How much hash does BCX need to take out Monero? (Hardware / AWS calculation)

[smoothie]

So if you're holding XMR and mining to a pool, it might make sense to solo mine?

And if you're holding and not mining, it might secure the network for you to set up mining, at least for a short time?

And if you're just mining, and mining to a pool, it might make sense to preserve the value of what you're mining by switching to solo?

If theres a real successful full-blown attack it truly doesn't matter if you mine or not. The coin's network will then be broken and can only be revived with a hardfork, blockchain roll-back, patched new version of the Monero codebase. If the latter is not innovated quickly, Monero would be dead.

Going solo does matter because if bcx ddos the major XMR mining pools it will make it easier to attack the chain.

[Oscilson]

So if you're holding XMR and mining to a pool, it might make sense to solo mine?

And if you're holding and not mining, it might secure the network for you to set up mining, at least for a short time?

And if you're just mining, and mining to a pool, it might make sense to preserve the value of what you're mining by switching to solo?

If theres a real successful full-blown attack it truly doesn't matter if you mine or not.

You are presuming there is a successful attack.

However, whether or not there is a successful attack may depend on whether you mine and how you mine. If you want to help support the coin, please mine it.

Best: Solo mine.

Better: Mine on small pool with backup pools configured.

Okay: Mine on big pool with backup pools configured.

Worst: Mine on big pool with no backup.

Solo mining is likely significantly better than the others given the possibility that an attack may compromise one or more pools and use their hash rate for the attack instead of just DDoSing them or fighting against them.

This all applies forever, not just in response to this immediate threat.

Is it possible to provide us a fast AMD GPU solo miner?

In the future, you can consider moving to a GPU friendly PoW mining algorithm, such as Scrypt-N, which is ASIC resistant and botnet unfriendly. I believe the reason why the present CPU friendly mining is used is that the creator of Bytecoin would like to introduce a deoptimized miner for their own profit.

[illodin]

Have you guys stopped to think that maybe the large rise in the hashrate over the past few days is BCX?

Hmm.. BCX's puppet account spreads fud - this makes it even more obvious he is full of hot air.

[Unbelive]

Have you guys stopped to think that maybe the large rise in the hashrate over the past few days is BCX?

what large raise?
hash rate follows price, price decreased for 30% in last days because of FUD, so is hashrate.
Maybe you were looking some other coin?

[smooth]

Is it possible to provide us a fast AMD GPU solo miner?

I would love to but it isn't possible to do that right now. Best case at the moment for AMD miners right now is to configure smaller pools with backup pools.

In the future, you can consider moving to a GPU friendly PoW mining algorithm, such as Scrypt-N, which is ASIC resistant and botnet unfriendly. I believe the reason why the present CPU friendly mining is used is that the creator of Bytecoin would like to introduce a deoptimized miner for their own profit.

Anything is possible, and we will definitely consider it. We have some other ideas to improve mining though, so not sure which direction we will go.

[hungryfordonuts]

I would love to but it isn't possible to do that right now. Best case at the moment for AMD miners right now is to configure smaller pools with backup pools.

Interesting to note here that with the large amount of people dealing with Claymore's GPU miner, surely someone could have organized a campaign by now for the ones that are not paying the dev fee of 5%, and deal with a 10% lower hashrate where these same people would instead be using his program with the dev fee and set aside the extra 5% they're getting extra because of it for an open source AMD miner. Imagine all the extra security the network would likely get in a time like this, where people like me won't run, or are seriously considering not running, the software because it's closed source in order to secure the network.

Looks like we got so many people caught up in not paying a fee at all that they didn't even think ahead.

oops.

[smooth]

I would love to but it isn't possible to do that right now. Best case at the moment for AMD miners right now is to configure smaller pools with backup pools.

Interesting to note here that with the large amount of people dealing with Claymore's GPU miner, surely someone could have organized a campaign by now for the ones that are not paying the dev fee of 5%, and deal with a 10% lower hashrate where these same people would instead be using his program with the dev fee and set aside the extra 5% they're getting extra because of it for an open source AMD miner. Imagine all the extra security the network would likely get in a time like this, where people like me won't run, or are seriously considering not running, the software because it's closed source in order to secure the network.

Looks like we got so many people caught up in not paying a fee at all that they didn't even think ahead.

oops.

I think some people cheat on it somehow, but I don't know the details. But that reduces the incentive to pay for an open source miner.

I'm with you, and my pledge for the open source AMD bounty is still unclaimed.

[rdnkjdi]

So CoinHoarder says that he thinks bcx is maybeprobably working with ArtForz ...  I looked at history and this is one of the first posts i saw

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=63365.msg742437#msg742437

i do quote

Not to mention I said from the start that CPU coins are a fucking stupid idea because even a tiny botnet can trivially 51% em.

I found this interesting (troll aside) - I verified the ArtFonz quote.  I really have no idea how large botnets get or what their availability for sale are.  Or if they would be ideal for an attack (maxing out CPU is liable to hint/reveal malware where a DDOS would not)

http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2012/11/05/where-to-rent-a-botnet-for-2-an-hour-or-buy-one-for-700/

Edit:  This was another interesting article.  I know this borders on fear mongering.  I'd just like to understand what's at the root of BCX's power.  I honestly don't like the feeling that a coin like XMR may be at his mercy

http://www.forbes.com/sites/eliseackerman/2012/05/19/i-run-a-small-botnet-and-sell-stolen-information-ask-me-anything/

“Asian installs are very cheap, $15 per 1000 installs and have good GPUs,” he explained.

[infofront]

There are two pools that bypass Claymore's 5% fee: noclaymorefee.com and monero.rs (fee optional)

Also, this was suggested to me in the Monero Mining Thread as a solution to solo GPU mining: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=735738.0

[wowthatsterrible]

There are two pools that bypass Claymore's 5% fee: noclaymorefee.com and monero.rs (fee optional)

Also, this was suggested to me in the Monero Mining Thread as a solution to solo GPU mining: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=735738.0

Right, so let's have the community act as thieves and children and then support them in doing so.

That's not the right way to fix this problem.

You're still dealing with a closed source GPU miner from a totally unknown person. Then you're saying it's okay to steal this person's money because fuck him I want my money.

Of course people would rather steal, cheat and lie than prevent themselves from ever having to in the first place. Just a total lack of forward thinking, like I said. Plus, in a situation like the one happening in 24 hours, people like me don't care fuck all about the miserable 5 or 10% extra. We care that I can go and look at the source code and compile directly from it and feel safe because other people, or myself may have observed the source code and made sure that nothing fishy is going on like in Claymore's miner.

I heard that the Claymore GPU miner opens a direct pathway for an NSA control interface. Is it true?


cowards.

[taketwo]

Or even one better!

I heard that Claymore was taking bids on putting a killswitch in his GPU miner, so that anyone that wanted to pay him enough could just tell him to shut them all down and instantly 51% attack the coin!

Yeah, that's what I heard! Is it true?

look, I'm not gonna tell you how to run your coin. but this is just a stupid thing that people let go on for too long. it's a problem and a massive security flaw, even bigger than than one you may or may not be dealing with right now.

sorry for striking while the iron's hot, but what if, tomorrow, if anything really does happen, all of your GPU mining programs close down at once?

youd never fucken see it coming.

enjoy your damn 10%

[aminorex]

Right, so let's have the community act as thieves and children and then support them in doing so.

I don't think the community wants that.
What the community does want is the freedom to decide for themselves.
I use Claymore, and pay the fee.
Claymore also provides an option to drop the fee, but slow the mining 10%. 
This is a useful option for those who think Claymore is accumulating too much XMR.
If he were to provide evidence that he sold his XMR at market, that would probably mean fewer people used the 10% penalty option.
I would prefer that Claymore open-sourced the miner. 
I would pay the 5% happily then.  Now I do it grudgingly.
But he prefers another choice.
That's freedom, and it is very good.

[Oscilson]

Right, so let's have the community act as thieves and children and then support them in doing so.

The simplest way to solve this problem is to use a tested and proven to work open source PoW mining algorithm such as Scrypt N which is ASIC resistant.

[ahappyfella]

I don't think the community wants that.
What the community does want is the freedom to decide for themselves.

I don't think they do either, but what could I be left to think, when the first two responses I get about it are either passive-aggressively saying I could bypass the fee, or flat out giving me an open source 'solution' FFS to a self made problem. I know smooth has an open bounty, but i really can't think that people are exercising their 'freedom to decide for themselves' when they've put themselves in a situation where possibly 50% of the hash power can disappear in an instant.

even if claymore was the pope i wouldn't give him that kind of power, so my freedom is best spent point out that keeping it closed source is inane whether or not people don't agree with me. Especially when those that are choosing to use the slower miner can be monitized in a neutral fashion that reflects forward thinking.

We can't settle for being lulled into the buzz of everyday business anymore, given the current situation. Regardless of the authenticity of the threat, this is something that has been a long time a part of the buzz.

I use Claymore, and pay the fee.

Just as any upstanding individual would do, but the points raised remain valid. People are stealing from the guy and in this type of situation, they are actually incentivizing him to lower his price as a purchasable attack vector. Every Monero he's lost is one that someone else now doesn't have to pay to potentially buy him out. Would you be open to raising awareness that an open source miner is an achievable goal for this community of otherwise reasonable, motivated and decent people?

Claymore also provides an option to drop the fee, but slow the mining 10%. 
This is a useful option for those who think Claymore is accumulating too much XMR.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear as to my agenda, yes I have one. I'm saying that if every single person that is using the 10% slower miner currently, or think that they could get by using it were to instead collude with the pool operators and put that 5% they've stolen from Claymore and put it toward something useful rather than their pockets only to trade to fiat, we might very well end up in a situation where we would not have to collude to steal from the guy anymore, because the money that is put aside could go to properly paying a developer to open source a miner.

Or, for those that aren't stealing and have chosen to go 10% slower, they can change to the developer fee model that is 10% faster and let Claymore get his 5%, but take the extra 5% that miner would get and instead put it toward an open source miner.

If he were to provide evidence that he sold his XMR at market, that would probably mean fewer people used the 10% penalty option.

I highly doubt he would provide the benefit to those that are being upstanding individuals at the expense of those that are not being upstanding individuals.

I would prefer that Claymore open-sourced the miner. 

He will not, as it is not his business model. You may confirm with him privately.

I would pay the 5% happily then.  Now I do it grudgingly.
But he prefers another choice.

As would I

That's freedom, and it is very good.

We should exercise our freedom, rather than defending Claymore's in this situation. Again, he might be the best person in the world, but knowing that 50% of the hashrate is living on borrowed time doesn't bode well for my freedom.

I'm not saying we should steal, I'm saying those that are stealing should work toward preventing themselves from continued theft. I'm saying that those who are tired of dealing with thieves, and defending someone else's freedom, can instead pay the developer and get their fellow human beings out of a shitty situation, and can do so in a neutral way that doesn't effect their wallet.

Claymore has provided an excellent service, and again might be the best person in the world. But the fact of the matter is that we don't know what's in the program. So, I'm gonna repeat myself: sorry for striking while the iron's hot, but what if, tomorrow, if anything really does happen, all of your GPU mining programs close down at once?

Or, we can deal with continued compromises, settle for the buzz and forever hand him his well deserved 5%. Likely forever.