You are threatening Bitcoin’s security

[speeder]

Because of this topic, I made this one: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=8783.0


Any suggestions there?

[goatpig]

OCN crowd is difficult to argue with. Use visual aids. Pictures of some insane watercooled rig with words 'I do not use large pools' would do wonders.

wisdom!

[N12]

OCN crowd is difficult to argue with. Use visual aids. Pictures of some insane watercooled rig with words 'I do not use large pools' would do wonders.

We shouldn’t attract such idiots in the first place. They don’t even care about Bitcoin.

[goatpig]

OCN crowd is difficult to argue with. Use visual aids. Pictures of some insane watercooled rig with words 'I do not use large pools' would do wonders.

We shouldn’t attract such idiots in the first place. They don’t even care about Bitcoin.

In my darkest hour I wished Deepbit would get attacked the chain forked so that they would drop Bitcoin forever after the market crash ensuing...

[mroth7684]

In my darkest hour I wished Deepbit would get attacked the chain forked so that they would drop Bitcoin forever after the market crash ensuing...

If bitcoin system is that insecure then make it so. Better now than later.

[goatpig]

In my darkest hour I wished Deepbit would get attacked the chain forked so that they would drop Bitcoin forever after the market crash ensuing...

If bitcoin system is that insecure then make it so. Better now than later.

I agree.

[Nesetalis]

actually, yes.. i kinda agree.. force the programmers to find a solution for this issue.. though id prefer they did it before it got used :p

[goatpig]

actually, yes.. i kinda agree.. force the programmers to find a solution for this issue.. though id prefer they did it before it got used :p

Well, there's the test net for that too

[mroth7684]

I think we have more to worry about from the Government getting involved than an attack from deepbit.

http://launch.is/blog/l019-bitcoin-p2p-currency-the-most-dangerous-project-weve-ev.html

Let's assume deepbit is secure and holy in its intentions and let's reverse the thought.  If it controls 55% of the hashing power that means no one else can control greater than 45%. So the solution is to have a pool with greater than 50% of the  hashing power and secure it like fort knox,

[Grinder]

The goddamn fee...

The goddamn utility bills...

It would be because of the accumulated hashrate of people like you who swarm one pool and will perpetuate that practice even if the pool has been compromised, all this for no good reason.

With Deepbit it would very quickly be noticed if it has been compromised, exactly because of the features I appreciate. You on the other hand could not know, because for all you know it could just be a particularly long round. You're really not very good at making up claims about what I would do.

No you won't deal with the consequences.

It will be impossible not to.

I'm not the one endangering the network, you are.

If you are using a pool you are endangering the network.

If you can't put it in your head with this that Deepbit has consequent variance, then there's nothing I can do for you.

Yet another straw man.

Here comes the irony. Score based pools defend against Raulo's attack, Deepbit doesn't.

Deepbit doesn't really need because of the high hash rate and 1 hr delay. It would probably be just as profitable and much easier to jump between BTCMine and Slush's pool to take advantage of particularly short rounds.

[rezin777]

I think we have more to worry about from the Government getting involved than an attack from deepbit.

http://launch.is/blog/l019-bitcoin-p2p-currency-the-most-dangerous-project-weve-ev.html

Let's assume deepbit is secure and holy in its intentions and let's reverse the thought.  If it controls 55% of the hashing power that means no one else can control greater than 45%. So the solution is to have a pool with greater than 50% of the  hashing power and secure it like fort knox,

The solution is hundreds of small pool and thousands of solo miners...

You came from OCN didn't you?

If we have to worry about the government, they don't need to buy a single computer to hurt the network. If there already exists a pool with >50% of the network, .gov only needs to do what they are good at, control one guy. As the network stands right now, they only need to control two. Hell, they don't even need to control them, just replace them with someone smart enough to hurt the network.

[N12]

If it controls 55% of the hashing power that means no one else can control greater than 45%.

I’ve read this three times now and can’t believe you are serious.

[goatpig]

The goddamn utility bills...

What are you even talking about?

With Deepbit it would very quickly be noticed if it has been compromised, exactly because of the features I appreciate. You on the other hand could not know, because for all you know it could just be a particularly long round. You're really not very good at making up claims about what I would do.

How? What particular feature of any pool allows you to know fake transactions have been added to the block you help solve? I can't name a single one, no matter the pool. Yet other pools are immune to this fact simply because they don't hold enough hashing power on their own to keep forcing corrupt transactions down the network's throat. Deepbit isn't. Now indulge me, name those features. Educate me with your obviously adequate way.

It will be impossible not to.

So why won't you deal with it now?

If you are using a pool you are endangering the network.

You understand this yet you refuse to mitigate the effect? This is getting better by the minute...

Yet another straw man.

Born from the very stats your pool officially advertises?

Deepbit doesn't really need because of the high hash rate and 1 hr delay. It would probably be just as profitable and much easier to jump between BTCMine and Slush's pool to take advantage of particularly short rounds.

No. Jumping in score based pools is as close as it gets to charity...

[huayra.agera]

Solo mining (very brief) guide:

1. one bitcoin daemon, many miners. (OBMM)

  On your local network you run one bitcoind. It is listening on 127.0.0.1:8332 . Unless there are improvement in latest version and you do not want to hack bitcoind source code you can simply run a http proxy which listens on one of your LAN IP's and proxyes it to 127.0.0.1:8332. I personally use haproxy with 5 line config. You than point your miners to this proxy.

2. many bitcoin daemons, many miners. (MBMM)

  On every miner machine you run it's own bitcoind and point your miners software to local bitcoind daemon listening on 127.0.0.1:8332.

3. one bitcoin daemon, many miners via ssh (OBMMssh)

  Same as OBMM but you use ssh port forwarding to get access to bitcoind's machine 127.0.0.1:8332. Check out autossh.

 

i've always been interested in setting up a pool for my gpus. How do i connect let's say miners 4 and 5 to 1,2,3? Scenario is gpu 4&5 are in another house, how do i make the 5 gpus combine their hashing power into solving a block cooperatively? I hope I'm clear on my explanation. Any help would be very greatly appreciated!

Nothing stops you from having two internal pools one in one house and one in another. Or one pool per machine i.e. a separate bitcoin daemon for each miner.

They always work cooperatively. Think about it as every machine buys you a billion of lottery tickets every second. It does not matter if you get money for lottery tickets pooled together and go to buy it in one shop once in a while or you send every machine on its own simultaneously to a separate shop to buy lottery tickets. The statistical expectation of winning is the same. Except you have to pay premium for bulk lottery ticket processing (pool fee).

Mining solo is really a nobrainer for anyone with more than a few Ghps.

Getting clearer. Tell me if I'm getting this right, I should set up House A rigs and House B rigs with the same bitcoin.conf and wallet.dat and the credit for example when a block is found would go to the one wallet I setup for both rigs. Just trying to be a solution to this pooled mining problem. =) Thanks!

[mroth7684]

Getting clearer. Tell me if I'm getting this right, I should set up House A rigs and House B rigs with the same bitcoin.conf and wallet.dat and the credit for example when a block is found would go to the one wallet I setup for both rigs. Just trying to be a solution to this pooled mining problem. =) Thanks!

Clearly the solution is flaming each other. Seems to be working so far.

[goatpig]

Getting clearer. Tell me if I'm getting this right, I should set up House A rigs and House B rigs with the same bitcoin.conf and wallet.dat and the credit for example when a block is found would go to the one wallet I setup for both rigs. Just trying to be a solution to this pooled mining problem. =) Thanks!

It's that more or less. The first transaction in a block is the 50BTC reward. To solve the block header you need to create the Merkle root for those transactions, which is unique to you since the address you would be publishing to cash in the 50BTC is unique for each competing miner (unless you're feeling charitable and want to write in my address =P). If you manage to solve the header, then you add the transactions of your choice plus the one that rewards your wallet with the 50BTC, and then it goes on to the network.

[huayra.agera]

Getting clearer. Tell me if I'm getting this right, I should set up House A rigs and House B rigs with the same bitcoin.conf and wallet.dat and the credit for example when a block is found would go to the one wallet I setup for both rigs. Just trying to be a solution to this pooled mining problem. =) Thanks!

It's that more or less. The first transaction in a block is the 50BTC reward. To solve the block header you need to create the Merkle root for those transactions, which is unique to you since the address you would be publishing to cash in the 50BTC is unique for each competing miner (unless you're feeling charitable and want to write in my address =P). If you manage to solve the header, then you add the transactions of your choice plus the one that rewards your wallet with the 50BTC, and then it goes on to the network.

Guess the only way to find you is try. But understood the concept. Like they said it should be a no brainer. Just wanted to make sure we're on the same page. +1

Getting clearer. Tell me if I'm getting this right, I should set up House A rigs and House B rigs with the same bitcoin.conf and wallet.dat and the credit for example when a block is found would go to the one wallet I setup for both rigs. Just trying to be a solution to this pooled mining problem. =) Thanks!

Clearly the solution is flaming each other. Seems to be working so far.

Seems to work for others.

[Grinder]

Yet another straw man.

Born from the very stats your pool officially advertises?

If you were as smart as you think you are it would be really interesting to continue discussing with you. I just had to mention that I checked the variance on BTC Mine for the last 24 hours, and the equivalent number would be about +40%. A bit more than the numbers you'll see on Deepbit...

[goatpig]

Yet another straw man.

Born from the very stats your pool officially advertises?

If you were as smart as you think you are it would be really interesting to continue discussing with you. I just had to mention that I checked the variance on BTC Mine for the last 24 hours, and the equivalent number would be about +40%. A bit more than the numbers you'll see on Deepbit...

As opposed to you I'm not concerned about day to day variance since I've been mining there for over 2 weeks, and intent to stay there even longer. Day to day variance is meaningless to me. Are you going to argue I'm not getting a better reward than you for equivalent hash rate on the long term? Please try, so I can witness you slowly give up on every single horrid superstition you're randomly throwing at this thread as they keep getting debunked one after the other.

[rezin777]

Bump because this is important.