Windows users of simpleminer with moneropool.org should update to the latest simpleminer: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B7RQILpPGrQbR1R4WDF6SVhwdW8&tid=0B7RQILpPGrQbYnF2OTA4NklrWmc
Mac users of simpleminer with moneropool.org should also update to the latest simpleminer: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B7RQILpPGrQbVXlCaHFiNEdDdG8&tid=0B7RQILpPGrQbYnF2OTA4NklrWmc
Linux users of simpleminer with moneropool.org should ensure their simpleminer was built from source after May 12th: https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/
The downloads in the first post are too outdated to work with the long polling I've just enabled for moneropool.org. The reason I enabled long polling is because of the high amount of orphaned blocks the pool is submitting.
Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 2028. (Read 4670562 times)
un-de-optimizations
I was skeptical of this conspiracy theory at first but after thinking about the numbers and looking back at the code again, I'm starting to believe it.
These are not deep optimizations, just cleaning up the code to work as intended.
At 100 H/s, with 500k iterations, 70 cycles per L3 memory access, we're now at 3.5 GHz which is reasonably close. So the algorithm is finally memory-bound, as it was originally intended to be. But as delivered by the bytecode developers not even close.
I know this is going to sound like tooting our own horn but this is another example of the kind of dirty tricks you can expect from the 80% premine crowd and the good work being done in the name of the community by the Monero developers.
Assuming they had the reasonable, and not deoptimized, implementation of the algorithm as designed all along (which is likely), the alleged "two year history" of bytecoin was mined on 4-8 PCs. It's really one of the shadiest and sleaziest premines scams yet, though this shouldn't be surprising because in every type of scam, the scams always get sneakier and more deceptive over time (the simple ones no longer work).
I always suspected, strongly, but now the evidence is coming together.
I can't comment on the motivations of the developers, but I concur with Noodle. The algorithm is actually very straightforward, and the code involved a _lot_ of unnecessary data movement, function call overhead, and uint8_t * manipulation that prevented the compiler for doing a reasonable job of optimizing it.
It could be that someone was trying to write the code to express the way they were thinking about it and that it had the effect of slowing it down, but there's certainly something odd about it.
Particularly given the elegance of the algorithm itself -- it's basically scrypt using AES as a mixing function, alternating with a 64 bit multiplication. The core difference is that it writes back to the scratchpad, making verification more costly, but preventing some of the LOOKUP_GAP optimizations used for scrypt coins. It's nicely designed and done, as far as my non-cryptographer eyes can tell.
Hey, so I was doing some thinking. If we just maximize the size of every block by moving a lot of money around .... would that fend off botnets by creating low subsidies?
Or would it be counterproductive because it would leave us w/ a high difficulty?
Thoughts?
Or would it be counterproductive because it would leave us w/ a high difficulty?
Thoughts?
Large size blocks incur a penalty on mining subsidy. Take a look at http://monerochain.info/
The largest block sizes yield very few MRO. If all blocks were full, the incentive to continue mining via botnet is reduced to the point where there is no point to mine with massive farms and you'd just be burning electricity for 1 MRO instead of 16. Granted this falls back on all miners, but provided the cost to single people per computer is much less than the cost of one person incurring a heavy loss of predicted income ... then I would imagine they would conclude that there's no reason to mine.
IE we've been given a weapon to combat heavy mining that has a larger impact to one person controlling 10% of the net hash than one person with .001% of the net hash.
Following through on this, it would give a rational reason to keep the velocity of money extremely high otherwise it ends up in the hands of very few people.
Won't really work because the block size limit increases adaptively. If you keep getting full blocks, the maximum size goes up. See "adaptive parameters" in the cryptonote documents.
Hey, so I was doing some thinking. If we just maximize the size of every block by moving a lot of money around .... would that fend off botnets by creating low subsidies?
Or would it be counterproductive because it would leave us w/ a high difficulty?
Thoughts?
Or would it be counterproductive because it would leave us w/ a high difficulty?
Thoughts?
Large size blocks incur a penalty on mining subsidy. Take a look at http://monerochain.info/
The largest block sizes yield very few MRO. If all blocks were full, the incentive to continue mining via botnet is reduced to the point where there is no point to mine with massive farms and you'd just be burning electricity for 1 MRO instead of 16. Granted this falls back on all miners, but provided the cost to single people per computer is much less than the cost of one person incurring a heavy loss of predicted income ... then I would imagine they would conclude that there's no reason to mine.
IE we've been given a weapon to combat heavy mining that has a larger impact to one person controlling 10% of the net hash than one person with .001% of the net hash.
Following through on this, it would give a rational reason to keep the velocity of money extremely high otherwise it ends up in the hands of very few people.
un-de-optimizations
I was skeptical of this conspiracy theory at first but after thinking about the numbers and looking back at the code again, I'm starting to believe it.
These are not deep optimizations, just cleaning up the code to work as intended.
At 100 H/s, with 500k iterations, 70 cycles per L3 memory access, we're now at 3.5 GHz which is reasonably close. So the algorithm is finally memory-bound, as it was originally intended to be. But as delivered by the bytecode developers not even close.
I know this is going to sound like tooting our own horn but this is another example of the kind of dirty tricks you can expect from the 80% premine crowd and the good work being done in the name of the community by the Monero developers.
Assuming they had the reasonable, and not deoptimized, implementation of the algorithm as designed all along (which is likely), the alleged "two year history" of bytecoin was mined on 4-8 PCs. It's really one of the shadiest and sleaziest premines scams yet, though this shouldn't be surprising because in every type of scam, the scams always get sneakier and more deceptive over time (the simple ones no longer work).
I always suspected, strongly, but now the evidence is coming together.
Awesome mate - Im mining with my terrible i3 but its working! Great work!
how much time to sync without the blockchain? I cant realize where to put the chain in order for the wallet to use it. srsly.
long time.
are you on windows 7 or 8? If so, it goes here: C:\Users\%username%\AppData\Roaming\Bitmonero\blockchain.bin
thank you very much, it synched alright, but now when I open my wallet.bin it says it couldnt connect to daemon host:8080 w/e ....
Can you provide more details of what you are doing, what platform, commands etc. You error message refers to a different port from when I try to start wallet without daemon running:
Quote
F:\>simplewallet.exe --wallet-file wallet.bin
bitmonero wallet v0.8.6.295(0.1-g7620d55)
password: ********************
Opened wallet: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Error: wallet failed to connect to daemon (http://localhost:18081). Daemon either is not started or passed wrong port. P
lease, make sure that daemon is running or restart the wallet with correct daemon address.
**********************************************************************
Use "help" command to see the list of available commands.
**********************************************************************
[wallet xxxxxxx]:
bitmonero wallet v0.8.6.295(0.1-g7620d55)
password: ********************
Opened wallet: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Error: wallet failed to connect to daemon (http://localhost:18081). Daemon either is not started or passed wrong port. P
lease, make sure that daemon is running or restart the wallet with correct daemon address.
**********************************************************************
Use "help" command to see the list of available commands.
**********************************************************************
[wallet xxxxxxx]:
Hey, so I was doing some thinking. If we just maximize the size of every block by moving a lot of money around .... would that fend off botnets by creating low subsidies?
Or would it be counterproductive because it would leave us w/ a high difficulty?
Thoughts?
Or would it be counterproductive because it would leave us w/ a high difficulty?
Thoughts?
Error: mixin_count should be non-negative integer, got <1>
Did you put <1> or 1? It should just be 1 (or 0, 2, 3, ...).
I will close the Giveaway at 01:00 UST.
So get your free MRO today, before it's too late. Reddit thread
Very nice project, looking to the future ☺So get your free MRO today, before it's too late. Reddit thread
Thank you ☺
41unF6HRS6Y1Yw51PCmuUFDW8YFXzhL85h3AVyzJmUQJC4JdVjAXH3RKcBkRs45kzY5ZqxXApa2DXUb efeYMt6VpNnFTswn
Error: mixin_count should be non-negative integer, got <1>
i'm also waitting for a optimized cpu minning tool, it seems that somebody has that version, now it's unfair for vs whice use the old tool~~
Why would you do that when mining with the existing miner is still very profitable? (And I would add does not risk wasting your time mining unspendable coins or other problems, as happened to people using another too-hastily-released mining tool.) Testing is good. Be patient.
I mined with 4x Core i7 3770 for four days straight and didn't find a block. doesn't seem profitable to me. was I just unlucky?
so do i , i didn't find any block these days, maybe more than 3 days,
What is your hashrate (show_hr)? Just divide it into the current global hashrate to get an idea of your chance to find each block. Times the blocks per day (1440) to get the daily chance. My hashrate is 20 with 4 core i7 3820, that's about one chance per 20 days for me at current global hash of around 620 KH/s. So you need to be patient to solo mine now. The difficulty is increasing rapidly, it has quadrupled in the last week. That's why pools are becoming more important now.
Awesome mate - Im mining with my terrible i3 but its working! Great work!
I contacted support of the domain registrar and they said they fixed it. It was working for some people and for me it was going in and out.
i think its moneropool.com
Oh, they seem to be two separate pools.
Yep, bad request.
This?: http://moneropool.org/
It works fine for me.
Pool
Hash Rate: 2.27 KH/sec
Block Found: Never
Round Hashes: 81574063
Connected Miners: 47
Mining Fee: 0%
need some help, please.
I read read up on the darkcoin dev history threads that the master nodes are useful to provide random mixing. the price of having a node is to make it costly to game the network. the anonymity is not native, that is a given.
They also have ring signatures, I2P and IP obfuscation planned. Not sure that some of this will actually work with the master node network.
Before I put any more into MRO, will MRO be able to convince people invested in darkcoin to switch away or attract new investors given the exposure darkcoin is having?
The perception of "costly" is very different for you and me vs. a large entity (a company or a government). If they want to game it, they can and will. Altcoin markets are so tiny in the grand scheme of things that even rich individuals can game it. Another thing to note is that the vast majority of masternodes are in various VPS services (http://drk.poolhash.org/darksend.html). Amazon by itself is over 40% of all masternodes and another called OVH is about 25%. We already know tech companies give data to governments without notifying us. So even an honest individual might be running a masternode keeping logs.
Also, promising ring signatures is very different from delivering it. Darkcoin developers aren't professional cryptographers. Copy-pasting CryptoNote code into the BTC code and trying to fix it is probably a hopeless endeavor. If they ever did manage to get their own implementation, my concern is that the market will crash when several hundred thousand DRK locked up in masternodes enters the supply. Hopefully they'll find a way out of this (if they try to go down this path).
There's definitely scope for marketplace competition between multiple implementations in the privacy sphere. It would be pretty boring if everyone adopted ring signatures.
how much time to sync without the blockchain? I cant realize where to put the chain in order for the wallet to use it. srsly.
long time.
are you on windows 7 or 8? If so, it goes here: C:\Users\%username%\AppData\Roaming\Bitmonero\blockchain.bin
thank you very much, it synched alright, but now when I open my wallet.bin it says it couldnt connect to daemon host:8080 w/e ....
Number of MRO in existence so far?
Around 740000. I multiply number of blocks which is almost 43000 with an avergae block payout which i put 17.2.
And Dark Coin's is $25 Million, so a lot of potential here.
And remember that CN coins anonymity doesn't rely on master nodes so it is better than darkcoin. i cant see a reason why monero cant also be in the millions once news of it are spread
Though we still need a nice GUI and pools.need some help, please.
I read read up on the darkcoin dev history threads that the master nodes are useful to provide random mixing. the price of having a node is to make it costly to game the network. the anonymity is not native, that is a given.
They also have ring signatures, I2P and IP obfuscation planned. Not sure that some of this will actually work with the master node network.
Before I put any more into MRO, will MRO be able to convince people invested in darkcoin to switch away or attract new investors given the exposure darkcoin is having?
i think its moneropool.com
Oh, they seem to be two separate pools.
Yep, bad request.
i think its moneropool.com
Oh, they seem to be two separate pools.
Jump to: