Code:
BURST-2222-2222-2222-22222
lot of transactions sent to that address, is it burn address ?
Topic: [ANN][BURST] Burst | Efficient HDD Mining | New 1.2.3 Fork block 92000 - page 1242. (Read 2171078 times)
August 15, 2014, 04:26:14 AM
what is this address
lot of transactions sent to that address, is it burn address ?
lot of transactions sent to that address, is it burn address ?
August 15, 2014, 04:14:45 AM
{
"lastBlock": "16322078320396019945",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1222,
"time": 299736,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "54.167.111.103:8123",
"numberOfBlocks": 1223,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "70385126787201",
"version": "1.0.0"
}
"lastBlock": "16322078320396019945",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1222,
"time": 299736,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "54.167.111.103:8123",
"numberOfBlocks": 1223,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "70385126787201",
"version": "1.0.0"
}
Another ~50% increase within ~16h
Code:
{
"lastBlock": "1520116135762103722",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1457,
"time": 367546,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "109.195.211.62",
"numberOfBlocks": 1458,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "105192234724606",
"version": "1.0.0"
}when the pools come out, its difficulty will increase more faster
,now only just 5 days since the coin came out,when the difficulty increase until you can only less than 1 block/TB/Month, then the coins value will be enhanced 
i think its already expensive, since we dont have fractional coin here
so coin cap of 2,158,812,800 coins is similar to 21 coin cap of bitcoin style shitcoin ( because of 8 digits fractional )
so i expect the price will be 100 sat btc to 1 burst ( 1million burst = 1 btc )
xcn, come out for three weeks, has 1.8billion coin, its total number is similar to burst, two weeks ago ,it was mined with cpu, its highest price is 0.00012btc, now , with gpu miners come out, its diffculty falls very fast, and the value falled very fast, and now steady at 0.00002btc for a long time, which means ,even at the lowest price, it still can reach 2000 sat btc,,total number can not decide a coin's value, it was determined by difficulty and popularity
and difficulty is determined by energy or value spent to mine those coins, in PoW GPU we waste electricity, so miner wouldn't want their mined coin priced below electricity cost, on PoC its should depend on how much the price of storage wasted, on PoS its stupid idea, they dont have natural intrinsic value except by popularity, utility functions and developer efforts
August 15, 2014, 04:10:10 AM
{
"lastBlock": "16322078320396019945",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1222,
"time": 299736,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "54.167.111.103:8123",
"numberOfBlocks": 1223,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "70385126787201",
"version": "1.0.0"
}
"lastBlock": "16322078320396019945",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1222,
"time": 299736,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "54.167.111.103:8123",
"numberOfBlocks": 1223,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "70385126787201",
"version": "1.0.0"
}
Another ~50% increase within ~16h
Code:
{
"lastBlock": "1520116135762103722",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1457,
"time": 367546,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "109.195.211.62",
"numberOfBlocks": 1458,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "105192234724606",
"version": "1.0.0"
}when the pools come out, its difficulty will increase more faster
,now only just 5 days since the coin came out,when the difficulty increase until you can only less than 1 block/TB/Month, then the coins value will be enhanced i think its already expensive, since we dont have fractional coin here
so coin cap of 2,158,812,800 coins is similar to 21 coin cap of bitcoin style shitcoin ( because of 8 digits fractional )
so i expect the price will be 100 sat btc to 1 burst ( 1million burst = 1 btc )
xcn, come out for three weeks, has 1.8billion coin, its total number is similar to burst, two weeks ago ,it was mined with cpu, its highest price is 0.00012btc, now , with gpu miners come out, its diffculty falls very fast, and the value falled very fast, and now steady at 0.00002btc for a long time, which means ,even at the lowest price, it still can reach 2000 sat btc,,total number can not decide a coin's value, it was determined by difficulty and popularity
August 15, 2014, 04:06:29 AM
Wait, how is this work globaly verifiable by peers, how do you know my miner isn't modded to just relay random data until something stivks and I get a block ?
my simplified answer is, you broadcast ur account number and ur selected nonce to network, these two numbers can be verified into deadline value, so yes you can just broadcast any data (nonce and account number), but i doubt you want to broadcast random account number since you wont receive ur reward, and for nonce yes it is just random value, we select it which one has lowest deadline value
edit : i think nonce is not so random, because they are relevant scoop for each block (depend on previous block hash), i am not sure, we need to read the implementation, its just based on OP post
August 15, 2014, 04:04:32 AM
here my offer is 1BTC=5M.
August 15, 2014, 04:02:31 AM
Wait, how is this work globaly verifiable by peers, how do you know my miner isn't modded to just relay random data until something stivks and I get a block ?
I also want to know the answer of this question. I dont have the time to debug the program now, but i think that admin will ensure us that everything is ok.And also why i have to send my passphrase to the central server/pool. It,s not secure... That way every pool admin will have the accounts of every user, which is mining...I don't want to speak about hackers... Why dont you send the Burst adress
this is from MinerCom.java
Code:
else if(message instanceof MinerSupr.msgSubmitResult) {
System.out.println("Submitting share");
try {
ContentResponse response = client.POST(addr + "/burst")
.param("requestType", "submitNonce")
[b].param("secretPhrase", ((MinerSupr.msgSubmitResult)message).passPhrase)[/b]
.param("nonce", Convert.toUnsignedLong(((MinerSupr.msgSubmitResult)message).nonce))
.timeout(5, TimeUnit.SECONDS)
.send();
String submitResult = response.getContentAsString();
System.out.println(submitResult);
}
catch(Exception e) {
System.out.println("Error: Failed to submit nonce");
}
}i think its push result to your wallet, so yes it need ur passpharase, and ur wallet is to be expected to run locally, we dont have pool implementation yet
August 15, 2014, 03:53:28 AM
to the DEV ... i musst ask again...
i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Either is fine. Technically, 500000 plots starting from 0 is 0 - 499999, so the second has a gap of 1 in between the first 2, but that doesn't matter.i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Overlapping is bad since it calculates to the same result in multiple places, wasting disk space and doing unnecessary work.
There is no problem with having gaps.
This:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
is just as good as this:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 5000000000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 9898000000 500000 2000 4
So, staggering is best implemented on the same drive. But on multiple drives, you can start from each one at 0 if you wanted to with one large plot for each. If I'm understanding this correctly. I notice that it seems that most people are more successful making smaller multiple plots on hdd's than one larger one.
So, the formula for calculating nonce size is this: x=Nonce size
f(x)=hdd size in GB
(256x)/10^6=f(x)
x=[f(x)*10^6]/256
its not 10^6 but 1024^2
That's an approximate, but so this would be the end result then: x=[f(x)*1024^2]/256
you should write it f(x) = x*1024^2/256 (for correct mathematical expression), where x is disk size in GB and f(x) is nonce count
anyway, more correct and simple equation form is f(x) = x*4096 , where x in GB of disk size
But yeah I should have reverse that. Not wrong either way depending what is selected as the range or domain, that's the beauty of Algebra. So, to even clean it up more, it's simple this: f(x)=4096x . Thanks
August 15, 2014, 03:52:59 AM
Wait, how is this work globaly verifiable by peers, how do you know my miner isn't modded to just relay random data until something stivks and I get a block ?
I also want to know the answer of this question. I dont have the time to debug the program now, but i think that admin will ensure us that everything is ok.And also why i have to send my passphrase to the central server/pool. It,s not secure... That way every pool admin will have the accounts of every user, which is mining...I don't want to speak about hackers... Why dont you send the Burst adress
this is from MinerCom.java
Code:
else if(message instanceof MinerSupr.msgSubmitResult) {
System.out.println("Submitting share");
try {
ContentResponse response = client.POST(addr + "/burst")
.param("requestType", "submitNonce")
[b].param("secretPhrase", ((MinerSupr.msgSubmitResult)message).passPhrase)[/b]
.param("nonce", Convert.toUnsignedLong(((MinerSupr.msgSubmitResult)message).nonce))
.timeout(5, TimeUnit.SECONDS)
.send();
String submitResult = response.getContentAsString();
System.out.println(submitResult);
}
catch(Exception e) {
System.out.println("Error: Failed to submit nonce");
}
} August 15, 2014, 03:49:12 AM
how i can start generate plat on next HDD?
Cent Os
2-nd HDD mount on
/mnt/disk1/
Cent Os
2-nd HDD mount on
/mnt/disk1/
August 15, 2014, 03:46:11 AM
Very unaccurate Burst network estimation at this moment : ~330TB (~60TB more than yesterday), and 0,89 block / TB / day
+- 50%
if anybody wants to participate in estimation please send me PM with info: plot size and ID
+- 50%
if anybody wants to participate in estimation please send me PM with info: plot size and ID
August 15, 2014, 03:41:47 AM
to the DEV ... i musst ask again...
i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Either is fine. Technically, 500000 plots starting from 0 is 0 - 499999, so the second has a gap of 1 in between the first 2, but that doesn't matter.i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Overlapping is bad since it calculates to the same result in multiple places, wasting disk space and doing unnecessary work.
There is no problem with having gaps.
This:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
is just as good as this:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 5000000000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 9898000000 500000 2000 4
So, staggering is best implemented on the same drive. But on multiple drives, you can start from each one at 0 if you wanted to with one large plot for each. If I'm understanding this correctly. I notice that it seems that most people are more successful making smaller multiple plots on hdd's than one larger one.
So, the formula for calculating nonce size is this: x=Nonce size
f(x)=hdd size in GB
(256x)/10^6=f(x)
x=[f(x)*10^6]/256
its not 10^6 but 1024^2
That's an approximate, but so this would be the end result then: x=[f(x)*1024^2]/256
you should write it f(x) = x*1024^2/256 (for correct mathematical expression), where x is disk size in GB and f(x) is nonce count
anyway, more correct and simple equation form is f(x) = x*4096 , where x in GB of disk size
August 15, 2014, 03:36:52 AM
to the DEV ... i musst ask again...
i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Either is fine. Technically, 500000 plots starting from 0 is 0 - 499999, so the second has a gap of 1 in between the first 2, but that doesn't matter.i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Overlapping is bad since it calculates to the same result in multiple places, wasting disk space and doing unnecessary work.
There is no problem with having gaps.
This:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
is just as good as this:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 5000000000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 9898000000 500000 2000 4
So, staggering is best implemented on the same drive. But on multiple drives, you can start from each one at 0 if you wanted to with one large plot for each. If I'm understanding this correctly. I notice that it seems that most people are more successful making smaller multiple plots on hdd's than one larger one.
So, the formula for calculating nonce size is this: x=Nonce size
f(x)=hdd size
(256x)/10^6=f(x)
x=[f(x)*10^6]/256
its not 10^6 but 1024^2
That's an approximate, but so this would be the end result then: x=[f(x)*1024kb^2]/256kb
August 15, 2014, 03:33:21 AM
to the DEV ... i musst ask again...
i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Either is fine. Technically, 500000 plots starting from 0 is 0 - 499999, so the second has a gap of 1 in between the first 2, but that doesn't matter.i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Overlapping is bad since it calculates to the same result in multiple places, wasting disk space and doing unnecessary work.
There is no problem with having gaps.
This:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
is just as good as this:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 5000000000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 9898000000 500000 2000 4
So, staggering is best implemented on the same drive. But on multiple drives, you can start from each one at 0 if you wanted to with one large plot for each. If I'm understanding this correctly. I notice that it seems that most people are more successful making smaller multiple plots on hdd's than one larger one.
So, the formula for calculating nonce size is this: x=Nonce size
f(x)=hdd size in GB
(256x)/10^6=f(x)
x=[f(x)*10^6]/256
its not 10^6 but 1024^2
August 15, 2014, 03:30:47 AM
to the DEV ... i musst ask again...
i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Either is fine. Technically, 500000 plots starting from 0 is 0 - 499999, so the second has a gap of 1 in between the first 2, but that doesn't matter.i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Overlapping is bad since it calculates to the same result in multiple places, wasting disk space and doing unnecessary work.
There is no problem with having gaps.
This:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
is just as good as this:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 5000000000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 9898000000 500000 2000 4
So, staggering is best implemented on the same drive. But on multiple drives, you can start from each one at 0 if you wanted to with one large plot for each. If I'm understanding this correctly. I notice that it seems that most people are more successful making smaller multiple plots on hdd's than one larger one.
So, the formula for calculating nonce size is this: x=Nonce size
f(x)=hdd size in GB
(256x)/10^6=f(x)
x=[f(x)*10^6]/256
August 15, 2014, 03:21:01 AM
{
"lastBlock": "16322078320396019945",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1222,
"time": 299736,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "54.167.111.103:8123",
"numberOfBlocks": 1223,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "70385126787201",
"version": "1.0.0"
}
"lastBlock": "16322078320396019945",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1222,
"time": 299736,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "54.167.111.103:8123",
"numberOfBlocks": 1223,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "70385126787201",
"version": "1.0.0"
}
Another ~50% increase within ~16h
Code:
{
"lastBlock": "1520116135762103722",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1457,
"time": 367546,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "109.195.211.62",
"numberOfBlocks": 1458,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "105192234724606",
"version": "1.0.0"
}when the pools come out, its difficulty will increase more faster
,now only just 5 days since the coin came out,when the difficulty increase until you can only less than 1 block/TB/Month, then the coins value will be enhanced i think its already expensive, since we dont have fractional coin here
so coin cap of 2,158,812,800 coins is similar to 21 coin cap of bitcoin style shitcoin ( because of 8 digits fractional )
so i expect the price will be 100 sat btc to 1 burst ( 1million burst = 1 btc )
August 15, 2014, 03:15:56 AM
{
"lastBlock": "16322078320396019945",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1222,
"time": 299736,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "54.167.111.103:8123",
"numberOfBlocks": 1223,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "70385126787201",
"version": "1.0.0"
}
"lastBlock": "16322078320396019945",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1222,
"time": 299736,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "54.167.111.103:8123",
"numberOfBlocks": 1223,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "70385126787201",
"version": "1.0.0"
}
Another ~50% increase within ~16h
Code:
{
"lastBlock": "1520116135762103722",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1457,
"time": 367546,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "109.195.211.62",
"numberOfBlocks": 1458,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "105192234724606",
"version": "1.0.0"
}when the pools come out, its difficulty will increase more faster
,now only just 5 days since the coin came out,when the difficulty increase until you can only less than 1 block/TB/Month, then the coins value will be enhanced 
August 15, 2014, 03:08:24 AM
{
"lastBlock": "16322078320396019945",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1222,
"time": 299736,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "54.167.111.103:8123",
"numberOfBlocks": 1223,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "70385126787201",
"version": "1.0.0"
}
"lastBlock": "16322078320396019945",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1222,
"time": 299736,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "54.167.111.103:8123",
"numberOfBlocks": 1223,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "70385126787201",
"version": "1.0.0"
}
Another ~50% increase within ~16h
Code:
{
"lastBlock": "1520116135762103722",
"lastBlockchainFeederHeight": 1457,
"time": 367546,
"lastBlockchainFeeder": "109.195.211.62",
"numberOfBlocks": 1458,
"isScanning": false,
"cumulativeDifficulty": "105192234724606",
"version": "1.0.0"
} August 15, 2014, 02:35:39 AM
Wait, how is this work globaly verifiable by peers, how do you know my miner isn't modded to just relay random data until something stivks and I get a block ?
August 15, 2014, 02:12:17 AM
to the DEV ... i musst ask again...
i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Either is fine. Technically, 500000 plots starting from 0 is 0 - 499999, so the second has a gap of 1 in between the first 2, but that doesn't matter.i have this: (overlapping is only bad for diskspace?)
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
or should i use this?
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 500001 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
and second.
if i have i big gap like this.. do i need ploting the missing file for correct mining or can i move to the next plot?
i mean do i ned a coherent chain ??
1. run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4 (128GB)
2. (missing file of 128GB)
3. run_generate.bat 1000001 500000 2000 4 (128GB)
4. (next plot: 1500001 500000 2000 4)
Overlapping is bad since it calculates to the same result in multiple places, wasting disk space and doing unnecessary work.
There is no problem with having gaps.
This:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 500000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 1000000 500000 2000 4
is just as good as this:
run_generate.bat 0 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 5000000000 500000 4000 4
run_generate.bat 9898000000 500000 2000 4
August 15, 2014, 02:11:19 AM
sell 20k=0,1 btc
Jump to: