mmmaybe
|
|
January 21, 2015, 12:19:13 AM |
|
Go right ahead! Nice work! Is it ok if I tweet about your article? Will send you a donation too Is that your picture in the article? I like it! Please re-tweet it too! HERE /url]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even in the event that an attacker gains more than 50% of the network's
computational power, only transactions sent by the attacker could be
reversed or double-spent. The network would not be destroyed.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
mmmaybe
|
|
January 21, 2015, 12:31:20 AM |
|
Great work today, guys Quite a bit has been done even if it doesn't is apparent yet.
|
|
|
|
burstcoin (OP)
|
|
January 21, 2015, 12:48:46 AM |
|
So, has any theorizing about attack vectors n the like or studies been done on this form of mining algo? What are its downfalls etc....
Im thoroughly interested in this method of securing a crypto, this coin has peaked my interest greatly =) too bad I dont have TB's and TB's of storage lallygagging around lol!
So far there are no known attacks, however there are a few weaknesses, although some of them can be solved with an updated algorithm. 1. Not much at stake. Many people consider the ability to mine multiple chains at the same time without a significant increase in resource consumption to be a major weakness in PoS algorithms, and this would apply partially to PoC as well. In PoC you could mine multiple chains at once, although do to disk bandwidth limits you would be able to mine significantly less chains than you would with PoS as you would be reading different parts for each chain, and therefore electricity consumption would also increase from doing so. This puts it in between PoW and PoS, although much closer to PoS in the 'nothing at stake' argument. 2. Block verification cost The strategy of hashing the nonce and account many times in advance and saving the result may result in a constant low computational cost for checking the nonce later, but everyone else still needs to run the whole hashing cycle on that nonce to verify the block. This results in very high computational cost for verifying blocks, and blockchain syncing being cpu bound. 3. Inability to scale to higher processing power Over the life of bitcoin, hashrate improvements have been much more significant than improvements in hdd capacity. The amount of work added in advance in PoC is constant, so if a similar arms race was to occur, significant enough processing power advances could cause PoW mining to become more efficient than mining PoC as intended. One user ran some calculation trying to estimate how the most efficient sha256 asics would compare in efficiency to hdd mining. Although the calculations were flawed, as they assumed 1 sha256 hash == 1 shabal256 hash regardless of the number of rounds done for the hash, if adjusted to assume 1 round of sha256 == 1 round of shabal256 they estimated those asics would have about 2x the efficiency of using hdds. Although having it within the same order of magnitude isn't too bad, and wouldn't provide enough of an incentive to actually design the hardware, it does show that it may already be possible to achieve better efficiency that way, and the gap could widen in the future. 4. Higher PoW resistance requires higher portion of data being read Under the current PoC system, increasing the number of scoops(which would decrease the amount of data read each block) would also decrease the effective hashrate/TB, however the hashrate from trying to mine it PoW style would be unaffected. This is a bad trend as reading higher portions of the disk each block provides higher PoW resistance, which is also worse for HDD life. 5. High blocktime variance Due to the high amount of diskspace used per nonce, the total amount of nonces checked per block is very low compared to PoW coins. This leads to higher variance in block times. And this is why we need PoC2. PoC2 has only been mentioned a few times publicly, but is a second hdd mining algorithm I plan to add in addition to the original POC. The original PoC will continue to remain as long as problems related to it don't start. PoC2 should solve points 2-4 above. A (very slow) miner for it was hacked together for it a few weeks ago, although it has not yet been implemented in the client. PoC2 started on irc some time ago during a discussion about the block verification cost, mczarnek posed the question about whether plots could be generated similarly to how PoW mining works, so verification would be just comparing a hash to a target. The end result of this once thought out was that plot files could store nonces instead of hashes, and there would be constraints on the nonces that could be used, so you'd be storing allowed nonces. When mining, you would only be able to use nonces where hash(account concat nonce) < target, and hash(hash(account concat nonce)) mod totalscoops == currentscoop. Plotting would then be similar to PoW mining for that target, and then sorting the results into buckets based on the second hash. The appropriate bucket could then be read each block and network state, account id, and nonce could then just be hashed together looking for the lowest result. 2. Block verification cost Verification would be cheap. 1 hash would be needed to compare to the target, another would be needed to calculate the scoop, and a third would be needed to check the deadline. 3. Processing power scaling The target can be set to slowly decrease over time. Although this would change the current rule that you never have to re-plot, users would able to plot setting the target knowing how long the plot would be usable for. Both mining with the finished plots and verifying the blocks would remain constant cost regardless of the target. As plotting and PoW style mining would become harder over time it would help prevent gains in processing power from causing PoW to become more efficient. 4. Under PoC2, changing the amount of scoops also directly affects PoW mining hashrate the same way. This allows it to be scaled to higher or lower portions of the disk being read each block without decreasing PoW resistance. Initial testing showed that storing nonces as 4 byte differences between the previous one in each bucket should be doable, which if the scoop number was adjusted to have PoC and PoC2 have the same hashrate/space used would require only 16MB/TB/block to be read, instead of the current 256MB/TB/block. A scaling factor could also be applied to the base difficulty to lower that even further, however it would make variance even worse.
|
BURST-QHCJ-9HB5-PTGC-5Q8J9
|
|
|
traderman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1001
|
|
January 21, 2015, 02:20:35 AM |
|
Yep it's mine, thanks for the donation Go right ahead! Nice work! Is it ok if I tweet about your article? Will send you a donation too Is that your picture in the article? I like it! Please re-tweet it too! HERE /url]
|
|
|
|
IncludeBeer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1164
Merit: 1010
|
|
January 21, 2015, 04:06:48 AM |
|
So, has any theorizing about attack vectors n the like or studies been done on this form of mining algo? What are its downfalls etc....
Im thoroughly interested in this method of securing a crypto, this coin has peaked my interest greatly =) too bad I dont have TB's and TB's of storage lallygagging around lol!
So far there are no known attacks, however there are a few weaknesses, although some of them can be solved with an updated algorithm. 1. Not much at stake. Many people consider the ability to mine multiple chains at the same time without a significant increase in resource consumption to be a major weakness in PoS algorithms, and this would apply partially to PoC as well. In PoC you could mine multiple chains at once, although do to disk bandwidth limits you would be able to mine significantly less chains than you would with PoS as you would be reading different parts for each chain, and therefore electricity consumption would also increase from doing so. This puts it in between PoW and PoS, although much closer to PoS in the 'nothing at stake' argument. 2. Block verification cost The strategy of hashing the nonce and account many times in advance and saving the result may result in a constant low computational cost for checking the nonce later, but everyone else still needs to run the whole hashing cycle on that nonce to verify the block. This results in very high computational cost for verifying blocks, and blockchain syncing being cpu bound. 3. Inability to scale to higher processing power Over the life of bitcoin, hashrate improvements have been much more significant than improvements in hdd capacity. The amount of work added in advance in PoC is constant, so if a similar arms race was to occur, significant enough processing power advances could cause PoW mining to become more efficient than mining PoC as intended. One user ran some calculation trying to estimate how the most efficient sha256 asics would compare in efficiency to hdd mining. Although the calculations were flawed, as they assumed 1 sha256 hash == 1 shabal256 hash regardless of the number of rounds done for the hash, if adjusted to assume 1 round of sha256 == 1 round of shabal256 they estimated those asics would have about 2x the efficiency of using hdds. Although having it within the same order of magnitude isn't too bad, and wouldn't provide enough of an incentive to actually design the hardware, it does show that it may already be possible to achieve better efficiency that way, and the gap could widen in the future. 4. Higher PoW resistance requires higher portion of data being read Under the current PoC system, increasing the number of scoops(which would decrease the amount of data read each block) would also decrease the effective hashrate/TB, however the hashrate from trying to mine it PoW style would be unaffected. This is a bad trend as reading higher portions of the disk each block provides higher PoW resistance, which is also worse for HDD life. 5. High blocktime variance Due to the high amount of diskspace used per nonce, the total amount of nonces checked per block is very low compared to PoW coins. This leads to higher variance in block times. And this is why we need PoC2. PoC2 has only been mentioned a few times publicly, but is a second hdd mining algorithm I plan to add in addition to the original POC. The original PoC will continue to remain as long as problems related to it don't start. PoC2 should solve points 2-4 above. A (very slow) miner for it was hacked together for it a few weeks ago, although it has not yet been implemented in the client. PoC2 started on irc some time ago during a discussion about the block verification cost, mczarnek posed the question about whether plots could be generated similarly to how PoW mining works, so verification would be just comparing a hash to a target. The end result of this once thought out was that plot files could store nonces instead of hashes, and there would be constraints on the nonces that could be used, so you'd be storing allowed nonces. When mining, you would only be able to use nonces where hash(account concat nonce) < target, and hash(hash(account concat nonce)) mod totalscoops == currentscoop. Plotting would then be similar to PoW mining for that target, and then sorting the results into buckets based on the second hash. The appropriate bucket could then be read each block and network state, account id, and nonce could then just be hashed together looking for the lowest result. 2. Block verification cost Verification would be cheap. 1 hash would be needed to compare to the target, another would be needed to calculate the scoop, and a third would be needed to check the deadline. 3. Processing power scaling The target can be set to slowly decrease over time. Although this would change the current rule that you never have to re-plot, users would able to plot setting the target knowing how long the plot would be usable for. Both mining with the finished plots and verifying the blocks would remain constant cost regardless of the target. As plotting and PoW style mining would become harder over time it would help prevent gains in processing power from causing PoW to become more efficient. 4. Under PoC2, changing the amount of scoops also directly affects PoW mining hashrate the same way. This allows it to be scaled to higher or lower portions of the disk being read each block without decreasing PoW resistance. Initial testing showed that storing nonces as 4 byte differences between the previous one in each bucket should be doable, which if the scoop number was adjusted to have PoC and PoC2 have the same hashrate/space used would require only 16MB/TB/block to be read, instead of the current 256MB/TB/block. A scaling factor could also be applied to the base difficulty to lower that even further, however it would make variance even worse. This PoC2 sounds very interesting! I'll have to comb through the new pages more carefully so I don't miss any updates/infos about it in the future! As always, keep up the great work Dev!
|
|
|
|
mmmaybe
|
|
January 21, 2015, 04:32:49 AM |
|
So, has any theorizing about attack vectors n the like or studies been done on this form of mining algo? What are its downfalls etc....
Im thoroughly interested in this method of securing a crypto, this coin has peaked my interest greatly =) too bad I dont have TB's and TB's of storage lallygagging around lol!
So far there are no known attacks, however there are a few weaknesses, although some of them can be solved with an updated algorithm. [---] This proofs you are the best dev around. Excellent answer! ***applause*** Soon I gonna call you Nick
|
|
|
|
bensam123
|
|
January 21, 2015, 07:30:21 AM |
|
Not sure if this has been looked into, but compression could compromise PoC in the future. I assume plots are made in such a way that they'd be uncompressible, but if a specific algo is developed for compressing them, it could lead to CPU races, where people would need more powerful CPUs to mine more.
|
|
|
|
seasonw
|
|
January 21, 2015, 09:11:01 AM |
|
-[ANNOUNCEMENT - NEW POOL GOING TO OPEN BETA!!POOL INFO
address - http://pool.burstcoining.com:8124 - same address for stats and mining right now, that may change.
reward assignment (the burst BANK! ) - BURST-BANK-DT2R-BM8G-FYFRH
I have set reward assignment to BURST-BANK-DT2R-BM8G-FYFRH, and getting error message:- {"errorCode":1004,"errorDescription":"Your Burst account does not have pool's account as reward recipient."} This error occurred in both uray miner and blago miner. Any clue? Or it is not open to public yet?
|
|
|
|
seasonw
|
|
January 21, 2015, 09:24:38 AM |
|
-[ANNOUNCEMENT - NEW POOL GOING TO OPEN BETA!!POOL INFO
address - http://pool.burstcoining.com:8124 - same address for stats and mining right now, that may change.
reward assignment (the burst BANK! ) - BURST-BANK-DT2R-BM8G-FYFRH
I have set reward assignment to BURST-BANK-DT2R-BM8G-FYFRH, and getting error message:- {"errorCode":1004,"errorDescription":"Your Burst account does not have pool's account as reward recipient."} This error occurred in both uray miner and blago miner. Any clue? Or it is not open to public yet? Problem solved after 5 blocks, I can't wait to try the new pool, haha
|
|
|
|
bobafett
|
|
January 21, 2015, 09:58:00 AM |
|
after a change of the reward recipend, you have to wait 4 block to take affect.
|
|
|
|
seasonw
|
|
January 21, 2015, 10:31:10 AM |
|
after a change of the reward recipend, you have to wait 4 block to take affect.
I did wait 4 blocks, but it only happen in 5 blocks
|
|
|
|
Elmit
|
|
January 21, 2015, 01:47:43 PM |
|
-[ANNOUNCEMENT]-COMPLETELY NEW POOL AVAILABLE FOR USE!!! CODE NOT BASED ON ANY OTHER CODE THAT ANY OTHER POOLS ARE RUNNING, COMPLETELY REBUILT FROM THE GROUND UP.
-MORE STATS
-BETTER PAYOUT SYSTEM
-ONGOING CHANGES (TAKING SUGGESTIONS)
-currently in open beta, so there may be some necessary fixes that still come up, but hey, it's a beta that's what it's for!
-MANY MANY MORE THINGS TO COME FROM BYTEENTERPRISES!
Check it out here...
http://pool.burstcoining.com:8124
COME CHECK IT OUT! COME MINE WITH US!
SOON, BURST.GA WILL BE MOVING TO THIS BACK END, TO GET AWAY FROM ALL OF THE BUGS. THANK YOU ALL! Looks good! Linux / Windows? Available or only for you? node?
|
|
|
|
Merick
|
|
January 21, 2015, 02:50:51 PM Last edit: January 21, 2015, 03:17:22 PM by Merick |
|
Hello Dev,
Just a quick question.
To better deal with the block time variation issue would it be possible to give the winning deadline to the submission that is closest to 4min instead of the submission that is the lowest deadline?
*edited for details* The network already knows who has the lowest deadline. This option would just require the network to know who has the deadline closest to 0, where deadline submitted = ( | 4min - Miner_submission | )
** edited again*** But, how long would the network wait for a submission that was closest to 4min? Right now the network just waits until the time has past for the lowest submission. Sorry I'm thinking out loud through the forum. I'll be quite now
*shrugs*
Just a thought. Keep up the good work.
|
|
|
|
Merick
|
|
January 21, 2015, 03:26:04 PM |
|
12hrs mining, 1TB, ~50 BURST payout. Take into account large difficulty fluctuations lately, typical variation. Sounds about right. Maybe mining for 48-72 hrs and then seeing what your average payout is would be a good idea before coming with the F-bombs. Just saying 12hrs seems like a short amount of time to come up with such a response.
Either way, Good-Luck
|
|
|
|
GenTarkin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2450
Merit: 1002
|
|
January 21, 2015, 03:47:04 PM |
|
Not sure if this has been looked into, but compression could compromise PoC in the future. I assume plots are made in such a way that they'd be uncompressible, but if a specific algo is developed for compressing them, it could lead to CPU races, where people would need more powerful CPUs to mine more.
hrm good point, I wonder what effect filesystem level compression would have on the plot files? I imagine not much since the data is all random, very little null spaces if any, usually thats not compressible.
|
|
|
|
12gaFacelift
|
|
January 21, 2015, 03:48:42 PM |
|
the only 2 thing my friend see all the time:
the deadline for your nonce is too long you need more plot files
thats it.
of what i have see until now that burst thing its only for people who know really what and how to do. i own 80tb and my friend use that but for now i think its better to close the mining until people can explain really how to plot the good way ect ect.
|
|
|
|
xizmax
|
|
January 21, 2015, 03:55:28 PM |
|
the only 2 thing my friend see all the time:
the deadline for your nonce is too long you need more plot files
thats it.
of what i have see until now that burst thing its only for people who know really what and how to do. i own 80tb and my friend use that but for now i think its better to close the mining until people can explain really how to plot the good way ect ect.
While I do not know whether there is, or what is the deadline length limit on the pool, it never hurts to have more space I do agree we need a better guide or a gui to set it all up, however for now crowetic's guide will have to suffice https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ytq47AmQZ1rzjoFuMW33c82JkuJ1L61Pdp95ZLbi3-k/edit?pli=1it is not half bad.
|
|
|
|
crowetic
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2282
Merit: 1072
https://crowetic.com | https://qortal.org
|
|
January 21, 2015, 04:03:22 PM |
|
-[ANNOUNCEMENT]-COMPLETELY NEW POOL AVAILABLE FOR USE!!! CODE NOT BASED ON ANY OTHER CODE THAT ANY OTHER POOLS ARE RUNNING, COMPLETELY REBUILT FROM THE GROUND UP.
-MORE STATS
-BETTER PAYOUT SYSTEM
-ONGOING CHANGES (TAKING SUGGESTIONS)
-currently in open beta, so there may be some necessary fixes that still come up, but hey, it's a beta that's what it's for!
-MANY MANY MORE THINGS TO COME FROM BYTEENTERPRISES!
Check it out here...
http://pool.burstcoining.com:8124
COME CHECK IT OUT! COME MINE WITH US!
SOON, BURST.GA WILL BE MOVING TO THIS BACK END, TO GET AWAY FROM ALL OF THE BUGS. THANK YOU ALL! Looks good! Linux / Windows? Available or only for you? node? The code is currently not finished, and I currently have no plans on releasing the code. Maybe in the future once it's perfect, and then I may let it go with a dev fee, and a fee paid to ByteEnterprises for usage of the software. (It was not free, after all, and took my dev a lot of time and work.) It's linux based code, as my developer is a linux developer only. I think this is preferable. I am not sure if it is node based or not. You'd have to ask my dev about that. I'm simply the guy who suggests to others what should be done, and pays for it. lol. Eventually I myself will re-learn web development, and learn other development as well, but I'm far too busy at this time. Thank you for the compliment on the pool, we're still working on it, and the front end will be changing still as well. But the back end is working very nicely right now, aside from a couple issues that still need to be found fully and worked out, we've been doing great. The payout system is very fair, and I think the first try at 50% current round and 50% historical based payouts, is what we will stick with for a while, this gives even small miners a chance to take a large portion of the payout, if they are the ones who find the block, I Think this will make everyone very happy. COME MINE WITH US EVERYONE! http://pool.burstcoining.com:8124BURST-BANK-DT2R-BM8G-FYFRH - reward assign yourself to the BURST BANK!
|
▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓
| ORTAL
| .⊙.Web and Application hosting. ⊙ decentralized infrastructure .⊙.leveling and voting.
| Founder/current dev group facilitator |
[/td][/tr][/table] [/table]
|
|
|
crowetic
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2282
Merit: 1072
https://crowetic.com | https://qortal.org
|
|
January 21, 2015, 04:12:43 PM |
|
the only 2 thing my friend see all the time:
the deadline for your nonce is too long you need more plot files
thats it.
of what i have see until now that burst thing its only for people who know really what and how to do. i own 80tb and my friend use that but for now i think its better to close the mining until people can explain really how to plot the good way ect ect.
While I do not know whether there is, or what is the deadline length limit on the pool, it never hurts to have more space I do agree we need a better guide or a gui to set it all up, however for now crowetic's guide will have to suffice https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ytq47AmQZ1rzjoFuMW33c82JkuJ1L61Pdp95ZLbi3-k/edit?pli=1it is not half bad. Actually, I don't want this guy on my pool, at all, someone who immediately ATTACKS me, when the pool is in OPEN BETA, saying some dumb shit about 1TB and 50 BURST a day, when the pool is JUST STARTING barely has any miners on it yet, and is still in fuckin OPEN BETA.... needs to just go away, go buy an ASIC and plug it in, let it run, burst is obviously too much for your little brain. Honestly, if you would have come at this a little bit nicer, maybe I would have helped you to set everything up and make sure you're plotted right, and start making some real cash. But now, there's no way that I will ever help you unless you make a serious apology to me that I deem heartfelt. It's utterly ridiculous for someone to act this way when they both don't understand what they're doing, and are completely new at something. IF you EVER want to be successful in life, I highly suggest that you re-think the way you approach situations, because if you do things like you did here, you're gonna have a miserable existence. Feel free to apologize to me, and I'll think about helping you mine. Also feel free to leave the burst community entirely, we really don't need people like you. BURST will succeed without the addition of assholes into the community. Plus, we've already got our own jerks, but they're ones we like. You, not so much. I am one of the biggest players in the community, I've given away hundreds of thousands of BURST, and given a lot of my time, effort, and cash to make sure BURST becomes the coin that we all know it could be. I am also one of the nicest people you could meet, if you don't immediately come at me with curse words and tell me my pool sucks and to fuck off. That's really not the best way to get me to be nice to you. But anyway, I'll stop here, but yea, apologize, leave the community, or find another pool and go to it. Because I won't tolerate people with attitudes like yours. Have a great day!
|
▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▒ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ ▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓
| ORTAL
| .⊙.Web and Application hosting. ⊙ decentralized infrastructure .⊙.leveling and voting.
| Founder/current dev group facilitator |
[/td][/tr][/table] [/table]
|
|
|
unsoindovo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1932
Merit: 1042
https://locktrip.com/?refId=40964
|
|
January 21, 2015, 04:44:43 PM |
|
the only 2 thing my friend see all the time:
the deadline for your nonce is too long you need more plot files
thats it.
of what i have see until now that burst thing its only for people who know really what and how to do. i own 80tb and my friend use that but for now i think its better to close the mining until people can explain really how to plot the good way ect ect.
While I do not know whether there is, or what is the deadline length limit on the pool, it never hurts to have more space I do agree we need a better guide or a gui to set it all up, however for now crowetic's guide will have to suffice https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ytq47AmQZ1rzjoFuMW33c82JkuJ1L61Pdp95ZLbi3-k/edit?pli=1it is not half bad. Actually, I don't want this guy on my pool, at all, someone who immediately ATTACKS me, when the pool is in OPEN BETA, saying some dumb shit about 1TB and 50 BURST a day, when the pool is JUST STARTING barely has any miners on it yet, and is still in fuckin OPEN BETA.... needs to just go away, go buy an ASIC and plug it in, let it run, burst is obviously too much for your little brain. Honestly, if you would have come at this a little bit nicer, maybe I would have helped you to set everything up and make sure you're plotted right, and start making some real cash. But now, there's no way that I will ever help you unless you make a serious apology to me that I deem heartfelt. It's utterly ridiculous for someone to act this way when they both don't understand what they're doing, and are completely new at something. IF you EVER want to be successful in life, I highly suggest that you re-think the way you approach situations, because if you do things like you did here, you're gonna have a miserable existence. Feel free to apologize to me, and I'll think about helping you mine. Also feel free to leave the burst community entirely, we really don't need people like you. BURST will succeed without the addition of assholes into the community. Plus, we've already got our own jerks, but they're ones we like. You, not so much. I am one of the biggest players in the community, I've given away hundreds of thousands of BURST, and given a lot of my time, effort, and cash to make sure BURST becomes the coin that we all know it could be. I am also one of the nicest people you could meet, if you don't immediately come at me with curse words and tell me my pool sucks and to fuck off. That's really not the best way to get me to be nice to you. But anyway, I'll stop here, but yea, apologize, leave the community, or find another pool and go to it. Because I won't tolerate people with attitudes like yours. Have a great day! i think you are not italian... and i think you have never studied Dante and Divina Commedia... but i can tell you "non ti curar di loro ma guarda e passa" i hope this is the correct translation "Don't care about them, but look-on and pass."
|
|
|
|
|