Topic: [1200 TH] EMC: 0 Fee DGM. Anonymous PPS. US & EU servers. No Registration! - page 21. (Read 499491 times)
May 19, 2013, 01:51:44 AM
Can you be fixing "Income per Worker' graph? Freezes up or takes back to cached logon screen after long time. Not be working rightly.
May 18, 2013, 05:15:45 AM
I have a little problem with Eclipse pool, just registered yesterday but it doesnt reflect the changes I do on my account settings, somebody can help please?
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
May 15, 2013, 02:47:29 AM
Of course
May 15, 2013, 02:07:08 AM
pool is 0.8.1 ready?
May 14, 2013, 11:18:11 AM
I'm looking into US1 now... not sure what happened there.
May 13, 2013, 03:53:00 PM
May 13, 2013, 09:21:40 AM
If you want to do OKpay they have 2 methods of withdrawing cash directly:
1.) Apply for their debitcard and withdraw cash immediately at ATM's, 3% fee with $3 minimum and $15 maximum
2.) Banking service of OKPAY 1% plus bank transfer commission fee charged, withdrawal can take up to 2-4 business days.
I personally think of all methods Libertyreserve ends up being the most expensive considering you would need to convert the LR again to another ewallet that would charge a conversion fee and then withdraw to bank account with another percentage fee.
1.) Apply for their debitcard and withdraw cash immediately at ATM's, 3% fee with $3 minimum and $15 maximum
2.) Banking service of OKPAY 1% plus bank transfer commission fee charged, withdrawal can take up to 2-4 business days.
I personally think of all methods Libertyreserve ends up being the most expensive considering you would need to convert the LR again to another ewallet that would charge a conversion fee and then withdraw to bank account with another percentage fee.
OKPay is not good. Lots of people encounter problems in their verification process. If not verified, you can only do withdrawals via currency exchangers.
May 12, 2013, 08:18:10 AM
Any chance the 24 hour earnings figure in top right could include amounts earnt from PPS please?
April 22, 2013, 01:18:10 AM
Block 232352 should be fixed now. Not sure why it got suck... high transaction volume I think.
Anyway, with regards to SD, I disabled it awhile ago to fix some issues with block propagation and then never re-enabled it. I don't have anything in particular against SD and I'll get it re-enabled again when I get some time.
Anyway, with regards to SD, I disabled it awhile ago to fix some issues with block propagation and then never re-enabled it. I don't have anything in particular against SD and I'll get it re-enabled again when I get some time.
April 21, 2013, 09:55:25 PM
I just returned to EMC becuause of the problems over at Ozcoin.
I was curious about block 232352 because it doesn't have as many confirmations as blocks after it. I don't know why that is true but while looking at the block I noticed that block 232352 has no transactions involving Satoshidice. That is odd because almost half a all bitcoin transactions are to or from Satoshidice. So it seems to me that EMC intentionally rejects all Satoshidice transactions. Is that true? What advantage does bring to the pool?
Here are three other EMC solved blocks, none of which have any Satoshidice transactions. 231290, 231742, 232237.
In contrast here are three blocks solved by Slush: 232503, 232379, 232197. A quick glance shows that about half of those transaction are to or from Satoshidice. (Every Satoshidice address has the word "dice" in it.) I also looked at an Ozcoin block and it had hundreds of Satoshidice transactions too.
Those three EMC blocks average 90 transaction each whereas those three Slush blocks average 436 transaction.
I was curious about block 232352 because it doesn't have as many confirmations as blocks after it. I don't know why that is true but while looking at the block I noticed that block 232352 has no transactions involving Satoshidice. That is odd because almost half a all bitcoin transactions are to or from Satoshidice. So it seems to me that EMC intentionally rejects all Satoshidice transactions. Is that true? What advantage does bring to the pool?
Here are three other EMC solved blocks, none of which have any Satoshidice transactions. 231290, 231742, 232237.
In contrast here are three blocks solved by Slush: 232503, 232379, 232197. A quick glance shows that about half of those transaction are to or from Satoshidice. (Every Satoshidice address has the word "dice" in it.) I also looked at an Ozcoin block and it had hundreds of Satoshidice transactions too.
Those three EMC blocks average 90 transaction each whereas those three Slush blocks average 436 transaction.
April 19, 2013, 02:29:12 AM
GBT and Getwork servers respond on port 8337 and port 80.
Stratum responds on ports 3333 and 443
Stratum responds on ports 3333 and 443
April 10, 2013, 12:43:48 AM
Website is up for me. Are you still having problems?
Got cloudflare a few times, but it's working nowYup same with me. Its up now tho
April 10, 2013, 12:35:59 AM
Website is up for me. Are you still having problems?
Got cloudflare a few times, but it's working now April 10, 2013, 12:33:35 AM
Website is up for me. Are you still having problems?
April 09, 2013, 09:28:48 PM
us1 has been down for roughly an hour
website is downpoolserver is still connected.
April 07, 2013, 10:57:04 PM
us1 has been down for roughly an hour
April 07, 2013, 11:58:25 AM
Hey Inaba.
What do you think of implementing LTC mining too?
What do you think of implementing LTC mining too?
April 07, 2013, 11:43:54 AM
Should be back up not... not sure why that server keeps locking up. I will look into it.
April 07, 2013, 09:52:53 AM
US2 was down for me ~12 hours...
April 02, 2013, 01:04:06 PM
Unlikely. The namecoin client is a complete disaster and has been abandoned for more than a year. It's basically just another scamcoin.
Jump to: