Topic: error - page 60. (Read 360507 times)

i can recommend n0nplusultra pools...there i know for a fact the admin is no scammer...

Well, after hashcows jumpped on it, the difficulty went from 38 to 53 when I checked :O

That's great! Happy to have another one join. I do find it strange that your stats are not reporting the same pool hashrate as the other ones but maybe that's because it's not online that long yet.

Existing entrypoints that I know of (disclaimer: the first is mine):

http://rpc.freily.com/
http://rav3n.dtdns.net:9127/
http://p2pool.name:9127/
http://solidpool.org


Hash away!

EDIT:

I found out that you're payout page does not list the same addresses as the rest of the pools, which also explains the pool hashrate difference. Did you start from rav3n his code or did you roll your own?

no i don't think so...it could be possible to implement some preventions other then difficulty change algos into the coin source but that is something you really would have to know what you are doing and i suppose a lot of work...(for example the coin network could reject shares that come from one source with a hashrate greater than a certain perecentage of the nethash)

like i posted above, what some folks clearly don't wanna hear (don't ask me why), the only possibility to stop this is either get multipools to stop mining coins who are smaller in nethash then their own pool or miners don't using multipools anymore... (btw: hashcows just stopped mining RPC after 2 hours and here we are at 53 it never came to drop down from 47 to 43...)

Anybody know what happened to ronpaulcoin.minercoop.org?  I was mining there all day yesterday and hadn't cashed out yet, now the domain is completely unresponsive.  Am I being scammed by startup pools that are just looking to grift early coins?

Now mining at rpc.cryptocoinpools.co.uk, and everything seems good so far (plus 0% transaction fees!).  Anybody know if this pool is reputable, or is this going to happen to me again tomorrow?

Thanks,

Anyway you can ban these guys from mining the coins then ?

wtf?! soviet russia?!

free market of morons if you all behave like this and don't stop and think about what i'm saying...but suite yourselves...if you don't get my good intentions then i just wish rpc good luck! and may the multipools spare him...

This just in: if I start seeing any more arguments for or against multipools I'm going to have colin make me moderator and start deleting them. This thread is for RPC discussion. Whatever your position is on multipools, this thread is not the place for evangelizing for or against them....at least not NEARLY in the quantity we've seen in the past 20 pages.

Let's make this thread more helpful for those who are new to the coin, as well as more productive for how we're going to keep moving forward. Multipools are a fact of the crypto-world so the round-and-round needs to stop ASAP in favor of discussing real progress.

Instead of arguing for or against multis, what about your thoughts on next step for the coin or a bounty you think we should post up? That sounds LIGHT YEARS better.

Let's do this.
-onaboat

Mike, this is not Soviet Russia.

No state planned economy here, instead we have free trade, free market, little or no rules but we adhere to them.
We don't send people to Siberia for mining "your" coin.

As I an others have pointed out btc4ever is a douchbag who is talking about people who are being present in third person, if you can't say something to my face sir it is just poor of you...just because i don't aprove of your law of the jungle logic...

an clearly you didn't invest a little bit of time reading my statements or thinking about the issue...clearly you don't understand how the system works...otherwise you would see my point...

As I and others have pointed out, Mike is blaming the multipools for RPC coin technical choices that have made it especially susceptible to getting stuck at high difficulties.   But he does it so loudly it seems like 20 people.   ;-)

Gee, have multipools killed Doge?

People are going to do what is most profitable for them.   This is called free will, free market, and rational self interest.   Get used to it Mike, mmm kay?

I recently launched a store, and am selling 0% fees to all of my pools for $1!!! Some of you have paid this in fees time over time already =)

I'd also accept the equivalent in RPC =)
Check it out!!

store.cryptotycoons.com

Also feel free to post items for sale! Its a craigslist style store. Currently prices are listed in $$ due to how unstable the prices are.
In a future release there will be live conversions to various alt coins at the time of listing.
The site handles no coin/money; similar to craigslist, you send an email to the owner to begin negotiations.


_______________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________

FIRST NORTH AMERICAN Pool
URL: rpc.cryptotycoons.com
Please sign up and give it a try!!
.5% fees!
withdrawal fees are 0.0001 RPC
DDOS protection
over 3.0 Ths bandwidth!
Enterprise Hardware!
I'm also the owner of the official forum at ronpaulcoin.cryptotycoons.com and many other pools which you can see at cryptotycoons.com!

This is one of the oldest, most trusted pools for this coin =)
Come join it!!! =D

it's still 47 and nothing has really settled as long as hashcows is taping in to the system the difficulty will always go up and down...all the stats are wrong nethash should lie by about 500gh/s an that woul be a difficulty of i would estimate much lower then 47 or even 43...more like 10-20...

The problem with the chosen solution is that it only reduces the scale of the problem.  Changing up to 11% every 48 blocks means there's an hour and a half of profitable mining time for the multipools before they can jump ship.  So the problem goes from days to hours, but it's still a problem.  Plus, the difficulty comes down as slowly as it goes up (by only 11% at a time).

In my opinion, the only true way to combat the multipools is with something that changes more instantaneously, such as the "gravity well."

So it looks like RPC has settled at difficulty of 43

I don't really see where that solves the problem....look over to 42 that's what the dev of that coin thought to and look at it bouncing! but yeah make yourself illusions as much as you want...

patience people....admins are also just human beings who make little mistakes from time to time...but i'll let them know to announce such work, if possible...

i for my part am curious to see what they are up to...still waiting for the community page, you'll see me there as an operator when it's finished... 

Hi guys!

P2pool mining pool for those who do not want to be cheated, 1% fee only.

http://solidpool.org

cgminer --scrypt -Q 0 -o solidpool.org:9127 -u your_ronpaulcoin_wallet_address -p x


Stats available: http://solidpool.org:9127/static/

For what it's worth the problem isn't really multipools causing huge fluctuations in hash rate.

The problem is braindead difficulty adjustments giving those huge fluctuations in hash rate positive rather than negative feedback.  When you have a situation where a feedback mechanism causes oscillations around a mean to get larger and larger rather than smaller and smaller, that's an unstable system.  And that's where RPC had gotten to, alternating between ridiculously low and ridiculously high difficulty, where the low difficulty attracted the hash power that led to high difficulty.

There were any number of possible simple fixes to the code.  Now that we've committed to one of them, the problem will go away.  But here in no particular order are a number of things that would have worked.

Difficulty adjustment limited to some smallish percentage per adjustment period (this is what we went with).  

New difficulty based on average hash rate for previous three or more adjustment periods rather than previous one.

Where D is new difficulty calculated on the basis of hash power over previous _single_ adjustment period, new difficulty is X% of old difficulty plus (100-X)% of D.  ("gravity well")

Difficulty increases by a fixed percentage if total block count is ahead of (total clock time since launch) / (nominal block time) and decreases by a small fixed percentage otherwise.  (note that this can be applied as an adjustment to any of the above, rather than just being used on its own).

Etc.