cgminer -T --config /config/cgminer.conf
[2013-10-16 22:35:43] Started cgminer 3.4.0
[2013-10-16 22:35:43] Loaded configuration file /config/cgminer.conf
[2013-10-16 22:35:43] Probing for an alive pool
just hangs and put 50btc in now and checked the config again, already did the replace manuver, hard reset...
[2013-10-16 22:36:43] No servers were found that could be used to get work from.
[2013-10-16 22:36:43] Please check the details from the list below of the servers you have input
[2013-10-16 22:36:43] Most likely you have input the wrong URL, forgotten to add a port, or have not set up workers
[2013-10-16 22:36:43] Pool: 0 URL: http://pool.50btc.com:8332 User: mininganon@redacted Password: 123
Topic: Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com - page 1303. (Read 3050075 times)
nice... I didn't even notice the conf.factory file.... good to kno its there
help, I can't get cgminer back running the config is fine.
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Started cgminer 3.4.0
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Loaded configuration file /config/cgminer.conf
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Error in configuration file, partially loaded.
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Start cgminer with -T to see what failed to load.
please point me in the right direction. pool is loaded?!
{
"pools" : [
{
"url" : "stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334",
"user" : "redacted",
"pass" : "123"
}
]
,
"api-listen" : true,
"api-network" : true,
"api-allow" : "W:0/0"
}
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
- /config/cgminer.conf 1/14 7%
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Started cgminer 3.4.0
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Loaded configuration file /config/cgminer.conf
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Error in configuration file, partially loaded.
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Start cgminer with -T to see what failed to load.
please point me in the right direction. pool is loaded?!
{
"pools" : [
{
"url" : "stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334",
"user" : "redacted",
"pass" : "123"
}
]
,
"api-listen" : true,
"api-network" : true,
"api-allow" : "W:0/0"
}
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
- /config/cgminer.conf 1/14 7%
run it with -T:
cgminer -T --config /config/cgminer.conf
to see what exactly is wrong
or replace it by the original one
cp /config/cgminer.conf.factory /config/cgminer.conf
Please help I'm not hashing at the moment losing money. will tip for answers.
That's not much info to go on...walk us thru what you did so far....
Please help I'm not hashing at the moment losing money. will tip for answers.
As in the hashrate will plateau after the shipment ceases as the proportional increase won't be of the same magnitude for a while. That's logical. Obviously the difficulty will continue through some crazy adjustment yet, as it is yet to truly reflect the current hashrate. Those increases will be close together obviously as blocks are solved faster.
By the way, do you even know how the difficulty is calculated?
I am starting to feel pity for you... Perhaps I should give you another 0.1 BTC tip to help with the rent?
Could anyone with a KNC miner do me a favour and ssh into your Miner and post the results for TOP.
So ssh into miner type top (Ctrl + to exit) and post your results. Troubleshooting mine at the moment so need to compare.
Thanks
Dave
So ssh into miner type top (Ctrl + to exit) and post your results. Troubleshooting mine at the moment so need to compare.
Thanks
Dave
Cheers Dude
Could anyone with a KNC miner do me a favour and ssh into your Miner and post the results for TOP.
So ssh into miner type top (Ctrl + to exit) and post your results. Troubleshooting mine at the moment so need to compare.
Thanks
Dave
So ssh into miner type top (Ctrl + to exit) and post your results. Troubleshooting mine at the moment so need to compare.
Thanks
Dave
help, I can't get cgminer back running the config is fine.
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Started cgminer 3.4.0
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Loaded configuration file /config/cgminer.conf
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Error in configuration file, partially loaded.
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Start cgminer with -T to see what failed to load.
please point me in the right direction. pool is loaded?!
{
"pools" : [
{
"url" : "stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334",
"user" : "redacted",
"pass" : "123"
}
]
,
"api-listen" : true,
"api-network" : true,
"api-allow" : "W:0/0"
}
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
- /config/cgminer.conf 1/14 7%
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Started cgminer 3.4.0
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Loaded configuration file /config/cgminer.conf
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Error in configuration file, partially loaded.
[2013-10-16 22:19:42] Start cgminer with -T to see what failed to load.
please point me in the right direction. pool is loaded?!
{
"pools" : [
{
"url" : "stratum.mining.eligius.st:3334",
"user" : "redacted",
"pass" : "123"
}
]
,
"api-listen" : true,
"api-network" : true,
"api-allow" : "W:0/0"
}
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
- /config/cgminer.conf 1/14 7%
I will repeat once more: there is not direct correlation between the number of users and the volume of transactions. How many times I have to repeat that to you understand? Do not really matter if more and more people start to use the Bitcoin Network, because that could result either in increase or decrease of transactions.
You are also assuming that an increase in the volume of transactions will result in an increase of collected fees. That is an incorrect assumption. There is no way to ensure that every transaction will result in a collected fee. Moreover, even if the Bitcoin protocol turns the transaction fees compulsory, each block would have at least 400,000 transactions of 0.0005 BTC to generate 200 BTC. As I had already demonstrated, this is absurd. At the present moment the Bitcoin Network is not generating more than an average of 372 transactions per block.
You are also assuming that an increase in the volume of transactions will result in an increase of collected fees. That is an incorrect assumption. There is no way to ensure that every transaction will result in a collected fee. Moreover, even if the Bitcoin protocol turns the transaction fees compulsory, each block would have at least 400,000 transactions of 0.0005 BTC to generate 200 BTC. As I had already demonstrated, this is absurd. At the present moment the Bitcoin Network is not generating more than an average of 372 transactions per block.
You come across as angry and patronising. Let me spell it out quite clearly. If Bitcoin became more mainstream, it is highly likely that your average person might start using it to buy and sell things online or in shops or anywhere. The more people like this the higher the number of transactions for which it would be reasonable to charge a fee. Yes, people move funds between wallets and accounts and it might be unreasonable to expect a high fee or any for these type of transactions. Yes some people spend all day gambling on BetCoin, and they certainly don't want to pay a high fee for each transaction. You are not wrong, but you are decidedly not listening to what people are saying either.
Most of the transactions which involve buying or selling something for which a fee would be acceptable go through the wallet interface or the UI of BitPay. These two places could be where the reasonable fee is added to the transaction. If the transaction fee is a percentage of the transaction amount, rather than fixed, then your 400,000 transaction argument becomes threadbare.
Sorry for being blunt, but you've been rude three times now.
Could anyone with a KNC miner do me a favour and ssh into your Miner and post the results for TOP.
So ssh into miner type top (Ctrl + to exit) and post your results. Troubleshooting mine at the moment so need to compare.
Thanks
Dave
So ssh into miner type top (Ctrl + to exit) and post your results. Troubleshooting mine at the moment so need to compare.
Thanks
Dave
Dude the hashrate is about to level out for a bit not, continue growing like this for a while. This has been the first shipment of a major die shrink. If anything it shows the genesis block was way off base all along, as I previously stated. This will be a huge step up over a couple of weeks and then there won't be anything in such a huge multiple in one go on to make such a marked effect on the hashrate again for sometime. More a plateau You certainly won't see a doubling of the current hashrate as it stands after the KnC delivery for a while yet, even during their November shipment. If they were to ship anywhere near what they shipped just now, it'll increase the current hashrate by a proportion, not a multiple due to the cumulative effect of this wave.
Dear reader,
Please, if you like to deal with strictly factual information, ignore the amount of gibberish stated the above quote.
Yours faithfully,
Augusto Croppo.
I will repeat once more: there is not direct correlation between the number of users and the volume of transactions. How many times I have to repeat that to you understand? Do not really matter if more and more people start to use the Bitcoin Network, because that could result either in increase or decrease of transactions.
You are also assuming that an increase in the volume of transactions will result in an increase of collected fees. That is an incorrect assumption. There is no way to ensure that every transaction will result in a collected fee. Moreover, even if the Bitcoin protocol turns the transaction fees compulsory, each block would have at least 400,000 transactions of 0.0005 BTC to generate 200 BTC. As I had already demonstrated, this is absurd. At the present moment the Bitcoin Network is not generating more than an average of 372 transactions per block.
You are also assuming that an increase in the volume of transactions will result in an increase of collected fees. That is an incorrect assumption. There is no way to ensure that every transaction will result in a collected fee. Moreover, even if the Bitcoin protocol turns the transaction fees compulsory, each block would have at least 400,000 transactions of 0.0005 BTC to generate 200 BTC. As I had already demonstrated, this is absurd. At the present moment the Bitcoin Network is not generating more than an average of 372 transactions per block.
This may look true skipping true the facts the way it's been written, but actually not correct as a whole. There is direct correlation between number of bitcoin network users and transactions fees. Although each individual transaction can't be forced to include a fee, mining pools have an incentive to include transactions with higher fees first, because they know everyone will benefit more if block is found with transactions with fees than without them. If you broadcast transaction without a fee it could easily happen to it to drop down the list and not be included in current block. It's not unheard off for such transactions to never be included in any block and need several days to clear from limbo and return to the wallet. If number of transactions ever rise close to the capabilities of miners to actually process them, you can bet on which transactions will be included and which will not.
one loose fan shroud, but nothing broken, works fine, box was beat to hell with a couple small holes in it
Are any hosted customers achieving 500+ GH/s? The best I seem to be able to get (sustained) is around 430GH with 10+% errors. I've seen momentary peaks over 500 but never a 10 minute average above 445 or so.
I've been at 500GH ever since Friday the 11th at 8PM. Before then it ranged between 0 and 130GH with nearly 10% rejections. Have you spoken with KNC over the phone? The $0.64 I spent on 6 phone calls (skype) over the last week was critical to getting my miners online.
Oh, I freely admit that it was a fluke (the one I saw was not the ASIC miner thing, I do remember that.)
If the block you saw is not related to the ASICMiner refund, then show me where you saw a block which generated 200 BTC in transactions fees. I want see with my own eyes if such block even exist...
here's a snip of the entire route & time to Hawaii via UPS...
alot of airtime i see. How did the miner fair?
Received my dhl tracking number for knc, I had to ago l ask them, they said there was a problem with dhl seeking tracking, let's see how long it takes them to get to Hawaii
Phoenix1969 is also in Hawaii... I think I read earlier today that he thought 2 business days from Sweden to HI. Oh, I freely admit that it was a fluke (the one I saw was not the ASIC miner thing, I do remember that.)
If the block you saw is not related to the ASICMiner refund, then show me where you saw a block which generated 200 BTC in transactions fees. I want see with my own eyes if such block even exist...
Well let's just throwing this out there.
~104,000 transactions/second
Isn't one of the points of BTC to replace these companies? (Remember this is just Visa, you can imagine how many transactions happen across all of these merchants and physical dollar transactions)
The minimum fee would be lowered at this point anyways because if BTC was adopted this widespread, the price per BTC would be much much higher.
Quote
VisaNet authorizes, clears and settles an average of 150 million transactions per day in 200 countries and territories.
~104,000 transactions/second
Isn't one of the points of BTC to replace these companies? (Remember this is just Visa, you can imagine how many transactions happen across all of these merchants and physical dollar transactions)
The minimum fee would be lowered at this point anyways because if BTC was adopted this widespread, the price per BTC would be much much higher.
No, it is not the point and it never was. Did you even read the paper released by Satoshi Nakamoto? The Bitcoin protocol was created to serve as alternative method to transfer monetary value without rely on a central authority to validate the transactions.
You are comparing apples and oranges.
By the way, widespread adoption of the Bitcoin Network do not means the price of BTC against fiat currency will rise. As number of users of the Bitcoin Network has no direct correlation with the volume of transactions, the number of users of the Bitcoin Network has also no direct correlation with the price of BTC against fiat currencies.
Bargraphics, bought a dozen of SHA-256 hash generators from KnCminer and is clueless about the Bitcoin Network structure...
Order #26XX in midwest USA here, showing "shipped" for a day or two now, no tracking info, nothing on the doorstep. Denied a refund. Hopefully 'rama is right about the hashrate leveling off, but I have a feeling he's being overly-optimistic on behalf of his employer.
Jump to: