website and pool is down 
prob from the scheduled maintenance Yep, came right back up too
Topic: [OFFLINE] SIMPLECOIN.US [PPLNS/SMPPS] - page 13. (Read 38067 times)
Yep, came right back up too
website and pool is down
prob from the scheduled maintenance 
website and pool is down
Dang! That TBX pool is off the hook! 
You forking the chain yet Mike?
Edit:
Thanks Chick!
You forking the chain yet Mike?
Edit:
Thanks Chick!
One suggestion would be that you use adapting units in the pool statistics.
So they show Mhash/s when the mining rate is below 1 Ghash/s and so forth. Could be useful particularly for the LTC and TBX pools yeah..
Also it would be nice to be able to see how many shares I have in the current round somewhere? edit: I found it eventually, though might want to show my individual stats in the pool seperate from the total pool stats somewhere
So they show Mhash/s when the mining rate is below 1 Ghash/s and so forth. Could be useful particularly for the LTC and TBX pools yeah..
Also it would be nice to be able to see how many shares I have in the current round somewhere? edit: I found it eventually, though might want to show my individual stats in the pool seperate from the total pool stats somewhere
Prop pool is down? 
pushpool hung up. I restarted the service.
Also,
There will be a probable outage tomorrow. The hosting company is doing network maintenance. This maintenance should better protect against DDOS and increase the network routing
Perhaps I've misunderstood something here.
By matching Bitcoin and Namecoin block I'm thinking of an SHA-256 hash of [a list of Bitcoin transactions, some Bitcoin address information, and Namecoin data in a merkle tree] which happens to be a particularly low number (begins with quite a lot of 0s). It was my understanding that any hash small enough to generate a Bitcoin block would also be small enough to generate a Namecoin block and consequently I expected any merged mining Bitcoin block to have a corresponding Namecoin block (at least while Namecoin difficulty is less than Bitcoin difficulty).
This belief was made stronger by posts such as this:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.566146
where slush proudly announced the first Bitcoin merged mining block (which had a Namecoin counterpart) Bitcoin 148744 = Namecoin 19274.
Can you guys explain why Bitcoin and Namecoin block generation events are not linked in this way? Are the corresponding random variables independent (in the sense of probability) and if so why?
Thanks.
By matching Bitcoin and Namecoin block I'm thinking of an SHA-256 hash of [a list of Bitcoin transactions, some Bitcoin address information, and Namecoin data in a merkle tree] which happens to be a particularly low number (begins with quite a lot of 0s). It was my understanding that any hash small enough to generate a Bitcoin block would also be small enough to generate a Namecoin block and consequently I expected any merged mining Bitcoin block to have a corresponding Namecoin block (at least while Namecoin difficulty is less than Bitcoin difficulty).
This belief was made stronger by posts such as this:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.566146
where slush proudly announced the first Bitcoin merged mining block (which had a Namecoin counterpart) Bitcoin 148744 = Namecoin 19274.
Can you guys explain why Bitcoin and Namecoin block generation events are not linked in this way? Are the corresponding random variables independent (in the sense of probability) and if so why?
Thanks.
The returning getwork hashes are passed to both nmc & btc clients. Either or both can find a block. To describe the whole process would be very lengthy.
I've just learned that with merged mining, more than 99% of Bitcoin blocks should each come with a Namecoin block. Check out https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.606537.
If you have two or more examples of a share which generated a Bitcoin block but not a Namecoin block then I recommend looking into this and making sure that most BTC/NMC miners are working on headers with valid Bitcoin and Namecoin information most of the time. Caution: cgminer has had issues with merged mining because old versions doesn't like to change the block header when new work is pushed for Namecoin. The current version of PoolServerJ seems to be ok right now, even with cgminer, and you can see an example of it in action here: (BTC and NMC).
Love the "Blocks found over last week" graph! Good luck guys!
Prop pool is down?
This looks like a very nice pool. I don't have a lot of hash but I will give it a try and test out some of these cpu currencies with you.
Do you have a promo banner that is more similar to the ones from other pools people show they are mining with in height I could put in my signature?
Though I do wonder why is there a ©SIMPLECOIN.US on your open source site. Remove this IP nonsense please
Do you have a promo banner that is more similar to the ones from other pools people show they are mining with in height I could put in my signature?
Though I do wonder why is there a ©SIMPLECOIN.US on your open source site. Remove this IP nonsense please
something is up with the BTC prop pool
SMPPS is down right now 
.
.
RFCpool closed down for good. Maybe some of those hashes will come our way
so does SMPPS have some secret lucky charm that the rest of the pools don't know about? if so can we make some for the other pools?
Me... although I mine in pplns just as much. Just been lucky in smpps.
so does SMPPS have some secret lucky charm that the rest of the pools don't know about? if so can we make some for the other pools?
Me... although I mine in pplns just as much. Just been lucky in smpps.
so does SMPPS have some secret lucky charm that the rest of the pools don't know about? if so can we make some for the other pools?
whats up with the pool?
Server Maintenance (with the hosting company), should be back up soon. 30 minutes was the projection.
whats up with the pool?
gotta love scoinuser 47,973 slinky234 30,101 for their hashes. lets find some blocks
LTC Prop Pool Open for testing 
Jump to: