex": "76a91406040de94c96094d379a25427510d4c3d83fd7aa88ac",
                    "address": "1YourPayoutAddressxxxxxxxxxteJhsz",
                    "type": "pubkeyhash"
                }
            },
            {
                "value": 0.1260917,
                "n": 1,
                "scriptPubKey": {
                    "asm": "OP_DUP OP_HASH160 f4cbe6c6bb3a8535c963169c22963d3a20e76869 OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG",
                    "desc": "addr(1PKN98VN2z5gwSGZvGKS2bj8aADZBkyhkZ)#5rs4qewl",
                    "hex": "76a914f4cbe6c6bb3a8535c963169c22963d3a20e7686988ac",
                    "address": "1PKN98VN2z5gwSGZvGKS2bj8aADZBkyhkZ",
                    "type": "pubkeyhash"
                }
            },
            {
                "value": 0.0,
                "n": 2,
                "scriptPubKey": {
                    "asm": "OP_RETURN aa21a9ed8d6dcf633056c61acab3dded8cd2e93b5547fbb23e3d9cf8b40bfcafe8364c92",
                    "desc": "raw(6a24aa21a9ed8d6dcf633056c61acab3dded8cd2e93b5547fbb23e3d9cf8b40bfcafe8364c92)#ks50402f",
                    "hex": "6a24aa21a9ed8d6dcf633056c61acab3dded8cd2e93b5547fbb23e3d9cf8b40bfcafe8364c92",
                    "type": "nulldata"
                }
            }
        ]
    },
    "error": null,
    "id": 0
}

as we see, 2% fee (here 0.1260917 BTC) goes to 1PKN98VN2z5gwSGZvGKS2bj8aADZBkyhkZ (owned by the pool operator) just as promised and promoted on his pool site. The reward of 6.1784937700000002 BTC in that example would go to users payout address.

Unfortunately and as not expected, the query does not work at all on your pool as it fails in the beginning with the error:

Failed json_rpc_call

For me it looks like that your pool spits out some json incompatible data, with which the mining software cgminer or the bitcoin core linked to it cannot process. Just guessing though. However, the query works against all other known pools available out there without issues, just your pool returns nothing but that error. I personally would avoid your pool under these circumstances, because it means for me: if my miner would find a block then I can't trust that I would get paid. Not to mention that the miner would have problems with the call at all because he can't seem to communicate properly.

Can you provide more info on why well-known and widely used mining software such as the latest version of cgminer used here spits out a false check?

[jack3rror]

Stay connected, don't go to shady solo pools, here you can verify the jobs I send, it's fair enough better

I tried to verify the payout amounts and addresses that you configured on your pool. I am using cgminer in its latest version. Unfortunately it failed completely with your pool. With eg. cgminer you can easily check what happens in case of a block found by querying the pool and see the coinbase transaction it returns.

Here's an example with solo.ckpool.org with a correct and expected output:

Code:

Pool stratum+tcp://solo.ckpool.org:3333:
{
    "result": {
        "txid": "497ee53104c2840e3ac3bd41d534711a243537de8d7ee6bbe853f4dcc1390cb8",
        "hash": "497ee53104c2840e3ac3bd41d534711a243537de8d7ee6bbe853f4dcc1390cb8",
        "version": 1,
        "size": 219,
        "vsize": 219,
        "weight": 876,
        "locktime": 0,
        "vin": [
            {
                "coinbase": "03c29a0b0004995d5a6304a598bc0e0c890a198600000000000000000a636b706f6f6c112f736f6c6f2e636b706f6f6c2e6f72672f",
                "sequence": 4294967295
            }
        ],
        "vout": [
            {
                "value": 6.1784937700000002,
                "n": 0,
                "scriptPubKey": {
                    "asm": "OP_DUP OP_HASH160 06040de94c96094d379a25427510d4c3d83fd7aa OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG",
                    "desc": "addr(1YourPayoutAddressxxxxxxxxxteJhsz)#3wcn68cg",
                    "hex": "76a91406040de94c96094d379a25427510d4c3d83fd7aa88ac",
                    "address": "1YourPayoutAddressxxxxxxxxxteJhsz",
                    "type": "pubkeyhash"
                }
            },
            {
                "value": 0.1260917,
                "n": 1,
                "scriptPubKey": {
                    "asm": "OP_DUP OP_HASH160 f4cbe6c6bb3a8535c963169c22963d3a20e76869 OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG",
                    "desc": "addr(1PKN98VN2z5gwSGZvGKS2bj8aADZBkyhkZ)#5rs4qewl",
                    "hex": "76a914f4cbe6c6bb3a8535c963169c22963d3a20e7686988ac",
                    "address": "1PKN98VN2z5gwSGZvGKS2bj8aADZBkyhkZ",
                    "type": "pubkeyhash"
                }
            },
            {
                "value": 0.0,
                "n": 2,
                "scriptPubKey": {
                    "asm": "OP_RETURN aa21a9ed8d6dcf633056c61acab3dded8cd2e93b5547fbb23e3d9cf8b40bfcafe8364c92",
                    "desc": "raw(6a24aa21a9ed8d6dcf633056c61acab3dded8cd2e93b5547fbb23e3d9cf8b40bfcafe8364c92)#ks50402f",
                    "hex": "6a24aa21a9ed8d6dcf633056c61acab3dded8cd2e93b5547fbb23e3d9cf8b40bfcafe8364c92",
                    "type": "nulldata"
                }
            }
        ]
    },
    "error": null,
    "id": 0
}

as we see, 2% fee (here 0.1260917 BTC) goes to 1PKN98VN2z5gwSGZvGKS2bj8aADZBkyhkZ (owned by the pool operator) just as promised and promoted on his pool site. The reward of 6.1784937700000002 BTC in that example would go to users payout address.

Unfortunately and as not expected, the query does not work at all on your pool as it fails in the beginning with the error:

Failed json_rpc_call

For me it looks like that your pool spits out some json incompatible data, with which the mining software cgminer or the bitcoin core linked to it cannot process. Just guessing though. However, the query works against all other known pools available out there without issues, just your pool returns nothing but that error. I personally would avoid your pool under these circumstances, because it means for me: if my miner would find a block then I can't trust that I would get paid. Not to mention that the miner would have problems with the call at all because he can't seem to communicate properly.

Can you provide more info on why well-known and widely used mining software such as the latest version of cgminer used here spits out a false check?

 Strange. Have you tried my method ?


I tested the pool with CPUMINER, Antminer, Whatsminer, but not CGMiner tested with 250 Ghs.


What command do you use ?
Edit : --decode. I'm building CGMiner for osx right now
Edit 2 : Got an old version for macOs that doesn't support -decode. I've ping a friend to decode it and try on my side. Will take a look.

[jack3rror]

Cannot afford the hosting this month. I'm sorry for that. I must choose between eat or provide this service.
And there is no hashrate at all.

For the bug = made a regression 1 week ago when I implemented the maxDiff and maxDiff Ever (user manager process) and I don't have enough time to take a look.

Will make some changes in the future.