I don't know who hosted that but it'd be useful to get it back up and running again soon.
I dug it out from the logs - it was elbandi...
Thanks for doing that. I've just PM'd elbandi. Would be good to have those stats available again.
Topic: [ANN] SpreadCoin | Decentralize Everything (decentralized blockexplorer coming) - page 222. (Read 790391 times)
November 30, 2015, 05:54:43 PM
I dug it out from the logs - it was elbandi...
Thanks for doing that. I've just PM'd elbandi. Would be good to have those stats available again.
November 30, 2015, 05:44:49 PM
I don't know who hosted that but it'd be useful to get it back up and running again soon.
I dug it out from the logs - it was elbandi...
November 30, 2015, 05:22:59 PM
I don't know who hosted that but it'd be useful to get it back up and running again soon.
November 30, 2015, 03:40:23 PM
Do you guys know who hosts this: http://104.36.83.126/spreadcoin/
It looks like it's down... ;(
It looks like it's down... ;(
November 21, 2015, 04:38:01 PM
What I don't get is why the AMD miner is so much worse than nvidia; and it has problems too.
I can't really judge it (yet), but it's probably badly implemented.
It's largely SPH code... really, really bad. About the same as the original darkcoin-mod.
EDIT: Idea! What's the padding made out of? Maybe I can shortcut the memory usage!
November 21, 2015, 04:34:09 PM
I'm baffled as to why it's done the way it is. There's just a TON of data in there being hashed by SHA256, far larger than any block SPR has...
Yes, the idea is that for hashWholeBlock we need to fill a complete MAX_BLOCK_SIZE block with data (that's why we have the "padding").
MAX_BLOCK_SIZE for spreadcoin is 200 Kbyte. https://github.com/spreadcoin/spreadcoin/blob/master/src/main.h#L35
So you have the header (less than 100 bytes) , followed by a few tx (<1 KByte or more), and then a giant padding (199 KBytes) to fill up the rest.
(This large pseudoblock is only existing temporarily in memory BTW, just to create the hashWholeBlock hash.)
From the whitepaper:
Quote
Padding ensures that there is no incentive to mine empty blocks without transactions
So the way I understand this, it means that padding calculations are more numerous the fewer transactions you get into your block.
Vice versa: The bigger the block already is (more txs), the less padding has to be added/calculated.
So in a way, padding is horrible on efficiency since we are mostly having 1 transaction blocks these days.
When this changes, then padding will not carry as much weight as it does now.
And yes, we are ALWAYS doing a double SHA256 calculation on a MAX_BLOCK_SIZE block (200 KByte).
This size doesn't change from block to block, it's always the maximum.
Why Mr. Spread did it this way?
I'd have to guess, but probably to deliberately give GPUs a hard time?
Wasn't he playing the "CPU-Only-coin" - card for some time?
Possibly.
But maybe its to give everyone equal weight. If you think about it, everyone effectively processes a full block. There is no incentive to choose more efficient blocks to mine to move on to the next one quickly.
I suppose if there is an incentive to fill blocks quickly, it sounds like it makes it more profitable to process blocks with transactions vs. padding.
What I don't get is why the AMD miner is so much worse than nvidia; and it has problems too.
That one's simple, the code sucks.
November 30, 2015, 03:20:38 PM
Just a quick update on the Bittrex situation.
I have been in contact with Bittrex today to check what our position with regard to the delisting notice is. Our volume is over the minimum amount at the moment so it doesn't look like we're being delisted.
I gave them a quick briefing on what we are doing with Spreadcoin and pointed them towards these links:
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/developers-propose-proof-bitcoin-node-reinvent-bitcoin-mining-big-data-mining/
http://spreadcoin.info/news/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Proof-of-Bitcoin-Node-DRAFTv1-1.pdf
Bittrex just emailed me to say that they will keep an eye on things in order to give us "some space for the project to grow". I have to say that they come across as a decent outfit, keen to support promising projects.
I won't speak on georgem's behalf but I understand that servicenode progress is going well in Spreadcoin HQ. Round 3 of testnet testing isn't far away. In the meantime, I'm going to try and show the coin some love and hoover some up while they're this cheap.
I have been in contact with Bittrex today to check what our position with regard to the delisting notice is. Our volume is over the minimum amount at the moment so it doesn't look like we're being delisted.
I gave them a quick briefing on what we are doing with Spreadcoin and pointed them towards these links:
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/developers-propose-proof-bitcoin-node-reinvent-bitcoin-mining-big-data-mining/
http://spreadcoin.info/news/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Proof-of-Bitcoin-Node-DRAFTv1-1.pdf
Bittrex just emailed me to say that they will keep an eye on things in order to give us "some space for the project to grow". I have to say that they come across as a decent outfit, keen to support promising projects.
I won't speak on georgem's behalf but I understand that servicenode progress is going well in Spreadcoin HQ. Round 3 of testnet testing isn't far away. In the meantime, I'm going to try and show the coin some love and hoover some up while they're this cheap.
November 30, 2015, 01:25:30 PM
Has there been any progress made on funding the project?
Yes, a few people are sponsoring further development.
It's just a matter of time for servicenodes to reach testnet.
Stay tuned.
Cool, thanks! You're always great at responding and I really appreciate it. Love this community.
November 29, 2015, 09:30:39 PM
The reason for supporting the mother ship haven't really changed. If anything, they are getting more critical as each day passes.
Still waiting for someone else to come up with a better solution. No solution = no bitcoin.
Still waiting for someone else to come up with a better solution. No solution = no bitcoin.
wow ... australia is in the top ten? ...
sheesh - who knew
...#crysx
Rumor has it that Satoshi Nakamoto is actually an alias of a Cryptography Developer down under hence why so many Australians are into bitcoin
ummm - what - where - when? ...
i have no idea who you are talking about
...or his whereabouts ... that guy - yes him ... the one i have no idea about ...
#crysx
November 29, 2015, 09:28:37 PM
The reason for supporting the mother ship haven't really changed. If anything, they are getting more critical as each day passes.
Still waiting for someone else to come up with a better solution. No solution = no bitcoin.
Still waiting for someone else to come up with a better solution. No solution = no bitcoin.
wow ... australia is in the top ten? ...
sheesh - who knew
...#crysx
Rumor has it that Satoshi Nakamoto is actually an alias of a Cryptography Developer down under hence why so many Australians are into bitcoin
November 29, 2015, 09:23:05 PM
The reason for supporting the mother ship haven't really changed. If anything, they are getting more critical as each day passes.
Still waiting for someone else to come up with a better solution. No solution = no bitcoin.
Still waiting for someone else to come up with a better solution. No solution = no bitcoin.
wow ... australia is in the top ten? ...
sheesh - who knew
...#crysx
November 21, 2015, 01:47:11 PM
Mr. Spread first created an AMD gpu miner, around 20th Nov 2014:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9606917
And then during the next month it was decided that girino's GPU miner was "the better one" ?
https://github.com/girino/spreadcoinx11-sgminer
Anyway...
Ah so it might be easier to modify Mr. Spread's miner.https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9606917
And then during the next month it was decided that girino's GPU miner was "the better one" ?
https://github.com/girino/spreadcoinx11-sgminer
Anyway...
Anyway Girino has some explaining to do.
Girino's IS better, and as I said, this is not a crippling of the miner, it's just WTF.
Does the hashing of all that data slow it down very much?
It does, but everyone has to do it, so it doesn't matter.
November 21, 2015, 01:46:19 PM
Girino's IS better, and as I said, this is not a crippling of the miner, it's just WTF.
Can you be a little bit more specific please?
You said words like: WTF, Insane, Barbaric and Ooops, so now I am not sure anymore I understand the point you are trying to make.
Nobody doubts that the miner's efficiency can be improved, and everybody knows that SpreadX11 is pretty exotic *
So... what gives?
Are you just baffled by it? In a good/bad way?
*(adds MinerSignature to the blockheader, and constructs MAX SIZE block by padding the previousBlockHash (this means many thousand iterations, depending on how "empty" the block is, but those are just simple multiplications and bit operations, no hashes) so that a hashWholeBlock value can be added to the header, so as to prove that whoever found a block solution was also the same person to sign the coinbase and know about the whole blocks content, before any pool did.).
I'm baffled as to why it's done the way it is. There's just a TON of data in there being hashed by SHA256, far larger than any block SPR has...
November 29, 2015, 07:58:30 PM
The reason for supporting the mother ship haven't really changed. If anything, they are getting more critical as each day passes.
Still waiting for someone else to come up with a better solution. No solution = no bitcoin.
Still waiting for someone else to come up with a better solution. No solution = no bitcoin.
November 29, 2015, 06:06:48 PM
We probably won't be delisted but:
Quote
This market is in danger of de-listing due to low trade volume and lack of user interest. It may be removed on December 4th unless the average daily trade volume for the last 7 days exceeds 0.2 BTC.
The problem is that we've got plenty of bag holders who won't sell at this price and won't buy until some tangible progress on service nodes has arrived.
Just chatting this through with the team. I believe that testnet is very close.
Not so much waiting for testnet to buy moar, just keen on spreading the love around - which is sort of your point, but in a different context.
November 29, 2015, 08:45:48 AM
We probably won't be delisted but:
Quote
This market is in danger of de-listing due to low trade volume and lack of user interest. It may be removed on December 4th unless the average daily trade volume for the last 7 days exceeds 0.2 BTC.
The problem is that we've got plenty of bag holders who won't sell at this price and won't buy until some tangible progress on service nodes has arrived.
Just chatting this through with the team. I believe that testnet is very close.
November 28, 2015, 05:56:11 PM
We probably won't be delisted but:
Quote
This market is in danger of de-listing due to low trade volume and lack of user interest. It may be removed on December 4th unless the average daily trade volume for the last 7 days exceeds 0.2 BTC.
November 21, 2015, 12:27:08 AM
Mr. Spread first created an AMD gpu miner, around 20th Nov 2014:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9606917
And then during the next month it was decided that girino's GPU miner was "the better one" ?
https://github.com/girino/spreadcoinx11-sgminer
Anyway...
Ah so it might be easier to modify Mr. Spread's miner.https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9606917
And then during the next month it was decided that girino's GPU miner was "the better one" ?
https://github.com/girino/spreadcoinx11-sgminer
Anyway...
Anyway Girino has some explaining to do.
Girino's IS better, and as I said, this is not a crippling of the miner, it's just WTF.
November 28, 2015, 10:13:19 AM
Has there been any progress made on funding the project?
Yes, a few people are sponsoring further development.
It's just a matter of time for servicenodes to reach testnet.
Stay tuned.
November 28, 2015, 06:43:38 AM
cant connect to spr.suprnova.cc
search for ocminer on here - and let him know mate ...
he is pretty kool - so will get it running again if its down ...
#crysx
Jump to: