It is quiet here.
not just here, from 50btc daily volume to 2btc
Topic: [BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed Since 2014 - page 222. (Read 1210779 times)
November 08, 2014, 05:37:53 PM
not just here, from 50btc daily volume to 2btc
November 08, 2014, 01:09:22 PM
It is quiet here.
not just here, from 50btc daily volume to 2btc
November 08, 2014, 10:01:00 AM
It is quiet here.
November 05, 2014, 01:59:23 PM
everything quite quiet right now ..
whats about multisig by the way? anything there already?
there is an open bazaar beta, would be nice to have BBR compatible
whats about multisig by the way? anything there already?
there is an open bazaar beta, would be nice to have BBR compatible
We are working.)
November 05, 2014, 10:47:29 AM
everything quite quiet right now ..
whats about multisig by the way? anything there already?
there is an open bazaar beta, would be nice to have BBR compatible
whats about multisig by the way? anything there already?
there is an open bazaar beta, would be nice to have BBR compatible
November 03, 2014, 09:52:28 AM
as soon as btc will turn back up..
BBR is so underrated again imo
BBR is so underrated again imo
So true. All the quality alts are waiting on BTC to lead the way.
November 02, 2014, 06:22:13 PM
Yes i made a mistake. But I am surprised that everybody is on that one pool.
I keep getting disconnects from that pool and would switch but no other decent pool out there.
Not really true. I have have using bbr.poolto.be the past week with good results, in doing my small part to divert some hashes from cncoin.I keep getting disconnects from that pool and would switch but no other decent pool out there.
Also mining at bbr.poolto.be for the last month or so, with no problems except occasional minor payout delays when simplewallet decides to fubar, but PCFil is usually responsive in #boolberry on freenode if you bug him to restart simplewallet.
pointing one miner to bbr.poolto.be since 2 days, works great / 1% fee / payouts OK
November 02, 2014, 05:41:28 PM
I made some changes to /r/boolberry at http://www.reddit.com/r/boolberry/ to try and prettify it a little bit. Please come stop by and let me know what you think if you have a minute.
i would choose the dark blue banner with white logo and font or the white one with "bbr blue" on top (100% width, no gradient).
for article headings i would use the color from the banner (dark blue or light blue) , but maybe bitcrea has some ideas since he is doing currently the gui design.
regards
Thanks for suggestions. I kinda like the gradient banner, but I agree the colors could use a little tweaking. I'll wait and see if/what anyone else has to say...
November 02, 2014, 04:49:51 PM
I made some changes to /r/boolberry at http://www.reddit.com/r/boolberry/ to try and prettify it a little bit. Please come stop by and let me know what you think if you have a minute.
i would choose the dark blue banner with white logo and font or the white one with "bbr blue" on top (100% width, no gradient).
for article headings i would use the color from the banner (dark blue or light blue) , but maybe bitcrea has some ideas since he is doing currently the gui design.
regards
November 02, 2014, 03:49:48 PM
I made some changes to /r/boolberry at http://www.reddit.com/r/boolberry/ to try and prettify it a little bit. Please come stop by and let me know what you think if you have a minute.
November 01, 2014, 05:12:08 PM
Yes i made a mistake. But I am surprised that everybody is on that one pool.
I keep getting disconnects from that pool and would switch but no other decent pool out there.
Not really true. I have have using bbr.poolto.be the past week with good results, in doing my small part to divert some hashes from cncoin.I keep getting disconnects from that pool and would switch but no other decent pool out there.
Also mining at bbr.poolto.be for the last month or so, with no problems except occasional minor payout delays when simplewallet decides to fubar, but PCFil is usually responsive in #boolberry on freenode if you bug him to restart simplewallet.
November 01, 2014, 04:34:08 PM
Yes i made a mistake. But I am surprised that everybody is on that one pool.
I keep getting disconnects from that pool and would switch but no other decent pool out there.
Not really true. I have have using bbr.poolto.be the past week with good results, in doing my small part to divert some hashes from cncoin.I keep getting disconnects from that pool and would switch but no other decent pool out there.
November 01, 2014, 04:20:57 PM
Yes i made a mistake. But I am surprised that everybody is on that one pool.
I keep getting disconnects from that pool and would switch but no other decent pool out there.
Not really true. I have have using bbr.poolto.be the past week with good results, in doing my small part to divert some hashes from cncoin. I keep getting disconnects from that pool and would switch but no other decent pool out there.
November 01, 2014, 12:20:09 PM
Yes i made a mistake. But I am surprised that everybody is on that one pool.
I keep getting disconnects from that pool and would switch but no other decent pool out there.
I keep getting disconnects from that pool and would switch but no other decent pool out there.
November 01, 2014, 10:46:38 AM
I'm not so sure it's just variance. I wrote a script for monero that xnbya runs with some modifications here ( http://minexmr.com/pools.html ), and in my experience it's not sometimes, it is all the time that the sum of the known pools hashrates adds up to be 20-33% larger than the hashrate calculated from the diff. I think the diff is based on last 24 hours, and the pools base their hashrate on the diff of blocks over the last 10 or 30 minutes. Maybe I'm wrong, but if it was just variance in the hashrate, then at some point the calculated network hashrate would be higher than the sum of the pools (since this isn't even including unknown/private pools and solo miners), but in my experience this is never true - the sum of the known pools is always greater than the calculated network hashrate. I don't know why this would be, just an observation from monero that also seems to hold true for boolberry and bytecoin.
If it is consistently true and doesn't swing the other direction as well, then the pools are overstating their hash rate. Simple as that.
That seems reasonable. Maybe not anything malicious, but just a bug in the node pool software perhaps?
November 01, 2014, 10:36:07 AM
I'm not so sure it's just variance. I wrote a script for monero that xnbya runs with some modifications here ( http://minexmr.com/pools.html ), and in my experience it's not sometimes, it is all the time that the sum of the known pools hashrates adds up to be 20-33% larger than the hashrate calculated from the diff. I think the diff is based on last 24 hours, and the pools base their hashrate on the diff of blocks over the last 10 or 30 minutes. Maybe I'm wrong, but if it was just variance in the hashrate, then at some point the calculated network hashrate would be higher than the sum of the pools (since this isn't even including unknown/private pools and solo miners), but in my experience this is never true - the sum of the known pools is always greater than the calculated network hashrate. I don't know why this would be, just an observation from monero that also seems to hold true for boolberry and bytecoin.
If it is consistently true and doesn't swing the other direction as well, then the pools are overstating their hash rate. Simple as that.
That seems reasonable. Maybe not anything malicious, but just a bug in the node pool software perhaps?
November 01, 2014, 10:26:19 AM
I'm not so sure it's just variance. I wrote a script for monero that xnbya runs with some modifications here ( http://minexmr.com/pools.html ), and in my experience it's not sometimes, it is all the time that the sum of the known pools hashrates adds up to be 20-33% larger than the hashrate calculated from the diff. I think the diff is based on last 24 hours, and the pools base their hashrate on the diff of blocks over the last 10 or 30 minutes. Maybe I'm wrong, but if it was just variance in the hashrate, then at some point the calculated network hashrate would be higher than the sum of the pools (since this isn't even including unknown/private pools and solo miners), but in my experience this is never true - the sum of the known pools is always greater than the calculated network hashrate. I don't know why this would be, just an observation from monero that also seems to hold true for boolberry and bytecoin.
If it is consistently true and doesn't swing the other direction as well, then the pools are overstating their hash rate. Simple as that.
November 01, 2014, 05:02:44 AM
It's probably just variance as the nethash calculations are just based on the timing between blocks and are just an estimate.
Hadn't considered that. Doesn't it take like 24 hours or so for the net hash/difficulty to catch up w/ the actual hash rate?
Is all this hash rate new?
Edit:
I love the charts on the website.
Seems like the good doctor has picked up the interest of a large friend, looking at the chart, you're correct, we're dealing with both variance and a surge in hashrate within the last day:
http://boolberry.com/state.html
Hope they're looking to hold!
I'm not so sure it's just variance. I wrote a script for monero that xnbya runs with some modifications here ( http://minexmr.com/pools.html ), and in my experience it's not sometimes, it is all the time that the sum of the known pools hashrates adds up to be 20-33% larger than the hashrate calculated from the diff. I think the diff is based on last 24 hours, and the pools base their hashrate on the diff of blocks over the last 10 or 30 minutes. Maybe I'm wrong, but if it was just variance in the hashrate, then at some point the calculated network hashrate would be higher than the sum of the pools (since this isn't even including unknown/private pools and solo miners), but in my experience this is never true - the sum of the known pools is always greater than the calculated network hashrate. I don't know why this would be, just an observation from monero that also seems to hold true for boolberry and bytecoin.
November 01, 2014, 03:43:18 AM
It's probably just variance as the nethash calculations are just based on the timing between blocks and are just an estimate.
Hadn't considered that. Doesn't it take like 24 hours or so for the net hash/difficulty to catch up w/ the actual hash rate?
Is all this hash rate new?
Edit:
I love the charts on the website.
Seems like the good doctor has picked up the interest of a large friend, looking at the chart, you're correct, we're dealing with both variance and a surge in hashrate within the last day:
http://boolberry.com/state.html
Hope they're looking to hold!
November 01, 2014, 03:37:33 AM
I think this coin might be forked. Why is it that all the hashrate is at cncoin farm???
I tried looking for another pool but can't find any. Seems like they have like 110% of the hashrate right now.
SOmething isn't right here.
I tried looking for another pool but can't find any. Seems like they have like 110% of the hashrate right now.
SOmething isn't right here.
http://bbr.geilidao.com//
http://cncoin.farm/
top one is .7 Gh, bottom one is 1.46Gh
Other pools are ~.01 Gh and below.
Net hash from the top two pools combined = 2.16 Gh, yet net reported by both is 1.57 Gh
So either the reporting mechanism for the pools is off, or someones got a hell of a duplicate share bug and it's skewing the hashrate of one of the pools. Prob just a bad net hash calculator.
Minergate/chainradar also say 1.46 Gh
Maybe ask the pool ops?
It's probably just variance as the nethash calculations are just based on the timing between blocks and are just an estimate.
Jump to: