Would it be possible to further modify the algorithm so it becomes completely impossible to mine on GPUs? Needless to say that most of people would prefer mining on CPUs as deploying GPU farms or having even a single GPU loaded at 100% is not possible for typical user.
Regarding open/closed source, experience says that open is always better than closed.
Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 6961. (Read 9723782 times)
February 09, 2014, 08:05:02 AM
February 09, 2014, 08:04:10 AM
The state of the network
Yesterday we had an eventful day and I wanted to wait and see what happened with the hashrate and difficulty before putting this update together. For those that weren't watching we went all the way from .7Gh/s to 3.2Gh/s due to either a large farm of computers or a working implementation of a GPU miner.
Anonymous Transactions
I'm happy to annouce that we have a fully working pre-alpha implementation of the anonymous transaction technology. Yesterday I was able to send ~40 anonymous transaction using the client and the code seems to work pretty well. I'd say it's very early pre-alpha, but it's 100% certain we'll be the first fully anonymous coin that exists.
The next stage of development is to deal with some bugs and other technicial issues I have in the code that will allow it to run without encountering issues. Currently, I have to reset the pool after every transaction and that needs to happen automatically across the network.
After that we're going to beat up the code up and harden it in a open pre-alpha. The code will only work on testnet during all of the next stages of development and we'll be giving out binary clients that can only connect to the testnet.
Then, we'll go through alpha/beta and then implement a full release of the code into the client.
Open Source or Closed Source?
Last night we were talking in #darkcoin (join us!) about 2 possibilities for launching the anonymous technology:
1.) We launch open source and hope we gain a good name in the community. If done correctly, all of the other coins will just be clones that don't add anything original. I would still be working on other functionality and improvements, so we'd always be ahead of the rest.
2.) We implement all of the unique technology as a closed source plugin. The plugin would be shipped separately and added to a folder to enable the privacy features, it would also work normally if it didn't find the plugin. This is how NVidia ships their closed source drivers for their video cards with linux.
Which should it be?
Thanks to all of those that had some faith in the project early on, the prospects of this coin are starting to look really promising.
Yesterday we had an eventful day and I wanted to wait and see what happened with the hashrate and difficulty before putting this update together. For those that weren't watching we went all the way from .7Gh/s to 3.2Gh/s due to either a large farm of computers or a working implementation of a GPU miner.
Anonymous Transactions
I'm happy to annouce that we have a fully working pre-alpha implementation of the anonymous transaction technology. Yesterday I was able to send ~40 anonymous transaction using the client and the code seems to work pretty well. I'd say it's very early pre-alpha, but it's 100% certain we'll be the first fully anonymous coin that exists.
The next stage of development is to deal with some bugs and other technicial issues I have in the code that will allow it to run without encountering issues. Currently, I have to reset the pool after every transaction and that needs to happen automatically across the network.
After that we're going to beat up the code up and harden it in a open pre-alpha. The code will only work on testnet during all of the next stages of development and we'll be giving out binary clients that can only connect to the testnet.
Then, we'll go through alpha/beta and then implement a full release of the code into the client.
Open Source or Closed Source?
Last night we were talking in #darkcoin (join us!) about 2 possibilities for launching the anonymous technology:
1.) We launch open source and hope we gain a good name in the community. If done correctly, all of the other coins will just be clones that don't add anything original. I would still be working on other functionality and improvements, so we'd always be ahead of the rest.
2.) We implement all of the unique technology as a closed source plugin. The plugin would be shipped separately and added to a folder to enable the privacy features, it would also work normally if it didn't find the plugin. This is how NVidia ships their closed source drivers for their video cards with linux.
Which should it be?
Thanks to all of those that had some faith in the project early on, the prospects of this coin are starting to look really promising.
Closed source mate. Protect the milestone to avoid lazy cloning. Cryptos are being churnned out like rabbit babies right now with next to no innovation. I suggest you fore stall that trend a bit as we fight for legitimacy.
February 09, 2014, 08:03:56 AM
Closed source at first, no question. Then after few months when DarkCoin has become de-facto anonymous transfers enabling currency release the source.
If people don't trust their whole wallet balance to the closed source plugin, they can have their main wallet running without the plugin, and xfer the amounts they want to transfer anonymously to the another wallet with the plugin.
If people don't trust their whole wallet balance to the closed source plugin, they can have their main wallet running without the plugin, and xfer the amounts they want to transfer anonymously to the another wallet with the plugin.
im standing behind this one as well, closed in the beginning so that we can get this coin well established
February 09, 2014, 08:02:52 AM
Closed source at first, no question. Then after few months when DarkCoin has become de-facto anonymous transfers enabling currency release the source.
If people don't trust their whole wallet balance to the closed source plugin, they can have their main wallet running without the plugin, and xfer the amounts they want to transfer anonymously to the another wallet with the plugin.
If people don't trust their whole wallet balance to the closed source plugin, they can have their main wallet running without the plugin, and xfer the amounts they want to transfer anonymously to the another wallet with the plugin.
February 09, 2014, 07:59:01 AM
Open source please.
February 09, 2014, 07:55:16 AM
The state of the network
Yesterday we had an eventful day and I wanted to wait and see what happened with the hashrate and difficulty before putting this update together. For those that weren't watching we went all the way from .7Gh/s to 3.2Gh/s due to either a large farm of computers or a working implementation of a GPU miner.
Anonymous Transactions
I'm happy to annouce that we have a fully working pre-alpha implementation of the anonymous transaction technology. Yesterday I was able to send ~40 anonymous transaction using the client and the code seems to work pretty well. I'd say it's very early pre-alpha, but it's 100% certain we'll be the first fully anonymous coin that exists.
The next stage of development is to deal with some bugs and other technicial issues I have in the code that will allow it to run without encountering issues. Currently, I have to reset the pool after every transaction and that needs to happen automatically across the network.
After that we're going to beat up the code up and harden it in a open pre-alpha. The code will only work on testnet during all of the next stages of development and we'll be giving out binary clients that can only connect to the testnet.
Then, we'll go through alpha/beta and then implement a full release of the code into the client.
Open Source or Closed Source?
Last night we were talking in #darkcoin (join us!) about 2 possibilities for launching the anonymous technology:
1.) We launch open source and hope we gain a good name in the community. If done correctly, all of the other coins will just be clones that don't add anything original. I would still be working on other functionality and improvements, so we'd always be ahead of the rest.
2.) We implement all of the unique technology as a closed source plugin. The plugin would be shipped separately and added to a folder to enable the privacy features, it would also work normally if it didn't find the plugin. This is how NVidia ships their closed source drivers for their video cards with linux.
Which should it be?
Thanks to all of those that had some faith in the project early on, the prospects of this coin are starting to look really promising.
Yesterday we had an eventful day and I wanted to wait and see what happened with the hashrate and difficulty before putting this update together. For those that weren't watching we went all the way from .7Gh/s to 3.2Gh/s due to either a large farm of computers or a working implementation of a GPU miner.
Anonymous Transactions
I'm happy to annouce that we have a fully working pre-alpha implementation of the anonymous transaction technology. Yesterday I was able to send ~40 anonymous transaction using the client and the code seems to work pretty well. I'd say it's very early pre-alpha, but it's 100% certain we'll be the first fully anonymous coin that exists.
The next stage of development is to deal with some bugs and other technicial issues I have in the code that will allow it to run without encountering issues. Currently, I have to reset the pool after every transaction and that needs to happen automatically across the network.
After that we're going to beat up the code up and harden it in a open pre-alpha. The code will only work on testnet during all of the next stages of development and we'll be giving out binary clients that can only connect to the testnet.
Then, we'll go through alpha/beta and then implement a full release of the code into the client.
Open Source or Closed Source?
Last night we were talking in #darkcoin (join us!) about 2 possibilities for launching the anonymous technology:
1.) We launch open source and hope we gain a good name in the community. If done correctly, all of the other coins will just be clones that don't add anything original. I would still be working on other functionality and improvements, so we'd always be ahead of the rest.
2.) We implement all of the unique technology as a closed source plugin. The plugin would be shipped separately and added to a folder to enable the privacy features, it would also work normally if it didn't find the plugin. This is how NVidia ships their closed source drivers for their video cards with linux.
Which should it be?
Thanks to all of those that had some faith in the project early on, the prospects of this coin are starting to look really promising.
February 09, 2014, 07:43:47 AM
He will stop right after the rediff to ~120.
And we'll never get another rediff with our hashrate...
there is 1 way to do a rediff... doing a hardfork.... its a bit complicated, but it can be doneAnd we'll never get another rediff with our hashrate...
It's no problem if it comes to that. We actually did that early on already, it's pretty simple.
However, I have a feeling the "whale" is just using GPUs. The X11 algos are very hardware optimized to run on a GPU and I think it would have taken someone about this much time to implement that and launch a farm. Time will tell if I'm right, but it seems likely.
If I'm correct, the hashrate shouldn't fall when difficulty resets (not > 20%) because the cost of running that setup is minimal.
And any thoughts on implmenting KGW?
The X11 algo should be compatible with GPUs and very difficulty to port to ASICs. I did some work on a GPU miner for X11, which is here: https://github.com/evan82/darkcoin-sgminer
I have some 7970's laying around here, I'll see if I can get it working for us
And any thoughts on implementing KGW? I think the current retargeting actually works pretty well, if we have to hard fork after this I'm not opposed to implementing something like that.
The algorithms I used for our proof-of-work came originally from here:
http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/ST/hash/sha-3/Round2/submissions_rnd2.html
February 09, 2014, 07:32:23 AM
Sorry, pasted wrong repo. It was https://github.com/ig0tik3d/darkcoin-cpuminer-1.2, not https://github.com/evan82/darkcoin
Whole config.log:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/08xxcg
Whole config.log:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/08xxcg
what version of ubuntu your running? best to stick with 12.04 imho
also saw this:
Code:
/usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/local_lim.h:39:26: fatal error: /usr/include/linux/limits.h: Permission denied
do you compile under sudo or normal user?
do
sudo apt-get reinstall build-essential
February 09, 2014, 07:26:49 AM
someone make the miner for intel opencl? i'm sure this would give an opportunity to intel chips owners=)
February 09, 2014, 06:11:21 AM
Difficulty 95.19166610
...and the big miner stays with his gigahashes (=it's not a question of cpu profitability)...
...and the big miner stays with his gigahashes (=it's not a question of cpu profitability)...
February 09, 2014, 05:37:28 AM
It is indeed 12.04 server.
I ran configure without sudo. Thought it's unnecessary. Shame on me, should have tried that myself
Running with sudo solves the problem.
I ran configure without sudo. Thought it's unnecessary. Shame on me, should have tried that myself
Running with sudo solves the problem. 
February 09, 2014, 05:28:14 AM
Sorry, pasted wrong repo. It was https://github.com/ig0tik3d/darkcoin-cpuminer-1.2, not https://github.com/evan82/darkcoin
Whole config.log:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/08xxcg
Whole config.log:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/08xxcg
what version of ubuntu your running? best to stick with 12.04 imho
also saw this:
Code:
/usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/local_lim.h:39:26: fatal error: /usr/include/linux/limits.h: Permission denied
do you compile under sudo or normal user?
February 09, 2014, 04:50:42 AM
Sorry, pasted wrong repo. It was https://github.com/ig0tik3d/darkcoin-cpuminer-1.2, not https://github.com/evan82/darkcoin
Whole config.log:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/08xxcg
Whole config.log:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/08xxcg
February 09, 2014, 04:34:50 AM
Hey, could anyone help with the following ./configure error? Ubuntu linux, kernel 3.10.26, gcc-4.6.3, source from https://github.com/ig0tik3d/darkcoin-cpuminer-1.2
Code:
checking build system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking host system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking target system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /bin/mkdir -p
checking for gawk... no
checking for mawk... mawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking whether to enable maintainer-specific portions of Makefiles... no
checking for style of include used by make... GNU
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether the C compiler works... yes
checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out
checking for suffix of executables...
checking whether we are cross compiling... no
checking for suffix of object files... o
checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes
checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
checking for gcc option to accept ISO C89... none needed
checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3
checking for gcc option to accept ISO C99... -std=gnu99
checking how to run the C preprocessor... /lib/cpp
configure: error: in `/home/queeq/repos/darkcoin-cpuminer-1.2':
configure: error: C preprocessor "/lib/cpp" fails sanity check
See `config.log' for more details
checking host system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking target system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /bin/mkdir -p
checking for gawk... no
checking for mawk... mawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking whether to enable maintainer-specific portions of Makefiles... no
checking for style of include used by make... GNU
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether the C compiler works... yes
checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out
checking for suffix of executables...
checking whether we are cross compiling... no
checking for suffix of object files... o
checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes
checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
checking for gcc option to accept ISO C89... none needed
checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3
checking for gcc option to accept ISO C99... -std=gnu99
checking how to run the C preprocessor... /lib/cpp
configure: error: in `/home/queeq/repos/darkcoin-cpuminer-1.2':
configure: error: C preprocessor "/lib/cpp" fails sanity check
See `config.log' for more details
February 09, 2014, 03:26:08 AM
Ugh, really? I thought you said it would be so difficult to get the GPU version working!
difficult, not impossible, someone determined enough could do it... think about it, if you know how, and can see you could get some money out of it...Yeah, we could consider a reasonable bounty for an open sourced GPU miner, or even GPU + CPU.
Yeah, and if there is a hardfork to add KGW, generate a lets say 10k bounty in the blockchain at the fork? Should that be incentive enough for getting a gpu miner appear?
February 09, 2014, 02:35:26 AM
A:0 and HW through the roof for all of us... hmm.
edit: The difficulty of the shares also seems to be broken since it rejects everything on submission... like 6/0 rejected, above target, 3/0 rejected etc.
edit2: The HW errors like these:
[08:45:37] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:38] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:38] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:39] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:39] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
were high intensity related, needed lower intensities (i17 = errors, i15=ok)
edit: The difficulty of the shares also seems to be broken since it rejects everything on submission... like 6/0 rejected, above target, 3/0 rejected etc.
edit2: The HW errors like these:
[08:45:37] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:38] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:38] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:39] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:39] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
were high intensity related, needed lower intensities (i17 = errors, i15=ok)
February 09, 2014, 02:26:30 AM
Damn, wish I had a GPU!
February 09, 2014, 02:18:46 AM
We need ig0tik3d! Heck, maybe that whale IS ig0tik3d, LOL (joking)
February 09, 2014, 02:01:33 AM
(5s):49.22K (avg):63.79Kh/s | A:0 R:0 HW:1731 WU:0.0/m
February 09, 2014, 01:59:40 AM
[08:45:13] Started sgminer 4.0.0
[08:45:31] Probing for an alive pool
[08:45:32] (null) difficulty changed to 0.003906
[08:45:32] Network diff set to 2.66M
[08:45:33] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:34] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:34] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:35] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:35] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:36] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:36] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:37] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:38] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:38] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:39] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:39] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
...I just checked if its thread concurrency related, because it tends to mess things, but checking a few values around it seems that it isn't. This is on a 5830. Hmm.. no shares submission, just plenty of HW.
edit: debug output
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 13269 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 13488 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 13833 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 14321 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 14476 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 14712 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 15122 found in slot 0
[08:45:31] Probing for an alive pool
[08:45:32] (null) difficulty changed to 0.003906
[08:45:32] Network diff set to 2.66M
[08:45:33] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:34] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:34] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:35] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:35] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:36] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:36] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:37] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:38] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:38] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:39] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
[08:45:39] GPU0: invalid nonce count - HW error
...I just checked if its thread concurrency related, because it tends to mess things, but checking a few values around it seems that it isn't. This is on a 5830. Hmm.. no shares submission, just plenty of HW.
edit: debug output
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 13269 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 13488 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 13833 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 14321 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 14476 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 14712 found in slot 0
[08:52:51] GPU0: invalid nonce - HW error
[08:52:51] Discarded cloned or rolled work
[08:52:51] Set globalThreads to 256, hashes to 256
[08:52:51] GPU 0 found something?
[08:52:51] OCL NONCE 15122 found in slot 0
[07:58:23] Started sgminer 4.0.0
[07:58:23] Loaded configuration file ./sgminer.conf
[07:58:23] WARNING: GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT is not specified!
[07:58:23] WARNING: GPU_USE_SYNC_OBJECTS is not specified!
[07:58:37] Probing for an alive pool
[07:58:37] (null) difficulty changed to 0.007812
[07:58:38] Network diff set to 2.66M
(5s):12.71K (avg):13.17Kh/s | A:0 R:0 HW:723 WU:0.0/m
Jump to: