https://www.kano.is/
and
https://kano.is/
for anyone missing the w key
Topic: KanoPool kano.is lowest 0.9% fee 🐈 since 2014 - Worldwide - 2432 blocks - page 2236. (Read 5351999 times)
November 10, 2014, 09:54:12 AM
If anyone was concerned about not having an https connection to the web site, I've just added that also.
https://www.kano.is/
and
https://kano.is/
for anyone missing the w key
https://www.kano.is/
and
https://kano.is/
for anyone missing the w key
November 10, 2014, 07:00:42 AM
...
Depends which way you look at it.
The block at 2014-11-07 06:44am took about 4 1/2 days .. actuallly
Either way, not bad for only 1.2Ph.
Yeah, the time for a single block is from the previous block to the time of the block.Depends which way you look at it.
The block at 2014-11-07 06:44am took about 4 1/2 days .. actuallly
Either way, not bad for only 1.2Ph.
Although you can say we found 7 blocks in a bit over a day, all the statistical calculations including the 1st block of those seven has to include the ~4.42days it took to find it.
I'm still amazed that the 6 blocks averaged less than 10.4% diff for all 6 ...
you are correct that is the right way to do it. but 7 in 27.5 hours sounds better even if it is playing with numbers a bit. LOL
November 10, 2014, 06:10:50 AM
To be fair, no-one should be using IE8 any more. Period.
To be very fair, no-one should be using any version of IE
November 10, 2014, 05:06:59 AM
Well I would mention that Windows 10 is available for free and is quite easy to install and run VM as an Enterprise version is available as well, BUT, it would seem that because these are preview versions that there is an outside chance that Microsoft has a key logger included...............
Outside chance? I think it's well documented that they are recording EVERYTHING. I wouldn't use
M
EDIT: I meant Windows 10, not IE 10...
November 10, 2014, 04:57:36 AM
To be fair, no-one should be using IE8 any more. Period.
To be very fair, no-one should be using any version of IE
November 10, 2014, 03:44:05 AM
Well I would mention that Windows 10 is available for free and is quite easy to install and run VM as an Enterprise version is available as well, BUT, it would seem that because these are preview versions that there is an outside chance that Microsoft has a key logger included...............
November 10, 2014, 03:20:09 AM
To be fair, no-one should be using IE8 any more. Period.
November 10, 2014, 02:35:45 AM
I've mentioned before about how the payout works such that the N in the PPLNS is usually a small amount more than the network difficulty when the block is found.
I updated the Help->Payouts page to include details about that.
When I later implement larger shifts, updating that page will also be easier since I can just change the ~30s to the new value
I updated the Help->Payouts page to include details about that.
When I later implement larger shifts, updating that page will also be easier since I can just change the ~30s to the new value
November 09, 2014, 09:56:54 PM
Fixed the above on IE8 and that may also fix it for anyone else who had the same issue.
Seems like IE8 doesn't like 3 digit colours #000 and #00f
So I could just change it to #000000 and #0000ff - but instead I just used the colour names for the white and blue font.
Just got back from dinner, that did the trick. It looks great now. Thank You! Seems like IE8 doesn't like 3 digit colours #000 and #00f
So I could just change it to #000000 and #0000ff - but instead I just used the colour names for the white and blue font.
November 09, 2014, 09:54:59 PM
Fixed the above on IE8 and that may also fix it for anyone else who had the same issue.
Seems like IE8 doesn't like 3 digit colours #000 and #00f
So I could just change it to #000000 and #0000ff - but instead I just used the colour names for the white and blue font.
Seems like IE8 doesn't like 3 digit colours #000 and #00f
So I could just change it to #000000 and #0000ff - but instead I just used the colour names for the white and blue font.
November 09, 2014, 09:08:47 PM
I don't know what could be so different about the color settings for safari vs. IE 11 but I can't make out any of the dark shaded % areas. Its like the offset colors for the digits isn't happening or lacks a proper brightness control to make them visible.
http://i.imgur.com/36N5V9A.png?1
The text colour is using:http://i.imgur.com/36N5V9A.png?1
Seems like your safari version is ignoring it?
OK better run the check across all the browsers I can test against ...
Checking menus and block page colours:
Windows:
FireFox 33.0.3 - OK (and 12.0 and 8.1 - it upgraded twice when I checked the version
)Chrome 38.0 - OK
IE8 (WinXP) - Menus OK - Blocks background OK but font colour all black
Safari 5.1.7 - OK
Linux:
FireFox 32.0 - OK
Chrome 38.0 - OK
Android:
Chrome - OK
FireFox - OK
Opera - OK
Default Browser - OK
(the default browser in my Samsung GalaxyS3 reports itself to web sites as Safari)
Edit: but it seems it isn't Safari but most likely some Mozilla derivative
N.B. I don't test all versions - those are the versions I currently have installed on each device
Seems like IE8 and your browser both ignore the font setting.
Sigh - stupid browsers
I imagine that's simply a case of using a css class for the font will fix that one - I'll do that later.
Edit: oh on closer examination it might be the colours on those 2 are not getting it right ... anyway I'll look into it on IE8 and that will probably fix it for you also.
November 09, 2014, 08:00:57 PM
I don't know what could be so different about the color settings for safari vs. IE 11 but I can't make out any of the dark shaded % areas. Its like the offset colors for the digits isn't happening or lacks a proper brightness control to make them visible.
November 09, 2014, 08:00:42 PM
...
Depends which way you look at it.
The block at 2014-11-07 06:44am took about 4 1/2 days .. actuallly
Either way, not bad for only 1.2Ph.
Yeah, the time for a single block is from the previous block to the time of the block.Depends which way you look at it.
The block at 2014-11-07 06:44am took about 4 1/2 days .. actuallly
Either way, not bad for only 1.2Ph.
Although you can say we found 7 blocks in a bit over a day, all the statistical calculations including the 1st block of those seven has to include the ~4.42days it took to find it.
I'm still amazed that the 6 blocks averaged less than 10.4% diff for all 6 ...
November 09, 2014, 07:27:37 PM
BTW the last block was under 50% cdf as I understand it.
I believe 39603666252 is the current diff. If you take exactly that number you are at 50% cdf.
Last block was 86.1% of that number.
@kano or ckolivas is that correct? if we match the diff shares cdf is 50%
The figure I have there on the blocks page is the % (the Diff amount next to it is) of network diff when the block was found.I believe 39603666252 is the current diff. If you take exactly that number you are at 50% cdf.
Last block was 86.1% of that number.
@kano or ckolivas is that correct? if we match the diff shares cdf is 50%
I'm pretty sure CDF isn't exactly 50% when you match 100% diff.
Anyway, the colouring is black at 100%, red above 100% and green below 100%
The brighter the green, the better, the brighter the red, the worse, though red hits it's brightness limit at 562%
https://bitbucket.org/ckolivas/ckpool/src/aca254495ebfc20f9358995d3859b4a2ffd138dc/pool/page_blocks.php?at=master#cl-3
November 09, 2014, 06:56:22 PM
No, the last block took about 35hrs. There was 7 blocks over about 4 days though. The one before that took about 4 1/2 days.
ah yeah that's true. it just feels like 7 in 24 hours hahaactually we did 7 in 27 1/2 hours first of the 7 was block made 2014-11-07 06:44am last of the 7 was 2014-11-08 10:18 am
see below
The block at 2014-11-07 06:44am took about 4 1/2 days .. actuallly
Either way, not bad for only 1.2Ph.
November 09, 2014, 06:39:29 PM
BTW the last block was under 50% cdf as I understand it.
I believe 39603666252 is the current diff. If you take exactly that number you are at 50% cdf.
Last block was 86.1% of that number.
@kano or ckolivas is that correct? if we match the diff shares cdf is 50%
I believe 39603666252 is the current diff. If you take exactly that number you are at 50% cdf.
Last block was 86.1% of that number.
@kano or ckolivas is that correct? if we match the diff shares cdf is 50%
November 09, 2014, 06:36:31 PM
No, the last block took about 35hrs. There was 7 blocks over about 4 days though. The one before that took about 4 1/2 days.
ah yeah that's true. it just feels like 7 in 24 hours hahaactually we did 7 in 27 1/2 hours first of the 7 was block made 2014-11-07 06:44am last of the 7 was 2014-11-08 10:18 am
Go ckpool! it was a tremendous run of luck
1ph at current diff should take 13 days to do what we did in 27.5 hours.
November 09, 2014, 06:34:01 PM
No, the last block took about 35hrs. There was 7 blocks over about 4 days though. The one before that took about 4 1/2 days.
ah yeah that's true. it just feels like 7 in 24 hours hahaactually we did 7 in 27 1/2 hours first of the 7 was block made 2014-11-07 06:44am last of the 7 was 2014-11-08 10:18 am
Go ckpool! November 09, 2014, 06:32:26 PM
No, the last block took about 35hrs. There was 7 blocks over about 4 days though. The one before that took about 4 1/2 days.
ah yeah that's true. it just feels like 7 in 24 hours hahaactually we did 7 in 27 1/2 hours first of the 7 was block made 2014-11-07 06:44am last of the 7 was 2014-11-08 10:18 am
see below
November 09, 2014, 05:58:34 PM
What's that now 7 blocks in 24 hours?
The blocks page is all OK again since I implemented the Markers yesterdayI put a fix in there to make sure it was OK even when I used the new -w option to reduce ram while I was working on the Markers
Before markers, CKDB (using a -w to greatly reduce the number of sharesummaries in ram) was using > 40GB ram
After Markers basic implementation it's now down to about 10GB and will drop more once I implement the longer marker shifts.
Yeah ckdb still has a memory image of the entire database.
There's a bunch of todos in the code to drop history from ram once I no longer need it - but the marker changes were required before that and at the moment it's back again well under control since the back end has more than enough ram and performance.
Edit: the % at the bottom is since the pool started and also correct
i.e. it doesn't count the orphan block as a block, so it's 2.69% just adds (correctly) on to the total
Jump to: