Topic: Vertcoin - 1 | ASIC - 0 | Lyra2RE | Decentralised | GPU Mineable | Open Source - page 85. (Read 415451 times)

We don't support botnets. But hey, using large fonts and graphics is always a sure sign of solid logic and a well reasoned argument...

We don't support botnets. But hey, using large fonts and graphics is always a sure sign of solid logic and a well reasoned argument...

Ipominer - stop being a pussy. Admit the fact that you are supporting botnets, or do something about it. Don't try to justify your actions by claiming that its anything but. You only show ignorance and stupidity then.

ipoMiner does not allow botnets, as I've said; the issue here is that what we're discussing is not a botnet by commonly accepted definitions. Of course you're entitled to your opinion though, and can mine wherever you prefer.

Like I said earlier, I accept your decision but you now need to live with the fact that Ipominer Pool not only Supports botnets but is Complicit with them.  And furthermore Ipominer Pool does not care about the health of a decent coin so long as their is a revenue stream.  How about that for a reputation?  I can't understand why anybody would mine with you (unless they have a botnet).

After evaluating the situation more over the past two days, I've decided to keep the Lyra2/VTC port open at ipoMiner. Considering shutting it down was a rushed decision, and it wasn't the right one. There's virtually zero benefit that comes from doing that, as discussion here has indicated. Mining power will just go elsewhere and create similar issues, with higher risks than mining happening on an established pool. Also, there's already no reason for non-ipoMiner users to mine VTC with us, as we're not a dedicated VTC pool and have higher fees than other VTC pools do.

That said, I have taken some additional steps to decrease the risks from large hashrate mining on a single pool, by further separating miners, wallets, etc. to eliminate the possibility of a series of blocks being found that would create a potential situation for risk of a double-spend.

Thanks to everyone for the input here, and especially to ocminer as a fellow pool operator sharing good insights as usual.

After evaluating the situation more over the past two days, I've decided to keep the Lyra2/VTC port open at ipoMiner. Considering shutting it down was a rushed decision, and it wasn't the right one. There's virtually zero benefit that comes from doing that, as discussion here has indicated. Mining power will just go elsewhere and create similar issues, with higher risks than mining happening on an established pool. Also, there's already no reason for non-ipoMiner users to mine VTC with us, as we're not a dedicated VTC pool and have higher fees than other VTC pools do.

That said, I have taken some additional steps to decrease the risks from large hashrate mining on a single pool, by further separating miners, wallets, etc. to eliminate the possibility of a series of blocks being found that would create a potential situation for risk of a double-spend.

Thanks to everyone for the input here, and especially to ocminer as a fellow pool operator sharing good insights as usual.

Just a quick question:

What if Danila simply starts his own (private) pool and hashes there?

IMHO anything "in the Internet" shouldnt and cannot be controlled, especially an open source crypto currency..  The Users do what they are supposed to do with the coin, they mine it.

The dev can implement counter measures like with xmg but if that really helps the coin value is an other question

Just my 2 Cents..  Even if ipominer kicks him off (which would be Bad for the pools rep if Danila is a legit Users which he seems he is from what i read in a few minutes) he could simply hash to his own pool..  (sooner or later)

And i have question. Why on ipominer on vtc was fixed dif miners was 0.25 on verters for example dif jumps?
And cpuminer x32 for vtc not exist?

Hey mate, good you are still here

Ah thanks for the heads up. I am certain ipominer will shut the Port when they promise.

I am not so used to botnets from the Operators view, i just remember a news Post about u torrent which also utilized cpu Power for mining.. Sounded a bit like this first.

I am also eager to see what will happen tomorrow.

Just a quick question:

What if Danila simply starts his own (private) pool and hashes there?

IMHO anything "in the Internet" shouldnt and cannot be controlled, especially an open source crypto currency..  The Users do what they are supposed to do with the coin, they mine it.

The dev can implement counter measures like with xmg but if that really helps the coin value is an other question

Just my 2 Cents..  Even if ipominer kicks him off (which would be Bad for the pools rep if Danila is a legit Users which he seems he is from what i read in a few minutes) he could simply hash to his own pool..  (sooner or later)

Hi old friend.

Danila has 149 workers (I iterated them to confirm this on pool2.ipominer.com). Bleeping Computer is a very reputable and well established malware/virus/pup guide website. It is I think beyond doubt that Danila is utilising a botnet to mine Vertcoin (currently), but was also previously mining various other coins - all on ipominer. We will see, but currently it seems that Danila set up his botnet so he can change the algorithm, and the port - but nothing else on his miners - as it would not make sense for him to use a pool that charges 3% when he could just set his own pool up (apart from security reasons, as all of his botnet is now pointing at ipominer's IP addresses rather than his own) - so what I would expect to see is that tomorrow, by 1pm when ipominer promised (its still written on their website) that they will close down their vtc port - that he will switch to another (less profitable) ipominer coin, rather than switch to another vtc pool (or make one himself). But we will see.

Just a quick question:

What if Danila simply starts his own (private) pool and hashes there?

IMHO anything "in the Internet" shouldnt and cannot be controlled, especially an open source crypto currency..  The Users do what they are supposed to do with the coin, they mine it.

The dev can implement counter measures like with xmg but if that really helps the coin value is an other question

Just my 2 Cents..  Even if ipominer kicks him off (which would be Bad for the pools rep if Danila is a legit Users which he seems he is from what i read in a few minutes) he could simply hash to his own pool..  (sooner or later)

It's in every pool's interest to protect all users, of course. We've long debated making changes like this, but I always argued they were unnecessary and that 100% transparency was worth pursuing. Prior to this there's never been a problem with user privacy becoming an issue, as the pool has been small enough and users have apparently been discrete enough. But, never let it be said that I can't admit being wrong As the saying goes, "this is why we can't have nice things".

I'm extremely hesitant to go into details about any user, but I'm able to disclose some basic information in this case, and that link actually explains quite a bit if you read closely. From http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/virus-removal/remove-cpu-miner:

"It is important to note that CPU Miner is bundled with and installed by free programs that did not adequately disclose that other software would be installed along with it. Therefore, it is important that you pay close attention to license agreements and installation screens when installing anything off of the Internet. If an installation screen offers you Custom or Advanced installation options, it is a good idea to select these as they will typically disclose what other 3rd party software will also be installed."

Now, I agree that bundling additional software for installation isn't the most user friendly thing in the world, and in an ideal world it would be done away with. However, it is an established and valid practice, and it does allow for software to be freely distributed which otherwise wouldn't be.

Since there were questions about a "botnet", it's worth noting that I did look into this, quite seriously, and received compelling documentation about the legitimacy of all mining, appropriate terms/licensing in place, etc.  That site throwing a label of "virus removal" onto it sounds catchy, but anything that can be removed with "Add or Remove Programs" hardly seems to fit that description well. It's pretty clearly a bundled installation item that's able to be uninstalled as normal.

Beyond that, it's worth noting that increases in mining across these coins have arguably caused price increases, which benefit everyone - especially long time holders of the coin. I personally am fairly hesitant to argue too hard against a combined increase in both hashrate and price being a positive thing, in any case.

Obviously one can argue for the importance of diversification of mining power, but that's more the case that the collective "we" as a community for each coin needs to do a better job in getting people interested in mining it, than anything else.

It's in every pool's interest to protect all users, of course. We've long debated making changes like this, but I always argued they were unnecessary and that 100% transparency was worth pursuing. Prior to this there's never been a problem with user privacy becoming an issue, as the pool has been small enough and users have apparently been discrete enough. But, never let it be said that I can't admit being wrong As the saying goes, "this is why we can't have nice things".

I'm extremely hesitant to go into details about any user, but I'm able to disclose some basic information in this case, and that link actually explains quite a bit if you read closely and can ignore the obvious inherent bias of the site. From http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/virus-removal/remove-cpu-miner :

"It is important to note that CPU Miner is bundled with and installed by free programs that did not adequately disclose that other software would be installed along with it. Therefore, it is important that you pay close attention to license agreements and installation screens when installing anything off of the Internet. If an installation screen offers you Custom or Advanced installation options, it is a good idea to select these as they will typically disclose what other 3rd party software will also be installed."

Now, I agree that bundling additional software for installation isn't the most user friendly thing in the world, and in an ideal world it would be done away with. However, it is an established and valid practice, and it does allow for software to be freely distributed which otherwise wouldn't be.

Since there were questions about a "botnet", it's worth noting that I did look into this, quite seriously, and received compelling documentation about the legitimacy of all mining, appropriate terms/licensing in place, etc.  That site throwing a label of "virus removal" onto it sounds catchy, but anything that can be removed with "Add or Remove Programs" hardly seems to fit that description well. It's pretty clearly a bundled installation item that's able to be uninstalled as normal.

Beyond that, it's worth noting that increases in mining across these coins have arguably caused price increases, which benefit everyone - especially long time holders of the coin. I personally am fairly hesitant to argue too hard against a combined increase in both hashrate and price being a positive thing, in any case.

Obviously one can argue for the importance of diversification of mining power, but that's more the case that the collective "we" as a community for each coin needs to do a better job in getting people interested in mining it, than anything else.

blah blah bla...

we like free money even if it's obtained by ethically and/or legally questionable means.

deal with it.

(•_•)

( •_•)>⌐■-■

(⌐■_■)

Well, they're making 3% off him and have been for months on various coins- so its of course in their financial interests to protect him.