Topic: http://www.pyramining.com/ - Discussion thread (no advertising here) - page 61. (Read 318060 times)
September 17, 2013, 06:52:40 AM
Can I get invite?>I have been advertising in the forums
September 17, 2013, 04:16:07 AM
p2pool.info
September 13, 2013, 10:03:40 PM
works again
Still not working for me. No CATHPA, as of 10:00PM EST
ART
10:50PM EST still no go on my side, in chrome or IE.
Code:
Failed to load resource: the server responded with a status of 500 (Internal Server Error) http://pyramining.com/simple_captcha?code=0d229f104d6d3e547a8b4626c5286f8d75a93ec8&time=1379127775
Looks like there script isn't working correctly.
September 17, 2013, 02:26:43 AM
Pool Hashrate: 11923.1 GH/sEstimated Time to Block: 11h16mCurrent Round: 1d14h19m
September 17, 2013, 12:46:57 AM
I still think new deposits should get all the power from the new infrastructure with the exception of the 30% going upwards of course. This would call for a lower ROI for new investors (which we need to keep it going) and thus we'll get a lot more ASIC power. Of course this means that newer investors get more bitcoins than the old, but I thinks it's totally fair that way, as it'll benefit older investors in the long run as the newer ones finishes.
I'm just trying to get some ideas going...
I'm just trying to get some ideas going...
Like the idea, but I'd make it work on deposits, not accounts that way all can benefit as soon as implemented.
So this is basically my suggestion except that I opt for a compromise. Instead of new deposits getting all the power from the new infrastructure they get half. And the other half they use to join the pool. It's a trade-off. Actually, by the time the deposits expire, there won't be any benefit towards old deposits. That's why you need a compromise.
Agree in any form of permanent presence actually an interesting idea would be to keep the 70/30 ratio now but instead of sponsorship rewards like now, 70% is fixed presence and 30% is community hash rate. With 30% of you're personal impact (fixed + proportional community reserve) going to your sponsors as is the case now.
September 17, 2013, 12:41:03 AM
I still think new deposits should get all the power from the new infrastructure with the exception of the 30% going upwards of course. This would call for a lower ROI for new investors (which we need to keep it going) and thus we'll get a lot more ASIC power. Of course this means that newer investors get more bitcoins than the old, but I thinks it's totally fair that way, as it'll benefit older investors in the long run as the newer ones finishes.
I'm just trying to get some ideas going...
I'm just trying to get some ideas going...
Like the idea, but I'd make it work on deposits, not accounts that way all can benefit as soon as implemented.
So this is basically my suggestion except that I opt for a compromise. Instead of new deposits getting all the power from the new infrastructure they get half. And the other half they use to join the pool. It's a trade-off. Actually, by the time the deposits expire, there won't be any benefit towards old deposits. That's why you need a compromise.
September 17, 2013, 12:34:13 AM
Yeah I think you have a very valid point. Currently the system is broken.
Your hashing power increases over time, when old deposits become complete. And it increases further when new deposits are made. So even if it may seem broken at start, it will turn to an advantage later.
Except that there is not much incentive for people to make new deposits.
Do you understand my idea? It incentivises investors while at the same time increasing the pool. And if the current infrastructure is ever higher than the new infrastructure cost (this is caused by old deposits getting finished), my suggestion will protect old investors. And new investors will still get a fantastic deal but not total exposure. If they had total exposure then current infrastructure will decrease a lot quicker to new infrastructure rate.
September 16, 2013, 11:02:50 PM
I still think new deposits should get all the power from the new infrastructure with the exception of the 30% going upwards of course. This would call for a lower ROI for new investors (which we need to keep it going) and thus we'll get a lot more ASIC power. Of course this means that newer investors get more bitcoins than the old, but I thinks it's totally fair that way, as it'll benefit older investors in the long run as the newer ones finishes.
Another idea is that you can add the ability to make accounts where you can't have any referral accounts, but the benefit is that you get almost all of the ASIC mining power (like the above). This would mean that any investor right now who wouldn't have been able to benefit from the changes, now benefit in the way that new accounts have to use an older account as sponsor..
I'm just trying to get some ideas going...
Another idea is that you can add the ability to make accounts where you can't have any referral accounts, but the benefit is that you get almost all of the ASIC mining power (like the above). This would mean that any investor right now who wouldn't have been able to benefit from the changes, now benefit in the way that new accounts have to use an older account as sponsor..
I'm just trying to get some ideas going...
Like the idea, but I'd make it work on deposits, not accounts that way all can benefit as soon as implemented.
September 16, 2013, 08:15:11 PM
Yeah I think you have a very valid point. Currently the system is broken.
Your hashing power increases over time, when old deposits become complete. And it increases further when new deposits are made. So even if it may seem broken at start, it will turn to an advantage later.
September 16, 2013, 08:12:44 PM
Another idea is that you can add the ability to make accounts where you can't have any referral accounts, but the benefit is that you get almost all of the ASIC mining power (like the above). This would mean that any investor right now who wouldn't have been able to benefit from the changes, now benefit in the way that new accounts have to use an older account as sponsor..
I may think about implementing such feature: accounts without sponsor/referrals. I will still need a couple of weeks to arrange things in racks (to install things faster I made a mess of boards and wires, not my style
) and then I will start thinking/implementing new features. September 16, 2013, 08:09:01 PM
Is there any intention to invest in the next generation of ASIC? Currently difficulty is increasing at approx 30% per 10 days, so reward time which is currently approx 3 years will start getting longer again. Not a complaint just an honest inquiry!
Yes of course, but I will choose only "readily available" products, no preorder. I don't want to risk your money... everyday new investments are (and will be) made with the cheaper solution available that may be our current asics or any product available on the market that can beat them.
September 16, 2013, 08:06:54 PM
Captcha broken on my side too and I get this error when I don't enter the captcha :
Sorry for the captcha trouble. The /tmp (ramdisk) was full, and I didn't notice it early enough!
September 16, 2013, 08:05:21 PM
Do you plan to keep on adding your own hardware the next few weeks or maybe there is some other product at your reach which could beat your hardware´s performance.
Don´t want to steal much of your precious time elaborating a long answer. Just, is there other overally worthy hardware or is yours currently still unbeatable in the short term?
Don´t want to steal much of your precious time elaborating a long answer. Just, is there other overally worthy hardware or is yours currently still unbeatable in the short term?
When there will be a better product available it would be stupid insisting with the current one. I think that until December actual units can do their job quite well. I am starting to plan the next step, it may be a second version of the current ASIC or maybe I will find an agreement with one chipmaker and start building from there. Things are becoming more complex and I am not sure I can beat big organizations with a complete experienced staff. If other makers (for example, cointerra) will deliver something interesting, that could be the way. By acquiring chips in quantity it should allow to reach a lower price/performances than the complete product.
September 14, 2013, 07:10:15 PM
I still think new deposits should get all the power from the new infrastructure with the exception of the 30% going upwards of course. This would call for a lower ROI for new investors (which we need to keep it going) and thus we'll get a lot more ASIC power. Of course this means that newer investors get more bitcoins than the old, but I thinks it's totally fair that way, as it'll benefit older investors in the long run as the newer ones finishes.
Another idea is that you can add the ability to make accounts where you can't have any referral accounts, but the benefit is that you get almost all of the ASIC mining power (like the above). This would mean that any investor right now who wouldn't have been able to benefit from the changes, now benefit in the way that new accounts have to use an older account as sponsor..
I'm just trying to get some ideas going...
Another idea is that you can add the ability to make accounts where you can't have any referral accounts, but the benefit is that you get almost all of the ASIC mining power (like the above). This would mean that any investor right now who wouldn't have been able to benefit from the changes, now benefit in the way that new accounts have to use an older account as sponsor..
I'm just trying to get some ideas going...
Or maybe you can reach a compromise. 50% of your deposit goes towards buying your own hardware. The other 50% goes towards buying hardware for the pool (and you get that much stake in the pool).
Wondering if that would be hard to implement.
Say, you invest 1 Bitcoin.
Current infrastructure: 222.74 MH/BTC
New infrastructure: ~ 2127.66 MH
So You would get 1063.83 MH for buying new equipment.
And the other 0.5 btc will go towards buying the pool 1063.83 MH.
So then your pool stake would net you (111.37 MH + increase from you)
Yeah I think you have a very valid point. Currently the system is broken.
It's like this analogy that I read recently. I'll post soon.
September 14, 2013, 04:39:56 PM
September 14, 2013, 01:09:57 PM
Working for me now!
September 14, 2013, 11:23:08 AM
Still not working for me. No CATHPA!! 
September 14, 2013, 04:14:26 AM
I still think new deposits should get all the power from the new infrastructure with the exception of the 30% going upwards of course. This would call for a lower ROI for new investors (which we need to keep it going) and thus we'll get a lot more ASIC power. Of course this means that newer investors get more bitcoins than the old, but I thinks it's totally fair that way, as it'll benefit older investors in the long run as the newer ones finishes.
Another idea is that you can add the ability to make accounts where you can't have any referral accounts, but the benefit is that you get almost all of the ASIC mining power (like the above). This would mean that any investor right now who wouldn't have been able to benefit from the changes, now benefit in the way that new accounts have to use an older account as sponsor..
I'm just trying to get some ideas going...
Another idea is that you can add the ability to make accounts where you can't have any referral accounts, but the benefit is that you get almost all of the ASIC mining power (like the above). This would mean that any investor right now who wouldn't have been able to benefit from the changes, now benefit in the way that new accounts have to use an older account as sponsor..
I'm just trying to get some ideas going...
September 14, 2013, 03:06:21 AM
I do not like captchas but I really hate it when they do not work properly.
Pls fix this :-)
ty
Pls fix this :-)
ty
September 13, 2013, 10:33:58 PM
Still not working for me. No CATHPA
Jump to: