[∞ YH] solo.ckpool.org 2% fee solo mining USA/DE 255 blocks solved! - page 314.

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: Ziploc on November 01, 2015, 06:37:41 PM

Thank You CK,

Does it mean that few ''proxied" workers work on the same block in the same time ? like 1 miner

for example s7 does 4,5TH and ''proxied'' workers do 100th ?

Everyone always works on the same block all the time everywhere irrespective of who or what they're mining with and which pool they're on.

Ziploc

sr. member

Activity: 405

Merit: 250

Quote from: -ck on November 01, 2015, 06:32:14 PM

Quote from: Ziploc on November 01, 2015, 06:31:15 PM

I have a question:

this are his stats :

"hashrate1m": "169T", "hashrate5m": "167T", "hashrate1hr": "146T", "hashrate1d": "15.2T", "hashrate7d": "2.48T", "lastupdate": 1446420514, "workers": 3,

How can he have only 3 workers for 169TH ?

Proxy

Thank You CK,

Does it mean that few ''proxied" workers work on the same block in the same time ? like 1 miner

for example s7 does 4,5TH and ''proxied'' workers do 100th ?

hodedowe

sr. member

Activity: 359

Merit: 251

Workers does not equal machines. You can have any number of machines contributing on one worker.

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: Ziploc on November 01, 2015, 06:31:15 PM

I have a question:

this are his stats :

"hashrate1m": "169T", "hashrate5m": "167T", "hashrate1hr": "146T", "hashrate1d": "15.2T", "hashrate7d": "2.48T", "lastupdate": 1446420514, "workers": 3,

How can he have only 3 workers for 169TH ?

Proxy

Ziploc

sr. member

Activity: 405

Merit: 250

Quote from: Rikim4ru on November 01, 2015, 05:35:17 PM

Wow!

Looks like a quick 200th rental Tongue

Someone have a good KARMA!
Happy for you, whoever!

I have a question:

this are his stats :

"hashrate1m": "169T", "hashrate5m": "167T", "hashrate1hr": "146T", "hashrate1d": "15.2T", "hashrate7d": "2.48T", "lastupdate": 1446420514, "workers": 3,

How can he have only 3 workers for 169TH ?

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: o_solo_miner on November 01, 2015, 05:31:25 PM

cool another Live view.

Congrats to 1LPWZ9AskyF8Ux384cXoYbvNRTKgLooGh3 for Block 381610

Code:

[2015-11-01 22:29:05.177] Possible block solve diff 154320816161.824310 !
[2015-11-01 22:29:05.861] BLOCK ACCEPTED!
[2015-11-01 22:29:05.864] Solved and confirmed block 381610 by 1LPWZ9AskyF8Ux384cXoYbvNRTKgLooGh3

https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/block/0000000000000000071fee9a793f726693022334e89df41febfe4b6d7696b1fb

Rikim4ru

full member

Activity: 169

Merit: 100

Wow!

Looks like a quick 200th rental Tongue

Someone have a good KARMA!
Happy for you, whoever!

o_solo_miner

legendary

Activity: 2483

Merit: 1482

-> morgen, ist heute, schon gestern <-

cool another Live view.

Congrats to 1LPWZ9AskyF8Ux384cXoYbvNRTKgLooGh3 for Block 381610

philipma1957

legendary

Activity: 4326

Merit: 8899

'The right to privacy matters'

Quote from: nicehash on November 01, 2015, 04:37:31 PM

Quote from: kano on November 01, 2015, 04:19:58 PM

Sorry, but this is a scam excuse.
You modified ckpool to update the coinbase for every user mining to you solo pool.
-ck did not give you his solo pool code changes (that also didn't work) - your solo pool changes were written by you.

... and I can add, that kano.is never had this problem, simply because I knew that the ckpool code worked for how I was using it (1 address coinbase) and my payout process uses bitcoind to do transaction generation and testing so if bitcoind couldn't do it right ... then yeah that would be a major problem for everyone.

