|
pyramining (OP)
|
 |
July 27, 2013, 01:46:27 PM |
|
It seems that P2Pool is now mature and we can stick on it.
I am installing a second node, for redundancy purposes. Maybe I will release the IP addresses so everyone interested can partecipate.
I am still doubtful to declare the IP addresses to the public because if anyone wants to hurt pyramining, he could try to take down our nodes (and not the others).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The network tries to produce one block per 10 minutes. It does this by automatically adjusting how difficult it is to produce blocks.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1002
|
|
July 27, 2013, 02:03:57 PM |
|
It seems that P2Pool is now mature and we can stick on it.
I am installing a second node, for redundancy purposes. Maybe I will release the IP addresses so everyone interested can partecipate.
I am still doubtful to declare the IP addresses to the public because if anyone wants to hurt pyramining, he could try to take down our nodes (and not the others).
Fear is never a good excuse to give up a fight for the greater good. It only gives potential enemies a weapon against you. Your own fear. |
|
|
|
|
|
kreeften
|
|
July 27, 2013, 03:23:11 PM |
|
2013-07-04 15:31:01 UTC 0.10320542 BTC queued
why does it take so long?
|
|
|
|
|
platti
|
|
July 27, 2013, 04:04:59 PM |
|
2013-07-04 15:31:01 UTC 0.10320542 BTC queued
why does it take so long?
there are 1900 GH/s * 2.9 BTC/GH/s = 5510 BTC, which are waiting for activation |
|
|
|
|
pyramining (OP)
|
|
July 27, 2013, 04:19:24 PM |
|
why does it take so long?
Because there is a huge amount of work behind, and it takes time. However starting from 6th of August a friend of mine (who should be in holidays from his real job) will come to help me installing, and we should be able to empty the queue pretty quickly! |
|
|
|
|
|
pyramining (OP)
|
|
July 28, 2013, 06:35:02 AM |
|
Updated the current price of the infrastructure. We are at ~476 MH/BTC With new deposits I have been able to increase the production quantity and optimized costs furthermore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
pyramining (OP)
|
|
July 28, 2013, 07:07:25 AM |
|
Fear is never a good excuse to give up a fight for the greater good. It only gives potential enemies a weapon against you. Your own fear.
Even if this doesn't apply to internet security, I like this statement and I agree with you. In other situations I would not do it, however the Bitcoin world is our ideal place, let's try to keep it ideal on every point of view. As soon as there will be both servers up and running and after studying firewall policies, I will make them public. |
|
|
|
|
lenny_
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
DARKNETMARKETS.COM
|
|
July 28, 2013, 08:47:39 AM |
|
Updated the current price of the infrastructure. We are at ~476 MH/BTC With new deposits I have been able to increase the production quantity and optimized costs furthermore.
Keep it going with increasing your hashrate and lowering costs. USB Erupters now in sale on BTCGuild are priced at 0.6 BTC/unit (560MH/BTC). And queue is only couple of days, not 2 TH like you have. |
|
|
|
|
pyramining (OP)
|
|
July 28, 2013, 10:38:26 AM |
|
Keep it going with increasing your hashrate and lowering costs.
USB Erupters now in sale on BTCGuild are priced at 0.6 BTC/unit (560MH/BTC). And queue is only couple of days, not 2 TH like you have.
It's not a fair comparison. You need to add the cost of the host to run an Erupter. And then you should add your internet connectivity cost. And probably something for cooling it down since as I can read through the forum you can cook on them. Then, if you buy many of them you should also add the cost of hubs, power supplies, and something to fix them on. At the end you will see that it will not be 560MH/BTC anymore. Plus, when difficulty increases and they stop to be effective, you can't do nothing. There are people who paid 2 BTC for one of those things, and one month later they sell it at 0.6... not very serious. If your miner breaks up (and it happens more often than you think) your earnings stop with it. Here instead your hashing power is updated while Pyramining grows, and no account will remain unpaid. All these words to tell that if you want to do comparisons, do it in the right way, and not considering only the appearance. Finally there is still a lot of room for improovement, and we will not be out of competition easily, for example, now I'm running the first version, made in a hurry, I already planned a new revision of the hardware, which hosts more chips on a single board reducing overall costs by far, and it will be available in the near future. However, should anything more efficient appear on the market (not pre-orders!!), we can always switch to that. |
|
|
|
|
lenny_
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
DARKNETMARKETS.COM
|
|
July 28, 2013, 10:54:14 AM |
|
Question:
Can we see photo of your hardware?
I am curious that you really not lying about and have your own designed hardware or just simply running BFL other manufacturer devices.
|
|
|
|
|
pyramining (OP)
|
|
July 28, 2013, 11:01:16 AM |
|
Can we see photo of your hardware?[/b]
I am curious that you really not lying about and have your own designed hardware or just simply running BFL other manufacturer devices.
I will make some pictures available in the near future as I did with FPGA equipment. And... BFL? Do you think I am so crazy, risking your funds with a such unreliable company? I should put a "BFL free" logo on the home page! :-) |
|
|
|
|
|
pyramining (OP)
|
|
July 28, 2013, 12:02:28 PM |
|
Some new deposit with really small amounts ( < 0.01 BTC ) are going to be activated because they do not change almost anything in the mining scenario, and they are polluting the queued deposit database. Hope nobody will complain for this.
I increased the threshold to 0.1 BTC. I thought I posted it on the thread but it seems I forgot it. Sorry! |
|
|
|
|
|
Foofighter
|
|
July 28, 2013, 12:14:47 PM |
|
Some new deposit with really small amounts ( < 0.01 BTC ) are going to be activated because they do not change almost anything in the mining scenario, and they are polluting the queued deposit database. Hope nobody will complain for this.
I increased the threshold to 0.1 BTC. I thought I posted it on the thread but it seems I forgot it. Sorry! thx pyra for the info, hm so where are the old pics of the FPGAs available , would really like to see them. br |
ex official Canaan Distributor (Cryptouniverse)
|
|
|
lenny_
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
DARKNETMARKETS.COM
|
|
July 28, 2013, 03:02:03 PM |
|
Can we see photo of your hardware?[/b]
I am curious that you really not lying about and have your own designed hardware or just simply running BFL other manufacturer devices.
I will make some pictures available in the near future as I did with FPGA equipment. And... BFL? Do you think I am so crazy, risking your funds with a such unreliable company? I should put a "BFL free" logo on the home page! :-) That's what I wanted to hear. Thanks. Now I am waiting for promised photos:) Would be nice to see FPGA farm as well. Regards Lenny |
|
|
|
jargoman
Member
Offline
Activity: 68
Merit: 10
|
|
July 28, 2013, 05:19:18 PM |
|
The queue dropped today and so did the completion time. Things might be looking up again.
|
|
|
|
|
pyramining (OP)
|
|
July 28, 2013, 09:26:25 PM |
|
I am thinking about improoving slightly the rules, to make pyramining more fair for everyone.
Now people tend to create an account with small deposits under a sponsor, and some other accounts under the first one with larger deposits. In this way, the effort of the sponsor, for advertising and getting referrals, leads to small advantages/rewards for him.
The change I am planning changes how bonuses are calculated. To get the full bonus, the account must contain two times the sum of the referral's active deposits, otherwise the bonus % is reduced proportionally. Also, accounts with no referrals will be linked to other random accounts.
These changes affect only new deposits. Past deposits are unchanged and will keep the same behaviour as before.
Comments are welcome.
|
|
|
|
|
gektek
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 237
Merit: 100
I rave ... whats your excuse?!?
|
|
July 28, 2013, 09:31:55 PM |
|
Comments are welcome.
Wish I made a few more deposits sooner... Not really sure how the old way was at all 'un' fair as everybody could do the same thing anybody else could do. ...dunno...just playing devils advocate really  |
|
|
|
|
|
pyramining (OP)
|
|
July 28, 2013, 09:50:16 PM |
|
Wish I made a few more deposits sooner...
Changes are not effective, yet! |
|
|
|
|
|
platti
|
|
July 28, 2013, 10:25:55 PM |
|
I am thinking about improoving slightly the rules, to make pyramining more fair for everyone.
Now people tend to create an account with small deposits under a sponsor, and some other accounts under the first one with larger deposits. In this way, the effort of the sponsor, for advertising and getting referrals, leads to small advantages/rewards for him.
The change I am planning changes how bonuses are calculated. To get the full bonus, the account must contain two times the sum of the referral's active deposits, otherwise the bonus % is reduced proportionally. Also, accounts with no referrals will be linked to other random accounts.
These changes affect only new deposits. Past deposits are unchanged and will keep the same behaviour as before.
Comments are welcome.
To make it fair for everybody, just remove this sponsor and ref - thing and pay everybody 20 % or maybe more bonus |
|
|
|
|
pyramining (OP)
|
|
July 28, 2013, 10:44:36 PM |
|
To make it fair for everybody, just remove this sponsor and ref - thing and pay everybody 20 % or maybe more bonus
It's something I can work on, but probably it would make more sense to start it in a parallel project, since it would change radically how things are managed. |
|
|
|
|
|
