BitExWorld - Bitcoin Mining

Can't connect to http://getwork.mining.eligius.st on port 80 or 8337 /r/Bitcoin

Can't connect to http://getwork.mining.eligius.st on port 80 or 8337 /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

bitcoin.conf for solo mining

I've done this a long time ago. It never was a problem. Nowadays I don't get it to work. Would be great to get some help:
My bitcoin.conf looks like this:
server=1 rpcuser=bomtom rpcpassword=secret rpcallowip=192.168.0.0/24 rpcport=8332 
If I point my miner to a pool via
./cgminer -o stratum+tcp://some.pool:8332 -u bomtom -p secret --api-listen --cs 9 --stmcu 0 -T --diff 12 
...it works just fine.
If I point my miner to my own bitcoind however via
./cgminer -o stratum+tcp://192.168.0.2:8332 -u bomtom -p secret --api-listen --cs 9 --stmcu 0 -T --diff 12 
...it doesn't work and just throws:
 [2018-01-01 04:14:10] Probing for an alive pool [2018-01-01 04:14:20] Waiting for work to be available from pools 
Is there anything wrong with my bitcoin.conf? My chain is up to date and bitcoind generally works.
submitted by bomtom1 to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

BTC Guild voluntarily limits their hash rate

BTC Guild voluntarily limits their hash rate submitted by nasato to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

What Is Merged Mining?

Cryptocurrency mining is a broad subject, with many different facets. There are a number of different ways in which mining can be done, ranging from traditional dedicated hardware mining, like the ASICs, GPU mining, cloud mining or web browser mining, to name some.
However, a very interesting and less known concept is the one of merged mining. This process entails the mining of two coins that are based on the same algorithm, simultaneously. Basically, merged mining allows a miner to mine on more than one blockchain at a time. The added benefit to this is that the miner will contribute to both of the blockchain’s hashrates, hence increasing their security (lower threat of a 51% attack) and functionality.
Satoshi Nakamoto himself has written on the subject, in this Bitcointalk post from 2010 regarding Bitcoin specifically, saying:
I think it would be possible for BitDNS to be a completely separate network and separate block chain, yet share CPU power with Bitcoin. The only overlap is to make it so miners can search for proof-of-work for both networks simultaneously.
The networks wouldn’t need any coordination. Miners would subscribe to both networks in parallel. They would scan SHA such that if they get a hit, they potentially solve both at once. A solution may be for just one of the networks if one network has a lower difficulty.
I think an external miner could call getwork on both programs and combine the work. Maybe call Bitcoin, get work from it, hand it to BitDNS getwork to combine into a combined work.
Instead of fragmentation, networks share and augment each other’s total CPU power. This would solve the problem that if there are multiple networks, they are a danger to each other if the available CPU power gangs up on one. Instead, all networks in the world would share combined CPU power, increasing the total strength. It would make it easier for small networks to get started by tapping into a ready base of miners.
Perhaps the most discussed examples of merged mining are the pairs Bitcoin & Namecoin and Litecoin & Dogecoin. In a merged mining process, there always has to be a parent blockchain and an auxiliary one.
This process does not require any additional computing power from the miners, which is a big advantage.
First, a block of transactions for each chain has to be assembled. The next step is simply starting to mine. During the process there are 3 possible outcomes:
The biggest disadvantage of implementing merged mining is that within the auxiliary chain, there is implementation and development work involved and when switching, a hard fork is needed.
Overall, merged mining benefits miners, not so much investors, however it does offer other perks like increased security for the actual networks. Could be the perfect approach for new projects, in terms of protecting themselves from a 51% attack for example. It is an interesting implementation which more people should be aware of.
submitted by Gath3r_Web_Miner to Gath3r_WebMiner [link] [comments]

BTC Guild is NOT close to 51% of the hash share, despite previous reports here

I wanted to debunk this, not because I like BTC guild (I use Slush's pool, which thankfully is now back up), but to stop the fear mongering of BTC Guild being large and another threat besides regulation, DDoS attacks, etc. Find the service you like, use them to mine, and be done with it. The whole purpose of BTC is to have more choices and allow more market freedom. If someone chooses to use BTC guild, they probably have a reason to do so, not because tehy were forced into it.
Source: http://bitcoincharts.com/bitcoin/
submitted by cconrad0825 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

PBaaS- The Age of Merged Mining is Upon Us

PBaaS- The Age of Merged Mining is Upon Us

Full article found here:
https://medium.com/@myschlongis/pbaas-the-age-of-merged-mining-is-upon-us-687f432bcac3

Summary of article below:

satoshi
Founder
Sr. Member
Activity: 364 Merit: 1997 View Profile
Re: BitDNS and Generalizing Bitcoin
December 09, 2010, 09:02:42 PM
Merited by Traxo (1)
#222
I think it would be possible for BitDNS to be a completely separate network and separate block chain, yet share CPU power with Bitcoin. The only overlap is to make it so miners can search for proof-of-work for both networks simultaneously.
The networks wouldn't need any coordination. Miners would subscribe to both networks in parallel. They would scan SHA such that if they get a hit, they potentially solve both at once. A solution may be for just one of the networks if one network has a lower difficulty.
I think an external miner could call getwork on both programs and combine the work. Maybe call Bitcoin, get work from it, hand it to BitDNS getwork to combine into a combined work.
Instead of fragmentation, networks share and augment each other's total CPU power. This would solve the problem that if there are multiple networks, they are a danger to each other if the available CPU power gangs up on one. Instead, all networks in the world would share combined CPU power, increasing the total strength. It would make it easier for small networks to get started by tapping into a ready base of miners.
-Satoshi Nakimoto


These were the anonymously written, prophetic words of Satoshi Nakimoto, posted to bitcointalk nearly a decade ago and yet they describe a concept that today we are only truly realizing. What Satoshi describes is not only an elegant solution to many of today's cryptocurrency shortcomings but if implemented properly, could form the backbone for an entire crypto-economy of secure, scalable, and self sufficient chains, outside of the flawed one we currently have.
This new crypto-economy would need to be backed by a secure chain itself with immunity to 51% attacks and powerful cutting edge technological features supporting anonymity and protection of assets to pass on down to the interconnected chains.

One such cutting edge project is Verus Coin (https://veruscoin.io/).
The lead Technical Developer of Verus is a former VP at Microsoft who also co-founded Microsoft’s Java and .NET platforms.
Verus has a unique, new consensus algorithm called Proof of Power, 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. Verus utilizes zk-snarks tech zero-knowledge proofs and is not "forced private", allowing for both transparent and shielded (private) transactions along with private messages as well. They created their very own hardware equalizing algorithm VerusHash 2.0, that leverages the many hardware advantages intrinsic to modern CPU's architecture, enabling the most decentralizing hardware, CPUs (due to their virtually complete market penetration), to stay relevant as miners for the indefinite future. VerusHash 2.0 is specifically designed to better equalize hashrates across all mining hardware types, allowing CPUs and FPGAs to mine competitively on the same network and by favoring the latest CPUs over older types, has the additional benefit of being a defense against the centralizing potential of botnets.

Verus and the Verus Coin project are community driven, all open source (https://github.com/VerusCoin/VerusCoin) and they are also now currently running a test net of their all new protocol, PBaaS (Public Blockchain as a Service) with merged mining of up to 15 (including Verus) fully independent, secure, scalable chains that all share the properties of the parent chain described above. Check out their Discord to give merged mining a try for yourself.

I do know that merged mining as a concept has been around for a while. There are even some implementations out there too, but not on the scale of what Verus is doing. They are creating an ecosystem fully interconnected and yet independent blockchains that scale and because of their implementation (The bottom link on Merkle Mountain Ranges (MMRs)) they will all be able to be exchanged with each other and converted automatically, like a smart exchange without the need for buyers and sellers. What they are doing is truly revolutionary in it's one click chain creation ease and the fact that it is a massive network of chains (just like each of all the coins we have now) but where people can mine up to 15 projects at a time at no additional energy costs and all the created projects are fully protected. I do understand that other projects are doing great things as well and it was not my aim to downplay that but rather to highlight what can come next and fill in the holes left from a first generation blockchain network.



A Peek at the GUI (Graphical User Interface) version of the wallet
https://preview.redd.it/sa0dzgtyk5v21.jpg?width=1651&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=08f89d5fbb7682a6fbba105fa8819c906dffcb44
https://preview.redd.it/1f65bfk1l5v21.png?width=3840&format=png&auto=webp&s=daadea4ad6775ac68abad2754944f7afd4ee4e0a


A Peek at the CLI (Command Line Interface) version of the wallet (with GUI) courtesy of a community member.
https://preview.redd.it/pdzpu4p7l5v21.jpg?width=2444&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=40c17cd47c1d25c98de1e50947949f99dcbc484d


A helpful place for lots of useful information and if you want to learn more, check out their Medium page (https://medium.com/veruscoin)

A rough description of the concepts described above:

-PBaaS: or Public Blockchain as a Service is a revolutionary new take on the blockchain as a service model entirely unique to Verus that offers the tools and necessary means to build on and utilize blockchain technology for business or personal use. It is similar to using a web hosting service to build a website with, but rather than having to build one by yourself from scratch, the service provider supplies the basics and handles all the necessary tasks from general upkeep to infrastructure maintenance. Since Verus doesn't rely on a centralized authority to work, there isn't any one single point of failure in the network, so in the event of a hack, power failure, data breach or loss, Verus' system is immune while the other options aren't. Instead of relying on a centralized system, Verus elegantly does work for the public by utilizing the public to do work.

-Merge Mining: or auxiliary mining is a lesser known cryptographic concept that has been seldom discussed and even less so attempted, but can be found as far back as bitcointalk's earliest days. Unfortunately, development in this area of work has remained largely stagnant due to the numerous difficulties involved in coding it, coupled with the sheer complexity and vast scope involved in the programming work. Fortunately, the development team's years of experience and months of hard work have finally paid off, and now merge mining in it's true form is at last a reality. This means that a miner could find a block for Verus and now hypothetically also earn block rewards for several other projects at the exact same time! With literally nothing to lose, and significantly more to gain, it's a no brainer choice for miners. Now miners who mine for profit can make more with the same energy expenditure, while at the same time still have the option to speculatively mine and hold projects they really believe in or care about. Businesses and individual project creators will benefit too by being able to attach a newly formed project to the hashrate of a larger, more established one. This would provide security and reliability to new projects right away and in their earliest stages, a point where they are most vulnerable. Verus has created the foundation for which any person or business, whether small or large, can safely and easily enter into the blockchain.

A semi-visual descriptive paper on the immense benefits of utilizing Merkle mountain ranges, one of the many technologies implemented in Verus PBaaS- https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-May/012715.html




Also, full disclosure for readers or mods, I am also a member of this crypto community among several others and this should not diminish the value of it's content. I wrote this post to highlight a genuine technical achievement in cryptocurrency and if not here, then where do we discuss this?
The lead developer Michael 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.
What their team has managed to do (in testnet, but open to the public for testing) is truly unique in that they've already built a functional system of fully interconnected blockchains that each are also completely independent from one another and fully scalable, private, secure, and immune to 51% attacks. Public blockchain as a service is their ultimate goal of offering these near infinite, secure blockchains to project creators, mineable for near zero energy and protected from attacks. Secure voting, polling, and identity using the tech are on the not-too-distant horizon.
Even the briefest glance over any of their work and it is easy to see this is not just another bs post. I hope this complies with all the rules. If there is some other place to discuss cryptocurrency and the launch of an all new system within it, please let me know. Things keep getting removed without a word said why. I'm happy to do things the proper way.
submitted by Godballz to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

SOLO Mining setup instructions. CCminer Nevermore and QT / CLI wallet.

First, I do not solo mine myself, so I can not confirm if this setup pays. I do not have the hash to even consider trying. I can confirm ccminer gets work from the wallet and cards get hot. Enjoy!
 
EDIT: Setup tested on coin with lower difficulty. I got paid.
 
 
 
rpcuser=user rpcpassword=pass rpcbind=192.168.1.100:8766 rpcallowip=192.168.1.1/24 server=1 
 
Replace user, pass and ips to match your setup. You can make up your own usepass. You need to use the same ones when configuring ccminer. 192.168.1.100 needs to be changed to the IP of the machine running the wallet. This setup allows connections from all ips in the range 192.168.1.X
 
 
:mine ccminer.exe -a x16r -o http://192.168.1.100:8766 -u user -p pass -i 21 --no-longpoll --no-getwork --no-stratum --coinbase-addr=YOUR_RVN_ADDRESS_HERE ping -n 30 127.0.0.1 goto :mine 
 
Replace user, pass and IP to match your setup. The IP is to the machine running the wallet and the usepass are the ones you set in the first config file. And don't forget to add your RVN-address.
 
 
If you found this useful any donation would be welcome RVN: RFmtFb9GdZHvbvBW5hYB3s9VezJxeSfnz3  
   
 
#!/bin/bash until /path/to/ccminer -a x16r -o http://192.168.1.100:8766 -u user -p pass -i 21 --no-longpoll --no-getwork --no-stratum --coinbase-addr=YOUR_RVN_ADDRESS_HERE; do ping -c 30 127.0.0.1 done 
 
Replace user, pass and IP to match your setup. The IP is to the machine running the wallet and the usepass are the ones you set in the first config file. And don't forget to add your RVN-address.
 
 
 
If you found this useful any donation would be welcome RVN: RFmtFb9GdZHvbvBW5hYB3s9VezJxeSfnz3
    
Found errors or got suggestions? - please leave a comment or send me a message.
 
Useful links:   https://github.com/brian112358/nevermore-minereleases https://github.com/brian112358/nevermore-minewiki/Solo-mining https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/118/how-much-bitcoin-will-i-mine-right-now-with-hardware-x https://rvnstats.info/
submitted by fdoving to Ravencoin [link] [comments]

Making pooled mining immune to 51% attacks, selfish mining, etc. by bundling an SPV client into mining software.

This idea has been floating in my mind for a while, but I haven't seen anyone else mention it. Figured it was worth discussing.

The problem

The threat posed by pools is that they indirectly control large amounts of hashing power. Miners are mining blindly on whatever header the pool gives them, and hence can be made to attack the network at their leisure.

GetBlockTemplate

GetBlockTemplate was supposed to fix this problem by allowing miners to do their own transactions (and making what they're mining completely transparent). This works, but adoption is low for a few reasons:
TLDR: GBT is a great way to neuter the ability of pools to do bad things™, but it isn't widely deployed due to the resource requirements and setup effort of using it properly.
Most/All the big threats posed by a large pool boil down to:
In both cases, the fact that this is occuring is actually detectable regardless of mining protocol (getwork,stratum,GBT), because the parent block hash is part of the header the miner is hashing. So the information you need to know whether you're being used to attack the network has been available all along.

The suggestion

By bundling an SPV client into mining software, all miners can verify that they're building on top of a block that is:
  1. Known to the network (blocking selfish mining).
  2. The tip of the longest chain (blocking orphaning of other blocks/51% attacks).
If this isn't the case, they can switch to their backup pool.

Advantages of the approach:

Disadvantages:

Does this work, or am I missing something obvious?
submitted by ninja_parade to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

To arms Bitcoin community! Help us to complete this mining installation for the Zürich MoneyMuseum. We are not asking for funds. Only your expertise needed! 20$ tip if you give us the relevant clue to solve or mitigate our main problem. Nice pictures of the exhibition inside as well…

Edit:
A big thank you to all people who helped us we can now mine true pps with diff1! The people in this thread which have helped most have been awarded. I want to mention also the operator of btcmp.com denis2342 and Luke-Jr.
Actually looking at the miner screen in the Linux terminal helped a lot ;-). The pool constantly resigned to stratum with variable difficulty. We can now mine true pps with diff1. Getwork with long polling seems to be default after disabling stratum...
We will probably post again, when there is a video of the installation in action...
Again many thanks. Learned a lot.
Edit: Thank you for all the answeres so far! We will try different things now and report back. Tip bounty will be distrubuted as soon as we found out what finally does the trick. Ths could take a few days. The offerd tip will be distributed and very likeley a few others as well.
First of all, let me tell you that the Bitcoin Exhibition at the Zürich MoneyMuseum is most likely the biggest and most diverse of it’s kind. Please read more about the museum and the exhibition below.
Help us solve the following problem we experience with our “Muscle Powered Proof of Work” installation:
Me and a friend have invested a lot of time to build an installation for the Museum. It is basically a 10GHash/s miner and RapberryPi which is powered by a hand generator (Maxon DC motor with planetary gear). Here are some pictures of the installation, although not entirely put together yet. There are still some changes planned.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/0qcvl3wu4romhnt/AAAYF08lnVAy6W6KEepE7e2Ua?dl=0
Now let’s get to the core of our problem:
We are mining at the getwork diff1 pool btcmp.com as it is a true pps pool with getwork diff1. The visitors in the museum can power the generator for 2-3min and see directly how many Satoshis the "network" (actually pool but we don't want to confuse the visitors to much at that point) has given the museum for their work. This all works well so far but one problem remains. Sometimes the pool does not get a share from us for more than 40 seconds or even more than 60 in some cases. I have calculated that with 8.4 GHash/s we should find a share about every 0.5 seconds in average (diff1). I think when the pool gets a share it gets all the hashes as it then accounts for several Satoshis. Statistically we get per minute what we should get in theory. We would very much like to lower the time between the accepted shares by the pool, however. This would help to make the overall experience much smoother for the visitors.
Please look at this screenshot from MinePeon and answer some questions:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lb1jei4trc9kqe5/MinePeonScreenshot.png?dl=0
We see that we get a lot of diff1 hashes. However, only 11 shares/packages have been accepted. The Is there a possibility to set the miner SW so it submits to the pool as soon as a share is found? It seems to send them in packages which sometimes have 4-5 seconds in between but sometimes a much as 80 seconds. I would like to submit packages of hashes much more often. How can this be influenced?
What exactly are the Getworks (GW)?
What exactly are the Accepted ones (Acc)? This is where the TipBounty is. Help us to get a better Acc/diff1 ratio. Best would be 1:1.
What exactly are the rejected ones (Rej)?
What exactly are the discarded ones (Disc)?
What exactly are the difficulty one hashes (diff1)?
Now some of these questions seem very very basic but it is important for us to understand what these are and how we can influence these. We have a 1:1 correlation between the Acc and the pool side acknowledgement of shares/packages. So whenever the MinePeon shows one more for this value the pool value for last submitted share goes to “moments ago”.
Does the miner SW have a setting where we can set after how many diff1 hashes a package of hashes is sent to the pool? If no, do you have another idea why so few are sent? Ideally we would set it so the diff1 hashes are sent every 5 seconds or so, probably even more often.
Is stratum with fixed diff1 possible? If so, would it be better to use stratum?
Are there critical settings if we should know of? (we have tried --request-diff and --no-submit-stale)
We are using BFGMiner on MinePeon if that matters. We could switch to CGMiner if that would help. Any help is very much appreciated. The museum is doing a great job explaining Bitcoin basics. We had special focus on interactive learning and have several things to underline this.
I hope to hear back from you so we can improve our installation. Please don't hesitate to ask if you have further questions. We are both not mining experts.
Thanks for reading and AMA.
SimonBelmond
Current features of the Bitcoin exhibition at the Zürich MoneyMuseum:
Current Features:
  • Life screen with various stats/charts/parameters/transactions…
  • Printed infographics.
  • Muscle powered PoW: Hand generator with 5v and 3.5-5A output, Raspberry Pi, MinePeon, 5x Antminer U2+ plus a screen to show the hash-rate at the pool and/or in MinePeon web interface. This screen will not be hand powered. This installation will complement their coining die (go to 1:27 to see what I mean).
  • The Bitcoin mining evolution (CPU, GPU, FPGA, ASIC)
  • A few short (2-3 minutes) interviews.
  • Other wallets, Trezor, PiperWallet
  • ATM Prototype, functional
  • MoneyMuseum Bit-Cards
  • PiperWallet to use.
  • Casascius and other physical Bitcoins, Wallets (also some commemorative coins), Paper wallet like one out of the first Bitcoin (A)TM ever
  • Bitcoin Quiz
  • 12 Picture tours
    • Bitcoin for beginners
    • Bitcoin advanced
    • Debunking 13 Bitcoin myths
    • What you definitely have to know
    • The history of Bitcoin
    • Bitcoin und traditional forms of money
    • Alternatives to Bitcoin
    • Citations about Bitcoin
    • How do I open an account?
    • How do I get Bitcoin?
    • Bitcoin community and economy
    • Bitcoin as a platform
I see this as a good opportunity for Bitcoin, so let’s embrace it. I am especially excited to compare the traditional forms of money which used proof of work to the new money which also uses proof of work. I think in that context it will be much easier for the visitors to value this concept.
A lot of schools and other groups book guided tours at the museum. It is open on every Friday from December 05. On. Entry is free of charge.
Edit:Markdown, typos
submitted by SimonBelmond to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why BTCGuild is a bigger threat than you think (or: why 6 confirmations is not enough)

TL;DR: even 40% hash control is too big, and 6 confirmations is too few.
A lot of people have been worrying about the possibility of BTCGuild getting 51% of the mining power and pulling off a majority attack. Personally, I don't think it will; I believe that if it does they'll cut off getwork and drop down to 35% or however much, plus people might start leaving.
But even 35% is still a threat.
Consider the figures in Table 1 of this paper. Specifically, look at the success rates for reversing a 6-confirm transaction with 25% of the hashing power. It's about 5-8%. Do you really want to deal with BTCGuild having a 5-8% success rate at reversing a transaction? Obviously they're not going to try for tiny ones, but what if they try it on a transfer on the order of tens thousands of bitcoins? That's a couple hundred USD at today's prices; while that wouldn't hold in the resultant panic selling, it'd still be a sizeable loss.
A lot of people say 'well, BTCGuild wouldn't do that, because X and Y and Z'. I think this is an unreasonable defense. BTCGuild might not, because they're invested in BTC staying a strong currency. But someone who wants to see BTC fail would have reasons to try this. I'm not saying I think that the government or whoever is going to try to hack the BTCGuild servers and try this, but I think that given that the point of BTC is to be resilient to that sort of thing, we shouldn't be making it possible.
Another thing I see people say a lot is that people will notice. How? It's not like your miner is going to suddenly pop up a big "ACTIVATING EVIL MODE" dialog box. Plus, even when people do notice that it's been suspiciously long since BTCGuild found a block, it might just be probability. And even if it were confirmed that they're malicious, you'd have to wait for people to actually find it out and pull their mining power. There are altogether too many 'if's here.
The intermediate solution, if you're worried, is to wait for more than 10 transactions for high-value transactions. However, the transaction number required is extremely high; even with 100 transactions BTCGuild would have a roughly 0.5% chance of reversing the transfer. I'd like at least eight more zeroes in front of that number (this is supposed to be super-secure, right?), and for the transfer count to be no more than 25. According to this calculation, the success probability with nobody controlling more than 25% of the hash power and 25 confirmations is about 10-12; even with 10 confirmations it's 7 * 10-6, and with 6 it's 6 * 10-4. These are numbers I can live with, but I suspect they're still a lot higher than most people's intuition for how high the probabilities are.
submitted by MonadicTraversal to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Announcing new LTC pool! stratum, getwork, sms/mail notify, and more!

Greetings fellow miners,
I've been working with Bitcoins a while now, but I got tired, so I've started with Litecoins. But none of the existing pools offered all of the services I wanted, so I decided to setup my own. Currently I'm developing the frontend to provide a better user experience. Requests for popular or usefull features can also be added on demand. The pool is quite new and the first block is not yet found, but all calculations I've done indicates that the first block will be found in one week, with only myself mining.
Currently, it's a PPLNS reward system, but I'm planning to make it possible to choose between PPLNS and PPS per pool worker. I also plan to rewrite the whole frontend in the future.
The url is: https://coinpool.in
Features:
IRC channels are available on Freenode (#coinpool.in) and I2P (#coinpool), and I will add forum if needed.
I'll hope you join me!
Best regards,
Meeh
https://coinpool.in
submitted by meeh420 to litecoinmining [link] [comments]

Would this mitigate the double-spend potential of a 51% attack?

After looking at cgminer and bfgminer source code I noticed both blindly include the transactions sent over in response to their getblocktemplate RPC calls.
What if instead, the mining software sourced its transactions from random nodes across the network and included those in their blocks and always dropped the ones coming directly from the node they requested the template from? That way, any double-spending transactions wouldn't make it into the new blocks as presumably they'd only be sent in response to getblocktemplate/getwork anyway in order to be effective.
submitted by andyd00d to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

P2Pool Error messages within shell window (win 10 pro)

Hi all,
Newbie trying to run my own P2Pool node for VTC and within the shell window periodically I start seeing the below error msg's in 15 second blurts, then it goes back to mining normal then all the sudden I will start seeing these error messages again.
Error Message in P2Pool shell window:
Error getting work from bitcoind: Traceback (most recent call last): File "twisted\internet\defer.pyc", line 653, in _runCallbacks File "twisted\internet\defer.pyc", line 1357, in gotResult File "twisted\internet\defer.pyc", line 1299, in _inlineCallbacks File "twisted\python\failure.pyc", line 393, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator
--- --- File "p2pool\util\deferral.pyc", line 41, in f File "twisted\internet\defer.pyc", line 1299, in _inlineCallbacks File "twisted\python\failure.pyc", line 393, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator File "p2pool\bitcoin\helper.pyc", line 47, in getwork File "twisted\internet\defer.pyc", line 1299, in _inlineCallbacks File "twisted\python\failure.pyc", line 393, in throwExceptionIntoGenerator File "p2pool\util\jsonrpc.pyc", line 126, in _http_do
twisted.web.error.Error: 500 Internal Server Error
Worker VvstnCT7shwVwg1JBh3du41dGMkq6V2gC1 submitted share more than once!
Does anyone know what it means? I'm generating VTC coins, but get these messages when the coins are being mined. Please help this newbie!
submitted by stratatrader to VertcoinMining [link] [comments]

Why isn't GHash/CEX.io addressing the community? BTC Guild used mitigation efforts in the past when they breached thresholds - GHash/CEX promised the same but then failed to follow through. Why haven't they explained why or made any comment?

The community has long expressed it's concern over any pool owning more then 50% of the mining network
What's going on?
Yesterday GHash/CEX.io's mining pool breached 51% of the hashing power in the bitcoin transaction network. This is dangerous because when a pool begins to regularly be above certain hashing power thresholds, there are weaknesses in the bitcoin transaction network that can be exploited.
In a rising value currency, such weaknesses are flat out not acceptable. These security flaws become exposed when the risk of a 51% attack is exposed.
How have other pools handled this in the past?
In 2013, BTC Guild issued mitigation guidlines incase their pool began to breach certain thresholds of the mining network.
bitcointalk link
If Pool Speed is Over 40% of Network
BTC Guild will begin limiting the creation of new accounts. Additionally, the fee on PPS will be increased from 5% to 7.5% on all new miners, and will be moved to 7.5% on old miners after the difficulty changes. PPLNS will remain at the 3% + tx fees rate initially.
If Pool Speed is Over 45% of Network
BTC Guild will remove all getwork based pool servers within 24 hours. This is expected to reduce the pool by about 3.5 TH/s, or roughly 15% as of this post.
If Pool Speed is Over 45% of Network After Getwork is Removed
PPLNS fee will be raised to 4%, and new registrations will be completely closed off until speed drops back under 40%.
What is GHash/CEX's Mitigation Plan?
We don't know. They have expressed goodwill towards the community but have not given any guidelines of their plan of action.
GHash.IO does not have any intentions to execute a 51% attack, as it will do serious damage to the Bitcoin community, of which we are part of. On the contrary, our plans are to expand the bitcoin community as well as utilise the hashing power to develop a greater bitcoin economic structure. If something happened to Bitcoin as a whole it could risk our investments in physical hardware, damage those who love Bitcoin and we see no benefit from having 51% stake in mining
-GHash/CEX
This was addressed a week before they breached the 50% threshold.
CryptoCoin News interview with Jeffrey Smith, Chief Info Officer
CCN: What has ghash.io learned from the last time this happened [gaining large percentages of the hashing power?]
Jeffrey Smith: We understand that the Bitcoin community strongly reacts to GHash.IO’s percentage of the total hash rate. However, we would never do anything to harm the Bitcoin economy; we believe in it. We have invested all our effort, time and money into the development of the Bitcoin economy. We agree that mining should be decentralised, but you cannot blame GHash.IO for being the #1 mining pool.
CCN: What steps were put in place to ensure something like this didn’t happen again? (stop accepting miners when you guys are at 50%?)
Jeffrey Smith:
Just yesterday, they repeated the same mantra. That they are coming up with a solution very soon™.
via CEX's Twitter
We are not intending to capture the 51% of the overall #Bitcoin hashrate. Working on solutions for decentralising Bitcoin mining. Stay tuned
GHash/CEX, can you please address the community's concerns? Your actions currently are making us very worried. Not talking to us is only making us more anxious and frustrated.
There should have been clear guidelines beforehand, and constantly prolonging this is making things worse.
tl;dr?: GHash/CEX.io made promises to not breach certain thresholds in the past. They have broke these promises and not addressed the concerns of the community
submitted by ForestOfGrins to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why we can't just apply Bitcoin changes naively

One of the questions that comes up frequently is "If we're just pulling in changes from Bitcoin, where does the time go?", and as I've just spent a couple of hours hunting down something with langerhans, now's probably a good time for a breakdown.
To start with, we're looking at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/4100 , so that's fairly meaty set of changes. It touches the mining protocol, which is where things get problematic, though. First of all, they're replacing the mining system in Bitcoin. Apply those same changes to Dogecoin, and it breaks. Adapt it to Scrpyt, and you're closer, but there are design differences in Scrypt (the same differences that were meant to make it ASIC resistant) that mean it can't be used the same way too.
Secondly, when the RPC "getwork" call went, it left "getworkaux" hanging, so there's a decision to be made on whether we hybridize Bitcoin's code to keep getworkaux functioning, or rip it out. In the end we've taken the decision to remove getworkaux, as everyone (in theory) should be using getauxblock instead.
Then... there's subtleties in differences between SHA2 and Scrypt. Again, Scrypt is a lot slower, and targets much higher, so the optimisations in the miner are subtly incompatible. It works well enough to pass basic testing, but in terms of performance on one specific test network is suddenly 10x slower. So we end up tweaking the values used to better match Dogecoin.
Now... we're definitely moving towards automation. There's 900-ish patches left, which at the current rate would take us through to summer. I've been working on tools to automatically determine how to apply patches from Bitcoin and automate as much of that process as possible, so all we require human intervention for is code review afterwards. Hopefully that will also let us expand the number of developers available for reviewing the code, which is the main time sink right now.
submitted by rnicoll to dogecoindev [link] [comments]

What is the plausibility (and impact) of the mining algorithm being "cracked"?

Forgive my ignorance here, but I was informed by someone with knowledge on the subject that the mining algorithm for bitcoin has been "cracked" (his word).
The individual is being purposefully vague, but implied that an update would need to be implemented by the bitcoin devs in the next few weeks when the specifics become public. He also mentioned that ASICs developed for the current algorithm would be inherently obsolete with the update.
My understanding of how mining works is that it is essentially a getwork proof of doing SHA256 hashes. The inherent security of SHA256 makes me wary of there being any truth to the claim, but - suspending that thought - if such a change was forced, the following would be some of the impacts:
Note: I'm simply asking for input on how this might work, not purporting that this is truly accurate information.
submitted by kancis to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Are we putting too much trust in pool operators?

Security in the bitcoin network is based on no single person having > 50% of the hashing power. However when mining in a pool you are not providing hashes for your own generated blocks, but providing work on behalf of the pool operator. The pool operator is the one who builds the blocks the pool members seem to only provide the hashing. I don't see any evidence that the mining clients that connect to pool actually verify the blocks the pools are creating.
The getwork RPC call definitely doesn't give enough for the miner to validate anything, the newer method getblocktemplate seems to give the individual transaction data but is this being fully used to validate what the pool operator is doing? Typically I also found that pool mining I don't even need to sync the blockchain so again seems little verification is happing locally.
My question is basically if a pool operator went rouge and started attacking the network, would this get detected immediately? Currently no pool has > 50% however the worst case would be if a few got together a did a coordinated attack, then they easily could get > 50% of the hashing power.
I imagine there is something that protects the network I am not aware of, still learning how this all works.
submitted by martinr22 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Having trouble with FPGA(Altera DE2 board) mining

I've been trying to mine with a DE2 board, and it keeps giving me this error
ERROR: Unable to getwork. Reason: key "result" not known in dictionary.
Anybody have any idea why?
I'm using The Open Source FPGA Bitcoin Miner
I have a regular DE2, not a DE2-115, and I managed to get the correct sof file to set it up (can't remember where I got it from though), so that's probably not the problem here..
I've tried using the mining_proxy, as someone suggested on the same fourm, but I can't seem to get it to work at all.. In fact, I have no idea how I was supposed to make it work; I even tried the proxy with my GPU and still couldn't get it to work.
the .bat files I used were
mining_proxy -nm -o teamdoge.com -p 3333
cudaminer.exe -o http://localhost:8332/ -O username:pass
Maybe if I get this working correctly, it'll actually work this time?
It would be awesome if someone could help me out here, I don't know much about mining in general as I started out only yesterday.
Thank you in advance!
submitted by KimchiFlavored to dogecoin [link] [comments]

[Informational] [CC0] GBT: Freedom Mining

GBT

The getblocktemplate protocol, or GBT, is a decentralized mining protocol that was developed in 2012 by Luke-Jr as a modern successor to the dated getwork protocol. The design of GBT gives contributing pool hashers more individual control over the blocks they are contributing towards. This is seen as desirable because it distributes the network mining authority more widely, instead of simply amongst a small set of mining pool operators.
Not many pools support the protocol, but there are two pools where it can be used: Bitminer and Eligius.
The protocol uses a series of JSON requests to work through the mining process. First the hasher gets the basic block template to start work against. Then, unlike in a centralized mining pool configuration, the hasher individually goes through all the transactions they have verified to include in the block, building the transactions' merkle root signature to use for their block hash. The hash of all the transactions is then combined with the block template to create the block header to hash against. While hashing, a hasher can request that new transaction data be signaled to him so that he can recalculate the transaction merkle root.
The origin of this protocol was in improvements forrrestv made so that P2Pool could use getmemorypool over JSON-RPC to allow decentralized miners to add transactions to their blocks. Luke-Jr expanded on that work to provide a solution for his Eligius pool, and created a solution that served as a simple compromise between centralized pools and a new system like P2Pool. Luke over time has tried to promote the broad use of GTB by standardizing the concept in BIP 22 and BIP 23, and by creating open source software to make its use easier.
submitted by pb1x to writingforbitcoin [link] [comments]

UPDATE: Virus found on my mining rig

Context here
I was able to run a wireshark on the packets and traced down what and where the data was coming from. This is the TCP Stream that lead me to 50btc
Authorization: Basic anJvZHJpZ3VlejQ0MkBvdXRsb29rLmNvbTpwYXNzd29yZA== Host: pool.50btc.com:8332 Accept: */* Accept-Encoding: deflate, gzip Content-type: application/json X-Mining-Extensions: longpoll midstate rollntime submitold Content-Length: 44 User-Agent: cgminer 2.10.4 {"method": "getwork", "params": [], "id":0} HTTP/1.1 200 OK server: 50BTC X-Long-Polling: http://pool.50btc.com:8331/LP X-Blocknum: 231342 X-Roll-NTime: expire=120 Content-Length: 607 Content-Type: application/json;charset=ISO-8859-1 { "error": null, "id": 0, "result": { "data": "000000025ecbc41aa5897932445af6485e044d24faedffe58daae1ae00000212000000007655b172b85920f3f03f8290b6abc4e6fb684bc374b3a89d6097a01a518fc45e516b00331a022fbe00000000000000800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080020000", "hash1": "00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000008000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000010000", "midstate": "50810233b8406896d763a6a432c16bda68080ecf1740d2e5336d6292af334dad", "target": "ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff00000000" } } 
So I emailed the pool and this is the reponse to me telling them they have fraudulent miners.
Hello, *!
Thanks ofr the feedback. Suspicious accounts was blocked, if you'll find any more bots, please let us know.
Your help is much appreciated! Best regards, team 50btc.com
Kudos to 50btc.com for taking care of the issue and if you find that your GPU is being used while your PC is idle start by looking at the task manager as regular virus programs will no detect miners yet. Malware Bytes will tag cgminer and others as PUP (Potentially unwanted programs) but this is only on a full scan. Track down the offending exe and before you delete it run a wireshark and see where it is mining too.
Be safe out there.
submitted by ruffneck123 to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Core 0.10.0 released | Wladimir | Feb 16 2015

Wladimir on Feb 16 2015:
Bitcoin Core version 0.10.0 is now available from:
https://bitcoin.org/bin/0.10.0/
This is a new major version release, bringing both new features and
bug fixes.
Please report bugs using the issue tracker at github:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues
The whole distribution is also available as torrent:
https://bitcoin.org/bin/0.10.0/bitcoin-0.10.0.torrent
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:170c61fe09dafecfbb97cb4dccd32173383f4e68&dn;=0.10.0&tr;=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.openbittorrent.com%3A80%2Fannounce&tr;=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.publicbt.com%3A80%2Fannounce&tr;=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.ccc.de%3A80%2Fannounce&tr;=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.coppersurfer.tk%3A6969&tr;=udp%3A%2F%2Fopen.demonii.com%3A1337&ws;=https%3A%2F%2Fbitcoin.org%2Fbin%2F
Upgrading and downgrading

How to Upgrade
If you are running an older version, shut it down. Wait until it has completely
shut down (which might take a few minutes for older versions), then run the
installer (on Windows) or just copy over /Applications/Bitcoin-Qt (on Mac) or
bitcoind/bitcoin-qt (on Linux).
Downgrading warning
Because release 0.10.0 makes use of headers-first synchronization and parallel
block download (see further), the block files and databases are not
backwards-compatible with older versions of Bitcoin Core or other software:
  • Blocks will be stored on disk out of order (in the order they are
received, really), which makes it incompatible with some tools or
other programs. Reindexing using earlier versions will also not work
anymore as a result of this.
  • The block index database will now hold headers for which no block is
stored on disk, which earlier versions won't support.
If you want to be able to downgrade smoothly, make a backup of your entire data
directory. Without this your node will need start syncing (or importing from
bootstrap.dat) anew afterwards. It is possible that the data from a completely
synchronised 0.10 node may be usable in older versions as-is, but this is not
supported and may break as soon as the older version attempts to reindex.
This does not affect wallet forward or backward compatibility.
Notable changes

Faster synchronization
Bitcoin Core now uses 'headers-first synchronization'. This means that we first
ask peers for block headers (a total of 27 megabytes, as of December 2014) and
validate those. In a second stage, when the headers have been discovered, we
download the blocks. However, as we already know about the whole chain in
advance, the blocks can be downloaded in parallel from all available peers.
In practice, this means a much faster and more robust synchronization. On
recent hardware with a decent network link, it can be as little as 3 hours
for an initial full synchronization. You may notice a slower progress in the
very first few minutes, when headers are still being fetched and verified, but
it should gain speed afterwards.
A few RPCs were added/updated as a result of this:
  • getblockchaininfo now returns the number of validated headers in addition to
the number of validated blocks.
  • getpeerinfo lists both the number of blocks and headers we know we have in
common with each peer. While synchronizing, the heights of the blocks that we
have requested from peers (but haven't received yet) are also listed as
'inflight'.
  • A new RPC getchaintips lists all known branches of the block chain,
including those we only have headers for.
Transaction fee changes
This release automatically estimates how high a transaction fee (or how
high a priority) transactions require to be confirmed quickly. The default
settings will create transactions that confirm quickly; see the new
'txconfirmtarget' setting to control the tradeoff between fees and
confirmation times. Fees are added by default unless the 'sendfreetransactions'
setting is enabled.
Prior releases used hard-coded fees (and priorities), and would
sometimes create transactions that took a very long time to confirm.
Statistics used to estimate fees and priorities are saved in the
data directory in the fee_estimates.dat file just before
program shutdown, and are read in at startup.
New command line options for transaction fee changes:
  • -txconfirmtarget=n : create transactions that have enough fees (or priority)
so they are likely to begin confirmation within n blocks (default: 1). This setting
is over-ridden by the -paytxfee option.
  • -sendfreetransactions : Send transactions as zero-fee transactions if possible
(default: 0)
New RPC commands for fee estimation:
  • estimatefee nblocks : Returns approximate fee-per-1,000-bytes needed for
a transaction to begin confirmation within nblocks. Returns -1 if not enough
transactions have been observed to compute a good estimate.
  • estimatepriority nblocks : Returns approximate priority needed for
a zero-fee transaction to begin confirmation within nblocks. Returns -1 if not
enough free transactions have been observed to compute a good
estimate.
RPC access control changes
Subnet matching for the purpose of access control is now done
by matching the binary network address, instead of with string wildcard matching.
For the user this means that -rpcallowip takes a subnet specification, which can be
  • a single IP address (e.g. 1.2.3.4 or fe80::0012:3456:789a:bcde)
  • a network/CIDR (e.g. 1.2.3.0/24 or fe80::0000/64)
  • a network/netmask (e.g. 1.2.3.4/255.255.255.0 or fe80::0012:3456:789a:bcde/ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff)
An arbitrary number of -rpcallow arguments can be given. An incoming connection will be accepted if its origin address
matches one of them.
For example:
| 0.9.x and before | 0.10.x |
|--------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|
| -rpcallowip=192.168.1.1 | -rpcallowip=192.168.1.1 (unchanged) |
| -rpcallowip=192.168.1.* | -rpcallowip=192.168.1.0/24 |
| -rpcallowip=192.168.* | -rpcallowip=192.168.0.0/16 |
| -rpcallowip=* (dangerous!) | -rpcallowip=::/0 (still dangerous!) |
Using wildcards will result in the rule being rejected with the following error in debug.log:
 Error: Invalid -rpcallowip subnet specification: *. Valid are a single IP (e.g. 1.2.3.4), a network/netmask (e.g. 1.2.3.4/255.255.255.0) or a network/CIDR (e.g. 1.2.3.4/24). 
REST interface
A new HTTP API is exposed when running with the -rest flag, which allows
unauthenticated access to public node data.
It is served on the same port as RPC, but does not need a password, and uses
plain HTTP instead of JSON-RPC.
Assuming a local RPC server running on port 8332, it is possible to request:
In every case, EXT can be bin (for raw binary data), hex (for hex-encoded
binary) or json.
For more details, see the doc/REST-interface.md document in the repository.
RPC Server "Warm-Up" Mode
The RPC server is started earlier now, before most of the expensive
intialisations like loading the block index. It is available now almost
immediately after starting the process. However, until all initialisations
are done, it always returns an immediate error with code -28 to all calls.
This new behaviour can be useful for clients to know that a server is already
started and will be available soon (for instance, so that they do not
have to start it themselves).
Improved signing security
For 0.10 the security of signing against unusual attacks has been
improved by making the signatures constant time and deterministic.
This change is a result of switching signing to use libsecp256k1
instead of OpenSSL. Libsecp256k1 is a cryptographic library
optimized for the curve Bitcoin uses which was created by Bitcoin
Core developer Pieter Wuille.
There exist attacks[1] against most ECC implementations where an
attacker on shared virtual machine hardware could extract a private
key if they could cause a target to sign using the same key hundreds
of times. While using shared hosts and reusing keys are inadvisable
for other reasons, it's a better practice to avoid the exposure.
OpenSSL has code in their source repository for derandomization
and reduction in timing leaks that we've eagerly wanted to use for a
long time, but this functionality has still not made its
way into a released version of OpenSSL. Libsecp256k1 achieves
significantly stronger protection: As far as we're aware this is
the only deployed implementation of constant time signing for
the curve Bitcoin uses and we have reason to believe that
libsecp256k1 is better tested and more thoroughly reviewed
than the implementation in OpenSSL.
[1] https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/161.pdf
Watch-only wallet support
The wallet can now track transactions to and from wallets for which you know
all addresses (or scripts), even without the private keys.
This can be used to track payments without needing the private keys online on a
possibly vulnerable system. In addition, it can help for (manual) construction
of multisig transactions where you are only one of the signers.
One new RPC, importaddress, is added which functions similarly to
importprivkey, but instead takes an address or script (in hexadecimal) as
argument. After using it, outputs credited to this address or script are
considered to be received, and transactions consuming these outputs will be
considered to be sent.
The following RPCs have optional support for watch-only:
getbalance, listreceivedbyaddress, listreceivedbyaccount,
listtransactions, listaccounts, listsinceblock, gettransaction. See the
RPC documentation for those methods for more information.
Compared to using getrawtransaction, this mechanism does not require
-txindex, scales better, integrates better with the wallet, and is compatible
with future block chain pruning functionality. It does mean that all relevant
addresses need to added to the wallet before the payment, though.
Consensus library
Starting from 0.10.0, the Bitcoin Core distribution includes a consensus library.
The purpose of this library is to make the verification functionality that is
critical to Bitcoin's consensus available to other applications, e.g. to language
bindings such as [python-bitcoinlib](https://pypi.python.org/pypi/python-bitcoinlib) or
alternative node implementations.
This library is called libbitcoinconsensus.so (or, .dll for Windows).
Its interface is defined in the C header [bitcoinconsensus.h](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/0.10/src/script/bitcoinconsensus.h).
In its initial version the API includes two functions:
  • bitcoinconsensus_verify_script verifies a script. It returns whether the indicated input of the provided serialized transaction
correctly spends the passed scriptPubKey under additional constraints indicated by flags
  • bitcoinconsensus_version returns the API version, currently at an experimental 0
The functionality is planned to be extended to e.g. UTXO management in upcoming releases, but the interface
for existing methods should remain stable.
Standard script rules relaxed for P2SH addresses
The IsStandard() rules have been almost completely removed for P2SH
redemption scripts, allowing applications to make use of any valid
script type, such as "n-of-m OR y", hash-locked oracle addresses, etc.
While the Bitcoin protocol has always supported these types of script,
actually using them on mainnet has been previously inconvenient as
standard Bitcoin Core nodes wouldn't relay them to miners, nor would
most miners include them in blocks they mined.
bitcoin-tx
It has been observed that many of the RPC functions offered by bitcoind are
"pure functions", and operate independently of the bitcoind wallet. This
included many of the RPC "raw transaction" API functions, such as
createrawtransaction.
bitcoin-tx is a newly introduced command line utility designed to enable easy
manipulation of bitcoin transactions. A summary of its operation may be
obtained via "bitcoin-tx --help" Transactions may be created or signed in a
manner similar to the RPC raw tx API. Transactions may be updated, deleting
inputs or outputs, or appending new inputs and outputs. Custom scripts may be
easily composed using a simple text notation, borrowed from the bitcoin test
suite.
This tool may be used for experimenting with new transaction types, signing
multi-party transactions, and many other uses. Long term, the goal is to
deprecate and remove "pure function" RPC API calls, as those do not require a
server round-trip to execute.
Other utilities "bitcoin-key" and "bitcoin-script" have been proposed, making
key and script operations easily accessible via command line.
Mining and relay policy enhancements
Bitcoin Core's block templates are now for version 3 blocks only, and any mining
software relying on its getblocktemplate must be updated in parallel to use
libblkmaker either version 0.4.2 or any version from 0.5.1 onward.
If you are solo mining, this will affect you the moment you upgrade Bitcoin
Core, which must be done prior to BIP66 achieving its 951/1001 status.
If you are mining with the stratum mining protocol: this does not affect you.
If you are mining with the getblocktemplate protocol to a pool: this will affect
you at the pool operator's discretion, which must be no later than BIP66
achieving its 951/1001 status.
The prioritisetransaction RPC method has been added to enable miners to
manipulate the priority of transactions on an individual basis.
Bitcoin Core now supports BIP 22 long polling, so mining software can be
notified immediately of new templates rather than having to poll periodically.
Support for BIP 23 block proposals is now available in Bitcoin Core's
getblocktemplate method. This enables miners to check the basic validity of
their next block before expending work on it, reducing risks of accidental
hardforks or mining invalid blocks.
Two new options to control mining policy:
  • -datacarrier=0/1 : Relay and mine "data carrier" (OP_RETURN) transactions
if this is 1.
  • -datacarriersize=n : Maximum size, in bytes, we consider acceptable for
"data carrier" outputs.
The relay policy has changed to more properly implement the desired behavior of not
relaying free (or very low fee) transactions unless they have a priority above the
AllowFreeThreshold(), in which case they are relayed subject to the rate limiter.
BIP 66: strict DER encoding for signatures
Bitcoin Core 0.10 implements BIP 66, which introduces block version 3, and a new
consensus rule, which prohibits non-DER signatures. Such transactions have been
non-standard since Bitcoin v0.8.0 (released in February 2013), but were
technically still permitted inside blocks.
This change breaks the dependency on OpenSSL's signature parsing, and is
required if implementations would want to remove all of OpenSSL from the
consensus code.
The same miner-voting mechanism as in BIP 34 is used: when 751 out of a
sequence of 1001 blocks have version number 3 or higher, the new consensus
rule becomes active for those blocks. When 951 out of a sequence of 1001
blocks have version number 3 or higher, it becomes mandatory for all blocks.
Backward compatibility with current mining software is NOT provided, thus miners
should read the first paragraph of "Mining and relay policy enhancements" above.
0.10.0 Change log

Detailed release notes follow. This overview includes changes that affect external
behavior, not code moves, refactors or string updates.
RPC:
  • f923c07 Support IPv6 lookup in bitcoin-cli even when IPv6 only bound on localhost
  • b641c9c Fix addnode "onetry": Connect with OpenNetworkConnection
  • 171ca77 estimatefee / estimatepriority RPC methods
  • b750cf1 Remove cli functionality from bitcoind
  • f6984e8 Add "chain" to getmininginfo, improve help in getblockchaininfo
  • 99ddc6c Add nLocalServices info to RPC getinfo
  • cf0c47b Remove getwork() RPC call
  • 2a72d45 prioritisetransaction
  • e44fea5 Add an option -datacarrier to allow users to disable relaying/mining data carrier transactions
  • 2ec5a3d Prevent easy RPC memory exhaustion attack
  • d4640d7 Added argument to getbalance to include watchonly addresses and fixed errors in balance calculation
  • 83f3543 Added argument to listaccounts to include watchonly addresses
  • 952877e Showing 'involvesWatchonly' property for transactions returned by 'listtransactions' and 'listsinceblock'. It is only appended when the transaction involves a watchonly address
  • d7d5d23 Added argument to listtransactions and listsinceblock to include watchonly addresses
  • f87ba3d added includeWatchonly argument to 'gettransaction' because it affects balance calculation
  • 0fa2f88 added includedWatchonly argument to listreceivedbyaddress/...account
  • 6c37f7f getrawchangeaddress: fail when keypool exhausted and wallet locked
  • ff6a7af getblocktemplate: longpolling support
  • c4a321f Add peerid to getpeerinfo to allow correlation with the logs
  • 1b4568c Add vout to ListTransactions output
  • b33bd7a Implement "getchaintips" RPC command to monitor blockchain forks
  • 733177e Remove size limit in RPC client, keep it in server
  • 6b5b7cb Categorize rpc help overview
  • 6f2c26a Closely track mempool byte total. Add "getmempoolinfo" RPC
  • aa82795 Add detailed network info to getnetworkinfo RPC
  • 01094bd Don't reveal whether password is <20 or >20 characters in RPC
  • 57153d4 rpc: Compute number of confirmations of a block from block height
  • ff36cbe getnetworkinfo: export local node's client sub-version string
  • d14d7de SanitizeString: allow '(' and ')'
  • 31d6390 Fixed setaccount accepting foreign address
  • b5ec5fe update getnetworkinfo help with subversion
  • ad6e601 RPC additions after headers-first
  • 33dfbf5 rpc: Fix leveldb iterator leak, and flush before gettxoutsetinfo
  • 2aa6329 Enable customising node policy for datacarrier data size with a -datacarriersize option
  • f877aaa submitblock: Use a temporary CValidationState to determine accurately the outcome of ProcessBlock
  • e69a587 submitblock: Support for returning specific rejection reasons
  • af82884 Add "warmup mode" for RPC server
  • e2655e0 Add unauthenticated HTTP REST interface to public blockchain data
  • 683dc40 Disable SSLv3 (in favor of TLS) for the RPC client and server
  • 44b4c0d signrawtransaction: validate private key
  • 9765a50 Implement BIP 23 Block Proposal
  • f9de17e Add warning comment to getinfo
Command-line options:
  • ee21912 Use netmasks instead of wildcards for IP address matching
  • deb3572 Add -rpcbind option to allow binding RPC port on a specific interface
  • 96b733e Add -version option to get just the version
  • 1569353 Add -stopafterblockimport option
  • 77cbd46 Let -zapwallettxes recover transaction meta data
  • 1c750db remove -tor compatibility code (only allow -onion)
  • 4aaa017 rework help messages for fee-related options
  • 4278b1d Clarify error message when invalid -rpcallowip
  • 6b407e4 -datadir is now allowed in config files
  • bdd5b58 Add option -sysperms to disable 077 umask (create new files with system default umask)
  • cbe39a3 Add "bitcoin-tx" command line utility and supporting modules
  • dbca89b Trigger -alertnotify if network is upgrading without you
  • ad96e7c Make -reindex cope with out-of-order blocks
  • 16d5194 Skip reindexed blocks individually
  • ec01243 --tracerpc option for regression tests
  • f654f00 Change -genproclimit default to 1
  • 3c77714 Make -proxy set all network types, avoiding a connect leak
  • 57be955 Remove -printblock, -printblocktree, and -printblockindex
  • ad3d208 remove -maxorphanblocks config parameter since it is no longer functional
Block and transaction handling:
  • 7a0e84d ProcessGetData(): abort if a block file is missing from disk
  • 8c93bf4 LoadBlockIndexDB(): Require block db reindex if any blk*.dat files are missing
  • 77339e5 Get rid of the static chainMostWork (optimization)
  • 4e0eed8 Allow ActivateBestChain to release its lock on cs_main
  • 18e7216 Push cs_mains down in ProcessBlock
  • fa126ef Avoid undefined behavior using CFlatData in CScript serialization
  • 7f3b4e9 Relax IsStandard rules for pay-to-script-hash transactions
  • c9a0918 Add a skiplist to the CBlockIndex structure
  • bc42503 Use unordered_map for CCoinsViewCache with salted hash (optimization)
  • d4d3fbd Do not flush the cache after every block outside of IBD (optimization)
  • ad08d0b Bugfix: make CCoinsViewMemPool support pruned entries in underlying cache
  • 5734d4d Only remove actualy failed blocks from setBlockIndexValid
  • d70bc52 Rework block processing benchmark code
  • 714a3e6 Only keep setBlockIndexValid entries that are possible improvements
  • ea100c7 Reduce maximum coinscache size during verification (reduce memory usage)
  • 4fad8e6 Reject transactions with excessive numbers of sigops
  • b0875eb Allow BatchWrite to destroy its input, reducing copying (optimization)
  • 92bb6f2 Bypass reloading blocks from disk (optimization)
  • 2e28031 Perform CVerifyDB on pcoinsdbview instead of pcoinsTip (reduce memory usage)
  • ab15b2e Avoid copying undo data (optimization)
  • 341735e Headers-first synchronization
  • afc32c5 Fix rebuild-chainstate feature and improve its performance
  • e11b2ce Fix large reorgs
  • ed6d1a2 Keep information about all block files in memory
  • a48f2d6 Abstract context-dependent block checking from acceptance
  • 7e615f5 Fixed mempool sync after sending a transaction
  • 51ce901 Improve chainstate/blockindex disk writing policy
  • a206950 Introduce separate flushing modes
  • 9ec75c5 Add a locking mechanism to IsInitialBlockDownload to ensure it never goes from false to true
  • 868d041 Remove coinbase-dependant transactions during reorg
  • 723d12c Remove txn which are invalidated by coinbase maturity during reorg
  • 0cb8763 Check against MANDATORY flags prior to accepting to mempool
  • 8446262 Reject headers that build on an invalid parent
  • 008138c Bugfix: only track UTXO modification after lookup
P2P protocol and network code:
  • f80cffa Do not trigger a DoS ban if SCRIPT_VERIFY_NULLDUMMY fails
  • c30329a Add testnet DNS seed of Alex Kotenko
  • 45a4baf Add testnet DNS seed of Andreas Schildbach
  • f1920e8 Ping automatically every 2 minutes (unconditionally)
  • 806fd19 Allocate receive buffers in on the fly
  • 6ecf3ed Display unknown commands received
  • aa81564 Track peers' available blocks
  • caf6150 Use async name resolving to improve net thread responsiveness
  • 9f4da19 Use pong receive time rather than processing time
  • 0127a9b remove SOCKS4 support from core and GUI, use SOCKS5
  • 40f5cb8 Send rejects and apply DoS scoring for errors in direct block validation
  • dc942e6 Introduce whitelisted peers
  • c994d2e prevent SOCKET leak in BindListenPort()
  • a60120e Add built-in seeds for .onion
  • 60dc8e4 Allow -onlynet=onion to be used
  • 3a56de7 addrman: Do not propagate obviously poor addresses onto the network
  • 6050ab6 netbase: Make SOCKS5 negotiation interruptible
  • 604ee2a Remove tx from AlreadyAskedFor list once we receive it, not when we process it
  • efad808 Avoid reject message feedback loops
  • 71697f9 Separate protocol versioning from clientversion
  • 20a5f61 Don't relay alerts to peers before version negotiation
  • b4ee0bd Introduce preferred download peers
  • 845c86d Do not use third party services for IP detection
  • 12a49ca Limit the number of new addressses to accumulate
  • 35e408f Regard connection failures as attempt for addrman
  • a3a7317 Introduce 10 minute block download timeout
  • 3022e7d Require sufficent priority for relay of free transactions
  • 58fda4d Update seed IPs, based on bitcoin.sipa.be crawler data
  • 18021d0 Remove bitnodes.io from dnsseeds.
Validation:
  • 6fd7ef2 Also switch the (unused) verification code to low-s instead of even-s
  • 584a358 Do merkle root and txid duplicates check simultaneously
  • 217a5c9 When transaction outputs exceed inputs, show the offending amounts so as to aid debugging
  • f74fc9b Print input index when signature validation fails, to aid debugging
  • 6fd59ee script.h: set_vch() should shift a >32 bit value
  • d752ba8 Add SCRIPT_VERIFY_SIGPUSHONLY (BIP62 rule 2) (test only)
  • 698c6ab Add SCRIPT_VERIFY_MINIMALDATA (BIP62 rules 3 and 4) (test only)
  • ab9edbd script: create sane error return codes for script validation and remove logging
  • 219a147 script: check ScriptError values in script tests
  • 0391423 Discourage NOPs reserved for soft-fork upgrades
  • 98b135f Make STRICTENC invalid pubkeys fail the script rather than the opcode
  • 307f7d4 Report script evaluation failures in log and reject messages
  • ace39db consensus: guard against openssl's new strict DER checks
  • 12b7c44 Improve robustness of DER recoding code
  • 76ce5c8 fail immediately on an empty signature
Build system:
  • f25e3ad Fix build in OS X 10.9
  • 65e8ba4 build: Switch to non-recursive make
  • 460b32d build: fix broken boost chrono check on some platforms
  • 9ce0774 build: Fix windows configure when using --with-qt-libdir
  • ea96475 build: Add mention of --disable-wallet to bdb48 error messages
  • 1dec09b depends: add shared dependency builder
  • c101c76 build: Add --with-utils (bitcoin-cli and bitcoin-tx, default=yes). Help string consistency tweaks. Target sanity check fix
  • e432a5f build: add option for reducing exports (v2)
  • 6134b43 Fixing condition 'sabotaging' MSVC build
  • af0bd5e osx: fix signing to make Gatekeeper happy (again)
  • a7d1f03 build: fix dynamic boost check when --with-boost= is used
  • d5fd094 build: fix qt test build when libprotobuf is in a non-standard path
  • 2cf5f16 Add libbitcoinconsensus library
  • 914868a build: add a deterministic dmg signer
  • 2d375fe depends: bump openssl to 1.0.1k
  • b7a4ecc Build: Only check for boost when building code that requires it
Wallet:
  • b33d1f5 Use fee/priority estimates in wallet CreateTransaction
  • 4b7b1bb Sanity checks for estimates
  • c898846 Add support for watch-only addresses
  • d5087d1 Use script matching rather than destination matching for watch-only
  • d88af56 Fee fixes
  • a35b55b Dont run full check every time we decrypt wallet
  • 3a7c348 Fix make_change to not create half-satoshis
  • f606bb9 fix a possible memory leak in CWalletDB::Recover
  • 870da77 fix possible memory leaks in CWallet::EncryptWallet
  • ccca27a Watch-only fixes
  • 9b1627d [Wallet] Reduce minTxFee for transaction creation to 1000 satoshis
  • a53fd41 Deterministic signing
  • 15ad0b5 Apply AreSane() checks to the fees from the network
  • 11855c1 Enforce minRelayTxFee on wallet created tx and add a maxtxfee option
GUI:
  • c21c74b osx: Fix missing dock menu with qt5
  • b90711c Fix Transaction details shows wrong To:
  • 516053c Make links in 'About Bitcoin Core' clickable
  • bdc83e8 Ensure payment request network matches client network
  • 65f78a1 Add GUI view of peer information
  • 06a91d9 VerifyDB progress reporting
  • fe6bff2 Add BerkeleyDB version info to RPCConsole
  • b917555 PeerTableModel: Fix potential deadlock. #4296
  • dff0e3b Improve rpc console history behavior
  • 95a9383 Remove CENT-fee-rule from coin control completely
  • 56b07d2 Allow setting listen via GUI
  • d95ba75 Log messages with type>QtDebugMsg as non-debug
  • 8969828 New status bar Unit Display Control and related changes
  • 674c070 seed OpenSSL PNRG with Windows event data
  • 509f926 Payment request parsing on startup now only changes network if a valid network name is specified
  • acd432b Prevent balloon-spam after rescan
  • 7007402 Implement SI-style (thin space) thoudands separator
  • 91cce17 Use fixed-point arithmetic in amount spinbox
  • bdba2dd Remove an obscure option no-one cares about
  • bd0aa10 Replace the temporary file hack currently used to change Bitcoin-Qt's dock icon (OS X) with a buffer-based solution
  • 94e1b9e Re-work overviewpage UI
  • 8bfdc9a Better looking trayicon
  • b197bf3 disable tray interactions when client model set to 0
  • 1c5f0af Add column Watch-only to transactions list
  • 21f139b Fix tablet crash. closes #4854
  • e84843c Broken addresses on command line no longer trigger testnet
  • a49f11d Change splash screen to normal window
  • 1f9be98 Disable App Nap on OSX 10.9+
  • 27c3e91 Add proxy to options overridden if necessary
  • 4bd1185 Allow "emergency" shutdown during startup
  • d52f072 Don't show wallet options in the preferences menu when running with -disablewallet
  • 6093aa1 Qt: QProgressBar CPU-Issue workaround
  • 0ed9675 [Wallet] Add global boolean whether to send free transactions (default=true)
  • ed3e5e4 [Wallet] Add global boolean whether to pay at least the custom fee (default=true)
  • e7876b2 [Wallet] Prevent user from paying a non-sense fee
  • c1c9d5b Add Smartfee to GUI
  • e0a25c5 Make askpassphrase dialog behave more sanely
  • 94b362d On close of splashscreen interrupt verifyDB
  • b790d13 English translation update
  • 8543b0d Correct tooltip on address book page
Tests:
  • b41e594 Fix script test handling of empty scripts
  • d3a33fc Test CHECKMULTISIG with m == 0 and n == 0
  • 29c1749 Let tx (in)valid tests use any SCRIPT_VERIFY flag
  • 6380180 Add rejection of non-null CHECKMULTISIG dummy values
  • 21bf3d2 Add tests for BoostAsioToCNetAddr
  • b5ad5e7 Add Python test for -rpcbind and -rpcallowip
  • 9ec0306 Add CODESEPARATOFindAndDelete() tests
  • 75ebced Added many rpc wallet tests
  • 0193fb8 Allow multiple regression tests to run at once
  • 92a6220 Hook up sanity checks
  • 3820e01 Extend and move all crypto tests to crypto_tests.cpp
  • 3f9a019 added list/get received by address/ account tests
  • a90689f Remove timing-based signature cache unit test
  • 236982c Add skiplist unit tests
  • f4b00be Add CChain::GetLocator() unit test
  • b45a6e8 Add test for getblocktemplate longpolling
  • cdf305e Set -discover=0 in regtest framework
  • ed02282 additional test for OP_SIZE in script_valid.json
  • 0072d98 script tests: BOOLAND, BOOLOR decode to integer
  • 833ff16 script tests: values that overflow to 0 are true
  • 4cac5db script tests: value with trailing 0x00 is true
  • 89101c6 script test: test case for 5-byte bools
  • d2d9dc0 script tests: add tests for CHECKMULTISIG limits
  • d789386 Add "it works" test for bitcoin-tx
  • df4d61e Add bitcoin-tx tests
  • aa41ac2 Test IsPushOnly() with invalid push
  • 6022b5d Make script_{valid,invalid}.json validation flags configurable
  • 8138cbe Add automatic script test generation, and actual checksig tests
  • ed27e53 Add coins_tests with a large randomized CCoinViewCache test
  • 9df9cf5 Make SCRIPT_VERIFY_STRICTENC compatible with BIP62
  • dcb9846 Extend getchaintips RPC test
  • 554147a Ensure MINIMALDATA invalid tests can only fail one way
  • dfeec18 Test every numeric-accepting opcode for correct handling of the numeric minimal encoding rule
  • 2b62e17 Clearly separate PUSHDATA and numeric argument MINIMALDATA tests
  • 16d78bd Add valid invert of invalid every numeric opcode tests
  • f635269 tests: enable alertnotify test for Windows
  • 7a41614 tests: allow rpc-tests to get filenames for bitcoind and bitcoin-cli from the environment
  • 5122ea7 tests: fix forknotify.py on windows
  • fa7f8cd tests: remove old pull-tester scripts
  • 7667850 tests: replace the old (unused since Travis) tests with new rpc test scripts
  • f4e0aef Do signature-s negation inside the tests
  • 1837987 Optimize -regtest setgenerate block generation
  • 2db4c8a Fix node ranges in the test framework
  • a8b2ce5 regression test only setmocktime RPC call
  • daf03e7 RPC tests: create initial chain with specific timestamps
  • 8656dbb Port/fix txnmall.sh regression test
  • ca81587 Test the exact order of CHECKMULTISIG sig/pubkey evaluation
  • 7357893 Prioritize and display -testsafemode status in UI
  • f321d6b Add key generation/verification to ECC sanity check
  • 132ea9b miner_tests: Disable checkpoints so they don't fail the subsidy-change test
  • bc6cb41 QA RPC tests: Add tests block block proposals
  • f67a9ce Use deterministically generated script tests
  • 11d7a7d [RPC] add rpc-test for http keep-alive (persistent connections)
  • 34318d7 RPC-test based on invalidateblock for mempool coinbase spends
  • 76ec867 Use actually valid transactions for script tests
  • c8589bf Add actual signature tests
  • e2677d7 Fix smartfees test for change to relay policy
  • 263b65e tests: run sanity checks in tests too
Miscellaneous:
  • 122549f Fix incorrect checkpoint data for testnet3
  • 5bd02cf Log used config file to debug.log on startup
  • 68ba85f Updated Debian example bitcoin.conf with config from wiki + removed some cruft and updated comments
  • e5ee8f0 Remove -beta suffix
  • 38405ac Add comment regarding experimental-use service bits
  • be873f6 Issue warning if collecting RandSeed data failed
  • 8ae973c Allocate more space if necessary in RandSeedAddPerfMon
  • 675bcd5 Correct comment for 15-of-15 p2sh script size
  • fda3fed libsecp256k1 integration
  • 2e36866 Show nodeid instead of addresses in log (for anonymity) unless otherwise requested
  • cd01a5e Enable paranoid corruption checks in LevelDB >= 1.16
  • 9365937 Add comment about never updating nTimeOffset past 199 samples
  • 403c1bf contrib: remove getwork-based pyminer (as getwork API call has been removed)
  • 0c3e101 contrib: Added systemd .service file in order to help distributions integrate bitcoind
  • 0a0878d doc: Add new DNSseed policy
  • 2887bff Update coding style and add .clang-format
  • 5cbda4f Changed LevelDB cursors to use scoped pointers to ensure destruction when going out of scope
  • b4a72a7 contrib/linearize: split output files based on new-timestamp-year or max-file-size
  • e982b57 Use explicit fflush() instead of setvbuf()
  • 234bfbf contrib: Add init scripts and docs for Upstart and OpenRC
  • 01c2807 Add warning about the merkle-tree algorithm duplicate txid flaw
  • d6712db Also create pid file in non-daemon mode
  • 772ab0e contrib: use batched JSON-RPC in linarize-hashes (optimization)
  • 7ab4358 Update bash-completion for v0.10
  • 6e6a36c contrib: show pull # in prompt for github-merge script
  • 5b9f842 Upgrade leveldb to 1.18, make chainstate databases compatible between ARM and x86 (issue #2293)
  • 4e7c219 Catch UTXO set read errors and shutdown
  • 867c600 Catch LevelDB errors during flush
  • 06ca065 Fix CScriptID(const CScript& in) in empty script case
Credits

Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release:
  • 21E14
  • Adam Weiss
  • Aitor Pazos
  • Alexander Jeng
  • Alex Morcos
  • Alon Muroch
  • Andreas Schildbach
  • Andrew Poelstra
  • Andy Alness
  • Ashley Holman
  • Benedict Chan
  • Ben Holden-Crowther
  • Bryan Bishop
  • BtcDrak
  • Christian von Roques
  • Clinton Christian
  • Cory Fields
  • Cozz Lovan
  • daniel
  • Daniel Kraft
  • David Hill
  • Derek701
  • dexX7
  • dllud
  • Dominyk Tiller
  • Doug
  • elichai
  • elkingtowa
  • ENikS
  • Eric Shaw
  • Federico Bond
  • Francis GASCHET
  • Gavin Andresen
  • Giuseppe Mazzotta
  • Glenn Willen
  • Gregory Maxwell
  • gubatron
  • HarryWu
  • himynameismartin
  • Huang Le
  • Ian Carroll
  • imharrywu
  • Jameson Lopp
  • Janusz Lenar
  • JaSK
  • Jeff Garzik
  • JL2035
  • Johnathan Corgan
  • Jonas Schnelli
  • jtimon
  • Julian Haight
  • Kamil Domanski
  • kazcw
  • kevin
  • kiwigb
  • Kosta Zertsekel
  • LongShao007
  • Luke Dashjr
  • Mark Friedenbach
  • Mathy Vanvoorden
  • Matt Corallo
  • Matthew Bogosian
  • Micha
  • Michael Ford
  • Mike Hearn
  • mrbandrews
  • mruddy
  • ntrgn
  • Otto Allmendinger
  • paveljanik
  • Pavel Vasin
  • Peter Todd
  • phantomcircuit
  • Philip Kaufmann
  • Pieter Wuille
  • pryds
  • randy-waterhouse
  • R E Broadley
  • Rose Toomey
  • Ross Nicoll
  • Roy Badami
  • Ruben Dario Ponticelli
  • Rune K. Svendsen
  • Ryan X. Charles
  • Saivann
  • sandakersmann
  • SergioDemianLerner
  • shshshsh
  • sinetek
  • Stuart Cardall
  • Suhas Daftuar
  • Tawanda Kembo
  • Teran McKinney
  • tm314159
  • Tom Harding
  • Trevin Hofmann
  • Whit J
  • Wladimir J. van der Laan
  • Yoichi Hirai
  • Zak Wilcox
As well as everyone that helped translating on [Transifex](https://www.transifex.com/projects/p/bitcoin/).
Also lots of thanks to the bitcoin.org website team David A. Harding and Saivann Carignan.
Wladimir
original: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-February/007480.html
submitted by bitcoin-devlist-bot to bitcoin_devlist [link] [comments]

GUIminer returning "Verification failed, check hardware" on HD 6870. BitMinters Client is working though.

I want to use GUIminer and more specifiaclly I want to use the poclbm kernel because it allows me to set the -f 60 flag, which allows me to play games (league of legends) while mining. However GUIminer returns:
2013-11-20 14:14:40: Running command: poclbm.exe MetalPinguin.GPU:[email protected]:3333 --device=0 --platform=0 --verbose -r1 -v -w 128 -f 60 --verbose 2013-11-20 14:14:40: Listener for "GPU #1" started 2013-11-20 14:14:43: Listener for "GPU #1": 20/11/2013 14:14:43, started OpenCL miner on platform 0, device 0 (Barts) 2013-11-20 14:14:43: Listener for "GPU #1": stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333 20/11/2013 14:14:43, checking for stratum... 2013-11-20 14:14:43: Listener for "GPU #1": stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333 20/11/2013 14:14:43, no response to getwork, using as stratum 2013-11-20 14:14:43: Listener for "GPU #1": stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333 20/11/2013 14:14:43, Setting new difficulty: 3 2013-11-20 14:15:12: Listener for "GPU #1": stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333 20/11/2013 14:15:12, Verification failed, check hardware! (0:0:Barts, 4bb0be35) 2013-11-20 14:15:13: Listener for "GPU #1": stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333 20/11/2013 14:15:13, Verification failed, check hardware! (0:0:Barts, a4bfd3a7) 2013-11-20 14:15:19: Listener for "GPU #1" shutting down 
I googled for a solution which said I should downgrade to CCC version 11.11, however this is not ideal since it would negatively affect my gaming experience. I also heard that BitMinter had a very easy to use client, so I decided to give that a shot. This client is indeed easy, as it immediatly worked! My work got accepted for the most part (5 stale out of 300+ proofs of work), however this is not the pool I want to mine in and the client does not allow me to set any parameters.
Anyone know a solution, obviously there are miners that could work with my card (BitMinter), but I did not find them yet. I tried GUIminer, Phoenix and CGminer.
PS: Please don't comment on whether mining is viable for me. I want to participate in Bitcoin mining with my gaming PC, my question is not about viability.
submitted by MetalPinguin to BitcoinBeginners [link] [comments]

GUIMiner Howto installation and configuration Guide - YouTube Best Bitcoin Mining Software That Work in 2020 🍓 - YouTube MINE 0.05 BTC .. BITCOIN MINING NETWORK How Does Bitcoin Work? - YouTube Crypto Tab Browser : Earn 8x Times Faster Bitcoin Mining ...

The Bitcoin.com mining pool has the lowest share reject rate (0.15%) we've ever seen. Other pools have over 0.30% rejected shares. Furthermore, the Bitcoin.com pool has a super responsive and reliable support team. Bitcoin is Secure. Bitcoin miners help keep the Bitcoin network secure by approving transactions. Mining is an important and integral part of Bitcoin that ensures fairness while keeping the Bitcoin network stable, safe and secure. Links. We Use Coins - Learn all about crypto-currency. Bitcoin News - Where the Bitcoin community gets news. Um Bitcoin Mining zu betreiben, müssen Sie einem Miningpool beitreten, was zusätzliche Kosten verursacht. Für das Mining benötigen Sie entsprechende Hardware. Auch hier kommen Kosten auf Sie zu. Je nachdem, wie leistungsfähig Ihr Bitcoin Miner sein soll, zahlen Sie bis zu 2.000 Euro. Es ist nicht bekannt, ob sich Mining auch in Zukunft noch lohnen wird. Wenn Sie nicht genau wissen, was ... Solo Bitcoin Mining ... The simplest and earliest method was the now-deprecated Bitcoin Core getwork RPC, which constructs a header for the miner directly. Since a header only contains a single 4-byte nonce good for about 4 gigahashes, many modern miners need to make dozens or hundreds of getwork requests a second. Solo miners may still use getwork on v0.9.5 or below, but most pools today ... Bitcoin Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for Bitcoin crypto-currency enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up. Sign up to join this community

[index] [22733] [48122] [43001] [39385] [10184] [21572] [46800] [34201] [11069] [11037]

GUIMiner Howto installation and configuration Guide - YouTube

Find out more on https://bitcoinvault.vip/ Find out how to mine bitcoin with Mining City one of the leading bitcoin mining companies in the world that offers... Thanks to Away for sponsoring this video! Go to https://www.awaytravel.com/techquickie and use promo code techquickie to get $20 off your next order! Bitcoin... ️ Download for free from http://bitsoftmachine.com/?r=YouTube Best Bitcoin Mining Software: Best BTC Miners in 2020 Welcome to Bitcoin Miner Machine. #Bitco... How to install and configure GUIMiner for Mining bitcoins is easy! This is the easiest way to get started mining on Windows. No messing around with the comma... #Getbitcoin org Mining Site Withdraw Trick 100% Work send massge.copy and past. ( Hi Dear , I am Zonair and Technical zonair my Youtube channel, I am join ww...

#