Topic: [1050 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff] - page 337. (Read 837101 times)
January 18, 2012, 02:15:33 PM
January 18, 2012, 02:09:57 PM
They appear to be running at half that.
Time for a BitMinter rise to power?
Time for a BitMinter rise to power?
January 18, 2012, 01:48:05 PM
We may wish to petition the mods for getting stickied as a top 10 pool.
It looks like ozcoin is ~20GH/s and is still stickied.
On edit: looks like their 24 hour avg is 85GH/s and their 7 day avg is 200 GH/s. Maybe we shouldn't contact admin yet but we should keep an eye on it.
It looks like ozcoin is ~20GH/s and is still stickied.
On edit: looks like their 24 hour avg is 85GH/s and their 7 day avg is 200 GH/s. Maybe we shouldn't contact admin yet but we should keep an eye on it.
January 17, 2012, 07:22:57 PM
My opinion is we stay with BTC/NMC, I have no interest in any other coins
January 17, 2012, 05:52:11 PM
litecoin mining at least makes more sense than mining bitcoins with the cpu, as currently implemented in bitminter miner app. I think its an okay way to introduce people to the concept, and its nice to be able to mine several coins per hour rather than per year, even though they are close to worthless. Think of if as a testnet.
As for merged mining other coins; meh. From a miner's profit motive, its really not worth it. And to support those chains, I havent seen any one I feel like worth supporting, with the possible exception of namecoin, but thats already implemented (and not worth it anymore either from a profit POV).
As for merged mining other coins; meh. From a miner's profit motive, its really not worth it. And to support those chains, I havent seen any one I feel like worth supporting, with the possible exception of namecoin, but thats already implemented (and not worth it anymore either from a profit POV).
January 17, 2012, 03:37:58 PM
Please don't make me heartbroken Haribo as I know I will be if I lose this pool.
Stales are pretty much extinct here and I'd prefer for it to stay this way.
How about staying true to the old *nix paradigm "Do One Thing and Do It Well"?
Alternative *coins are basically worthless and I don't think anyone actually gives a rat's ass about them.
Litecoin is laughable trying to coexist with Bitcoin. Current btc-e price is 1200 LTC for one BTC.
This CPU-based coin is apparently mined by kids trying to make use of their mining rigs' CPUs forgetting that CPUs use power as well.
Stales are pretty much extinct here and I'd prefer for it to stay this way.
How about staying true to the old *nix paradigm "Do One Thing and Do It Well"?
Alternative *coins are basically worthless and I don't think anyone actually gives a rat's ass about them.
Litecoin is laughable trying to coexist with Bitcoin. Current btc-e price is 1200 LTC for one BTC.
This CPU-based coin is apparently mined by kids trying to make use of their mining rigs' CPUs forgetting that CPUs use power as well.
January 17, 2012, 02:35:52 PM
Any thoughts, everyone? Devcoin? Litecoin? Others?
None of the above. There is always a cost. Merged mining isn't free for the pool operator. It takes time, introduces bugs, requires testing, likely new pages/reports, etc.
Time & resources better spent making Bitminter the best Bitcoin pool.
January 17, 2012, 01:41:41 PM
I think it could be cool to have some more coins or other bitcoin-like commodities in the pool. But I just wish the bitcoin clones would have some real purpose and novel features. Well, maybe I'm mixing up purpose and profitability?
Any thoughts, everyone? Devcoin? Litecoin? Others?
I wasn't making any comment on the usefulness of devcoin, I just don't see a reason not to merge mine and sell the devcoins for a tiny bit of extra profit.Any thoughts, everyone? Devcoin? Litecoin? Others?
In terms of purpose, Litecoin looks to be the best of the alt chains, but it can't be merge-mined with Bitcoin.
January 17, 2012, 01:06:04 PM
Devcoin - I don't know if I believe in that one. A coin where some central dude gets 10% of the minted coins, and he decides how to distribute 80% of the coins to "developers" by some criteria I don't know about. The last 10% goes to miners.
And also, why would anyone pay for those devcoins? Because they want to donate to open source? Just send bitcoins instead. If you send bitcoins, 100% of your donation goes to the developer.
If miners here want it I could implement it even if I don't understand the purpose of devcoin. But I'm also worried about a 51% attack being very easy against such a tiny coin. Wasn't there recently some sort of attack against a new coin?
If you go to devcoin.org you see devcoin has its own pool at pool.devcoin.org. Strangely it says "You are here: BitMinersUnion.org - Pool Statistics". BitMinersUnion? And also "Pool Hash Rate: 0 Ghash/s", "Active Workers: 1". There seems to be only one dude mining?
I think it could be cool to have some more coins or other bitcoin-like commodities in the pool. But I just wish the bitcoin clones would have some real purpose and novel features. Well, maybe I'm mixing up purpose and profitability?
Any thoughts, everyone? Devcoin? Litecoin? Others?
And also, why would anyone pay for those devcoins? Because they want to donate to open source? Just send bitcoins instead. If you send bitcoins, 100% of your donation goes to the developer.
If miners here want it I could implement it even if I don't understand the purpose of devcoin. But I'm also worried about a 51% attack being very easy against such a tiny coin. Wasn't there recently some sort of attack against a new coin?
If you go to devcoin.org you see devcoin has its own pool at pool.devcoin.org. Strangely it says "You are here: BitMinersUnion.org - Pool Statistics". BitMinersUnion? And also "Pool Hash Rate: 0 Ghash/s", "Active Workers: 1". There seems to be only one dude mining?
I think it could be cool to have some more coins or other bitcoin-like commodities in the pool. But I just wish the bitcoin clones would have some real purpose and novel features. Well, maybe I'm mixing up purpose and profitability?
Any thoughts, everyone? Devcoin? Litecoin? Others?
January 17, 2012, 04:08:06 AM
DrHaribo, have you considered adding Devcoin merged mining support?
January 16, 2012, 05:07:51 PM
Updated website front page with 2 new carousel images by ElideN - thanks!
Also nice: 4 BTC blocks today
Yeah, those tweaks had more effect than I thought - nice
Also nice: 4 BTC blocks today
Id say, mission accomplished
Yeah, those tweaks had more effect than I thought - nice
January 16, 2012, 02:18:01 PM
Today is one of the better days !
January 16, 2012, 11:08:50 AM
This fixes the error mentioned in the previous posts. Long polling has also been improved, but we'll have to wait and see whether it will have a visible effect on the number of rejected proofs of work.
Id say, mission accomplished:
0.08% is something I can live with
January 14, 2012, 04:57:10 AM
New mining back end is up and running. Sorry if you got a couple rejected proofs of work during the switch.
This fixes the error mentioned in the previous posts. Long polling has also been improved, but we'll have to wait and see whether it will have a visible effect on the number of rejected proofs of work. Also, connections from miners are kept alive longer. There's at least one buggy miner that attempts to reuse connections that have been closed. This should result in fewer error messages in such miners because the server won't close the connection on you as long as you are actively mining.
This fixes the error mentioned in the previous posts. Long polling has also been improved, but we'll have to wait and see whether it will have a visible effect on the number of rejected proofs of work. Also, connections from miners are kept alive longer. There's at least one buggy miner that attempts to reuse connections that have been closed. This should result in fewer error messages in such miners because the server won't close the connection on you as long as you are actively mining.
January 13, 2012, 11:29:08 AM
The error message is misleading.
Sorry about that. It's fixed in a new version of the mining back end that I hope soon to put into production.
January 13, 2012, 10:40:06 AM
My first try at pool mining with DiabloMiner
I get: ERROR: cannot connect to mint.bitminter.com Bitcoin disconnected during response: 500 Internal Server Error
What am I doing wrong? Do I need a bitcoin client running on my miner?
I get: ERROR: cannot connect to mint.bitminter.com Bitcoin disconnected during response: 500 Internal Server Error
What am I doing wrong? Do I need a bitcoin client running on my miner?
No. The error message is misleading. Make sure you have your workers, username, password, url correct.
BitMinter uses _ naming convention. ACCOUNT_WORKER
if you still get errors provide the full connection string (just replace password w/ pass)
January 13, 2012, 10:38:01 AM
My first try at pool mining with DiabloMiner
I get: ERROR: cannot connect to mint.bitminter.com Bitcoin disconnected during response: 500 Internal Server Error
What am I doing wrong? Do I need a bitcoin client running on my miner?
I get: ERROR: cannot connect to mint.bitminter.com Bitcoin disconnected during response: 500 Internal Server Error
What am I doing wrong? Do I need a bitcoin client running on my miner?
January 09, 2012, 01:46:17 AM
Some how it kinda lags for me. I still get my 200 mh/s but it looks like the program is lagging.
Try clicking the "tune & tweak" button for the GPU and selecting a lower work interval. Try 5 ms, that should be smooth, or even 1 ms.
January 08, 2012, 11:29:06 PM
Some how it kinda lags for me. I still get my 200 mh/s but it looks like the program is lagging.
January 08, 2012, 01:01:16 PM
I don't know but maybe DrHaribo can give us some insight on what is going on with the server.
The web server process was overloaded with more requests than it was configured for. The rest of the server was ok, but the web part was slowing down badly. With port 80 mining going through the web server, a lot of bitcointalk users loading the avatar images, plus more people using and visiting BitMinter than before, the pressure on the web server has gone up lately.
I modified the configuration and restarted the web server. It seems to be running fine again now. I just have to be careful I don't let it use too many resources and affect the mining.
The Apache web server software scales really badly (it needs insane amounts of memory when you have many users). I always intended to switch to the more modern Nginx, but I've been putting it off to instead implement new BitMinter features. I may have to switch soon, though.
If you need funds for a better server I would gladly chip in. This pool has been good for me.
Thanks a lot for the offer. After a couple little fixes I am working on now I will implement donations. If miners donate a little I'll look at some bigger servers.
Jump to: