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

[smooth]

lazybear are you interested in a bounty to release the source code (maybe cleaned up a bit?) your optimized miner?  

If not, I'll probably play around with the code myself tomorrow and see if I can come up with something, or maybe Noodle Doodle will take an interest.

smooth, NoodleDoodle just said on IRC his latest optimizations are 4x faster on Windows. Untested on Linux so far but he'll push the source to the git repo soon.

We'll be at 1 million network hashrate pretty soon.

Cool!

[smooth]

lazybear are you interested in a bounty to release the source code (maybe cleaned up a bit?) your optimized miner? 

If not, I'll probably play around with the code myself tomorrow and see if I can come up with something, or maybe Noodle Doodle will take an interest.

0. I'm not a git and programming friendly.
1. There're AES and SSE hard coded, without choice.
2. There're 3 files with a bunch of indish code.
3. Tested only on linux x64 (Ubuntu 14.04) gcc 4.8.2, boost 1.55

Ok?

Sounds like one of our developers has already done it and is still testing it before release, so no need

[cakir]

what's the current block id?
how'll I understand my bitmonerond is synced?

[dreamspark]

what's the current block id?
how'll I understand my bitmonerond is synced?

Height = 42175

type set_log 1 in bitmonerod and you will see when you stop getting blocks coming in constantly.

[smooth]

As for Monero not being in their radar, I agree... for now. But if the coin gets big, botnet mining will be a HUGE attraction.

We'll see what happens. It might not even stay CPU mineable that long, so its kind of silly to speculate at this point.

If it does happen though (coin gets very big, stays CPU mineable), I predict that it still won't make sense for regular users to turn off their wallet miners. Since we've assumed here that the coin gets very big, there will be many, many such users. Small or moderate botnets will be no threat at all. Large ones may or may not be.

Ultimately "the coin gets big" means almost everyone is is using it. At that point you have to believe in botnets spanning the majority of computers or even a large portion of computers. That is likely not true and never will be true. A well executed cpu-mineable crypto coin is in fact the ultimate botnet and will likely outcompete the other botnets. It doesn't have to hide from the users because it recruits them to voluntarily install it.

[smooth]

About the "free" aspect of the hardware - the home user cannot often build their hashrate with very little money + a medium amount of work.

Build hash rate, heavens no. Most home users have no interest in building a mining farm. They have one computer (or maybe 2-3) -- already paid for -- and if it makes sense to run a wallet miner on it, they will (as long as it is well-written to stay out of their way, like your invisible botnet, except without the need to hide).

The purpose of egalitarian mining is to recruit a large number of casual users to mine -- and ensure they can mine at a proportionally reasonable rate -- blocking concentration and making it uneconomical. Since casual users aren't paying for "mining gear" and often might not even think they are paying for electricity (in some cases actually not), they are the low cost provider.

[smooth]

what's the current block id?
how'll I understand my bitmonerond is synced?

It says 'synchronization OK' in green in the daemon window, although on occasion I've seen it get that wrong.

The current block height is 42185

[eizh]

A well executed cpu-mineable crypto coin is in fact the ultimate botnet and will likely outcompete the other botnets. It doesn't have to hide from the users because it recruits them to voluntarily install it.

This just got meta.

Anyway, perpetual CPU mining is the CryptoNote developers' vision, but none of the devs on Monero feel strongly about it as far as I know -- meaning this coin will not hard fork to actively avoid optimized mining. My guess is it will follow the natural evolution that BTC and LTC laid out before, although the GPU/CPU or ASIC/GPU performance ratio might be substantially worse.

[smooth]

meaning this coin will not hard fork to actively avoid optimized mining.

I don't know if I would go so far as to promise no hard fork for that ever. If there is some well-thought-out improved version of CryptoNight (perhaps from the original developers) and it seems useful, I could see a carefully-done hard fork to adopt it.

Half-assed efforts to tweak this or that in a poorly-researched way to desperately defeat some optimized miners will very likely not happen. Cyptonote tried to do CPU-only, and they have a reasoned justification for it (though certainly not all agree). If they fail to deliver, we won't stand in the way of that natural evolution to GPU/ASIC/whatever.

[smooth]

You really don't have to worry about botnets doing a 51%, there's not much profit in it. You'd be competing against other, "honest" botnets (weird thing to say) that are working for the coin, not against it.

Then I see no real problem. As long as they contribute to the network and behave themselves, all is well.

Sure, if you get an INSANE number of regular users to mine for themselves, then you won't have to worry about it. But most people are slow to adopt new things - and even less so when they don't see a clear benefit for them. "Who wants to make pennies a day for letting software run on your computer" - even if you could pay them in fiat, which most of them would be far more comfortable with - that's hardly a tantalizing headline. Most people would figure it's not worth the effort.

You can't assume the coin gets really big and also assume hardly anyone uses it. The idea of a wallet miner is that its very easy, probably a check box and a simple explanation ("Do you want to help secure the network, and be eligible to receive free coins?") at installation. Most causal users will check it and never turn it off (as long as it is well-written to stay out of their way, as we have both described).

[smooth]

You see no real problem with bot herders - who are very likely to just dump the coins no matter what market price is - getting a rather large portion of the coins compared to regular miners?

Rig miners and industrial miners do largely the same thing, especially the ones with big expensive GPU/ASIC farms and large power bills to pay. Maybe they dump a little more carefully, but they still dump.

The miners who are far more likely to actually hold their coins are a widely distributed population of causal users who don't get many coins each but don't spend a lot to get them.

[eddywise]

meaning this coin will not hard fork to actively avoid optimized mining.

I don't know if I would go so far as to promise no hard fork for that ever. If there is some well-thought-out improved version of CryptoNight (perhaps from the original developers) and it seems useful, I could see a carefully-done hard fork to adopt it.

Half-assed efforts to tweak this or that in a poorly-researched way to desperately defeat some optimized miners will very likely not happen. Cyptonote tried to do CPU-only, and they have a reasoned justification for it (though certainly not all agree). If they fail to deliver, we won't stand in the way of that natural evolution to GPU/ASIC/whatever.

Any progress in the new mine tool?
publish a linux first,let us rise the nethash

[aloney]

meaning this coin will not hard fork to actively avoid optimized mining.

I don't know if I would go so far as to promise no hard fork for that ever. If there is some well-thought-out improved version of CryptoNight (perhaps from the original developers) and it seems useful, I could see a carefully-done hard fork to adopt it.

Half-assed efforts to tweak this or that in a poorly-researched way to desperately defeat some optimized miners will very likely not happen. Cyptonote tried to do CPU-only, and they have a reasoned justification for it (though certainly not all agree). If they fail to deliver, we won't stand in the way of that natural evolution to GPU/ASIC/whatever.

Any progress in the new mine tool?
publish a linux first,let us rise the nethash

i'm also waitting for a optimized cpu minning tool, it seems that somebody has that version, now it's unfair for vs whice use the old tool~~

[dreamspark]

meaning this coin will not hard fork to actively avoid optimized mining.

I don't know if I would go so far as to promise no hard fork for that ever. If there is some well-thought-out improved version of CryptoNight (perhaps from the original developers) and it seems useful, I could see a carefully-done hard fork to adopt it.

Half-assed efforts to tweak this or that in a poorly-researched way to desperately defeat some optimized miners will very likely not happen. Cyptonote tried to do CPU-only, and they have a reasoned justification for it (though certainly not all agree). If they fail to deliver, we won't stand in the way of that natural evolution to GPU/ASIC/whatever.

Any progress in the new mine tool?
publish a linux first,let us rise the nethash

i'm also waitting for a optimized cpu minning tool, it seems that somebody has that version, now it's unfair for vs whice use the old tool~~

The new miner will be released by noodle once it has been properly tested he is a dev.

Its not unfair if people have the skills to write their own miners...

[surfer43]

I’ve got this error repeating over and over.
I think it's still mining however.

Code:

2014-Apr-28 18:03:06.878417 [P2P6]ERROR /XXX/bitmonero/contrib/epee/include/net/abstract_tcp_server2.inl:307 send que size is more than ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT(100), shutting down connection
2014-Apr-28 18:03:06.878504 [P2P6]ERROR /XXX/bitmonero/contrib/epee/include/net/levin_protocol_handler_async.h:515 [54.255.153.190:47988 INC]Failed to do_send
2014-Apr-28 18:03:06.878580 [P2P6]Failed to invoke command 1002 return code -1
2014-Apr-28 18:03:06.878701 [P2P6][54.255.153.190:47988 INC]COMMAND_TIMED_SYNC invoke failed. (-1, LEVIN_ERROR_CONNECTION)
2014-Apr-28 18:03:06.878771 [P2P6]Failed to invoke command 1002 return code 0

Has this bug been fixed yet? The pool daemon keeps doing this. Would changing ABSTRACT_SERVER_SEND_QUE_MAX_COUNT to 10,000 be OK?

[parker928]

is the beta wallet working?

has the code been vetted and stuff?

[mrpopgun]

I keep getting the following when running against the monerpool.org pool.  Any ideas why?  I get this on my home machine as well as my VPS (Windows at home, Ubuntu on the VPS).  They run for awhile the disconnect and the process ends.  I run one on simpleminer for each core.

2014-May-15 22:09:03.430341 Getting next job...
2014-May-15 22:09:03.894369 READ ENDS: Success. bytes_tr: 392
2014-May-15 22:09:03.899369 -->>http_stream_filter::parse_cached_header(*)
2014-May-15 22:09:03.905369 <<--http_stream_filter::parse_cached_header(*)
2014-May-15 22:09:24.242533 Getting next job...
2014-May-15 22:09:25.245591 Timed out socket
2014-May-15 22:09:25.250593 READ ENDS: Connection err_code 1236
2014-May-15 22:09:25.255593 Problems at read: The network connection was aborted
 by the local system
2014-May-15 22:09:25.263592 Unexpected reciec fail
2014-May-15 22:09:25.268592 Returning false because of wrong state machine. stat
e: 5
2014-May-15 22:09:25.278593 Failed to invoke http request to  /
2014-May-15 22:09:25.285593 Can't get new job! Disconnect and sleep....

C:\Users\me\Downloads\bitmonero.win64>

[surfer43]

I keep getting the following when running against the monerpool.org pool.  Any ideas why?  I get this on my home machine as well as my VPS (Windows at home, Ubuntu on the VPS).  They run for awhile the disconnect and the process ends.  I run one on simpleminer for each core.

I would use cpuminer-multi. It doesn't have that bug, doesn't crash when you are disconnected, and can use multiple cores with one process.

There's a CPUMiner fork that supports MRO that I was asked to compile. The github is here: https://github.com/Lucasjones/cpuminer-multi

Here are the binaries, statically linked so there's no DLLs to carry around with the executable, and signed with my OTC GPG key, just like my win64 sgminer binaries.

https://ottrbutt.com/cpuminer-multi/cpuminer-multi-win64-05-15-2014-git.zip
https://ottrbutt.com/cpuminer-multi/cpuminer-multi-win64-05-15-2014-git.zip.sig

If you continue using simpleminer the only option is to restart the process or have some program automatically restart the process when it crashes.

[Kyune]

I'd like to see a bounty raised for a block chain explorer. I don't think this is a dev issue as it doesn't really involve protocol changes. Let's leave the dev's to fixing their laundry list of more important things.

I'll put up 70 MRO toward a web-based block explorer.

I realize that we can get info from the daemon or wallet, but it will be convenient for those that do not have them open to instead be able to go to a website.

Someone (not me) created a Monero block explorer and announced it yesterday in a separate thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=611561.0

I didn't see any mention of it in this thread.

[cubydu]

I keep getting the following when running against the monerpool.org pool.  Any ideas why?  I get this on my home machine as well as my VPS (Windows at home, Ubuntu on the VPS).  They run for awhile the disconnect and the process ends.  I run one on simpleminer for each core.

I would use cpuminer-multi. It doesn't have that bug, doesn't crash when you are disconnected, and can use multiple cores with one process.

There's a CPUMiner fork that supports MRO that I was asked to compile. The github is here: https://github.com/Lucasjones/cpuminer-multi

Here are the binaries, statically linked so there's no DLLs to carry around with the executable, and signed with my OTC GPG key, just like my win64 sgminer binaries.

https://ottrbutt.com/cpuminer-multi/cpuminer-multi-win64-05-15-2014-git.zip
https://ottrbutt.com/cpuminer-multi/cpuminer-multi-win64-05-15-2014-git.zip.sig

If you continue using simpleminer the only option is to restart the process or have some program automatically restart the process when it crashes.

Cpuminer finds shares only few minutes after start and then it finds nothing.

Tested on Ubuntu 13.10 and Debian 6,7