[ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched! - page 374.

jago25_98

hero member

Activity: 900

Merit: 1000

Crypto Geek

Quote from: Matoking on October 24, 2011, 11:35:28 AM

What's your hash rate?

You don't make progress when mining, you have the same chance of generating a block for every hash you generate.
[/quote]

Hash is approx. 2x3000khash.
I understand that with probability it's not accumulative. But the chances of not getting anything after a couple of days seems a bit much? I just want to be sure everything's setup ok

To the guy who compiled on linux: congrats, I had no joy on that... do we trust you for a binary now?

coblee

donator

Activity: 1654

Merit: 1354

Creator of Litecoin. Cryptocurrency enthusiast.

litecoin.org has now been moved to be hosted on github.com
litecoin.info will soon redirect to the new wiki at https://github.com/coblee/litecoin/wiki

terrytibbs

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 501

Quote from: 3phase on October 24, 2011, 12:07:57 PM

Quote from: terrytibbs on October 24, 2011, 12:03:10 PM

Quote from: 3phase on October 24, 2011, 12:00:56 PM

I tried to compile the latest litecoind (ver. 50001) in a new machine (Ubuntu 11.04), I transferred my wallet.dat from my current machine, ran litecoind -rescan but my balance appears to be "0.00".

Have I missed something Huh

Did you let it download the blockchain?

Yes, I let it download the blockchain first, stopped the daemon, copied the wallet.dat and restarted the daemon with the -rescan option.

Try removing the blockchain with the new wallet intact and let it redownload. If it successfully launches without errors, the chances of your private keys getting lost are close to none.

3phase

sr. member

Activity: 313

Merit: 251

Third score

Quote from: terrytibbs on October 24, 2011, 12:03:10 PM

Quote from: 3phase on October 24, 2011, 12:00:56 PM

I tried to compile the latest litecoind (ver. 50001) in a new machine (Ubuntu 11.04), I transferred my wallet.dat from my current machine, ran litecoind -rescan but my balance appears to be "0.00".

Have I missed something Huh

Did you let it download the blockchain?

Yes, I let it download the blockchain first, stopped the daemon, copied the wallet.dat and restarted the daemon with the -rescan option.

terrytibbs

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 501

Quote from: 3phase on October 24, 2011, 12:00:56 PM

I tried to compile the latest litecoind (ver. 50001) in a new machine (Ubuntu 11.04), I transferred my wallet.dat from my current machine, ran litecoind -rescan but my balance appears to be "0.00".

Have I missed something Huh

Did you let it download the blockchain?

3phase

sr. member

Activity: 313

Merit: 251

Third score

I tried to compile the latest litecoind (ver. 50001) in a new machine (Ubuntu 11.04), I transferred my wallet.dat from my current machine, ran litecoind -rescan but my balance appears to be "0.00".

Have I missed something Huh

Matoking

sr. member

Activity: 352

Merit: 250

Firstbits: 1m8xa

Quote from: jago25_98 on October 24, 2011, 11:33:42 AM

That doesn't mean a block has been found.
[/quote]

Thanks :/ Been going for a couple of days now and still nothing... I'm thinking something's wrong....
[/quote]
What's your hash rate?

You don't make progress when mining, you have the same chance of generating a block for every hash you generate.

jago25_98

hero member

Activity: 900

Merit: 1000

Crypto Geek

[/quote]
That doesn't mean a block has been found.
[/quote]

Thanks :/ Been going for a couple of days now and still nothing... I'm thinking something's wrong....

froggy

full member

Activity: 127

Merit: 100

Quote from: coblee on October 23, 2011, 11:05:25 PM

The next thing I'd like to add to the Litecoin client is the ability to mine at a pool. Matoking built a nice GUI on top of minerd. I will look into incorporating this into the client. See: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.587882

Sounds like a great idea. Would you be able to include an easy way for people to switch between different flavours of minerd optimized for different CPUs ( like http://www.wuala.com/jbw9/pub/Bitcoin/Tenebrix/miner/win/ ), maybe something like the way guiminer for Bitcoin enables this (doesn't need to be tabs for different versions of minerd, I guess it could be a drop-down selection or something)?

Matoking

sr. member

Activity: 352

Merit: 250

Firstbits: 1m8xa

Quote from: jago25_98 on October 24, 2011, 06:52:51 AM

Quote from: Matoking on October 24, 2011, 03:52:59 AM

No, the messy output usually happens after long poll.

Are you replying to me to say that this isn't a block found:

"[[22001111--110-24 09:430:-2234] 0t9h:r4e3a:d2 20]: t3h6r1e8a dh as1h:e s3,0 2
0.45 0h akshhaessh,/ s0ec
.47 khash/sec"

?

That doesn't mean a block has been found.

jago25_98

hero member

Activity: 900

Merit: 1000

Crypto Geek

Quote from: Matoking on October 24, 2011, 03:52:59 AM

No, the messy output usually happens after long poll.

Are you replying to me to say that this isn't a block found:

"[[22001111--110-24 09:430:-2234] 0t9h:r4e3a:d2 20]: t3h6r1e8a dh as1h:e s3,0 2
0.45 0h akshhaessh,/ s0ec
.47 khash/sec"

?

322i0n

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 101

Quote from: coblee on October 23, 2011, 11:05:25 PM

The next thing I'd like to add to the Litecoin client is the ability to mine at a pool. Matoking built a nice GUI on top of minerd. I will look into incorporating this into the client. See: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.587882

A similar but opposite feature I'd like work on is for each client to be able to act as a node in a distributed pool.
Something like p2pool: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool
Either add a UI for the client to kick off p2pool. Or code up p2pool (or something similar) in C++.
The former will be much simpler, but would be hacky, because litecoin will start/stop/configure p2pool via python scripts, and p2pool will talk to litecoin via RPC calls on localhost.
The latter would be much nicer because the client will communicate with different nodes on the same p2p network as the block chain communication, but it would take considerable amount of work to implement it.

+1 nice! the latter. maybe something could be done in the interim and hold back the c++ implementation for a future release.

Matoking

sr. member

Activity: 352

Merit: 250

Firstbits: 1m8xa

No, the messy output usually happens after long poll.

PROOF OF WORK RESULT: true (yay!!!) means you've found a block if you are solo mining.
False, on the other hand means you've found a block, but were too late to broadcast it to the network. (I've had this happen to me once, it wasn't fun)

Quote from: coblee on October 23, 2011, 11:05:25 PM

The next thing I'd like to add to the Litecoin client is the ability to mine at a pool. Matoking built a nice GUI on top of minerd. I will look into incorporating this into the client. See: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.587882

Neat.

There is a small problem due to how the minerd executable works, though. The application receives the output only after the output buffer has been filled, which means the GUI doesn't report everything in real-time, and takes a minute to start reporting anything due to the way how minerd works (it won't output anything until a minute has passed).

The mining information (accepted shares, mining speed, etc.) could probably be added under the Wallet subtitle in the Overview page, I'll probably look into it soon.

jago25_98

hero member

Activity: 900

Merit: 1000

Crypto Geek

Code:

[[22001111--110-24 09:430:-2234]  0t9h:r4e3a:d2 20]:  t3h6r1e8a dh as1h:e s3,0 2
0.45 0h akshhaessh,/ s0ec
.47 khash/sec

^ does this mean the miner has found a block? It's different from the usual:

Code:

[2011-10-24 09:44:58] thread 0: 3175 hashes, 0.56 khash/sec

No extra coins are shown in the client window as I would expect. Been mining for a couple of days and still nothing makes me think there's something wrong even though I can see the rpc user & password are excepted.

BitcoinPorn

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Posts: 69

When the client is ready enough to accept more users, I think that GUI built in is going to be necessary.

I think a big draw to digital currencies like these was the ability to mine from your home computer. That ability to do anything you wanted just using your computer. Bitcoin and pools have taken this out of the hands of the casual user. CPU mining I felt kind of put it back on more even grounds than video card wars, so if people had that built in, it would be good. I know the majority of the users here live and die in command line operation systems, but when everyone is done hoarding and ready to accept the general populace, a proper built in miner with options would be good.

Having pool options I guess could be necessary, using SolidCoin's drop down as an example, I would not include the names of any specific pools at all and rather just link to a landing page set up to pull recent pool info and activity.

Also, make a feature to stop the client from freezing my computer Wink

Graet

vip

Activity: 980

Merit: 1001

Quote from: HolodeckJizzmopper on October 23, 2011, 09:00:04 PM

Quote from: Graet on October 23, 2011, 07:45:43 PM

And would ANYONE like to explain to me how doing a 51% attack on a new chain at very little price value will help my rep and the sustainability of either of the pools I run or any other cryptocurrency venture I might pursue.....

Did not mean you any offense, Graet. You run a high-quality pool. Happily hashing away litecoins at your place.

I suck at tact and my words come don't come out right sometimes.

Was more concerned with the tremendous jump in hash rate by "temp" that gave your pool 70% control at one point. It could have been any pool, just noticed it on yours because I mine there.

Kinda scary seeing that much power thrown at a popular, fledgling branch. Will be interesting to see how this affects Litecoin long term, if at all.

all good man - no offence taken - I was sort of rushing out to take kids to school when I posted, that was a general question.
Glad you are having a good experience at Ozcoin

But the "OMG 51% thing" is an issue I am dealing with a lot Wink

The interesting thing was as pool hashrate climbed the "unknown" section of the graph at http://litecoin.kicks-ass.org/graphs/graphs.html shrank.
at first we thought it was someone "showing " themselves as he was only on for a short time and then went back to "unknown".
I investigated "temp" as soon as i saw him start overtaking the pool hashrate. I do not think it is my place to release users details in public but I am satisfied this is a legitimate user.
I have also noticed hash spikes on other pools - had wondered if he was "testing" all the pools before he chose one to mine on.

Overnight (my tz) the network hashrate has increased and even with temp, Ozcoin cant currently get over 50%
I sincerely hope these are legit users - all pools need to be on the lookout for the other type Wink

coblee

donator

Activity: 1654

Merit: 1354

Creator of Litecoin. Cryptocurrency enthusiast.

The next thing I'd like to add to the Litecoin client is the ability to mine at a pool. Matoking built a nice GUI on top of minerd. I will look into incorporating this into the client. See: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.587882

A similar but opposite feature I'd like work on is for each client to be able to act as a node in a distributed pool.
Something like p2pool: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2Pool
Either add a UI for the client to kick off p2pool. Or code up p2pool (or something similar) in C++.
The former will be much simpler, but would be hacky, because litecoin will start/stop/configure p2pool via python scripts, and p2pool will talk to litecoin via RPC calls on localhost.
The latter would be much nicer because the client will communicate with different nodes on the same p2p network as the block chain communication, but it would take considerable amount of work to implement it.

Which of these features do you want?

ineededausername

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 1000

bitcoin hundred-aire

Quote from: worldinacoin on October 23, 2011, 10:28:44 PM

Quote from: coblee on October 23, 2011, 01:29:35 PM

Quote from: terrytibbs on October 23, 2011, 10:11:34 AM

Quote from: chieffery on October 23, 2011, 10:08:54 AM

You charged people money for something, gave them something else then claimed ignorance and washed your hands... frankly it was your business failure not theirs. Your logic makes about as much sense as asking your supplier for refunds when buyer don't pay. If your supplier was shady, that is your loss to take, not your honest paying customers...

Anyways, I luckily didn't get scammed by you, my concern is that you don't seem like a very good name to be managing the 2 domains of a new coin.

If you care about the litecoin community then you should disassociate your name from it, doesn't instill much trust having a scammer representing us.

I do not manage the Litecoin domain names. They are managed by coblee, and it was his decision to point them at my servers.

terrytibbs has done more for Litecoin than most people. He designed the webpage and set up the wiki and offered to host the webpages. The fact that he has a disagreement with his customers over a previous dealing has no effect on whether or not he can design a great webpage or host the webpage. Given the amount of time he's put into the project, I trust him.

And the worst he can do is basically put a malware binary as the link to the Litecoin client download. If there's any signs of that, I will definitely switch to a different host.

Note: It really shows you his character when terrytibbs continue to post with his original account. Most scammers will just create a new account and continue to scam others.

I support your stance, and I also feel that this thread should not be used to discuss terrytibbs's character.

+1. I want to mention that I've done business with terrytibbs before and I can vouch for him.

worldinacoin

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

Quote from: coblee on October 23, 2011, 01:29:35 PM

Quote from: terrytibbs on October 23, 2011, 10:11:34 AM

Quote from: chieffery on October 23, 2011, 10:08:54 AM

You charged people money for something, gave them something else then claimed ignorance and washed your hands... frankly it was your business failure not theirs. Your logic makes about as much sense as asking your supplier for refunds when buyer don't pay. If your supplier was shady, that is your loss to take, not your honest paying customers...

Anyways, I luckily didn't get scammed by you, my concern is that you don't seem like a very good name to be managing the 2 domains of a new coin.

If you care about the litecoin community then you should disassociate your name from it, doesn't instill much trust having a scammer representing us.

I do not manage the Litecoin domain names. They are managed by coblee, and it was his decision to point them at my servers.

terrytibbs has done more for Litecoin than most people. He designed the webpage and set up the wiki and offered to host the webpages. The fact that he has a disagreement with his customers over a previous dealing has no effect on whether or not he can design a great webpage or host the webpage. Given the amount of time he's put into the project, I trust him.

And the worst he can do is basically put a malware binary as the link to the Litecoin client download. If there's any signs of that, I will definitely switch to a different host.

Note: It really shows you his character when terrytibbs continue to post with his original account. Most scammers will just create a new account and continue to scam others.

I support your stance, and I also feel that this thread should not be used to discuss terrytibbs's character.

kano

legendary

Activity: 4634

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on October 23, 2011, 08:03:06 PM

Quote from: Justin Bieber on October 23, 2011, 01:15:47 PM

Quote from: kano on October 23, 2011, 10:45:40 AM

For those who don't realise it, it is straight forward to work out how long the expected average time to get a block its.

Firstly, however, it is of course an expected average time, not an expected time.
Meaning that if you got say 1 million blocks, then your average time per block should be close to the calculated value, however, for only a few blocks, the average can vary immensely.
According to the Law of Large Numbers, the more blocks you get the closer the average should be to the expected average time.

Anyway, the expected average number of hashes to find a block is 2^32 * difficulty.
At the moment that is: 2^32 * 0.16800443 or 721,573,532 hashes.

So if you hash at 1kh/s your expected average time to find a block will be ~200 hours.
If you hash at 10kh/s your expected average will be ~20 hours.
If you hash at 100kh/s then your expected average will be ~2hours.
etc.

Where did you get the 2^32 from?

Difficulty 1 = one block in 2^32 shares.

So difficulty x = (x)*(2^32)

The 2^32 is somewhat arbitrary but it is equal to difficulty 1.

Oh didn't notice the question at the bottom of that page. Oops.
It comes from the fact that a difficulty one block has the first 32 bits (of 256) all zero.

e.g. a difficulty one hash is defined as looking something like:
00000000.f77fad94.f1fac4e4.380fe9a6.04c07964.d4af9c4b.3cd5177f.dfebf13f
(I added the '.'s to make it easier to see the 32 bit breaks)

The statistically expected chance of getting one of them is of course 1 in 2^32 (since you want all those 32 bits to be zero)

Topic: [ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched! - page 374. (Read 1467485 times)