Topic: Vanity Pool - vanity address generator pool - page 18. (Read 148044 times)
Much appreciated, yep sry for the recent low rewards, I gave away a lot of coins in other threads recently, like https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56562.0;all
04C13D9C... is mine
BTW, I have found _two_ '1Lebanon' for you. Do you need second one too?
Thanks for the offer, but one 1Lebanon is quite sufficient & thanks for the other ones solved recently - it was like 5 or so in the last couple of days.
There is one thing I do not understand:
Why isn't this vanity miner testing all available works at once? I thought the slowest part in this process is crypting/hashing, so testing result against hundreds/thousands/milions of adresses should not be that big deal (if some smart datastructure like trie would be used...).
Am I wrong?
Why isn't this vanity miner testing all available works at once? I thought the slowest part in this process is crypting/hashing, so testing result against hundreds/thousands/milions of adresses should not be that big deal (if some smart datastructure like trie would be used...).
Am I wrong?
You can only test concurrently any available work that has the same public key when it was requested.
eg my pub key is A & I request vans:
b, c, d, e, f
all these can be tested or searched for together, as my private key to A gives me the private key solution to them.
but someone else with pub key B requests van gens;
g, h, i
these can't be searched for at the same time as mine as it's a different pub key & hence priv key needed to see/de-crypt the solution.
(A non tech attempt at explanation as I see it - I'm geek lvl @ minus 10 btw, as I'm sure is evident)
There is one thing I do not understand:
Why isn't this vanity miner testing all available works at once? I thought the slowest part in this process is crypting/hashing, so testing result against hundreds/thousands/milions of adresses should not be that big deal (if some smart datastructure like trie would be used...).
Am I wrong?
Why isn't this vanity miner testing all available works at once? I thought the slowest part in this process is crypting/hashing, so testing result against hundreds/thousands/milions of adresses should not be that big deal (if some smart datastructure like trie would be used...).
Am I wrong?
@gyverlb: Are these numbers in line with your choice of vanity mining versus Bitcoin mining?
I use http://fizzisist.com/mining-value/api/vanitypool-value which outputs the BTC/GKey that oclvanityminer actually works on.
I then compute my estimated earnings with my actual mining speed and power usage for BTC/LTC/Vanity. Vanity uses less power than BTC on my hardware/driver configuration but is a little slower than the estimates used by fizzisist on http://fizzisist.com/mining-value/.
Currently my earnings would be slightly lower if I mined Vanity addresses instead of BTC.
Here's the output of the controller which chooses what my rigs work on:
Code:
130327 12:15:28: BTC/EUR: 66.24, LTC/BTC: 0.0066, BTC/GKEY: 0.000014028, Diff: 6695826.28, LtcDiff: 78.31
btc (*): 26.19 EUR/j ( 31.89 - 5.70) sat/s: 557.17
ltc : 25.56 EUR/j ( 32.40 - 6.84) sat/s: 566.18
vanity : 25.75 EUR/j ( 30.83 - 5.08) sat/s: 538.71
BTC/EUR and LTC/BTC are values computed from exchange APIs and are pessimistic (they react quickly on dives in price but slowly to rises). BTC/GKEY is from fizzisist API and diffs are fetched from local bitcoin/litecoin daemons.
Ah interesting, I see many unusual happenings regarding Tarot which I use in my day to day life/living for many years, please to excuse my minimal fees offered recently, this is because the requested addresses are really just for fun or like as you enjoy solving some even though it may not be the most cost effective use of resources - I have a couple of drinks & think that would be cool to have that one out there in the block chain, at least my public key has some earlier quite fat fees offered to hopefully make it worth mining at once in a while & in the past ppl have pulled in quite decent btc rewards from it, my favorite to date being 1ELiZABETH that I requested for my niece - a cool 9 chars after the 1 & of the harder initial A to P variety even I learn now = all the better.
@Otoh: Thanks for the info. But, I think 1ELiZABETH would be among the lower-difficulty 9-letter vanity addresses. Compare "1NewYork1" (8 letters) to "1p2pCoin" (7 letters) in the table, below.
@all: The table below shows what is on vanitypool.appspot.com, sorted in descending order of Satoshis per gigakey. The raw data came from the oclvanityminer with the verbose option, and with the printf tweaked to show Satoshis instead of uBtc. oclvanityminer always takes the top item from the sorted list and works on it. "1Douglas" would take about a day on my hardware and would pay 0.008 BTC. Next, oclvanityminjer would pick up the 2 patterns submitted by 04262ADA. (1andreas and 1aantonon). "1andreas" is more likely to be found first, it would take about 2 months on my hardware and would pay 0.40 BTC. Then 2 more months to find "1JohnGalt". Then 2 more months to find "1gSILVER". But this is my hardware. Let's consider a serious miner...
Using the data from here, and taking the best AMD hardware for vanity mining currently on the Wiki (a Radeon HD 5870), and the highest paying pattern on vanityminer.appspot.com, a Vanity Miner will be paid about 916 Satoshi/Gkey * 30 Mkey/sec * 86400 sec/day = 2374272 Satoshi/day = 0.02374272 BTC/day.
Using data from the same table, and current block difficulty, a Bitcoin miner with the same hardware could expect to earn about 400 Mhash/sec * 86400 sec/day / 2^32hashes/share * 25 BTC/block * 1 block/6695826shares = 0.03004344 BTC/day.
(I hope somebody will check my arithmetic, but I think this explains why your vanity addresses aren't being mined. As I said before, I'm experimenting, I'm very far from profitability. @Otoh: You've been lucky. Of course, you have also benefited by having 30 to 40 address being mined concurrently.)
@gyverlb: Are these numbers in line with your choice of vanity mining versus Bitcoin mining?
Code:
Satoshis
per Gkey Pattern Reward
-------- --------- --------
916 1Doug1as 0.008
796 Sum over 2 patterns submitted for 04262ADA...
776 1andreas 0.40
758 1JohnGALT 0.384
433 1gSiLVER 0.2232
395 Sum over 32 patterns submitted for 04C13D9C...
233 1burrito 0.12
230 123456789 0.118493
175 1DanieLRH 0.08868
168 1swhitt7 0.0864
158 1Coinbets 0.08
155 1Satoshi 0.08
126 17Strykes 0.064
109 1Casascius 3.20
63 1Lebanon1 0.032
54 1kArLMaRx 1.60
47 1AuGramAu 0.024
47 1NewYork1 0.024
47 1p2pCoin 0.024
31 1TeraVPS 0.016
29 1tigereye 0.88
25 1AUSTRALiA 0.72
25 1Casascius 0.72
23 1bitpoin 0.012
21 1EstradaC 0.0104
20 1aantonop 0.60
17 1LoveLTCs 0.0088
16 1ZhouTong 0.48
11 1111Wish 0.32
5 1MrCoinMan 0.16
5 1SkRRJyTC 0.16
4 1MoLeCuLaR 0.12
3 1ALiCECiLA 0.08
3 1Anonymous 0.08
3 1Fizzisist 0.08
3 1Konichiwa 0.08
3 1RedCross 0.08
3 1RedQueen 0.08
3 1STEELERS 0.08
3 1STEQUALD 0.08
3 1Satan666 0.08
3 1Saturday 0.08
3 1SiLkRoAd 0.08
3 1SoDesuNe 0.08
3 1ThankYou 0.08
3 1Thousand 0.08
3 1Thursday 0.08
3 1Universe 0.08
3 1Washing1 0.08
3 1currency 0.08
1 1BitSnitch 0.04
0 1Rastafari 0.48
0 1TheDoctor 0.40
0 1ThePiachu 0.80
0 1Wednesday 0.08
0 1WiKiLEAKS 0.08
0 1SatoshiNak 0.08
0 1qwertyuiop 1.20
Update: Correction to formula for bitcoin mining
Ah interesting, I see many unusual happenings regarding Tarot which I use in my day to day life/living for many years, please to excuse my minimal fees offered recently, this is because the requested addresses are really just for fun or like as you enjoy solving some even though it may not be the most cost effective use of resources - I have a couple of drinks & think that would be cool to have that one out there in the block chain, at least my public key has some earlier quite fat fees offered to hopefully make it worth mining at once in a while & in the past ppl have pulled in quite decent btc rewards from it, my favorite to date being 1ELiZABETH that I requested for my niece - a cool 9 chars after the 1 & of the harder initial A to P variety even I learn now = all the better.
Blowfeld, 04C13D9C... is mine & I've had about 2 per day solved for the last 3 days or more, many thanks if that's you! - Much appreciated
& very interesting about the easier & harder prefixes I wasn't at all aware of that.
You're welcome for what I did: I found 1Tarot78 and 1Hashing. Nothing else for a while. So, there are other vanity miners doing the majority of your work. The 1Tarot78 prefix was extremely lucky, because it was equivalent to some 8-character vanity addresses. & very interesting about the easier & harder prefixes I wasn't at all aware of that.
Blowfeld, 04C13D9C... is mine & I've had about 2 per day solved for the last 3 days or more, many thanks if that's you! - Much appreciated
& very interesting about the easier & harder prefixes I wasn't at all aware of that.
& very interesting about the easier & harder prefixes I wasn't at all aware of that.
I think the vanityminer idea is a pretty cool idea. The prices are so low, I'm not even close to making a profit, but I'm in experimental mode. For new people like jaywaka2713, they don't really know whether or when miners will get to their work.
I would suggest a sort of bid/ask criteria. (I privately mentioned something like this to ThePiachu, but he said he doesn't have time.)
One idea is to have miners work on posted requests, but allow the miner to put a price on their work. "I've solved your hash, but I'd like to receive X.XX BTC for my work." As with any other market, when bid and ask meet, the transaction takes place. Here, however, the market is quite thin. There may be multiple sellers of the solved hash, but there is only one possible buyer.
Maybe a better idea would be for miners to advertize their rate. Something like "I'm only working on hashes valued at over 8000 satoshis per gigakey".
Customers also need a better idea of the difficulty of their pattern and the value they are offering to miners.
Did you know that a vanity address that starts with an upper case R-Z or a lower case letter is about 58 times harder than a vanity address of the same length that starts with a digit or an upper case A-P? So, "1Stryker" or "17Stryker" would take about 2 months on my hardware, while "15tryker" would take about a day.
Just some ideas.
I would suggest a sort of bid/ask criteria. (I privately mentioned something like this to ThePiachu, but he said he doesn't have time.)
One idea is to have miners work on posted requests, but allow the miner to put a price on their work. "I've solved your hash, but I'd like to receive X.XX BTC for my work." As with any other market, when bid and ask meet, the transaction takes place. Here, however, the market is quite thin. There may be multiple sellers of the solved hash, but there is only one possible buyer.
Maybe a better idea would be for miners to advertize their rate. Something like "I'm only working on hashes valued at over 8000 satoshis per gigakey".
Customers also need a better idea of the difficulty of their pattern and the value they are offering to miners.
Did you know that a vanity address that starts with an upper case R-Z or a lower case letter is about 58 times harder than a vanity address of the same length that starts with a digit or an upper case A-P? So, "1Stryker" or "17Stryker" would take about 2 months on my hardware, while "15tryker" would take about a day.
Just some ideas.
Well that is odd cause the minimum fee is 0.08 BTC as listed on the site for an address with 8 characters. I specified an address starting with 17Strykes which has 8 characters (disregarding the 1 i suppose). I will continue to add more BTC to the address. As long as it is public I am happy. Also, today, 2 withdrawals of 0.01 BTC for a total of 0.02 BTC were made. Why?
It seems as if vanitypool is having some trouble today. I solved 1Hashing, but it isn't accepting my solution. Maybe the deduction from 7Stryker is related to my problem. Was your 20% fee already deducted?ThePiachu said "the more you pay the faster the miners will get to your work". That's true. But below a certain threshold, few, if any, miners will spend cycles on your work.
The standard oclvanityminer client appears to work exclusively on the highest valued set of patterns. At the present time, there are several patterns (about ten, I think) with higher values than what is showing for 7Stryker. [So 7Stryker is probably not getting any attention, and won't get any attention for a while.] For example, the group of keys with public key starting with 04C13D9C has a combined value of about 1500 satoshis per gigakey, as reported by the oclvanityminer client. Your key has a value of 126 satoshis per gigakey.
Different miners will have different criteria, of course, but before the price dips to 126 satoshis per gigakey for Vanity Mining, I think most vanity miners will have switched back to conventional mining or turned off their miners due to cost of electricity.
Wait so I need to pay 0.02 BTC more to get to the minimum 0.08 BTC requirement for an address with 8 specified characters? I wish I was notified first. Please clarify before I deposit such an amount.
If the pool says the minimal fee is 0.01, then you need to send 0.01 to get the address into the public pool to be solved. Anything after that is a guideline - the more you pay the faster the miners will get to your work. Honest fee is an amount that would be fair to the miners in comparison to them mining blocks.
As I see from your link, your work is public, meaning that the miners can work on it and claim the reward.
Well that is odd cause the minimum fee is 0.08 BTC as listed on the site for an address with 8 characters. I specified an address starting with 17Strykes which has 8 characters (disregarding the 1 i suppose). I will continue to add more BTC to the address. As long as it is public I am happy. Also, today, 2 withdrawals of 0.01 BTC for a total of 0.02 BTC were made. Why?
If you want the pool to be more successful, you should advise a price where mining with oclvanityminer is clearly more profitable than both BTC or LTC mining and make it clear to customers than below this price there's not much incentive for anyone to work for the reward.
At the moment the minimum fee is a fraction of the honest fee. The reason I did this was because a lot of addresses can be mined in parallel if they share the same public key (if one person orders a lot of vanity addresses simultaneously - this has happened before). This approach allows for people that want one or a hundred vanity addresses to be able to adjust their price accordingly. On the other hand, people that just want to be cheap will have their work sitting there forever. If I raise the minimum fee, this will hurt the bulk buyers, so I'd rather leave it to supply and demand. I guess I might start prompting people that have heavily underpaid works on the pool to send in a bit more money to get things moving.
Most of the problems I find with the site are purely UI ones.
I think the details of how to profit from multiple works sharing the same public key are obscure for most. I understand the principle and could compute a fee profitable for miners but honestly I can't bother. Until now I never purchased anything because of that.
Each time I come to the site I have to look around to find out how to generate the data needed for a request too (there's not even a link on the request page): this doesn't help.
Multiple works aren't so easy to setup if you want to get a result for all of them: when some are found, the rest becomes less profitable to mine and miners eventually stop working on them. So a potential customer will certainly have to add to the original rewards possibly multiple times: this should be explained and made easy.
I'm not even sure that you can withdraw a request and get back your reward. This is not helping gaining customers: if I pay for a vanity address and find out later that it will never be found unless I pay much more did I lose my original payment for nothing if I can't/won't pay more?
If you want the pool to be more successful, you should advise a price where mining with oclvanityminer is clearly more profitable than both BTC or LTC mining and make it clear to customers than below this price there's not much incentive for anyone to work for the reward.
At the moment the minimum fee is a fraction of the honest fee. The reason I did this was because a lot of addresses can be mined in parallel if they share the same public key (if one person orders a lot of vanity addresses simultaneously - this has happened before). This approach allows for people that want one or a hundred vanity addresses to be able to adjust their price accordingly. On the other hand, people that just want to be cheap will have their work sitting there forever. If I raise the minimum fee, this will hurt the bulk buyers, so I'd rather leave it to supply and demand. I guess I might start prompting people that have heavily underpaid works on the pool to send in a bit more money to get things moving.
Wait so I need to pay 0.02 BTC more to get to the minimum 0.08 BTC requirement for an address with 8 specified characters? I wish I was notified first. Please clarify before I deposit such an amount.
If the pool says the minimal fee is 0.01, then you need to send 0.01 to get the address into the public pool to be solved. Anything after that is a guideline - the more you pay the faster the miners will get to your work. Honest fee is an amount that would be fair to the miners in comparison to them mining blocks.
As I see from your link, your work is public, meaning that the miners can work on it and claim the reward.
My miners won't work on vanity pool if BTC or LTC mining is more profitable, I'm not sure about others but I don't see why they would act in any other way. The minimum fees don't work at all: there are below BTC/LTC profitability and probably below some other rewards on the pool.
It's not a surprise that there's a lot of work sitting on vanity pool for ages: there's no incentive to work on it. If you want the pool to be more successful, you should advise a price where mining with oclvanityminer is clearly more profitable than both BTC or LTC mining and make it clear to customers than below this price there's not much incentive for anyone to work for the reward. A way to check how much more reward an existing work need to become profitable would help clear up the queue too.
I'm not sure if your pool is in sync with what oclvanityminer can do (is it able to choose the theoretically most profitable method given the current work yet?). At least your minimum fees are largely undervalued and last time I checked the recommended fees could be lower on some of the longer patterns. LTC mining profitability is simple to compute: the mining hashrate is ~0.001 of BTC's and the current difficulty and BTC/LTC exchange rate are easy to query (at least I use these informations to switch between BTC/LTC mining automatically)..
Wait so I need to pay 0.02 BTC more to get to the minimum 0.08 BTC requirement for an address with 8 specified characters? I wish I was notified first. Please clarify before I deposit such an amount.
If the pool says the minimal fee is 0.01, then you need to send 0.01 to get the address into the public pool to be solved. Anything after that is a guideline - the more you pay the faster the miners will get to your work. Honest fee is an amount that would be fair to the miners in comparison to them mining blocks.
As I see from your link, your work is public, meaning that the miners can work on it and claim the reward.
The payment address is tied to your request - you can pay into it in as many transactions as you like. Only after the work is finished and the payment is sent to the miner, will your extra transactions be ignored. You can try sending in two 0.01BTC transactions to start and see if the reward increases once the transactions are confirmed. If you come across any problems, just let me know.
I sent through 3 transactions of 0.01, 0.01, and 0.06 to the address 1PDWfc29f8uSX6nJ7VdqHUJ7goLtAiG3pX
Verify at https://blockchain.info/address/1PDWfc29f8uSX6nJ7VdqHUJ7goLtAiG3pX
However, here: https://vanitypool.appspot.com/check?key=17Strykes:04387C0A9AD5739A92D12E3C4C05ABDE45EB8712A7DE27A5A0D590DB520169E62A8CD330D2AAB93 9EFAA723C5D97E00A2DFE457BCA138CAF6077024EAAE346730F it only shows that I have paid in 0.008 BTC, when in fact I've paid in 0.08 BTC. Could you please fix this display error? A floating point variable or some data polling code may be messed up.
Okay, sorry about that - pool's memory cache didn't flush properly. A proper bounty is appearing now (0.064 - 80% of 0.08 as per norm). I will add memory clearing functionality for that use case to my TODO list.
Wait so I need to pay 0.02 BTC more to get to the minimum 0.08 BTC requirement for an address with 8 specified characters? I wish I was notified first. Please clarify before I deposit such an amount.
The payment address is tied to your request - you can pay into it in as many transactions as you like. Only after the work is finished and the payment is sent to the miner, will your extra transactions be ignored. You can try sending in two 0.01BTC transactions to start and see if the reward increases once the transactions are confirmed. If you come across any problems, just let me know.
I sent through 3 transactions of 0.01, 0.01, and 0.06 to the address 1PDWfc29f8uSX6nJ7VdqHUJ7goLtAiG3pX
Verify at https://blockchain.info/address/1PDWfc29f8uSX6nJ7VdqHUJ7goLtAiG3pX
However, here: https://vanitypool.appspot.com/check?key=17Strykes:04387C0A9AD5739A92D12E3C4C05ABDE45EB8712A7DE27A5A0D590DB520169E62A8CD330D2AAB93 9EFAA723C5D97E00A2DFE457BCA138CAF6077024EAAE346730F it only shows that I have paid in 0.008 BTC, when in fact I've paid in 0.08 BTC. Could you please fix this display error? A floating point variable or some data polling code may be messed up.
Okay, sorry about that - pool's memory cache didn't flush properly. A proper bounty is appearing now (0.064 - 80% of 0.08 as per norm). I will add memory clearing functionality for that use case to my TODO list.
The payment address is tied to your request - you can pay into it in as many transactions as you like. Only after the work is finished and the payment is sent to the miner, will your extra transactions be ignored. You can try sending in two 0.01BTC transactions to start and see if the reward increases once the transactions are confirmed. If you come across any problems, just let me know.
I sent through 3 transactions of 0.01, 0.01, and 0.06 to the address 1PDWfc29f8uSX6nJ7VdqHUJ7goLtAiG3pX
Verify at https://blockchain.info/address/1PDWfc29f8uSX6nJ7VdqHUJ7goLtAiG3pX
However, here: https://vanitypool.appspot.com/check?key=17Strykes:04387C0A9AD5739A92D12E3C4C05ABDE45EB8712A7DE27A5A0D590DB520169E62A8CD330D2AAB93 9EFAA723C5D97E00A2DFE457BCA138CAF6077024EAAE346730F it only shows that I have paid in 0.008 BTC, when in fact I've paid in 0.08 BTC. Could you please fix this display error? A floating point variable or some data polling code may be messed up.
I just requested a 7 char after the initial 1 vanity address & from the time of sending the fee to receiving the (multiplication) solution was just 12 minutes, amazing! Many thanks.
requested 10.39 am
fee sent 10.42 am
solution received 10.54 am
requested 10.39 am
fee sent 10.42 am
solution received 10.54 am
I'm glad you had a good time at our service!
So I have my payment address ready with the minimum fee of 0.01. However, I wish to pay more than that, but with a requirement. I wish to make multiple payments into the wallet, but I'm not sure if that is possible. Would I be able to do this?
The payment address is tied to your request - you can pay into it in as many transactions as you like. Only after the work is finished and the payment is sent to the miner, will your extra transactions be ignored. You can try sending in two 0.01BTC transactions to start and see if the reward increases once the transactions are confirmed. If you come across any problems, just let me know.
Jump to: