[ANN][BURST] Burst | Efficient HDD Mining | New 1.2.3 Fork block 92000

[seasonw]

Actually, I sent also log to Blago at the very beginning of burst mining.
And I am not ok with "luck" I have mining burst.

Considering to re-plot also my hdds also I considered to use different addr for each server.
You just made me paranoid more than usually I am.

And I am have bad "luck". 

I must replot all my plots?

http://burstcoin.eu/address/17930413153828766298
21.5 Tb

paranoics everywhere
 

Ohoh~~ didn't ever know Blago has own pool in russian, why not listed in OP 

He has hardly been hiding that pool.

Ha~~ Too bad then, Blago should not post the 21.5TB address, there is a trace to your pool's BURST ID..... from GOOGLE 

[mmmaybe]

Why wouldn't he post that address? 

[fivebells]

How do I get the debugger to run the ATs?  The "Add AT" button seems to work, and I've dragged the assembly from the two examples into the resulting windows.  The "Run" etc. buttons are grayed out, and stay that way no matter what I've tried so far.  Advance block seems to have no effect, and anything I put in the "Balance" field gets zeroed out when I advance or undo the blockchain.  The "Send Tx" dialogs don't seem to do anything.  No errors are reported in the terminal I launch the debugger from, but there are some "Vector" messages, which I assume result from the assembly of the machine code.

Running on ubuntu trusty, with jdk1.8.0_25

[vaxman]

wow, I restarted my 2 wallets (I have two miners running) two hours ago, and noticed that they are on different chains during the last 15 minutes;
how can that happen ?

I restarted because I had just 1 block during the last 24 hours, and suspected bad peers.

[edit]
just a few minutes later they are in sync again, the block 69189 is the only one displayed differently now, but this may be just a glitch - when I look up the block information the details are the same.

Wallet 2 has 5 of 20 connections with outdated peers, even a v1.1.0. Ouch.
[/edit]


wallet 1
---------
Height   Date   Amount   Fee   # TX   Generator   Payload   Base Target
69191   21/02/2015 01:35:21   87'797.56006772   4   4   BURST-3R9L-AZTF-FCW9-2HWVB   704 B   0001 %
69190   21/02/2015 01:33:22   0   0   0   BURST-7CJE-8EA6-BVKE-AG6PM   0 B   0001 %
69189   21/02/2015 01:29:26   0   0   0   BURST-QLW8-Y3H4-Z2NF-AEQMW   0 B   0001 %
69188   21/02/2015 01:24:09   91'831.05512561   78   78   BURST-SDAC-FFUD-SMCB-D3Q74   13 KB   0001 %

wallet 2
---------
Height   Date   Amount   Fee   # TX   Generator   Payload   Base Target
69191   21/02/2015 01:35:21   87'797.56006772   4   4   BURST-3R9L-AZTF-FCW9-2HWVB   704 B   0001 %
69190   21/02/2015 01:33:22   0   0   0   BURST-7CJE-8EA6-BVKE-AG6PM   0 B   0001 %
69189   21/02/2015 01:28:46   87'797.56006772   4   4   BURST-3N7E-CX8T-K6AM-D6Q4N   704 B   0001 %
69188   21/02/2015 01:24:09   91'831.05512561   78   78   BURST-SDAC-FFUD-SMCB-D3Q74   13 KB   0001 %

connected machines wallet 1:

  210.61.217.206   0   223 KB   365 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  91.202.25.207:8123   0   235 KB   497 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  144.76.196.195:8123   0   40 KB   122 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  99.113.26.253   0   195 KB   477 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  161.53.40.242   0   159 KB   357 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  185.32.157.27   0   12 KB   25 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  192.162.248.15   0   38 KB   423 KB   NRS 1.1.5   PC
  194.252.183.86   0   240 KB   541 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  CLV[Suspicious link removed]IVATEDNS.ORG:8123   0   217 KB   505 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  107.191.39.180   0   127 KB   263 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  217.51.10.170   0   313 KB   606 KB   NRS 1.2.2   FreeBSD
  188.25.135.62   0   167 KB   280 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  108.238.244.144   0   195 KB   270 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  188.165.181.182   0   60 KB   271 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  198.199.103.145   0   325 KB   298 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  176.9.101.198   0   141 KB   81 KB   NRS 1.2.2   Burstcoin.eu
  85.214.58.104   0   724 KB   386 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  chemwa.hd.free.fr   0   5 KB   31 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  95.82.224.150:8833   0   266 KB   141 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  92.242.54.83:8123   0   66 KB   126 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  83.141.0.226   0   38 KB   86 KB   NRS 1.1.3   PC
  61.91.14.55   0   220 KB   156 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  178.63.9.6   0   165 KB   21 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  46.59.226.106   0   98 KB   43 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  107.220.143.176:8123   0   233 KB   105 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC

connected machines wallet 2:

  192.198.95.51   0   97 KB   481 KB   NRS 1.2.0   PC
  136.243.22.88:8123   0   750 KB   587 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  109.121.255.96   0   949 B   31 KB   NRS 1.2.1   PC
  195.13.160.104   0   350 KB   162 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  194.252.183.86   0   116 KB   139 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  81.29.25.109   0   158 KB   151 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  70.168.116.190   0   35 KB   236 KB   NRS 1.2.1   PC
  5.9.23.116   0   4 KB   11 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  46.163.110.77   0   69 KB   60 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  71.245.115.177   0   30 KB   263 KB   NRS 1.2.1   PC
  5.9.81.9   0   361 KB   496 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  92.27.7.209   0   88 KB   127 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  148.251.154.165   0   369 KB   389 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  176.9.101.198   0   314 KB   390 KB   NRS 1.2.2   Burstcoin.eu
  98.17.167.196   0   77 KB   26 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  148.251.190.170:8123   0   7 KB   1 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  178.172.181.172   0   258 KB   283 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  83.172.25.92   0   360 KB   342 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC
  69.30.248.188   0   350 KB   269 KB   NRS 1.2.2   pool.burstcoin.io
  142.4.211.170   0   3 MB   270 KB   NRS 1.1.0   PC
  50.178.106.66   0   276 KB   232 KB   NRS 1.2.2   PC

[mmmaybe]

Twitter 23 hours after a BURST press release:

[mmmaybe]

All Time High

[bensam123]

The PoC verification hashes your account id and nonce from the block and uses that when calculating/checking your deadline. If someone tried to swap out the account id it'd result in a completely different hash and therefore a completely different deadline. Only the account id in the block's reward recipient can receive the block reward.

Coins definitely make you paranoid the more you get fucked by them. I was under the impression in the mining phase the miner finds a specific hash with your account number that it's looking for and then sends it to the wallet, but after it finds it you've pretty much 'solved' things and the answer is submitted to the wallet.

I think several folks posting here are not quite well versed in how math, blockchains, crypto, mining etc... all work in relationship to one another.

we have folks who don't understand  what variance is ("luck" in laymens terms) and freak out and start saying things that border on slander and unfounded accusations.  albeit, I can concede that lack of knowledge (aka ignorance) easily explains their behavior.

Week of stats... 360 blocks per day, 2520 per week. 2500 points of data is not by any means a small pool. If things balanced out I should've been hitting ~two blocks per day (this is with 17PB). Law of large numbers (randomness does not make things inherently completely random). Lack of knowledge when it comes to stats is also considered ignorance.

You're not the only one that can fling poo bro and there is plenty of evidence in the BTC forums of backstabbing, scamming, and stealing, including creative ways of doing it that people didn't think could be done in the first place (There are plenty of miners that had hidden 'fees'). That is by no means in short supply. Paranoia in this case is much more helpful then a lack of it as more people can pool their points of data and it can be discussed further. That's the whole reason I brought it to light here. Even if it seems like it's not feasible, if other people have also experienced a similar drop in income after submitting logs to Blago it should be looked at thoroughly. Ignorance would be ignoring such a trend because he's 'reputable', whatever that means in the BTC forums. Because he makes a miner people use and depend on he should receive even more scrutiny as you're essentially giving him access to all your sensitive bits of information.

I found two blocks so far already today just to add more anecdotal evidence after switching to a pool.

[mmmaybe]

[---]
Week of stats... 360 blocks per day, 2520 per week. 2500 points of data is not by any means a small pool.
[---]

Are you serious...?

That is a tiny pool a data; even a year of data wouldn't be enough to draw any definitive conclusions (and. yes, I know there are pseudo-scientist claiming the opposite but they are simply ignorant). Ofc you can be correct but that would be like winning the Euro-lotto: pure damn luck and nothing but that.

[haitch]

The PoC verification hashes your account id and nonce from the block and uses that when calculating/checking your deadline. If someone tried to swap out the account id it'd result in a completely different hash and therefore a completely different deadline. Only the account id in the block's reward recipient can receive the block reward.

Coins definitely make you paranoid the more you get fucked by them. I was under the impression in the mining phase the miner finds a specific hash with your account number that it's looking for and then sends it to the wallet, but after it finds it you've pretty much 'solved' things and the answer is submitted to the wallet.

I think several folks posting here are not quite well versed in how math, blockchains, crypto, mining etc... all work in relationship to one another.

we have folks who don't understand  what variance is ("luck" in laymens terms) and freak out and start saying things that border on slander and unfounded accusations.  albeit, I can concede that lack of knowledge (aka ignorance) easily explains their behavior.

Week of stats... 360 blocks per day, 2520 per week. 2500 points of data is not by any means a small pool. If things balanced out I should've been hitting ~two blocks per day (this is with 17PB). Law of large numbers (randomness does not make things inherently completely random). Lack of knowledge when it comes to stats is also considered ignorance.

You're not the only one that can fling poo bro and there is plenty of evidence in the BTC forums of backstabbing, scamming, and stealing, including creative ways of doing it that people didn't think could be done in the first place (There are plenty of miners that had hidden 'fees'). That is by no means in short supply. Paranoia in this case is much more helpful then a lack of it as more people can pool their points of data and it can be discussed further. That's the whole reason I brought it to light here. Even if it seems like it's not feasible, if other people have also experienced a similar drop in income after submitting logs to Blago it should be looked at thoroughly. Ignorance would be ignoring such a trend because he's 'reputable', whatever that means in the BTC forums. Because he makes a miner people use and depend on he should receive even more scrutiny as you're essentially giving him access to all your sensitive bits of information.

I found two blocks so far already today just to add more anecdotal evidence after switching to a pool.

Three days ago I found 5 blocks, the day after that I also found 5 blocks. Since then I haven't found any, and I haven't submitted any logs to Blago. Unless the logs you're submitting include your wallet passphrase, there is absolutely zero sensitive information in the log files - and if you're posting your passphrase anywhere you're a moron thats gets what they deserve.

[Blago]

Just found this Russian article: http://www.moneynews.ru/News/19214/

Does anyone know if it is positive, negative, neutral or just a translated press release?

translated press release.
From here http://www.criptomoney.com/burst-dognat-i-peregnat-efirium/   (Translation avaible)

[mmmaybe]

Just found this Russian article: http://www.moneynews.ru/News/19214/

Does anyone know if it is positive, negative, neutral or just a translated press release?

translated press release.
From here http://www.criptomoney.com/burst-dognat-i-peregnat-efirium/   (Translation avaible)

Thanks 

[Blago]

Ha~~ Too bad then, Blago should not post the 21.5TB address, there is a trace to your pool's BURST ID..... from GOOGLE 

it's small pool, hardware do not allow to handle requests from many miners...

[bensam123]

[---]
Week of stats... 360 blocks per day, 2520 per week. 2500 points of data is not by any means a small pool.
[---]

Are you serious...?

That is a tiny pool a data; even a year of data wouldn't be enough to draw any definitive conclusions (and. yes, I know there are pseudo-scientist claiming the opposite but they are simply ignorant). Ofc you can be correct but that would be like winning the Euro-lotto: pure damn luck and nothing but that.

Sir you haven't taken any stats courses. Statistics is not a 'pseudoscience'. You don't have a chance on average of winning the lottery twice a day and then it doesn't happen 70% of the time for a week. Two times a day was based on peak network usage as well (17PB). A year worth of stats based on that would mean the calculator is essentially wrong at that point or something is seriously influencing your distribution.

Three days ago I found 5 blocks, the day after that I also found 5 blocks. Since then I haven't found any, and I haven't submitted any logs to Blago. Unless the logs you're submitting include your wallet passphrase, there is absolutely zero sensitive information in the log files - and if you're posting your passphrase anywhere you're a moron thats gets what they deserve.

And that's less then half a weeks worth of data. You also did not list your plot sizes so there is no way of knowing if two blocks is a lot or a little for you. Because finding all the passphrases in a 20MB txt file always happens and you're a 'moron' if you miss any part of it. Blago could easily split your passphrase up or use a cipher and there is no way of knowing if he didn't distribute it over the log file at that point.

It may not even have anything to do with the log files, he posts custom built .exes all over. He sent me a second one yesterday to try out, which at this point I'm going to decline, and there was another one in the thread a week ago, that fixes... something? There is more then one way to get a hold of sensitive information.

[Blago]

[---]
Week of stats... 360 blocks per day, 2520 per week. 2500 points of data is not by any means a small pool.
[---]

Are you serious...?

That is a tiny pool a data; even a year of data wouldn't be enough to draw any definitive conclusions (and. yes, I know there are pseudo-scientist claiming the opposite but they are simply ignorant). Ofc you can be correct but that would be like winning the Euro-lotto: pure damn luck and nothing but that.

Sir you haven't taken any stats courses. Statistics is not a 'pseudoscience'. You don't have a chance on average of winning the lottery twice a day and then it doesn't happen 70% of the time for a week. Two times a day was based on peak network usage as well (17PB). A year worth of stats based on that would mean the calculator is essentially wrong at that point or something is seriously influencing your distribution.

Three days ago I found 5 blocks, the day after that I also found 5 blocks. Since then I haven't found any, and I haven't submitted any logs to Blago. Unless the logs you're submitting include your wallet passphrase, there is absolutely zero sensitive information in the log files - and if you're posting your passphrase anywhere you're a moron thats gets what they deserve.

And that's less then half a weeks worth of data. You also did not list your plot sizes so there is no way of knowing if two blocks is a lot or a little for you. Because finding all the passphrases in a 20MB txt file always happens and you're a 'moron' if you miss any part of it. Blago could easily split your passphrase up or use a cipher and there is no way of knowing if he didn't distribute it over the log file at that point.

It may not even have anything to do with the log files, he posts custom built .exes all over. He sent me a second one yesterday to try out, which at this point I'm going to decline, and there was another one in the thread a week ago, that fixes... something? There is more then one way to get a hold of sensitive information.

Your log files do not contain "secret" information (you deleted it).
The only thing that is clear of them - is the process of working miner, programs creates them just for that.
The source code of the program you can see https://github.com/Blagodarenko/miner-burst, you can see it, check and compile.

Now I'm working on a new version of the program as soon as the update the https://github.com/Blagodarenko/miner-burst

[callmejack]

[---]
Week of stats... 360 blocks per day, 2520 per week. 2500 points of data is not by any means a small pool.
[---]

Are you serious...?

That is a tiny pool a data; even a year of data wouldn't be enough to draw any definitive conclusions (and. yes, I know there are pseudo-scientist claiming the opposite but they are simply ignorant). Ofc you can be correct but that would be like winning the Euro-lotto: pure damn luck and nothing but that.

Sir you haven't taken any stats courses. Statistics is not a 'pseudoscience'. You don't have a chance on average of winning the lottery twice a day and then it doesn't happen 70% of the time for a week. Two times a day was based on peak network usage as well (17PB). A year worth of stats based on that would mean the calculator is essentially wrong at that point or something is seriously influencing your distribution.

Three days ago I found 5 blocks, the day after that I also found 5 blocks. Since then I haven't found any, and I haven't submitted any logs to Blago. Unless the logs you're submitting include your wallet passphrase, there is absolutely zero sensitive information in the log files - and if you're posting your passphrase anywhere you're a moron thats gets what they deserve.

And that's less then half a weeks worth of data. You also did not list your plot sizes so there is no way of knowing if two blocks is a lot or a little for you. Because finding all the passphrases in a 20MB txt file always happens and you're a 'moron' if you miss any part of it. Blago could easily split your passphrase up or use a cipher and there is no way of knowing if he didn't distribute it over the log file at that point.

It may not even have anything to do with the log files, he posts custom built .exes all over. He sent me a second one yesterday to try out, which at this point I'm going to decline, and there was another one in the thread a week ago, that fixes... something? There is more then one way to get a hold of sensitive information.

Your log files do not contain "secret" information (you deleted it).
The only thing that is clear of them - is the process of working miner, programs creates them just for that.
The source code of the program you can see https://github.com/Blagodarenko/miner-burst, you can see it, check and compile.

Now I'm working on a new version of the program as soon as the update the https://github.com/Blagodarenko/miner-burst

only a side remark to information theory from my observer perspective without saying anyone does this currently.

if someone wants to leak data through unsensitive log files it is possible to code any information into regular looking log data.
without knowing the coding table it is impossible to detect that there is invisible information transfered.
for burst a really simple solution could be to use the blockheight as reference and then hide one byte of data within the additional information created for this block in the log.
a simple way would be to use 3 decimals on a percentage value which normally looks reliable for that block. this in combination with the blockheight and a secret coding table could transfer out almost any passphrase with log entries within less than a day of mining.
to hide it more you may split this between several number values or create a checksum based attempt.
in other words in crypto i personally can even not trust sourcecode i have personally reviewed (you may use a similar approach within sourcecode if you construct complex enough objects) but i have many coins and nothing happened so far.

[bloodDiamond]

@FakeAccount

Considering matter in that way, I have hundreds of GPU, can plot more than 1000Tb/day.

if you have Hundreds of GPU,
your business model could be to plot for third part users...
 and to get paid for this!!!

 

[Yanakitu Tenatako]

@FakeAccount

Considering matter in that way, I have hundreds of GPU, can plot more than 1000Tb/day.

if you have Hundreds of GPU,
your business model could be to plot for third part users...
 and to get paid for this!!!

 

Not an option. No demand on such service.

[bloodDiamond]

@FakeAccount

Considering matter in that way, I have hundreds of GPU, can plot more than 1000Tb/day.

if you have Hundreds of GPU,
your business model could be to plot for third part users...
 and to get paid for this!!!

 

Not an option. No demand on such service.

perhaps because no one has yet proposed ...
or perhaps because no one can provide it!

[mmmaybe]

[---]
Week of stats... 360 blocks per day, 2520 per week. 2500 points of data is not by any means a small pool.
[---]

Are you serious...?

That is a tiny pool a data; even a year of data wouldn't be enough to draw any definitive conclusions (and. yes, I know there are pseudo-scientist claiming the opposite but they are simply ignorant). Ofc you can be correct but that would be like winning the Euro-lotto: pure damn luck and nothing but that.

Sir you haven't taken any stats courses. Statistics is not a 'pseudoscience'. You don't have a chance on average of winning the lottery twice a day and then it doesn't happen 70% of the time for a week. Two times a day was based on peak network usage as well (17PB). A year worth of stats based on that would mean the calculator is essentially wrong at that point or something is seriously influencing your distribution.

Get back in a year.

I did, of course, not mean that statistics as such is pseudo, but everyone understanding stats are extremely careful drawing conclusions from small datasets (or even large...), bur you aren't. I've plenty of stats in my education, but what I do know you lack a deeper understanding of both statistics and very, very basic logic.

Get back in six months.

[coinits]

Heh. I just discovered that I am somewhat of a BURST Whale ok maybe a Baby Whale   Come on guys don't let this knuckle-dragger outdo you!