Asic Bitcoin gebraucht kaufen! Nur noch 2 St. bis -60% ...

BitOffer institute: Ethereum miners' daily earnings soared 60%, ETF earning over 85 times

BitOffer institute: Ethereum miners' daily earnings soared 60%, ETF earning over 85 times

https://preview.redd.it/95910ilvizd51.png?width=696&format=png&auto=webp&s=6681449d66d95faa67159454fe7faff49b4d7df8
On June 27, Ethereum miners earned about $1.85 per 100 (MH/s) per day. In the past month, especially in the last two weeks, the income rose by 60%, reaching a peak of $3.27 per 100 MH/s on July 25, before falling back to around $3.
Over the same period, the price of ETH has risen more than 40%, from $229 on June 27 to $327.99, which is a new high for 2020.
On July 22, the total market value of decentralized Financial DeFi passed $11.5 billion. The massive hype of DeFi caused a surge in trading volume in ETH, which, along with the surge in trading volume from ETH, pushed miners’ daily income to its highest level in two years.
Etherscan, a blockchain browser, shows that the entire computing power of the Ethereum blockchain, the world’s second-largest by market value, has been stable at around 190 petahash per second. Indeed, data from Bitinfocharts show that in the first quarter of this year, Ethereum’s daily mining revenue was below $2 per 100 MH/s before falling to $1 per 100 MH/s on March 12 after the cryptographic market collapsed. Ethereum’s daily mining revenues have tripled in recent months.
Currently, some of the most advanced ETH mining equipment, such as the core A10 Pro, which has a 500-megabit hash per second (MH/s) computing power and a power ratio of 1.9w/m, generates $13 per day at Ethereum’s current price and mining difficulty. Based on the miner’s profitability level, and A10 Pro Ethereum miner’s daily power consumption is about 1.1 dollars, and its daily net profit is nearly 12 dollars.
Even though bitcoin’s price topping $11,000 for the first time since September 2019, the difficulty of mining bitcoin remains at an all-time high. As a result, even the most efficient bitcoin miners, such as MicroBT’s WhatsMiner M30S ++ and Bitmaint’s AntMiner S19 Pro, generate $9 in daily income. Based on the current price of bitcoin and the difficulty of mining it, a more efficient Bitcoin miner (within 40w/T power ratio) generates about $6.50 in net profits per day. Ethereum miners earn about $13 a day, which is twice as Bitcoin miners.
Since the launch of DeFi, it has received a lot of attention from investment institutions and individual investors. Currently, DeFi Wallet has been downloaded more than 5,000 times, far more than any other type of DAPP, it is the number one DAPP developed based on Ethereum. According to the popularity and the current download speed, in the next few months, the downloading number will break through 6000 and bring a sufficient number of volumes for the ETH. Meanwhile, as the ETH 2.0 launch date approximation, these two advantages will boost the price of ETH, the income of the ETH miners will be at the appointed time with increased, which gradually widening the income gap with BTC miner.
It is the best time to invest in Ethereum.
However, buying BitOffer’s Ethereum ETF Ethereum is better than buying a future, in which profits start at a minimum of three times. Besides, it also includes an intelligent dynamic position reallocation mechanism and the calculation of fund compound interest with the returns of up to 17 times.
In the latest week, the Ethereum ETF (ETH3X) has jumped 160% from a peak of $6 to $16, according to data analysis from the BitOffer Exchange. With the launch of DeFi and ETH 2.0, once Ethereum rises more than fivefold over the next few months, the ETH3X could rise as much as 85 times.
If you buy Ethereum for $10,000, and ETH goes up fivefold, you can maximum make a fivefold profit, Which from $10,000 to $50,000. But buying ETH3X is a different story. Once Ethereum increases fivefold, you can make up to 85 times, which would be from $10,000 to $850,000, the 17 times than buying futures, more than over $800,000. Buying the Ethereum ETF would be a better deal.
submitted by Bitoffer_Official to BitOffer_Official [link] [comments]

Are ASICs a real problem for Ethereum miners?

Are ASICs a real problem for Ethereum miners?
ASICs are coming to the Ethereum mining industry, and small independent miners are virtually doomed. 2Ether has come up with a solution — the third element in our dynamic block reward system. But before we explain it, we’ll have to talk about Ethereum ASICs.
If you don’t know that much about Ethereum, you might be surprised to learn that ASICs for mining ETH actually exist. Isn’t Ethereum’s algorithm — Ethash — supposed to be ASIC-resistant? If it isn’t then why is everyone still mining using GPUs?
Well, Ethash is indeed much less ASIC-friendly than the algorithm of Bitcoin. It doesn’t mean that you can’t make ASIC chips for mining ether, though. It’s just that it’s difficult to make ASICs that would be much more efficient than graphic cards (GPUs).
The efficiency of a piece of mining hardware is calculated as a ratio of power (measured in kilowatt hours) to hash power (measured in megahash per second). So for example, if you have two devices that both produce 50 MH/s, but one of them consumes 1 kWh, and the other consumes 2 kWh, then the first device is twice more efficient.
ASICs cost a lot of money to design, and their market price is high. So it only makes sense to buy an ASIC if it gives you a serious advantage over other types of hardware. You should also keep in mind that if the algorithm changes, you’ll need to replace your ASIC with a new model. Such chips are built to carry out one task and one task only — that’s why they are called application-specific integrated circuits (that’s how the acronym is deciphered).
Now, the first ASICs for Ethereum came out in April 2018, and they were more than a curious gadget than a serious rival to GPUs. Vitalik Buterin said that they were not a threat and the best action would be no action.
But the situation changed. Soon, there were ASICs twice as efficient as the best graphic cards. Still, it wasn’t enough to justify the price difference.
Finally, in late September 2019, Chinese manufacturer and distributor of mining hardware Canaan announced that it would start selling a new ASIC that is 5 to 7 times more efficient than the leading GPU models. Its W/MHs ratio is just 0.68–7.5 times better compared to AMD Vega 64 and 5.3 times better than AMD RX570.
What does this mean for Ethereum mining? When such models go on sale, whoever can afford them will be able to extract very high profits. GPU miners will be at a disadvantage. And if you have only a small rig with a couple of GPUs at home, your prospects are grim.
You might ask: can’t Ethereum devs do something — say, change the algorithm? Bitcoin algo changes regularly, after all. Unfortunately, Ethereum works differently, so every algorithm change would require a hard fork — with all the consequences it entails. The devs have been talking about introducing a new consensus protocol called ProgPOW (Programmable Proof of Work). It would make the algorithm change regularly and ensure ASIC resistance. But Vitalik Buterin believes that the real goal is a switch to Proof of Stake, not tweaking PoW.
What other options are there to protect small miners from the upcoming wave of ASICs? In our next post, we’ll explain how 2Ether plans to deal with this problem.

https://2ether.com/
Web site — https://2ether.com/ Twitter — https://twitter.com/2Ether_ Discord — https://discord.gg/TuqG4py Facebook — https://www.facebook.com/2Ethe Reddit — https://www.reddit.com/use2Ether Medium — https://medium.com/@2ether Teletype — https://teletype.in/@2ether Telegram — https://t.me/ether2support Telegram chat — https://t.me/blockchain_2ether
submitted by 2Ether to u/2Ether [link] [comments]

Canaan's new ASIC is a Pipe Dream, not an Ethereum Threat

So, yesterday Kristy-Leigh Minehan posted on Twitter that a company named Canaan announced an ASIC that is capable of 0.68W/Mhs
That's 2200Mh/s running at 1500w
https://twitter.com/OhGodAGirl/status/1176938519866089473
Here is a list of how it compares to other ASICs and GPUs.
https://blog.miningstore.com/blog/ethereum-mining-hardware-for-2019
She used this tweet to promote the need for ProgPoW
Today, I am attempting to explain that Canaan is not a threat to centralize Ethereum mining with their ASICs.
First, I cannot find any information regarding Canaan announcing an Ethereum ASIC other than Kristy's twitter post
There is only one article written about it and it uses Kristy's twitter post as their source.
https://cryptoslate.com/ethereum-asic-dominates-gpu-performance/
Nothing on Canaan's website talks about this miner
Nor does Canaan's twitter account mention anything like this.
If we look closely at Kristy's twitter picture, you can see the Canaan Ethereum miner will be called the V10.
I cannot find any info anywhere on this miner.
You would think that if Canaan is unveiling a new product, they would be talking about it more to spread awareness and raise hype, but they aren't.
I mean, they made a big to-do when they announced the A10 bitcoin miner in March, so why are they posting nothing about the V10 ethereum miner.
https://twitter.com/canaanio/status/1111513725733724160
And a google search will show many many more articles written about the bitcoin A10 after its announcement.
I'm not saying the announcement isn't real, just that I find it odd that the company isn't talking about it themselves.
Canaan did respond to a tweet from “cryptoState”, the writer's of the article based on Kristy's tweet.
Canaan replied that the v10 is not an official worldwide Canaan product.
https://twitter.com/canaanio/status/1177088253431668736
and further in the cryptostate article, Canaan says “It is a little hard to explain, but those are not products designed and built by Canaan engineering. They are products sold by the domestic sales team and are not an official worldwide Canaan product,”
I do not know what that means exactly. If it means it's not an official Canaan product, or that it won't be available worldwide, or what.
But this is the first clue to me that it isn't anything to worry about.
If it's not an official Canaan product, then it doesn't seem like it will have support from Canaan to bring it to market.
It won't be marketed by Canaan, use it's supply chain, it's business resources and contacts, use it's support system, or be built by Canaan.
Next, yes 0.68W/Mhs is more efficient than GPUs, but that isn't all that matters when miners choose the devices to use.
What matters also is how much the machine costs.
If the V10 is price too high, then it's not something to worry about.
Without a price, Kristy can't claim in good faith that the V10 is something Ethereum needs to worry about and a reason ProgPoW needs to be adopted.
I'm not sure how to price the thing, myself, but at current ETH prices and hashrate, it would make $2200 in 4 months.
I think generally ASIC mfgs price their machines to break even in 3-4 months.
So that would be the machine will cost around $2200.
BUT, that's only if ONE machine is running on the network.
The more machines on the network, the less profitable they are.
If we look at the Avalon A1066, it's november batch costs $1390, and has a break-even time of 464 months at current bitcoin prices.
So it seems to me the Canaan V10 will be quite a bit more expensive than $2200.
Which doesn't make it feasible for that many people to buy.
Next, there was no product on display at the New Era Mining Summit, where this product was announced.
Only some graphics of numbers they claim.
Nor can I find any technical documentation talking about how they plan to achieve the advertised hashrate
I tweeted Kristy telling her that this seems, at best, like just an idea to me, to help them raise money and that it takes more than an idea to bring an ASIC to market.
https://twitter.com/AltcoinXP/status/1177290387205054464
Kristy then blocked me on Twitter and told me to stop spreading misinformation.
https://imgur.com/lWEAWbd
So, now let's talk about the article I replied to her with, claiming that Canaan doesn't have enough funding for this.
Granted, I said this without doing as much research as I could've, but let's see if what I said holds true.
Here is the article I linked in the tweet.
https://www.coindesk.com/avalon-bitcoin-miner-maker-canaan-is-plotting-another-ipo-attempt
Notice the date this article was published. March 27th 2019.
Notice that Avalon announce their Bitcoin A10 miner the next day.
https://twitter.com/canaanio/status/1111513725733724160
Perhaps to help attract funding from new investors, which the Coindesk article says they haven't been able to bring on any new investors in a long time.
I'm not going to cite the whole article here, read it for yourself, but it generally explains that Canaan is unable to attract new funding.
Also, Xianfu Lui, a 17.2% shareholder in Canaan left the company in February, so I doubt he invested money into Canaan.
https://www.coindesk.com/co-founder-quits-avalon-mining-chip-maker-canaan-over-differences
Here are some more Coindesk articles speaking about Canaan trying to raise money.
https://www.coindesk.com/huobi-plans-backdoor-ipo-attempt-in-hong-kong-document-suggests
“After mining giant Bitmain’s IPO attempt in Hong Kong was allowed to expire, apparently due to reluctance from HKEX, it’s reportedly now planning to list in the U.S. Another miner manufacturer, Canaan Creative, is also reported to have already confidentially filed in the U.S. after a failed HKEX attempt. “
https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-miner-maker-canaan-confidentially-files-for-ipo-in-us-report
https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-miner-canaans-ipo-likely-delayed-after-hong-kong-filing-expires
“The Reuters report, citing anonymous sources, further said the HKEX and financial regulators in Hong Kong have raised questions over Canaan’s business model, given the volatile nature of cryptocurrencies. As such, the news agency said the IPO might not go ahead this year, since there have been no updates from a listing hearing with the HKEX. “
So seems to be Caanan is having a hard time finding funding for their endeavors. Pretty much every single article on Coindesk about them is about them trying to get funding and failing at it.
So do they have enough money to bring the V10 to market AND bring enough V10s to be a problem?
They would need to produce 45,000 units to get 50% of the Ethereum mining power.
Current network is 197TH/s https://bitinfocharts.com/ethereum/
Currently Bitmain is estimated to have produced less than 20,000 units since the Antminer E3's announcement in April 2018.
https://www.reddit.com/ethereum/comments/d8fuvj/an_argument_against_progpow_a_day_part_1/f1axc2c/
https://www.coindesk.com/bitmain-confirms-release-first-ever-ethereum-asic-miners
Bitmain being a much larger company than Canaan, it seems unlikely they will produce 45,000 units quick enough to become a problem.
Anyway,
For those of you that don't know, Canaan manages the Avalon bitcoin ASICs and have done so since 2014. Canaan is fulling in charge of Avalon.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Avalon
Maybe I should've said that sooner, I don't know. I'm just typing as I come up with stuff.
But we can look at Avalon's bitcoin past to determine what the future ethereum miner supply might look like. Keep in mind though, this was also during a time when they were well-funded.
I'm not sure what their bank account looks like now, but they have been in the red every year since their existance, so I have to assume they have less money now than when they were releasing bitcoin miners
Avalon announce the A10 March 2019, and started shipping pre-orders in October 2019.
If the V10 follows suit, we won't see a V10 in the hands of miners until April 2020
https://www.coindesk.com/demand-for-new-bitcoin-miners-is-again-outstripping-supply
Ok, I'm done. That's all I put together and why I don't believe the Canaan ASIC that was announced is a concern warranting the immediate adoption of ProgPoW
Thanks for reading.
submitted by Anthony-AltcoinXP to ethereum [link] [comments]

With the pretty awesome rise of almost all crypto currencies, it's time to restart our machines and mine the most profitable coin today 30.01.2020!!!

So let's talk about the GPUs to start with, the ranking has radically changed and even those that were running at a loss have become profitable again The top 10 chart:
1.NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 4.60 Mh/s 220W $1.35 $0.55 Zcoin(XZC) MTP Algo
2.NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 4.00 Mh/s 190W $1.17 $0.48 Zcoin(XZC) MTP
3.AMD Radeon VII 78.00 Mh/s 230W $1.22 $0.39 EthereumClassic(ETC) Ethash Algo
4.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 3.60 Mh/s 190W $1.05 $0.37 Zcoin(XZC) MTP
5.AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 51.50 Mh/s 140W $0.81 $0.30 EthereumClassic(ETC) Ethash
6.NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 2.60 Mh/s 130W $0.76 $0.29 Zcoin(XZC)MTP
7.NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 2.80 Mh/s 150W $0.82 $0.28 Zcoin(XZC) MTP
8.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 2.80 Mh/s 150W $0.82 $0.28 Zcoin(XZC) MTP
9.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 2.50 Mh/s 130W $0.73 $0.26 Zcoin(XZC) MTP
10.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 2.00 Mh/s 100W $0.59 $0.22 Zcoin(XZC)
Now let's go to the asic Top 10:
  1. Innosilicon A10 ETHMaster 500.00 Mh/s 750W Ethash $5.13 EthereumClassic(ETC) Ethash
  2. Bitmain Antminer Z11 135.00 kh/s 1418W Equihash $3.45 Pirate(ARRR)
  3. BlackMiner F1+ 22.00 Gh/s 860W Eaglesong $3.23 Nervos(CKB) FPGAminer
4.Bitmain Antminer B7 96.00 kh/s 528W Tensority $1.87
5.Bitmain Antminer S17+ 73.00 Th/s 2920W SHA-256 $1.67 BitcoinSV(BSV)
6.StrongU STU-U6 420.00 Gh/s 2100W X11 $1.52 Dash(DASH)
  1. Bitmain Antminer S17 Pro 56 Th/s 2212W SHA-256 $1.46 BitcoinSV(BSV)
  2. Bitmain Antminer S17 59.00 Th/s 2385W SHA-256 $1.34 BitcoinSV(BSV)
  3. Innosilicon A9 ZMaster 50.00 kh/s 620W Equihash $1.08 Pirate(ARRR)
  4. FusionSilicon X7 262.00 Gh/s 1300W X11 $1.03 Dash(DASH)
Dont forget you can find around new Firmware for example for Z9/Z11 Efudd Firmware,and Hive OS firmwares which can Overclock S9/S15/S17 or Underclock (if your electriciy fee are too expensive), for example my S17 Pro I switched to new firmware (Hive OS) to 36Th/s with 900 Watts power gives me a 2.90 usd/day profit without electricity of course, for Z11 Overclocking without changing PSU from 135 to 150-160Ko/sol.
I calculated everything on the basis of 0.15 cens Kw / h.
Brand New Miner coming out:
ASICminer Zeon Turbo 400,000 Sol/s Equihash
Most Profitable Miner in the World. ASICminer Daily Revenue: $27 $16 (less 0.15 Kw/h fee) ASICminer Power Consumption: 2500W
asicminer dot co/shop (Factory)
submitted by pushingworld77 to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Gold a Shitcoin Vulnerable to Attack Despite $200 Million Market Cap

Bitcoin Gold a Shitcoin Vulnerable to Attack Despite $200 Million Market Cap

https://preview.redd.it/vddehe8qfo321.png?width=690&format=png&auto=webp&s=44a4111dddd126729769612bd27e1ebc30753e14
https://cryptoiq.co/bitcoin-gold-a-shitcoin-vulnerable-to-attack-despite-200-million-market-cap/
The War On Shitcoins Episode 1: Bitcoin Gold (BTG). The war on shitcoins is a Crypto.IQ series that targets and shoots down cryptocurrencies that are not worth investing in either due to their being scams, having serious design flaws, being centralized, or in general just being worthless copies of other cryptocurrencies. There are thousands of shitcoins that are ruining the markets, and Crypto.IQ intends to expose all of them. The crypto space needs an exorcism, and we are happy to provide it.
There are more than 2,000 cryptocurrencies listed on CoinMarketCap, and Bitcoin Gold (BTG) is near the top at number 25 with a market cap of $207 million. This would seem to indicate that Bitcoin Gold is a major cryptocurrency, but it is simply a copycat of Bitcoin with one key and debilitating difference that makes it worse than Bitcoin. Bitcoin Gold is designed to block ASIC miners, leaving only GPU miners.
The idea was that GPU miners would rally around Bitcoin Gold since GPU Bitcoin miners were disenfranchised by ASIC miners years ago. Ultimately, this decision to only allow GPUs resulted in such a low mining hash rate that Bitcoin Gold is vulnerable to 51 percent attacks, and a serious 51 percent attack has already happened once. Further, Bitcoin Gold has had centralization problems from the very beginning.
When Bitcoin Gold launched in November 2017 the developers did a massive premine of 8,000 blocks, which yielded them about 100,000 BTG. At today’s price $12 this is $1.2 million, and when BTG’s price peaked near $500, this was $50 million. This premine is unfair to other BTG miners, traders, and investors. Supposedly, the premined BTG were placed in an “endowment,” which means the developers will receive all of that money eventually, just not all at once. There is no way to verify if this is even true, however, and the excessive 97 percent BTG price crash since January 2018 might be partially due to developers dumping their coins.
A far more serious issue than the premine is BTG’s lack of network security. BTG made mining ASIC resistant by using the Equishash Proof of Work (PoW) algorithm. However, ASICs were eventually developed for Equihash since ASICs can be developed for any PoW algorithm. In May 2018 a 51 percent double spend attack occurred on the Bitcoin Gold network, and a hacker stole $18.6 million from cryptocurrency exchanges that listed BTG. This caused the developers to hard fork in order to implement a newer version of Equihash that is supposedly more ASIC resistant. Clearly, the developers did not learn their lesson that there is no ASIC-resistant PoW algorithm. If Bitcoin Gold became valuable enough, someone would produce an ASIC for it.
It is unclear if Equihash ASICs were the reason for the 51 percent attack, since an attacker could literally just rent some hash rate on a cloud mining site and successfully 51 percent attack Bitcoin Gold. Currently it only takes 1.6 MH/s of rented mining power to successfully perform a double spend attack on the Bitcoin Gold network, and this costs about $1,000 per hour if the hash rate is rented from NiceHash.
Effectively, Bitcoin Gold is not cryptographically secure. The original purpose of banning ASIC miners so that GPU miners could thrive ended up being a fatal flaw for Bitcoin Gold. It is ridiculous that major exchanges like Binance and Bitfinex still offer BTG trading. This is a true disservice to the users of these exchanges and is a risk for the exchanges themselves.
Crypto users need to educate themselves thoroughly before buying any cryptocurrency, or they could end up buying a shitcoin like Bitcoin Gold just because it has a high ranking on CoinMarketCap. BTG has already lost 97 percent of its value since January 2018, and there is strong potential for it to become completely worthless once someone decides to rent some hash power and perform a vicious 51 percent attack.
submitted by turtlecane to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

I literally have tens of thousands of dollars in top-shelf hardware, looking to repurpose some before selling on eBay to build a NAS system, possibly a dedicated firewall device as well. o_O

Q1) What will you be doing with this PC? Be as specific as possible, and include specific games or programs you will be using.**

A1) This will be a dedicated NAS system for my home network. As such, I'm looking to have it:

- Host ##TB's of 720, 1080 & up resolution Movies and TV Shows I'm about to begin ripping from a MASSIVE DVD & Blueray collection I have.

- My kids are big on Minecraft. I understand it's possible to host your own "worlds" (or whatever they call the maps you can build) on your own "server". I think it would be pretty neat to offer them (& their friends - if can be done 'safely/securely') their own partition on one of my NAS HDD's.

- I also have accounts with a couple diff VPN companies... I understand it's possible (?) to sync said VPN's with a NAS, this might be a more relative topic on the next point/purpose...

- I'd like to be able to remotely link to this NAS for when I travel overseas and want to stream at my temp location from my house/this NAS.
______________________
Q2) What is your maximum budget before rebates/shipping/taxes?**

* A2) Here's where I make matters more complicated than most others would... I've been an advocate for Bitcoin and crypto-currencies in general since 2013. I invested in a small mining outfit back in 2014 (strictly Bitcoin/ASIC's). One of my buddies is the President of a large-scale mining operation (foreign and domestic) and he convinced me to dabble in the GPU mining-space. I made my first hardware purchase in Q4, 2017 and launched a small-scale GPU-Farm in my house since then. I had the rigs mining up until Q3 of 2018 (not cost-efficient to keep on, especially living in SoFlo) and since then, the hardware's been collecting dust (& pissing off my family members since they lost access to 3X rooms in the house - I won't let anyone go near my gear). One of my New Years Resolutions for 2019 was to clear out the house of all my mining equipment so that's all about to go up on eBay. So "budget" is relative to whatever I "MUST" spend if I can't repurpose any of the parts I already have on hand for this build... (Anyone having something I "need" and is looking to barter for one of the items I'll list later on in here, LMK).
______________________
Q3) When do you plan on building/buying the PC? Note: beyond a week or two from today means any build you receive will be out of date when you want to buy.**

A3) IMMEDIATELY! :)
______________________
Q4) What, exactly, do you need included in the budget? (ToweOS/monitokeyboard/mouse/etc\)**

A4) Well I had a half-assed idea approximately 1 year ago that it might be wise to build a bunch of 'gaming rigs' to sell on eBay with my intended repurposed mining hardware so I went on a shopping spree for like 6 months. That said; I've got a plethora of various other components that aren't even unboxed yet. 90% of the items I've purchased for this additional project were items that were marked down via MIR (mail-in-rebates) & what-not...
AFAIK, there are only 3X items I absolutely do not have which I 'MUST' find. Those would be - 1) Motherboard which accepts "ECC RAM". 2) CPU for said MOBO. 3) Said "ECC RAM".\* 
______________________
Q5) Which country (and state/province) will you be purchasing the parts in? If you're in US, do you have access to a Microcenter location?**

A5) I'm located in Southwest Florida. No Microcenter's here. Best Buy is pretty much my only option although I am a member of Newegg, Amazon & Costco if that makes any difference?
______________________
Q6) If reusing any parts (including monitor(s)/keyboard/mouse/etc), what parts will you be reusing? Brands and models are appreciated.**

A6) In an attempt to better clean up this Q&A, I'm going to list the items I have on-hand at the end of this questionnaire in-case passers-by feel like this might be a TLDR.* (Scroll to the bottom & you'll see what I mean).
______________________
Q7) Will you be overclocking? If yes, are you interested in overclocking right away, or down the line? CPU and/or GPU?**

A7) I don't think that's necessary for my intended purpose although - I'm not against it if that helps & FWIW, I'm pretty skilled @ this task already (it's not rocket science).
______________________
Q8) Are there any specific features or items you want/need in the build? (ex: SSD, large amount of storage or a RAID setup, CUDA or OpenCL support, etc)**

A8) As stated in A4; ECC RAM is non-negotiable... RAID seems like a logical application here as well.

- This will predominantly be receiving commands from MacOS computers. I don't think that matters really but figured it couldn't hurt to let you guys know.\*

- I'd also be quite fond of implementing "PFSENSE" (or something of that caliber) applied to this system so I could give my Netgear Nighthawks less stress in that arena, plus my limited understanding of PFSENSE is that it's ability to act as a firewall runs circles around anything that comes with consumer-grade Wi-Fi routers (like my Nighthawks). Just the same, I'm open to building a second rig just for the firewall.\*

- Another desirable feature would be that it draws as little electricity from the wall as possible. (I'm EXTREMELY skilled in this arena. I have "Kill-A-Watts" to test/gauge on, as well as an intimate understanding of the differences between Silver, Gold, Platinum and Titanium rated PSU's. As well as having already measured each of the PSU's I have on-hand and taken note of the 'target TDP draw' ("Peak Power Efficiency Draw") each one offers when primed with X amount of GPU's when I used them for their original purpose.\*

- Last, but not least, sound (as in noise created from the rig). I'd like to prop this device up on my entertainment center in the living room. I've (almost) all of the top-shelf consumer grade products one could dream of regarding fans and other thermal-related artifacts.

- Almost forgot; this will be hosting to devices on the KODI platform (unless you guys have better alternative suggestions?)
______________________
Q9) Do you have any specific case preferences (Size like ITX/microATX/mid-towefull-tower, styles, colors, window or not, LED lighting, etc), or a particular color theme preference for the components?**

A9) Definitely! Desired theme would be WHITE. If that doesn't work for whatever reason, black or gray would suffice. Regarding "Case Size". Nah, that's not too important although I don't foresee a mini-ITX build making sense if I'm going to be cramming double digit amounts of TB in the system, Internal HDD's sounds better than a bunch of externals plugged in all the USB ports.
______________________
Q10) Do you need a copy of Windows included in the budget? If you do need one included, do you have a preference?**

A10) I don't know. If I do need a copy of Windows, I don't have one so that's something I'll have to consider I guess. I doubt that's a necessity though.
______________________
______________________
______________________
**Extra info or particulars:*\*

AND NOW TO THE FUN-STUFF... Here's a list of everything (PARTS PARTS PARTS) I have on-hand and ready to deploy into the wild &/or negotiate a trade/barter with:

CASES -
Corsair Carbide Series Air 540 Arctic White (Model# Crypto-Currency-9011048-WW) - (Probably my top pick for this build).
Cooler Master HAF XB EVO (This is probably my top 1st or 2nd pick for this build, the thing is a monster!).
Cooler Master Elite 130 - Mini ITX - Black
Cooler Master MasterBox 5 MID-Tower - Black & White
Raidmax Sigma-TWS - ATX - White
MasterBox Lite 5 - ATX - Black w/ diff. Colored accent attachments (included with purchase)
NZXT S340 Elite Matte White Steel/Tempered Glass Edition
EVGA DG-76 Alpine White - Mid Tower w/ window
EVGA DG-73 Black - Mid Tower w/ window (I have like 3 of these)

______________________
CPU's -
***7TH GEN OR BELOW INTEL's ("Code Name Class mentioned next to each one)**\*
Pentium G4400 (Skylake @54W TDP) - Intel ARK states is "ECC CAPABLE"
Celeron G3930 (Kaby Lake @ 51W TDP) - Intel ARK states is "ECC CAPABLE" :)
i5 6402P (Skylake @65W TDP) - Intel ARK states is "NOT ECC CAPABLE" :(
i5 6600k (Skylake @ 91W TDP) - Intel ARK states is "NOT ECC CAPABLE" :(
i7 6700 (Skylake @ 65W TDP) - Intel ARK states is "NOT ECC CAPABLE" :(
i7 7700k (Kaby Lake @ 95W TDP) - Intel ARK states is "NOT ECC CAPABLE" :(


***8TH GEN INTEL's **\*
i3-8350K (Coffee Lake @91W TDP) - Intel ARK states is "ECC FRIENDLY" :)
I5-8600K (Coffee Lake @95W TDP) - Intel ARK states is "NOT ECC CAPABLE" :(


***AMD RYZEN's **\*
Ryzen 3 2200G
Ryzen 5 1600
Ryzen 7 1700X

______________________
MOTHERBOARDS -

***7TH GEN AND BELOW INTEL BASED MOBO'S - **\*
MSI Z170A-SLI
ASUS PRIME Z270-A
ASUS PRIME Z270-P
ASUS PRIME Z270-K
EVGA Z270 Stinger
GIGABYTE GA-Z270XP-SLI
MSI B150M ARCTIC
MSI B250M MICRO ATX (PRO OPT. BOOST EDITION)

***8TH GEN INTEL BASED MOBO'S - **\*
EVGA Z370 FTW
GIGABYTE Z370XP SLI (Rev. 1.0)
MSI Z370 SLI PLUS


***AMD RYZEN BASED MOBO'S - **\*
ASUS ROG STRIX B350-F GAMING
MSI B350 TOMAHAWK
MSI X370 GAMING PRO
ASROCK AB350M PRO4
______________________


RAM -

Way too many to list, nothing but 4 & 8GB DDR4 sticks and unfortunately, none are ECC so it's not even worth mentioning/listing these unless someone reading this is willing to barter. At which time I'd be obliged to send an itemized list or see if I have what they're/you're specifically looking for.\*
______________________
THERMAL APPLICATIONS/FANS -
JUST FANS -
BeQuiet -
Pure Wings 2 (80mm)
Pure Wings 2 (120mm)
Pure Wings 2 (140mm)
Silent Wings 3 PWM (120mm)

NOCTUA -
PoopBrown - NF-A20 PWM (200mm) Specifically for the BIG "CoolerMaster HAF XB EVO" Case
GREY - NF-P12 Redux - 1700RPM (120mm) PWM
Corsair -
Air Series AF120LED (120mm)

CPU COOLING SYSTEMS -
NOCTUA -
NT-HH 1.4ml Thermal Compound
NH-D15 6 Heatpipe system (this thing is the tits)

EVGA (Extremely crappy coding in the software here, I'm like 99.99% these will be problematic if I were to try and use in any OS outside of Windows, because they barely ever work in the intended Windows as it is).
CLC 240 (240mm Water-cooled system
CRYORIG -
Cryorig C7 Cu (Low-Profile Copper Edition*)

A few other oversized CPU cooling systems I forget off the top of my head but a CPU cooler is a CPU cooler after comparing to the previous 3 models I mentioned.
I almost exclusively am using these amazing "Innovation Cooling Graphite Thermal Pads" as an alternative to thermal paste for my CPU's. They're not cheap but they literally last forever.

NZXT - Sentry Mesh Fan Controller
______________________
POWER SUPPLIES (PSU's) -
BeQuiet 550W Straight Power 11 (GOLD)

EVGA -
750P2 (750W, Platinum)
850P2 (850W, Platinum)
750T2 (750W, TITANIUM - yeah baby, yeah)

ROSEWILL -
Quark 750W Platinum
Quark 650W Platinum

SEASONIC -
Focus 750W Platinum
______________________
STORAGE -
HGST Ultrastar 3TB - 64mb Cache - 7200RPM Sata III (3.5)
4X Samsung 860 EVO 500GB SSD's
2X Team Group L5 LITE 3D 2.5" SSD's 480GB
2X WD 10TB Essential EXT (I'm cool with shucking)
+ 6X various other external HDD's (from 4-8TB) - (Seagate, WD & G-Drives)
______________________

Other accessories worth mentioning -
PCI-E to 4X USB hub-adapter (I have a dozen or so of these - might not be sufficient enough &/or needed but again, 'worth mentioning' in case I somehow ever run out of SATA & USB ports and have extra external USB HDD's. Although, I'm sure there would be better suited components if I get to that point that probably won't cost all that much).
______________________
______________________
______________________
Needless to say, I have at least 1X of everything mentioned above. In most all cases, I have multiples of these items but obviously won't be needing 2X CPU's, Cases, etc...

Naturally, I have GPU's. Specifically;

At least 1X of every. Single. NVIDIA GTX 1070 TI (Yes, I have every variation of the 1070 ti made by MSI, EVGA and Zotac. The only brand I don't have is the Gigabyte line. My partners have terrible experience with those so I didn't even bother. I'm clearly not going to be needing a GPU for this build but again, I'm cool with discussing the idea of a barter if anyone reading this is in the market for one.

I also have some GTX 1080 TI's but those are already spoken for, sorry.

It's my understanding that select CPU's I have on this list are ECC Friendly and AFAIK, only 1 of my MOBO's claims to be ECC Friendly (The ASROCK AB350M PRO4), but for the life of me, I can't find any corresponding forums that confirm this and/or direct me to a listing where I can buy compatible RAM. Just the same, if I go w/ the ASROCK MOBO, that means I'd be using one of the Ryzens. Those are DEF. power hungry little buggers. Not a deal-breaker, just hoping to find something a little more conservative in terms of TDP.


In closing, I don't really need someone to hold my hand with the build part as much as figuring out which motherboard, CPU and RAM to get. Then I'm DEFINITELY going to need some guidance on what OS is best for my desired purpose. If building 2X Rigs makes sense, I'm totally open to that as well...
Rig 1 = EPIC NAS SYSTEM
Rig 2 = EPIC PFSENSE (or the like) DEDICATED FIREWALL

Oh, I almost forgot... The current routers I'm using are...
1X Netgear Nighthawk 6900P (Modem + Router)
1X Netgear Nighthawk X6S (AC 4000 I believe - Router dedicated towards my personal devices - no IoT &/or Guests allowed on this one)
1X TP-Link Archer C5 (Router). Total overkill after implementing the Nighthawks but this old beast somehow has the best range, plus it has 2X USB ports so for now, it's dedicated towards my IoT devices.
---- I also have a few other Wi-Fi routers (Apple Airport Extreme & some inferior Netgear's but I can only allocate so many WiFi Routers to so many WiFi channels w/out pissing off my neighbors) On that note, I have managed to convince my neighbors to let me in their house/WiFi configuration so we all have our hardware locked on specific, non-competing frequencies/channels so everyone's happy. :)


Please spare me the insults as I insulted myself throughout this entire venture. Part of why I did this was because when I was a kid, I used to fantasize about building a 'DREAM PC' but could never afford such. To compensate for this deficiency, I would actually print out the latest and greatest hardware components on a word document, print the lists up & tape to wall (for motivation). I was C++ certified at the age of 14 and built my first PC when I was 7. At the age of 15 I abandoned all hope in the sector and moved on to other aspirations. This entire ordeal was largely based off me finally fulfilling a childhood fantasy. On that note = mission accomplished. Now if I'm actually able to fulfill my desires on this post, I'm definitely going to feel less shitty about blowing so much money on all this stuff over the last couple years.

TIA for assisting in any way possible. Gotta love the internets!


THE END.
:)

EDIT/UPDATE (5 hours after OP) - My inbox is being inundated with various people asking for prices and other reasonable questions about my hardware being up for sale. Not to be redundant but rather to expound on my previous remarks about 'being interested in a bartetrade' with any of you here...

I did say I was going to sell my gear on eBay in the near future, I also said I wanted to trade/barter for anything relative to helping me accomplish my OP's mission(s). I'm not desperate for the $$$ but I'm also not one of those people that likes to rip other people off. That said; I value my time and money invested in this hardware and I'm only willing to unload it all once I've established I have ZERO need for any of it here in my home first. Hence my writing this lengthy thread in an attempt to repurpose at least a grand or two I've already spent.

One of the most commonly asked questions I anticipate receiving from interested bodies is going to be "How hard were you on your hardware?" Contrary to what anyone else would have probably done in my scenario which is say they were light on it whether they were or weren't, I documented my handling of the hardware, and have no problem sharing such documentation with verified, interested buyers (WHEN THE TIME COMES) to offer you guys peace of mind.

I have photo's and video's of the venture from A-Z. I am also obliged to provide (redacted) electricity bill statements where you can correlate my photo's (power draw on each rig), and also accurately deduct the excess power my house consumed with our other household appliances. Even taking into consideration how much (more) I spent in electricity from keeping my house at a constant, cool 70-72F year-round (via my Nest thermostat). Even without the rigs, I keep my AC @ 70 when I'm home and for the last 1.5-2 years, I just so happened to spend 85% of my time here at my house. When I would travel, I'd keep it at 72 for my wife & kids.
Additionally; I had each GPU 'custom' oveunderclocke'd (MSI Afterburner for all GPU's but the EVGA's).*
I doubt everyone reading this is aware so this is for those that don't.... EVGA had the brilliant idea of implementing what they call "ICX technology" in their latest NVIDIA GTX GPU's. The short(est) explanation of this "feature" goes as follows:

EVGA GPU's w/ "ICX 9 & above" have EXTRA HEAT/THERMAL SENSORS. Unlike every other GTX 1070 ti on the market, the one's with this feature actually have each of 2/2 on-board fans connected to individual thermal sensors. Which means - if you were to use the MSI Afterburner program on one of these EVGA's and create a custom fan curve for it, you'd only be able to get 1/2 of the fans to function the way intended. The other fan simply would not engage as the MSI Afterburner software wasn't designed/coded to recognize/ communicate with an added sensor (let alone sensor'S). This, in-turn, would likely result in whoever's using it the unintended way having a GPU defect on them within the first few months I'd imagine... Perhaps if they had the TDP power settings dumbed down as much as I did (60-63%), they might get a year or two out of it since it wouldn't run as near as hot, but I doubt any longer than that since cutting off 50% of the cooling system on one of these can't be ignored too long, surely capacitors would start to blow and who knows what else...
(Warning = RANT) Another interesting side-note about the EVGA's and their "Precision-X" OveUnderclocking software is that it's designed to only recognize 4X GPU's on a single system. For miners, that's just not cool. My favorite builds had 8X and for the motherboards that weren't capable of maintaining stable sessions on 8, I set up with 6X. Only my EVGA Rigs had 3 or 4X GPU's dedicated to a single motherboard. Furthermore, and as stated in an earlier paragraph, (& this is just my opinion) = EVGA SOFTWARE SUCKS! Precision X wasn't friendly with every motherboard/CPU I threw at it and their extension software for the CLC Close-Loop-Cooling/ CPU water-coolers simply didn't work on anything, even integrating into their own Precision-X software. The amount of time it took me to finally find compatible matches with that stuff was beyond maddening. (END RANT).
Which leads me to my other comments on the matter. That's what I had every single 1070 ti set at for TDP = 60-63%. Dropping the power load that much allowed me to bring down (on average) each 1070 ti to a constant 110-115W (mind you, this is only possible w/ "Titanium" rated PSU's, Platinum comes pretty damn close to the Titanium though) while mining Ethereum and was still able to maintain a bottom of 30 MH/s and a ceiling of 32 MH/s. Increasing the TDP to 80, 90, 100% or more only increased my hashrates (yields) negligibly, like 35-36 MH/s TOPS, which also meant each one was not only pulling 160-180W+ (Vs. the aforementioned 115'ish range), it also meant my rigs were creating a significantly greater amount of heat! Fortunately for the GPU's and my own personal habits, I live in South Florida where it's hot as balls typically, last winter was nothing like this one. Increasing my yields by 10-15% didn't justify increasing the heat production in my house by >30%, nor the added electricity costs from subjecting my AC handlers to that much of an extra work-load. For anyone reading this that doesn't know/understand what I'm talking about - after spending no less than 2-3 hours with each. and. every. one. I didn't play with the settings on just one and universally apply the settings to the rest. I found the 'prime' settings and documented them with a label-maker and notepad. Here's the math in a more transparent manner:

*** I NEVER LET MY GPU's BREACH 61C, EVER. Only my 8X GPU rigs saw 60-61 & it was the ones I had in the center of the build (naturally). I have REALLY high power fans (used on BTC ASIC MINERS) that were sucking air from those GPU's which was the only way I was able to obtain such stellar results while mining with them. **\*
Mining at "acceptable" heat temps (not acceptable to me, but most of the internet would disagree = 70C) and overclocking accordingly brings in X amount of yields per unit. =
'Tweaking' (underclocking) the GPU's to my parameters reduced my yield per unit from -10-15%, but it SAVED me well over 30-35% in direct electricity consumption, and an unknown amount of passive electricity consumption via creating approximately 20%+ less heat for my AC handler to combat.

I say all this extra stuff not just for anyone interested in mining with their GPU's, but really to answer (in-depth) the apparent questions you people are asking me in PM's. Something else that should help justify my claims of being so conservative should be the fact I only have/used "Platinum and Titanium" rated PSU's. Heat production, power efficiency and longevity of the hardware were ALWAYS my top priority.* . I truly thought Crypto would continue to gain and/or recover and bounce back faster than it did. If this project had maintained positive income for 12 months+, I'd have expanded one of our sites to also cater to GPU mining on a gnarly scale.

Once I have my NAS (& possibly 2nd rig for the firewall) successfully built, I'll be willing/able to entertain selling you guys some/all of the remaining hardware prior to launching on eBay. If there's something you're specifically looking for that I listed having, feel free to PM me with that/those specific item(s). Don't count on an immediate response but what you can count on is me honoring my word in offering whoever asks first right of refusal when the time comes for me to sell this stuff. Fortunately for me, PM's are time-stamped so that's how I'll gauge everyone's place in line. I hope this extra edit answers most of the questions you guys wanted to have answered and if not, sorry I guess. I'll do my best to bring light to anything I've missed out on after I realize whatever that error was/is. The only way anyone is getting first dibs on my hardware otherwise is if they either offer compelling insight into my original questions, or have something I need to trade w/.

THE END (Round#2)


submitted by Im-Ne-wHere to buildapcforme [link] [comments]

Regarding Threads on Bitmain and ASIC Resistance (Mega Thread!)

Guys,
Let’s take a minute to talk about what’s going on. We need to make sure all users are on the same page and the falsifications and assumptions stop.
I'm with you, and I understand that you feel betrayed. However, cleaning up after the constant bickering for those pro-fork and those anti-fork is growing tiresome. It's time we have a civil discussion and talk about facts.

Timeline of events

On 03/31/2018, a user from Ethfans.org posted a video on Telegram of a supposed Ethash ASIC. The video made its way to /Ethermining in a thread. It is important to mention that these values can be modified by changing “get_miner_status.cgi” and “minerStatus.cgi” and that there has been no credible evidence that has popped up in the nine days following the release of the supposed leak. Additionally, the following abnormalities should be noted:
Also on 3/31/2018, a user on Russian site Bits.media noticed that the pre-order for the Bitmain E3 was already up. It was believed to be an April fools joke; needless to say, it wasn’t.
On 04/02/2018, Bitmain launched the E3 and began taking pre-orders for a June delivery. At that time, the price was $800 and promised a hashing power of 180MH/s at 800 watts.
On 04/06/2018, Ethereum core developers decided against hard-forking Ethereum at this time, as they weren't convinced that it would positively impact the community given a hard-fork's disruption and the unknown of how the ASIC worked (specifically if it was programmable). The community became upset over broken promises of ASIC resistance, and this has since spread to a full out finger pointing of who is wrong.
On 04/08/2018, an apparently forged photo showed up showing a higher-hashing ASIC with far less power consumption. This is not only very unlikely, but the link in the photo was gibberish, whereas the E3's link was valid. We're writing that one up as FUD.

The "ASIC Resistance" Argument

At this point, I think that it’s I think it's important that we visit some key points of the Ethereum project. A lot of people have been quoting the whitepaper, calling ETH ASIC-proof and implying that the developers do not care about the problem.
In actuality, Ethereum never promised that it would be ASIC-proof, merely that it would provide an economic incentive to be resistant to the development of an ASIC. I'd like to produce a quote from the Ethereum Wiki, found here.
Ultimately, perfect ASIC resistance is impossible; there are always portions of circuits that are going to be unused by any specific algorithm and that can be trimmed to cut costs in a specialized device. However, what we are looking for is not perfect ASIC resistance but rather economic ASIC resistance.
...
The problem is that measuring an economy in a secure way is a difficult problem. The most obvious metric that the system has access to is mining difficulty, but mining difficulty also goes up with Moore's law and in the short term with ASIC development, and there is no known way to estimate the impact of Moore's law alone and so the currency cannot know if its difficulty increased by 10x due to better hardware, a larger user volume or a combination of both. Other metrics, such as transaction count, are potentially gameable by entities that want the supply to change in a particular direction (generally, holders want a lower supply, miners want a higher supply).
This is solidified by revisiting the whitepaper, specifically the section which identifies how ASICs will be economically stymied:
This model is untested, and there may be difficulties along the way in avoiding certain clever optimizations when using contract execution as a mining algorithm. However, one notably interesting feature of this algorithm is that it allows anyone to "poison the well", by introducing a large number of contracts into the blockchain specifically designed to stymie certain ASICs. The economic incentives exist for ASIC manufacturers to use such a trick to attack each other. Thus, the solution that we are developing is ultimately an adaptive economic human solution rather than purely a technical one.
So with the Ethereum team providing only an economic reason to not develop an ASIC since the beginning, there has been no lie.

Second batch of E3s will not be profitable with Ethereum

As a response to the developers announcing that they are not initiating a hard fork, Bitmain raised the price of the second batch of E3s to $1800. With a PSU ($105) and shipping costs ($225), plus duty fees ($25). That brings each E3 up to $2,155, or $11.97 per MH.
Comparatively, this is like paying $300 per GPU ($1800) plus Mobo/PSU/risers ($355). I have built rigs with similar hashrates for under $1,900 ($10.50 per MH).
If we speculate that Casper is as close as we think (see below), coupled with the rising difficulty, the second batch of E3s are not likely to break-even with Ethereum as a whole. If ETH rises to its ATH, the second batch units may be profitable. Tis the risk of mining.

Current speculation:

  • ASICs are bad!
    • In the Ethereum mining community, ASICs to be viewed as a formidable commodity, when they should rather be viewed as a tool. Tools are never inherently good or bad, but how they are used can be, and some developers intend for the coin to eventually be used with an ASIC. Some coins, such as Sia, were designed to specifically work with an ASIC. > 51% centralization is bad.
  • Bitmain has a better ASIC.
    • Probably. But this is an unknown. Speculation of an ASIC is not a reason to fork the second largest cryptocurrency.
  • Bitmain will be a cause for centralization
    • Everything should be a concern for centralization. Hell, early miners can be a bigger concern. The principals of economies of scale still apply to mining; so those who started out with a lot of GPUs are heavily mining. I've set up warehouses full of GPUs for clients, so if you think some of the guys here are big shots, I promise you there are larger concerns for the current state of centralization.
    • I will also note that yes, we will need to worry about a mass-manufacturer of just ASICs, especially if they are pumping out > 30,000 units per month at the current rate. But the firm that uncovered Bitmain's ASIC, Susquehannah, claims that there are at least three other ASIC manufacturers out there. This puts some silent competition on Bitmain.
  • Ethereum is not as centralized as Bitcoin
    • You'd think that, and the goal of the whitepaper was for Ethereum to be less centralized as bitcoin. It even mentions that "three mining pools indirectly control roughly 50% of processing power in the Bitcoin network." Ethereum is in this state already. Ethermine controls ~28% of the network hashrate, F2pool has ~17%, and SparkPool has ~15%. Arguably, the Ethereum network is in a more sensitive state.
  • Casper is right around the corner.
    • This has been speculation for some time now. Developers confirmed that testnet should be fully operational by August, meaning that we may be able to expect PoS hybrid by DecembeJanuary assuming everything goes as planned.
  • Dev team does not care about miners
    • In the project's current state, miners are a necessity. Remember that seigniorage must be sinigicant enough for miners to continue mining, otherwise, the network would slow and we'd have another Crypto Kitties incident on our hands. Until Ethereum is PoS, you are valid.
  • Dev team wants to get rid of miners
    • Well, yeah. That's what PoS is about. Ethereum will not be Proof of Work forever and that needs to be appreciated.
  • We should fork ourselves into an ASIC-proof currency
    • Do it! Take some initiative and work up a team, I'll be happy to help and support in any way that I can, including pointing my hashing power your way.

Ethereum decision governance

Right now, large decisions are made by the Ethereum core developers. This last decision to not hard-fork was not well received by the community. It feels to be almost an "electoral college" kind of deal, and that's something that has upset a lot of people. Is this the topic that we need to discuss in more detail?

So what is this thread?

For now, this is going to replace our weekly discussion for a few weeks until everything calms down. The sub is in a volatile state and everyone is slinging FUD at everyone else. We need to clean up and calmly discuss our position on the matter at hand. This means:
  • No more fighting about the ASIC in the comments
  • OUTSIDE OF THIS THREAD, please do not shitpost. Meaning, no more strongly worded threads about how you're out of mining completely because of the ASIC, or how the developers screwed you over because ETH was supposed to be ASIC proof, or how people are whining. I'm deleting threads left and right for people who are just using the sub as an outlet to name call on both sides.
  • As always, constructive threads are welcome, but shitposts are to be confined to this thread, please.

We all have different opinions

I am going to remain neutral on this topic. I mine with both GPUs and ASICs, and I've worked with countless numbers of people who do as well. We need to cooperate as a community instead of tearing each other apart over the issue. Let's think before we post and keep comments constructive.
Happy mining!
  • Rob
submitted by Robbbbbbbbb to EtherMining [link] [comments]

The Problem with PoW

The Problem with PoW
Miners have always had it rough..
"Frustrated Miners"

The Problem with PoW
(and what is being done to solve it)

Proof of Work (PoW) is one of the most commonly used consensus mechanisms entrusted to secure and validate many of today’s most successful cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin being one. Battle-hardened and having weathered the test of time, Bitcoin has demonstrated the undeniable strength and reliability of the PoW consensus model through sheer market saturation, and of course, its persistency.
In addition to the cost of powerful computing hardware, miners prove that they are benefiting the network by expending energy in the form of electricity, by solving and hashing away complex math problems on their computers, utilizing any suitable tools that they have at their disposal. The mathematics involved in securing proof of work revolve around unique algorithms, each with their own benefits and vulnerabilities, and can require different software/hardware to mine depending on the coin.
Because each block has a unique and entirely random hash, or “puzzle” to solve, the “work” has to be performed for each block individually and the difficulty of the problem can be increased as the speed at which blocks are solved increases.

Hashrates and Hardware Types

While proof of work is an effective means of securing a blockchain, it inherently promotes competition amongst miners seeking higher and higher hashrates due to the rewards earned by the node who wins the right to add the next block. In turn, these higher hash rates benefit the blockchain, providing better security when it’s a result of a well distributed/decentralized network of miners.
When Bitcoin first launched its genesis block, it was mined exclusively by CPUs. Over the years, various programmers and developers have devised newer, faster, and more energy efficient ways to generate higher hashrates; some by perfecting the software end of things, and others, when the incentives are great enough, create expensive specialized hardware such as ASICs (application-specific integrated circuit). With the express purpose of extracting every last bit of hashing power, efficiency being paramount, ASICs are stripped down, bare minimum, hardware representations of a specific coin’s algorithm.
This gives ASICS a massive advantage in terms of raw hashing power and also in terms of energy consumption against CPUs/GPUs, but with significant drawbacks of being very expensive to design/manufacture, translating to a high economic barrier for the casual miner. Due to the fact that they are virtual hardware representations of a single targeted algorithm, this means that if a project decides to fork and change algorithms suddenly, your powerful brand-new ASIC becomes a very expensive paperweight. The high costs in developing and manufacturing ASICs and the associated risks involved, make them unfit for mass adoption at this time.
Somewhere on the high end, in the vast hashrate expanse created between GPU and ASIC, sits the FPGA (field programmable gate array). FPGAs are basically ASICs that make some compromises with efficiency in order to have more flexibility, namely they are reprogrammable and often used in the “field” to test an algorithm before implementing it in an ASIC. As a precursor to the ASIC, FPGAs are somewhat similar to GPUs in their flexibility, but require advanced programming skills and, like ASICs, are expensive and still fairly uncommon.

2 Guys 1 ASIC

One of the issues with proof of work incentivizing the pursuit of higher hashrates is in how the network calculates block reward coinbase payouts and rewards miners based on the work that they have submitted. If a coin generated, say a block a minute, and this is a constant, then what happens if more miners jump on a network and do more work? The network cannot pay out more than 1 block reward per 1 minute, and so a difficulty mechanism is used to maintain balance. The difficulty will scale up and down in response to the overall nethash, so if many miners join the network, or extremely high hashing devices such as ASICs or FPGAs jump on, the network will respond accordingly, using the difficulty mechanism to make the problems harder, effectively giving an edge to hardware that can solve them faster, balancing the network. This not only maintains the block a minute reward but it has the added side-effect of energy requirements that scale up with network adoption.
Imagine, for example, if one miner gets on a network all alone with a CPU doing 50 MH/s and is getting all 100 coins that can possibly be paid out in a day. Then, if another miner jumps on the network with the same CPU, each miner would receive 50 coins in a day instead of 100 since they are splitting the required work evenly, despite the fact that the net electrical output has doubled along with the work. Electricity costs miner’s money and is a factor in driving up coin price along with adoption, and since more people are now mining, the coin is less centralized. Now let’s say a large corporation has found it profitable to manufacture an ASIC for this coin, knowing they will make their money back mining it or selling the units to professionals. They join the network doing 900 MH/s and will be pulling in 90 coins a day, while the two guys with their CPUs each get 5 now. Those two guys aren’t very happy, but the corporation is. Not only does this negatively affect the miners, it compromises the security of the entire network by centralizing the coin supply and hashrate, opening the doors to double spends and 51% attacks from potential malicious actors. Uncertainty of motives and questionable validity in a distributed ledger do not mix.
When technology advances in a field, it is usually applauded and welcomed with open arms, but in the world of crypto things can work quite differently. One of the glaring flaws in the current model and the advent of specialized hardware is that it’s never ending. Suppose the two men from the rather extreme example above took out a loan to get themselves that ASIC they heard about that can get them 90 coins a day? When they join the other ASIC on the network, the difficulty adjusts to keep daily payouts consistent at 100, and they will each receive only 33 coins instead of 90 since the reward is now being split three ways. Now what happens if a better ASIC is released by that corporation? Hopefully, those two guys were able to pay off their loans and sell their old ASICs before they became obsolete.
This system, as it stands now, only perpetuates a never ending hashrate arms race in which the weapons of choice are usually a combination of efficiency, economics, profitability and in some cases control.

Implications of Centralization

This brings us to another big concern with expensive specialized hardware: the risk of centralization. Because they are so expensive and inaccessible to the casual miner, ASICs and FPGAs predominantly remain limited to a select few. Centralization occurs when one small group or a single entity controls the vast majority hash power and, as a result, coin supply and is able to exert its influence to manipulate the market or in some cases, the network itself (usually the case of dishonest nodes or bad actors).
This is entirely antithetical of what cryptocurrency was born of, and since its inception many concerted efforts have been made to avoid centralization at all costs. An entity in control of a centralized coin would have the power to manipulate the price, and having a centralized hashrate would enable them to affect network usability, reliability, and even perform double spends leading to the demise of a coin, among other things.
The world of crypto is a strange new place, with rapidly growing advancements across many fields, economies, and boarders, leaving plenty of room for improvement; while it may feel like a never-ending game of catch up, there are many talented developers and programmers working around the clock to bring us all more sustainable solutions.

The Rise of FPGAs

With the recent implementation of the commonly used coding language C++, and due to their overall flexibility, FPGAs are becoming somewhat more common, especially in larger farms and in industrial setting; but they still remain primarily out of the hands of most mining enthusiasts and almost unheard of to the average hobby miner. Things appear to be changing though, one example of which I’ll discuss below, and it is thought by some, that soon we will see a day when mining with a CPU or GPU just won’t cut it any longer, and the market will be dominated by FPGAs and specialized ASICs, bringing with them efficiency gains for proof of work, while also carelessly leading us all towards the next round of spending.
A perfect real-world example of the effect specialized hardware has had on the crypto-community was recently discovered involving a fairly new project called VerusCoin and a fairly new, relatively more economically accessible FPGA. The FPGA is designed to target specific alt-coins whose algo’s do not require RAM overhead. It was discovered the company had released a new algorithm, kept secret from the public, which could effectively mine Verus at 20x the speed of GPUs, which were the next fastest hardware types mining on the Verus network.
Unfortunately this was done with a deliberately secret approach, calling the Verus algorithm “Algo1” and encouraging owners of the FPGA to never speak of the algorithm in public channels, admonishing a user when they did let the cat out of the bag. The problem with this business model is that it is parasitic in nature. In an ecosystem where advancements can benefit the entire crypto community, this sort of secret mining approach also does not support the philosophies set forth by the Bitcoin or subsequent open source and decentralization movements.
Although this was not done in the spirit of open source, it does hint to an important step in hardware innovation where we could see more efficient specialized systems within reach of the casual miner. The FPGA requires unique sets of data called a bitstream in order to be able to recognize each individual coin’s algorithm and mine them. Because it’s reprogrammable, with the support of a strong development team creating such bitstreams, the miner doesn’t end up with a brick if an algorithm changes.

All is not lost thanks to.. um.. Technology?

Shortly after discovering FPGAs on the network, the Verus developers quickly designed, tested, and implemented a new, much more complex and improved algorithm via a fork that enabled Verus to transition smoothly from VerusHash 1.0 to VerusHash 2.0 at block 310,000. Since the fork, VerusHash 2.0 has demonstrated doing exactly what it was designed for- equalizing hardware performance relative to the device being used while enabling CPUs (the most widely available “ASICs”) to mine side by side with GPUs, at a profit and it appears this will also apply to other specialized hardware. This is something no other project has been able to do until now. Rather than pursue the folly of so many other projects before it- attempting to be “ASIC proof”, Verus effectively achieved and presents to the world an entirely new model of “hardware homogeny”. As the late, great, Bruce Lee once said- “Don’t get set into one form, adapt it and build your own, and let it grow, be like water.”
In the design of VerusHash 2.0, Verus has shown it doesn’t resist progress like so many other new algorithms try to do, it embraces change and adapts to it in the way that water becomes whatever vessel it inhabits. This new approach- an industry first- could very well become an industry standard and in doing so, would usher in a new age for proof of work based coins. VerusHash 2.0 has the potential to correct the single largest design flaw in the proof of work consensus mechanism- the ever expanding monetary and energy requirements that have plagued PoW based projects since the inception of the consensus mechanism. Verus also solves another major issue of coin and net hash centralization by enabling legitimate CPU mining, offering greater coin and hashrate distribution.
Digging a bit deeper it turns out the Verus development team are no rookies. The lead developer Michael F Toutonghi has spent decades in the field programming and is a former Vice President and Technical Fellow at Microsoft, recognized founder and architect of Microsoft's .Net platform, ex-Technical Fellow of Microsoft's advertising platform, ex-CTO, Parallels Corporation, and an experienced distributed computing and machine learning architect. The project he helped create employs and makes use of a diverse myriad of technologies and security features to form one of the most advanced and secure cryptocurrency to date. A brief description of what makes VerusCoin special quoted from a community member-
"Verus has a unique and new consensus algorithm called Proof of Power which is a 50% PoW/50% PoS algorithm that solves theoretical weaknesses in other PoS systems (Nothing at Stake problem for example) and is provably immune to 51% hash attacks. With this, Verus uses the new hash algorithm, VerusHash 2.0. VerusHash 2.0 is designed to better equalize mining across all hardware platforms, while favoring the latest CPUs over older types, which is also one defense against the centralizing potential of botnets. Unlike past efforts to equalize hardware hash-rates across different hardware types, VerusHash 2.0 explicitly enables CPUs to gain even more power relative to GPUs and FPGAs, enabling the most decentralizing hardware, CPUs (due to their virtually complete market penetration), to stay relevant as miners for the indefinite future. As for anonymity, Verus is not a "forced private", allowing for both transparent and shielded (private) transactions...and private messages as well"

If other projects can learn from this and adopt a similar approach or continue to innovate with new ideas, it could mean an end to all the doom and gloom predictions that CPU and GPU mining are dead, offering a much needed reprieve and an alternative to miners who have been faced with the difficult decision of either pulling the plug and shutting down shop or breaking down their rigs to sell off parts and buy new, more expensive hardware…and in so doing present an overall unprecedented level of decentralization not yet seen in cryptocurrency.
Technological advancements led us to the world of secure digital currencies and the progress being made with hardware efficiencies is indisputably beneficial to us all. ASICs and FPGAs aren’t inherently bad, and there are ways in which they could be made more affordable and available for mass distribution. More than anything, it is important that we work together as communities to find solutions that can benefit us all for the long term.

In an ever changing world where it may be easy to lose sight of the real accomplishments that brought us to this point one thing is certain, cryptocurrency is here to stay and the projects that are doing something to solve the current problems in the proof of work consensus mechanism will be the ones that lead us toward our collective vision of a better world- not just for the world of crypto but for each and every one of us.
submitted by Godballz to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

On the Security Economics of Public Blockchains: Why using the Ethereum public chain for STO contracts is not a good idea

by Hendrik C

We coin the term “security economics” to mean the system of economic incentives designed to guarantee the security required for a public chain to operate. For example, with PoW (proof of work), honest miners are incentivized to contribute compute power for mining reward. The higher aggregate hash rate of a network, the more difficult it will be to perform a 51% attack. We will introduce a new framework to analyze this relationship, and study the limiting cases where the current security economic relationship might breakdown.
In a given period T, the blockchain network will release n coins according to its predetermined mining schedule. For example, bitcoin currently reward 12.5 coins per block. Its mining difficulty is adaptively set so it produces 144 blocks per day, with a very small margin of error. Whether total network hashpower is 50 ExH/s or 5 ExH/s, total reward per day is always 1800 bitcoins. Only difference is that the expected reward per hash diminishes when total network hash increases. But hashpower cost money, 50 ExH/s will cost 10 times as much as 5 ExH/s, assuming they’re running on the same kind of hardware. The economic equilibrium is arrived when reward per day (RPD) = cost per day (CPD).
We further breakdown CPD to its components: sunk cost (e.g. cost of the miner) and operating cost per day (OCPD). We make the following postulates about the mining process and miner’s behavior.
1, When price of a coin goes up, temporarily RPD > CPD, new hash power will be introduced as it will be profitable.
2, When price of a coin goes down, but RPD > OCPD, then nothing will happen.
3, When price of a coin goes down so much, that RPD < OCPD, some miners will stop mining, total network hash will fall, until RPD > OCPD again.
4, Mining hardware have a useful life of approximately 2 years, miners would only deploy new hardware if they can cover cost within 1 year of mining.
Assuming the above behavior of miners, in the equilibrium state, the total hash power (per second) of a network is bounded above by the market value of expected reward (per second). To stage a 51% attack on the network, the adversary will need to match all of the existing hashpower on the network. The required investment is approximately equal to the market value of minable coins in 1 year. Take bitcoin for example, a total of 52560 BTC are released to miners a year, which equate to about $189m, assuming $3600 / BTC. The total hashpower of the bitcoin network is about 42 ExH/s, which equates to about 3 million Antminer S9’s. This is what it takes to stage a 51% attack, the cost of staging such an attack is a good measure of how safe a network is.
Would anyone do it? Perhaps not, which is the ingenuity of Satoshi Nakamoto. Assume you did invest $189m, and compromised the bitcoin network. What returns will you get? Sure, you double spend bitcoins, but bitcoins will be worthless when people find out its security is being compromised. The delicate game theoretic equilibrium, which we shall call the Nakamoto equilibrium, is just as important as all the cryptographic wizardry in keeping a blockchain safe.
The Nakamoto equilibrium design has a number of drawbacks, although none of them were of interest for Nakamoto to consider, they do not apply to bitcoin.
1, Nakamoto equilibrium only guarantees the security of the public chain itself, and not the smart contract tokens which runs on it.
2, Out of all the blockchains that use the same hash algorithm, only the one with the most honest hashpower is safe.
We will focus the remainder of this paper elaborating point number 1, and leave 2 to another article.
The utility tokens created in the ICO hype, were predominately ERC 20 contracts executed on the ethereum network. Despite of their huge speculative value, these tokens do not have much intrinsic value right now. They simply represent the access right to a particular utility, which will be built (if ever) far into the future. The aggregate market value of all ERC 20 tokens, have never exceeded that of ethereum. Hence, the hashpower required to guarantee the safety of ethereum is automatically extended to the ERC 20 tokens running on the network.
We now consider a scenario with securities tokens produced from STO’s. A security token represent a share of a securitized asset. These could be company stocks, bonds, buildings, infrastructure etc, indeed everything in the world could be securitized and tokenized on a blockchain. The fundamental difference between securities token and utility token is that securities token have an intrinsic value attached to it. The intrinsic value of a securitized asset could be several times the market cap of the public chain it’s running on.
For example, as of Feb 2019, ethereum have a market share of about $8 - $10 billion dollars. About 7 million ETH is minable a year (before the Constantinople fork), the total value at current market price of $120/ETH is about $840 million. The total network hashpower is 140 TH/s. A Bitmain E3 miner has an advertised performance of 180 MH/s, so total network hashpower is equivalent to about 777777 E3 miners, which would cost roughly $800 million (though the exact cost could be quite volatile). This is how much one would have to invest to stage a 51% attack on ethereum network. If the network consists of only ETH and utility tokens, whose value would plummet if such an attack were to be successful, nobody is incentivized to do so. But (imagine sometime in the future), if the ethereum network has securities token contracts, whose underlying asset worth a total of a trillion dollars, then carrying out such an attack would seem quite profitable.
A new security economic model is clearly required for any public chain to run securities token. The biggest problem with ethereum, is that miners are not incentivized to contribute hashpower, as a function of total market cap of tokens running on ethereum. This is not a problem in the era of utility tokens, when they are worth significantly less than the main ethereum network. In the era of securities tokens however, this will become a significant risk, as securities tokens can easily worth several folds more than the public chain itself. We need to figure out a new economic model, where the public chain’s hashpower is a direct function of total token value running on the public chain.
submitted by True_Chain to ethereum [link] [comments]

such beginner shibe thread wow how to get coin

 how to shibecoin v rich in minutes much instruct so simple any doge can do 

START HERE

UPDATE 1/21/14: I'm not updating this guide anymore. Most of the steps should still work though. See the wiki or check the sidebar for updated instructions.
Before you do anything else, you need to get a wallet. Until there's a secure online wallet, this means you need to download the dogecoin client.
Now open the client you just downloaded. You'll be given a default address automatically, and it should connect to peers and start downloading the dogechain (aka blockchain in formal speak). You'll know because there will be a progress bar at the bottom and at the lower right there should be a signal strength icon (TODO: add screenshots).
If you've waited 2 or 3 minutes and nothing is happening, copy this:
maxconnections=100 addnode=95.85.29.144 addnode=162.243.113.110 addnode=146.185.181.114 addnode=188.165.19.28 addnode=166.78.155.36 addnode=doge.scryptpools.com addnode=doge.netcodepool.org addnode=doge.pool.webxass.de addnode=doge.cryptopool.it addnode=pool.testserverino.de addnode=doge.luckyminers.com addnode=doge.cryptovalley.com addnode=miner.coinedup.comdoge addnode=doge.cryptoculture.net addnode=dogepool.pw addnode=doge.gentoomen.org addnode=doge.cryptominer.net addnode=67.205.20.10 addnode=162.243.113.110 addnode=78.46.57.132 
And paste it into a new text file called dogecoin.conf, which you then place into the dogecoin app directory.
Now restart your qt client and the blockchain should start downloading in about 1-2 minutes.
Once it finished downloading, you're ready to send and receive Dogecoins!

GETTING COINS

Decide how you want to get Dogecoin. Your options are:
I'll go into detail about each of these. I'm currently writing this out. I'll make edits as I add sections. Suggestions are welcome.

MINING

Mining is how new dogecoins are created. If you're new to crypto currencies, read this. To mine (also called "digging"), a computer with a decent GPU (graphics card) is recommended. You can also mine with your CPU, but it's not as efficient.

GPU MINING

These instructions cover only Windows for now. To mine, you'll need to figure out what GPU you have. It'll be either AMD/ATI or Nvidia. The setup for both is approximately the same.

Step One: Choose a pool

There's a list of pools on the wiki. For now it doesn't really matter which one you choose. You can easily switch later.
NOTE: You can mine in two ways. Solo mining is where you mine by yourself. When you find a block you get all the reward. Pool mining is when you team up with other miners to work on the same block together. This makes it more likely that you'll find a block, but you won't get all of it, you'll have to split it up with others according to your share of the work. Pool mining is recommended because it gives you frequent payouts, because you find more blocks. The larger the pool you join, the more frequent the payouts, but the smaller the reward you get.
Over a long period of time the difference between pool and solo mining goes away, but if you solo mine it might be months before you get any coins.

Step two: Set up pool account

The pool you chose should have a getting started page. Read it and follow the instructions. Instructions vary but the general idea is:
When you're done with this, you'll need to know:

Step three: Download mining software

For best performance you'll need the right mining software.
Unzip the download anywhere you want.

Step four: Set up miner

Create a text file in the same folder as your miner application. Inside, put the command you'll be running (remove brackets).
For AMD it's cgminer.exe --scrypt -o stratum+tcp://: -u -p
For Nvidia it's cudaminer.exe -o stratum+tcp://: -O :
Substitute the right stuff in for the placeholders. Then on the next line of the text file type pause. This will let you see any errors that you get. Then save the file with any name you want, as long as the file extension is .bat. For example mine_serverName.bat.

Step five: Launch your miner

Just open the .bat file and a command line window should pop up, letting you know that the miner is starting. Once it starts, it should print out your hash rate.
If you now go to the pool website, the dashboard should start showing your hashrate. At first it'll be lower than what it says in the miner, but that's because the dashboard is taking a 5 minute average. It'll catch up soon enough.
NOTE: A normal hashrate is between 50 Kh/s up to even 1 Mh/s depending on your GPU.

You're now mining Dogecoins

That's it, nothing more to it.

CPU MINING

CPU mining isn't really recommended, because you'll be spending a lot on more on power than you'd make from mining Dogecoin. You could better spend that money on buying Dogecoin by trading. But if you have free electricity and want to try it out, check out this informative forum post.

Trading

Trading has been difficult so far, but Dogecoin just got added to a few new exchanges. If you don't have a giant mining rig, this is probably the best way to get 100k or more dogecoins at the moment. I'll write up a more complete guide, but for now check out these sites:

Faucets

Faucets are sites that give out free coins. Usually a site will give out somewhere between 1 and 100 Dogecoin. Every site has its own time limits, but usually you can only receive coins once every few hours, or in some cases, days. It's a great way to get started. All you do is copy your address from the receive section of your wallet and enter it on some faucet sites. Check out /dogecoinfaucets for more. If you go to each site on there you might end up with a couple hundred Dogecoin!

Begging

This method is pretty straightforward. Post your receiving address, and ask for some coins. Such poor shibe. The only catch is, don't do it here! Please go to /dogecoinbeg.

Tips

At the moment there are two tip bots:
Other redditors can give you Dogecoin by summoning the tip bot, something like this:
+dogetipbot 5 doge
This might happen if you make a good post, or someone just wants to give out some coins. Once you receive a tip you have to accept it in a few days or else it'll get returned. Do this by following the instructions on the message you receive in your inbox. You reply to the bot with "+accept". Commands go in the message body. Once you do that, the bot will create a tipping address for you, and you can use the links in the message you receive to see your info, withdraw coins to your dogecoin-qt wallet, see your history, and a bunch of other stuff.
As a bonus, so_doge_tip has a feature where you can get some Dogecoins to start with in exchange for how much karma you have. To do this, send the message "+redeem DOGE" to so_doge_tip. You'll need to create a tipping account if you don't have one.
If you want to create a tipping account without ever being tipped first, message either of the bots with "+register" and an address will be created for you.

CHANGELOG

  • 1/21/14 - Added note about this thread no longer being updated
  • 1/21/14 - Changed wallet links to official site
  • 12/27/13 - Added 1.3 wallet-qt links
  • 12/21/13 - Added new windows 1.2 wallet link
  • 12/20/13 - Fixed +redeem text
  • 12/18/13 - Added short blurb on trading.
  • 12/18/13 - Updated cudaminer to new version (cudaminer-2013-12-18.zip).
  • 12/18/13 - Fixed +redeem link
  • 12/18/13 - Updates dogecoin.conf, from here.
  • 12/17/13 - Linked to mining explanation.
  • 12/17/13 - Added link to CPU mining tutorial, in response to this.
  • 12/16/13 - Added links to tip commands, link to dogetipbot wiki.
  • 12/16/13 - Note about tip commands going in body, in response to this.
  • 12/16/13 - Added link to cgminer mirror, thanks to scubasteve812 and thanks to Bagrisham.
  • 12/16/13 - Note about removing brackets in response to this.
  • 12/15/13 - Fixed hash rate as per this comment, thanks lleti
  • 12/15/13 - Added info for all other ways of getting money, except for trading (placeholder for now)
  • 12/15/13 - Added windows GPU mining instructions 12/15/13 - Added wallet instructions, list of how to get money
submitted by lego-banana to dogecoin [link] [comments]

The Problem with PoW


Miners have always had it rough..
"Frustrated Miners"


The Problem with PoW
(and what is being done to solve it)

Proof of Work (PoW) is one of the most commonly used consensus mechanisms entrusted to secure and validate many of today’s most successful cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin being one. Battle-hardened and having weathered the test of time, Bitcoin has demonstrated the undeniable strength and reliability of the PoW consensus model through sheer market saturation, and of course, its persistency.
In addition to the cost of powerful computing hardware, miners prove that they are benefiting the network by expending energy in the form of electricity, by solving and hashing away complex math problems on their computers, utilizing any suitable tools that they have at their disposal. The mathematics involved in securing proof of work revolve around unique algorithms, each with their own benefits and vulnerabilities, and can require different software/hardware to mine depending on the coin.
Because each block has a unique and entirely random hash, or “puzzle” to solve, the “work” has to be performed for each block individually and the difficulty of the problem can be increased as the speed at which blocks are solved increases.
Hashrates and Hardware Types
While proof of work is an effective means of securing a blockchain, it inherently promotes competition amongst miners seeking higher and higher hashrates due to the rewards earned by the node who wins the right to add the next block. In turn, these higher hash rates benefit the blockchain, providing better security when it’s a result of a well distributed/decentralized network of miners.
When Bitcoin first launched its genesis block, it was mined exclusively by CPUs. Over the years, various programmers and developers have devised newer, faster, and more energy efficient ways to generate higher hashrates; some by perfecting the software end of things, and others, when the incentives are great enough, create expensive specialized hardware such as ASICs (application-specific integrated circuit). With the express purpose of extracting every last bit of hashing power, efficiency being paramount, ASICs are stripped down, bare minimum, hardware representations of a specific coin’s algorithm.
This gives ASICS a massive advantage in terms of raw hashing power and also in terms of energy consumption against CPUs/GPUs, but with significant drawbacks of being very expensive to design/manufacture, translating to a high economic barrier for the casual miner. Due to the fact that they are virtual hardware representations of a single targeted algorithm, this means that if a project decides to fork and change algorithms suddenly, your powerful brand-new ASIC becomes a very expensive paperweight. The high costs in developing and manufacturing ASICs and the associated risks involved, make them unfit for mass adoption at this time.
Somewhere on the high end, in the vast hashrate expanse created between GPU and ASIC, sits the FPGA (field programmable gate array). FPGAs are basically ASICs that make some compromises with efficiency in order to have more flexibility, namely they are reprogrammable and often used in the “field” to test an algorithm before implementing it in an ASIC. As a precursor to the ASIC, FPGAs are somewhat similar to GPUs in their flexibility, but require advanced programming skills and, like ASICs, are expensive and still fairly uncommon.
2 Guys 1 ASIC
One of the issues with proof of work incentivizing the pursuit of higher hashrates is in how the network calculates block reward coinbase payouts and rewards miners based on the work that they have submitted. If a coin generated, say a block a minute, and this is a constant, then what happens if more miners jump on a network and do more work? The network cannot pay out more than 1 block reward per 1 minute, and so a difficulty mechanism is used to maintain balance. The difficulty will scale up and down in response to the overall nethash, so if many miners join the network, or extremely high hashing devices such as ASICs or FPGAs jump on, the network will respond accordingly, using the difficulty mechanism to make the problems harder, effectively giving an edge to hardware that can solve them faster, balancing the network. This not only maintains the block a minute reward but it has the added side-effect of energy requirements that scale up with network adoption.
Imagine, for example, if one miner gets on a network all alone with a CPU doing 50 MH/s and is getting all 100 coins that can possibly be paid out in a day. Then, if another miner jumps on the network with the same CPU, each miner would receive 50 coins in a day instead of 100 since they are splitting the required work evenly, despite the fact that the net electrical output has doubled along with the work. Electricity costs miner’s money and is a factor in driving up coin price along with adoption, and since more people are now mining, the coin is less centralized. Now let’s say a large corporation has found it profitable to manufacture an ASIC for this coin, knowing they will make their money back mining it or selling the units to professionals. They join the network doing 900 MH/s and will be pulling in 90 coins a day, while the two guys with their CPUs each get 5 now. Those two guys aren’t very happy, but the corporation is. Not only does this negatively affect the miners, it compromises the security of the entire network by centralizing the coin supply and hashrate, opening the doors to double spends and 51% attacks from potential malicious actors. Uncertainty of motives and questionable validity in a distributed ledger do not mix.
When technology advances in a field, it is usually applauded and welcomed with open arms, but in the world of crypto things can work quite differently. One of the glaring flaws in the current model and the advent of specialized hardware is that it’s never ending. Suppose the two men from the rather extreme example above took out a loan to get themselves that ASIC they heard about that can get them 90 coins a day? When they join the other ASIC on the network, the difficulty adjusts to keep daily payouts consistent at 100, and they will each receive only 33 coins instead of 90 since the reward is now being split three ways. Now what happens if a better ASIC is released by that corporation? Hopefully, those two guys were able to pay off their loans and sell their old ASICs before they became obsolete.
This system, as it stands now, only perpetuates a never ending hashrate arms race in which the weapons of choice are usually a combination of efficiency, economics, profitability and in some cases control.
Implications of Centralization
This brings us to another big concern with expensive specialized hardware: the risk of centralization. Because they are so expensive and inaccessible to the casual miner, ASICs and FPGAs predominantly remain limited to a select few. Centralization occurs when one small group or a single entity controls the vast majority hash power and, as a result, coin supply and is able to exert its influence to manipulate the market or in some cases, the network itself (usually the case of dishonest nodes or bad actors).
This is entirely antithetical of what cryptocurrency was born of, and since its inception many concerted efforts have been made to avoid centralization at all costs. An entity in control of a centralized coin would have the power to manipulate the price, and having a centralized hashrate would enable them to affect network usability, reliability, and even perform double spends leading to the demise of a coin, among other things.
The world of crypto is a strange new place, with rapidly growing advancements across many fields, economies, and boarders, leaving plenty of room for improvement; while it may feel like a never-ending game of catch up, there are many talented developers and programmers working around the clock to bring us all more sustainable solutions.
The Rise of FPGAs
With the recent implementation of the commonly used coding language C++, and due to their overall flexibility, FPGAs are becoming somewhat more common, especially in larger farms and in industrial setting; but they still remain primarily out of the hands of most mining enthusiasts and almost unheard of to the average hobby miner. Things appear to be changing though, one example of which I’ll discuss below, and it is thought by some, that soon we will see a day when mining with a CPU or GPU just won’t cut it any longer, and the market will be dominated by FPGAs and specialized ASICs, bringing with them efficiency gains for proof of work, while also carelessly leading us all towards the next round of spending.
A perfect real-world example of the effect specialized hardware has had on the crypto-community was recently discovered involving a fairly new project called VerusCoin and a fairly new, relatively more economically accessible FPGA. The FPGA is designed to target specific alt-coins whose algo’s do not require RAM overhead. It was discovered the company had released a new algorithm, kept secret from the public, which could effectively mine Verus at 20x the speed of GPUs, which were the next fastest hardware types mining on the Verus network.
Unfortunately this was done with a deliberately secret approach, calling the Verus algorithm “Algo1” and encouraging owners of the FPGA to never speak of the algorithm in public channels, admonishing a user when they did let the cat out of the bag. The problem with this business model is that it is parasitic in nature. In an ecosystem where advancements can benefit the entire crypto community, this sort of secret mining approach also does not support the philosophies set forth by the Bitcoin or subsequent open source and decentralization movements.
Although this was not done in the spirit of open source, it does hint to an important step in hardware innovation where we could see more efficient specialized systems within reach of the casual miner. The FPGA requires unique sets of data called a bitstream in order to be able to recognize each individual coin’s algorithm and mine them. Because it’s reprogrammable, with the support of a strong development team creating such bitstreams, the miner doesn’t end up with a brick if an algorithm changes.
All is not lost thanks to.. um.. Technology?
Shortly after discovering FPGAs on the network, the Verus developers quickly designed, tested, and implemented a new, much more complex and improved algorithm via a fork that enabled Verus to transition smoothly from VerusHash 1.0 to VerusHash 2.0 at block 310,000. Since the fork, VerusHash 2.0 has demonstrated doing exactly what it was designed for- equalizing hardware performance relative to the device being used while enabling CPUs (the most widely available “ASICs”) to mine side by side with GPUs, at a profit and it appears this will also apply to other specialized hardware. This is something no other project has been able to do until now. Rather than pursue the folly of so many other projects before it- attempting to be “ASIC proof”, Verus effectively achieved and presents to the world an entirely new model of “hardware homogeny”. As the late, great, Bruce Lee once said- “Don’t get set into one form, adapt it and build your own, and let it grow, be like water.”
In the design of VerusHash 2.0, Verus has shown it doesn’t resist progress like so many other new algorithms try to do, it embraces change and adapts to it in the way that water becomes whatever vessel it inhabits. This new approach- an industry first- could very well become an industry standard and in doing so, would usher in a new age for proof of work based coins. VerusHash 2.0 has the potential to correct the single largest design flaw in the proof of work consensus mechanism- the ever expanding monetary and energy requirements that have plagued PoW based projects since the inception of the consensus mechanism. Verus also solves another major issue of coin and net hash centralization by enabling legitimate CPU mining, offering greater coin and hashrate distribution.
Digging a bit deeper it turns out the Verus development team are no rookies. The lead developer Michael F Toutonghi has spent decades in the field programming and is a former Vice President and Technical Fellow at Microsoft, recognized founder and architect of Microsoft's .Net platform, ex-Technical Fellow of Microsoft's advertising platform, ex-CTO, Parallels Corporation, and an experienced distributed computing and machine learning architect. The project he helped create employs and makes use of a diverse myriad of technologies and security features to form one of the most advanced and secure cryptocurrency to date. A brief description of what makes VerusCoin special quoted from a community member-
"Verus has a unique and new consensus algorithm called Proof of Power which is a 50% PoW/50% PoS algorithm that solves theoretical weaknesses in other PoS systems (Nothing at Stake problem for example) and is provably immune to 51% hash attacks. With this, Verus uses the new hash algorithm, VerusHash 2.0. VerusHash 2.0 is designed to better equalize mining across all hardware platforms, while favoring the latest CPUs over older types, which is also one defense against the centralizing potential of botnets. Unlike past efforts to equalize hardware hash-rates across different hardware types, VerusHash 2.0 explicitly enables CPUs to gain even more power relative to GPUs and FPGAs, enabling the most decentralizing hardware, CPUs (due to their virtually complete market penetration), to stay relevant as miners for the indefinite future. As for anonymity, Verus is not a "forced private", allowing for both transparent and shielded (private) transactions...and private messages as well"
If other projects can learn from this and adopt a similar approach or continue to innovate with new ideas, it could mean an end to all the doom and gloom predictions that CPU and GPU mining are dead, offering a much needed reprieve and an alternative to miners who have been faced with the difficult decision of either pulling the plug and shutting down shop or breaking down their rigs to sell off parts and buy new, more expensive hardware…and in so doing present an overall unprecedented level of decentralization not yet seen in cryptocurrency.
Technological advancements led us to the world of secure digital currencies and the progress being made with hardware efficiencies is indisputably beneficial to us all. ASICs and FPGAs aren’t inherently bad, and there are ways in which they could be made more affordable and available for mass distribution. More than anything, it is important that we work together as communities to find solutions that can benefit us all for the long term.
In an ever changing world where it may be easy to lose sight of the real accomplishments that brought us to this point one thing is certain, cryptocurrency is here to stay and the projects that are doing something to solve the current problems in the proof of work consensus mechanism will be the ones that lead us toward our collective vision of a better world- not just for the world of crypto but for each and every one of us.
submitted by Godballz to EtherMining [link] [comments]

Why not forking away makes Zen less valuable.

Often people ask what is Bitcoin backed by? What is any crypto-currency backed with? The answer is electricity used to mine it. I did some calculations today how much power is backing Zen(not 100% accurate as change all the time but you will get the picture). The answer may surprise you.

Hashrate was at 92,963,252.00 Sols. I will assume no sane GPU miner is mining Zen anymore, z9 mini overclocked produces 16500 Sols for 390W. It takes 5634 z9 mini's to create this hashrate.
Very decentralized, would you say? I know. so 300 ZEN is mined each hour. At the same time 2197 kW of electricity are used to mine those coins. This means, 7.32 kW are used for each 1 Zen that is being mined. At average electricity price of 0.1 cents per kW that makes 0.732$ per 1 Zen.

Now lets calculate network prior to ASICS. 3 Months ago, network has was around 60 Mh/s. Average gpu's that mined it were GTX 1070 which used 170W for 500 Sols. This means it took 120 000 GPU's for that hashrate, and it used 20400 kw of electricity.
This means that for each Zen to be mined on GPU only network prior to ASICS, we needed 64 kW of power per Zen. Or 6,4$ used for electricity. Which one is safer again guys? This kind of calculations didnt even consider newer and more power efficient A9 ZMaster that has 50 000 Sols per 620 W or Asic Miner Co Zeon200,000 Sols which uses 2200W.

Did the same calculations on Zcash (which stayed on equihash as well) and Bitcoin Gold which forked to 144_5 algo just to compare it. On Zcash it takes 6.145 $ worth of electricity to mine 1 Zcash. 3 months ago, it was 53,2$.

Did the current calculation for Bitcoin Gold as well. Most efficient mining on Bitcoin Gold is at 110W and 65% power limit with GTX 1070 making 42-45 Sols per card. Results is 7.2$ worth of electricity needed per 1 Bitcoin Gold.

If you think i made a mistake with the calculations, please contribute.
Thank you
(from Discord) Trololino





submitted by Spiral1990 to Horizen [link] [comments]

Frequently Asked Questions

NOTICE

This post is a temporary resting place for FAQs while we wait for the release of VertDocs.

What is Vertcoin?

Vertcoin is a digital peer to peer currency focused on decentralization and ASIC resistance. Vertcoin is aiming to be easily accessible to the everyday user without extensive technical knowledge. Vertcoin has started to lower the barrier of entry with lots of video guides and the development of the One Click Miner (OCM).

Why does ASIC Resistance Matter?

ASICs (Application Specific Integrated Circuits) are dedicated mining devices that can only mine one algorithm. Coins like Bitcoin and Litecoin both made GPU mining obsolete when SHA-256 and Scrypt ASICs were created.
ASIC Resistance and How it Makes Vertcoin Decentralized
Vertcoin believes that ASIC resistance goes hand in hand with decentralization.
ASICs are made by companies like Bitmain and almost all the original sellers of ASICs sell on a preorder basis. When pre ordering an ASIC you are buying from a limited batch that the ASIC company has produced. Often times the batch will not be fully filled and the ASIC company will often have left over ASICs. When the ASIC company has left over ASICs they will put them to work mining. Soon enough the ASIC company will have a very large amount of unsold ASICs that are mining and slowly the ASIC company starts to own a large part of the network’s hashrate. When an ASIC company(s) starts to own a large majority of the hashrate the network can become very centralized after a while.
Having your network consist of a few large companies can be very dangerous as they could eventually get 51% hashing power and 51% attack your network, destabilizing the network. When your network is made out of a lot of smaller miners, like Vertcoin, it is much harder for your network to be 51% attacked, therefore increasing network security. By having centralized hashing power your coin effectively centralizing the network as the centralized hashing power can deny transactions and stop any activity they don’t want.

What Ways is Vertcoin Superior to Litecoin and Bitcoin?

Network Difficulty Adjustments with Kimoto Gravity Well
Vertcoin uses a difficulty adjustment called Kimoto Gravity Well which adjusts the difficulty every block, whereas Bitcoin and Litecoin’s difficulty changes every 2016 blocks. By adjusting the difficulty every block Vertcoin’s block time can stay consistent by adjusting for the fluctuation in network hash rate from hash rate renting and part time miners. If a large miner switches off Bitcoin or Litecoin mining the network could be slowed to a crawl until 2016 blocks are mined and the difficulty can change to adjust for the new network hash rate. We observed this happen to Bitcoin when Bitcoin Cash became more profitable than Bitcoin and Bitcoin’s network hash rate saw a steep fall off, slowing the network to a crawl. If this was to happen with Vertcoin the difficulty would adjust after 1 block was mined, allowing Vertcoin to always be profitable to mine.
Anyone can Meaningfully help Verify Transactions
In Proof-of-Work crypto currencies miners help secure the blockchain and get rewarded with the block reward. In ASIC mineable coins like Bitcoin and Litecoin you can’t meaningfully verify transactions unless you pay 1000-2000$ for a ASIC miner. When you mine with a CPU or GPU in a ASIC mineable coin you make no meaningful impact on the network. It is like trying to break concrete with a shovel while everyone else has a jackhammer.
Simple Upgrades Aren’t Held back by 1-2 Large Miners
In ASIC market people buy ASICs in batches in a preorder. With Bitcoin ASICs there is not enough demand for ASICs so the batch often doesn’t get sold out so now the manufacturer has spare ASICs. Now that the manufacturer has spare ASICs they will often start mining with them and eventually the ASIC company has one of the highest hash rates. If the ASIC company doesn’t want a certain upgrade to go through, for example SegWit, they can vote with their hash rate to hold back the upgrade forever or at least until people who want SegWit get more hash rate.
You Have a Say in Protocol Rules and Consensus
In Bitcoin you are a passive observer because you can only issue transactions and you have no part in the process after that. In Vertcoin you can be apart of the process for deciding the ordering of transactions and deciding what transactions get into blocks.
Block Rewards and Transaction Fees are Distributed Evenly
In Bitcoin and Litecoin the block rewards and transaction fees are often given to the large miners in China due to mining centralization created by ASICs. Vertcoin distributes its mining rewards to people all around the world thanks to the mining decentralization.

When will Atomic Swaps Be Ready?

Atomic Swaps can be done in two flavors: On-chain and Off-chain (via Lightning Network). On-chain swaps were actually done already using Blocknet, you can see it in use on Youtube. We're looking into doing it again using Interledger.
However our main focus is to do off-chain Atomic Swaps using Lightning Network technology. Because it has the same benefits as Lightning transactions: No network fees and instant transactions.
For off-chain swaps we need Lightning Network to be fully operational. It's difficult to give an ETA on that since we aren't the ones developing it. U/gertjaap posted a video on the current state of the Lightning Network for Vertcoin a while ago, which you can see here.
This was actually the "bleeding edge" of Lightning Network at the time. was able to use it on VTC's main net, meaning that our blockchain is ready for the good stuff. As you can see however, it can't yet be considered production ready (most users would want a little better UX than a command line app).
Now off-chain Atomic Swaps is a technique based on the same principles as Lightning Network, but adds an extra complexity for it being across chains. So it's basically the same as a "multi hop" Lightning payment, which is not yet built by any of the implementations. They're still working hard on making the single-hop payments robust. So in order for AS to be possible, LN has to be fully operational.
A timeline cannot be given at this time, because frankly we don't know. The implementation of Lightning Network we feel has the most potential is LIT, because it supports multiple currencies in its protocol (where LND is bitcoin-only at the time and requires significant work to support other currencies, which is an essential part of being able to work across multiple blockchains).
LIT is open source and there's nothing secretive about its progress, you can see the development on Github. We even have our lead dev James Lovejoy (u/jamesl22) close to the action and contributing to it where possible (and our team as well through testing it on the Vertcoin chain).
So we're not developing LN or AS ourselves, we're just ready with our blockchain technology whenever it becomes available.
If we have any real progress that has some substance, you can expect us to let the world know. We're not interested in fluffy marketing - we post something when we achieve real progress. And we are not keeping that secret.

How do I Choose the Right Vertcoin Wallet?

Deciding what Vertcoin wallet you should choose can be a difficult process. You can choose between three different wallets: Core, Electrum and Paper. Once you decide you can use the "How to Setup Your Vertcoin Wallets" video guide to assist you.

Core

The Core wallet is the wallet that most people should use. It will store the entire blockchain (~2GB) on your computer. The Core wallet is the only wallet that fully supports P2Pool mining. You will also have to use the Core wallet if you plan to run a P2Pool node or any Vertcoin related server.

Electrum

The Electrum wallet is a light wallet for Vertcoin. You do not have to download the blockchain on your computer, but you will still have your own private keys on your computer. This is recommended for people who don't need to store Vertcoins for very long and just need a quick but secure place to store them.

Paper

The Paper wallet is as the name implies, a physical paper wallet. When generating a paper wallet you will get a pdf that will need to print out. A paper wallet is normally used for long term storage since it is the safest way to store Vertcoins. A paper wallet can also be called "cold storage." Cold storage references the storage of your coins offline, preventing you from getting hacked over the internet.

Ledger Nano S

The Ledger Nano S is a hardware wallet designed by Ledger. A hardware wallet is similar to a paper wallet since it is normally used for cold storage. The hardware wallet is on par with the security of a paper wallet while being easy to use and setup. Note: You should never mine directly to a Ledger hardware wallet.

How do I start mining Vertcoin?

We have many guides available for you to use depending on your computer specifications.
Nvidia GPUs on Windows
Nvidia GPUs on Linux
AMD GPUs on Windows WARNING: Very unprofitable, AMD optimized miner is coming very soon.

Where can I get the One Click Miner (OCM)

You can get the latest version of the One Click Miner in the Vertcoin Discord. The download is pinned to the top of the #oneclick channel.

What do all the Numbers Mean on P2Pool’s Web Interface

I've seen a lot of confusion from new miners on public p2pool nodes, so here's a primer for the most common static node page style, for first time miners: https://imgur.com/K48GmMw

Active Miners on this Node

Address - This is the list of addresses currently mining on this node. If your address does not show up here, you are not mining on this node.
Hashrate
This is a snapshot of your hashrate as seen by the node. It will fluctuate up to 15% from the hashrate you are seeing on your mining software, but will average out to match the output in your mining software.
Rejected Hashrate
This is the amount of your hashing contribution that is rejected, both in hashrate and as a percentage of your total contribution. Running your own p2pool node minimizes this number. Mining on a node that is geographically close to reduce lag also minimizes this number. Ideally you would like it to be less than 1%, but most people seem happy keeping it under 3%.
Share Difficulty
This speaks for itself, it is the difficulty of the share being currently worked on. Bigger numbers are more difficult.
Time to Share
This is how long you need to mine before you will receive any payouts, or any "predicted payout." The lower your hashrate, the higher your time to share.
Predicted Payout
This is the reward you would receive if a block was found by p2pool right now. If it reads "no shares yet" then you have not yet been mining the requisite amount of time as seen in the previous "time to share" column.

Status

Network Hashrate
This is the total hashrate of all the miners mining vertcoin everywhere, regardless of where or how.
Global Pool Hashrate
This is the total hashrate of all the miners mining vertcoin on this p2pool network, be it the first network or the second network.
Local Pool Hashrate
This is the total hashrate of all the miners mining Vertcoin on this node.
Current Block Value
This is the reward that will be given for mining the current block. The base mining reward is currently 50 VTC per block, so any small decimal over that amount is transaction fees being paid by people using the network.
Network Block Difficulty
This is the difficulty of the block being mined. The higher the number, the higher the difficulty. This number rises as the "Network Hashrate" rises, so that blocks will always be found every 2.5 minutes. Inversely, this number falls when the "Network Hashrate" lowers as well.
Expected Time to Block
This is a guess at how much time will elapse between blocks being found by this p2pool network. This guess is accurate on average, but very inaccurate in the short term. Since you only receive a payout when the network finds a block, you can think of this as "Estimated Time to Payout."

Why is P2Pool Recommended Over Traditional Pools?

Decentralisation

P2Pool is peer to peer allowing a decentralized pool mining system. There are many nodes setup around the world that connect to each other too mine together. Many other coins have 1 very large pool that many miners connect to and sometimes the largest pool can have 51% or more of the network hash rate which makes the network vulnerable to a 51% attack. If P2Pool is the largest network then that prevents the Vertcoin network to be susceptible to a 51% attack as P2Pool is decentralized.

PPLNS Payout System

P2Pool uses a PPLNS (Pay Per Last N Shares) payout system which awards miners more the longer they mine, sort of like a loyalty system. A drawback to this system is that part time miners that aren't 24/7 won't be able to earn that much.

2 Networks

While Network 1 is catered towards 24/7 miners and people who have dedicated mining rigs, Vertcoin has a second P2Pool network where part time miners and miners under 100 MH/s can go to mine.

Mines Directly to Your Wallet

P2Pool mines directly to your wallet and cuts out the middleman. This reduces the likely hood that the pool will run away with your coins.

No Downtime

Since P2Pool is decentralized and has different nodes for you to choose from there will be no downtime because the P2Pool network does not die if one node goes down. You can setup a backup server in your miner so that you will have no downtime when mining.

Anonymity and Security

When using P2Pool you use a wallet address making your real identity anonymous, you are simply known by a random 34 letter string. Along with using a wallet address instead of a username there is no password involved P2Pool preventing the possibility of cracking your pool account (If you were on a traditional pool,) and stealing all your coins.

How do I Find a Nearby P2Pool Node

You can find the public p2pool nodes the the P2Pool Node Scanners. If you want to find a network 1 node go here. If you want to find a network 2 node go here.

How do I setup a P2Pool Node?

Linux P2Pool Setup
Windows P2Pool Setup (Text)
Windows P2Pool Setup (Video) This guide setups a network 2 node. When downloading Python download the 32bit version, not the 64bit. Downloading the 64bit version causes problems with the twisted install.
How do I setup a change my node to network 1 or network 2?
In the P2Pool startup script when you type the --network flag add vertcoin1 for network 1 and vertcoin2 for network 2 right after.

How do I Buy Vertcoin?

You can see a video guide on Youtube, "How to Buy Vertcoin with Fiat Using Bittrex and Coinbase"

How can I get help with "X problem?"

The quickest way for you to get help is for you to join the Vertcoin Discord Group. We almost always have knowledgable Vertans, whether that be developers or experienced Vertans, online to help you with whatever problems you may have.

How can I donate to the Developers?

You can donate to the dev fund at https://vertcoin.org/donate/. You can select what you want your funds to go to by donating to the corresponding address. You can also see how much funding is required and how much we have donated.

Where can I see what exchanges Vertcoin is on?

You can see what exchanges Vertcoin is listed on at CoinMarketCap. You can see what exchanges Vertcoin has applied to be on at this google docs spreadsheet.

Where can I see Vertcoin's Roadmap?

The Vertcoin developers currently have a trello board where you can see the goals and what the status of said goal is. You can also vote on what you want the Vertcoin developers to focus on next.

What is the Status of the AMD Optimized Miner?

The AMD Optimized Miner internal beta is aiming to be ready by the end of September. The AMD Optimized Miner is currently being developed by @turekaj on the Vertcoin Discord. He currently does not have a Reddit account and Discord is the only way you can contact him.

What Does Halving Mean?

Halving means that the block reward for miners will be split in half. Halving happens around every 4 years for Vertcoin or 840,000 blocks. This means around December miners will only receive 25 VTC per block instead of the current 50 VTC per block.
If you would like to add another question to this list please comment it and I will get around to adding it ASAP.
submitted by asianboygames to vertcoin [link] [comments]

Swiss Alps Mining

Swiss Alps Mining & Energy Logo, Source: swissalpsmining.io
In the world of cryptocurrencies, money is not created, it is discovered and this process is known as mining. Mining started off simple, it could be done with the hardware of any computer equipment but with the passage of time the activity became profitable, leaving behind the inefficient equipment, evolving into RIG and ASIC mining farms.
Nowadays, mining farms are being built seeking the best hardware conditions with an efficient hashrate, the lowest possible electrical consumption, and favorable environmental conditions to reduce energy consumption with 'natural cooling', combining eco-friendly solutions.
Swiss Alps Energy AG (SAE) is Swiss Alps Mining & Energy operating business combining: unused buildings in the Swiss Alps, environmentally friendly mining and a sophisticated mining farm called ‘Modular Cube System’ (SAM Cubes) which evolved the ‘how-to’ of a mining farm’s development.
SAE will rent out entire cubes or individual mining capacities, guaranteeing highly energy efficient and cost competitive mining. SAE will allow the possibility to rent mining facilities and the power needed can be paid in SAM tokens, offered on SAE Initial Coin Offer (ICO). Customers may also purchase cubes for their own use obtaining the necessary power from SAE and operating the cube on SAE’s premises, or deploy the cube elsewhere.
Key factors of the SAE mining farms.
In order to be profitable, it is essential to be efficient in all the factors that influence the cryptocurrency mining. SAE has taken into account a solution for all relevant factors:
Infrastructure: they take on disused structures that cannot be inhabited, which avoids the high costs in commercial property rentals.
A recovered alpine house for mining, source: swissalpsmining.io
SAM Cube: mining is evolving in the creation of mining farms within adapted containers which facilitates the transport of mining farms to a new location. SAE developed its own mobile farm in prefabricated and fast-mountable SAM Cubes. The Cubes improve the transport and design of containers used for maritime transportation. They are self-contained and operate autonomously thus achieving a maximum efficient mining for maximum profit. SAM Cubes have two models available.
https://swissalpsmining.io/
submitted by daupreapnemem1986 to Crypto_ICO_Investing [link] [comments]

The Problem with PoW

The Problem with PoW

Miners have always had it rough..
"Frustrated Miners"


The Problem with PoW
(and what is being done to solve it)

Proof of Work (PoW) is one of the most commonly used consensus mechanisms entrusted to secure and validate many of today’s most successful cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin being one. Battle-hardened and having weathered the test of time, Bitcoin has demonstrated the undeniable strength and reliability of the PoW consensus model through sheer market saturation, and of course, its persistency.
In addition to the cost of powerful computing hardware, miners prove that they are benefiting the network by expending energy in the form of electricity, by solving and hashing away complex math problems on their computers, utilizing any suitable tools that they have at their disposal. The mathematics involved in securing proof of work revolve around unique algorithms, each with their own benefits and vulnerabilities, and can require different software/hardware to mine depending on the coin.
Because each block has a unique and entirely random hash, or “puzzle” to solve, the “work” has to be performed for each block individually and the difficulty of the problem can be increased as the speed at which blocks are solved increases.
Hashrates and Hardware Types
While proof of work is an effective means of securing a blockchain, it inherently promotes competition amongst miners seeking higher and higher hashrates due to the rewards earned by the node who wins the right to add the next block. In turn, these higher hash rates benefit the blockchain, providing better security when it’s a result of a well distributed/decentralized network of miners.
When Bitcoin first launched its genesis block, it was mined exclusively by CPUs. Over the years, various programmers and developers have devised newer, faster, and more energy efficient ways to generate higher hashrates; some by perfecting the software end of things, and others, when the incentives are great enough, create expensive specialized hardware such as ASICs (application-specific integrated circuit). With the express purpose of extracting every last bit of hashing power, efficiency being paramount, ASICs are stripped down, bare minimum, hardware representations of a specific coin’s algorithm.
This gives ASICS a massive advantage in terms of raw hashing power and also in terms of energy consumption against CPUs/GPUs, but with significant drawbacks of being very expensive to design/manufacture, translating to a high economic barrier for the casual miner. Due to the fact that they are virtual hardware representations of a single targeted algorithm, this means that if a project decides to fork and change algorithms suddenly, your powerful brand-new ASIC becomes a very expensive paperweight. The high costs in developing and manufacturing ASICs and the associated risks involved, make them unfit for mass adoption at this time.
Somewhere on the high end, in the vast hashrate expanse created between GPU and ASIC, sits the FPGA (field programmable gate array). FPGAs are basically ASICs that make some compromises with efficiency in order to have more flexibility, namely they are reprogrammable and often used in the “field” to test an algorithm before implementing it in an ASIC. As a precursor to the ASIC, FPGAs are somewhat similar to GPUs in their flexibility, but require advanced programming skills and, like ASICs, are expensive and still fairly uncommon.
2 Guys 1 ASIC
One of the issues with proof of work incentivizing the pursuit of higher hashrates is in how the network calculates block reward coinbase payouts and rewards miners based on the work that they have submitted. If a coin generated, say a block a minute, and this is a constant, then what happens if more miners jump on a network and do more work? The network cannot pay out more than 1 block reward per 1 minute, and so a difficulty mechanism is used to maintain balance. The difficulty will scale up and down in response to the overall nethash, so if many miners join the network, or extremely high hashing devices such as ASICs or FPGAs jump on, the network will respond accordingly, using the difficulty mechanism to make the problems harder, effectively giving an edge to hardware that can solve them faster, balancing the network. This not only maintains the block a minute reward but it has the added side-effect of energy requirements that scale up with network adoption.
Imagine, for example, if one miner gets on a network all alone with a CPU doing 50 MH/s and is getting all 100 coins that can possibly be paid out in a day. Then, if another miner jumps on the network with the same CPU, each miner would receive 50 coins in a day instead of 100 since they are splitting the required work evenly, despite the fact that the net electrical output has doubled along with the work. Electricity costs miner’s money and is a factor in driving up coin price along with adoption, and since more people are now mining, the coin is less centralized. Now let’s say a large corporation has found it profitable to manufacture an ASIC for this coin, knowing they will make their money back mining it or selling the units to professionals. They join the network doing 900 MH/s and will be pulling in 90 coins a day, while the two guys with their CPUs each get 5 now. Those two guys aren’t very happy, but the corporation is. Not only does this negatively affect the miners, it compromises the security of the entire network by centralizing the coin supply and hashrate, opening the doors to double spends and 51% attacks from potential malicious actors. Uncertainty of motives and questionable validity in a distributed ledger do not mix.
When technology advances in a field, it is usually applauded and welcomed with open arms, but in the world of crypto things can work quite differently. One of the glaring flaws in the current model and the advent of specialized hardware is that it’s never ending. Suppose the two men from the rather extreme example above took out a loan to get themselves that ASIC they heard about that can get them 90 coins a day? When they join the other ASIC on the network, the difficulty adjusts to keep daily payouts consistent at 100, and they will each receive only 33 coins instead of 90 since the reward is now being split three ways. Now what happens if a better ASIC is released by that corporation? Hopefully, those two guys were able to pay off their loans and sell their old ASICs before they became obsolete.
This system, as it stands now, only perpetuates a never ending hashrate arms race in which the weapons of choice are usually a combination of efficiency, economics, profitability and in some cases control.
Implications of Centralization
This brings us to another big concern with expensive specialized hardware: the risk of centralization. Because they are so expensive and inaccessible to the casual miner, ASICs and FPGAs predominantly remain limited to a select few. Centralization occurs when one small group or a single entity controls the vast majority hash power and, as a result, coin supply and is able to exert its influence to manipulate the market or in some cases, the network itself (usually the case of dishonest nodes or bad actors).
This is entirely antithetical of what cryptocurrency was born of, and since its inception many concerted efforts have been made to avoid centralization at all costs. An entity in control of a centralized coin would have the power to manipulate the price, and having a centralized hashrate would enable them to affect network usability, reliability, and even perform double spends leading to the demise of a coin, among other things.
The world of crypto is a strange new place, with rapidly growing advancements across many fields, economies, and boarders, leaving plenty of room for improvement; while it may feel like a never-ending game of catch up, there are many talented developers and programmers working around the clock to bring us all more sustainable solutions.
The Rise of FPGAs
With the recent implementation of the commonly used coding language C++, and due to their overall flexibility, FPGAs are becoming somewhat more common, especially in larger farms and in industrial setting; but they still remain primarily out of the hands of most mining enthusiasts and almost unheard of to the average hobby miner. Things appear to be changing though, one example of which I’ll discuss below, and it is thought by some, that soon we will see a day when mining with a CPU or GPU just won’t cut it any longer, and the market will be dominated by FPGAs and specialized ASICs, bringing with them efficiency gains for proof of work, while also carelessly leading us all towards the next round of spending.
A perfect real-world example of the effect specialized hardware has had on the crypto-community was recently discovered involving a fairly new project called VerusCoin and a fairly new, relatively more economically accessible FPGA. The FPGA is designed to target specific alt-coins whose algo’s do not require RAM overhead. It was discovered the company had released a new algorithm, kept secret from the public, which could effectively mine Verus at 20x the speed of GPUs, which were the next fastest hardware types mining on the Verus network.
Unfortunately this was done with a deliberately secret approach, calling the Verus algorithm “Algo1” and encouraging owners of the FPGA to never speak of the algorithm in public channels, admonishing a user when they did let the cat out of the bag. The problem with this business model is that it is parasitic in nature. In an ecosystem where advancements can benefit the entire crypto community, this sort of secret mining approach also does not support the philosophies set forth by the Bitcoin or subsequent open source and decentralization movements.
Although this was not done in the spirit of open source, it does hint to an important step in hardware innovation where we could see more efficient specialized systems within reach of the casual miner. The FPGA requires unique sets of data called a bitstream in order to be able to recognize each individual coin’s algorithm and mine them. Because it’s reprogrammable, with the support of a strong development team creating such bitstreams, the miner doesn’t end up with a brick if an algorithm changes.
All is not lost thanks to.. um.. Technology?
Shortly after discovering FPGAs on the network, the Verus developers quickly designed, tested, and implemented a new, much more complex and improved algorithm via a fork that enabled Verus to transition smoothly from VerusHash 1.0 to VerusHash 2.0 at block 310,000. Since the fork, VerusHash 2.0 has demonstrated doing exactly what it was designed for- equalizing hardware performance relative to the device being used while enabling CPUs (the most widely available “ASICs”) to mine side by side with GPUs, at a profit and it appears this will also apply to other specialized hardware. This is something no other project has been able to do until now. Rather than pursue the folly of so many other projects before it- attempting to be “ASIC proof”, Verus effectively achieved and presents to the world an entirely new model of “hardware homogeny”. As the late, great, Bruce Lee once said- “Don’t get set into one form, adapt it and build your own, and let it grow, be like water.”
In the design of VerusHash 2.0, Verus has shown it doesn’t resist progress like so many other new algorithms try to do, it embraces change and adapts to it in the way that water becomes whatever vessel it inhabits. This new approach- an industry first- could very well become an industry standard and in doing so, would usher in a new age for proof of work based coins. VerusHash 2.0 has the potential to correct the single largest design flaw in the proof of work consensus mechanism- the ever expanding monetary and energy requirements that have plagued PoW based projects since the inception of the consensus mechanism. Verus also solves another major issue of coin and net hash centralization by enabling legitimate CPU mining, offering greater coin and hashrate distribution.
Digging a bit deeper it turns out the Verus development team are no rookies. The lead developer Michael F Toutonghi has spent decades in the field programming and is a former Vice President and Technical Fellow at Microsoft, recognized founder and architect of Microsoft's .Net platform, ex-Technical Fellow of Microsoft's advertising platform, ex-CTO, Parallels Corporation, and an experienced distributed computing and machine learning architect. The project he helped create employs and makes use of a diverse myriad of technologies and security features to form one of the most advanced and secure cryptocurrency to date. A brief description of what makes VerusCoin special quoted from a community member-
"Verus has a unique and new consensus algorithm called Proof of Power which is a 50% PoW/50% PoS algorithm that solves theoretical weaknesses in other PoS systems (Nothing at Stake problem for example) and is provably immune to 51% hash attacks. With this, Verus uses the new hash algorithm, VerusHash 2.0. VerusHash 2.0 is designed to better equalize mining across all hardware platforms, while favoring the latest CPUs over older types, which is also one defense against the centralizing potential of botnets. Unlike past efforts to equalize hardware hash-rates across different hardware types, VerusHash 2.0 explicitly enables CPUs to gain even more power relative to GPUs and FPGAs, enabling the most decentralizing hardware, CPUs (due to their virtually complete market penetration), to stay relevant as miners for the indefinite future. As for anonymity, Verus is not a "forced private", allowing for both transparent and shielded (private) transactions...and private messages as well"
If other projects can learn from this and adopt a similar approach or continue to innovate with new ideas, it could mean an end to all the doom and gloom predictions that CPU and GPU mining are dead, offering a much needed reprieve and an alternative to miners who have been faced with the difficult decision of either pulling the plug and shutting down shop or breaking down their rigs to sell off parts and buy new, more expensive hardware…and in so doing present an overall unprecedented level of decentralization not yet seen in cryptocurrency.
Technological advancements led us to the world of secure digital currencies and the progress being made with hardware efficiencies is indisputably beneficial to us all. ASICs and FPGAs aren’t inherently bad, and there are ways in which they could be made more affordable and available for mass distribution. More than anything, it is important that we work together as communities to find solutions that can benefit us all for the long term.
In an ever changing world where it may be easy to lose sight of the real accomplishments that brought us to this point one thing is certain, cryptocurrency is here to stay and the projects that are doing something to solve the current problems in the proof of work consensus mechanism will be the ones that lead us toward our collective vision of a better world- not just for the world of crypto but for each and every one of us.
submitted by Godballz to gpumining [link] [comments]

The Most Compact + Powerful GPU Miner - Shark Mining 4x 1080 TI Mining Rig  200+ Mh/s Gridseed Scrypt Mining Farm 50,000 KH/s Scryptsolutions 100 Mh/s Litecoin Miner 5 MH/S Gridseed ASIC scrypt miner 150 Gridseed ASIC Mining Farm - 50MH+ Mine LTC/DOGE

TTBIT SCRYPT USB Stick LiteCoin LTC Miner (wie Moonlander 2 /kein Bitcoin Miner) EUR 53,99. Preisvorschlag senden - TTBIT SCRYPT USB Stick LiteCoin LTC Miner (wie Moonlander 2 /kein Bitcoin Miner) BW.COM L21 550 mh/s Scrypt miner mit HP Netzteil. EUR 60,00. Preisvorschlag senden - BW.COM L21 550 mh/s Scrypt miner mit HP Netzteil. Bitmain Antminer L3+ im neuwertigen Zustand ohne Netzteil _1 ... Canaan Avalon 1246 - Bitcoin Miner 90 TH/S $ 2,090.00; Bitmain Antminer Z15 - ZCash 420 KSOL/S - SECOND HAND $ 5,940.00; Bitmain Antminer Z11E - ZCash 60 KSOL/S $ 500.00 $ 600.00; Canaan Avalon 1066 PRO - 55 TH/S - SECOND HAND $ 770.00; Innosilicon A10 PRO 720MH/S - ETH Miner $ 5,090.00; Brands Carousel. Coinbase. Cryptominer.deals. Kryptosphere . Societe General. The Family. Onsale Products ... 50.0 Gh/s Bitcoin Miner BTC 50,000 Mh/s For Life, Mine At CEX.IO - Go Shop Coins Peter Thiel-backed Layer1 told investors Liu Xiangfu, co-founder of Chinese bitcoin miner maker Canaan, joined its team as a key member. But Liu says that’s not true. Bitmain Antminer U3 Bitcoin-Miner, 63 GH/s ohne Ne . Bitmain Antminer U3 Bitcoin-Miner, zum verkauf steht: 1x antminer u1 v1.1 asic usb bitcoin miner btc mining inkl. Bitmain Antminer U3, ist in einem guten Zustand. Ich versende mit Hermes. Es handelt sich um einen Privatverkauf. M...

[index] [44249] [46628] [43659] [44669] [20678] [3331] [38359] [10340] [20251] [15471]

The Most Compact + Powerful GPU Miner - Shark Mining 4x 1080 TI Mining Rig 200+ Mh/s

A Video of my Miner from www.scryptsolutions.com running at 100 Mh/s. First ASIC for mining Litecoins This is an overview of the Gridseed G-Blade 5 Mh/s ASIC scrypt miner so you can see what its hashrate is like while mining. 1 GHS FREE claim MINIG Bitcoin, Dogecoin, Litecoin, Reddcoin, Tiret https://goo.gl/wLnssj Get 100 GH/S bonus free mining and Claim faucet Your can get some bitcoin - dogecoin - dollar - litecoin ... SCRYPT ASIC MINER 50 MH/s Excalibur 1 ASIC Scrypt Miner. ASIC Scrypt Miner to mine Litecoin, Dogecoin, Feathercoin and other Scrypt Coins www.mining-asics-technologies.com € 4.999,00. 35% ... Today we review one of the most compact and power gpu mining rigs ever built. This tiny frame (Shark Mini) packs 4x Nvidia GTX 1080 TI's which hash over 50 mh/s thanks to the OhGodAnEthlargementPill.

#