Pages:
Author

Topic: ### A ChainWorks Industries (CWI) Project - SweepStakeCoin | Fast Fun Secure - page 27. (Read 51253 times)

legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
Forking?

Not that I can see.

We are testing the new kernels for JHA that will be present in the new CWIgm release. They are running fine and stable, and we will be removing the test mine soon.

So if you want to mine at the CWI-Pool SweepStakeCoin for the time being, you can share in the blocks rather than try and solomine.

#crysx

No I mean I was used to get every block I've found, some months ago, but back then the nethash was a third that it is today. That's why I thought there was a problem with the chain.
From your words I think I to understand the problem is within TOR (or slowness in general updating the current block).

Oh OK.

Well - TOR is slower than using just IPv4, rather than 'slow'. Sync will still be going, but the way it is syncing via TOR is a painful one.

We will have to stick with TOR for the time being until we can configure the code and support nodes for the IPv4 (TOR free) code.

We will concern ourselves with that after we solidify our infrastructure and migration of the CWI-SeedNodes and CWI-Pool system first.

#crysx
sr. member
Activity: 599
Merit: 273
---
Forking?

Not that I can see.

We are testing the new kernels for JHA that will be present in the new CWIgm release. They are running fine and stable, and we will be removing the test mine soon.

So if you want to mine at the CWI-Pool SweepStakeCoin for the time being, you can share in the blocks rather than try and solomine.

#crysx

No I mean I was used to get every block I've found, some months ago, but back then the nethash was a third that it is today. That's why I thought there was a problem with the chain.
From your words I think I to understand the problem is within TOR (or slowness in general updating the current block).
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
In addition to that, the network seems to be having problem in synching the chain. I solved in solo blocks that are just not accepted by the chain (in fact, it seems I'm either ahead or backward). I'm trying to keep mine solo for a while and let's see what happens.

That's because the block are being solved faster than you are committing them to the blockchain.

It happens, and always will.

We decided to push a few of our own miners into the CWI-Pool SweepStakeCoin and mine for a little while, and unfortunately for the network currently, we have the highest hashrate, which means the pool will have the better chance of committing to the blockchain than a solo miner would.

Have a look - http://pool.chainworksindustries.com/sweep/index.php?page=dashboard

That doesn't mean solo mining is impossible, it just simply means that solo mining will have a harder time getting blocks in when you are up against a pool with the higher hashrate. We seem to be suffering the same sort of fate in our other pools due to this same issue, with other pools having the much higher hashrate.

The difference is syncing via TOR is slower than Syncing via IPv4 also, as small a situation that may be, it still contributes. Other factors of course contribute to this as well, and they all play a part in the sync/blockchain commits, but there should still be successes in solving blocks solo or not. We all need to take into account the orphan blocks also, as PoS plays a big part in that side of things as well.

#crysx

Then let's hope you can stabilize the client and the chain soon, without TOR.

In any case I've lost half of the blocks I've found, I thought it was a forking problem again.

Forking?

Not that I can see.

We are testing the new kernels for JHA that will be present in the new CWIgm release. They are running fine and stable, and we will be removing the test mine soon.

So if you want to mine at the CWI-Pool SweepStakeCoin for the time being, you can share in the blocks rather than try and solomine.

#crysx
sr. member
Activity: 599
Merit: 273
---
In addition to that, the network seems to be having problem in synching the chain. I solved in solo blocks that are just not accepted by the chain (in fact, it seems I'm either ahead or backward). I'm trying to keep mine solo for a while and let's see what happens.

That's because the block are being solved faster than you are committing them to the blockchain.

It happens, and always will.

We decided to push a few of our own miners into the CWI-Pool SweepStakeCoin and mine for a little while, and unfortunately for the network currently, we have the highest hashrate, which means the pool will have the better chance of committing to the blockchain than a solo miner would.

Have a look - http://pool.chainworksindustries.com/sweep/index.php?page=dashboard

That doesn't mean solo mining is impossible, it just simply means that solo mining will have a harder time getting blocks in when you are up against a pool with the higher hashrate. We seem to be suffering the same sort of fate in our other pools due to this same issue, with other pools having the much higher hashrate.

The difference is syncing via TOR is slower than Syncing via IPv4 also, as small a situation that may be, it still contributes. Other factors of course contribute to this as well, and they all play a part in the sync/blockchain commits, but there should still be successes in solving blocks solo or not. We all need to take into account the orphan blocks also, as PoS plays a big part in that side of things as well.

#crysx

Then let's hope you can stabilize the client and the chain soon, without TOR.

In any case I've lost half of the blocks I've found, I thought it was a forking problem again.
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
The latest version wallet 1.3.0.0, or there is a newer version?

That is the latest.

Once organized and if available, a list of all the downloads of the latest wallets for Windows/OSX/Linux (RedHat and Ubuntu) will posted in the main CWI-Thread for reference, and also to maintain ONE place where we will have to update.

#crysx
newbie
Activity: 34
Merit: 0
The latest version wallet 1.3.0.0, or there is a newer version?
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
I always wondered why the big prize has been thrown there (and TOR... ? What's good for? In practice I mean...). There are already GOZZILLIONS of this sweepstakecoins, even if the big stake is working and you can get 10 millions sweep, it's not helping the final price vs. bitcoin. It's just pushing toward the value of a cryptopenny. Or even less, like a decimal of satoshi.
2Bl coins is not too much. There are a lot of coins that has 10+ times more. Verge for example, but it still cost 100+satoshi and not 1 as SWEEP. And also thousands BTC of daytrade.
The SweepStake feature is just one thing that makes this coin different and could make it attractive to people - there are a lot of people who play lotteries. But we have what we have.
Actually I don't know what's the problem with TOR. SWEEP wallet works perfectly. It is one of the most stable that I have. For example one of the worst is TZC wallet that crashes blockchain file(or index) each time after improper reboot and doesn't recover it. I always need to delete all files and to sync it again.
Another bad example is Smart wallet - you'll need a lot of time to force to sync it.

I don't know what can bring sweep to life.

TOR hogs resources.

Especially ports. You cannot have another TOR based wallet (especially if you want a couple of SWEEP wallets like we need) when TOR is active as it locks the TOR port. Which means ANY coin that uses TOR needs to be setup on another machine/VM. Unless there is a way around it, which I have no knowledge of.

Apart from that, the SweepStake code itself does not work properly, which eventually forks the blockchain due to the way it finds the sweep block. There is almost no way around it except to recode it using a different method, which changes it from a sweep - to a jackpot. Heard of that coin before Wink

There are a number of other things that need to be looked at, which means that the coin itself will have to change if we are to change the sweepstake code.

I have another bone to pick with you concerning some false 'facts' that you have posted a while back. You really need to get your facts straight when posting about coins that you base ALL you assumptions off ONE place. Those market cap places have not updated for AGES, and you blurted out falsities of figures as well the so called 'facts'. Even at the time of committing that absurd post of yours about GRN and INFX - they were doing very well. Even moreso now, but at the time of post they were doing very well.

When you publish OPINIONS - that's one thing. When you publish what YOU consider FACTS - then do your THOROUGH research BEFORE you post.

I don't want to go back that far now and respond to you ridiculous post, but I assure you when I read it, I was incensed at the fact that YOU do NOT do your thorough research BEFORE you post.

Other than that, you do bring up a few good points and on a number of occasions, actually have some damned good suggestions. It just makes me wonder what on earth you do before your post trash about other coins being dead and low volume and not worth anything. Such garbage belongs in the bin, not here.

I could go on about almost every point you made in that post - especially about answering you directly, as if you are my boss or owner of sorts. I personally have nothing to answer YOU for. Nor do you have the right to have that privilege. I owe you nothing, nor does the company. IF you were a shareholder in the company, THEN I would need to answer you directly as well as have some reasoning as to why when where and what.

ESPECIALLY when it comes to OUR coded miner CWIgm. Making things up about what I said it to be 'polish' is NOT a good argument. Especially when (once again) we OWE YOU NOTHING. This is our right as coders, as individuals, and as a company to produce what when where and how we please. YOU have the right to walk away from it - that's all you have. CWIgm-0.9.9 IS going to be released with a LOT more than a couple more algos in it. Which is one of the reasons we have been working on it for so long. But again, YOU don't have the right to demand from OR command us to do anything we don't feel we should. Say and do what you wish, but not here, or in any of our other threads.

It's this time wastage that I abhor responding to a person who posts such thing when he can't even get his facts straight. I won't tolerate it any longer here mate. Notice I have said 'I' won't tolerate it. I seriously was hoping that you would actually make some decent criticisms, and on occasion you have, but the majority of that post as you can see, still irks me.

That all aside and back to SWEEP, we are considering shifting it's focus off the sweep and onto another niche. Will see how that goes. If you have a concern about that, or have a suggestion, please voice it. If it is unfounded drivel, it will be deleted. I shall be more vigilant with such things in future.

Word of advice - don't take coinmarketcap as the RULE to all data you need to glean to make your decisions before you post. There are other methods and many at that.

#crysx
full member
Activity: 728
Merit: 106
I always wondered why the big prize has been thrown there (and TOR... ? What's good for? In practice I mean...). There are already GOZZILLIONS of this sweepstakecoins, even if the big stake is working and you can get 10 millions sweep, it's not helping the final price vs. bitcoin. It's just pushing toward the value of a cryptopenny. Or even less, like a decimal of satoshi.
2Bl coins is not too much. There are a lot of coins that has 10+ times more. Verge for example, but it still cost 100+satoshi and not 1 as SWEEP. And also thousands BTC of daytrade.
The SweepStake feature is just one thing that makes this coin different and could make it attractive to people - there are a lot of people who play lotteries. But we have what we have.
Actually I don't know what's the problem with TOR. SWEEP wallet works perfectly. It is one of the most stable that I have. For example one of the worst is TZC wallet that crashes blockchain file(or index) each time after improper reboot and doesn't recover it. I always need to delete all files and to sync it again.
Another bad example is Smart wallet - you'll need a lot of time to force to sync it.

I don't know what can bring sweep to life.

Anyone know why there is a difference in hashrate reported by miner when miming to pool vs solo?
My 1060 makes stable 21.3Mh/s to pool. But the same cards show only ~18-19 when mining on local wallet and they greatly fluctuates from 14 to 20.
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
In addition to that, the network seems to be having problem in synching the chain. I solved in solo blocks that are just not accepted by the chain (in fact, it seems I'm either ahead or backward). I'm trying to keep mine solo for a while and let's see what happens.

That's because the block are being solved faster than you are committing them to the blockchain.

It happens, and always will.

We decided to push a few of our own miners into the CWI-Pool SweepStakeCoin and mine for a little while, and unfortunately for the network currently, we have the highest hashrate, which means the pool will have the better chance of committing to the blockchain than a solo miner would.

Have a look - http://pool.chainworksindustries.com/sweep/index.php?page=dashboard

That doesn't mean solo mining is impossible, it just simply means that solo mining will have a harder time getting blocks in when you are up against a pool with the higher hashrate. We seem to be suffering the same sort of fate in our other pools due to this same issue, with other pools having the much higher hashrate.

The difference is syncing via TOR is slower than Syncing via IPv4 also, as small a situation that may be, it still contributes. Other factors of course contribute to this as well, and they all play a part in the sync/blockchain commits, but there should still be successes in solving blocks solo or not. We all need to take into account the orphan blocks also, as PoS plays a big part in that side of things as well.

#crysx
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
I always wondered why the big prize has been thrown there (and TOR... ? What's good for? In practice I mean...). There are already GOZZILLIONS of this sweepstakecoins, even if the big stake is working and you can get 10 millions sweep, it's not helping the final price vs. bitcoin. It's just pushing toward the value of a cryptopenny. Or even less, like a decimal of satoshi.

Well,

That is an opinionated thing.

We can bring examples of many coins that have had that argument placed against then for having too many coins int he market; the market being diluted; price this and price that. All arguments are moot when it comes to crypto, as ANYTHING may be be possible. Look at the latest ICO claims making tens of millions of dollars now, for the 'hope' that they will develop what they say they will.

We don't care about price, we care about functionality and productivity. Price is merely a consequence.

#crysx
sr. member
Activity: 599
Merit: 273
---
In addition to that, the network seems to be having problem in synching the chain. I solved in solo blocks that are just not accepted by the chain (in fact, it seems I'm either ahead or backward). I'm trying to keep mine solo for a while and let's see what happens.
sr. member
Activity: 599
Merit: 273
---
I always wondered why the big prize has been thrown there (and TOR... ? What's good for? In practice I mean...). There are already GOZZILLIONS of this sweepstakecoins, even if the big stake is working and you can get 10 millions sweep, it's not helping the final price vs. bitcoin. It's just pushing toward the value of a cryptopenny. Or even less, like a decimal of satoshi.
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
Could you tell details about it? Is there a roadmap anywhere? I would like to read that. Of course SWEEP will rise, it's only the question of time

There are much info can be found in official CWI slack.
I can try to figure out most important steps were announced:
1. New version of SWEEP wallet tor-stripped version available that will be only with IPv4 seednodes https://github.com/chainworksindustries/sweepstakecoin/ (Waitiing for ipv4 seednodes)
2. CWI will launch 3 new pool servers and 26 seednodes to support all FIVE coins, including support for new SWEEP wallet.
3. All coins will get code rebase (to make them work more stable and sync faster)
4. Some coins will get new algos (SWEEP can stay the same)
5. Sweepstake function will be re-enabled for SWEEP.

SWEEP is not the first in a row, it will be reworked after OZC and INFX coins.

This is my point of view, based on information posted in #general channel.

Maybe Chrysophylax will correct me and provide more info about plans and incoming updates.


All but the last.

TOR was stripped, but now seems to be a problematic issue, apart from the non-existent IPv4 seednodes. So the latest code in Master will not compile and work nicely. We have not reverted the code, as we are still working on it, but it is third/fourth in line after OZC and INFX. Plenty of time to mine and accumulate Wink

However, the SweepStake function of this coin is problematic regardless. We seem to have figured a fix, BUT, this means a full rework of the code. This is a domino effect here. If a rework of the code is inevitable, then the changes made may mean that the SweepStake itself will be changed. The theory behind it works, but the practice almost ALWAYS generates a fork. TOR doesn't help matters there.

As for the new servers, the pool servers are not so much the same servers, but rather all play part of the new backend servers for the CWI-Pool system. We have an issue currently which the ISP is working on so that we can move forward with the rebuild. Too many issues have set back this build and it has now cost us a great deal of time and money. Hence why we take our time to make sure things are planned from the beginning and NOT rushed into. These issues have risen due to the push for a number of new servers without the prior planning involved on our end. Which is why everything is set back now.

A full update soon though - in the main CWI-Thread.

For any of those that wish to dump their SWEEP holding, we would be happy to do a deal with you Wink

#crysx
full member
Activity: 158
Merit: 100
mine safe o/
In addition to mining guide, there is current list of connected nodes:
addnode=sfdfsuyf6nkuy7o7.onion:17570
addnode=ve2t5g2gogo3noso.onion:17570
addnode=dzfyj7cwm6imj5jb.onion:17570
addnode=fqftt6knzep4pboe.onion:17570
addnode=axpmo3rowqrrxon5.onion:17570
addnode=h5ajb3zxqbwq7kl3.onion:17570
addnode=vqh43spharyg2mk6.onion:17570
addnode=yzrj2ozyxsu74de4.onion:17570
addnode=fbv2kacllsebewxs.onion:17570
addnode=6yhn4w5w3yqdeu7g.onion:17570
addnode=nu26qbrejnqpvwfh.onion:17570
addnode=xn7gmw33u2cclggp.onion:17570
addnode=lw4755atqmpfrq3l.onion:17570
addnode=4v2xki6eof2jy5sd.onion:17570
addnode=h35wkcywci5r6ph6.onion:17570
addnode=f6zp2ti543jkj5ca.onion:17570
full member
Activity: 158
Merit: 100
mine safe o/
Could you tell details about it? Is there a roadmap anywhere? I would like to read that. Of course SWEEP will rise, it's only the question of time

There are much info can be found in official CWI slack.
I can try to figure out most important steps were announced:
1. New version of SWEEP wallet tor-stripped version available that will be only with IPv4 seednodes https://github.com/chainworksindustries/sweepstakecoin/ (Waitiing for ipv4 seednodes)
2. CWI will launch 3 new pool servers and 26 seednodes to support all FIVE coins, including support for new SWEEP wallet.
3. All coins will get code rebase (to make them work more stable and sync faster)
4. Some coins will get new algos (SWEEP can stay the same)
5. Sweepstake function will be re-enabled for SWEEP.

SWEEP is not the first in a row, it will be reworked after OZC and INFX coins.

This is my point of view, based on information posted in #general channel.

Maybe Chrysophylax will correct me and provide more info about plans and incoming updates.


sr. member
Activity: 1042
Merit: 328
SIGNATURE CREATION by uralcryptocoin
What are your rewards looking like?

Depends on difficulty. Last day it went up to 17.5, so it was 31 blocks/day with one GTX 1070 GPU.
With my big rig on it, it gives 444 blocks/day, or 18,5/hour.
If sold at current 0.00000001 price it would be $1.76/day for 1070 GPU.
A couple days before it was $3/day.

But selling now is not good idea.
After incoming updates and hardfork Sweepstakecoin will cost much more.
When brand new updated SWEEP will be listed at Cryptopia, nothing will stop the train Smiley

But now we need to get patience and wait for those changes.
I think ETA is first half of December.



Could you tell details about it? Is there a roadmap anywhere? I would like to read that. Of course SWEEP will rise, it's only the question of time
full member
Activity: 158
Merit: 100
mine safe o/
What are your rewards looking like?

Depends on difficulty. Last day it went up to 17.5, so it was 31 blocks/day with one GTX 1070 GPU.
With my big rig on it, it gives 444 blocks/day, or 18,5/hour.
If sold at current 0.00000001 price it would be $1.76/day for 1070 GPU.
A couple days before it was $3/day.

But selling now is not good idea.
After incoming updates and hardfork Sweepstakecoin will cost much more.
When brand new updated SWEEP will be listed at Cryptopia, nothing will stop the train Smiley

But now we need to get patience and wait for those changes.
I think ETA is first half of December.

full member
Activity: 158
Merit: 100
mine safe o/
CWI Sweep stratum is a bit outdated and not friendly for low-end rigs.
I had chance to test new stratum, and after a couple of tweaks from pool side it run smooth and perfect, giving 10-15 shares / minute both for 1x1070 and 8x1080ti rigs.

Now the best way to get SWEEP is to solomine it directly to your wallet.

First of all, you need to add to your sweepstakecoin.conf list of nodes so it could sync.
Then, add

server=1
daemon=1
rpcport=17571
port=17570
listen=1
rpcuser=123
rpcpassword=456
rpcallowip=127.0.0.1

And the last: use ccminer 2.2.2 by tpruvot to mine with .bat like that "ccminer.exe -i 25 -a jackpot -o 127.0.0.1:17571 -u 123 -p 456"


newbie
Activity: 24
Merit: 0
I had the pleasure of chatting with the support of zpool. The conversation ended in a ban for me. I caught them in fraud. Instead of 2% commission they take 20% (correctly to say they do not take but steal)

Make a public topic and paste the evidence there. If you are right many ppl will get mad on them.
Useless. During the conversation, the administrator gave me a link to the topic on the forum. It has been discussed for a long time  20%. He gave a link and commented: "Go there and there with pleasurebaby discuss." After that, i banned and all my posts in his topic deleted.
Link to discussion scams zpool https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/zpoolca-does-it-take-20-22-fee-1951402
P.S. Text was translated by Google
member
Activity: 196
Merit: 10
StasyQ
I had the pleasure of chatting with the support of zpool. The conversation ended in a ban for me. I caught them in fraud. Instead of 2% commission they take 20% (correctly to say they do not take but steal)

Make a public topic and paste the evidence there. If you are right many ppl will get mad on them.
Pages:
Jump to: