Bitcoin Forum
May 28, 2017, 06:56:42 AM *
News: If the forum does not load normally for you, please send me a traceroute.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 [1420] 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 ... 1559 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1905631 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 03:23:11 PM
 #28381

...
why haven't i seen Eligius mining 0 tx blocks, or have i just missed it?  so this SPV mining is not confined to China?  i thought this was primarily an inferior connectivity issue behind the GFC?  why haven't we seen it before with Eligius if this is his norm?
They do >2% since they started according to
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1085800.msg11805900#msg11805900

I not sure how much verification eloipool does but it does enough to avoid the v2/v3 fork that happened so it's not completely without verification.

wouldn't it be enough to just ask Luke how much verification he does?
1495954602
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1495954602

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1495954602
Reply with quote  #2

1495954602
Report to moderator
1495954602
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1495954602

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1495954602
Reply with quote  #2

1495954602
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1495954602
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1495954602

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1495954602
Reply with quote  #2

1495954602
Report to moderator
1495954602
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1495954602

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1495954602
Reply with quote  #2

1495954602
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 03:26:09 PM
 #28382

Quote from: domob
So you think that it would be best to simply put all that spam on the blockchain, and have everyone that ever wants to validate it go through that spam for eternity?  Wouldn't it be better to simply let the network and miners adjust their fee policies instead as they see fit and make sure that the spam is not even mined unless they pay "enough" fees?

Who decides what enough fees is?

I think this whole blocksize debate comes down to ideology.  It's not a technical decision. Some people think we need to keep 1 degree of freedom of control to shape Bitcoin "correctly," while others think we should let destiny take the wheel.

it certainly does.

you once described Bitcoin in a helpful way; it represents Hope. 

i also happen to think it represents Sound Money.  Bitcoin has become a public good which cannot be seen to be influenced by any group with a financial interest.  it's the People's Money after all.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 03:28:25 PM
 #28383

You think that because you are blinded.

My well informed, prescient suggestion is wholeheartedly support the pegged side chain direction; otherwise prepare to exchange your BTC for another monetary unit or accept centralization.

I've got to put this type of comment in the "give-up" file.
It would have merit if the following weren't the case:

x=Software & design optimizations. e.g. BitcoinCore is orders of magnitude faster in many respects than in 2009.
y=Moore's "Law" and Nielsen's "Law" and other relevant descriptions of the rate of improvement in computing technology

x*y > rate-of-growth-of-the-world-economy  (here's a visual)



It is only a matter of time before Bitcoin can handle a large proportion of world transactions. The key thing is not to f*ck up the process in the meantime.

others think we should let destiny take the wheel.

I think this is the only viable option.

yes solex.  i think this is the only way.
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
July 07, 2015, 03:34:58 PM
 #28384

...
why haven't i seen Eligius mining 0 tx blocks, or have i just missed it?  so this SPV mining is not confined to China?  i thought this was primarily an inferior connectivity issue behind the GFC?  why haven't we seen it before with Eligius if this is his norm?
They do >2% since they started according to
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1085800.msg11805900#msg11805900

I not sure how much verification eloipool does but it does enough to avoid the v2/v3 fork that happened so it's not completely without verification.

wouldn't it be enough to just ask Luke how much verification he does?
Because his answers are often misleading Tongue

A good example of this in the "Empty Block" discussion is how people were saying they aren't confirming transactions.
His answer was that they are confirming transactions ... previous transactions.
So the statement needed to be "they aren't confirming new transactions" which of course is what was meant, but he decided to avoid the issue with a technicality Tongue

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 03:43:46 PM
 #28385

...
why haven't i seen Eligius mining 0 tx blocks, or have i just missed it?  so this SPV mining is not confined to China?  i thought this was primarily an inferior connectivity issue behind the GFC?  why haven't we seen it before with Eligius if this is his norm?
They do >2% since they started according to
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1085800.msg11805900#msg11805900

I not sure how much verification eloipool does but it does enough to avoid the v2/v3 fork that happened so it's not completely without verification.

wouldn't it be enough to just ask Luke how much verification he does?
Because his answers are often misleading Tongue

A good example of this in the "Empty Block" discussion is how people were saying they aren't confirming transactions.
His answer was that they are confirming transactions ... previous transactions.
So the statement needed to be "they aren't confirming new transactions" which of course is what was meant, but he decided to avoid the issue with a technicality Tongue

does BCT allow stickies for this post?  Grin
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 03:46:58 PM
 #28386

...
why haven't i seen Eligius mining 0 tx blocks, or have i just missed it?  so this SPV mining is not confined to China?  i thought this was primarily an inferior connectivity issue behind the GFC?  why haven't we seen it before with Eligius if this is his norm?
They do >2% since they started according to
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1085800.msg11805900#msg11805900

I not sure how much verification eloipool does but it does enough to avoid the v2/v3 fork that happened so it's not completely without verification.

wouldn't it be enough to just ask Luke how much verification he does?
Because his answers are often misleading Tongue

A good example of this in the "Empty Block" discussion is how people were saying they aren't confirming transactions.
His answer was that they are confirming transactions ... previous transactions.
So the statement needed to be "they aren't confirming new transactions" which of course is what was meant, but he decided to avoid the issue with a technicality Tongue

hey, since everybody and their mother now knows i'm an eye doc, how's your diabetic retinopathy?  i was dying to ask you that 3 yr ago back in my cgminer days when you first revealed that.  but that was before HF. Tongue   that's right up my alley you know.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 03:55:21 PM
 #28387

back with a vengeance:

Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 03:58:41 PM
 #28388

Coz someone linked a post earlier in this thread ...

For pools that normally mine full blocks as well as uncommon empty blocks, the empty blocks are the work the pool sends every block change.
They are of the opinion that because Luke-jr's eloipool is shit slow at handling block changes, they should send out empty work first and then full work soon after it.
Obviously the empty work is mined for a small % of the average block change length so it would also mean that the miners finding block with the empty work would be a smaller % of all the blocks found by the pools that do this.

As I've explained in the empty blocks thread, when comparing eligius with it's empty block change work and my pool https://kano.is/ with our full block change work, my pool beats eligius on average sending out block change work.
During normal times when the relay is working and there isn't a massive spam test running, my pools beats eloipool >90% of the time with block changes.

hey, the great kano.  thx for the explanation.

why haven't i seen Eligius mining 0 tx blocks, or have i just missed it?  so this SPV mining is not confined to China?  i thought this was primarily an inferior connectivity issue behind the GFC?  why haven't we seen it before with Eligius if this is his norm?

I was chatting with Luke-jr last night on Reddit, Eligius mines lots of 0tx blocks he said they don't SPV mine so it's just Kano is saying, they are just slow to transition.

Quote from: Luke-Jr
Eligius does not do any SPV mining. Empty blocks are generated only after the previous block has been fully verified, but before the next block's transaction set has been calculated.


Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 03:59:08 PM
 #28389

there's a real battle going on at Bitstamp.  aren't they close to Greece?  i wouldn't be too pessimistic.

tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156


View Profile
July 07, 2015, 03:59:40 PM
 #28390

ok, i'm not getting the bolded part.  this graph shows 37 MB worth of unconf tx's, no?:
No clue, no node I have access to is seeing that much-- they may have turned off the minfee rules (not unreasonable for a metrics thing)...

Even given that, again, 37MB doesn't explain your swap.

yeah, i had noticed that.  strange...

Maybe a bloated swap file is a surprise Easter egg 'feature' of XT nodes?

As I said weeks ago, good luck getting BTC core devs to help fix it when your Gavinsista troll fork goes haywire.   Tongue

LOL (as usual.)  I wonder if anyone has even build XT for themselves rather than simply running someone else's build.

Cypherdoc noticed significant swap usage but went on to state that his machine was woefully 'underutilized' anyway.  Typical.

It's bizarre to me that RAM use is so low while swap is significant, but I'm not familiar with whatever tool it is that produces the GUI he screencap'd.  I wonder if he'd just triggered some sort of preen operation or killed an auxiliary analysis process or something to try to produce numbers which he could pass off to the (even more) ignorant that his machine was running fine.


Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 04:01:39 PM
 #28391

I had to go back 500 days to get enough data for Eligius, but it looks like they have historically produced more empty blocks when the previous block was large, similar to F2Pool. 


Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 04:12:22 PM
 #28392

I was chatting with Luke-jr last night on Reddit, Eligius mines lots of 0tx blocks he said they don't SPV mine so it's just Kano is saying, they are just slow to transition.

Why would a pool ever mine an empty block if they weren't SPV mining (at least for a short amount of time while they validate the previous block and before they re-assign the hashers a new non-empty block to work on)?

Personally, I find it difficult to communicate with Luke-Jr because he will often argue based on a technicality due to his own personal definitions of some word, rather than talking about the thing everyone is actually trying to talk about.  It looks like he does this in other sub-reddits too, for example, he claims that the Pope is not the Pope.

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 04:14:50 PM
 #28393

I was chatting with Luke-jr last night on Reddit, Eligius mines lots of 0tx blocks he said they don't SPV mine so it's just Kano is saying, they are just slow to transition.

Why would a pool ever mine an empty block if they weren't SPV mining (at least for a short amount of time while they validate the previous block and before they re-assign the hashers a new non-empty block to work on)?

Personally, I find it difficult to communicate with Luke-Jr because he will often argue based on a technicality due to his own personal definitions of some word, rather than talking about the thing everyone is actually trying to talk about.  It looks like he does this in other sub-reddits too, for example, he claims that the Pope is not the Pope.

a couple others do exactly that too.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 04:20:11 PM
 #28394

oh Lordy.  trusty SLW off the cliff!:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 04:22:56 PM
 #28395

if you're a goldbug, you have GOT to be concerned:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 04:27:57 PM
 #28396

growth?  what fricking growth?

copper:


Freeport:


BHP:


oil:



Chevron:
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 04:31:00 PM
 #28397

hmm, i wonder if those 2 SPV blocks could cause a fork?

Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 04:35:18 PM
 #28398

I was chatting with Luke-jr last night on Reddit, Eligius mines lots of 0tx blocks he said they don't SPV mine so it's just Kano is saying, they are just slow to transition.

Why would a pool ever mine an empty block if they weren't SPV mining (at least for a short amount of time while they validate the previous block and before they re-assign the hashers a new non-empty block to work on)?

Personally, I find it difficult to communicate with Luke-Jr because he will often argue based on a technicality due to his own personal definitions of some word, rather than talking about the thing everyone is actually trying to talk about.  It looks like he does this in other sub-reddits too, for example, he claims that the Pope is not the Pope.

Here is his answer to: I've notice eligius mining multiple empty blocks in a row, is that because they are SPV mining too, and if you know and it's open, what is the SPV mining policy?


Quote from: Luke-Jr
Eligius does not do any SPV mining. Empty blocks are generated only after the previous block has been fully verified, but before the next block's transaction set has been calculated.



It may come down to how you defined SPV mining I guess he is saying they try to mine on top of valid blocks and not empty ones.but if you get lucky you may have empty blocks in a row?

Would that be SPV mining?

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 04:42:07 PM
 #28399

I was chatting with Luke-jr last night on Reddit, Eligius mines lots of 0tx blocks he said they don't SPV mine so it's just Kano is saying, they are just slow to transition.

Why would a pool ever mine an empty block if they weren't SPV mining (at least for a short amount of time while they validate the previous block and before they re-assign the hashers a new non-empty block to work on)?

Personally, I find it difficult to communicate with Luke-Jr because he will often argue based on a technicality due to his own personal definitions of some word, rather than talking about the thing everyone is actually trying to talk about.  It looks like he does this in other sub-reddits too, for example, he claims that the Pope is not the Pope.

Here is his answer to: I've notice eligius mining multiple empty blocks in a row, is that because they are SPV mining too, and if you know and it's open, what is the SPV mining policy?


Quote from: Luke-Jr
Eligius does not do any SPV mining. Empty blocks are generated only after the previous block has been fully verified, but before the next block's transaction set has been calculated.



It may come down to how you defined SPV mining I guess he is saying they try to mine on top of valid blocks and not empty ones.but if you get lucky you may have empty blocks in a row?

Would that be SPV mining?

yes, the defiinition is important.  all these guys are trying to shave milliseconds of the time to start hashing the next block after arrival of a block. 

before Luke, we had been talking about starting hashing of a 0tx blk immediately upon receipt of a "large" block, however that's defined by the pool to attempt to save the time of validating that large blk.  once validated, they sub out the 0tx with a blk with tx's and resume hashing.

Luke apparently gets a blk, large or small, validates it, then routinely sends out a 0tx blk to start hashing, just b/c he wants to save the milliseconds it takes to construct the tx template for a blk with tx's.  once constructed, he resends that blk out with the tx's.
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036



View Profile
July 07, 2015, 04:53:55 PM
 #28400

Quote from: Luke-Jr
Eligius does not do any SPV mining. Empty blocks are generated only after the previous block has been fully verified, but before the next block's transaction set has been calculated.


It may come down to how you defined SPV mining I guess he is saying they try to mine on top of valid blocks and not empty ones.but if you get lucky you may have empty blocks in a row?

Would that be SPV mining?

Let's call it "empty block mining" instead.  He's right that it's not strictly SPV mining if you've indeed verified the previous block, but I think people are interested in the behaviour of Miners in the time between when a miner could begin hashing on an empty block, and when the hashers are actually working on a new non-empty block.  

So then there's:

   (1) empty block mining (previous block verified but new transaction set not built).
   (2) empty block mining (previous block not verified).  

EDIT: it would be nice to make a diagram to visualize all the steps that take place in the mining process.

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
Pages: « 1 ... 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 [1420] 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 ... 1559 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!