@Sun, please keep the negative rhetoric off the forum going forward.
The conversation is between noxpost and I.
Topic: BiblePay | 10% to Orphan-Charity | RANDOMX MINING | Sanctuaries (Masternodes) - page 179. (Read 243386 times)
April 05, 2019, 12:10:58 PM
The conversation is between noxpost and I.
April 05, 2019, 12:07:40 PM
and what exactly is wrong if one ad is displayed at the bottom of the page. Page owner has to earn some revenue dont you think.
BBP would have no control over the specific ads. It would be a matter of time before the ad server brought up an ad that would be embarrassing and unfitting to BBP.
April 05, 2019, 11:12:37 AM
@Sun, please keep the negative rhetoric off the forum going forward.
April 05, 2019, 10:38:38 AM
If someone has a gambling problem, would you want to show them Bitcoin Casino ads when they visit BiblePay Explorer?
If I own a bitcoin casino yes
April 05, 2019, 10:11:03 AM
and what exactly is wrong if one ad is displayed at the bottom of the page. Page owner has to earn some revenue dont you think.
April 05, 2019, 08:30:31 AM
I think a few €uros more per month. Next round, if I'm still around and want to participate in BBP, I can ask. Otherwise, Rob can pay the BTC himself directly or put the proposal in himself. I don't think you should have to pay $40/mo to host explorer.biblepay.org though... Not fair to you and not a good value in terms of cost.
Maybe I missed something, but it seems kind of weird to just say that any one person in the community should "pay the BTC himself directly" as a funding option - right? I mean, if it's an explorer for the community, I would think that a proposal is the way to go, allowing the community to vote on if we want an explorer without ads, and if so, if we are willing to pay. I'd love to see more and more features get created, and more community outreach and involvement, but I don't think it works if we put funding decisions or upfront on any one person (even if it is the person who is making the thing).
If I misread that, my bad, happy to be corrected.
April 04, 2019, 09:52:53 PM
New BiblePay Explorer
The proposal to fund a new BiblePay Explorer is now live.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/
Due to a misunderstanding with minimums (they wanted at least 6 months), the ad version of the explorer is running. My apologies if any ads being displayed are promoting non-Christian values.
Anyone can contribute BTC to fund help continue the Explorer.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/contribute.dws?coin=bbp
This run much faster than the current explorer and offers many analytics that the Iquudus Explorer.
The proposal to fund a new BiblePay Explorer is now live.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/
Due to a misunderstanding with minimums (they wanted at least 6 months), the ad version of the explorer is running. My apologies if any ads being displayed are promoting non-Christian values.
Anyone can contribute BTC to fund help continue the Explorer.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/contribute.dws?coin=bbp
This run much faster than the current explorer and offers many analytics that the Iquudus Explorer.
Awesome! How much more cost to get ads removed? Id vote yes for it!, Its really fast!
I think a few €uros more per month. Next round, if I'm still around and want to participate in BBP, I can ask. Otherwise, Rob can pay the BTC himself directly or put the proposal in himself. I don't think you should have to pay $40/mo to host explorer.biblepay.org though... Not fair to you and not a good value in terms of cost.
April 04, 2019, 06:32:54 PM
New BiblePay Explorer
The proposal to fund a new BiblePay Explorer is now live.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/
Due to a misunderstanding with minimums (they wanted at least 6 months), the ad version of the explorer is running. My apologies if any ads being displayed are promoting non-Christian values.
Anyone can contribute BTC to fund help continue the Explorer.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/contribute.dws?coin=bbp
This run much faster than the current explorer and offers many analytics that the Iquudus Explorer.
The proposal to fund a new BiblePay Explorer is now live.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/
Due to a misunderstanding with minimums (they wanted at least 6 months), the ad version of the explorer is running. My apologies if any ads being displayed are promoting non-Christian values.
Anyone can contribute BTC to fund help continue the Explorer.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/contribute.dws?coin=bbp
This run much faster than the current explorer and offers many analytics that the Iquudus Explorer.
Awesome! How much more cost to get ads removed? Id vote yes for it!, Its really fast!
April 04, 2019, 01:24:41 PM
In my country, evangelicals are considered an extremist organization.But charity is very good anyway.But judging by the orders on the exchanges, Your token has not been in demand lately.That's too bad.
April 04, 2019, 01:06:36 PM
Info on the 3 days of darkness:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PfGp_Jhe90
(Adding to our pool gospel links now).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PfGp_Jhe90
(Adding to our pool gospel links now).
April 04, 2019, 12:38:54 PM
and does purepool check the nonce as each small share is solved?
Yes, purepool checks the nonce on every share.
One more dumb question, you said 25% more on solo than multi against purepool, I know this sounds relatively dumb but are you positive those figs are not reversed? As Capulo is seeing the opposite with 100 running for 4 hours.
Yes, I'm a sure the numbers are right
But as said, my test might be simply different from what capulo had done. My test was much shorter, too. I simply can't run the test for 4 hours right now, I need to wait for the weekend to do that.
But at the same time, I'm not sure if there isn't another factor of importance here:
pool has limit 40 threads... so you cant use 320, but i'm not sure if also purepool has limit
No, purepool does not limit the threads. No information given by the client that can not be verified is part of the checks. Only the calculated share is of importance, it must be unique and valid.
Everything else seems quite easy to fake, so I don't think it is of any use to build on these.
But given that 40 threads and 320 theads are quite different, what happens if you run 8 wallets with 5 threads each = 40 threads. That would be a fair run, and ensure that the thread count isn't the "problem".
Aside from that, I'm not sure how any of this could be prevented, if it is true. What stops a user from creating multiple accounts on the main pool or purepool and run one wallet of the multi wallet setup per account against the pool? We could check the ip address, but that would harm other users, too, if we allow only one miner per IP.
Ok good on the nonce.
Maybe we will need to ask Capulo to run against purepool then and confirm.
We've ran the test multiple times and still arrive at the same results, but now that pool.biblepay is not rewarding for stale_share's I think his nodes are about even now.
The 40 thread limit on pool.biblepay is Only to prevent the pool from being hammered by chatty clients (its not to change payment results). Threads of 80 for example require the pool to respond more and imho no one needs it (they can max out their processor with 20 threads).
April 04, 2019, 11:52:49 AM
and does purepool check the nonce as each small share is solved?
Yes, purepool checks the nonce on every share.
So, how does share difficulty submission work on purepool?
If we run 32 threads on a 4 core system, does that means each thread will submit lower difficulty shares more often than if using a 4 core with 4 threads?
Rob's pool is not accepting any share higher than current difficulty (which I think is weird). Are you doing that as well? All the pools I ever participated in will give share credit of whatever the current pool difficulty for the worker is. so, if pool accepts 1 diff, then even if you submit a share diff of 10, you only get credit of 1. I can only think higher share diff is rejected so discourage high hash rate pool participants.
That could explain why we have so many solo miners instead.
Quote from: capulo
capulo:
What's the advantage of running more threads than you have cores or hyperthreads?
April 04, 2019, 10:27:31 AM
New BiblePay Explorer
The proposal to fund a new BiblePay Explorer is now live.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/
Due to a misunderstanding with minimums (they wanted at least 6 months), the ad version of the explorer is running. My apologies if any ads being displayed are promoting non-Christian values.
Anyone can contribute BTC to fund help continue the Explorer.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/contribute.dws?coin=bbp
This run much faster than the current explorer and offers many analytics that the Iquudus Explorer.
The proposal to fund a new BiblePay Explorer is now live.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/
Due to a misunderstanding with minimums (they wanted at least 6 months), the ad version of the explorer is running. My apologies if any ads being displayed are promoting non-Christian values.
Anyone can contribute BTC to fund help continue the Explorer.
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/contribute.dws?coin=bbp
This run much faster than the current explorer and offers many analytics that the Iquudus Explorer.
April 04, 2019, 05:12:20 AM
restrictions are not good, any restriction can be bypassed. even if you do one miner per ID card, it still can be minable on grandpa
April 04, 2019, 02:11:10 AM
and does purepool check the nonce as each small share is solved?
Yes, purepool checks the nonce on every share.
One more dumb question, you said 25% more on solo than multi against purepool, I know this sounds relatively dumb but are you positive those figs are not reversed? As Capulo is seeing the opposite with 100 running for 4 hours.
Yes, I'm a sure the numbers are right
But as said, my test might be simply different from what capulo had done. My test was much shorter, too. I simply can't run the test for 4 hours right now, I need to wait for the weekend to do that.
But at the same time, I'm not sure if there isn't another factor of importance here:
pool has limit 40 threads... so you cant use 320, but i'm not sure if also purepool has limit
No, purepool does not limit the threads. No information given by the client that can not be verified is part of the checks. Only the calculated share is of importance, it must be unique and valid.
Everything else seems quite easy to fake, so I don't think it is of any use to build on these.
But given that 40 threads and 320 theads are quite different, what happens if you run 8 wallets with 5 threads each = 40 threads. That would be a fair run, and ensure that the thread count isn't the "problem".
Aside from that, I'm not sure how any of this could be prevented, if it is true. What stops a user from creating multiple accounts on the main pool or purepool and run one wallet of the multi wallet setup per account against the pool? We could check the ip address, but that would harm other users, too, if we allow only one miner per IP.
April 03, 2019, 06:44:31 PM
So, I run my test against purepool, but I couldn't verify what happened on the main pool.
Maybe my tests are wrong, but in my tests, a single wallet gets around 25% more shares than a multiwallet setup. Looks like the overhead kills hit here.
My test system: I created an VM with ubuntu 18.04 and biblepay from the official repo. I created a new wallet and run it for 1 hour against purepool with 16 threads on my cpu (with 16 cores).
After that, I created 8 new wallets (each from scratch) and pointed them to a new biblepay adress in purepool, each with two threads. The cpu usage was the same with both setups.
I even gave the multiwallet setup two minutes more time, as they needed more time to fully start.
I tried it with more wallets (16), but my internet connection died trying it. Not sure why, I suspect my internet box died with the many open connections.
Maybe it wasn't enough wallets, but I can't test with more until the end of the week with more wallets.
Was my setup wrong?
Maybe my tests are wrong, but in my tests, a single wallet gets around 25% more shares than a multiwallet setup. Looks like the overhead kills hit here.
My test system: I created an VM with ubuntu 18.04 and biblepay from the official repo. I created a new wallet and run it for 1 hour against purepool with 16 threads on my cpu (with 16 cores).
After that, I created 8 new wallets (each from scratch) and pointed them to a new biblepay adress in purepool, each with two threads. The cpu usage was the same with both setups.
I even gave the multiwallet setup two minutes more time, as they needed more time to fully start.
I tried it with more wallets (16), but my internet connection died trying it. Not sure why, I suspect my internet box died with the many open connections.
Maybe it wasn't enough wallets, but I can't test with more until the end of the week with more wallets.
Was my setup wrong?
Before I answer I just want to double check, how hard is each share (IE how many minutes does it take to solve one share on an avg pc), and does purepool check the nonce as each small share is solved? The reason I ask is pool.biblepay rejects nonces higher than the allowed nonce for the share.
One more dumb question, you said 25% more on solo than multi against purepool, I know this sounds relatively dumb but are you positive those figs are not reversed? As Capulo is seeing the opposite with 100 running for 4 hours.
It would be nice to see a duplicate of the findings.
April 03, 2019, 06:35:57 PM
Exciting to see what the summer brings for us, especially as interest in crypto (in general) tends to go up as the reference value (Bitcoin) increases. If that continues together with our new rebase and new features, it could be a great back half of the year for BBP. I'd love to see new users from a different user base / population segment, and to widen our impact on the world!
Let's rally for the Orphans in 2019!
April 03, 2019, 06:35:24 PM
So, I run my test against purepool, but I couldn't verify what happened on the main pool.
Maybe my tests are wrong, but in my tests, a single wallet gets around 25% more shares than a multiwallet setup. Looks like the overhead kills hit here.
My test system: I created an VM with ubuntu 18.04 and biblepay from the official repo. I created a new wallet and run it for 1 hour against purepool with 16 threads on my cpu (with 16 cores).
After that, I created 8 new wallets (each from scratch) and pointed them to a new biblepay adress in purepool, each with two threads. The cpu usage was the same with both setups.
I even gave the multiwallet setup two minutes more time, as they needed more time to fully start.
I tried it with more wallets (16), but my internet connection died trying it. Not sure why, I suspect my internet box died with the many open connections.
Maybe it wasn't enough wallets, but I can't test with more until the end of the week with more wallets.
Was my setup wrong?
Maybe my tests are wrong, but in my tests, a single wallet gets around 25% more shares than a multiwallet setup. Looks like the overhead kills hit here.
My test system: I created an VM with ubuntu 18.04 and biblepay from the official repo. I created a new wallet and run it for 1 hour against purepool with 16 threads on my cpu (with 16 cores).
After that, I created 8 new wallets (each from scratch) and pointed them to a new biblepay adress in purepool, each with two threads. The cpu usage was the same with both setups.
I even gave the multiwallet setup two minutes more time, as they needed more time to fully start.
I tried it with more wallets (16), but my internet connection died trying it. Not sure why, I suspect my internet box died with the many open connections.
Maybe it wasn't enough wallets, but I can't test with more until the end of the week with more wallets.
Was my setup wrong?
Before I answer I just want to double check, how hard is each share (IE how many minutes does it take to solve one share on an avg pc), and does purepool check the nonce as each small share is solved? The reason I ask is pool.biblepay rejects nonces higher than the allowed nonce for the share.
April 03, 2019, 06:31:57 PM
yeah thats right
pool has limit 40 threads... so you cant use 320, but i'm not sure if also purepool has limit
pool has limit 40 threads... so you cant use 320, but i'm not sure if also purepool has limit
How do you set more threads with one core?
Runs 40 mining threads regardless of cpu core count.
April 03, 2019, 04:57:48 PM
yeah thats right
pool has limit 40 threads... so you cant use 320, but i'm not sure if also purepool has limit
pool has limit 40 threads... so you cant use 320, but i'm not sure if also purepool has limit
How do you set more threads with one core?
Jump to: