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

[bensam1231]

Interesting. Ok you definitely see the problem I see with these coins. Why exactly am I wrong though?
If you "invest" in a coin then definitely, inflationary model won't be appealing. On the deflationary model you're just gambling that you'll figure out when to dump, before others do. Some will win, some will lose, in the end it's a sick gable. Worst thing that can happen to you is get very lucky on the first coins you try. suicide will soon follow HAHAH

However if the coin is NOT just a platform for ponzi games, it has usefulness, then you can safely treat is as a commodity (or so I'm inclined to think).
The idea came to me for the particular use of mixing transactions. In that case, there will definitely be a lot of buys and sells, but not to invest, but because of the mixing going on. So profit can be made by trading the coin, short term, sell a bit higher, buy a bit lower and do that a huge number of times. Also I suggested burning the tx fees (which should be substantial fees), instead of adding to the mining reward, and burning a % from old inputs. This coin would only exist to be transacted, if you don't transact it, you are sure to lose.

And of course the reward would not increase infinitely. At some point the maximum hashpower will be reached. It should even decrease, if the market price falls. I think my idea simply deters ponzi usage of it, and gives the reward to miners and skilled traders. And the actual users will pay the bill (gladly!). If you try to mix with Monero, good luck! Or just wait until the order book looks like it might be a safe time to do it. With the kind of coin I'm proposing I don't think fluctuations can be too severe over short periods of time.

PS: with normal currency, for example EUR and USD are both inflationary, right? If you think investing in dollars now and gain something 10 years in the future, you are an idiot. But still there's good money to be made on forex. Right? In fact if they hold back on the inflation, they're actually in big trouble. Like what's happening now with the crysis. Which I guess is because the inflationary mechanism they used wasn't a good one. But still we need to find ways to inflate them

That's the state cryptocoins are in right now, anybody who holds them is essentially an idiot. We are all idiots. I'm an idiot I'm holding 2.5M BURST, hoping that a bigger idiot will eventually show up. But I'm forced to do it. Thanks, y'all!

If you're holding a coin obviously it seems like the right decision to reduce supply, it therefore increases the value of what you own (supply/demand). However if no one cares about what you have anymore you're essentially a bag holder, so it doesn't even matter what the supply and demand end up as. There wont be any demand because people will no longer care.

Money has value because people give it value, not necessarily because the supply is limited or it does something fancy. It has a lot to do with psychology as much as it has to do with math.

The 'care' Burst has right now is it's relatively profitable, it's interesting (miners are geeks), and it has a decent community (which are almost entirely all miners). If the block reward hits rock bottom, then you better hope that there are people besides miners supporting the coin or they'll leave with the money. I don't think that's something a lot of coin makers understand. BTC and altcoins are very community driven and it all comes from the miners. We're essentially paid to care.

That's why I proposed freezing the block reward or changing it to a more manageable and more appealing form to miners. One of the biggest issues I had with going in on Burst in the first place is I have to buy hardware JUST for one coin. If Burst crashes or other alt coins don't pop up, I'm essentially stuck with a bunch of used hardware that relatively no one is going to want. I could and did sell off my GPUs, but HDs are much harder to sell used because they have a effective life time. They go bad overtime. Buying a used drive is taking a pretty big gamble.

As a miner I hoped and still do that altcoins pop up that also use POC, even if they aren't highly successful because it gives miners more options and assurance. POCs unique model would allow you to mine more then one altcoin at the same time too (use the same plots). Although I'm not sure how this will influence the economics of coins if they can all be mined at the same time (and maybe they wouldn't want to be and a replot would be required).

Playing coins will always happen. Theres always going to be people that see coins as 'get rich fast' things and the whole reason I'm mining burst right now is because I could make some money doing it. I'm not going to lie. The people that hold the coin right now also I'm sure are holding it because they think it'll be worth more, they're also here for profit. But that also means we all have a reason to work together.

I'm not sure I fully understand all of what you're saying in your post though. Payouts right now are all proportional. It's a giant pie. If you give everyone their own pie, they'll just dump them all. So while I'm against overall scarcity, there needs to be balance for income for miners. A model that's based on market volume may not be a horrible idea (but it may also cause things to explode). It'd be interesting to try for a prototype coin, but not for a established coin.

I do agree about the transaction fees. Blockrewards in general are just made to encourage people to jump in and 'get rich' early, but it deters people from staying on the coin. If the blockreward was frozen and transmission fees were increased it may just cause people to not trade the coin and that's also something you don't want. Transmission fees right now are grossly small though compared to the blockreward. If they were something like they are for BTC that wouldn't be bad... like $.04-.01 per transmission. Maybe proportional compared to the blockreward, decreasing over time.

I'm not sure exactly where the limits are on Bitcoin's scripts, but it likely is able to handle at least the simple side of the previously described transfer. Monitoring btc's blockchain would introduce a ton of unwanted traffic, and would only assist in transfering between one coin instead of any.

I'm not sure this is what you want to hear, but as your average Joe miner, I still have no idea what ATs are and what they mean to me as a miner or a user of burst. Best I can tell, you can use them as fundraisers, but there is currently no way of actually looking at them or doing anything with them without a bunch of messing around (special scripts).

That's a problem with Burst in general, it's not user friendly at all. I still think there should be a official online wallet with security and all that jazz. Since all you need is your passphrase, you should be able to access your wallet anywhere without any downloads. That's actually one of the best parts of this coin is it's all web based.

[1714712852]

1714712852

[1714712852]

1714712852

[elproducto]

Using Blago Miner 1.150319,  For some reason my network drive plots are not getting recognized.  They where recognized in 1.4 version so not sure if I need to change anything in my config.  I can navigate to the network drive using explorer.

Code:

"Paths":
[
        "Z:\\plots",
        "D:\\plots",
        "E:\\FVOFFICE"
],
"SkipBadPlots" : false,
"CacheSize" : 100000,
"UseSorting" : true,
"UseCleanMem" : true,
 
"Debug" : true,
"UseLog" : true,
"ShowMsg" : false,
"ShowUpdates" : false
}

https://i.imgur.com/HUmwxEQ.png
https://i.imgur.com/uXQS9EU.png

[bitladen]

If you're holding a coin obviously it seems like the right decision to reduce supply, it therefore increases the value of what you own (supply/demand). However if no one cares about what you have anymore you're essentially a bag holder, so it doesn't even matter what the supply and demand end up as. There wont be any demand because people will no longer care.

To begin, I think you're too stuck in the mainline bitcoin propaganda, I do know the theory, but as you can see, it's not really working out. Reason being, that some people care a lot less than others, due to the fact that they got their coins VERY inexpensively. It's a design flaw. As another user pointed out, the faster the reward is being scheduled to reduce, the more aggravated this is. However this exists even in bitcoin, but because the reward reduces a lot more slowly and hashrate is kind of stabilized, the coin still resists, it doesn't die like the others. Others (including BURST) have this scheduled too fast, I don't see them holding at this rate. In fact, we see them failing all the time.

Your proposal with freezing the reward is very good. You got a supporter already!

I am only holding 2.5M, while I have had 10% of the hashpower for a month. My 2.5M change nothing, even though it should. That's the point I'm trying to make here.

It'd be interesting to try for a prototype coin, but not for a established coin.

Of course I am talking about a prototype coin, I never said change burst, it's a bit late for that. But I got here because it seems I'm one of the main miners, and recently people have been talking about me, so I responded, and I also took the opportunity to bring my ideas to the community.

[burstcoin]

I'm not sure exactly where the limits are on Bitcoin's scripts, but it likely is able to handle at least the simple side of the previously described transfer. Monitoring btc's blockchain would introduce a ton of unwanted traffic, and would only assist in transfering between one coin instead of any.

I'm not sure this is what you want to hear, but as your average Joe miner, I still have no idea what ATs are and what they mean to me as a miner or a user of burst. Best I can tell, you can use them as fundraisers, but there is currently no way of actually looking at them or doing anything with them without a bunch of messing around (special scripts).

This is the main thing being worked on currently. I have a site I'm working on which has various AT tools, some simple, and some more advanced. It will have a AT creation tool which will allow you to choose templates and options and it will tell you what to plug into burst to make that AT. There is an AT examine tool which dumps the state of an AT and disassembles tje code so you can see what it does. On the more advances side, there's an in-browser version of the AT assembler, and an editor for creating AT interfaces. In a future update ATs will be able to have interface data attached to them so they can be interacted with without all the extra html file stuff that's currently used. I know the current toolchain is rather ugly for those without knowledge of the internals.

[bitladen]

This is the main thing being worked on currently. I have a site I'm working on which has various AT tools, some simple, and some more advanced. It will have a AT creation tool which will allow you to choose templates and options and it will tell you what to plug into burst to make that AT. There is an AT examine tool which dumps the state of an AT and disassembles tje code so you can see what it does. On the more advances side, there's an in-browser version of the AT assembler, and an editor for creating AT interfaces. In a future update ATs will be able to have interface data attached to them so they can be interacted with without all the extra html file stuff that's currently used. I know the current toolchain is rather ugly for those without knowledge of the internals.

This is interesting. AT assembler? What kind of code is this?

[bobafett]

Update and News: www.burstcoin.de

>> New Feature: German Linux Plot Optimization Guide is available

[burstcoin]

This is the main thing being worked on currently. I have a site I'm working on which has various AT tools, some simple, and some more advanced. It will have a AT creation tool which will allow you to choose templates and options and it will tell you what to plug into burst to make that AT. There is an AT examine tool which dumps the state of an AT and disassembles tje code so you can see what it does. On the more advances side, there's an in-browser version of the AT assembler, and an editor for creating AT interfaces. In a future update ATs will be able to have interface data attached to them so they can be interacted with without all the extra html file stuff that's currently used. I know the current toolchain is rather ugly for those without knowledge of the internals.

This is interesting. AT assembler? What kind of code is this?

It's assembly language for the AT vm.

Some examples can be found here, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=949438.msg10408276#msg10408276
and full specs are here http://ciyam.org/at/at.html and http://ciyam.org/at/at_api.html

[CIYAM]

This is interesting. AT assembler? What kind of code is this?

AT is a virtual CPU so they are "machine code" (a bit like the contents of an .exe for Windows).

The AT Assembler allows a higher level than writing raw machine code (which is just hex bytes) but lower level than languages such as C or Python.

It is envisioned that for the most part people will actually just use "templates" and not have to worry about writing "code" at all. You will select the appropriate template (let's say Crowdfund) then fill in some values (such as payout account, amount to raise and time limit to raise the funds) and the assembly (and machine code) will be generated for you automatically.

[Blago]

Using Blago Miner 1.150319,  For some reason my network drive plots are not getting recognized.  They where recognized in 1.4 version so not sure if I need to change anything in my config.  I can navigate to the network drive using explorer.
....

try share folder "plots" as network drive "Z:\"

[elproducto]

try share folder "plots" as network drive "Z:\"

Thanks for you help.  I tried what you recommended and got an error message "Debug Assertion Failed!".  I also tried with "Z:\\" and the miner starts but again the contents of Z: is not recognized.

https://i.imgur.com/eqI58hB.png

[bobafett]

you have Z:\, has to be Z:\\

[bensam1231]

I agree, Blago definitely needs a readme file. I swapped to the dev pool and had to look around for settings and I don't even know if found them all again.

Curiously, what is the best pool for a larger miner? I've tried dev before and urays. I haven't tried burst.ninja. What are peoples experience?

[crowetic]

I agree, Blago definitely needs a readme file. I swapped to the dev pool and had to look around for settings and I don't even know if found them all again.

Curiously, what is the best pool for a larger miner? I've tried dev before and urays. I haven't tried burst.ninja. What are peoples experience?

ninja pool is set to be friendly to larger miners and blockfinders (but yet also be friendly to smaller miners, and we're constantly changing how payouts work.)


We have a pretty solid setup right now which goes like this...


There are two pies, one that is historic share submissions calculated into percentages of input (power) to the pool. Based on lowest share submissions, a miner is placed with a percentage of the pool. This percentage is a ladder you can see on the stats. The Right pie, the historic pie, shows the historically best submitting miners.

The left pie, is the Current round pie, this shows the submissions and percentage distribution ladder for current round shares. A miner submits a great share, they get a much larger percentage in this pie, but also a submission of another great share would give that miner another larger percentage of the current round pie, and a good chunk of the reward. You can see the percentage distribution ladder on the stats there too...

The blend of the two pies that makes the total is 60% based on the Left (current round, current block) pie, and 40% based on the right (historically best submitting miners) pie.


We have a method of both changing the distribution ladders, and also the basis of payments on each pie. Everything is completely customizable.

The settings that we've got there currently I have had no complaints about, and block finder gets the most, followed by the second best submission for current round, then the larger boys get a more solid payout each block, and of course a lot more if they are the block finder, or have a share close to the block finder (in seconds)

We believe we have the best payout system, we like that it gives the lowest submissions a lot, while simulaneously providing solid payouts to our more supportive and larger guys.

I think it is a nice system. We always take the advice of our miners, and listen with open ears, if we think you've got a good suggestion, we will take it into account. we've got many other ideas for the pool as well.

Come give us a shot, if you don't like it, let me know what you don't like and we can take a change into consideration.

My goal is to make the most balanced and fair payout system in the BURST community.

We are also working on a new UI, so the rainbow will soon be no more. lol.



We have also a minimum payout (I think it is set to 300?) so no payouts under that are sent, to avoid unnecessary transaction fees. They are stored until you have enough to get a payout. If you decide to quit mining, after a set number of blocks (I believe that number is 500?) the system will pay you out regardless of balance.

[bensam1231]

As far as UI goes, Uray definitely has the best stats system. Although some bits are messing or hard to find. It also consumes a lot of CPU when you have his miner page open. That's really secondary to payouts though.

[bensam1231]

Also I may have found a bug with Blagos latest version. It's not showing confirmations from dev v2 even though the pool is giving me shares.

Come give us a shot, if you don't like it, let me know what you don't like and we can take a change into consideration.

Curiously, why doesn't it just tabulate the amount of space you hashed for a block and then do a proportional payout for it regardless of your deadlines? Since it's random, users have no control over their deadlines and can't really 'tweak' them. The only thing they can tweak is speed. How much you can hash within a given time frame is a good indicator of 'hashrate', since size alone doesn't determine how effective your Burst miner is. A block itself simply could be used for the time frame of hashing and the proportion of work for that block.

I don't know if pools can see how much storage someone has, but if they could this seems like the overall best method. Big miner or small it really shouldn't matter, it's all about the amount of work you can do. Block winner and second best deadlines shouldn't matter again as it's random and the whole reason for being on a pool is to average everything out.

You could add a 'historic' element in there too to prevent pool hoping, but that's really not a thing in Burst and it honestly doesn't matter. Someone hoping on the pool for five minutes is just as effective as someone hoping on for 10 days relatively speaking per block (as long as they stay for the full block).

[crowetic]

Also I may have found a bug with Blagos latest version. It's not showing confirmations from dev v2 even though the pool is giving me shares.

Come give us a shot, if you don't like it, let me know what you don't like and we can take a change into consideration.

Curiously, why doesn't it just tabulate the amount of space you hashed for a block and then do a proportional payout for it regardless of your deadlines? Since it's random, users have no control over their deadlines and can't really 'tweak' them. The only thing they can tweak is speed. How much you can hash within a given time frame is a good indicator of 'hashrate', since size alone doesn't determine how effective your Burst miner is. A block itself simply could be used for the time frame of hashing and the proportion of work for that block.

I don't know if pools can see how much storage someone has, but if they could this seems like the overall best method. Big miner or small it really shouldn't matter, it's all about the amount of work you can do. Block winner and second best deadlines shouldn't matter again as it's random and the whole reason for being on a pool is to average everything out.

You could add a 'historic' element in there too to prevent pool hoping, but that's really not a thing in Burst and it honestly doesn't matter. Someone hoping on the pool for five minutes is just as effective as someone hoping on for 10 days relatively speaking per block (as long as they stay for the full block).

It is not possible to see exact amount of size a miner has, our pool estimates and that is as good as it gets.

Basing payouts off a rough estimation is a bad plan. Right now we base payouts on how many good submissions and how many of the good submissions are lower numbers, and that is how it is paid out. I believe this to be the only fair way to pay miners in a BURST pool.

payment based on what you give, you get what you give. The better you do, the better the pool does, the more you get. The lower shares you submit, the more you get.

Basing payouts (even if we could estimate size perfectly) on size alone is simply not a good way to do things. What if a miner has a ton of space but can't read through it all correctly because they don't have a great processor, they should be paid more than someone who has less actual space but yet provides more useful share submissions to the pool?

I'm sorry, I just don't agree with this method of payout at all. Feel free to clarify if I'm not correct in your suggestion.

It is all about how much you give to the pool. When you base it off share submissions, and give the better shares a better pay, this is how it works, then the miners who consistently submit better shares, get a little extra bonus with the Historic pie, because they give more overall good work to the pool.

[Blago]

...
Let's just say, amongst many other bugs, that {char blago[50]; return blago;} is just not right. OK? I see Blago commented on me
Peace be upon you!

Found, fixed, thanks! 

[crazyearner]

Just had problem with miner crash out again




any idea what the cause of this is using blago miner

[go6ooo1212]

Just install Blagos miner 19.03.2015 edition - couple of posts above...

[mmmaybe]

Regarding anonymity and the refreshing discussion around bitladen today, do we have any contact with monero...? Have anyone approached them asking what they think about ATs in their setting?