[XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency

[eizh]

How can we understand this?
BMR is revamped as individual coin? I think we don't need two the same coins.
Site http://bitmonero.org/ lives now and there is a new binaries. Seems thankful_for_today is working very actively.
What does it mean?
Is it unable to reach agreement between thankful_for_today and Monero core team?
Please clarify the situation.

I wish we knew. But none of those files linked are up-to-date. If a useful feature is implemented, MRO will happily merge it in.

Hashrate went from 24 to 12... i7-4770k @4GHz, 7 threads, win8.1 x64

Switching back to 0.8.5 for now

See above. Download from main post.

[1701299092]

1701299092

[1701299092]

1701299092

[1701299092]

1701299092

[1701299092]

1701299092

[tacotime]

There is a writeup today from Hearn on stealth addressing. CN coins like Monero already use stealth addressing (and denominations) for all tx.

https://medium.com/p/cb2f81962c1b

[lisalee]

Quanttek will be doing German and David Latapie French. Monero will be soon be very international.

Chinese translation will be one of the most important. If anyone can offer to do a high-quality one (or knows someone that can), that would be great.

Those who want to translate the website: PM me. Do not start with the "getting started" page as it is the one most prone to heavy changes, though.

Is someone translating it to Chinese? If not, could I have a try and do the Chinese translation?

[eizh]

Quanttek will be doing German and David Latapie French. Monero will be soon be very international.

Chinese translation will be one of the most important. If anyone can offer to do a high-quality one (or knows someone that can), that would be great.

Those who want to translate the website: PM me. Do not start with the "getting started" page as it is the one most prone to heavy changes, though.

Is someone translating it to Chinese? If not, could I have a try and do the Chinese translation?

Sure! Right now we don't have any bounties for translation, though, so the translators have been volunteers.

[trogdorjw73]

I'm getting the following on a regular basis after the latest May 8 update, all in red text:

Code:

2014-May-09 10:13:43.360776 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\abstract_tcp_server2.inl:307 send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(100),
shutting down connection
2014-May-09 10:13:43.370784 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\levin_protocol_handler_async.h:638 [188.138.109.185:18080 OUT]Failed to do_send()
2014-May-09 10:13:43.378789 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\abstract_tcp_server2.inl:307 send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(100),
shutting down connection
2014-May-09 10:13:43.386796 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\levin_protocol_handler_async.h:638 [79.140.30.52:18080 OUT]Failed to do_send()

To my knowledge, this is only on the primary system that's running the wallet -- though I haven't really spent time verifying that statement. Thoughts?

[tacotime]

I'm getting the following on a regular basis after the latest May 8 update, all in red text:

Code:

2014-May-09 10:13:43.360776 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\abstract_tcp_server2.inl:307 send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(100),
shutting down connection
2014-May-09 10:13:43.370784 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\levin_protocol_handler_async.h:638 [188.138.109.185:18080 OUT]Failed to do_send()
2014-May-09 10:13:43.378789 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\abstract_tcp_server2.inl:307 send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(100),
shutting down connection
2014-May-09 10:13:43.386796 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\levin_protocol_handler_async.h:638 [79.140.30.52:18080 OUT]Failed to do_send()

To my knowledge, this is only on the primary system that's running the wallet -- though I haven't really spent time verifying that statement. Thoughts?

Well known bug that needs to be fixed, raise an issue on the monero-project github

[trogdorjw73]

I'm getting the following on a regular basis after the latest May 8 update, all in red text:

Code:

2014-May-09 10:13:43.360776 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\abstract_tcp_server2.inl:307 send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(100),
shutting down connection
2014-May-09 10:13:43.370784 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\levin_protocol_handler_async.h:638 [188.138.109.185:18080 OUT]Failed to do_send()
2014-May-09 10:13:43.378789 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\abstract_tcp_server2.inl:307 send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(100),
shutting down connection
2014-May-09 10:13:43.386796 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\levin_protocol_handler_async.h:638 [79.140.30.52:18080 OUT]Failed to do_send()

To my knowledge, this is only on the primary system that's running the wallet -- though I haven't really spent time verifying that statement. Thoughts?

Well known bug that needs to be fixed, raise an issue on the monero-project github

I guess I should clarify: is the affected PC (PCs) still mining properly and I can ignore the error/warning, or when this starts to happen do I need to restart the daemon?

[tacotime]

I'm getting the following on a regular basis after the latest May 8 update, all in red text:

Code:

2014-May-09 10:13:43.360776 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\abstract_tcp_server2.inl:307 send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(100),
shutting down connection
2014-May-09 10:13:43.370784 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\levin_protocol_handler_async.h:638 [188.138.109.185:18080 OUT]Failed to do_send()
2014-May-09 10:13:43.378789 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\abstract_tcp_server2.inl:307 send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(100),
shutting down connection
2014-May-09 10:13:43.386796 [P2P8]ERROR c:\temp\bytecoin\git\bitmonero-master\contrib\epee\include\n
et\levin_protocol_handler_async.h:638 [79.140.30.52:18080 OUT]Failed to do_send()

To my knowledge, this is only on the primary system that's running the wallet -- though I haven't really spent time verifying that statement. Thoughts?

Well known bug that needs to be fixed, raise an issue on the monero-project github

I guess I should clarify: is the affected PC (PCs) still mining properly and I can ignore the error/warning, or when this starts to happen do I need to restart the daemon?

You can generally ignore it, but it's probably annoying to the peer that you're making hundreds of outbound connections to. It's best to restart the daemon if you catch this.

[Zosergag]

I consider carefully all about monero. I suppose unfair distribution happens due the super-optimized miner probably

[Keyboard-Mash]

Hey guys check out this interesting article, it seems to be addressing centralization of mining pools by offering innovative ways to combat heating and power issues that miners often encounter. This is a real major issue for those that would love to mine, but don't have the proper facilities or resources to do so:

http://bitcoinrewind.com/cryptocurrency-mining-roundup/

The cryptocurrency mining industry is changing day by day and there are new products that are introduced every day. The popularity of the altcoins is increasing every day. The companies are finding new way of cyyptography and the companies are offering new mining opportunities for the users. The power and cooling were the main concerns for the manufacturers and new methods of mining will help the companies to overcome the problems. But with data centers full of mining racks and malicious actors dropping cryptocurrency mining libraries into mobile malware, new and unexpected technological developments still crop up to make things interesting.

A company based in Seattle named as Hashplex announced that they will introduce their own data center called the Hashcenter. The company is founded by the old employees of Microsoft, Facebook and Google. This data center will help the people to distribute the hashing power of the bitcoins. There are some other features introduced by the Hashplex that will make them famous. Customers can utilize HashPlex’s own mining gear, cloud-style, or mining gear can be sent to the company’s data centre in the Seattle area. Either mining units a customer already has or ones currently on order with mining manufacturers.

There are some rumors that the USB miners are also coming in the field. With the new USB technology, you will be able to hold together low power with high storage. This will be very efficient for the users. The technology will be data center friendly and can be linked with blade miner. If space is an issue, USB miners may still provide a way to custom build an ASIC rig. The Hex-Fury stick does have a heat sink on one side, but cooling will still be an issue to contend with. The mining techniques will provide high revenues to the companies and will also help to prevent the data centers from the hackers. Hackers will not be able to get the users data easily. Big companies such as Amazon and Google are also stepping in the market of mining.

[Xterry]

I consider carefully all about monero. I suppose unfair distribution happens due the super-optimized miner probably

Can super-optimized miner be a reason of my impossibility of mining? I didn't get any results

[blaaaaacksuit]

I consider carefully all about monero. I suppose unfair distribution happens due the super-optimized miner probably

Can super-optimized miner be a reason of my impossibility of mining? I didn't get any results

Probably just CPU farms mining the most promising new coin.  You'll get a chance whenever the pools come out.

[Keeminakar]

what's damn going on? the difficulty is extremly high!

[Quincy1m8]

I followed the beautiful updates in Russian thread. It is good decision to cut-off Mining guide into other post from main topic. Smart move!

[hedgy73]

This coin is very difficult to set up wallet and start mining unless you are a programmer or hacker

Been trying for a few hours now to get my head around this and I think I'll have to give it a miss until a normal wallet and pools are setup unfortunately.

[smooth]

I consider carefully all about monero. I suppose unfair distribution happens due the super-optimized miner probably

Can super-optimized miner be a reason of my impossibility of mining? I didn't get any results

Probably just CPU farms mining the most promising new coin.  You'll get a chance whenever the pools come out.

Or just be patient and wait to get lucky. Mining doesn't need to be a steady income. Sometimes you have to dig and dig and dig through worthless dirt and then you finally find a nice big gold nugget!

[trogdorjw73]

I consider carefully all about monero. I suppose unfair distribution happens due the super-optimized miner probably

There's nothing unfair going on that I can see. If you got in early when the difficulty was lower, you could have mined a higher percentage of blocks, but the block times have been pretty consistent from the start AFAIK. Of course, no one has a block explorer for MRO, but you can read out the time stamps in the daemon. There are some fast blocks for the first few, then some longer blocks as things slow down and difficulty adjusts. Oddly, I do see a few instances where the timestamp on the next block is earlier than the timestamp on the previous block (e.g. block 100 is 1397822726, block 101 is 1397822717), but perhaps the time stamp comes from the PC that finds the block, so you could easily have a skew of several minutes given that PC clocks are notoriously prone to being off by several minutes.

At present, we are on block 32442, and with an average payout of 17.3 MRO per block we have mined roughly 560K MRO out of the target 18.4 million. So considering MRO was launched on April 18, in about the first three weeks we have mined 3% of the total MRO. Considering many coins have had 1-3% premines, 3% distributed among the miners that came on board in the first three weeks is peanuts.

[Keyboard-Mash]

This coin is very difficult to set up wallet and start mining unless you are a programmer or hacker

Been trying for a few hours now to get my head around this and I think I'll have to give it a miss until a normal wallet and pools are setup unfortunately.

Well that's just too bad. There are so many people who have reported the exact opposite (thousands based on the hashrate!), so I'm very sorry to hear that you've run into troubles.

I'm not a programmer nor a hacker, but I will be here for the next 10-12 hours, and am willing to help you with whatever troubles you may have run into as I've not had them

If I can't get it done, there are others here who can help you!

[eizh]

Good progress on the pool reported by NOMP dev zone117x. Stay tuned, everyone.

And remember to email your favorite exchanges about adding MRO.

[smooth]

And remember to email your favorite exchanges about adding MRO.

+1000

I'm glad I am able to help out the community by operating the OTC exchange thread but it is a ton of work and i'm looking forward to being replaced by a computer!

OTC exchange: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=578192.0

Also, if you want to support the pool developer contribute to the open source pool bounty. We are building a whole new ecosystem of superior crypto here. Not being a bitcoin/shitcoin clone means that everything needs to be built from the bottom up.  You can help:

Open source pool bounty: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=589533.0