Author

Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1150. (Read 3917058 times)

full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
Just for comic relief I think someone might be trolling the stock over at BTC-TC.CO
ASICMINER-PT   19 minutes ago   1   1.222222   1.222222
ASICMINER-PT   19 minutes ago   1   1.22222   1.22222
ASICMINER-PT   19 minutes ago   1   1.2222   1.2222
ASICMINER-PT   19 minutes ago   1   1.222        1.222
ASICMINER-PT   19 minutes ago   1   1.22        1.22

Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
Efficiency was close to zero with an Avalon mining stratum on p2pool.
Odd and worrying: you are not the only one having tried mining on p2pool with Avalons. I don't follow it closely (forums are not really the best for bug reports, I have to work from memory and I'm on painkillers right now...) but I know people have managed to bring Avalons at least in the 50-75% efficiency range right from the beginning and made progress from this point (maybe not with stratum).

I suspect there's at least one Avalon user on P2Pool for quite some time now which uses it without apparent problems given his payouts (185Kip6odGYs4eSHD6DYsWVDJBg2DNLfiV since 2013-09-04 with an effective ~65GH/s hashrate).

It was a bug in Avalon's fork of cgminer, which Avalon refused to fix.

forrest, the guy who wrote p2pool, ended up fixing it on his end which isn't an appropriate way of fixing it. Avalon users mine on p2pool fine now.
hero member
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
Efficiency was close to zero with an Avalon mining stratum on p2pool.
Odd and worrying: you are not the only one having tried mining on p2pool with Avalons. I don't follow it closely (forums are not really the best for bug reports, I have to work from memory and I'm on painkillers right now...) but I know people have managed to bring Avalons at least in the 50-75% efficiency range right from the beginning and made progress from this point (maybe not with stratum).

I suspect there's at least one Avalon user on P2Pool for quite some time now which uses it without apparent problems given his payouts (185Kip6odGYs4eSHD6DYsWVDJBg2DNLfiV since 2013-09-04 with an effective ~65GH/s hashrate).
hero member
Activity: 499
Merit: 500
It only moves the situation from BTCGuild's "problem" to Asicminers'.  It doesn't solve the underlying problem of a single large hasher.

I fail to see how some one entity having 10%, 15% or even 20% of the hashing power represents a "problem".  Care to explain, or better yet, rather than gumming up this thread, create/link to the thread that explains your viewpoint?
vip
Activity: 574
Merit: 500
Don't send me a pm unless you gpg encrypt it.
This also helps out with BTCGuild's situation of being in possession of too much hashing power.


It only moves the situation from BTCGuild's "problem" to Asicminers'.  It doesn't solve the underlying problem of a single large hasher.
-ck
legendary
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631
Ruu \o/
As I said - go read the p2pool thread ... sigh.

The reason why Josh has sent a Jalapeno to forrestv is coz even a 5GH/s device makes p2pool use up 100% CPU and cause immense problems when it is talking to the other p2pools.
It's also most likely directly related to the issue with Avalons.

Edit: and you even posted (after it) on the page that has the discussion ... I take it reading the posts in the p2pool thread is too boring?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1970271

No, I've read it. ckolivas doesn't report his node efficiency, so his post doesn't exhibit any problem until he reports it. If you still don't understand that stales on p2pool are not a problem if you have around 100% efficiency, there's not much I can do to explain it further...
Efficiency was close to zero with an Avalon mining stratum on p2pool.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 501
Maybe solo mined blocks have address tags like they do in blockchaininfo so shareholders can monitor.  Or is that a bad idea?

A comment can be attached to the coinbase.

https://blockchain.info/tx/06e1227819722bf68a16dd783aeddd9aaca931ac28051b26853281cc21126642
Vbs
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
With 8.7TH at current 10076292 difficulty, that's an average of 121.6 blocks/week (3040 BTC). There is really no need for anything more elaborate than solo mining. Any new element is always a possible point of failure in a system.
hero member
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
As I said - go read the p2pool thread ... sigh.

The reason why Josh has sent a Jalapeno to forrestv is coz even a 5GH/s device makes p2pool use up 100% CPU and cause immense problems when it is talking to the other p2pools.
It's also most likely directly related to the issue with Avalons.

Edit: and you even posted (after it) on the page that has the discussion ... I take it reading the posts in the p2pool thread is too boring?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1970271

No, I've read it. ckolivas doesn't report his node efficiency, so his post doesn't exhibit any problem until he reports it. If you still don't understand that stales on p2pool are not a problem if you have around 100% efficiency, there's not much I can do to explain it further...
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 13
They won't do p2pool.
They only need to point one 10GH/s board at it and they'll see the current problems with p2pool.
Then imagine 8TH/s ...
Read the p2pool thread for more details.

Still spreading FUD around? I've used p2pool with more than 10GH/s for months and didn't have any problem with it. Unless ASICMINER tests p2pool (probably using a stratum proxy) there's no way to know if it will or won't work well with their hardware.
As I said - go read the p2pool thread ... sigh.

The reason why Josh has sent a Jalapeno to forrestv is coz even a 5GH/s device makes p2pool use up 100% CPU and cause immense problems when it is talking to the other p2pools.
It's also most likely directly related to the issue with Avalons.

Edit: and you even posted (after it) on the page that has the discussion ... I take it reading the posts in the p2pool thread is too boring?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1970271

That's not due to the hashrate. It's latency caused by the design of the hardware. ASICMINER gear (being different) may not have that problem. p2pool can pretty obviously handle lots more than 5Gh/s.

Maybe the thing to do is to ask someone who has won an ASICMINER blade auction and see how it worked for them on p2pool.
legendary
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
They won't do p2pool.
They only need to point one 10GH/s board at it and they'll see the current problems with p2pool.
Then imagine 8TH/s ...
Read the p2pool thread for more details.

Still spreading FUD around? I've used p2pool with more than 10GH/s for months and didn't have any problem with it. Unless ASICMINER tests p2pool (probably using a stratum proxy) there's no way to know if it will or won't work well with their hardware.
As I said - go read the p2pool thread ... sigh.

The reason why Josh has sent a Jalapeno to forrestv is coz even a 5GH/s device makes p2pool use up 100% CPU and cause immense problems when it is talking to the other p2pools.
It's also most likely directly related to the issue with Avalons.

Edit: and you even posted (after it) on the page that has the discussion ... I take it reading the posts in the p2pool thread is too boring?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1970271
newbie
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
Maybe solo mined blocks have address tags like they do in blockchaininfo so shareholders can monitor.  Or is that a bad idea?
did't Friedcat mentioned that in his post?
...We plan to do it with writing information to the coinbase transaction to let everyone check.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
Maybe solo mined blocks have address tags like they do in blockchaininfo so shareholders can monitor.  Or is that a bad idea?
newbie
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
Over time this may be the large problem. ASICMINER may become rouge itself.
I see little difference between central bank and dozen mining companies. Especially if half of them will be in one country.
you can see how hard is to get and maintain at least 10%. and when you have problems to climb to 15% when whole network has 80TH/s, it will not get easier "over time" when whole network will have few hundreds TH/s. and now it is probably mostly about deploying, but "over time" it will be also about maintain, debugging and replacing units.
and if you think that "over time" it will be easier to AM, because the team will have know how in anything, that means Avalon and other will have also know how about what they do. and they need to get know how just about assembling and selling, but AM needs know how about assembling, getting power, making efficient internal network...  It is not like multiple n-times what we do and the result will be n-times bigger.

you can see, that it is not so easy for example on this:
... If we get the 60TH/s online (conservative) in late April, ...
and even IF AM could get any close to 50%, why would somebody be afraid of AM if their intends are clear and public? (I know why, just trying to point to something) There can be already some evil 51% miner hidden in the the network, but nobody is panicking because nobody can see that in charts. so please do not panic about AM.

I hope that nobody will take my citation of Friedcat as I'm complaining about AM. Just getting sick about 51%, if the shares are under or over valuated. Guys, please, try to move all the speculations to other place. just trying to find Friedcat post (throught his last posts) about the 10% took me a while. By my opinion, this thread should be about updates, trading possibilities, and company plans and the only acceptable speculation here was about where and how fast is AM mining.

btw: I probably never wrote, but:
Friedcat and others around, thank you very much for AM. Have good luck (and enough kW and space) in the future.
hero member
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
They won't do p2pool.
They only need to point one 10GH/s board at it and they'll see the current problems with p2pool.
Then imagine 8TH/s ...
Read the p2pool thread for more details.

Still spreading FUD around? I've used p2pool with more than 10GH/s for months and didn't have any problem with it. Unless ASICMINER tests p2pool (probably using a stratum proxy) there's no way to know if it will or won't work well with their hardware.
sr. member
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
http://coin.furuknap.net/
Years of playing World of Warcraft [it kept me sane during college and a bit after] have just instilled the need to troll whenever I see 'rouge' Smiley.

Well, I guess that those college years have killed your career working in or managing a chain of cosmetics stores, then :-)

.b
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007
I can't resist responding...I'm so sorry friedcat for putting these here, but it's irresistable:

Well, I really meant the redish type of entity!

 Tongue

.b

Years of playing World of Warcraft [it kept me sane during college and a bit after] have just instilled the need to troll whenever I see 'rouge' Smiley.
sr. member
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
http://coin.furuknap.net/
I can't resist responding...I'm so sorry friedcat for putting these here, but it's irresistable:

Well, I really meant the redish type of entity!

 Tongue

.b
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007
I can't resist responding...I'm so sorry friedcat for putting these here, but it's irresistable:

ASICMINER may become rouge itself.

thus making the network more resiliant to a rouge entity wishing to attack.


Rouge
member
Activity: 106
Merit: 10
Again I see little difference between one central regulator and 10 major players. It is not a peering network.
Heck I gues even 10 players won't last for long. It somehow always goes to two entities.
Republicans vs democrats
Intel vs amd
iOS vs android
Coca cola vs pepsi
Paper or plastic Smiley

Ok this is offtopic. I'm going to stop here.
Jump to:
© 2020, Bitcointalksearch.org