Reuben posted a new update on Zcoin 3 hours ago on youtube 19min 47 sec video.
https://youtu.be/3DlsJXoXxiI
A couple highlights:
-Proof of Work vs. Proof of Stake.
-Reaffirming Zcoin maintaining itself as a currency.
-Timeline of other coins progress ICO, or PoW phase, into PoS phases etc. and now Zcoin compares to it or will compare to those other timelines.
-MTP to ensure large distribution of Zcoins
-(Spoke on this before) MTP rollout solo-mining probably, probably bounty for pool mining programming as the Zcoin team does not have expertise in this area.
-Ensuring decentralization.
Topic: [ANN] Zcoin (XZC) - Implementing ZKP privacy without trusted setup - page 79. (Read 663349 times)
March 27, 2018, 07:20:40 PM
March 27, 2018, 01:48:36 PM
We are aware of about 20-30% hashrate on some unaccounted pools. We knew this because when we were trying to notify our pools to hard fork, we couldn't find these guys.
Btw, we are aware of some of the concerns of miners that our hashrate is being dominated by botnets. Ocminer from Suprnova mentioned that previously there were some schools etc who complained to him and he identified them from many small hashrates. He does have a point.
I spoke to miningpoolhub on this and he mentioned that this could be CPU miners as well and he brought up that on other coins, there are single entities with much bigger hashing power as well.
So, both sides have valid points.
Regardless of this, MTP is now an absolute priority and coding is well underway. We will post updates as soon as they are available and a more accurate timeframe can be estimated but tentatively should be by the end of Q2 2018 and hence we won't be doing a another transition algorithm since it's not that far off.
We previously had some concerns of pool software as none of our coders are experienced pool coders but we believe that even if we have to launch with solo mining to start with and then organizing a bounty for an open sourced nomp or yiimp pool for MTP, this would be acceptable. A period of solo mining isn't bad and is true decentralization.
Btw, we are aware of some of the concerns of miners that our hashrate is being dominated by botnets. Ocminer from Suprnova mentioned that previously there were some schools etc who complained to him and he identified them from many small hashrates. He does have a point.
I spoke to miningpoolhub on this and he mentioned that this could be CPU miners as well and he brought up that on other coins, there are single entities with much bigger hashing power as well.
So, both sides have valid points.
Regardless of this, MTP is now an absolute priority and coding is well underway. We will post updates as soon as they are available and a more accurate timeframe can be estimated but tentatively should be by the end of Q2 2018 and hence we won't be doing a another transition algorithm since it's not that far off.
We previously had some concerns of pool software as none of our coders are experienced pool coders but we believe that even if we have to launch with solo mining to start with and then organizing a bounty for an open sourced nomp or yiimp pool for MTP, this would be acceptable. A period of solo mining isn't bad and is true decentralization.
As I don't understand too much from the tech perspective, will MTP solve the botnet mining issue once and for all or are there also problems that might come up some time in the future?
As I understood MTP requires large amount of RAM ~10 Gb. Miner activity will affect behavior of average computer much more and thus will reveal itself. As expected botnet performance will be reduced.
So every mining rig would need 12 GB or so of RAM to be able to continue mining ZCoin? That's a hefty additional expense, particularly with DDR4 systems.
That means it does not only successfully prevent botnets from mining, but also negatively impacts all the average miners who have good intentions?
It may be. But miners have intention to do job for network unlike botnet computers which are just victims and tool in hands of botnet master.
Not so much.
"Reuben Yap 7 months ago
It depends on the parameters. The design goal is actually to allow MTP to go up to 10 gb of RAM while remaining lightweight to verify though the reference implementation is 2 gb."
Zcoin MTP video, only 2minutes 49 seconds to understand it.
https://youtu.be/DAJirQaBIzY
That seems to be an interesting solution, but I keep thinking of this always as a cat and mouse game. Like no solution is forever when it coms to technology. I can be totally mistaken because I am not a programmer, but maybe one day those who produce Asics find a way to counter this again? Could that happen?
They call them ASIC resistance algorithms. So they resist but are not ASIC proof. Because of the memory usage, it increases the cost to produce a machine hopefully making it less profitable for them to make it for this coin/algorithm. It should do a good job of identifying bots and help reduce those since the memory usage will hopefully alert the user that their computer is infected.
Other than that the mining difficulty is about to crack 29k, ouch.
March 27, 2018, 01:43:13 PM
Hello,
I just downloaded the latest wallet version because of the hard fork. But after I unzipped the new wallet and tried to open it it got stuck on the loading screen. So I see the zcoin logo but it doenst open the wallet anymore
does anyone have a idea why its stuck?
I just downloaded the latest wallet version because of the hard fork. But after I unzipped the new wallet and tried to open it it got stuck on the loading screen. So I see the zcoin logo but it doenst open the wallet anymore
does anyone have a idea why its stuck? I did not know there was a new wallet. I guess that explained why my wallet was 7 weeks behind with no block source. I downloaded and installed the new wallet and it is working fine. It did not get stuck on the loading screen and it is currently reindexing the blocks on my computer. Maybe try closing down all instances of the program to make sure the DB is free and try running it again.
I deleted everything and downloaded the wallet again 0.13.5.7 but same problem. After deleting all files in roaming except wallet.dat it opened. So it worked out but its kinda strange that the wallet wont open after a fresh download. Maybe a bug ?
I have seen some problems with the wallet in the past
It sucks that there are not better options just to sweep the coins to a temporary place or to spend them
I hope ledger support comes in 2018
March 27, 2018, 12:16:58 PM
Hello,
I just downloaded the latest wallet version because of the hard fork. But after I unzipped the new wallet and tried to open it it got stuck on the loading screen. So I see the zcoin logo but it doenst open the wallet anymore does anyone have a idea why its stuck?
I just downloaded the latest wallet version because of the hard fork. But after I unzipped the new wallet and tried to open it it got stuck on the loading screen. So I see the zcoin logo but it doenst open the wallet anymore
does anyone have a idea why its stuck? I did not know there was a new wallet. I guess that explained why my wallet was 7 weeks behind with no block source. I downloaded and installed the new wallet and it is working fine. It did not get stuck on the loading screen and it is currently reindexing the blocks on my computer. Maybe try closing down all instances of the program to make sure the DB is free and try running it again.
I deleted everything and downloaded the wallet again 0.13.5.7 but same problem. After deleting all files in roaming except wallet.dat it opened. So it worked out but its kinda strange that the wallet wont open after a fresh download. Maybe a bug ?
March 27, 2018, 10:19:52 AM
March 27, 2018, 09:43:49 AM
Hello,
I just downloaded the latest wallet version because of the hard fork. But after I unzipped the new wallet and tried to open it it got stuck on the loading screen. So I see the zcoin logo but it doenst open the wallet anymore does anyone have a idea why its stuck?
I just downloaded the latest wallet version because of the hard fork. But after I unzipped the new wallet and tried to open it it got stuck on the loading screen. So I see the zcoin logo but it doenst open the wallet anymore
does anyone have a idea why its stuck? I did not know there was a new wallet. I guess that explained why my wallet was 7 weeks behind with no block source. I downloaded and installed the new wallet and it is working fine. It did not get stuck on the loading screen and it is currently reindexing the blocks on my computer. Maybe try closing down all instances of the program to make sure the DB is free and try running it again.
March 27, 2018, 09:27:17 AM
Hello,
I just downloaded the latest wallet version because of the hard fork. But after I unzipped the new wallet and tried to open it it got stuck on the loading screen. So I see the zcoin logo but it doenst open the wallet anymore does anyone have a idea why its stuck?
I just downloaded the latest wallet version because of the hard fork. But after I unzipped the new wallet and tried to open it it got stuck on the loading screen. So I see the zcoin logo but it doenst open the wallet anymore
does anyone have a idea why its stuck? 
March 27, 2018, 08:17:45 AM
We are aware of about 20-30% hashrate on some unaccounted pools. We knew this because when we were trying to notify our pools to hard fork, we couldn't find these guys.
Btw, we are aware of some of the concerns of miners that our hashrate is being dominated by botnets. Ocminer from Suprnova mentioned that previously there were some schools etc who complained to him and he identified them from many small hashrates. He does have a point.
I spoke to miningpoolhub on this and he mentioned that this could be CPU miners as well and he brought up that on other coins, there are single entities with much bigger hashing power as well.
So, both sides have valid points.
Regardless of this, MTP is now an absolute priority and coding is well underway. We will post updates as soon as they are available and a more accurate timeframe can be estimated but tentatively should be by the end of Q2 2018 and hence we won't be doing a another transition algorithm since it's not that far off.
We previously had some concerns of pool software as none of our coders are experienced pool coders but we believe that even if we have to launch with solo mining to start with and then organizing a bounty for an open sourced nomp or yiimp pool for MTP, this would be acceptable. A period of solo mining isn't bad and is true decentralization.
Btw, we are aware of some of the concerns of miners that our hashrate is being dominated by botnets. Ocminer from Suprnova mentioned that previously there were some schools etc who complained to him and he identified them from many small hashrates. He does have a point.
I spoke to miningpoolhub on this and he mentioned that this could be CPU miners as well and he brought up that on other coins, there are single entities with much bigger hashing power as well.
So, both sides have valid points.
Regardless of this, MTP is now an absolute priority and coding is well underway. We will post updates as soon as they are available and a more accurate timeframe can be estimated but tentatively should be by the end of Q2 2018 and hence we won't be doing a another transition algorithm since it's not that far off.
We previously had some concerns of pool software as none of our coders are experienced pool coders but we believe that even if we have to launch with solo mining to start with and then organizing a bounty for an open sourced nomp or yiimp pool for MTP, this would be acceptable. A period of solo mining isn't bad and is true decentralization.
As I don't understand too much from the tech perspective, will MTP solve the botnet mining issue once and for all or are there also problems that might come up some time in the future?
As I understood MTP requires large amount of RAM ~10 Gb. Miner activity will affect behavior of average computer much more and thus will reveal itself. As expected botnet performance will be reduced.
So every mining rig would need 12 GB or so of RAM to be able to continue mining ZCoin? That's a hefty additional expense, particularly with DDR4 systems.
That means it does not only successfully prevent botnets from mining, but also negatively impacts all the average miners who have good intentions?
It may be. But miners have intention to do job for network unlike botnet computers which are just victims and tool in hands of botnet master.
Not so much.
"Reuben Yap 7 months ago
It depends on the parameters. The design goal is actually to allow MTP to go up to 10 gb of RAM while remaining lightweight to verify though the reference implementation is 2 gb."
Zcoin MTP video, only 2minutes 49 seconds to understand it.
https://youtu.be/DAJirQaBIzY
That seems to be an interesting solution, but I keep thinking of this always as a cat and mouse game. Like no solution is forever when it coms to technology. I can be totally mistaken because I am not a programmer, but maybe one day those who produce Asics find a way to counter this again? Could that happen?
March 27, 2018, 01:07:47 AM
We are aware of about 20-30% hashrate on some unaccounted pools. We knew this because when we were trying to notify our pools to hard fork, we couldn't find these guys.
Btw, we are aware of some of the concerns of miners that our hashrate is being dominated by botnets. Ocminer from Suprnova mentioned that previously there were some schools etc who complained to him and he identified them from many small hashrates. He does have a point.
I spoke to miningpoolhub on this and he mentioned that this could be CPU miners as well and he brought up that on other coins, there are single entities with much bigger hashing power as well.
So, both sides have valid points.
Regardless of this, MTP is now an absolute priority and coding is well underway. We will post updates as soon as they are available and a more accurate timeframe can be estimated but tentatively should be by the end of Q2 2018 and hence we won't be doing a another transition algorithm since it's not that far off.
We previously had some concerns of pool software as none of our coders are experienced pool coders but we believe that even if we have to launch with solo mining to start with and then organizing a bounty for an open sourced nomp or yiimp pool for MTP, this would be acceptable. A period of solo mining isn't bad and is true decentralization.
Btw, we are aware of some of the concerns of miners that our hashrate is being dominated by botnets. Ocminer from Suprnova mentioned that previously there were some schools etc who complained to him and he identified them from many small hashrates. He does have a point.
I spoke to miningpoolhub on this and he mentioned that this could be CPU miners as well and he brought up that on other coins, there are single entities with much bigger hashing power as well.
So, both sides have valid points.
Regardless of this, MTP is now an absolute priority and coding is well underway. We will post updates as soon as they are available and a more accurate timeframe can be estimated but tentatively should be by the end of Q2 2018 and hence we won't be doing a another transition algorithm since it's not that far off.
We previously had some concerns of pool software as none of our coders are experienced pool coders but we believe that even if we have to launch with solo mining to start with and then organizing a bounty for an open sourced nomp or yiimp pool for MTP, this would be acceptable. A period of solo mining isn't bad and is true decentralization.
As I don't understand too much from the tech perspective, will MTP solve the botnet mining issue once and for all or are there also problems that might come up some time in the future?
As I understood MTP requires large amount of RAM ~10 Gb. Miner activity will affect behavior of average computer much more and thus will reveal itself. As expected botnet performance will be reduced.
So every mining rig would need 12 GB or so of RAM to be able to continue mining ZCoin? That's a hefty additional expense, particularly with DDR4 systems.
That means it does not only successfully prevent botnets from mining, but also negatively impacts all the average miners who have good intentions?
It may be. But miners have intention to do job for network unlike botnet computers which are just victims and tool in hands of botnet master.
Not so much.
"Reuben Yap 7 months ago
It depends on the parameters. The design goal is actually to allow MTP to go up to 10 gb of RAM while remaining lightweight to verify though the reference implementation is 2 gb."
Zcoin MTP video, only 2minutes 49 seconds to understand it.
https://youtu.be/DAJirQaBIzY
March 26, 2018, 10:18:46 PM
ZCoin Community Announcement: Vote for XZC to be listed on CryptalDash.com Exchange.
ZCoin has been featured in the New Coin Listing Competition, this is your chance to grow the market cap and liquidity pool of ZCoin.
Support your coin by voting now, voting ends in 8 days. (ZCoin is currently in last place with 0 votes)
https://www.cryptaldash.com/new-coin-listing
ZCoin has been featured in the New Coin Listing Competition, this is your chance to grow the market cap and liquidity pool of ZCoin.
Support your coin by voting now, voting ends in 8 days. (ZCoin is currently in last place with 0 votes)
https://www.cryptaldash.com/new-coin-listing
March 26, 2018, 03:35:40 PM
We are aware of about 20-30% hashrate on some unaccounted pools. We knew this because when we were trying to notify our pools to hard fork, we couldn't find these guys.
Btw, we are aware of some of the concerns of miners that our hashrate is being dominated by botnets. Ocminer from Suprnova mentioned that previously there were some schools etc who complained to him and he identified them from many small hashrates. He does have a point.
I spoke to miningpoolhub on this and he mentioned that this could be CPU miners as well and he brought up that on other coins, there are single entities with much bigger hashing power as well.
So, both sides have valid points.
Regardless of this, MTP is now an absolute priority and coding is well underway. We will post updates as soon as they are available and a more accurate timeframe can be estimated but tentatively should be by the end of Q2 2018 and hence we won't be doing a another transition algorithm since it's not that far off.
We previously had some concerns of pool software as none of our coders are experienced pool coders but we believe that even if we have to launch with solo mining to start with and then organizing a bounty for an open sourced nomp or yiimp pool for MTP, this would be acceptable. A period of solo mining isn't bad and is true decentralization.
Btw, we are aware of some of the concerns of miners that our hashrate is being dominated by botnets. Ocminer from Suprnova mentioned that previously there were some schools etc who complained to him and he identified them from many small hashrates. He does have a point.
I spoke to miningpoolhub on this and he mentioned that this could be CPU miners as well and he brought up that on other coins, there are single entities with much bigger hashing power as well.
So, both sides have valid points.
Regardless of this, MTP is now an absolute priority and coding is well underway. We will post updates as soon as they are available and a more accurate timeframe can be estimated but tentatively should be by the end of Q2 2018 and hence we won't be doing a another transition algorithm since it's not that far off.
We previously had some concerns of pool software as none of our coders are experienced pool coders but we believe that even if we have to launch with solo mining to start with and then organizing a bounty for an open sourced nomp or yiimp pool for MTP, this would be acceptable. A period of solo mining isn't bad and is true decentralization.
As I don't understand too much from the tech perspective, will MTP solve the botnet mining issue once and for all or are there also problems that might come up some time in the future?
As I understood MTP requires large amount of RAM ~10 Gb. Miner activity will affect behavior of average computer much more and thus will reveal itself. As expected botnet performance will be reduced.
So every mining rig would need 12 GB or so of RAM to be able to continue mining ZCoin? That's a hefty additional expense, particularly with DDR4 systems.
That means it does not only successfully prevent botnets from mining, but also negatively impacts all the average miners who have good intentions?
It may be. But miners have intention to do job for network unlike botnet computers which are just victims and tool in hands of botnet master.
March 26, 2018, 01:08:23 PM
I have been hodling onto this coin for quite sometime now. I really believe that Zcoin has the potential to become a really great privacy coin. Does anyone know if Zcoin is planning for any partnerships moving forward? I believe they have something going on with Bitdegree. is this true?
March 26, 2018, 11:14:27 AM
How does this coin compare to Zero or BTCZ or even Hush. Seems Zero, BTCZ and Hush are directs competitor with active devs with very small market cap that soon going to go up. It's not fud I'm just wondering. Also Zero or BTCZ or even Hush can be mining using GPU.
Isn't Hush like a messenger app? I think they're just a zcash clone. Zcoin uses Lyra2z algo and also has masternodes among many other technical features.
March 26, 2018, 09:14:08 AM
I have had my eye on this coin for a while now but i didn't want to buy it. I think I need to start mining. Any advice from any miners out there, on the best way to start?
Buy mb, cpu, memory, gpus and start mining. That is all there is to it.
March 26, 2018, 09:02:43 AM
I have had my eye on this coin for a while now but i didn't want to buy it. I think I need to start mining. Any advice from any miners out there, on the best way to start?
March 26, 2018, 08:58:36 AM
What about cc miner 2.2, did anyone compared results against DJM34 on MPH?
I have tried some other Lyra2z Coins on other pools and with DJM34 I had lots of "Invalid Job ID" and after that I tried ccminer 2.2 and didn't get any Invalid jobs.
It seems strange because this invalid jobs should occur on pools sides when block is already found and it seems strange that after replacing miner i immediately become faster founder/sender.
I have tried some other Lyra2z Coins on other pools and with DJM34 I had lots of "Invalid Job ID" and after that I tried ccminer 2.2 and didn't get any Invalid jobs.
It seems strange because this invalid jobs should occur on pools sides when block is already found and it seems strange that after replacing miner i immediately become faster founder/sender.
March 26, 2018, 08:30:13 AM
Around 3200 kh/s per card, so a total of 12800 kh/s. Yes, i'm using DJM34 for Lyra2z.
Mining pool hub reported on average around 6 mh/s, and mint pond reported around 12 mh/s.
3200KH/s with what settings on cards?
Also did you notice that profitability is better on MPH or Mintpond, I know that is hard to say if you don't have 2 same rigs mining at the same time on 2 different pools but still
We were on MT before it froze up for a while, then swapped to SN but their support team dropped the ball for a week when the pool froze so we switched back to MPH. We were getting "higher profitability" with SN (not by much,) but the pool only had about 1.8-2.4Gh/s so took roughly 15+ hours on average to find a block. MPH reward per block is much lower but before this week averaging 4-5 blocks found per hour. At the moment 2-3 blocks per hour. We find even though there is a pool fee etc. on MPH, the rewards are "more guaranteed/lower risk" if that makes sense. We end up losing less if one of the rigs goes down for a bit before we can get to it.
So for the moment MPH.
March 26, 2018, 08:21:52 AM
How do you think is it normal value on MPH? Interesting percent of invalid shares
Round Shares Submitted shares since last found block (ie. round shares)
Est. Shares 442,919 (done: 118.06%)
Your Valid 183.9309
Your Invalid 8.0927 (4.21%)
Round Shares Submitted shares since last found block (ie. round shares)
Est. Shares 442,919 (done: 118.06%)
Your Valid 183.9309
Your Invalid 8.0927 (4.21%)
We are usually at 0% invalid shares on MPH
Est. Shares 444,541 (done: 563.19%)
Your Valid 824.1024
Your Invalid 0.0000 (0.00%)
At the moment, the last block found 60 minutes ago... extremely unlikely, although possible with the supposed 163.2Gh/s pool vs. 190.2 Gh/s network (85.8% of the network hashrate, supposedly.)
March 26, 2018, 04:29:08 AM
How do you think is it normal value on MPH? Interesting percent of invalid shares
Round Shares Submitted shares since last found block (ie. round shares)
Est. Shares 442,919 (done: 118.06%)
Your Valid 183.9309
Your Invalid 8.0927 (4.21%)
Round Shares Submitted shares since last found block (ie. round shares)
Est. Shares 442,919 (done: 118.06%)
Your Valid 183.9309
Your Invalid 8.0927 (4.21%)
March 26, 2018, 02:36:11 AM
Around 3200 kh/s per card, so a total of 12800 kh/s. Yes, i'm using DJM34 for Lyra2z.
Mining pool hub reported on average around 6 mh/s, and mint pond reported around 12 mh/s.
3200KH/s with what settings on cards?
Also did you notice that profitability is better on MPH or Mintpond, I know that is hard to say if you don't have 2 same rigs mining at the same time on 2 different pools but still
I'm using MSI afterburner, with these settings:
Power limit: 100
Clock: 3x+150, 1x+200
Memory clock: -300
Power consumption: 0.57 kw/h
MPH was showing less than half the hashrate we we're getting.
However, in 24 hours of tracking, we got very similiar results from both pool, around 0.13 coins.
Round est. showed 0.16 coins, but that value dropped to 0.13 after we shut the miner down.
Jump to: