Bitcoin Mining Calculator CoinWarz

hashflare

Discussion based on cloud mining specifically using HashFlare.
[link]

NobleCoin

A crypto currency for the most Noble.
[link]

Gridcoin 5.0.0.0-Mandatory "Fern" Release

https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Research/releases/tag/5.0.0.0
Finally! After over ten months of development and testing, "Fern" has arrived! This is a whopper. 240 pull requests merged. Essentially a complete rewrite that was started with the scraper (the "neural net" rewrite) in "Denise" has now been completed. Practically the ENTIRE Gridcoin specific codebase resting on top of the vanilla Bitcoin/Peercoin/Blackcoin vanilla PoS code has been rewritten. This removes the team requirement at last (see below), although there are many other important improvements besides that.
Fern was a monumental undertaking. We had to encode all of the old rules active for the v10 block protocol in new code and ensure that the new code was 100% compatible. This had to be done in such a way as to clear out all of the old spaghetti and ring-fence it with tightly controlled class implementations. We then wrote an entirely new, simplified ruleset for research rewards and reengineered contracts (which includes beacon management, polls, and voting) using properly classed code. The fundamentals of Gridcoin with this release are now on a very sound and maintainable footing, and the developers believe the codebase as updated here will serve as the fundamental basis for Gridcoin's future roadmap.
We have been testing this for MONTHS on testnet in various stages. The v10 (legacy) compatibility code has been running on testnet continuously as it was developed to ensure compatibility with existing nodes. During the last few months, we have done two private testnet forks and then the full public testnet testing for v11 code (the new protocol which is what Fern implements). The developers have also been running non-staking "sentinel" nodes on mainnet with this code to verify that the consensus rules are problem-free for the legacy compatibility code on the broader mainnet. We believe this amount of testing is going to result in a smooth rollout.
Given the amount of changes in Fern, I am presenting TWO changelogs below. One is high level, which summarizes the most significant changes in the protocol. The second changelog is the detailed one in the usual format, and gives you an inkling of the size of this release.

Highlights

Protocol

Note that the protocol changes will not become active until we cross the hard-fork transition height to v11, which has been set at 2053000. Given current average block spacing, this should happen around October 4, about one month from now.
Note that to get all of the beacons in the network on the new protocol, we are requiring ALL beacons to be validated. A two week (14 day) grace period is provided by the code, starting at the time of the transition height, for people currently holding a beacon to validate the beacon and prevent it from expiring. That means that EVERY CRUNCHER must advertise and validate their beacon AFTER the v11 transition (around Oct 4th) and BEFORE October 18th (or more precisely, 14 days from the actual date of the v11 transition). If you do not advertise and validate your beacon by this time, your beacon will expire and you will stop earning research rewards until you advertise and validate a new beacon. This process has been made much easier by a brand new beacon "wizard" that helps manage beacon advertisements and renewals. Once a beacon has been validated and is a v11 protocol beacon, the normal 180 day expiration rules apply. Note, however, that the 180 day expiration on research rewards has been removed with the Fern update. This means that while your beacon might expire after 180 days, your earned research rewards will be retained and can be claimed by advertising a beacon with the same CPID and going through the validation process again. In other words, you do not lose any earned research rewards if you do not stake a block within 180 days and keep your beacon up-to-date.
The transition height is also when the team requirement will be relaxed for the network.

GUI

Besides the beacon wizard, there are a number of improvements to the GUI, including new UI transaction types (and icons) for staking the superblock, sidestake sends, beacon advertisement, voting, poll creation, and transactions with a message. The main screen has been revamped with a better summary section, and better status icons. Several changes under the hood have improved GUI performance. And finally, the diagnostics have been revamped.

Blockchain

The wallet sync speed has been DRASTICALLY improved. A decent machine with a good network connection should be able to sync the entire mainnet blockchain in less than 4 hours. A fast machine with a really fast network connection and a good SSD can do it in about 2.5 hours. One of our goals was to reduce or eliminate the reliance on snapshots for mainnet, and I think we have accomplished that goal with the new sync speed. We have also streamlined the in-memory structures for the blockchain which shaves some memory use.
There are so many goodies here it is hard to summarize them all.
I would like to thank all of the contributors to this release, but especially thank @cyrossignol, whose incredible contributions formed the backbone of this release. I would also like to pay special thanks to @barton2526, @caraka, and @Quezacoatl1, who tirelessly helped during the testing and polishing phase on testnet with testing and repeated builds for all architectures.
The developers are proud to present this release to the community and we believe this represents the starting point for a true renaissance for Gridcoin!

Summary Changelog

Accrual

Changed

Most significantly, nodes calculate research rewards directly from the magnitudes in EACH superblock between stakes instead of using a two- or three- point average based on a CPID's current magnitude and the magnitude for the CPID when it last staked. For those long-timers in the community, this has been referred to as "Superblock Windows," and was first done in proof-of-concept form by @denravonska.

Removed

Beacons

Added

Changed

Removed

Unaltered

As a reminder:

Superblocks

Added

Changed

Removed

Voting

Added

Changed

Removed

Detailed Changelog

[5.0.0.0] 2020-09-03, mandatory, "Fern"

Added

Changed

Removed

Fixed

submitted by jamescowens to gridcoin [link] [comments]

Beginner project using YFinance - need help!

Hey all,
I'm fairly novice at Python, but have started to (attempt to) write useful programs. So far I've put one together that traverses a folder list and checks for a particular folder and either adds it if it isn't there, or renames it if it is labelled incorrectly.
I have recently almost finished my 2nd project. It's a data extractor that calculates percentage returns of most of the world's major stock market indices over a user-selected time period, using the YFinance library.
I've managed to capture and address all errors except for a ValueError to do with the datetime module. It will only come up if the user enters an incorrect date (e.g. the 31st of February) and causes the program to crash.
You will see in the While loop for the 'end date' field, I've tried adding the ValueError statement here (I've also tried other places in the code as well including under the loop that reads the dictionary of stock indices) but each time a wrong date format is entered, the error appears.
What I need help with is:
I've been reading up on datetime for much of the weekend but still haven't made any progress with it. I'm sure it's a relatively simple fix, but I am requesting help from those who are much more skilled than I.
Also if anyone notices any redundant info in the code, please don't hesitate to inform me!
Thanks in advance for your help!!
import yfinance as yf import pandas import re import sys import datetime from datetime import timedelta """Title:""" print("MAJOR INDICES STOCK PRICE CALCULATOR (FROM DATE TO DATE) \n") """Ensure user enters correct date format:""" correct_date_format = re.compile(r'\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}') """User enters date range:""" while True: start_date_script = "Enter a start date in the format YYYY-MM-DD" start_date_script += "\n(type 'q' then press 'enter' to exit): " end_date_script = "\nEnter an end date in the format YYYY-MM-DD: " end_date_script += "\n(type 'q' then press 'enter' to exit): " start_date = '' end_date = '' """Ensure start/end date matches correct format and give option to exit""" while True: start_date = input(start_date_script) start_date_match = re.search(correct_date_format, start_date) if start_date == 'q': sys.exit() if not start_date_match is None: break else: print( "You must enter a start date in the format YYYY-MM-DD! \n" ) while True: try: end_date = input(end_date_script) except ValueError: print( "This month doesn't have this many days. Please try again.") except IndexError: print("\nPlease enter a larger date range") continue else: end_date_match = re.search(correct_date_format, end_date) if end_date == 'q': sys.exit() if end_date <= start_date: print("\nThe end date cannot be before the start date!") print() continue if not end_date_match is None: break else: print( "You must enter an end date in the format YYYY-MM-DD!\n" ) """List of all ticker symbols to be used""" yahoo_tickers = { 'All Ords': '^AORD', 'S&P ASX 200': '^AXJO', 'NZX50': '^NZ50', 'NASDAQ': '^NDX', 'S&P 500': '^GSPC', 'Dow Jones': '^DJI', 'FTSE': '^FTSE', 'DAX': '^GDAXI', 'Hang Seng': '^HSI', 'Nikkei225': '^N225', 'Gold': 'GC=F', 'Oil': 'CL=F', 'CMC Crypto 200': '^CMC200', 'Bitcoin (in AUD)': 'BTC-AUD', 'MSCI World index': 'XWD.TO' } """Calculate difference between end date and set time periods""" datetimeFormat = '%Y-%m-%d' date1 = start_date date2 = end_date diff = datetime.datetime.strptime(date1, datetimeFormat)\ - datetime.datetime.strptime(date2, datetimeFormat) print() print("-------------------------------------------------") print("Total days in period:", abs(diff.days)) print("-------------------------------------------------") """Return percentage change reports from major indices:""" for index, ticker_code in yahoo_tickers.items(): try: ticker = yf.Ticker(ticker_code) ticker_history = ticker.history(start = start_date, end = end_date) except ValueError: print( "Incorrect amount of days for month. Please try again.") except(IndexError, KeyError): print( "To avoid the above error, try extending your date range\n." ) else: ticker_percent_change = "%.2f" % round( (((ticker_history['Close'][-1] / ticker_history['Close'][0]) - 1)* 100), 2) print( "{0:<50}{1:>10}".format( "\n" + index + " % change in selected period: ", (str(ticker_percent_change) + '%'))) goto_start = "\nDo you want to input a new date range? " goto_start += "\nPress 'y' & 'enter' to input a new date range." goto_start += "\nPress 'n', then 'enter' to exit. " cont_or_exit = input(goto_start) if cont_or_exit == 'y': print() continue if cont_or_exit == 'n': break 
submitted by AussieMazza to learnpython [link] [comments]

Reinvesting vs. Profit Taking...

Hi all, new to cloud mining and researching at the moment.
I was wondering whether anybody could share their experiences and things to consider regarding 'reinvesting' vs. profit taking.
As I understand, retaining the same hash rate as the difficulty adjustment increases reduces your reward. Reinvesting your reward into greater hash power will merely keep you treading water in terms of your reward rate, and eat into your take home profits. Surely there comes a point where you decide to stop reinvesting and take the profit instead?
Or am I correct in thinking that people reinvest to retain their hash power, with the expectation that the coin will be worth considerably more in the future and the profit can be taken by cancelling the reinvest option further down the line where the profits will be greater?
Is my above logic correct? What other considerations are there? Are there reinvesting strategies that people use?
Thanks in advance.
submitted by krom1985 to hashflare [link] [comments]

Difficulty change by percentage during the last year

Difficulty change by percentage during the last year submitted by btcbarron to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

What is the Bitcoin ABC "Modified fee structure" and how does it decrease fees for "typical transactions"?

Bitcoin ABC were planning to do this:
Modified fee structure to allow for an order of magnitude decrease in fees for typical transactions (not strictly a consensus change, but an important change being included with the release).
What exactly does this mean?
I can't see any mention of it in the 0.18.x releases.
submitted by hapticpilot to btc [link] [comments]

Transcript of discussion between an ASIC designer and several proof-of-work designers from #monero-pow channel on Freenode this morning

[08:07:01] lukminer contains precompiled cn/r math sequences for some blocks: https://lukminer.org/2019/03/09/oh-kay-v4r-here-we-come/
[08:07:11] try that with RandomX :P
[08:09:00] tevador: are you ready for some RandomX feedback? it looks like the CNv4 is slowly stabilizing, hashrate comes down...
[08:09:07] how does it even make sense to precompile it?
[08:09:14] mine 1% faster for 2 minutes?
[08:09:35] naturally we think the entire asic-resistance strategy is doomed to fail :) but that's a high-level thing, who knows. people may think it's great.
[08:09:49] about RandomX: looks like the cache size was chosen to make it GPU-hard
[08:09:56] looking forward to more docs
[08:11:38] after initial skimming, I would think it's possible to make a 10x asic for RandomX. But at least for us, we will only make an ASIC if there is not a total ASIC hostility there in the first place. That's better for the secret miners then.
[08:13:12] What I propose is this: we are working on an Ethash ASIC right now, and once we have that working, we would invite tevador or whoever wants to come to HK/Shenzhen and we walk you guys through how we would make a RandomX ASIC. You can then process this input in any way you like. Something like that.
[08:13:49] unless asics (or other accelerators) re-emerge on XMR faster than expected, it looks like there is a little bit of time before RandomX rollout
[08:14:22] 10x in what measure? $/hash or watt/hash?
[08:14:46] watt/hash
[08:15:19] so you can make 10 times more efficient double precisio FPU?
[08:16:02] like I said let's try to be productive. You are having me here, let's work together!
[08:16:15] continue with RandomX, publish more docs. that's always helpful.
[08:16:37] I'm trying to understand how it's possible at all. Why AMD/Intel are so inefficient at running FP calculations?
[08:18:05] midipoet ([email protected]/web/irccloud.com/x-vszshqqxwybvtsjm) has joined #monero-pow
[08:18:17] hardware development works the other way round. We start with 1) math then 2) optimization priority 3) hw/sw boundary 4) IP selection 5) physical implementation
[08:22:32] This still doesn't explain at which point you get 10x
[08:23:07] Weren't you the ones claiming "We can accelerate ProgPoW by a factor of 3x to 8x." ? I find it hard to believe too.
[08:30:20] sure
[08:30:26] so my idea: first we finish our current chip
[08:30:35] from simulation to silicon :)
[08:30:40] we love this stuff... we do it anyway
[08:30:59] now we have a communication channel, and we don't call each other names immediately anymore: big progress!
[08:31:06] you know, we russians have a saying "it was smooth on paper, but they forgot about ravines"
[08:31:12] So I need a bit more details
[08:31:16] ha ha. good!
[08:31:31] that's why I want to avoid to just make claims
[08:31:34] let's work
[08:31:40] RandomX comes in Sep/Oct, right?
[08:31:45] Maybe
[08:32:20] We need to audit it first
[08:32:31] ok
[08:32:59] we don't make chips to prove sw devs that their assumptions about hardware are wrong. especially not if these guys then promptly hardfork and move to the next wrong assumption :)
[08:33:10] from the outside, this only means that hw & sw are devaluing each other
[08:33:24] neither of us should do this
[08:33:47] we are making chips that can hopefully accelerate more crypto ops in the future
[08:33:52] signing, verifying, proving, etc.
[08:34:02] PoW is just a feature like others
[08:34:18] sech1: is it easy for you to come to Hong Kong? (visa-wise)
[08:34:20] or difficult?
[08:34:33] or are you there sometimes?
[08:34:41] It's kind of far away
[08:35:13] we are looking forward to more RandomX docs. that's the first step.
[08:35:31] I want to avoid that we have some meme "Linzhi says they can accelerate XYZ by factor x" .... "ha ha ha"
[08:35:37] right? we don't want that :)
[08:35:39] doc is almost finished
[08:35:40] What docs do you need? It's described pretty good
[08:35:41] so I better say nothing now
[08:35:50] we focus on our Ethash chip
[08:36:05] then based on that, we are happy to walk interested people through the design and what else it can do
[08:36:22] that's a better approach from my view than making claims that are laughed away (rightfully so, because no silicon...)
[08:36:37] ethash ASIC is basically a glorified memory controller
[08:36:39] sech1: tevador said something more is coming (he just did it again)
[08:37:03] yes, some parts of RandomX are not described well
[08:37:10] like dataset access logic
[08:37:37] RandomX looks like progpow for CPU
[08:37:54] yes
[08:38:03] it is designed to reflect CPU
[08:38:34] so any ASIC for it = CPU in essence
[08:39:04] of course there are still some things in regular CPU that can be thrown away for RandomX
[08:40:20] uncore parts are not used, but those will use very little power
[08:40:37] except for memory controller
[08:41:09] I'm just surprised sometimes, ok? let me ask: have you designed or taped out an asic before? isn't it risky to make assumptions about things that are largely unknown?
[08:41:23] I would worry
[08:41:31] that I get something wrong...
[08:41:44] but I also worry like crazy that CNv4 will blow up, where you guys seem to be relaxed
[08:42:06] I didn't want to bring up anything RandomX because CNv4 is such a nailbiter... :)
[08:42:15] how do you guys know you don't have asics in a week or two?
[08:42:38] we don't have experience with ASIC design, but RandomX is simply designed to exactly fit CPU capabilities, which is the best you can do anyways
[08:43:09] similar as ProgPoW did with GPUs
[08:43:14] some people say they want to do asic-resistance only until the vast majority of coins has been issued
[08:43:21] that's at least reasonable
[08:43:43] yeah but progpow totally will not work as advertised :)
[08:44:08] yeah, I've seen that comment about progpow a few times already
[08:44:11] which is no surprise if you know it's just a random sales story to sell a few more GPUs
[08:44:13] RandomX is not permanent, we are expecting to switch to ASIC friendly in a few years if possible
[08:44:18] yes
[08:44:21] that makes sense
[08:44:40] linzhi-sonia: how so? will it break or will it be asic-able with decent performance gains?
[08:44:41] are you happy with CNv4 so far?
[08:45:10] ah, long story. progpow is a masterpiece of deception, let's not get into it here.
[08:45:21] if you know chip marketing it makes more sense
[08:45:24] linzhi-sonia: So far? lol! a bit early to tell, don't you think?
[08:45:35] the diff is coming down
[08:45:41] first few hours looked scary
[08:45:43] I remain skeptical: I only see ASICs being reasonable if they are already as ubiquitous as smartphones
[08:45:46] yes, so far so good
[08:46:01] we kbew the diff would not come down ubtil affter block 75
[08:46:10] yes
[08:46:22] but first few hours it looks like only 5% hashrate left
[08:46:27] looked
[08:46:29] now it's better
[08:46:51] the next worry is: when will "unexplainable" hashrate come back?
[08:47:00] you hope 2-3 months? more?
[08:47:05] so give it another couple of days. will probably overshoot to the downside, and then rise a bit as miners get updated and return
[08:47:22] 3 months minimum turnaround, yes
[08:47:28] nah
[08:47:36] don't underestimate asicmakers :)
[08:47:54] you guys don't get #1 priority on chip fabs
[08:47:56] 3 months = 90 days. do you know what is happening in those 90 days exactly? I'm pretty sure you don't. same thing as before.
[08:48:13] we don't do any secret chips btw
[08:48:21] 3 months assumes they had a complete design ready to go, and added the last minute change in 1 day
[08:48:24] do you know who is behind the hashrate that is now bricked?
[08:48:27] innosilicon?
[08:48:34] hyc: no no, and no. :)
[08:48:44] hyc: have you designed or taped out a chip before?
[08:48:51] yes, many years ago
[08:49:10] then you should know that 90 days is not a fixed number
[08:49:35] sure, but like I said, other makers have greater demand
[08:49:35] especially not if you can prepare, if you just have to modify something, or you have more programmability in the chip than some people assume
[08:50:07] we are chipmakers, we would never dare to do what you guys are doing with CNv4 :) but maybe that just means you are cooler!
[08:50:07] and yes, programmability makes some aspect of turnaround easier
[08:50:10] all fine
[08:50:10] I hope it works!
[08:50:28] do you know who is behind the hashrate that is now bricked?
[08:50:29] inno?
[08:50:41] we suspect so, but have no evidence
[08:50:44] maybe we can try to find them, but we cannot spend too much time on this
[08:50:53] it's probably not so much of a secret
[08:51:01] why should it be, right?
[08:51:10] devs want this cat-and-mouse game? devs get it...
[08:51:35] there was one leak saying it's innosilicon
[08:51:36] so you think 3 months, ok
[08:51:43] inno is cool
[08:51:46] good team
[08:51:49] IP design house
[08:51:54] in Wuhan
[08:52:06] they send their people to conferences with fake biz cards :)
[08:52:19] pretending to be other companies?
[08:52:26] sure
[08:52:28] ha ha
[08:52:39] so when we see them, we look at whatever card they carry and laugh :)
[08:52:52] they are perfectly suited for secret mining games
[08:52:59] they made at most $6 million in 2 months of mining, so I wonder if it was worth it
[08:53:10] yeah. no way to know
[08:53:15] but it's good that you calculate!
[08:53:24] this is all about cost/benefit
[08:53:25] then you also understand - imagine the value of XMR goes up 5x, 10x
[08:53:34] that whole "asic resistance" thing will come down like a house of cards
[08:53:41] I would imagine they sell immediately
[08:53:53] the investor may fully understand the risk
[08:53:57] the buyer
[08:54:13] it's not healthy, but that's another discussion
[08:54:23] so mid-June
[08:54:27] let's see
[08:54:49] I would be susprised if CNv4 ASICs show up at all
[08:54:56] surprised*
[08:54:56] why?
[08:55:05] is only an economic question
[08:55:12] yeah should be interesting. FPGAs will be near their limits as well
[08:55:16] unless XMR goes up a lot
[08:55:19] no, not *only*. it's also a technology question
[08:55:44] you believe CNv4 is "asic resistant"? which feature?
[08:55:53] it's not
[08:55:59] cnv4 = Rabdomx ?
[08:56:03] no
[08:56:07] cnv4=cryptinight/r
[08:56:11] ah
[08:56:18] CNv4 is the one we have now, I think
[08:56:21] since yesterday
[08:56:30] it's plenty enough resistant for current XMR price
[08:56:45] that may be, yes!
[08:56:55] I look at daily payouts. XMR = ca. 100k USD / day
[08:57:03] it can hold until October, but it's not asic resistant
[08:57:23] well, last 24h only 22,442 USD :)
[08:57:32] I think 80 h/s per watt ASICs are possible for CNv4
[08:57:38] linzhi-sonia where do you produce your chips? TSMC?
[08:57:44] I'm cruious how you would expect to build a randomX ASIC that outperforms ARM cores for efficiency, or Intel cores for raw speed
[08:57:48] curious
[08:58:01] yes, tsmc
[08:58:21] Our team did the world's first bitcoin asic, Avalon
[08:58:25] and upcoming 2nd gen Ryzens (64-core EPYC) will be a blast at RandomX
[08:58:28] designed and manufactured
[08:58:53] still being marketed?
[08:59:03] linzhi-sonia: do you understand what xmr wants to achieve, community-wise?
[08:59:14] Avalon? as part of Canaan Creative, yes I think so.
[08:59:25] there's not much interesting oing on in SHA256
[08:59:29] Inge-: I would think so, but please speak
[08:59:32] hyc: yes
[09:00:28] linzhi-sonia: i am curious to hear your thoughts. I am fairly new to this space myself...
[09:00:51] oh
[09:00:56] we are grandpas, and grandmas
[09:01:36] yet I have no problem understanding why ASICS are currently reviled.
[09:01:48] xmr's main differentiators to, let's say btc, are anonymity and fungibility
[09:01:58] I find the client terribly slow btw
[09:02:21] and I think the asic-forking since last may is wrong, doesn't create value and doesn't help with the project objectives
[09:02:25] which "the client" ?
[09:02:52] Monero GUI client maybe
[09:03:12] MacOS, yes
[09:03:28] What exactly is slow?
[09:03:30] linzhi-sonia: I run my own node, and use the CLI and Monerujo. Have not had issues.
[09:03:49] staying in sync
[09:03:49] linzhi-sonia: decentralization is also a key principle
[09:03:56] one that Bitcoin has failed to maintain
[09:04:39] hmm
[09:05:00] looks fairly decentralized to me. decentralization is the result of 3 goals imo: resilient, trustless, permissionless
[09:05:28] don't ask a hardware maker about physical decentralization. that's too ideological. we focus on logical decentralization.
[09:06:11] physical decentralization is important. with bulk of bitnoin mining centered on Chinese hydroelectric dams
[09:06:19] have you thought about including block data in the PoW?
[09:06:41] yes, of course.
[09:07:39] is that already in an algo?
[09:08:10] hyc: about "centered on chinese hydro" - what is your source? the best paper I know is this: https://coinshares.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Mining-Whitepaper-Final.pdf
[09:09:01] linzhi-sonia: do you mine on your ASICs before you sell them?
[09:09:13] besides testing of course
[09:09:45] that paper puts Chinese btc miners at 60% max
[09:10:05] tevador: I think everybody learned that that is not healthy long-term!
[09:10:16] because it gives the chipmaker a cost advantage over its own customers
[09:10:33] and cost advantage leads to centralization (physical and logical)
[09:10:51] you guys should know who finances progpow and why :)
[09:11:05] but let's not get into this, ha ha. want to keep the channel civilized. right OhGodAGirl ? :)
[09:11:34] tevador: so the answer is no! 100% and definitely no
[09:11:54] that "self-mining" disease was one of the problems we have now with asics, and their bad reputation (rightfully so)
[09:13:08] I plan to write a nice short 2-page paper or so on our chip design process. maybe it's interesting to some people here.
[09:13:15] basically the 5 steps I mentioned before, from math to physical
[09:13:32] linzhi-sonia: the paper you linked puts 48% of bitcoin mining in Sichuan. the total in China is much more than 60%
[09:13:38] need to run it by a few people to fix bugs, will post it here when published
[09:14:06] hyc: ok! I am just sharing the "best" document I know today. it definitely may be wrong and there may be a better one now.
[09:14:18] hyc: if you see some reports, please share
[09:14:51] hey I am really curious about this: where is a PoW algo that puts block data into the PoW?
[09:15:02] the previous paper I read is from here http://hackingdistributed.com/2018/01/15/decentralization-bitcoin-ethereum/
[09:15:38] hyc: you said that already exists? (block data in PoW)
[09:15:45] it would make verification harder
[09:15:49] linzhi-sonia: https://the-eye.eu/public/Books/campdivision.com/PDF/Computers%20General/Privacy/bitcoin/meh/hashimoto.pdf
[09:15:51] but for chips it would be interesting
[09:15:52] we discussed the possibility about a year ago https://www.reddit.com/Monero/comments/8bshrx/what_we_need_to_know_about_proof_of_work_pow/
[09:16:05] oh good links! thanks! need to read...
[09:16:06] I think that paper by dryja was original
[09:17:53] since we have a nice flow - second question I'm very curious about: has anyone thought about in-protocol rewards for other functions?
[09:18:55] we've discussed micropayments for wallets to use remote nodes
[09:18:55] you know there is a lot of work in other coins about STARK provers, zero-knowledge, etc. many of those things very compute intense, or need to be outsourced to a service (zether). For chipmakers, in-protocol rewards create an economic incentive to accelerate those things.
[09:19:50] whenever there is an in-protocol reward, you may get the power of ASICs doing something you actually want to happen
[09:19:52] it would be nice if there was some economic reward for running a fullnode, but no one has come up with much more than that afaik
[09:19:54] instead of fighting them off
[09:20:29] you need to use asics, not fight them. that's an obvious thing to say for an asicmaker...
[09:20:41] in-protocol rewards can be very powerful
[09:20:50] like I said before - unless the ASICs are so useful they're embedded in every smartphone, I dont see them being a positive for decentralization
[09:21:17] if they're a separate product, the average consumer is not going to buy them
[09:21:20] now I was talking about speedup of verifying, signing, proving, etc.
[09:21:23] they won't even know what they are
[09:22:07] if anybody wants to talk about or design in-protocol rewards, please come talk to us
[09:22:08] the average consumer also doesn't use general purpose hardware to secure blockchains either
[09:22:14] not just for PoW, in fact *NOT* for PoW
[09:22:32] it requires sw/hw co-design
[09:23:10] we are in long-term discussions/collaboration over this with Ethereum, Bitcoin Cash. just talk right now.
[09:23:16] this was recently published though suggesting more uptake though I guess https://btcmanager.com/college-students-are-the-second-biggest-miners-of-cryptocurrency/
[09:23:29] I find it pretty hard to believe their numbers
[09:24:03] well
[09:24:09] sorry, original article: https://www.pcmag.com/news/366952/college-kids-are-using-campus-electricity-to-mine-crypto
[09:24:11] just talk, no? rumors
[09:24:18] college students are already more educated than the average consumer
[09:24:29] we are not seeing many such customers anymore
[09:24:30] it's data from cisco monitoring network traffic
[09:24:33] and they're always looking for free money
[09:24:48] of course anyone with "free" electricity is inclined to do it
[09:24:57] but look at the rates, cannot make much money
[09:26:06] Ethereum is a bloated collection of bugs wrapped in a UI. I suppose they need all the help they can get
[09:26:29] Bitcoin Cash ... just another get rich quick scheme
[09:26:38] hmm :)
[09:26:51] I'll give it back to you, ok? ha ha. arrogance comes before the fall...
[09:27:17] maye we should have a little fun with CNv4 mining :)
[09:27:25] ;)
[09:27:38] come on. anyone who has watched their track record... $75M lost in ETH at DAO hack
[09:27:50] every smart contract that comes along is just waiting for another hack
[09:27:58] I just wanted to throw out the "in-protocol reward" thing, maybe someone sees the idea and wants to cowork. maybe not. maybe it's a stupid idea.
[09:29:18] linzhi-sonia: any thoughts on CN-GPU?
[09:29:55] CN-GPU has one positive aspect - it wastes chip area to implement all 18 hash algorithms
[09:30:19] you will always hear roughly the same feedback from me:
[09:30:52] "This algorithm very different, it heavy use floating point operations to hurt FPGAs and general purpose CPUs"
[09:30:56] the problem is, if it's profitable for people to buy ASIC miners and mine, it's always more profitable for the manufacturer to not sell and mine themselves
[09:31:02] "hurt"
[09:31:07] what is the point of this?
[09:31:15] it totally doesn't work
[09:31:24] you are hurting noone, just demonstrating lack of ability to think
[09:31:41] what is better: algo designed for chip, or chip designed for algo?
[09:31:43] fireice does it on daily basis, CN-GPU is a joke
[09:31:53] tevador: that's not really true, especially in a market with such large price fluctuations as cryptocurrency
[09:32:12] it's far less risky to sell miners than mine with them and pray that price doesn't crash for next six months
[09:32:14] I think it's great that crypto has a nice group of asicmakers now, hw & sw will cowork well
[09:32:36] jwinterm yes, that's why they premine them and sell after
[09:32:41] PoW is about being thermodynamically and cryptographically provable
[09:32:45] premining with them is taking on that risk
[09:32:49] not "fork when we think there are asics"
[09:32:51] business is about risk minimization
[09:32:54] that's just fear-driven
[09:33:05] Inge-: that's roughly the feedback
[09:33:24] I'm not saying it hasn't happened, but I think it's not so simple as saying "it always happens"
[09:34:00] jwinterm: it has certainly happened on BTC. and also on XMR.
[09:34:19] ironically, please think about it: these kinds of algos indeed prove the limits of the chips they were designed for. but they don't prove that you cannot implement the same algo differently! cannot!
[09:34:26] Risk minimization is not starting a business at all.
[09:34:34] proof-of-gpu-limit. proof-of-cpu-limit.
[09:34:37] imagine you have a money printing machine, would you sell it?
[09:34:39] proves nothing for an ASIC :)
[09:35:05] linzhi-sonia: thanks. I dont think anyone believes you can't make a more efficient cn-gpu asic than a gpu - but that it would not be orders of magnitude faster...
[09:35:24] ok
[09:35:44] like I say. these algos are, that's really ironic, designed to prove the limitatios of a particular chip in mind of the designer
[09:35:50] exactly the wrong way round :)
[09:36:16] like the cache size in RandomX :)
[09:36:18] beautiful
[09:36:29] someone looked at GPU designs
[09:37:31] linzhi-sonia can you elaborate? Cache size in RandomX was selected to fit CPU cache
[09:37:52] yes
[09:38:03] too large for GPU
[09:38:11] as I said, we are designing the algorithm to exactly fit CPU capabilities, I do not claim an ASIC cannot be more efficient
[09:38:16] ok!
[09:38:29] when will you do the audit?
[09:38:35] will the results be published in a document or so?
[09:38:37] I claim that single-chip ASIC is not viable, though
[09:39:06] you guys are brave, noone disputes that. 3 anti-asic hardforks now!
[09:39:18] 4th one coming
[09:39:31] 3 forks were done not only for this
[09:39:38] they had scheduled updates in the first place
[09:48:10] Monero is the #1 anti-asic fighter
[09:48:25] Monero is #1 for a lot of reasons ;)
[09:48:40] It's the coin with the most hycs.
[09:48:55] mooooo
[09:59:06] sneaky integer overflow, bug squished
[10:38:00] p0nziph0ne ([email protected]/vpn/privateinternetaccess/p0nziph0ne) has joined #monero-pow
[11:10:53] The convo here is wild
[11:12:29] it's like geo-politics at the intersection of software and hardware manufacturing for thermoeconomic value.
[11:13:05] ..and on a Sunday.
[11:15:43] midipoet: hw and sw should work together and stop silly games to devalue each other. to outsiders this is totally not attractive.
[11:16:07] I appreciate the positive energy here to try to listen, learn, understand.
[11:16:10] that's a start
[11:16:48] <-- p0nziph0ne ([email protected]/vpn/privateinternetaccess/p0nziph0ne) has quit (Quit: Leaving)
[11:16:54] we won't do silly mining against xmr "community" wishes, but not because we couldn'd do it, but because it's the wrong direction in the long run, for both sides
[11:18:57] linzhi-sonia: I agree to some extent. Though, in reality, there will always be divergence between social worlds. Not every body has the same vision of the future. Reaching societal consensus on reality tomorrow is not always easy
[11:20:25] absolutely. especially at a time when there is so much profit to be made from divisiveness.
[11:20:37] someone will want to make that profit, for sure
[11:24:32] Yes. Money distorts.
[11:24:47] Or wealth...one of the two
[11:26:35] Too much physical money will distort rays of light passing close to it indeed.
submitted by jwinterm to Monero [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Rhodium Mining Guide

Bitcoin Rhodium Mining Guide
Happy Mining!

All available XRC pools can be found on MiningPoolStats

Bitcoin Rhodium Mining Hardware

Baikal Giant+: 1.6 GH/s
Baikal Quad Cube: 1.2 GH/s
Baikal Giant: 900 MH/s
Baikal Quadruple Mini Miner: 600 MH/s
Baikal Miner Cube: 300 MH/s
Baikal Mini Miner: 150 MH/s

Mining Setup

To mine Bitcoin Rhodium you need to set up an XRC wallet and configure your miner of choice. You can choose between Web wallet, Electrum-XRC or Magnum wallet. To set up a web wallet please visit wallet.bitcoinrh.org. Or download and install Electrum-XRC wallet (recommended) for Windows, Linux and MacOS.
Web wallet: wallet.bitcoinrh.org
Electrum-XRC wallet: electrum.bitcoinrh.org
Magnum wallet: https://magnumwallet.co

Sign up for XRC web wallet if not yet done so

  1. Create an account, with your username, password and secure question.
  2. Sign in and click “Create Wallet”.
  3. Set up a strong transaction password. Make sure you store it securely in a secure password manager of choice.
  4. Copy the seed somewhere safe. It’d be a good idea to write seed on a hardcopy and keep it safe.
  5. Paste it to confirm you got it right.
  6. Grab an address for the mining step. Your wallet is now ready to mine XRC.

Instructions for mining XRC on the official pool

Pool link: poolcore.bitcoinrh.org
  1. Any miner that supports X13 will be able to mine XRC. We have a few examples below of miners that are well tested with Bitcoin Rhodium network.
  2. For any miner, configure the miner to point to:
(0–0.8 GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3061
(0.8–2 GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3062
(3–4 GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3063
(5+ GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3064
with your XRC address as username and x as password. You don’t need to open an account on pool. You will be mining to XRC address and mined coins will be transferred to your wallet
after blocks reach 10 block maturity
after you mined up minimal amount of coins (currently 0.1 XRC)
sometimes mined blocks could get rejected by network (orphaned) after they were counted as valid blocks. This is normal network behavior to follow longest chain
  1. http://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org is used to follow your miner and network statistics.

CPU Miner-Multi

Source: https://github.com/tpruvot/cpuminer-multi
Sample configuration with CPU Miner tested on UBUNTU.
{
“url” : “stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3061”, “user” : “YOUR XRC ADDRESS”,
“pass” : “x”,
“algo” : “x13”, “threads” : 1,
“cpu-priority” : 5,
“cpu-affinity” : 1, “benchmark” : false, “debug” : true, “protocol”: true, “show-diff”: true, “quiet” : false
}
Command to run your CPUMiner: cpuminer -c cpuminer.json

SGMiner (ATI GPU)

SGMiner is a GPU-based mine: https://github.com/nicehash/sgminereleases
The configuration below was tested on Windows:
setx GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR 0
setx GPU_MAX_HEAP_SIZE 100
setx GPU_USE_SYNC_OBJECTS 1
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT 100
setx GPU_SINGLE_ALLOC_PERCENT 100
cd C:\Software\sgminer-5.6.1-nicehash-51-windowsamd64 sgminer.exe
— gpu-platform 1 — algorithm x13mod -url stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh. org:3062 — pool-user — userpass :x — auto-fan — temp-target 70 — temp-over- heat 82 — temp-cutoff 85 — gpu-fan 65–85 — log-file log.txt — no-adl — no-extra- nonce -P –T

CCMiner (NVIDIA GPU)

CCMiner is a GPU-based miner (NVIDIA)
Command to run your CCMINER:
ccminer-x64.exe -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3062 -O :without -D — show-diff

Baikal miner

Settings: Url:
(0–2 GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3062
(3–4 GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3063
(5+ GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3064
Algo: x13User: your XRC receiving address (make sure you set 2 distinct addresses for each hashing board)
Pass: x
Extranonce: leave off Priority set to 0 and 1
Once pool stratum address and your wallet as user are set up you should see your miner mining against XRC pool. When miner is working the status column is green. The pool and miner are incorrectly configured now as status says “Dead” highlighted in red.

Instructions for mining XRC on BSOD pool

Pool link: bsod.pw/en/pool/dashboard/XRC/
Use this code for your miner: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://pool.bsod.pw:2582 -u WALLET.rig
BSOD pool allows both solo and party mining.
For solo mining use code: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://pool.bsod.pw:2582 -u WALLET.rig -p m=solo And for party mining use: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://pool.bsod.pw:2582 -u WALLET.rig -p m=party.yourpassword
NOTICE: You can use us for North America and asia for Asia instead of euin your .bat file or config.
You can also use BSOD pool’s monitor app for Android and iOS.

Instructions for mining XRC on ZERGPOOL

Zergpool offers low fees (just 0.5%) and also SOLO and PARTY mining with no extra fees.
To mine XRC on Zergpool use this command lines for your miner:
Regular: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://x13.mine.zergpool.com:3633 -u -p c=XRC,mc=XRC Solo: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://x13.mine.zergpool.com:3633 -u -p c=XRC,mc=XRC,m=solo Party: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://x13.mine.zergpool.com:3633 -u -p c=XRC,mc=XRC,m=party
Use your coin wallet address as username in mining software. Specify c=SYMBOL as password to identify payout wallet coin, and the same coin in mc=SYMBOL to specify mining coin.
For more information and support please visit http://zergpool.com
Notice that when there are more pools mining XRC in different geographic/availability locations choose the nearest to you as lowest priority and then add desirable fall back pool options in different geographic locations or pools. This is useful when one pool experiences issues, to fall back to different pool in Bitcoin Rhodium network.

Calculate your Bitcoin Rhodium mining profitability

WhatToMine: https://whattomine.com/coins/317-xrc-x13
CoinCalculators: https://www.coincalculators.io/coin/bitcoin-rhodium

Feel free to ask questions in Discord community. There are lots of helpful people around the world watching XRC 24x7.

Bitcoin Rhodium Dev Team
submitted by BitcoinRh to BitcoinRhodium [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Mining Difficulty: 908,350,862

http://bitcoin.sipa.be/
submitted by TheStygianSun to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

Xthinner mainnet compression performance stats

I've been collecting some compression efficiency data on BCH mainnet blocks with Xthinner for the last 1.5 days, and thought I would share some results.
Of the last 200 blocks, there were 13 instances in which the recipient was missing one or more transactions and had to fetch with a round trip, for a 6.5% fetch rate.
I calculated the compression efficiency in 3 separate ways:
  1. With all data sent by Xthinner, including the shortID segment, the missing transactions, the coinbase transaction, and the block header;
  2. With the shortIDs, coinbase, and header, but not the missing transactions; and
  3. With only the shortIDs.
The mean compression rates for these 201 blocks were as follows:
99.563% without cb+header+missing 99.385% with cb+header w/o missing 99.209% with everything 
In terms of bits/tx, those numbers are:
14.021 bits/tx without cb+header+missing 19.721 bits/tx w cb+header w/o missing 25.348 bits/tx with everything 
The average block size during this test was 327 tx/block or 131 kB/block. I expect these numbers to tend towards 12 bits/tx asymptotically as block sizes increase.
These numbers were calculated using the sum of the Xthinner message sizes divided by the sum of the block sizes, rather than the mean of the individual blocks' compression rates. This means that my mean compression numbers are weighted by block size.
In comparison, bissias reported yesterday that Graphene got a median compression (with everything) of 98.878% on these dinky mainnet BCH block sizes. Graphene does much better at large block sizes, though, getting up to 99.88% on the biggest blocks, which is about 2x-3x better than the best Xthinner can do.
Except for the missing transactions, there were 0 errors decoding Xthinner messages. Specifically, of the last 201 blocks, there were 0 instances of Xthinner encoding too little information to disambiguate between transactions in the recipient's mempool, and there were 0 instances of checksum errors during decoding. (This is normal and expected for normal operation. In adversarial cases or extreme stress-test scenarios with desynced mempools, these numbers might go up, but if they do they only cause an extra round trip.
The full dataset of 201 blocks (with lame formatting) can be found here.
Astute observers might notice that this performance result is much better than what I first reported, in which around 75% of blocks had "missing" transactions. It turns out that these were actually decoding ambiguities caused by my encoder having an off-by-one error when finding the nearest mempool neighbor. Oopsies. Fixed. I also changed my test setup to have better and more realistic mempool synchrony. These two changes lowered the missing transaction rate to about 6.5% of blocks.
If anyone wants to dig into the code or play around with it, you can find it here. Keep in mind that there may still be remote crash or remote code execution vulnerabilities, so don't run this code on anything you want to not get hacked.
Edit: I think I prefer the alternate formulation for compression ratios in which 0% is the ideal. Using that formula, Xthinner was able to compress the blocks down to an average of
0.437% without cb+header+missing 0.615% with cb+header w/o missing 0.781% with everything 
of their original size, whereas Graphene was able to get to1.122% on the median block, and 0.117% on the best block.
Edit2: If we examine only the 5 blocks with more than 1000 tx in them, we get:
Fetched transactions 0 of 5 times Mean compression: 0.390% without cb+header 0.420% with everything 13.285 bits/tx average 12.330 bits/tx without coinbase+header 
Edit4: It's been almost two weeks, and I now have 197 blocks over 1k tx in the dataset:
Fetched transactions 9 of 107 times 0 ambiguities, 0 checksum errors Mean compression: 99.563% without cb+header+missing 99.518% with cb+header w/o missing 99.500% with everything 14.522 bits/tx average with missing, 14.017 bits/tx average without 12.701 bits/tx without coinbase+header 
submitted by jtoomim to btc [link] [comments]

6 TH/s ASIC is coming to town...

6 TH/s ASIC is coming to town... submitted by aliparvin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Observe for yourself: Segwit allows 2 MB blocks in the typical scenario

Basic English explanation of the process

To demonstrate this, I take each block, figure out the average transaction size and weight, calculate how many of these segwit would allow in a block, and then measure the total sizes of them.
Because the generation transaction is inherently unusual, and few transactions make too small a sample size to be meaningful, I exclude blocks with fewer than 16 transactions (ie, empty blocks).
Finally, I take the average of these segwit block sizes.

The result

25th pct: 1807737 Average: 1890429.153079902 90th pct: 2062659 Largest: 2816041 
Yes, 1.890429 MB is close enough that I'm going to round it up to 1.9 MB or even 2 MB considering the Notes below.

How to reproduce this

Note I do all this stuff on Linux. If you don't know how to use Linux yet, get a Raspberry Pi and learn. ;)
1. Build custom bitcoind to calculate max segwit block sizes.
Apply this patch to your bitcoin code and recompile:
curl https://gist.githubusercontent.com/luke-j62435b3fb80fcf9c12a4629be02c5861/raw/e7baefecff05322277773410ec5e841164a54bcb/segwit_equiv_hack.diff | patch -p1 make 
2. Generate table of max segwit block sizes.
[Re]start your custom bitcoind, and for each block, print its height, block hash, max segwit block size, and transaction count.
first_block=412404 last_block=465000 while [ $first_block -le $last_block ]; do blkhash=$(bitcoin-cli getblockhash $first_block); echo "$first_block $blkhash $(bitcoin-cli getblock $blkhash | python -c 'import json, sys; j = json.load(sys.stdin); print("%d %d" % (j["segwit_equiv_hack"], len(j["tx"])))')"; let first_block=first_block+1; done > data 
This is looking at the last 1 year of blocks.
3. Calculate average (and other stats) of statistically-useful max segwit block sizes.
Save this Python script to a file, then run it: python size_statistics.py < data

Notes

  1. These statistics are assuming every single block is full, and with the same ratio of spam/non-spam as presently. In a less extreme scenario, if a block maxed out at 1.8 MB, the 200k of transactions left would simply get mined in a 2.2+ MB block instead since the average block size wouldn't be the average filled block size.
  2. The network currently does not have any Lightning or sidechain usage yet. It is likely these will weigh heavier on witness data, and thereby expand the block sizes further, possibly even hitting 3 MB.
submitted by luke-jr to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Something is rotten in the state of DOGE mining

Shibes, something stinks in doge land. A problem in the design of dogecoin means that dishonest (or perhaps we should call them "creative") miners can take a disproportionate share of rewards, leaving everyone else to earn less than they deserve. Many of you have probably noticed that calculators estimate payouts larger than what you earn in practice (for example, dustcoin estimates ~1500DOGE/day @ 200KH/s while Non Stop Mine pays about a quarter of that rate), and most have written it off as bad luck: the blocks your pool found happened to be small, or your pool happened to be unlucky, and such is life. At least another friendly Shibe is having a better day, and it'll come around in tips anyway! Unfortunately, the truth is much darker.
The "random" DOGE rewards per block are not random. In fact, the value of each block is predetermined by a simple equation applied to the hash of the previous block. A creative miner can take advantage of this fact to mine dogecoin when the potential reward is high, and switch to litecoin when the potential reward is low. During some rounds, the reward is so small it isn't worth the electricity spent finding it; during more rounds, the reward is less than can be earned mining LTC; in a few rounds, the reward is spectacular. Honest miners mine with the expectation of earning an average of 500,000 DOGE per block, but when people are selectively mining the high-profit DOGE rounds, the average reward falls for honest miners.
So the question is: is this problem theoretical, or are honest miners really losing value to cheaters? I spent some time digging, and it appears that cheating is rampant! There are a few ways cheating can be detected.
If there is outside competition for high-value blocks, then pools should on average be finding blocks worth less than 500,000 DOGE (because some of the valuable blocks, but none of the low-value blocks, will be found by cheaters). The largest pool, Dogehouse, reports some useful averages: over all time, the pool has found 11,241 valid blocks worth 5365077071.0746 DOGE, for an average of 477,277 DOGE (including fees, which should actually raise the average above 500,000!). That's 4.5% below the expected average block value. Is it simply bad luck? No. With so many blocks found, there's about a 7% chance that the average will be above 505,000 or below 495,000; there's a <<1% chance their average will be above 510,000 or below 490,000, and effectively NO chance of seeing an average below 485,000. 477,000 is simply preposterous. Dogepool is either mind-bogglingly unlucky, or something is fishy.
Maybe Dogehouse is doing something fishy...but we can look at other pools. Dogechain's pool's all-time average block value is similar: 478847 DOGE. They're a smaller pool so the odds of this being bad luck aren't astronomical, but it's not very likely. Fast-pool's average is 477892. They're big enough that the odds are again astronomical.
And this only accounts for people cheating outside of the pools. Cheaters can operate inside our pools (more on this later)!
Maybe there's something wrong with the pools. They mostly run similar software. All their owners could be lying to us. We can check for signs of cheating independent of the pools: if more people are mining high-value blocks than low-value blocks, the hash-rate will be higher when the next block is high-value, so high-value blocks will be found faster than low-value blocks. Here's what you find if you look at 5000 recent blocks (blocks 80,001 to 85,000) and measure the average time to find a block, broken out by the block value:
I had to drop about 50 blocks which were missing good timestamps, but they're evenly distributed and shouldn't skew the averages.
The pattern is clear: the network is finding high-value blocks significantly faster than low-value blocks. Low-value rounds take as much as 10% longer than intended, and high-value rounds take around 5% less time than intended. Significant hashrate belongs to miners that cheat.
I mentioned cheaters can operate inside our pools. The payment algorithms used by most pools were carefully designed for bitcoin's (effectively) fixed block reward. They reliably protect against cheaters trying to hop in and out of pools based on short-term profitability, by making payouts solely dependent on the unknowable future (the straightforward pool payment schemes allow cheaters to look at a pool's recent history and use that to take an unfair share of its earnings; read this awesome paper for details). Since the future reward for a bitcoin pool is completely unknowable, PPLNS does not protect against a hopper who knows the future. In the case of Dogecoin, the future reward IS knowable, and PPLNS offers no protection.
Dogehouse is so big we can reasonably assume they'll find any particular block. Dogehouse is using a PPLNS target similar to an ordinary round's length. Someone who mines only during high-value rounds will, with high confidence, earn significantly more DOGE per share submitted than someone who mines Dogecoin 24/7. They also experience much lower variance in earnings.
The random block reward size needs to be removed. It's fun, but it rewards cheaters. Developing a more secure random block value selection technique is possible, but based on observations of GitHub, I do not trust the Dogecoin creator to get it right. Even subtle errors re-open the opportunity for cheating.
While I believe cheating is already unacceptably common, many will disagree until it worsens. To force the issue, I've included everything you need to join the cheaters.
Patch dogecoin/src/main.cpp:
diff --git a/src/main.cpp b/src/main.cpp index 2af23af..8c32dad 100644 --- a/src/main.cpp +++ b/src/main.cpp @@ -1794,6 +1794,8 @@ bool CBlock::ConnectBlock(CValidationState &state, CBlockIndex* pindex, CCoinsVi prevHash = pindex->pprev->GetBlockHash(); } +fprintf(stdout, "Next block value: %lld\n", GetBlockValue(pindex->nHeight, 0, GetHash())); +fflush(stdout); if (vtx[0].GetValueOut() > GetBlockValue(pindex->nHeight, nFees, prevHash)) return state.DoS(100, error("ConnectBlock() : coinbase pays too much (actual=%"PRI64d" vs limit=%"PRI64d")", vtx[0].GetValueOut(), GetBlockValue(pindex->nHeight, nFees, prevHash))); 
Perl script to control cgminer:
#!/usbin/perl use strict; use warnings; my $ltcMiner = "192.168.1.1 4029"; my $dogeMiner = "192.168.1.1 4028"; open (INSTREAM, "dogecoind|") or die; my $lastPool = 0; # LTC while (my $line = ) { if ($line =~ /Next block value: ([\d].*)/) { my $val = $1; if ($val >= 70000000000000) { # High-value DOGE round if ($lastPool == 0) { # Switch from LTC to DOGE $lastPool = 1; &onoff($dogeMiner, "en"); &onoff($ltcMiner, "dis"); } else { # Already mining DOGE } } elsif ($lastPool == 1) { # Low-value DOGE round and currently mining DOGE $lastPool = 0; print " Switching to LTC\n"; &onoff($ltcMiner, "en"); &onoff($dogeMiner, "dis"); } else { # Low-value DOGE round; already mining LTC anyway } } } close (INSTREAM); exit; sub onoff { my $miner = shift; my $enDis = shift; open (OUT1, "|nc $miner") or die $!; print OUT1 "gpu${enDis}able|0"; close (OUT1); } 
Then, simply run two instances of cgminer with separate API ports, one configured for LTC and the other configured for DOGE.
submitted by DisappointedShibe to dogemining [link] [comments]

51% attack on monacoin

IMPORTANT NOTE 2018,05.21.

Monacoin dev sent Lae an email, saying that his current advice for exchanges is to increase confirmations to 100 for now, and that he doesn't have a concrete plan moving forward yet.

Original post:

Currently we are having an 51%+selfish mining+timestamp attack on monacoin reported by several people. Some exchanges (Bittrex, Livecoin) alreday disabled depositing Monacoin, i suggest other exchanges to disable it as well temporarly. monacoin dev suggests to set confirmation time to 100 and everything can resume.

What is happening?

-one of the mining community witholds the blocks
-due to buggy diff retarget calculation the next block can be mined very easily
-new blocks can be issued rapidly
-result 1 = faulty confirmed payments into exchanges (hidden block with a hidden transaction to different address from earlyer and not to exchange + issuing block with payment to exchange and rapidly issued forged blocks relation to this block -> exchange detects proper number of confirmations, then they free up the real block as well, resulting the original forged blocks to be orphanged -> the new chain has no payment to the exchange, but the payment is alreday in the exchange database -> swapping to other coins and withdraw)
-result 2 = and stealing the block reward from a lot of blocks
The bug is the quite similar as Verge had a month ago. Increasing block age for deposits will not fix it, but increasing the block confirmations actually secures you from the attack aniway. Exchangers and online services should increase it above 100. (There is difference as in Verge the timestamp itself was faked - here a different algorithmic error plays role, which the developers must first find).
The main issue (witholding the blocks) was discovered earlyer, but until now it was not a threat (now it became malicious due to this retarget bug - basically combining this 3 phenomon together). The attacker attempts to do the attack for half year with automated mechanisms, now he succeeded.
You may continue using monacoin for buying and selling stuff, but wait a few hours before shipping the product.
Western exchages (Livecoin) lost $90k usd due to attack.
(The bug probably exists with almost all of the bitcoin clones as well - but you must be able to withold blocks to exploit it. )
Your personal Monacoin holdings are not in danger.
The network and transactions - besides this - working as usual, you can continue using your wallet as you did before.
This does NOT have any impact on you as a regular user.
Disclaimer:
  1. i am nobody, and i am not a core developer
  2. i cant check the credibility of the informations i posted above
  3. we are trying to reconstruct whats happening. the monacoin developers dont speak english, and we dont speak japanese
  4. i am programmer, but i am not expert in crypto in any ways
  5. i am not affiliated with monacoin project
  6. meanwhile the title says 51% attack, its possible to achieve this attack around 40-45% hashrate as well (however lower the attackers percentage is, lower the chance of succesfully executing the attack)
an example of suspicious activity on monacoin chain: https://imgur.com/a/OeUwU3I
https://twitter.com/tcejorpniocanom/status/997147764294270982
https://twitter.com/tcejorpniocanom/status/997141459777110017
https://www.reddit.com/monacoin/comments/7z6tgt/more_than_51_hash_power_for_unknown_address/
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=392436.msg37346720#msg37346720
https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20180518-00000040-zdn_n-sci
https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/5076/what-stops-miners-nodes-lying-about-what-time-a-block-was-mined?rq=1
Statistic data from Ming:
Traversal of reorg chains data https://pastebin.com/nh57q3k8
Mined blocks that are not in the main chain according to API (hash block_height address value): https://pastebin.com/C92iqmY4
Diagram of chain reorg, now with the replaced chain.
https://gist.github.com/Ming-Tang/7d4d1441b78b551bf752a3ef0a953fbd
PDF version: https://www.dropbox.com/s/stormjg8bcpacg4/reorgs.pdf?dl=0
Suspected attacker: MBTt4Z*********************Wsx

Aftermath:

  1. bittrex employee contacted me, and told me that they consider delisting the coin if they cant contact twitter.com/tcejorpniocanom - i gave them contacts who might know how to contact the developer, and suggested them to do 300 block confirmations
  2. the coins alreday scammed out from the legitimate owners canot be returned - the chain canot be modified backwards
  3. another bitcoin clone called bitcoin gold got hit by a similar attack ( https://forum.bitcoingold.org/t/double-spend-attack-on-exchanges/1362 Details on similar attack for Bitcoin Gold. )
  4. monacoin dev suggest to set confirmation time to 100. no new actions will take place now. enjoy using the coin.
  5. bitbank re-enabled their wallet
  6. bittrex reopened wallet
submitted by GeriGeriGeri to monacoin [link] [comments]

The "I'm interested in moving to Japan" FAQ/AMA

I hosted an AMA somewhere else and it got more responses than I thought it would.
I did some searching on reddit, but found a post that was about 3 years old, and one that was from someone at a start up. Thought I could contribute from a large company perspective.
start up AMA: https://www.reddit.com/japanlife/comments/50ewvi_am_a_software_engineer_web_mobile_for_a/
a few years old AMA: https://www.reddit.com/japan/comments/34j2y3/software_engineers_of_japan_whats_it_like/
I'm going to leave some FAQs here, but feel free to ask away.
I am an American engineer at AmaAppGooBookSoft in Japan.
(Amazon or Apple or Google or Facebook or Microsoft). I transferred here from the US after working a year or so there. At the time of this writing, I have been in Tokyo for about 3 years.
Answers from OP with regards to things related to work will be in the context of these kinds of big software companies.
I would encourage others who live in Japan that are qualified to answer questions to do so! Wish I had this info before I transferred.
Q: How is the pay, hours?
A: Hours are super normal like they were in the US. Wfh, etc is like the US...but might vary by manager. I knew a designer whose Japanese boss was not on the wfh boat. Pay is terrible. Entry level engineer initial offer was 7.5M yen w/5k USD stock per year. I negotiated up to 8.25M base pay. Currently mid-level engieer and at about 9.5M yen and 15k USD/year (~105k USD total?). This is offset somewhat by affordable housing. Think 1.5k USD for a decent apartment, but smaller. Also health insurance is part of taxes, so you don't need to pay extra for it. Train commute is paid for by company. Don't need a car, either. It's a very livable salary, tbh.
Q: How is the dating scene for internationals? Are Japanese people open to dating people from other races? What about LGBTQ?
A: I'd say definitely. I met my wife here. If you are particularly looking for a date, dating apps and goukon (group dating) is a good way to go. As far as LGBTQ, yeah, for sure! Shinjuku ni cho me is the place for you (and also dating apps). (新宿二丁目)
Q: Do you like cost of living better in Tokyo than the states?
A: Yes! My total taxes are about 25% of my gross monthly salary and that includes health insurance. Clinics are insanely cheap because the government regulates the cost of medicine and pays 70% of your medical bills. I was once in the hospital for a week in a private room and it costed about 2500 USD. I opted for the fancy private room, though. My wife gave birth and it costed 2k or so. She had a private room in a hospital with amazing food for a week. I was allowed to stay in the room as well and got food. Rent is reasonable (1.5k or so) for a 700sqft place. Things that annoy me: Albums are like, 30 bucks. New release 4k Blu Ray movies range from 60-85 bucks. Old non-4k Blu Ray movies cost about 35-40 bucks. Groceries are a bit more expensive, but the quality is worth it. Our monthly food budget for 2 adults is about 800 bucks a month. Restaurants are very cheap. Like, 8-10 bucks for lunch. Usually under 1000 yen.
Q: I heard Japanese can be racists towards non Japanese living in Japan. True?
A: True! To some degree. I had the best resume a realtor had ever seen: N1 fluency in Japanese. I studied at the "Harvard of Japan" for a year. 5 year visa (longest duration). High paying job at a huge company. Stable work history. 5/6 landlords didn't give a shit. "no gaijin". You will also not receive service at probably 95% of "adult... services", if you're into that. When I was in college, a few part time jobs I applied to straight up told me they didn't hire foreigners. But once you're settled in, it's not that noticeable. Your average encounter will be pretty friendly. I'd say it's more rare to experience it.
Q: Do you know any Japanese? How essential is it in your wok and your daily life?
A: I am N1 level fluent. But I was dismayed that all that studying didn't mean anything for work, haha. Most engineers are foreigners. Everyone speaks English at the office and they have to know it because the code base is in English. Daily life, I use it all the time. My wife doesn't speak English as well as I speak Japanese. I also know several people who don't speak at all, and they seem to get by. Companies will often pay for Japanese classes as well, and let you attend during work hours.
Q: Did you just apply for Tokyo positions? How did the visa work?
A: Yup! I just applied. Visa was taken care of by a company hired by my employer. Mine was tricky because I didn't major in CS. There is a law that a work visa applicant must have a degree related to the field of work, or have 10 years experience. Since I majored in Japanese, they added "required to translate Japanese in addition to coding" to the job description, and boom. Visa. (I ended up doing semi-voluntary stuff like office hours in addition to my engineering work, where I needed to use Japanese) They'll figure it out, whatever the case is.
Q: Did you start working in Japan after graduation or moved from the US? Is it easy to get permanent residence if you wanted?
A: I transferred internally after a year or so in the US. PR is very attainable under certain circumstances. There is a point system. You get points for age (younger is better), salary, work experience, and Japanese ability. 80 points means that you only have to live in Japan for a year to get PR. 70 points, 3 years.
http://www.immi-moj.go.jp/newimmiact_3/en/evaluate/index.html
Look at the Excel sheet and find the tab for regular workers (not researchers or business owners).
Q: How comfortable is your life there compared to the US? Does money go further?
A: Very comfortable. If you buy a place (and have permanent residence), you're looking at interest rates as low as 0.495% (mine). I have a 500k USD condo and I pay about 1300/month. 33 year loan. Plus about 350/month in maintenance for the building. Groceries are a bit more expensive, but worth it. Restaurants are much cheaper. Like, 800-1000 yen for lunch. Monthly grocery budget for 2 adults is about 800 bucks (my situation, not counting baby expenses). Convenience stores are AMAZING and have great food (for a convenience store). I regularly get a crispy lettuce sandwich, onigiri and can Coffee for breakfast at the shop outside work. Spending power is pretty low, though. Most consumer goods are really expensive. New release 4k Blu Ray is about 65-80 bucks. Old Blu Rays (Disney and marvel as examples) are 35-40 bucks. But Netflix and Hulu are here and have American and some Japanese content. Internet speed is awesome. Gigabit in most places. But apps and Japanese webforms are fucking terrible. Most things feel like the state of the internet 10 or 15 years ago. One of my banks prevents you from using special characters for your password. Swear to God. A lot of foreigners find it difficult to get a credit card. Especially if you are under 30. Just got to UFJ Mitsubishi. Open an account and you can get a debit card you can use online. All in all, I love it here (aside from work - projects I don't want to work on and a low salary compared to the US). We live 5 minutes from a major train station, which means 5 minutes to dozens of restaurants, a handful of grocery stores, some pharmacies, a few clinics, and a mall.
Q: I heard it was easy to internally transfer to Japan (or anywhere with the pay cut) but extremely hard to transfer back to the US so people might get stuck overseas. Is this true? Oh and supposedly transferring to tends to be a promotion +1 level or potentially 2 whereas from leads to a demotion?
A: I don't think this is true at all. I know a few people who have gone back.
I also did not go up when I came to Japan, and I know people who moved to the US and they did not move down.
Q: Is there any American things you miss while in Japan?
A: American internet. God, Japan is so technologically behind it drives me nuts sometimes. It's like the internet from 10-15 years ago. Apps suck. Japanese websites suck. Internet banking and apps suck. One of my banks *prevents* you from using special characters in your password. Streaming services exist, but they're not anywhere near as ubiquitous as they are in the US. I also miss how cheap Blu-rays are. 35 bucks for Zootopia? Come on.
Internet is shitty, but FAST, though. Gigabit everywhere.
Q: The idea of working abroad is pretty novel. Sounds like you have no regrets about the time you spent there?
A: Yes!! I'd definitely do it again, but I might have waited until I had been mid-level engineer for a year or more. The 2 rounds of paycuts was rough. First was base pay, then a surprise paycut when my US stock grants fully vested. Went from expected value of 30k/year to new grants at expected value of 5k. There is a lot to love about Tokyo. The positives far outweigh the negatives.
Q: Visiting Japan soon, what do you recommend doing at night that is friendly to gaijins in Tokyo/Shibuya? I’ve heard a lot of bars/clubs are no gaijins.
A: I would say that's probably rarer. Shinjuku has a good bar scene where you can do some serious bar hopping. If you are super concerned about getting turned away (a really terrible experience. It's really a shitty feeling), then stick to Roppongi! You may also find some ladies (or men) there that are very into foreigners. Shibuya also has quite a few clubs that are foreigner friendly. There's even a soapland that caters specifically to foreigners, if you want that experience. It's in Kawasaki, I think it's called paradise inn. The most tourist-ey thing is "robot restaurant" (also in Shinjuku). I took my American boss there on a business trip (before I moved here) and he fucking loved it. Sky tree or Tokyo tower are also great at night.
Q: Do you have any take on how big the cryptocurrency craze is or was there compared to United States? Do you own any bitcoin personally?
A: I haven't been into the crypto scene. But I think it's more known here. There's even a few big name stores that accept bitcoin. Don't remember which ones, but they charge like, 20% more if you pay in BC. I don't own any, though.
Q: Is AmaAppGooBookSoft japan mostly for SDEs? Or is there place for us non engineering muggles?
A: Lol, Muggles. Yes!! There are TPMs, SDMs, UX designers, etc. But the more you get into the business side (vendor managers, TAM, site merchandiser, etc), the more you will probably be required to speak and be literate in Japanese.
Q: What made you move to japan for an engineering role? Never heard that before.
A: I've wanted to live in Japan since I was a teenager. Spent a year there in University and 2 exchanges in highschool. Originally I just wanted to live in Japan. So after I graduated, I did a few interviews for English teaching. After one of the interviews, they asked me to prepare a lesson plan. My immediate reaction was, "I don't care about a lesson plan, I just want to live in Japan!" Then I realized I needed to calm the fuck down and get there by doing something that I like, and with a marketable skill. I just didn't know what that skill would be...I landed a shit temp job testing Japanese games. Ended up getting an automatable task and googled how to automate it. Then found what I wanted to do. Got into AmaAppGooBookSoft as a contractor, interviewed and got FTE, then made my way to Japan internally.
Q: I speak 0 japanese will this be a huge issue? Also if I am a mid-level engineer in usa how much equivalent jp total compensation should I be looking for?
A: Not an issue at all for work. Most of the engineers are foreigners. You'll also be able to get by out in the real world. But I'd suggest taking Japanese classes. Company will pay for it here. That would probably equate to maybe 9.5M-110M yen and about 15-20k in RSUs per year? I have zero knowledge of the pay bands here, but I believe 200k is just above middle for US? I make about 9.5, but I have no idea where that is in the pay band. Whatever they offer you, negotiate for more. Always negotiate. It is plenty to live on. You can get a nice place for 150,000/month and a nicer place for 200,000/month. If you want to live further from work or get a smaller place you could get rent as low as 80,000/month, with a 30 minute train ride. Restaurants are very cheap for lunch. Maybe 700-1100 for lunch? Very cheap compared to the states. Company will pay for your daily commute fees. Spending power is low, though. Media is really expensive. Do some searches on Amazon Japan for common stuff to get an idea. FYI, my take home is about 600,000/month to give you an idea about taxes. No need to pay for health insurance plans. The government has you covered. In a month, I spend 144,000 on mortgage, 36,000 on maintenance, about 15,000 on electric + gas (total), about 3,000 on water, about 5,000 on internet, about 80,000 on food for 2 adults, 60,000 for "allowance" for myself and wife, 3,000 on phone (LINE mobile!!! If you go through SoftBank or docomo, or other big players, expect 10,000/month), about 150,000 on miscellaneous stuff, and try to save the rest. Let me know if I'm missing anything expense you are thinking of.
Q: 1. Do you know if unvested stocks earned in the US keep vesting in the US? 2. Understand that salary is lower, but are savings about the same in terms of dollars?
A: 1. GREAT question!! Yes!! Stock that was granted in the states continues to vest at the agreed to schedule. It will still be 100% taxed by the US, but you'll get some of it back. Taxes are such that the fraction of time spent in a country during a vest will determine how much tax goes to that country. Example: you have a 2 year vest and transfer with the last year vesting while you are in Japan. Once it vests, US takes the usual tax rate, but should return about half of that back because half of it was "earned" in Japan. Japan will then apply their tax rate to the other half. 2. No, savings is still less. Because cost of living isn't toooo drastically different, but you make a lot less,you really end up taking a bath on savings. Like, currently for my family of 3, we end up saving about 700 USD a month in cash. In the states, it would be about the same (after 3k rent and a 1k car payment...Tesla, baby), we would end up saving about the same in cash (except we'd also pad our "allowance" by an additional total of 700 bucks). Then you look at stock. 15k gross value in the RSUs in Japan vs 30-50k in the US. Pretty big difference, IMO.
Q: So if you don't speak any Japanese, could you still make it in terms of acquiring a visa? If so, how long would it take to acquire intermediate level proficiency in Japanese you think?
A: Yes, but you'll need a degree from the sciences, probably. Or 10 years experience. Intermediate level is maybe 1200 hours of study?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese-Language_Proficiency_Test#Estimated_study_time
Q: How do you feel about "Cool Biz" campaign and what is the general public opinion about it?
A: Hard to tell because I work at a US company. I'm shielded from a lot of stuff like that. 28 C is a terribly hot temperature, though, Jesus. I don't really hear it being brought up that much on the morning talk shows, but I don't watch every day. Wish I could be of more help. It's definitely not 28 degrees in my office. We absolutely have AC because we don't want our employees to needlessly suffer in order to scrape a bit off of our electric bill.
Q: Why did you wanna go to Japan in the first place?
A: It started with martial arts when I was in elementary school. Always liked Japanese food, and in high school, anime, judo, and Japanese language. But when I started studying the language, I got super into it. I've been aiming to live here since I was a teenager been 10 times before moving including a few study abroads (1 year in college, 2 weeks, and another 2 weeks in HS). I've always liked the craftsmanship that is in Japan. Watch Jiro dreams of sushi. Perfectly captures the "shokunin" spirit. That guy is like 90 and he still chases perfection. There are LOTS of examples of this, but I love that about Japan. And Tokyo is just super convenient. Trains go everywhere in the country. Don't need a car. I live 5 minutes from Meguro station. So 5 minutes away from 5 grocery stores, 2 or 3 clinics, a few dentists, a mall, transportation of course, and dozens of restaurants. Love the convenience here.
Q: How do the taxes work for US citizen? Do US citizens pay taxes twice for income earned in Japan (once in Japan and again in US)?
A: Taxes are relatively simple. You pay taxes to Japan, you report income to the US. I think once your income exceeds a certain amount (100 some odd thousand), you will be taxed on the difference of that minus taxes to Japan. So, like if the amount was 100k and you made 110k, they'd tax you if the taxes you paid to Japan on that 10k were less than the US would have taxed. But it's the diff. So if the US would have taken 3k of that 10k, but Japan took 2k, you'd owe the US 1k. So it's not that bad. Stock is way more complicated because it depends on where you were for the duration of the vest and where it was granted. For example, I had a 4 year vest and moved to Japan in year 3. The third year, I had "earned" that 2 years in the US and 1 in Japan. So the US took more taxes. I mean, the second it vests, the US takes their full tax rate, but they'll give a bunch back at tax season. And Japan will take some of that. You usually come out on top somehow. Like, last year, I had 60k or something vesting. I got back 12k from the US and had to pay Japan 5k. The US had initially taken about 16k of that 60k. The percentage of tax paid depends on how long you were in a given country during the vest. Negotiate a tax accountant into your contract. My employer uses another company and I don't have calculate all this shit. I only know it because I want to know how it works, so I ask my accountants a bunch of annoying questions. Once you start getting grants in Japan, no money is taken at vest, and you pay Japan for taxes on the vest value in January.
Q: My wife and Iove Japan very much, we’ve always talked about “living there for some years”. However we have 2 kids (less than 3 years) and I’m concerned it would be hard for them. Since you mentioned that your kid, do you think moving there is a bad idea ?
A: It depends. If you are already doing parenting on hard mode instead of support network mode, I think it won't be much different. I know someone who went from Tokyo back to the US, but moved back for the same reason: lack of support. I think it would be harder on you than them. Just make sure you bring English books and media. Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon have a decent amount of kids programming here that is in English as well.
submitted by rice_otaku to AskEngineers [link] [comments]

Crypterra: Most common mistakes people make when joining.

Some quick tips:
1) Understand what to mine:
Please use a mining calculator to verify which coin is the right for you, https://coinwarz.com good mining calculator for ETH/LTC/BTC. Everyone is joining the BTC hype, but do they realize that there are a lot of people stuck in the 12k-19k BTC range? https://www.tradingview.com/x/veTUpi9n/, chart looks like we will need a lot of new money in Bitcoin in order to make new highs, maybe some future news about the Lighting Network could trigger the move.
BTC Profitability increases when mining difficulty decreases (https://btc.com/stats/diff) and when price increases (https://coinmarketcap.com/). Given the future projections of difficulty and current chart coin investors should consider mining Ethereum given the bullishness of the chart (https://www.tradingview.com/x/YlvNfhcJ/) and the +50% move since mid December.
2) How to reduce payment fees: I originally bought 5 TH/s with Bitcoin and paid almost $30 in fees while transferring from Exxodus to Crypterra. Paid 5 TH/s with LTC and only paid 6.86 in fees. If your going to invest more than $500 in Crypterra I highly suggest you use Litecoin to avoid the insane amounts of BTC transfer fee. The transaction will be cheaper and also faster since there are almost 145,000 BTC transactions pending in the blockchain.
3) Missing Hashpower : Lots of people have been complaining about not receiving hashpower after sending payment. I had the same problem when I paid with BTC, it took 9 days for my hashpower to show. I did not have the same problem when I paid with Litecoin (LTC).
4) Understand the risk: As with any investment you need to manage risk, invest only what you can afford to lose. I started with $500 I had to wait 11 days for my first payout, (9 for my hash power to appear + 1.5 mining for $10), the 20 TH/s special is good but don't feel forced to buy into it.
If you want to join Crypterra, educate yourself on the topic and join me https://crypterra.net/?code=CR8960
submitted by gyferlotus to Crypterra [link] [comments]

IRC Log from Ravencoin Open Developer Meeting - Aug 10, 2018

[16:01] <@Wolfsokta> Todays topics: DGW implementation, segfault, Q&A, feedback on IRC
[16:01] <@Wolfsokta> Just to set the stage here, this is a developer meeting where developers that have contributed source code to the Ravencoin project can meet and chat about items they are working on. Please be respectful to one another. For the sake of staying on target, please limit interactions to questions and comments on code or projects that you are working on. Any time left over at the end can be opened up for general Q&A.
[16:02] <@Wolfsokta> FYI - I'm RavencoinDev, and lets get started.
[16:03] <@Wolfsokta> @Tron, can you talk about where we are at with DGW on testnet and mainnet?
[16:03] <@Tron> Sure.
[16:03] can someone volunteer to take notes and post also?
[16:03] <@Tron> We are building binaries that will activate DGW-180 at block 338778
[16:04] <@Tron> It looks back 180 blocks to calculate the diff.
[16:04] I will copy the text from the meeting into a file that can be archived later. I can also make summary notes after like BTC core does.
[16:04] I'll save a log of the whole meeting and can post it on the subreddit thread.
[16:04] <@Wolfsokta> We have setup testnet4 in order to test the new binaries.
[16:04] great
[16:05] <@Wolfsokta> We plan to release the binaries later today.
[16:05] @Tron have you looked into the timestamp attack concerns of DGW?
[16:05] https://github.com/zawy12/difficulty-algorithms/issues/30
[16:06] <@Tron> Yes. And for that reason, we've tightened up the timestamps that will be accepted for valid blocks.
[16:06] <@Tron> Moved from 2h to 12 minutes.
[16:06] nice
[16:06] Oh wow okay
[16:06] <@Tron> Its also the reason we went from 60 blocks (lookback) to 180 blocks.
[16:07] why would 2h ever be acceptable? lol
[16:07] 2h was originally used for daylight savings shenanigans I believe
[16:07] <@Tron> It was from bitcoin, and it factors in clock skew, and variance in finding blocks on 10 minute intervals, and block propagation time.
[16:07] makes sense
[16:08] what about the segmentation fault when reindexing?
[16:08] any fix yet?
[16:08] @Tron 12 minutes seems to be pretty small window for clock skew
[16:08] I assume it was chosen due to 1/10th scaling from BTC?
[16:09] <@Wolfsokta> Not yet ruski, we'll cover that in a bit.
[16:09] <@Tron> We did divide existing by 10.
[16:10] <@Wolfsokta> Any further questions about DGW on testnet or on mainnet?
[16:10] What block is it activating on mainnet?
[16:10] <@Wolfsokta> 338778
[16:11] And will there be the need to update binaries twice (for DGW fork and asset layer fork)?
[16:11] <@Tron> We are activating DGW by block height because headers sync first, and the BIP9 activation flag sets a flag, and we need to look at either block height or version to know which diff algo.
[16:11] <@Wolfsokta> Calculated to be near the end of the month so we have some time with DGW on testnet.
[16:11] Someone on discord asked this a while back, but why Was DGW chosen over something like digishield or anyother algo
[16:11] <@Tron> And block version can be changed (tampering) and still make it on the chain.
[16:12] Binaries will need to be updated as more asset layer stuff get completed and tested. Not by the end of the month though.
[16:12] <@Tron> We looked at DGW and LWMA. LWMA has a lot of constants that must be tuned right.
[16:13] <@Tron> We were impressed with the amount of work on LWMA to analyze how it responds, but it wasn't straightforward to understand the nuances of how/why it works.
[16:13] zawy was in the #development channel on Discord. He's an expert on DAAs. I'm sure he would help with tuning LWMA if you asked.
[16:14] <@Tron> Either will be much better that what we have. Even at the extremes, it will adjust smoothly.
[16:14] Are there any issues or comments on the DGW code that should be addressed?
[16:14] @devs in general
[16:15] <@Wolfsokta> Thanks @brianmct, we did look extensively at the DGW code to ensure we weren't going to see the same issues that happened to Verge.
[16:16] so i guess you would have to make way more blocks with false timestamps to be able to exploit our version of dgw right?
[16:16] because of the 12 minute timestamp thing?
[16:16] <@Wolfsokta> With X16R, and with the changes Tron talked about we feel confident that this will address the swings without being able to be exploited.
[16:17] nice
[16:17] @russki Yeah, pretty much.
[16:17] verge is a different type of situation - but overall asics and mining are a risk always
[16:18] <@Wolfsokta> Okay, anything else on the difficulty targeting change?
[16:19] <@Wolfsokta> Cool, blondfrogs wanted to talk about subassets that were added.
[16:19] ooh yeah i saw those github commits
[16:19] looking good
[16:19] We also want to let everyone know that you can now create sub assets with the new binaries that will be posted soon. You can create these subassets using the issue rpc call. Qt will be built shortly. This will allow users to make an asset PARENT
[16:20] <@Wolfsokta> Basic overview. If you own an asset you can create sub-assets by including a '/
[16:20] nice
[16:20] And then make any of the following PARENT/A PARENT/B .... PARENT/Z
[16:20] <@Tron> We'll post a FAQ on assets later today.
[16:21] <@Wolfsokta> And it only is 100 Raven for a subasset
[16:21] on testnetv4 it still says asset activation status: waiting
[16:21] why?
[16:21] <@Tron> Yep, it needs to be voted in.
[16:21] <@Wolfsokta> We wanted to test the BIP9 activation process again as well. The more testing the better.
[16:21] We wanted to make sure that we follow the same process the Mainnet is going to go through.
[16:21] ok nice
[16:22] <@Wolfsokta> Any questions about subassets?
[16:23] are they unique?
[16:23] <@Tron> No
[16:23] <@Wolfsokta> Yes, they behave the same way as a normal asset, just live under an owned asset.
[16:23] <@Tron> Maybe I misunderstood the question. Unique with parent.
[16:23] Each subasset can have their own number issued? So PARENT/A can have 1,000 and PARENT/B can be 50?
[16:23] yes
[16:23] oooh ok that makes more sense
[16:23] <@Wolfsokta> Exactly thanks traysi
[16:24] <@Tron> And, not the same thing as "Unique Assets"
[16:24] <@Wolfsokta> The individual unique asset support is included in an upcoming phase.
[16:25] Moving onto the Segfault issue ----------------------->>>>>>>>>>> SEGFAULT
[16:25] Are we able to changes the properties of subassets after they have been created? Or is something like that specified when creating them?
[16:25] <@Tron> Yes
[16:25] can sub-assets be reassigned to other addresses while retaining control of the parent asset elsewhere?
[16:25] So basically it has all the features of a normal asset, but live under an asset's top-level namespace?
[16:25] satoshi corbie @russkidooski
[16:25] So basically it has all the features of a normal asset, but live under an asset's top-level namespace?
[16:26] <@Tron> Sub-assets are identical to assets after creation.
[16:26] <@Tron> Just cheaper to create, and in your "owned" namespace.
[16:26] Okay cool
[16:26] will subassets eventually have a unqiue tag? eg ASSET/SUB:1
[16:26] We have found an issue with our testnet binaries and are still looking to the issue. The issue presents itself when a user performs a reindexing of the chain. We think we have pinpointed the where the problem is and are currently working a fix. This fix will be out shortly.
[16:26] plan is to make default reissue=true and units=0 and allow increase in units on reissue
[16:26] How much is it going to be for a sub-asset?
[16:27] 100
[16:27] <@Wolfsokta> Okay, let's now focus on the SegFault issue that was discovered by Under.
[16:28] do you know what the issue was?
[16:28] <@Wolfsokta> It seems to be a build problem with the boost library.
[16:28] Still looking into though. :)
[16:29] <@Wolfsokta> We have been able to reproduce it on linux internally with 2.0.3
[16:29] yea i get the same issue on windows 10
[16:30] I saw a Bitcoin thread a while back about the seg fault error. I had it because I had conflicting versions of BDB
[16:30] static compiled on ubuntu 18.04
[16:30] <@Wolfsokta> We really appreciate you guys pulling down master and helping test.
[16:30] @Trap we will look into that also
[16:30] no problem, im just curious lol
[16:32] <@Wolfsokta> We haven't been able to build a windows version that doesn't have the segfault issue.
[16:32] <@Tron> We're dropping Windows support ;)
[16:32] lol
[16:33] Just finished setting up a new Windows test environment so we can test and validate the solution as we are working on it.
[16:33] The bdb issue is a known issue that has been around for some time. We are pretty certain it is a boost library issue, and are working quickly to get a windows build that fixes the issue.
[16:34] what did you guys do to fix the linux version?
[16:34] Once we have binaries for all supported platforms ready, hopefully tonight. No promises. We will make an announcement
[16:34] The issue has been fixed on Linux and Mac though?
[16:34] (oops sorry already answered)
[16:34] <@Wolfsokta> If anybody else gets there first with Windows please let us know what you found.
[16:34] Built the binairies on a Ubuntu 16.04 box.
[16:34] that was it?
[16:35] Yeah, we think so. 16.04 has boost 1.58 which seems to fix the issue. The build on 18.04 use boost 1.67 which seems to cause the issue.
[16:35] is there a boost 1.58 repo on 18.04?
[16:35] 18.04 used 1.65***
[16:36] I've built with boost 1.68 on arch Linux
[16:36] It worked
[16:37] wallet 2.0.x?
[16:37] @Trap, the issue is when -reindex is used.
[16:37] Oh sorry my bad
[16:37] Wallet 2.0.3
[16:38] <@Wolfsokta> For those that joined late we're discussing https://github.com/RavenProject/Ravencoin/issues/208
[16:38] 1 sec im going to boot into ubuntu and try compiling with 1.58 on 18.04
[16:39] Any other questions pertaining to the segfault?
[16:40] <@Wolfsokta> Alright, thanks everybody. Before we start the Q&A I would like to get some quick feedback on using IRC for this meeting.
[16:41] If we're going to use IRC we should take some measures to at least hide people's IPs when they join
[16:42] Yea. It is very hard to read this back.
[16:42] Also no message history
[16:42] If you disconnect and reconnect
[16:42] <@Tron> I'll throw in a vote for Discord.
[16:43] <@Wolfsokta> If you use a decent IRC client instead of the website it's not bad.
[16:43] Some of us used a VPN before we connected to IRC
[16:43] If needed we can restrict channel to Developer roles, etc for the developer meeting and open it up for general Q&A
[16:43] https://www.strawpoll.me/16247952
[16:43] poll
[16:43] Make a discord when only mods can submit links
[16:43] Where*
[16:45] Discord won the poll 5 to 2
[16:45] <@Wolfsokta> There are also a lot of IRC tools that can be used to track the meetings.
[16:45] we know
[16:46] <@Wolfsokta> We also want any developer to be able to speak.
[16:48] <@Wolfsokta> We're open to try Discord next week.
[16:48] <[kai]> perhaps you could even get a feed from this irc to discord?
[16:49] <[kai]> a feed would enable discordians to view the chat, but only contribute if they take the extra steps to come here.
[16:49] <@Wolfsokta> That's a good idea kai... Has anybody seen that working?
[16:50] <[kai]> https://github.com/reactiflux/discord-irc
[16:50] <[kai]> im sure you could make this a one way deal.
[16:51] <@Wolfsokta> I like that idea, let's try that for next week. So we'll meet here in IRC again, but it should be broadcast to Discord.
[16:53] <@Wolfsokta> Okay, we'll go with IRC next week with the broadcast to discord and re-visit for next week.
[16:54] <@Wolfsokta> Okay, let's do open Q&A for the next few mins.
[16:54] <[kai]> just a quickey, more for my curioisty, did you look at digishield?
[16:54] <[kai]> DGW solution seems solid.
[16:55] <[kai]> was just curious if it was one of the four solutions you looked at.
[16:55] <@Wolfsokta> Tron is answering... Any others Q?
[16:55] <@Tron> We briefly looked at Digishield, but our analysis was between DGW and LWMA.
[16:55] <[kai]> right on.
[16:56] <[kai]> cheers guys, see you next time.
[16:56] OPen the gates for the last 4 minutes for any other questions?
[16:58] <@Wolfsokta> Alright, thank you all for being here today and please join the development effort with us. If you have an idea, or a fix for an issue write it up and submit a pull request.
[16:59] <@Wolfsokta> Thanks again for all those that have contributed their time and effort to make Ravencoin successful. We have the BEST community.
[16:59] ^
6:59] You devs are pretty cool
[16:59] did the burn get discussed?
[16:59] <@Wolfsokta> Special thanks to Bruce, really glad you could make it with the short notice.
[17:00] <@Tron> Thanks everyone!
submitted by __pathfinder__ to Ravencoin [link] [comments]

To arms Bitcoin community! Help us to complete this mining installation for the Zürich MoneyMuseum. We are not asking for funds. Only your expertise needed! 20$ tip if you give us the relevant clue to solve or mitigate our main problem. Nice pictures of the exhibition inside as well…

Edit:
A big thank you to all people who helped us we can now mine true pps with diff1! The people in this thread which have helped most have been awarded. I want to mention also the operator of btcmp.com denis2342 and Luke-Jr.
Actually looking at the miner screen in the Linux terminal helped a lot ;-). The pool constantly resigned to stratum with variable difficulty. We can now mine true pps with diff1. Getwork with long polling seems to be default after disabling stratum...
We will probably post again, when there is a video of the installation in action...
Again many thanks. Learned a lot.
Edit: Thank you for all the answeres so far! We will try different things now and report back. Tip bounty will be distrubuted as soon as we found out what finally does the trick. Ths could take a few days. The offerd tip will be distributed and very likeley a few others as well.
First of all, let me tell you that the Bitcoin Exhibition at the Zürich MoneyMuseum is most likely the biggest and most diverse of it’s kind. Please read more about the museum and the exhibition below.
Help us solve the following problem we experience with our “Muscle Powered Proof of Work” installation:
Me and a friend have invested a lot of time to build an installation for the Museum. It is basically a 10GHash/s miner and RapberryPi which is powered by a hand generator (Maxon DC motor with planetary gear). Here are some pictures of the installation, although not entirely put together yet. There are still some changes planned.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/0qcvl3wu4romhnt/AAAYF08lnVAy6W6KEepE7e2Ua?dl=0
Now let’s get to the core of our problem:
We are mining at the getwork diff1 pool btcmp.com as it is a true pps pool with getwork diff1. The visitors in the museum can power the generator for 2-3min and see directly how many Satoshis the "network" (actually pool but we don't want to confuse the visitors to much at that point) has given the museum for their work. This all works well so far but one problem remains. Sometimes the pool does not get a share from us for more than 40 seconds or even more than 60 in some cases. I have calculated that with 8.4 GHash/s we should find a share about every 0.5 seconds in average (diff1). I think when the pool gets a share it gets all the hashes as it then accounts for several Satoshis. Statistically we get per minute what we should get in theory. We would very much like to lower the time between the accepted shares by the pool, however. This would help to make the overall experience much smoother for the visitors.
Please look at this screenshot from MinePeon and answer some questions:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lb1jei4trc9kqe5/MinePeonScreenshot.png?dl=0
We see that we get a lot of diff1 hashes. However, only 11 shares/packages have been accepted. The Is there a possibility to set the miner SW so it submits to the pool as soon as a share is found? It seems to send them in packages which sometimes have 4-5 seconds in between but sometimes a much as 80 seconds. I would like to submit packages of hashes much more often. How can this be influenced?
What exactly are the Getworks (GW)?
What exactly are the Accepted ones (Acc)? This is where the TipBounty is. Help us to get a better Acc/diff1 ratio. Best would be 1:1.
What exactly are the rejected ones (Rej)?
What exactly are the discarded ones (Disc)?
What exactly are the difficulty one hashes (diff1)?
Now some of these questions seem very very basic but it is important for us to understand what these are and how we can influence these. We have a 1:1 correlation between the Acc and the pool side acknowledgement of shares/packages. So whenever the MinePeon shows one more for this value the pool value for last submitted share goes to “moments ago”.
Does the miner SW have a setting where we can set after how many diff1 hashes a package of hashes is sent to the pool? If no, do you have another idea why so few are sent? Ideally we would set it so the diff1 hashes are sent every 5 seconds or so, probably even more often.
Is stratum with fixed diff1 possible? If so, would it be better to use stratum?
Are there critical settings if we should know of? (we have tried --request-diff and --no-submit-stale)
We are using BFGMiner on MinePeon if that matters. We could switch to CGMiner if that would help. Any help is very much appreciated. The museum is doing a great job explaining Bitcoin basics. We had special focus on interactive learning and have several things to underline this.
I hope to hear back from you so we can improve our installation. Please don't hesitate to ask if you have further questions. We are both not mining experts.
Thanks for reading and AMA.
SimonBelmond
Current features of the Bitcoin exhibition at the Zürich MoneyMuseum:
Current Features:
  • Life screen with various stats/charts/parameters/transactions…
  • Printed infographics.
  • Muscle powered PoW: Hand generator with 5v and 3.5-5A output, Raspberry Pi, MinePeon, 5x Antminer U2+ plus a screen to show the hash-rate at the pool and/or in MinePeon web interface. This screen will not be hand powered. This installation will complement their coining die (go to 1:27 to see what I mean).
  • The Bitcoin mining evolution (CPU, GPU, FPGA, ASIC)
  • A few short (2-3 minutes) interviews.
  • Other wallets, Trezor, PiperWallet
  • ATM Prototype, functional
  • MoneyMuseum Bit-Cards
  • PiperWallet to use.
  • Casascius and other physical Bitcoins, Wallets (also some commemorative coins), Paper wallet like one out of the first Bitcoin (A)TM ever
  • Bitcoin Quiz
  • 12 Picture tours
    • Bitcoin for beginners
    • Bitcoin advanced
    • Debunking 13 Bitcoin myths
    • What you definitely have to know
    • The history of Bitcoin
    • Bitcoin und traditional forms of money
    • Alternatives to Bitcoin
    • Citations about Bitcoin
    • How do I open an account?
    • How do I get Bitcoin?
    • Bitcoin community and economy
    • Bitcoin as a platform
I see this as a good opportunity for Bitcoin, so let’s embrace it. I am especially excited to compare the traditional forms of money which used proof of work to the new money which also uses proof of work. I think in that context it will be much easier for the visitors to value this concept.
A lot of schools and other groups book guided tours at the museum. It is open on every Friday from December 05. On. Entry is free of charge.
Edit:Markdown, typos
submitted by SimonBelmond to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The Strange Birth & History of Monero, Part IV: Monero "as it is now"

You can read here part III.
You can read this whole story translated into Spanish here
This is part IV, the last but not least.
Monero - A secure, private, untreceable cryptocurrency
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.0
Notable comments in this thread:
-201: “I would like to offer 1000 MRO to the first person who creates a pool”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6422665#msg6422665)
[tacotime offers bounty to potential pool developer. Bytecoin devs haven’t released any code for pools, and the only existent pool, minergate (in the future related to BCN interests) was closed source]
-256: “Adam back seems to like CryptoNote the better than Zerocash https://twitter.com/adam3us/status/453493394472697856”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6440769#msg6440769)
-264: “update on pools: The NOMP guy (zone117x) is looking to fork his open source software and get a pool going, so one should hopefully be up soon.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6441302#msg6441302)
-273: “Update on GUI: othe from VertCoin has notified me that he is working on it.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6442606#msg6442606)
-356: “Everyone wanting a pool, please help raise a bounty with me here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=589533.0
And for the GUI:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=589561.0”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6461533#msg6461533)
[5439 MRO + 0.685 BTC + 5728555.555 BCN raised for pool and 1652 XMR, 121345.46695471 BCN for the GUI wallet. Though this wallet was "rejected" as official GUI because wallet still has to be polished before building a GUI]
-437: “Yes, most Windows users should see a higher hashrate with the new build. You can thank NoodleDoodle. ”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6481202#msg6481202)
-446: “Even faster Windows binaries have just been uploaded. Install for more hash power! Once again, it was NoodleDoodle.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6483680#msg6483680)
-448: “that almost doubled my hashrate again! GREAT STUFF !!!”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6484109#msg6484109)
-461: “Noodle only started optimization today so there may be gains for your CPU in the future.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6485247#msg6485247)
[First day of miner optimization by NoodleDoodle, it is only May 1st]
-706: “The unstoppable NoodleDoodle has optimized the Windows build again. Hashrate should more than double. Windows is now faster than Linux. :O”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6549444#msg6549444)
-753: “i here tft is no longer part of the project. so is he forking or relaunching bytecoin under new name and new parameters (merged mining with flatter emission curve.) also. what is the end consensus for the emission curve for monero. will it be adjusted."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6561345#msg6561345)
[May, 5th 2014. TFT is launching FANTOMCOIN, a clone coin which its "only" feature was merged mining]
-761: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6561941#msg6561941) [May, 5th 2014 – eizh on emission curve and tail emission]
-791: “As promised, I did Russian translation of main topic.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6565521#msg6565521)
[one among dozens of decentralized and “altruist” collaborators of Monero in minor tasks]
-827: image
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6571652#msg6571652)
-853: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6575033#msg6575033)
[some are not happy that NoodleDoodle had only released the built binaries, but not the source code]
-950: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6593768#msg6593768)
[Rias, an account suspected to be related to the Bytecoin scam, dares to tag Monero as “instamine”]
-957: “It's rather bizarre that you're calling this an "instamine" scam when you're so fervently supporting BCN, which was mined 80% before entering the clearnet. Difficulty adjustments are per block, so there is no possibility of an instamine unless you don't publish your blockchain (emission is regular at the preset interval, and scales adequately with the network hash rate). What you're accusing monero of is exactly what ByteCoin did.”
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6594025#msg6594025
[Discussion with rias drags on for SEVERAL posts]
-1016: “There is no "dev team". There is a community of people working on various aspects of the coin.
I've been keeping the repo up to date. NoodleDoodle likes to optimise his miner. TFT started the fork and also assists when things break. othe's been working on a GUI. zone117x has been working on a pool.
It's a decentralized effort to maintain the fork, not a strawman team of leet hackers who dwell in the underbellies of the internet and conspire for instamines.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6596828#msg6596828)
-1023: “Like I stated in IRC, I am not part of the "dev team", I never was. Just so happens I took a look at the code and changed some extremely easy to spot "errors". I then decided to release the binary because I thought MRO would benefit from it. I made this decision individually and nobody else should be culpable”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6597057#msg6597057)
[Noodledoodle gets rid of the instaminer accusations]
-1029: “I decided to relaunch Monero so it will suit all your wishes that you had: flatter emission curve, open source optimized miner for everybody from the start, no MM with BCN/BMR and the name. New Monero will be ready tomorrow”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6597252#msg6597252)
[people trying to capitalize mistakes is always there.]
-1030: "Pull request has been submitted and merged to update miner speed
It appears from the simplicity of the fix that there may have been deliberate crippling of the hashing algorithm from introduction with ByteCoin."
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6597460#msg6597460
[tacotime “officially” raises suspects of possible voluntarily crippled miner]
-1053: "I don't mind the 'relaunch' or the merge-mining fork or any other new coin at all. It's inevitable that the CryptoNote progresses like scrypt into a giant mess of coins. It's not undesirable or 'wrong'. Clones fighting out among themselves is actually beneficial for Monero. Although one of them is clearly unserious and trolling by choosing the same name.
Anyway, this sudden solidarity with BCN or TFT sure is strange when none of these accounts were around for the discussions that took place 3 weeks ago. Such vested interests with no prior indications. Hmm...? "
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6599013#msg6599013
[eizh points out the apparent organized fudding]
-1061: "There was no takeover. The original developer (who himself did a fork of bytecoin and around a dozen lines of code changes) was non-responsive and had disappeared. The original name had been cybersquatted all over the place (since the original developer did not even register any domain name much less create a web site), making it impossible to even create a suitably named web site. A bunch of us who didn't want to see the coin die who represented a huge share of the hash power and ownership of the coin decided to adopt it. We reached out to the original developer to participate in this community effort and he still didn't respond over 24 hours, so we decided to act to save the coin from neglect and actively work toward building the coin."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6599798#msg6599798)
[smooth defends legitimacy of current “dev team” and decisions taken]
-1074: “Zerocash will be announced soon (May 18 in Oakland? but open source may not be ready then?).
Here is a synopsis of the tradeoffs compared to CyptoNote: […]"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6602891#msg6602891)
[comparison among Zerocash y Cryptonote]
-1083: "Altcoin history shows that except in the case of premine (Tenebrix), the first implementation stays the largest by a wide margin. We're repeating that here by outpacing Bytecoin (thanks to its 80% mine prior to surfacing). No other CN coin has anywhere near the hashrate or trading volume. Go check diff in Fantom for example or the lack of activity in BCN trading.
The only CN coin out there doing something valuable is HoneyPenny, and they're open source too. If HP develops something useful, MRO can incorporate it as well. Open source gives confidence. No need for any further edge."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6603452#msg6603452)
[eizh reminds everyone the “first mover” advantage is a real advantage]
-1132: "I decided to tidy up bitmonero GitHub rep tonight, so now there is all valuable things from latest BCN commits & Win32. Faster hash from quazarcoin is also there. So BMR rep is the freshest one.
I'm working on another good feature now, so stay tuned."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6619738#msg6619738)
[first TFT apparition in weeks, he somehow pretends to still be the "lead dev"]
-1139: "This is not the github or website used by Monero. This github is outdated even with these updates. Only trust binaries from the first post."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6619971#msg6619971)
[eizh tries to clarify the community, after tft interference, which are the official downloads]
-1140: “The faster hash is from NoodleDoodle and is already submitted to the moner-project github (https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero) and included in the binaries here.
[trying to bring TFT back on board] It would be all easier if you just work together with the other guys, whats the problem? Come to irc and talk like everyone else?
[on future monero exchangers] I got confirmation from one."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6619997#msg6619997)
[8th may 2014, othe announces NoodleDoodle optimized miner is now open source, asks TFT to collaborate and communicates an exchanger is coming]
-1146: "I'll be impressed if they [BCN/TFT shills] manage to come up with an account registered before January, but then again they could buy those.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6620257#msg6620257)
[smooth]
-1150: “Ring signatures mean that when you sign a transaction to spend an output (coins), no one looking at the block chain can tell whether you signed it or one of the other outputs you choose to mix in with yours. With a mixing factor of 5 or 10 after several transactions there are millions of possible coins all mixed together. You get "anonymity" and mixing without having to use a third party mixer.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6620433#msg6620433)
[smooth answering to “what are ring signatures” in layman terms]
-1170: "Someone (C++ skilled) did private optimized miner a few days ago, he got 74H/s for i5 haswell. He pointed that mining code was very un-optimized and he did essential improvements for yourself. So, high H/S is possible yet. Can the dev's core review code for that?"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6623136#msg6623136)
[forums are talking about an individual or group of individuals with optimized miners - may 9th 2014]
-1230: "Good progress on the pool reported by NOMP dev zone117x. Stay tuned, everyone.
And remember to email your favorite exchanges about adding MRO."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6640190#msg6640190)
-1258: "This is actually as confusing to us as you. At one point, thankful_for_today said he was okay with name change: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563821.msg6368600#msg6368600
Then he disappeared for more than a week after the merge mining vote failed.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6645981#msg6645981)
[eizh on the TFT-issue]
-1358: “Jadehorse: registered on 2014-03-06 and two pages of one line posts:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=263597
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=263597;sa=showPosts
Trustnobody: registered on 2014-03-06 and two pages of one line posts:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=264292
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=264292;sa=showPosts
You guys should really just stop trying. It is quite transparent what you are doing. Or if you want to do it, do it somewhere else. Everyone else: ignore them please."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6666844#msg6666844)
[FUD campaign still ongoing, smooth battles it]
-1387: "The world’s first exchange for Monero just opened! cryptonote.exchange.to"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6675902#msg6675902)
[David Latapie announces an important milestone: exchanger is here]
-1467: "image"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6686125#msg6686125)
[it is weird, but tft appears again, apparently as if he were in a parallel reality]
-1495: “http://monero.cc/blog/monero-price-0-002-passed/”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6691706#msg6691706)
[“trading” milestone reached: monero surpassed for first time 0.002 btc price]
-1513: "There is one and only one coin, formerly called Bitmonero, now called Monero. There was a community vote in favor (despite likely ballot stuffing against). All of the major stakeholders at the time agreed with the rename, including TFT.
The code base is still called bitmonero. There is no reason to rename it, though we certainly could have if we really wanted to.
TFT said he he is sentimental about the Bitmonero name, which I can understand, so I don't think there is any malice or harm in him continuing to use it. He just posted the nice hash rate chart on here using the old name. Obviously he understands that they are one and the same coin."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6693615#msg6693615)
[Smooth clears up again the relation with TFT and BMR. Every time he appears it seems to generate confusion on newbies]
-1543: "Pool software is in testing now. You can follow the progress on the pool bounty thread (see original post on this thread for link)."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6698097#msg6698097)
-1545: "[on the tail emission debate] I've been trying to raise awareness of this issue. The typical response seems to be, "when Bitcoin addresses the problem, so will we." To me this means it will never be addressed. The obvious solution is to perpetually increase the money supply, always rewarding miners with new coins.
Tacotime mentioned a hard fork proposal to never let the block reward drop below 1 coin:
Code: if (blockReward < 1){ blockReward = 1; }
I assume this is merely delaying the problem, however. I proposed a fixed annual debasement (say 2%) with a tx fee cap of like 0.001% of the current block reward (or whatever sounds reasonable). That way we still get the spam protection without worrying about fee escalation down the road."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6698879#msg6698879)
[Johnny Mnemonic wants to debate tail emission. Debate is moved to the “Monero Economy” thread]
-1603: “My GOD,the wallet is very very wierd and too complicated to operate, Why dont release a wallet-qt as Bitcoin?”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6707857#msg6707857)
[Newbies have hard times with monero]
-1605: "because this coin is not a bitcoin clone and so there isnt a wallet-qt to just copy and release. There is a bounty for a GUI wallet and there is already an experimental windows wallet..."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6708250#msg6708250)
-1611: "I like this about Monero, but it seems it was written by cryptographers, not programmers. The damned thing doesn't even compile on Arch, and there are several bugs, like command history not working on Linux. The crypto ideas are top-notch, but the implementation is not."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6709002#msg6709002)
[Wolf0, a miner developer, little by little joining the community]
-1888: "http://198.199.79.100 (aka moneropool.org) successfully submitted a block. Miners will be paid for their work once payments start working.
P.S. This is actually our second block today. The first was orphaned. :/"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6753836#msg6753836)
[May 16th: first pool block]
-1927: "Botnets aren't problem now. The main problem is a private hi-performance miner"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6759622#msg6759622)
-1927: "Evidence?"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6759661#msg6759661)
[smooth about the private optimized miner]
-1937: “[reference needed: smooth battling the weak evidence of optimized miner] Yes, I remember that. Some person on the Internet saying that some other unnamed person said he did something hardly constitutes evidence.
I'm not even doubting that optimized asm code could make a big difference. Just not sure how to know whether this is real or not. Rumors and FUD are rampant, so it is just hard to tell."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6760040#msg6760040)
[smooth does not take the "proof" seriously]
-1949: "image
One i5 and One e5 connected to local pool:
image"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6760624#msg6760624)
[proof of optimized miner]
-1953: "lazybear are you interested in a bounty to release the source code (maybe cleaned up a bit?) your optimized miner? If not, I'll probably play around with the code myself tomorrow and see if I can come up with something, or maybe Noodle Doodle will take an interest."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6760699#msg6760699)
[smooth tries to bring lazybear and his optimized miner on board]
-1957: "smooth, NoodleDoodle just said on IRC his latest optimizations are 4x faster on Windows. Untested on Linux so far but he'll push the source to the git repo soon. We'll be at 1 million network hashrate pretty soon."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6760814#msg6760814)
[eizh makes publics NoodleDoodle also has more miner optimizations ready]
-1985: “Someone (not me) created a Monero block explorer and announced it yesterday in a separate thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=611561.0”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6766206#msg6766206)
[May 16th, 2014: a functional block explorer]
-2018: “Noodle is doing some final tests on Windows and will begin testing on Linux. He expects hashrate should increase across all architectures. I can confirm a 5x increase on an i7 quad-core + Windows 7 64-bit.
Please be patient. These are actual changes to the program, not just a switch that gets flicked on. It needs testing.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6770093#msg6770093)
[eizh has more info on last miner optimization]
-2023: “Monero marketcap is around $300,000 as of now”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6770365#msg6770365)
-2059: I was skeptical of this conspiracy theory at first but after thinking about the numbers and looking back at the code again, I'm starting to believe it.
These are not deep optimizations, just cleaning up the code to work as intended.
At 100 H/s, with 500k iterations, 70 cycles per L3 memory access, we're now at 3.5 GHz which is reasonably close. So the algorithm is finally memory-bound, as it was originally intended to be. But as delivered by the bytecode developers not even close.
I know this is going to sound like tooting our own horn but this is another example of the kind of dirty tricks you can expect from the 80% premine crowd and the good work being done in the name of the community by the Monero developers.
Assuming they had the reasonable, and not deoptimized, implementation of the algorithm as designed all along (which is likely), the alleged "two year history" of bytecoin was mined on 4-8 PCs. It's really one of the shadiest and sleaziest premines scams yet, though this shouldn't be surprising because in every type of scam, the scams always get sneakier and more deceptive over time (the simple ones no longer work)."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6773168#msg6773168)
[smooth blowing the lid: if miner was so de-optimized, then BCN adoption was even lower than initially thought]
-2123: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6781481#msg6781481)
[fluffypony first public post in Monero threads]
-2131: "moneropool.org is up to 2KHs, (average of 26Hs per user). But that's still only 0.3% of the reported network rate of 575Khs.
So either a large botnet is mining, or someone's sitting quietly on a much more efficient miner and raking in MRO."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6782192#msg6782192)
[with pools users start to notice that “avg” users account for a very small % of the network hashrate, either botnets or a super-optimized miner is mining monero]
-2137: “I figure its either:
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6782852#msg6782852)
-2192: “New source (0.8.8.1) is up with optimizations in the hashing. Hashrate should go up ~4x or so, but may have CPU architecture dependence. Windows binaries are up as well for both 64-bit and 32-bit."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6788812#msg6788812)
[eizh makes official announce of last miner optimization, it is may 17th]
-2219: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6792038#msg6792038)
[wolf0 is part of the monero community for a while, discussing several topics as botnet mining and miner optimizations. Now spots security flaws in the just launched pools]
-2301: "5x optimized miner released, network hashrate decreases by 10% Make your own conclusions. :|"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6806946#msg6806946)
-2323: "Monero is on Poloniex https://poloniex.com/exchange/btc_mro"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6808548#msg6808548)
-2747: "Monero is holding a $500 logo contest on 99designs.com now: https://99designs.com/logo-design/contests/monero-mro-cryptocurrency-logo-design-contest-382486"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6829109#msg6829109)
-2756: “So... ALL Pools have 50KH/s COMBINED.
Yet, network hash is 20x more. Am i the only one who thinks that some people are insta mining with prepared faster miners?”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6829977#msg6829977)
-2757: “Pools aren't stable yet. They are more inefficient than solo mining at the moment. They were just released. 10x optimizations have already been released since launch, I doubt there is much more optimization left.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6830012#msg6830012)
-2765: “Penalty for too large block size is disastrous in the long run.
Once MRO value increases a lot, block penalties will become more critical of an issue. Pools will fix this issue by placing a limit on number and size of transactions. Transaction fees will go up, because the pools will naturally accept the most profitable transactions. It will become very expensive to send with more than 0 mixin. Anonymity benefits of ring signatures are lost, and the currency becomes unusable for normal transactions.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6830475#msg6830475)
-2773: "The CryptoNote developers didn't want blocks getting very large without genuine need for it because it permits a malicious attack. So miners out of self-interest would deliberately restrict the size, forcing the network to operate at the edge of the penalty-free size limit but not exceed it. The maximum block size is a moving average so over time it would grow to accommodate organic volume increase and the issue goes away. This system is most broken when volume suddenly spikes."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6830710#msg6830710)
-3035: "We've contributed a massive amount to the infrastructure of the coin so far, enough to get recognition from cryptonote, including optimizing their hashing algorithm by an order of magnitude, creating open source pool software, and pushing several commits correcting issues with the coin that eventually were merged into the ByteCoin master. We also assisted some exchange operators in helping to support the coin.
To say that has no value is a bit silly... We've been working alongside the ByteCoin devs to improve both coins substantially."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6845545#msg6845545)
[tacotime defends the Monero team and community of accusations of just “ripping-off” others hard-work and “steal” their project]
-3044: "image"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6845986#msg6845986)
[Monero added to coinmarketcap may 21st 2014]
-3059: "You have no idea how influential you have been to the success of this coin. You are a great ambassador for MRO and one of the reasons why I chose to mine MRO during the early days (and I still do, but alas no soup for about 5 days now)."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6846509#msg6846509)
[random user thanks smooth CONSTANT presence, and collaboration. It is not all FUD ;)]
-3068: "You are a little too caught up in the mindset of altcoin marketing wars about "unique features" and "the team" behind the latest pump and dump scam.
In fact this coin is really little more than BCN without the premine. "The team" is anyone who contributes code, which includes anyone contributing code to the BCN repository, because that will get merged as well (and vice-versa).
Focus on the technology (by all accounts amazing) and the fact that it was launched in a clean way without 80% of the total world supply of the coin getting hidden away "somewhere." That is the unique proposition here. There also happens to be a very good team behind the coin, but anyone trying too hard to market on the basis of some "special" features, team, or developer is selling you something. Hold on to your wallet."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6846638#msg6846638)
[An answer to those trolls saying Monero has no innovation/unique feature]
-3070: "Personally I found it refreshing that Monero took off WITHOUT a logo or a gui wallet, it means the team wasn't hyping a slick marketing package and is concentrating on the coin/note itself."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6846676#msg6846676)
-3119: “image
[included for the lulz]
-3101: "[…]The main developers are tacotime, smooth, NoodleDoodle. Some needs are being contracted out, including zone117x, LucasJones, and archit for the pool, another person for a Qt GUI, and another person independently looking at the code for bugs."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6848006#msg6848006)
[the initial "core team" so far, eizh post]
-3123: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6850085#msg6850085)
[fluffy steps-in with an interesting dense post. Don’t dare to skip it, worthwhile reading]
-3127: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6850526#msg6850526)
[fluffy again, worth to read it too, so follow link, don’t be lazy]
-3194: "Hi guys - thanks to lots of hard work we have added AES-NI support to the slow_hash function. If you're using an AES-NI processor you should see a speed-up of about 30%.”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6857197#msg6857197)
[flufflypony is now pretty active in the xmr topic and announces a new optimization to the crippled miner]
-3202: "Whether using pools or not, this coin has a lot of orphaned blocks. When the original fork was done, several of us advised against 60 second blocks, but the warnings were not heeded.
I'm hopeful we can eventually make a change to more sane 2- or 2.5-minute blocks which should drastically reduce orphans, but that will require a hard fork, so not that easy."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6857796#msg6857796)
[smooth takes the opportunity to remember the need of bigger target block]
-3227: “Okay, optimized miner seems to be working: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=619373”
[wolf0 makes public his open source optimized miner]
-3235: "Smooth, I agree block time needs to go back to 2 minutes or higher. I think this and other changes discussed (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=597878.msg6701490#msg6701490) should be rolled into a single hard fork and bundled with a beautiful GUI wallet and mining tools."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6861193#msg6861193)
[tail emission, block target and block size are discussed in the next few messages among smooth, johnny and others. If you want to know further about their opinions/reasonings go and read it]
-3268: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6862693#msg6862693)
[fluffy dares another user to bet 5 btc that in one year monero will be over dash in market cap. A bet that he would have lost as you can see here https://coinmarketcap.com/historical/20150524/ even excluding the 2M “instamined” coins]
-3283: "Most of the previous "CPU only" coins are really scams and the developers already have GPU miner or know how to write one. There are a very few exceptions, almost certainly including this one.
I don't expect a really dominant GPU miner any time soon, maybe ever. GPUs are just computers though, so it is certainly possible to mine this on a GPU, and there probably will be a some GPU miner, but won't be so much faster as to put small scale CPU miners out of business (probably -- absent some unknown algorithmic flaw).
Everyone focuses on botnets because it has been so long since regular users were able to effectively mine a coin (due to every coin rapidly going high end GPU and ASIC) that the idea that "users" could vastly outnumber "miners" (botnet or otherwise) isn't even on the radar.
The vision here is a wallet that asks you when you want to install: "Do you want to devote some of you CPU power to help secure the network. You will be eligible to receive free coins as a reward (recommended) [check box]." Get millions of users doing that and it will drive down the value of mining to where neither botnets nor professional/industrial miners will bother, and Satoshi's original vision of a true p2p currency will be realized.
That's what cryptonote wants to accomplish with this whole "egalitarian mining" concept. Whether it succeeds I don't know but we should give it a chance. Those cryptonote guys seem pretty smart. They've probably thought this through better than any of us have."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6863720#msg6863720)
[smooth vision of a true p2p currency]
-3318: "I have a screen shot that was PMed to me by someone who paid a lot of money for a lot of servers to mine this coin. He won't be outed by me ever but he does in fact exist. Truth."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6865061#msg6865061)
[smooth somehow implies it is not botnets but an individual or a group of them renting huge cloud instances]
-3442: "I'm happy to report we've successfully cracked Darkcoin's network with our new quantum computers that just arrived from BFL, a mere two weeks after we ordered them."
[fluffy-troll]
-3481: “Their slogan is, "Orphaned Blocks, Bloated Blockchain, that's how we do""
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6878244#msg6878244)
[Major FUD troll in the topic. One of the hardest I’ve ever seen]
-3571: "Tacotime wanted the thread name and OP to use the word privacy instead of anonymity, but I made the change for marketing reasons. Other coins do use the word anonymous improperly, so we too have to play the marketing game. Most users will not bother looking at details to see which actually has more privacy; they'll assume anonymity > privacy. In a world with finite population, there's no such thing as anonymity. You're always "1 of N" possible participants.
Zero knowledge gives N -> everyone using the currency, ring signatures give N -> your choice, and CoinJoin gives N -> people who happen to be spending around the same amount of money as you at around the same time. This is actually the critical weakness of CoinJoin: the anonymity set is small and it's fairly susceptible to blockchain analysis. Its main advantage is that you can stick to Bitcoin without hard forking.
Another calculated marketing decision: I made most of the OP about ring signatures. In reality, stealth addressing (i.e. one-time public keys) already provides you with 90% of the privacy you need. Ring signatures are more of a trump card that cannot be broken. But Bitcoin already has manual stealth addressing so the distinguishing technological factor in CryptoNote is the use of ring signatures.
This is why I think having a coin based on CoinJoin is silly: Bitcoin already has some privacy if you care enough. A separate currency needs to go way beyond mediocre privacy improvements and provide true indistinguishably. This is true thanks to ring signatures: you can never break the 1/N probability of guessing correctly. There's no additional circumstantial evidence like with CoinJoin (save for IP addresses, but that's a problem independent of cryptocurrencies)."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6883525#msg6883525)
[Anonymity discussions, specially comparing Monero with Darkcoin and its coinjoin-based solution, keep going on]
-3593: "Transaction fees should be a fixed percentage of the block reward, or at the very least not be controllable by the payer. If payers can optionally pay more then it opens the door for miner discrimination and tx fee bidding wars."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6886770#msg6886770)
[Johnny Mnemonic is a firm defender of fixed fees and tail emission: he see the “fee market” as big danger to the usability of cryptocurrencies]
-3986: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6930412#msg6930412)
[partnership with i2p]
-4373: “Way, way faster version of cpuminer: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=619373”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6993812#msg6993812)
[super-optimized miner is finally leaked to the public. Now the hashrate is 100 times bigger than originally with crippled miner. The next hedge for "cloud farmers" is GPU mining]
-4877: “1. We have a logo! If you use Monero in any of your projects, you can grab a branding pack here. You can also see it in all its glory right here:
logo […] 4. In order to maintain ISO 4217 compliance, we are changing our ticker symbol from MRO to XMR effective immediately."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg7098497#msg7098497)
[Jun 2nd 2014]
-5079: “First GPU miner: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=638915.0”
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg7130160#msg7130160)
[4th June: Claymore has developed the first CryptoNight open source and publicly available GPU miner]
-5454: "New update to my miner - up to 25% hash increase. Comment and tell me how much of an increase you got from it: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=632724"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg7198061#msg7198061)
[miner optimization is an endless task]
-5464: "I have posted a proposal for fixed subsidy:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=597878.msg7202538#msg7202538"
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg7202776#msg7202776)
[Nice charts and discussion proposed by tacotime, worth reading it]
-5658: "- New seed nodes added. - Electrum-style deterministic wallets have been added to help in the recovery of your wallet should you ever need to. It is enabled by default."
(https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg7234475#msg7234475)
[Now you can recover your wallet with a 24 word seed]
-5726: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg7240623#msg7240623)
[Bitcoin Pizza in monero version: a 2500 XMR picture sale (today worth ~$20k)]
-6905: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg7386715#msg7386715)
[Monero missives: CryptoNote peer review starts whitepaper reviewed)]
-7328: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg7438333#msg7438333)
[android monero widget built]
This is a dense digest of the first several thousand messages on the definitive Monero thread.
A lot of things happened in this stressful days and most are recorded here. It can be summarized in this:
  • 28th April: Othe and zone117x assume the GUI wallet and CN pools tasks.
  • 30th April: First NoodleDoodle's miner optimization.
  • 11th May: First Monero exchanger
  • 13th May: Open source pool code is ready.
  • 16th May: First pool mined block.
  • 19th May: Monero in poloniex
  • 20th May: Monero +1100 bitcoin 24h trading volume in Poloniex.
  • 21st May: New official miner optimization x4 speed (accumulated optimization x12-x16). Open source wolf0's CPU miner released.
  • 25th May: partnership with i2p
  • 28th May: The legendary super-optimized miner is leaked. Currently running x90 original speed. Hedge of the "cloud farmers" is over in the cpu mining.
  • 2nd June: Monero at last has a logo. Ticker symbol changes to the definitive XMR (former MRO)
  • 4th June: Claymore's open source GPU miner.
  • 10th June: Monero's "10,000 bitcoin pizza" (2500 XMR paintig). Deterministic seed-based wallets (recover wallet with a 24 word seed)
  • March 2015 – tail emission added to code
  • March 2016 – monero hard forks to 2 min block and doubles block reward
There basically two things in here that can be used to attack Monero:
  • Crippled miner Gave unfair advantage to those brave enough to risk money and time to optimize and mine Monero.
  • Fast curve emission non-bitcoin-like curve as initially advertised and as it was widely accepted as suitable
Though we have to say two things to support current Monero community and devs:
  • The crippled miner was coded either by Bytecoin or CryptoNote, and 100% solved within a month by Monero community
  • The fast curve emission was a TFT miscalculation. He forgot to consider that as he was halving the block target he was unintentionally doubling the emission rate.
submitted by el_hispano to Monero [link] [comments]

Hashstrom New Free Bitcoin cloudminer Site 2020  0.005 ... Beginner's guide to solo bitcoin and litecoin mining ... Gekkoscience NewPac - USB BTC Mining (100 GH/s + on ... New LiteCoin Mining Site 2020 / Earn 0.009 BTC Daily / WithOut Investment / Technical Bhatti Bitcoin Mining Machine

Bitcoin is the first digital object that cannot be copied, duplicated, pirated or forged. Those are the primary attributes that give its unique value. Bitcoin is the first digitally scarce thing known to mankind, and within its inner workings is a Mathematical mechanism that should make Bitcoin's value continue to rise. Each bitcoin is mined from so-called "blocks". A block is a 1MB piece of ... An easy to use crypto-currency finance utility used to calculate a Bitcoin miner's potential profits in ETH and multiple fiat currencies. The calculator fetches price and network data from the internet and only requires the hash rate (speed of mining) from the user. A projected future profit chart is created dynamically and displayed instantly. Calculate Bytecoin (BCN) mining profitability in realtime based on hashrate, power consumption and electricity cost. BCN exchange rates, mining pools. Bitcoin Mining Calculator Englisch: Mit dem "Bitcoin Mining Calculator" errechnen Sie, ob Bitcoin Mining für Sie rentabel wäre, Accurate Bitcoin mining calculator trusted by millions of cryptocurrency miners since May 2013 - developed by an OG Bitcoin miner looking to maximize on mining profits and calculate ROI for new ASIC miners. Updated in 2020, the newest version of the Bitcoin mining calculator makes it simple and easy to quickly calculate mining profitability for your Bitcoin mining hardware.

[index] [30393] [1026] [6925] [46664] [1115] [32012] [20480] [33149] [47586] [17780]

Hashstrom New Free Bitcoin cloudminer Site 2020 0.005 ...

New video every Tuesday! Today we are taking a look at the Gekkoscience NewPac USB miner. We'll check all the hardware you need for setting it up, discuss so... Bitcoin basics: What is the difficulty target and how does it adjust itself? - Duration: 7:12. Keifer Kif 4,471 views. 7:12. Bitmain Antminer Z9 Mini ASIC Miner - Thoughts, Review, & Setup Guide ... Diff between soft wear and hard wear. This video is unavailable. This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue Hashstrom New Free Bitcoin cloudminer Site 2019 0.005 Btc Payment Proof Zero Invest website link https://hashstorm.digital/?ref=1190 btc mining calculator ...

#