Eh, kano, take a look here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11621884

ck- admitted there was a bug and fixed it. We could also keep the info about this bug to our self, fixed it at our side and then someday the same issue might happen to ck solo pool - but the beauty of open source code is sharing the experience and improving the code.

And here is the unfortunate transaction: https://blockchain.info/tx/778724d38cfec7dc8782621cd8d0d9f09e4a7c1a1f82a66ddbdda698ef3b9433

It was good of you to share that info and the refund of his 3 btc was good. But you should have given him some more.

yeah maybe not 22 more coins or whatever the full block was worth but he did you a favor and the all of us mining solo on ck's pool a favor.

I read about this in a few posts but did not understand fully what happened.

I hit 2 blocks in 90 minutes on ck's pool with a single signature hot wallet address. If I was doing a multi-signature I would have lost 50 coins. and since I was running the solo for 10 people 45 coins would have come out of my pocket as I am not going to let the people down. I would have lost about 11000 dollars at the time. I mention it since I hit the 2 blocks very close in time to this lost block.

You have been a standup guy and run a good service you should consider giving him some more coin.

Just my opinion BTW I am renting from your pool to give him a shot at ½ a block.

kano

legendary

Activity: 4592

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: nicehash on November 01, 2015, 04:37:31 PM

Quote from: kano on November 01, 2015, 04:19:58 PM

Sorry, but this is a scam excuse.
You modified ckpool to update the coinbase for every user mining to you solo pool.
-ck did not give you his solo pool code changes (that also didn't work) - your solo pool changes were written by you.

... and I can add, that kano.is never had this problem, simply because I knew that the ckpool code worked for how I was using it (1 address coinbase) and my payout process uses bitcoind to do transaction generation and testing so if bitcoind couldn't do it right ... then yeah that would be a major problem for everyone.

Eh, kano, take a look here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11621884

ck- admitted there was a bug and fixed it. We could also keep the info about this bug to our self, fixed it at our side and then someday the same issue might happen to ck solo pool - but the beauty of open source code is sharing the experience and improving the code.

And here is the unfortunate transaction: https://blockchain.info/tx/778724d38cfec7dc8782621cd8d0d9f09e4a7c1a1f82a66ddbdda698ef3b9433

We know there was a bug in -ck's code.
I even stated that.
Can you not read?

Quote

You modified ckpool to update the coinbase for every user mining to you solo pool.
-ck did not give you his solo pool code changes (that also didn't work) - your solo pool changes were written by you.

Your code changes didn't work.

nicehash

legendary

Activity: 885

Merit: 1006

NiceHash.com

Quote from: kano on November 01, 2015, 04:19:58 PM

Sorry, but this is a scam excuse.
You modified ckpool to update the coinbase for every user mining to you solo pool.
-ck did not give you his solo pool code changes (that also didn't work) - your solo pool changes were written by you.

... and I can add, that kano.is never had this problem, simply because I knew that the ckpool code worked for how I was using it (1 address coinbase) and my payout process uses bitcoind to do transaction generation and testing so if bitcoind couldn't do it right ... then yeah that would be a major problem for everyone.

Eh, kano, take a look here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11621884

ck- admitted there was a bug and fixed it. We could also keep the info about this bug to our self, fixed it at our side and then someday the same issue might happen to ck solo pool - but the beauty of open source code is sharing the experience and improving the code.

And here is the unfortunate transaction: https://blockchain.info/tx/778724d38cfec7dc8782621cd8d0d9f09e4a7c1a1f82a66ddbdda698ef3b9433

kano

legendary

Activity: 4592

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: nicehash on November 01, 2015, 12:52:31 PM

Quote from: Fingolfin on November 01, 2015, 12:04:04 PM

About Nicehash, where excatly is the Problem sending the Block / 25 BTC from "jacobmayes94" to an adress that is accesible Huh

Sorry! But that's just not legit!!! (or i get something wrong again???)

Hmm, how is "jacobmayes94" related to this issue? As already said, there was a serious bug in ck's ckpool source code, which was unfortunately not discovered neither by ck's testing nor our testing (the bug was present in ck's solo pool as well as in our pool or any solo pool that was built on top of ckpool source code) - this bug was unfortunately hit by fredi. To explain what happened (simplified explanation): ckpool code was unable to handle generating found block to a multi-sig address (3xxx). When fredi was mining it was using multi-sig address and he was the first ever to find block when using mulit-sig address. When the block was found the ckpool code generated this block to a "random" Bitcoin address (ckpool converted the bitcoin address to hash160, and "inserted" that hash to coinbase tx).

Sorry, but this is a scam excuse.
You modified ckpool to update the coinbase for every user mining to you solo pool.
-ck did not give you his solo pool code changes (that also didn't work) - your solo pool changes were written by you.

... and I can add, that kano.is never had this problem, simply because I knew that the ckpool code worked for how I was using it (1 address coinbase) and my payout process uses bitcoind to do transaction generation and testing so if bitcoind couldn't do it right ... then yeah that would be a major problem for everyone.

Fingolfin

member

Activity: 90

Merit: 12

Hi Philip,

maybe you ignore newbs by default!? However, to show that i mean what i say i just added the promissed hashrate to : http://solo.ckpool.org/users/1JdC6Xg3ajT3rge3FgPNSYYFpmf53Vbtje until 03. November 21:00h 2015 Berlin Time

I liked your solidarity, and decided i like to step in. If we hit a block, proceed like you whish! But if you will fund 4,5 BTC to the adress i will specify in the "lucky case", all (Kano, -ck, and my electricity bill will have fun ; ) ... also fredi will feel much better! Which was the main reason Wink

... maybe we also can start talking about legit s5 & S7 firmware....

By the way, i used your Nice Hash Sig-link to open an account there and also spend alot of coins Wink

So far... nevermind! But maybe not all people should mistrust newbs by default ( for example: your mistrust against RichBC ... he didn't wanted to sell you anything! Also, i didn't asked for your trust, i made the total different! think about!)

And for second time! Thanks for ALL your usefull posts!

Best Wishes!

Fingolfin

Quote from: philipma1957 on November 01, 2015, 02:20:11 PM

Quote from: hodedowe on November 01, 2015, 01:30:23 PM

I'm of the opinion that 12.5 BTC + 3 BTCwould have been sufficient for a refund. That would make NH come out like the big guy doing well by its customers for having untested faulty code (either on the website, checking for non-compliant addresses, or the backend mining code) and give Fredi a bug-finding reward. He wouldn't have thrown a fit and made the problem so public had he been made happy within reason either, further tarninshing NiceHash's reputation.

I'll add that I'll mine for you too, Fredi. For the next WEEK my little Sparky experiment will be mining for you. If I win, I'll send you 15.5 BTC and feel good about every bit of it.

Good luck!

I did a long signature with nicehash maybe 6 months he was pretty good to me. ck has been pretty good to me. So I am not throwing them under the bus.

I think the mining community needs both a solid solo pool like ck runs and I think we need a service like nicehash.

But I feel for fredi so if a few of us donate a bit maybe it will work out for him. He did take a bullet for all of us on the multi sig issue.

jacobmayes94

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

when I hit I will donate 1 BTC to this guy if a solution hasn't been found for him, I will also donate 0.5BTC to CK as well to contribute to the solo pool. I feel though that nicehash being a big player could have afforded giving this guy something more than what he paid as a gesture of goodwill. Even if not the 25BTC. But what 'random' address was this? How did a random address generated just so happened to be a valid one? Or was it generated then, but no corresponding private key exists? Has there been any activity from this wallet in past or present? A check of the blockchain could find this out? Like if its a wallet someone already has or if it was generated then with no private key to match? I am not saying this is a conspiracy of any kind on the part of nicehash but I always like to know the full, and both sides of a story!

To be fair out of all solo type pools I think CKs is the only one I will mine on. I trust it more than my own node in terms of its latency too.

Jacob

hodedowe

sr. member

Activity: 359

Merit: 251

Not under the bus, but NH's customer service in this instance left a lot to be desired. CK I've got no problem with - he runs a good solo pool and we agree on a lot of stuff. Plus he MADE Cgminer so...lifetime free pass in my book. Cheesy

The problem lies with NiceHash selling a service, letting someone play the game by the rules, and then telling them sorry, your not a winner. Here's the money you paid in so let's just pretend this didn't happen.

Anyway, what's done is done. I'll put a week on Fredi's ticket and we'll see what happens.

philipma1957

legendary

Activity: 4326

Merit: 8899

'The right to privacy matters'

Quote from: hodedowe on November 01, 2015, 01:30:23 PM

I'm of the opinion that 12.5 BTC + 3 BTCwould have been sufficient for a refund. That would make NH come out like the big guy doing well by its customers for having untested faulty code (either on the website, checking for non-compliant addresses, or the backend mining code) and give Fredi a bug-finding reward. He wouldn't have thrown a fit and made the problem so public had he been made happy within reason either, further tarninshing NiceHash's reputation.

I'll add that I'll mine for you too, Fredi. For the next WEEK my little Sparky experiment will be mining for you. If I win, I'll send you 15.5 BTC and feel good about every bit of it.

Good luck!

I did a long signature with nicehash maybe 6 months he was pretty good to me. ck has been pretty good to me. So I am not throwing them under the bus.

I think the mining community needs both a solid solo pool like ck runs and I think we need a service like nicehash.

But I feel for fredi so if a few of us donate a bit maybe it will work out for him. He did take a bullet for all of us on the multi sig issue.

hodedowe

sr. member

Activity: 359

Merit: 251

I'm of the opinion that 12.5 BTC + 3 BTCwould have been sufficient for a refund. That would make NH come out like the big guy doing well by its customers for having untested faulty code (either on the website, checking for non-compliant addresses, or the backend mining code) and give Fredi a bug-finding reward. He wouldn't have thrown a fit and made the problem so public had he been made happy within reason either, further tarninshing NiceHash's reputation.

I'll add that I'll mine for you too, Fredi. For the next WEEK my little Sparky experiment will be mining for you. If I win, I'll send you 15.5 BTC and feel good about every bit of it.

Good luck!

Fingolfin

member

Activity: 90

Merit: 12

Quote from: jacobmayes94 on November 01, 2015, 01:02:52 PM

I think he's confused me with fredi.

In response to the other post I turn on the cpu miner when I'm out in low temperatures only haha quite a way to warm you up

I don't run it much though I'd rather not stress it if one wants to cpu mine a block erupted is better

Yes! Sorry, i changed the Name to "fredi" in my post

... Good Luck with CPU-mining Shocked

.... i tried 70 days with around 11TH .... nope, nothing , nada

Best share around 8.800.000.000 ... later with around 1 TH 11.000.000.000 .... speed is only part of the game Wink

... Luck is more important! Don't overheat your Laptop

Fingolfin

member

Activity: 90

Merit: 12

@nicehash

Sorry, i didn't wanted to offend you, my intention for this post was a complete other!

quote:

To explain what happened (simplified explanation): ckpool code was unable to handle generating found block to a multi-sig address (3xxx). When fredi was mining it was using multi-sig address and he was the first ever to find block when using mulit-sig address. When the block was found the ckpool code generated this block to a "random" Bitcoin address (ckpool converted the bitcoin address to hash160, and "inserted" that hash to coinbase tx).

quote end

I don't said you or -ck has access to the coins! I'm just wondering why (obviously a bug! or?), a bitcoin adress is randomly generated and there is nowhere access to the corresponding private key. That where my thoughts! Nothing else! Sorry, i just was wondering!

When i read my post again, i better had skipped the "not legit" part! Sorry again!

Best Regards!

Fingolfin

jacobmayes94

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

I think he's confused me with fredi.

In response to the other post I turn on the cpu miner when I'm out in low temperatures only haha quite a way to warm you up

I don't run it much though I'd rather not stress it if one wants to cpu mine a block erupted is better

Topic: [∞ YH] solo.ckpool.org 2% fee solo mining USA/DE 255 blocks solved! - page 314. (Read 1514786 times)