Author

Topic: [ANN][MIN] Minerals - POS | Developing own anon solution | - page 420. (Read 742176 times)

full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
its upto the devs to do their job and actively ban big hashers untill the coin has the capacity to handle big hashers. which it proberly wont

sr. member
Activity: 411
Merit: 252
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?
Miners with these experimental PCIE FPGA boards maybe? What to they do? 20 mh/board?
Really?What's the name of this board?Where to buy?
I read about it here: https://bitcointa.lk/threads/x11-fpga-is-here-betarigs-mining-rig-1713-3x-phaethon-pci-e-fpga-board.322979/

I've tried looking for this on google and such to no avail. Probably prototype board being tested...
legendary
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

50 mh/s per ip would limit hash more imo, but 1 worker per account would be another barrier.

you can't limit per ip, since there are people behind proxy, or dont have public IP, their IP will use their ISP public IP, and then limiting per IP will make betarigs.com, leaserigs, nicehash.com not operational, there are small miner who dont have huge mining farm rent rigs from there, its just injustice for small miners

That was my point.  It limits rental hash.  To be honest, I'm renting a bunch of hash to mine this with many workers.  If he limits it 1 per account, I could just create more accounts.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
you didn't changed logo yet ?   
hero member
Activity: 1400
Merit: 505
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

50 mh/s per ip would limit hash more imo, but 1 worker per account would be another barrier.

you can't limit per ip, since there are people behind proxy, or dont have public IP, their IP will use their ISP public IP, and then limiting per IP will make betarigs.com, leaserigs, nicehash.com not operational, there are small miner who dont have huge mining farm rent rigs from there, its just injustice for small miners
full member
Activity: 186
Merit: 100
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

Could you please tell me before you do that.  I have like 5 small rigs each with 5 mgh on 5 different workers and i dont want to see that I am screwed in the morning.  I took seriously your words that you gonna punish the big farms but i see only big farms in the pools (hundreds of mgh/s).  What is that? I dont like that. I feel betrayed.
legendary
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

50 mh/s per ip would limit hash more imo, but 1 worker per account would be another barrier.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

we've contacted all major exchanges and we are willing to share the source code with them
Already got contacted by smaller exchanges but I'm not sure if we should let them list Minerals first
Focus on Bittrex and Poloniex. Forget about smaller exchanges.
Maybe some good Korea exchange, they love crypto and StarCraft Wink

Yeahh i forgot this one is the South Korea National Currency
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?
Miners with these experimental PCIE FPGA boards maybe? What to they do? 20 mh/board?
Really?What's the name of this board?Where to buy?
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

we've contacted all major exchanges and we are willing to share the source code with them
Already got contacted by smaller exchanges but I'm not sure if we should let them list Minerals first


Wait for Bittrex or Poloniex.
+1 no shitti exchanges please
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

we've contacted all major exchanges and we are willing to share the source code with them
Already got contacted by smaller exchanges but I'm not sure if we should let them list Minerals first
Focus on Bittrex and Poloniex. Forget about smaller exchanges.
Maybe some good Korea exchange, they love crypto and StarCraft Wink
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 500
Twitter: @FedKassad
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

we've contacted all major exchanges and we are willing to share the source code with them
Already got contacted by smaller exchanges but I'm not sure if we should let them list Minerals first


Wait for Bittrex or Poloniex.
sr. member
Activity: 411
Merit: 252
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?
What if you have 2 rigs? Mining with 280X's here. I'm nowhere near 50MH with that. Miners with these experimental PCIE FPGA boards maybe? What to they do? 20 mh/board?
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

I'm sure they'll come to an agreement once they start to behave like gentlemen making money


I think 1 worker is a good idea, but we should get a few hours warning as people in Asia and Eastern Europe have probably already gone to bed...
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
Minerals Dev
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?

we've contacted all major exchanges and we are willing to share the source code with them
Already got contacted by smaller exchanges but I'm not sure if we should let them list Minerals first
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?
+1
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Not all the people in the network has public ip address.They share isp's limited ip addresses and result in auto changed ip occasionally.
newbie
Activity: 37
Merit: 0
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

anyway  it is a new idea, we should support it.  but i am confused  how to get the exchange if you don't publish the soucre and wallet?
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
we are thinking of limiting account to 1 worker. So we can delete all workers except 1 for every account and prevent creating more then 1 worker per account. 50 Hh/s limit per worker will persist

What do you guys think?

If so, go for 4 workers. Most people that have actual miners have 12-14 MH/s rigs. I'd like to be able to see which of em is down or not Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 354
Merit: 254
Owner of MiningRigRentals
Asics and Multipools are an obvioius cheat so we don't have them.

Cmon now. Cheats? Seriously? Multipools are made up of hashers just like your 6 private pools, there is 0 difference.
Merc82.. I'm so disappointed you stoop to the level of binaryclock and that other twat from suchpool. Multipools don't help any coin, we all know that, especially your kind which is profit switching. Don't be a hypocrite by denying it. Albeit, all you do is offer a service, and you can't harm unless miners join it, but let's not pretend it's good for the coins you dump.
So by cheat I'm pretty he meant in his context that you harm the coin.

If pools really wanted to help coins they'd at least go the p2pool route.

I'm really not stooping to anyones level. I'm just a bit surprised in the amount of effort people put in to 'preventing multipools'. The only issue a multipool causes coins is in regards to coin difficulty. A while back, it was possible to exploit lower difficulty coins (intentionally or not) buy mining during the low periods, and once it adjusted to a higher difficulty you would abandon it and move on to the next coin.

In this regard, I completely agree that multipools used to do bad things to coins. With the newer retargeting algo's this is not the case anymore. Multipools are no different than other people mining the coin at any pool and then selling it. It's what a large percentage of the crypto-hashers do, we just make it easier for them -- so saying that preventing multipools is going to prevent dumping is not a fair statement in the least. This is what ruffles my feathers, so to speak.

Jump to: