Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1705. (Read 4671953 times)

Relax, why do you need a wallet anyway ? You can use the wallet exchange on poloniex.com if it's too complicated for you.
It is the same as having an online wallet.

There are GUI wallet being developed :
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bounty-for-open-source-bytecoinmonero-gui-589561
Check Jojatekok or neozaru work.

GOOD COIN ........SUCK ASS WALLET!!!!           Devs why release a wallet update when it doesn't work for half your investors or miners? This is a Great Coin with a half ass wallet both Window and Mac wallets. I should not have to go thru all this bullshit to get a wallet. Just make a online wallet to bypass the Bullshit.

Please someone "EXPLAIN" how do you add the seed nodes to this crap wallet. Do I make a .conf file, do i go through the command line? I don't have a file that says peerlist or seed node, typing help in the simplewallet is no help. Please help how do I add the seeds to this wallet so it can become sync?


 

who dump?

xmr.farm fast and reliable monero pool !  

Is it technically possible to side-embed monero to bitcoin?

I have one big probleme .
Many users is not happy by chance in my pool .
Is very low and quit my pool .

I know my methode is best ( same of MPOS per exemple ).

I lose users with my methode. For joke, I have used the same methode of standard pool and find 446%
http://monero.crypto-pool.fr/testttt.html#pool_blocks

Lucky: 446% is liard.
Pool Efficiency: 103% Is already very good number  ( between 90% and 100% , is good number ).

If you explain "285% luck factor!"
Please explain me 446% luck factor

Yes, if my server is down or all composant of my pool not running as not impact of efficiancy.
The principal probleme of pool monero is daemon bitmonerod crashed or not response RPC.

I've been trying to work out if the "luck factor" stat shows anything useful at all for the last couple of days, but not been getting much feedback so I'm not sure anyone cares 

First of all, there are two different luck calculations being used, crypto-pool.fr and cryptonotepool.org.uk implemented one based on calculating (hashes to find block) / (block difficulty), the Zone117x released a pool update which included a luck calculation based on (block difficulty) / (hashes to find block). I may well be biased but I prefer the former as I believe it produces more easily comparable results, take a look at the sites to see what you think. The standard pool method produces exponential results, and I havent see any of the sites using it trying to explain what their "285% luck factor!" actually means, other than the implied bigger is better.

After pondering here's what I believe you need to consider when looking at luck scores:

• I prefer to refer to it as "efficiency" rather than luck, when using my pool's calculation method 100% efficiency should be average for the network
• Network difficulty lags behind the actual network hash power, so when it is increasing miners should overall be luckier than the implied average
• The difficulty is time based, aiming to set the mining efficiency at a level which produces a block every 60secs on average. However the pool efficiency calculation isnt time based, as it assumes 100% uptime, pool downtime wont affect the efficiency displayed
• When all other factors are equal, i.e. difficulty remains constant and pools have no downtime, then the efficiency across all pools should average 100%. If some pools are consistently over 100% then that must be at the expense of some other pools running at less than 100%.

To answer your original question, unfortunately the block explorer doesnt record hashes required per block, so you cant get a luck factor that way. You could look at the average block generation time to see if it is 60secs as intended, if it averages much lower then the coins generated per day will be higher than expected, which could affect price.

if anyone has any interest im willing to sell silver bullion for xmr

New features on pool
Features uniq for the moment.

I wonder if the high luck recently reported by several pools is having a downward impact on price?

Can anyone extrapolate a cohesive "mining luck" formula that can be scraped or otherwise determined from the block explorer?

there are now close to 400 cryptos, getting confused is understandable and you are confused stilll, vertcoin is VTC

Devs are still working hard on the core code, look at the forks of the main monero-project in github and you will see plenty of commits for improvements. There is a thread in http://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/ looking for people to test new developments, which is one way that most people can contribute (other than donating!).

In general one has to remember that this is not like all the Bitcoin derived altcoins, who have inherited four years of extensive development work to ensure that the basic technology they are using is well tested and optimised. I know it has been said that if the major issues like blockchain size and gui wallet aren't resolved quickly then Monero is at risk of being overtaken by a clone of itself, but that would require the clone devteam to produce their own solutions to those issues so I doubt its a major concern for now.

Would be nice to see the slick new website, but I believe that's imminent...

I am constantly confused between vericoin (vrc) and vertcoin (vrt).  I imagine that I am not the only one.  Nominally, it boils down to whether one dots one's I or crosses one's T.
Verisend is a mixer, I believe.

Searching a place to mine Monero?  

Spread the hashes !  

XMR MINING POOL >> http://xmr.poolto.be

use : stratum+tcp://xmr.poolto.be:3001

Join us on iRC: #poolto.be @ irc.freenode.net

http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=%23poolto.be

Happy Mining !  

pool fee: 0.20% (pool) + 0.05% (devs) to support XMR ! >> Join us!

no, vertcoin does not use a mixer. it uses what's called a stealth address for privacy, not for anonymity. the distinction is very important to vertcoin folks.

DB work is currently in progress.  Personally, I would consider it the first priority, after critical bug fixes and security vulnerabilities as the are identified in real-time, so I am pleased with the prioritization which is being done by the core team.  Among other work items I have tracked, the rpc changes in support of GUI wallets appears to be to have peaked.  This will gratify those who prioritize GUI wallets.   I suppose a 64-bit GUI wallet could be put out pretty quickly now, but it seems more logical to me to get the db conversion done, so that all platforms can be equally supported, and the client conversion from boost serializations to DB is more managable, before a GUI is blessed as a reference implementation.

Just peanut gallery comments.

Yes, I understand that now.  Thank you for correcting the record.

This is one concern I have for this platform.  The development community seems a bit on the slow side.  I don't say much as I am not a dev, but I hope code is being worked on faster than it seems.  We don't need flashy websites, or even a gui yet...  but I hope real progress is being made on core server improvements, the database etc...

Any ideas why diff has risen so much?