[ANN][MIN] Minerals - POS | Developing own anon solution |

[Minerals]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

[zedomax]

I don't think it's possible to actually limit by IP.  If you do that, there's a way to easily reroute the IP.  Not everyone knows how to do it but it's going to give advantage to those who know how to do that.  But I think holding wallet is a great idea so multipools cannot get in.

[merc82]

Asics and Multipools are an obvioius cheat so we don't have them.

Cmon now. Cheats? Seriously? Multipools are made up of hashers just like your 6 private pools, there is 0 difference.

Merc82.. I'm so disappointed you stoop to the level of binaryclock and that other twat from suchpool. Multipools don't help any coin, we all know that, especially your kind which is profit switching. Don't be a hypocrite by denying it. Albeit, all you do is offer a service, and you can't harm unless miners join it, but let's not pretend it's good for the coins you dump.
So by cheat I'm pretty he meant in his context that you harm the coin.

If pools really wanted to help coins they'd at least go the p2pool route.

I'm really not stooping to anyones level. I'm just a bit surprised in the amount of effort people put in to 'preventing multipools'. The only issue a multipool causes coins is in regards to coin difficulty. A while back, it was possible to exploit lower difficulty coins (intentionally or not) buy mining during the low periods, and once it adjusted to a higher difficulty you would abandon it and move on to the next coin.

In this regard, I completely agree that multipools used to do bad things to coins. With the newer retargeting algo's this is not the case anymore. Multipools are no different than other people mining the coin at any pool and then selling it. It's what a large percentage of the crypto-hashers do, we just make it easier for them -- so saying that preventing multipools is going to prevent dumping is not a fair statement in the least. This is what ruffles my feathers, so to speak.

[Soepkip]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

If so, go for 4 workers. Most people that have actual miners have 12-14 MH/s rigs. I'd like to be able to see which of em is down or not

[seyond]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

[hero18688]

Not all the people in the network has public ip address.They share isp's limited ip addresses and result in auto changed ip occasionally.

[degel_x]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

+1

[Minerals]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

we've contacted all major exchanges and we are willing to share the source code with them
Already got contacted by smaller exchanges but I'm not sure if we should let them list Minerals first

[Kenta]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

I'm sure they'll come to an agreement once they start to behave like gentlemen making money


I think 1 worker is a good idea, but we should get a few hours warning as people in Asia and Eastern Europe have probably already gone to bed...

[Hoshimaru]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

What if you have 2 rigs? Mining with 280X's here. I'm nowhere near 50MH with that. Miners with these experimental PCIE FPGA boards maybe? What to they do? 20 mh/board?

[fedmahnkassad]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

we've contacted all major exchanges and we are willing to share the source code with them
Already got contacted by smaller exchanges but I'm not sure if we should let them list Minerals first

Wait for Bittrex or Poloniex.

[untalented]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

we've contacted all major exchanges and we are willing to share the source code with them
Already got contacted by smaller exchanges but I'm not sure if we should let them list Minerals first

Focus on Bittrex and Poloniex. Forget about smaller exchanges.
Maybe some good Korea exchange, they love crypto and StarCraft

[degel_x]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

we've contacted all major exchanges and we are willing to share the source code with them
Already got contacted by smaller exchanges but I'm not sure if we should let them list Minerals first

Wait for Bittrex or Poloniex.

+1 no shitti exchanges please

[hero18688]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

Miners with these experimental PCIE FPGA boards maybe? What to they do? 20 mh/board?

Really?What's the name of this board?Where to buy?

[degel_x]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

we've contacted all major exchanges and we are willing to share the source code with them
Already got contacted by smaller exchanges but I'm not sure if we should let them list Minerals first

Focus on Bittrex and Poloniex. Forget about smaller exchanges.
Maybe some good Korea exchange, they love crypto and StarCraft

Yeahh i forgot this one is the South Korea National Currency

[pseudonymdude]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

50 mh/s per ip would limit hash more imo, but 1 worker per account would be another barrier.

[bitwolf]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

Could you please tell me before you do that.  I have like 5 small rigs each with 5 mgh on 5 different workers and i dont want to see that I am screwed in the morning.  I took seriously your words that you gonna punish the big farms but i see only big farms in the pools (hundreds of mgh/s).  What is that? I dont like that. I feel betrayed.

[uray]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

50 mh/s per ip would limit hash more imo, but 1 worker per account would be another barrier.

you can't limit per ip, since there are people behind proxy, or dont have public IP, their IP will use their ISP public IP, and then limiting per IP will make betarigs.com, leaserigs, nicehash.com not operational, there are small miner who dont have huge mining farm rent rigs from there, its just injustice for small miners

[unlock.mk]

you didn't changed logo yet ?   

[pseudonymdude]

we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

50 mh/s per ip would limit hash more imo, but 1 worker per account would be another barrier.

you can't limit per ip, since there are people behind proxy, or dont have public IP, their IP will use their ISP public IP, and then limiting per IP will make betarigs.com, leaserigs, nicehash.com not operational, there are small miner who dont have huge mining farm rent rigs from there, its just injustice for small miners

That was my point.  It limits rental hash.  To be honest, I'm renting a bunch of hash to mine this with many workers.  If he limits it 1 per account, I could just create more accounts.