[∞ YH] solo.ckpool.org 2% fee solo mining USA/DE 255 blocks solved!

[zuzuca]

another block for solo...was'nt me

[CardShare]

only 3 days ago I posted saying I think we are dew a block by past records.
I know its a game of chance but if you look back at the historical data most block arrive early or late in the month on the pool..

[ComputerGenie]

only 3 days ago I posted saying I think we are dew a block by past records.
I know its a game of chance but if you look back at the historical data most block arrive early or late in the month on the pool..

The law of averages is a strong force. 

[CardShare]

You are 100% correct there.

I am guessing now we see the block between  1st-16th aug  / Guess

[mylesrom]

Considering the block was found on the 20th, is that really considered late in the month....  if so then early would be 1-10 and late 20-30/31st..... that covers 2/3 of the month, so odds are its going to be found in that portion..

[o_solo_miner]

Block #477392 solved by 1MEq97jjRKrmSwgVLJirB1ZcrEvnURUAhj

  congratulation

[-ck]

Block #477392 solved by 1MEq97jjRKrmSwgVLJirB1ZcrEvnURUAhj

  congratulation

I second that! Congrats!

https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/block/0000000000000000012288cec644c7ab65fcce61adaf30316ce1ccfcc99791f9

Code:

[2017-07-24 12:59:47.557] Possible block solve diff 968803270026.079346 ! 
[2017-07-24 12:59:47.652] BLOCK ACCEPTED! 
[2017-07-24 12:59:47.670] Solved and confirmed block 477392 by 1MEq97jjRKrmSwgVLJirB1ZcrEvnURUAhj.r35192 
[2017-07-24 12:59:47.670] User 1MEq97jjRKrmSwgVLJirB1ZcrEvnURUAhj:{"hashrate1m": "405T", "hashrate5m": "400T", "hashrate1hr": "383T", "hashrate1d": "87.2T", "hashrate7d": "118T"} 
[2017-07-24 12:59:47.670] Worker 1MEq97jjRKrmSwgVLJirB1ZcrEvnURUAhj.r35192:{"hashrate1m": "318T", "hashrate5m": "310T", "hashrate1hr": "296T", "hashrate1d": "40.5T", "hashrate7d": "50.2T"} 
[2017-07-24 12:59:47.673] Block solved after 113994199677 shares at 14.2% diff 

Lucky block   It was only 12 seconds after the block before it.

Code:

2017-07-24 17:59:35.610026 UpdateTip: new best=000000000000000001290cd8f91689506ce1f38e05acdf1ec1d3fcdcc52c6535 height=477391 version=0x20000002 log2_work=86.817537 tx=241568059 date='2017-07-24 17:59:27' progres
s=1.000000 cache=617.8MiB(303646tx)
2017-07-24 17:59:47.648430 UpdateTip: new best=0000000000000000012288cec644c7ab65fcce61adaf30316ce1ccfcc99791f9 height=477392 version=0x20000002 log2_work=86.817573 tx=241570404 date='2017-07-24 17:59:35' progres
s=1.000000 cache=618.2MiB(305602tx)

Interestingly enough the block wasn't even full because the pool's bitcoind memory pool was almost completely empty after that block because it was so close to the one before it. Makes one wonder about what the urgency is for 2 capacity increases in the blockchain now that the transaction spam has ended...

[CardShare]

Block #477392 solved by 1MEq97jjRKrmSwgVLJirB1ZcrEvnURUAhj

  congratulation

I second that! Congrats!

https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/block/0000000000000000012288cec644c7ab65fcce61adaf30316ce1ccfcc99791f9

Code:

[2017-07-24 12:59:47.557] Possible block solve diff 968803270026.079346 ! 
[2017-07-24 12:59:47.652] BLOCK ACCEPTED! 
[2017-07-24 12:59:47.670] Solved and confirmed block 477392 by 1MEq97jjRKrmSwgVLJirB1ZcrEvnURUAhj.r35192 
[2017-07-24 12:59:47.670] User 1MEq97jjRKrmSwgVLJirB1ZcrEvnURUAhj:{"hashrate1m": "405T", "hashrate5m": "400T", "hashrate1hr": "383T", "hashrate1d": "87.2T", "hashrate7d": "118T"} 
[2017-07-24 12:59:47.670] Worker 1MEq97jjRKrmSwgVLJirB1ZcrEvnURUAhj.r35192:{"hashrate1m": "318T", "hashrate5m": "310T", "hashrate1hr": "296T", "hashrate1d": "40.5T", "hashrate7d": "50.2T"} 
[2017-07-24 12:59:47.673] Block solved after 113994199677 shares at 14.2% diff 

Lucky block   It was only 12 seconds after the block before it.

Code:

2017-07-24 17:59:35.610026 UpdateTip: new best=000000000000000001290cd8f91689506ce1f38e05acdf1ec1d3fcdcc52c6535 height=477391 version=0x20000002 log2_work=86.817537 tx=241568059 date='2017-07-24 17:59:27' progres
s=1.000000 cache=617.8MiB(303646tx)
2017-07-24 17:59:47.648430 UpdateTip: new best=0000000000000000012288cec644c7ab65fcce61adaf30316ce1ccfcc99791f9 height=477392 version=0x20000002 log2_work=86.817573 tx=241570404 date='2017-07-24 17:59:35' progres
s=1.000000 cache=618.2MiB(305602tx)

Interestingly enough the block wasn't even full because the pool's bitcoind memory pool was almost completely empty after that block because it was so close to the one before it. Makes one wonder about what the urgency is for 2 capacity increases in the blockchain now that the transaction spam has ended...

Possibly to try combat it in future is one reason I think that its got support because no one wants to go through all that carry on again. But I do see now why mess when with something that's not technically broken!

Congratulations to the block finders!

[-ck]

Possibly to try combat it in future is one reason I think that its got support because no one wants to go through all that carry on again. But I do see now why mess when with something that's not technically broken!

For the reference I have no problem with a 2MB base block size increase. I have a huge problem with a rushed hard fork without core's support which is the one thing most likely to lead to a split in bitcoin since its inception. November 1 is not far away and I see no reconciliation in sight.

[madmartyk]

Possibly to try combat it in future is one reason I think that its got support because no one wants to go through all that carry on again. But I do see now why mess when with something that's not technically broken!

For the reference I have no problem with a 2MB base block size increase. I have a huge problem with a rushed hard fork without core's support which is the one thing most likely to lead to a split in bitcoin since its inception. November 1 is not far away and I see no reconciliation in sight.

This sounds like what they did to ETH.

[-ck]

Possibly to try combat it in future is one reason I think that its got support because no one wants to go through all that carry on again. But I do see now why mess when with something that's not technically broken!

For the reference I have no problem with a 2MB base block size increase. I have a huge problem with a rushed hard fork without core's support which is the one thing most likely to lead to a split in bitcoin since its inception. November 1 is not far away and I see no reconciliation in sight.

This sounds like what they did to ETH.

Except that there was a disagreement about whether they should roll back their block chain to recover the lost funds. There's no such disagreement here that we shouldn't do a block size increase at some time, it's just a matter of how soon. Which means that for the sake of a time frame disagreement we're looking at a blockchain split :\

[CardShare]

Possibly to try combat it in future is one reason I think that its got support because no one wants to go through all that carry on again. But I do see now why mess when with something that's not technically broken!

For the reference I have no problem with a 2MB base block size increase. I have a huge problem with a rushed hard fork without core's support which is the one thing most likely to lead to a split in bitcoin since its inception. November 1 is not far away and I see no reconciliation in sight.

Firmly agree with you on that about the rushing point with the market cap bitcoin has now that's a lot of risk to be rushing changes into a system without its outcomes being fully understood or even challenged.

I thought the scary time in bitcoin was over but to be honest.. I was wrong

[-ck]

I thought the scary time in bitcoin was over but to be honest.. I was wrong

Indeed everyone's celebrating the safe landing of segwit without a blockchain split but that was never going to be the worrisome part of segwit2x, it's the 2x part

[CardShare]

I thought the scary time in bitcoin was over but to be honest.. I was wrong

Indeed everyone's celebrating the safe landing of segwit without a blockchain split but that was never going to be the worrisome part of segwit2x, it's the 2x part

I sat up and watched the block roll in on tradeblock and watched the price rise I thought it was going to hit all time highs so did about 10,000 other people on youtube celebrating on a live stream.

I thought, Hmm,, wonder if they think 2x willl as smooth let alone even understand it.

[ComputerGenie]

Except that there was a disagreement about whether they should roll back their block chain to recover the lost funds...

Most specifically funds that were lost privately and having nothing to do with the chain.

[-ck]

Except that there was a disagreement about whether they should roll back their block chain to recover the lost funds...

Most specifically funds that were lost privately and having nothing to do with the chain.

Indeed and there have been other funds lost since yet they didn't do a further rollback. What a sham.

[-ck]

Pretty big best share already. That would have been a block a few weeks ago if the diff wasn't going to the moon, or maybe more like Saturn.

[Heppe]

Hi, i wanna try Solo Mining with rented hashrate, How much do i have to Rent and what diff should the rented rig have?

[-ck]

Hi, i wanna try Solo Mining with rented hashrate, How much do i have to Rent and what diff should the rented rig have?

The diff doesn't matter and the hashrate is as much as you are willing to gamble on it. A lot of hashrate for a short period is exactly the same as a little bit of hashrate for a long period. The only difference is whether you get your hashes in before the next diff change, so if network diff is set to rise, you should do more hashrate for less time.

[willi9974]

Hi, i wanna try Solo Mining with rented hashrate, How much do i have to Rent and what diff should the rented rig have?

On Nicehash it is usually a little cheaper as on Miningrentals ;-)