There is no OP_P2SH. BIP 12, 16, and 17 are all competing standards for P2SH. BIP 17 is the most sane, and BIP 16 the least.
No it is not! BIP 17 is bad for the network and will give you herpes!
Topic: [OLD] Eligius: ASIC, no registration, no fee CPPSRB BTC + 105% PPS NMC, 877 # - page 156. (Read 458499 times)
January 27, 2012, 02:23:33 PM
No it is not! BIP 17 is bad for the network and will give you herpes!
January 27, 2012, 06:58:40 AM
What's up with the Namecoin transactions info? I just checked my NMC json info using the python tool and it now shows my address as not existing any more.
I checked on the Namecoin block explorer and it shows a payout on the 19th. Was this a flushing out of balances and reset? Just wondering because I didn't get those NMC in my address at CryptoXchange even though past ones worked fine.
I checked on the Namecoin block explorer and it shows a payout on the 19th. Was this a flushing out of balances and reset? Just wondering because I didn't get those NMC in my address at CryptoXchange even though past ones worked fine.
Code:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import json, urllib2, datetime
address = 'YourNameCoinAddressHere'
url = 'http://eligius.st/~luke-jr/raw/7/NMC/balances.json'
data = json.load(urllib2.urlopen(url, timeout=5))
print "Address : " + address
print "Balance : " + str(data[address]['balance']/100000000.0)
print "Everpaid : " + str(data[address]['everpaid']/100000000.0)
print "Oldest : " + str(datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(data[address]['oldest']))
print "Newest : " + str(datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(data[address]['newest']))
Did you change the /5/ to /7/ in the python code?
Correct, Everpaid will show a value when you get your first payment on the new server.
January 26, 2012, 10:04:02 PM
What's up with the Namecoin transactions info? I just checked my NMC json info using the python tool and it now shows my address as not existing any more.
I checked on the Namecoin block explorer and it shows a payout on the 19th. Was this a flushing out of balances and reset? Just wondering because I didn't get those NMC in my address at CryptoXchange even though past ones worked fine.
I checked on the Namecoin block explorer and it shows a payout on the 19th. Was this a flushing out of balances and reset? Just wondering because I didn't get those NMC in my address at CryptoXchange even though past ones worked fine.
Code:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import json, urllib2, datetime
address = 'YourNameCoinAddressHere'
url = 'http://eligius.st/~luke-jr/raw/7/NMC/balances.json'
data = json.load(urllib2.urlopen(url, timeout=5))
print "Address : " + address
print "Balance : " + str(data[address]['balance']/100000000.0)
print "Everpaid : " + str(data[address]['everpaid']/100000000.0)
print "Oldest : " + str(datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(data[address]['oldest']))
print "Newest : " + str(datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(data[address]['newest']))
Did you change the /5/ to /7/ in the python code?
January 26, 2012, 09:09:00 PM
Don't troll. Eligius is pro-P2SH (BIP 17).
BIP17 is OP_CHV, not OP_P2SH - as you well know.
Be straight: Eligius is pro-BIP17 and therefore anti-BIP16, am I correct?
January 26, 2012, 09:05:55 PM
Don't troll. Eligius is pro-P2SH (BIP 17).
BIP17 is OP_CHV, not OP_P2SH - as you well know.
Be straight: Eligius is pro-BIP17 and therefore anti-BIP16, am I correct?
January 26, 2012, 08:56:52 PM
Leave Eligius!
It's against /P2SH/
Don't troll. Eligius is pro-P2SH (BIP 17). It's against /P2SH/
January 26, 2012, 08:47:21 PM
Leave Eligius!
It's against /P2SH/
It's against /P2SH/
January 25, 2012, 07:22:44 PM
What's up with the Namecoin transactions info? I just checked my NMC json info using the python tool and it now shows my address as not existing any more.
I checked on the Namecoin block explorer and it shows a payout on the 19th. Was this a flushing out of balances and reset? Just wondering because I didn't get those NMC in my address at CryptoXchange even though past ones worked fine.
I checked on the Namecoin block explorer and it shows a payout on the 19th. Was this a flushing out of balances and reset? Just wondering because I didn't get those NMC in my address at CryptoXchange even though past ones worked fine.
Code:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import json, urllib2, datetime
address = 'YourNameCoinAddressHere'
url = 'http://eligius.st/~luke-jr/raw/7/NMC/balances.json'
data = json.load(urllib2.urlopen(url, timeout=5))
print "Address : " + address
print "Balance : " + str(data[address]['balance']/100000000.0)
print "Everpaid : " + str(data[address]['everpaid']/100000000.0)
print "Oldest : " + str(datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(data[address]['oldest']))
print "Newest : " + str(datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(data[address]['newest']))
Did you change the /5/ to /7/ in the python code?
January 25, 2012, 12:06:39 AM
What's up with the Namecoin transactions info? I just checked my NMC json info using the python tool and it now shows my address as not existing any more.
I checked on the Namecoin block explorer and it shows a payout on the 19th. Was this a flushing out of balances and reset? Just wondering because I didn't get those NMC in my address at CryptoXchange even though past ones worked fine.
I checked on the Namecoin block explorer and it shows a payout on the 19th. Was this a flushing out of balances and reset? Just wondering because I didn't get those NMC in my address at CryptoXchange even though past ones worked fine.
January 22, 2012, 04:37:45 AM
My miners have Eligius as a backup, and I'm seeing it down. YMMV.
January 22, 2012, 12:01:09 AM
It's up.
January 21, 2012, 08:42:49 PM
anyone tell me if the eligius pool is still down?
January 20, 2012, 11:09:09 AM
Set up a private pool for your important miners. Only tell them the IP. 
January 18, 2012, 08:57:17 PM
On Topic; Luke, is it the getworks that are slowing down the hash rate without tripping CGminer to fallback? That parts seems a bit strange.
If I knew the problem, it'd be solved. 
January 18, 2012, 08:30:51 PM
We're under a tight DoS attack. Been analyzing it, but not sure what the cause is yet.
The cause is you dumbass,
Lets see how you handle this pool from now on.
wow, that threw me off. I was thinking to myself, "What the hell crawled up Inaba's butt tonight?" =)
Seeing who it is, I am not surprised. Though, I can't really disagree with the sentiment. But the judges give it a 1 out of 10 for his approach.
cheers
P.S. *offers Plastic.Elastic a hug*
On Topic; Luke, is it the getworks that are slowing down the hash rate without tripping CGminer to fallback? That parts seems a bit strange.
Use the load balancing feature in cgminer and it'll help with that.
January 18, 2012, 08:27:36 PM
We're under a tight DoS attack. Been analyzing it, but not sure what the cause is yet.
The cause is you dumbass,
Lets see how you handle this pool from now on.
wow, that threw me off. I was thinking to myself, "What the hell crawled up Inaba's butt tonight?" =)
Seeing who it is, I am not surprised. Though, I can't really disagree with the sentiment. But the judges give it a 1 out of 10 for his approach.
cheers
P.S. *offers Plastic.Elastic a hug*
On Topic; Luke, is it the getworks that are slowing down the hash rate without tripping CGminer to fallback? That parts seems a bit strange.
January 18, 2012, 08:22:36 PM
We're under a tight DoS attack. Been analyzing it, but not sure what the cause is yet.
The cause is you dumbass,
Lets see how you handle this pool from now on.
January 18, 2012, 08:20:52 PM
I guess this is the new type of "dos attack"
Under the old dos attack, if speed drops, then there should be some share submitting problems with cgminer,
and cgminer will automatically switch to other pools.
This new "dos attack" does not. It EAT shares, Strange
Any shares accepted should be represented as usual. If that's not the case, please double check your miner isn't dropping the shares (eg, with Wireshark) and get in touch with me about it in our IRC channel. Under the old dos attack, if speed drops, then there should be some share submitting problems with cgminer,
and cgminer will automatically switch to other pools.
This new "dos attack" does not. It EAT shares, Strange
January 18, 2012, 07:51:31 PM
I guess this is the new type of "dos attack"
Under the old dos attack, if speed drops, then there should be some share submitting problems with cgminer,
and cgminer will automatically switch to other pools.
This new "dos attack" does not. It EAT shares, Strange
Under the old dos attack, if speed drops, then there should be some share submitting problems with cgminer,
and cgminer will automatically switch to other pools.
This new "dos attack" does not. It EAT shares, Strange
January 18, 2012, 03:25:47 PM
We're under a tight DoS attack. Been analyzing it, but not sure what the cause is yet.
Jump to: