Bitcoin Mining Using Raspberry Pi : 8 Steps (with Pictures ...
Bitcoin Mining Pool Bitcoin.com
Bitcoin mining mit dem Raspberry Pi 3 - techgeeks.de
Bitcoin Mining with a Raspberry Pi - Lonewolf Online
The home for the most innovative cryptocurrency, VeriCoin and Verium VeriCoin: Proof-of-Stake-Time Protocol. PoST Verified. Verium: Proof-of-Work-Time Protocol. PoWT Verified. CPU Mine-able (GPU and ASIC Resistant)
Coin of the Magi is a peer-to-peer global currency that enables instant payments to anyone in the world. XMG utilizes proof-of-work and proof-of-stake systems and is CPU and eco focussed - rewards reduce as hash increases.
[MINING] Can anyone help with this? "stratum_subscribe timed out ...retry after 10 seconds"
Hi everyone, Just as a disclaimer for the beginning, I'm not investing in Bitcoin, I'm not doing this for any profit or reason, it's more for my own interest. I'm trying to do some mining on my Raspberry Pi 3, and I have set up a wallet, got a pool account with Slush Pool, and installed or the libraries and software needed to run. As far as I am aware I have ran the right code. However, when I run it, I get this:
./cpuminer --algo sha256d --url stratum+tcp://eu.stratum.slushpool.com:3333 --user CENSORED --pass CENSORED ** cpuminer-multi 1.3.7 by [email protected] ** [2020-05-18 21:25:38] Starting Stratum on stratum+tcp://eu.stratum.slushpool.com:3333 [2020-05-18 21:25:38] 4 miner threads started, using 'sha256d' algorithm. [2020-05-18 21:26:08] stratum_subscribe timed out [2020-05-18 21:26:08] ...retry after 10 seconds [2020-05-18 21:26:48] stratum_subscribe timed out [2020-05-18 21:26:48] ...retry after 10 seconds [2020-05-18 21:27:28] stratum_subscribe timed out [2020-05-18 21:27:28] ...retry after 10 seconds [2020-05-18 21:28:08] stratum_subscribe timed out [2020-05-18 21:28:08] ...retry after 10 seconds [2020-05-18 21:28:48] stratum_subscribe timed out [2020-05-18 21:28:48] ...retry after 10 seconds
Anyone have any idea on how to sort this out? Thanks
Onion Monero Blockchain Explorer by mWo12 included.
Auto loading menu for Monero updates, and script that auto detects, formats and mounts attached USB drives. Labels drive for simple detection by future versions of PiNode-XMR so the blockchain is maintained between versions.
tor bridging Node - routes your transactions through the tor network
Public Node - Using new RPC payment feature* - soon
Private Node - with mining (For education/experiment only)
Simple control with Web-UI
View Monero node and hardware status
Control bandwidth, connection limits and RPC port
Transaction pool and summary viewer
View connected peer info
Monerod log file view page
Easy setup menu for config of passwords, USB storage, Update and optional dynamic DNS.
All the benefits of running on a Pi, silent/fanless, low power (approx 15w) for 24/7 node, low cost.
Headless (No need for extra monitor,keyboard,etc) and connect via Ethernet or WiFi**
Background: I've been making nodes for other coins for a few years to learn about some crypto basics. It got a bit of interest for I have a site https://PiNode.co.uk but recently far more advanced projects have come on the scene (such as RaspiBlitz for Bitcoin) which was so far superior there was no sense pursuing it . However there are benefits for Monero users running their own node and we didn't have that quality of plug and play node. So I've been giving it a go and this is the result. The Future of PiNode-XMR: First of all project needs feedback to continue, I don't know what to develop and introduce unless people say what they don't like, do like or want. Second, it'd be great if anyone else in the Monero community would like to get involved, we have a great group and I'm sure there is an aspect of this project someone takes an interest in. Please get in touch. Like if there are any budding website designers in our midst the UI is the last module of this project that isn't open source, it's from a template and I've put it together best I can but...throwing that out there :) I'd be nice if the monero community could completely own this project, completely open source. Finally, I know that now there is more choice on the single board computer market and although the Raspberry Pi is popular it may not be the best hardware choice. So the next plan is to rather than make disk images that are hardware specific, to instead make scripts that are based on an OS ( probably Debian ). This way this project can be built by anyone using a single command onto Pine64, Odroid, Bananapi or any old laptop/pc with Debian for thier full node. Thanks for taking an interest and readingDan The "Advanced Settings" page from the UI for a bit of colour after all that text: https://preview.redd.it/4pqg5mcqr6941.png?width=1340&format=png&auto=webp&s=aa1f9ee176746ea064c8e8573ba04ee864ab5bc3 Edit: Added download link to this page too. Corrected image layout. Edit2: Added hash of image. And note it's also possible to flash the image directly onto a USB drive with a program like Rufus and not insert a MicroSD at all. You'll need to then manually expand that partition to the size of the drive, but may be useful to know.
Will Ghost coin be listed in stock market, like BTC/USD?
Would it be possible to use the ghost e-sim with custom phones, for instance a Raspberry Pi phone? What would the minimum requirements be?
Could you explain some more about the 'quantum threat'? How exactly cold-staking would work?
About Telaghost, will it require a specific phone model to run?
Could you please elaborate more on how the 'proof-of-stake' approach can help avoid common problems we see in Bitcoin mining, such as 'pooling farms, use of ASICs, centralization of mining power'?
It's said in the Ghost Whitepaper that " Checkpointing is considered controversial in the cryptocurrency community, as it is a “centralized” solution". Could you explain how this solution works and what are the risks involved? Is it possible to do "checkpointing" without centralization?
Is there any schedule for expanding the e-sim services to other countries?
First-time poster here, don’t bully me, apologies for the potentially atrocious formatting :) TL;DR at the end So in the wake of Bitcoin’s explosive rise in value and media attention, I’ve been encouraged by others to share my experience over the past few years as a miner. Here's my story (it's kinda long, you've been warned)
It all started almost three years ago in the beginning of 2015 when Bitcoin flew under my radar. Looking into it, I admittedly wasn’t drawn in because of the decentralisation or the anonymous payments, I was hooked on the idea that anyone could get their hands on some just by running a program and leaving it to do its own thing. I know, how shallow of me. But the idea of making even a bit of money without ‘any work’ was convincing enough for 11-year-old me to do more digging into the matter. To my disappointment, I soon found out that the era of mining Bitcoins with a PC’s CPU or GPU was long obsolete and instead it was all ASICs at that point. So that summer, for my twelfth birthday, I got a little ASIC machine for €60, an Antminer U3. This little thing took up less space than a graphics card but could mine at 60 GH/s. Because, at the time, I didn’t have a controller device that could be kept up and running all day long so it could run the program that mined Bitcoin using the U3, I went ahead and got a Raspberry Pi. After setting up the Pi and installing all the necessary stuff (took an awfully long time), I connected it to AntPool and plugged the U3 in. Two days past and the mining pool sent the first Bitcoin I ever received to my wallet (I was using Blockchain.info). It was just 30 cents worth of BTC but I felt a bit of a rush because I was earning a bit of money through this completely new thing and the idea of that was thrilling. Let’s back up for a second. I just used the term ‘earning’ as if I was profiting, and naive me 2 years ago was no different. In reality, I was at first oblivious to the fact that I was most likely LOSING money overall because of how much energy that little sucker was taking in. But, I was comforted thinking that using that machine was just a practical way of learning about this modern currency and that the loss of several cents’ worth of energy was acceptable in the name of education and learning. Fast forward ten months to the wonderful summer of 2016. I had recently turned 13 and the Antminer U3 had been running on and off throughout. Various pauses and breaks in mining would be observed, as I had to manually get everything up and running after frequent breaks in the Internet connection. You’d expect my newly-turned-teenage brain to lose interest in Bitcoin as it does with many other gimmicks, but – even surprising myself – I miraculously didn’t. Good thing I maintained interest thinking about it now, not so good at the time for my parents. Why do I say this? I felt like it was time to get a little upgrade in my hardware.
Getting an upgrade
Days passed with me comparing every ASIC miner I could at that price point. It was then I set my eyes upon the Antminer S7 (same folks who did my U3, nice). I had put it up against a plethora of other miners and I figured the S7 was my best bet; the thing costs only about 10 times that of my U3 but could run at 4.73 TH/s, almost 80 times as powerful. The only problem being its power consumption was at 1300 watts, which would put a massive dent in the electricity bill and eliminate any profit I would make. Fortunately, I had a secret weapon up my sleeve – or rather my mum did. She had rented out an office outside our apartment where she would keep files and paperwork. The office’s electricity bill was a flat rate as far as I’m aware and it ended up being my saving grace because it virtually got rid of the “oh no I’m actually going to be losing money because of how much electricity I’m eating up” factor, making this whole hardware upgrade viable. After convincing my parents, they finally agreed to shell out the requested amount, with the initial investment being paid back with time. I went to a local Bitcoin vendor and purchased 1 BTC for about $665 in cash (sigh yes, I know. $665 dollars). Shortly after, I used about 0.9 BTC to purchase the Antminer S7 and a 1600W power supply for a grand total of $600. The products would be made and shipped from China so I was definitely in for a wait. A month passes and the package arrives at last. I connected all the wires from the power supply into the S7 and – with great anticipation – I plugged it into the wall to start its first ever run. And what do you know? An extremely loud and high-pitched whirring sound blasted out from the fans on both the power supply as well as the S7. After killing the thing, I questioned my choices. I couldn’t dare put that thing anywhere near my mum’s office in the event it drive everyone in the building absolutely nuts. I was at a loss. However, I soon recovered from my temporarily debilitated state and got working on a solution. The first idea that came to my mind: change the fans. The stocks fans were by Evercool and spun at around 3000 RPM. The power supply used a small, robust fan that looked like a cube that must’ve spun at extremely high speeds judging by how high the sound it produced was. I got my parents to give me some more funding so I could acquire the replacement fans and I did. Bust. After installation and testing, none of the fans would work. I managed to configure the S7 to connect to my Antpool account and the machine would manage mining for several minutes running at peak performance but ultimately be automatically cut off because of how hot the machine was getting (I’m talking about 80 degrees Celsius kinda hot in that thing). The fans got refunded and I was back to the drawing board. After combing through some forum posts and videos, I came across this video and a forum post in which people have their mining rigs placed inside a ventilated, muffled cabinet. Undertaking a project like this would be time-consuming and risky but I had no better ideas so I decided to go through with the idea anyway. Firstly, I sought out a cabinet with suitable dimensions. I managed to get just what I needed at a second-hand IKEA shop. Great. Secondly, I went ahead and acquired some sound-absorbing acoustic foam from a local provider. Fantastic. Finally I had to get a ventilation system going within the cabinet, otherwise, all the hot air would roast the machine alive in there in a bloody mess. With the help of my dad, we found a pair cabinet fans on the Internet that were close to silent but could circulate the air well enough. Eventually, all the materials came and, with the help of my parents, put everything together. The process took quite long time and we had a couple hiccups along the way, but we got it done and it came out pretty nice. The moment of truth came and, to my relief, it ran so much quieter than without the cabinet. It was nowhere near silent but it reduced the noise a great deal. Soon after, I got the thing into the office and set everything up from there. Unfortunately, I was forced to underclock it because you could still hear the machine’s whining from outside the thin office door. Gunning the hashrate down about 25% to 3.7TH/s, I could lower the fan speed without risking the machine burning up. Sure, I wasn’t getting the full potential of the machine but I didn’t complain because electricity was not an issue there and it was still a whole lot better than my U3. With it up and running, I could leave it there, periodically checking to see if it was mining on Antpool.
In the months that followed, I was getting a solid $2.5 worth of BTC on daily basis. Half a year later, May of 2017, I had accumulated a satisfactory $600. I thought, “At this rate, I’d be able to pay my parents’ investment back in a few months” (the total investment came close to $900). Bitcoin had risen to over $1500 so I was already over the moon at that point because of how well everything was going. Little did I know… I hit 0.5 BTC midway through September this year. The price of BTC had dropped after a sudden rise to $5000, but I couldn’t have asked for more. Although I possessed only half the amount of BTC I paid for the machine, its value was over twice that of the initial investment. I thought BTC would level off at around $4000 but nope. In the month of October, the price skyrocketed. Since September, I had only mined 0.017 BTC but the value was already over $3000. It was just a matter of selling it, but I decided to hodl. Good thing I did. As of November 5, I have approximately 0.52 BTC mined in total from my S7, valued at $4000. If I were to sell it right now, I’d have a profit of over $3100. And as for my miner, it’s churning out 0.0006 BTC daily, sounds like nothing but it’s still the equivalent of $5 today and I couldn’t be happier, at least with the miner and Bitcoin. You remember that $665 for 1 BTC that I mentioned earlier? In hindsight, it would’ve been such a better idea to just keep that one Bitcoin and not do anything with it until today (in the interest of making much more money), as I’d theoretically have upwards of $7000. The idea of that still haunts me sometimes if I dwell on it too long but knowing that I’m in possession of an already hefty amount, the pain of it had numbed slightly. It’s not all doom and gloom for me from the exponential increase in Bitcoin’s value, however. Those first $0.3 payments from my humble little U3 all those years ago now are now the equivalent of over $6 today! Bitcoin and everything it encompasses has been and still is a journey of discovery and an adventure. Looking back, starting with a modest €60 Antminer U3 to having a sum of Bitcoin equivalent to two extremely high-end gaming rigs (first thing I could think of as a comparison, sorry) has been something I can’t really describe. Through the course of the past few years, I’ve learned more about technology, I’ve unexpectedly gotten insight into economics and business and – of course – I’ve made a lot of money (if I decide to stop hodling that is). Also, props to my parents for keeping an open mind throughout, I know some parents would be horrified at their kids being involved in something that has been used in some less-than-savoury ways and it's great knowing mine have been supportive all the way. TL;DR got into Bitcoin mining 3 years ago at age 11 with an Antminer U3 that ran at 60 GH/s, got an Antminer S7 (4.73TH/s) and built a sound-muffling, ventilated cabinet for it. Am sat here today with $3000 profit if I decide to sell right now.
Hi Bitcoiners! I’m back with the 23rd monthly Bitcoin news recap. For those unfamiliar, each day I pick out the most popularelevant/interesting stories in Bitcoin and save them. At the end of the month I release them in one batch, to give you a quick (but not necessarily the best) overview of what happened in bitcoin over the past month. You can see recaps of the previous months on Bitcoinsnippets.com A recap of Bitcoin in November 2018 Adoption
Raspberry Pi Sumcoin Supernode and General Bytes ATM Setup
Sumcoin is built on the Decentralized Bitcoin Protocol. Many references will point to Bitcoin ‘how to’s’ but will work the same way. The key difference of Sumcoin is how it derives its value. “SUM” is an Index based crypto currency and the first of its kind. Think of it like the Dow Jones of crypto but with all other Bitcoin attributes. Mineable, but extremely fast to transact. Readers should also grab a Mobile Wallet. You can visit https://www.sumcoin.org/ for many links to resources and you can find a pool to begin mining at https://miningpoolstats.stream/sumcoin About: Sumcoin is the worlds first Index based Crypto Currency by SumcoinIndex.com | Sumcoin is supported by all participating General Bytes ATM's. Sumcoin is a cryptographic blockchain and the worlds first cryptographic Index which uses a proof-of-work algorithm to unlock coins. Its maximum targeted processing time is only 3 mins with a maximum supply of only 100 M coins. Sumcoin is also Segwit enabled • Sumcoin is implemented in all General Bytes ATM's worldwide. You need only ask the machines operator for support. • The Index• Sumcoin, or the "SUM" of coins means that it tracks all coins in near real time from over 600 different data points. Sumcoin is continuously aggregating and finds what the current top 100 coins are by global market cap. The "SUM" price is generated using a decentralized algorithm created and maintained by The Global Sumcoin Developers • Given the speed, security and simplicity being able to hold the "SUM" of the market in only one coin, Sumcoin is for those who want to gain maximum exposure to the crypto space but may only want to hold one coin for simplicity, which can reduce risk factors. As the value is spread across 100 coins, there is a great reduction of volatility to Sumcoin vs any other coin. Full Story on Raspberry Sumcoin Node in Medium Post Below https://medium.com/@Sumtoshi/raspberry-pi-sumcoin-supernode-and-general-bytes-atm-setup-f8463b2f0fbc
I decided to write this up because there's a lot of confusion about what a "Node" is. I personally had to do a lot of research to figured this out myself. If anyone would like to suggest edits, I welcome them. Due to the decentralized nature of Litecoin, sometimes key terms or definitions don’t get standardized. This is particularly problematic for newcomers who want to learn about Litecoin but get confused by variant vocabulary. For example, a Full Litecoin Node to one person may mean something slightly different to another. In light of this, below I suggest a list of terms to help the community use the same definitions and language in regards to Litecoin Nodes.
Before we talk about Litecoin Nodes, let’s talk about nodes in a broad sense. In a distributed network, the simplest way to define a node would be to say it is a point of intersection or connection with the network. It can act as both a redistribution point or a communication endpoint. This loose definition helps us better understand the different ways a Litecoin Node functions within the Litecoin Network. The following definitions should collectively be considered Litecoin Nodes.
A Full Node
A Full Litecoin Node is an integral component of the Litecoin Network because it validates the blockchain. It does this by downloading a copy of it. It is also capable of relaying transactions and recent blocks, but this isn’t required to be considered a Full Node. Now when you first open up a Full Node client like Litecoin Core, most people are sitting behind a firewall. In this case, your Full Node is limited in the number of connections it can connect to (around 8) and only looks for Super Nodes a.k.a. Listening Nodes. The reason for this is because your Full Node isn’t publicly connectable yet.
A Super Node a.k.a. Listening Node
In a distributed network, a Super Node functions as a highly connected redistribution point as well as a relay station. Therefore this would be an appropriate term to describe a publicly connectable Full Litecoin Node. This means many nodes can connect to it to obtain relayed transactional data and blockchain history. This may require more bandwidth and CPU than a Full Node because of all the extra work it’s doing. These Super Nodes are normally on 24/7 and are reliable focal points for other nodes to connect to. In order to activate this within a Litecoin client functioning as a node, you must make it publicly connectable. One way to do this is to bypass any potential firewalls and/or setup port forwarding. Some manuals suggest running litecoind(litecoin daemon) in the background instead of Litecoin-Qt, but this isn’t necessary. u/aaron0791 Raspberry Pi guide can either be a super node or a full node depending on whether it is publicly connectable. You can run it with the litecoind as well in order to avoid setting up a GUI with the Raspberry Pi.
A Miner’s Node
Today, miners utilize mining programs separate from Litecoin Core to mine Litecoin blocks. Some miners choose to solo mine and therefore use their own Full Node to maintain a full copy of the blockchain via litecoind. Others choose to pool mine and work together to solve blocks. In this case, the admin of the pool maintains a Full Node while pool miners contribute their hashpower. A third method, though highly discouraged and harmful to the network, is to SPV mine by mining on top of blocks before fully validating them. These SPV pool miners typically trust another mining pool’s Full Node as a reference to build on top of. In light of this, a Miner’s Node can be further subcategorized as either a Solo Miner’s Full Node or a Pool Miner’s Full Node.
SPV clients like Loafwallet (the Litecoin App for smartphones) are not Full Nodes because they don’t download the blockchain. SPV clients do this by ensuring your transactions are put in a block and then confirm that other blocks are being added to it. Therefore in the loosest sense, an SPV Client may fit the criteria of a node. However, they don’t do much to support and validate the distributed trustless ledger of Litecoin. Instead, they store just copies of all the headers of all the blocks in the blockchain that are taken from other Super Nodes. Therefore, SPV clients are unable to verify any transactions in the chain because they don’t have access to it. In this way, they function as communication endpoints as they are are unable to relay transactions or blockchain data. Additionally, it is important to put your own full nodes behind them to securely use SPV clients as wallets.
Specialized “Edge Routing” Nodes
Other types of nodes exist where Full Nodes are stripped of its wallet and mining capabilities. Entities such exchanges and merchant payment processors then build on top of these specialized “edge routing” nodes.
Above, I’ve briefly described the various roles a Litecoin Node can have. I’ve also included a broad overview of the necessary steps a user would need to take to use Litecoin Core in these roles. Hopefully by providing this list of terminology, it will empower users to understand what exact role they are playing in the network and to inform them of the steps they can take if they want to play a different one. edit: clarified my language after consulting bitcoin dev's. edit2: source if you want visuals-> https://medium.com/the-litecoin-school-of-crypto/lets-talk-about-litecoin-nodes-77383339cdf7 edit3: tips appreciate
if you think the 21inc bitcoin computer is a waste of money because of ROI, i believe you're missing the point
i keep seeing posts about people being upset because they can't understand why someone would pay $400 for a raspberry pi with a mining shield, a big ass heatsink, and a fan. this isn't marketed as a bitcoin mining device. it's being marketed as a device (a dev kit for future devices, at this point) that is designed to integrate with bitcoin in many ways. mining is one (and definitely not the only one) of the ways it does that. and it's not mining to just be mining. i'm not super familiar with the ins and outs of this newfangled device, but it seems to me like the satoshis are for other uses, like smart contract kinds of uses. the things are definitely not mining for profit. i don't get everyone's obsession with ROI. would you be considering the ROI if you were investing in any other computer? obviously a computer is an investment, but the value you get out of it is from its utility. you can do all kinds of crazy cool shit with a computer. things you never imagined you could do before. i recently got a raspberry pi, and the uses seem endless. i never thought i would be learning about linux, coding, web design, electronics, robotics, music, web servers, home servers, proxys, radio, graphic design, and home automation, all because of the same little device! i don't see anything keeping this 21inc device from being a great tool for bitcoin innovation on many levels. and it seems they're just getting started. it also seems to me like 21inc will eventually have a very decentralized mining pool. plus, the existence of another mining pool adds decentralization to bitcoin mining in general. right? perhaps someone who is more knowledgeable could elaborate or cmv? tl;dr the 21 inc computer is not a mining rig. it's a computer. it does stuff. some people find value in that.
I still favor Bitcoin P2P Electronic Cash instead of any of those cool altcoin projects because of its perfect ratio between maturity and ambition.
Bitcoin (Cash) is serious business. It is not just novel tech and hot air that brings a coin to mainstream adoption. I've personally seen many awesome projects fade into oblivion due to marketing and administrative failures. One of the greatest fallacies of a rookie crypto investor is the assumption that technical glitter is the only parameter that differentiates viable projects from the doomed ones. As a result we've seen a storm of whitepapers making far-fetched promises that go like this:
we implement this and that
this and that make us better than Bitcoin and Ethereum combined
mainstream adoption (profit)
Not going to happen because it's the people, the community and the will of multiple powerful entities that is necessary for reaching mainstream adoption. Technically there is nothing stopping Bitcoin Cash from scaling to the levels required by the mainstream adoption. I can even see how mining pools would establish high speed private connections between each other just to share TX data. We have the brand, we have the big backers, public icons and the community. A bet on Bitcoin Cash is like a bet on Coca-Cola in 1984. Just because your regular neckbearded basement dweller with his pet Raspberry Pi would never even dream to have such infrastructure supporting their "novel and better-than Bitcoin" cryptocurrency does not mean Bitcoin (Cash) is a bad bet. For that reason, I congratulate everyone who has used this exceptional opportunity to multiply their original bitcoins many times thanks to the fork that happened in August 2017. Bitcoin Core tokens were the dividends that were paid to Bitcoin Cash holders ;) better sell those dividends before they depreciate into oblivion.
Hi Guys, I'm officially announcing that I have started mining Bitcoineum on the Ethereum network as of 4:00 am EST July 19, 2017, and anyone is free to join me. This is a fair mined, no founder's reward, no premine, no hidden shenanigans token. I was going to make this public announcement even earlier but due to scheduled travel I wanted to make sure I was available to answer questions if there were any. Bitcoineum attempts to duplicate the value preserving aspect of Bitcoin and bake it into the Ethereum network as an ERC20 Token while employing a completely novel virtual mining system. Think of it as a modular base token that abstracts the mining, and has functionality for converting into other types of tokens and systems as the ERC20 infrastructure evolves. A transferrable proof-of-burn that is designed to bootstrap a value store right onto the Ethereum smart contract network. A simpler and more straight forward approach than trying to attach a separate smart contract network to your value store, such as what is happening in Bitcoin right now. Further, anyone who has Ether can mine Bitcoineum from a web interface right now without any special hardware. That means device independent mining, mobile phones, the web, embedded, raspberry pi, whatever. I wanted to create a fair, equitable, distributed and accessible mining system that can drive value into other tokens. The example web miner works but is very bare bones, and needs further improvement but anyone can build a miner that interfaces with the smart contract. I can imagine a very sleek front end built around it to start, but the actual mining algorithm can be tweaked to try and optimize returns. A little bonus for the people interested in algorithmic trading. I am also actively working on a mining pool contract that will aggregate multiple users which will both increase the likelihood of mining the block, and proportionally increase the reward. The idea that other contracts will drive mining in the future is central to Bitcoineum. The possibilities behind that are very interesting and could help create actual on chain financial products. You can read more about it, including motivations, technical white paper, and other general information at: http://www.bitcoineum.com/ You can check out the Solidity smart contract code, testing harnesses, and miner frontend at http://www.gitlab.com/mbrix/bitcoineum Pull requests gladly accepted. If you have the chops to security audit the contract code I'd be glad to hear your feedback. You can start mining directly with a locally unlocked Geth/Parity node, and the web miner at http://www.bitcoineum.com/mine It is web console based, and tested mostly on Chrome. The one feature that is worth noting is that you can set the credit account to a cold wallet address, so you can limit the funds the miner has access to in your unlocked geth instance and still securely deliver any mining rewards to cold storage directly. I recommend doing this to limit any potential loss of funds due to bugs, misconfiguration, etc. I don't want to get reports back that someone lost a million ether on their unlocked instance because of a hack or a silly bug. Keep the accessible miner account limited, and verify the contract address on the transactions being done. If you are concerned about the integrity of the web site for some reason (it is completely statically served on S3) you can run the miner directly from the git repo, although that's a bit outside of the scope of this post. It is also possible to mine using MetaMask, but without being able to unlock your wallet it is extremely tedious. Once this is addressed upstream it will not be necessary to run a local node to mine Bitcoineum, really easy decentralized mining. Currently I disable metamask/parity chrome client when mining since they tend to interfere. The contract address is 0x73dd069c299a5d691e9836243bcaec9c8c1d8734 Finally, a quick word about proof-of-burn. There was a rigorous debate about it's merits last time I released a token for registering Lost ether. I am a strong proponent of proof-of-burn as a substitute for proof-of-work, but I am cognizant of the argument that there must be a reason to exist beyond simply store-of-value, deflationary, fixed cap semantics. Although, I believe that Bitcoineum's structure is useful and complementary to inflationary Ether, I've taken it one important step further. I think there are several things about an ERC20 token that we are only beginning to explore. You can think of it as an atom in a larger structure, a building block towards more sophisticated capabilities. Bitcoineum's user-oriented mining and value semantics are meant to serve as a base token for a wide range of other applications. I've built a simple but effective interface into the token called Transmutable. This let's one Bitcoineum seamlessly turn into other ERC20 tokens that have yet to be created. The value burned to create Bitcoineum can than transfer directly into these other types of tokens in a standardized way. A a tangible example users could migrate value into a successor ZkSnark Bitcoineum token once that functionality makes it into Etheruem. So the value store itself can directly be used as an input into more advanced tokens. This is both new and novel functionality, that when combined with it's other properties makes it a worthy thing to mine. Please join me :D. I'll be around for a little while to answer questions, but I'm also on the road the next few weeks, so if I'm slow to respond to pull requests for the awesome new miner your wrote please be patient. You can email me at [email protected], reach me here on Reddit, or come at me on twitter @brantonbits. Despite the testing and work I've put into it this is still a beta product, so you mine at your own risk. I'm hoping this makes a useful addition to the Ethereum ecosystem, and chips away at the idea that Bitcoin can survive simply as a store-of-value when developers can create these types of systems right on Ethereum.
Day 142, still bagholding. Doesn't matter though, cause fundamentals still solid; blockfolio deleted a long time ago. Some general stats (and changes since last time): Mining difficulty: 818,109,875 (+12.67%) (next: ~821,808,011) (+11.54%) Estimated hashrate: 4.17 Th/s (-20.11%) Current average reward time: 13.73 minutes (+31.51%) Tokens minted: 3,280,900 0xBTC (+3.32%) Token holders: 4494 holders (+1.83%) Total contract operations: 187886 txs (+0.46%) Source: https://0x1d00ffff.github.io/0xBTC-Stats/?page=stats Tokens required to be a top holder (and changes since last time): Top 10: 36197.32435793 0xBTC (0.00%) Top 25: 22696.27021038 0xBTC (+8.07%) Top 50: 14174 0xBTC (+5.15%) Top 100: 6860.91934523 0xBTC (+2.28%) Top 200: 2950 0xBTC (+2.64%) Top 300: 1543 0xBTC (+2.86%) Top 500: 607.62911227 0xBTC (+1.16%) Top 1000: 158.19372159 0xBTC (-2.46%) Source: https://etherscan.io/token/0xb6ed7644c69416d67b522e20bc294a9a9b405b31#balance Recent events:
Infernal_toast has been working tirelessly on the Lava Network, with new breakthroughs being made weekly. When asked to comment on the main function of the innovative network, the elusive software developer only said that it'll "pump it". The network is expected to go live "soon".
Lodge proposed building a sidechain on Ethereum for 0xBTC with the pimp-ass name 0xBitchain. From the Discord: The proposed sidechain would be based on a non-POW consensus mechanism. With goals of performance and scaleability in mind first, consensus nodes could run on a Raspberry Pi; If 0xBitcoin has a scaleable side chain with a value bridge to mainnet, the Pools could exist in a distributed environment treating solidity and transaction scaleability as first class citizensso... A. Mine 0xBitcoin on mainnet, cause POW Token distribution is gangster B. Move some over to 0xBitchain C. Pay txns to Dapps on the chain directly in 0xBitcoin, for a fraction of a fraction of the cost on mainnet D. When done, move 0xBitcoin back to mainnetIts not a new paradigm, it's a side chain bound to a token, only in our case, it's a fairly distributed token.This link has more info on the proposal. http://forum.0xbtc.io/t/concept-0xbitchain-a-layer-2-sidechain-that-runs-natively-on-0xbitcoin/117
There was probably lots more going on, but I was away for most of the past two weeks, so feel free to add to the list in the comments section.
Preventing double-spends is an "embarrassingly parallel" massive search problem - like Google, [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid. BUIP024 "address sharding" is similar to Google's MapReduce & Berkeley's BOINC grid computing - "divide-and-conquer" providing unlimited on-chain scaling for Bitcoin.
TL;DR: Like all other successful projects involving "embarrassingly parallel" search problems in massive search spaces, Bitcoin can and should - and inevitably will - move to a distributed computing paradigm based on successful "sharding" architectures such as Google Search (based on Google's MapReduce algorithm), or [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid (based on Berkeley's BOINC grid computing architecture) - which use simple mathematical "decompose" and "recompose" operations to break big problems into tiny pieces, providing virtually unlimited scaling (plus fault tolerance) at the logical / software level, on top of possibly severely limited (and faulty) resources at the physical / hardware level. The discredited "heavy" (and over-complicated) design philosophy of centralized "legacy" dev teams such as Core / Blockstream (requiring every single node to download, store and verify the massively growing blockchain, and pinning their hopes on non-existent off-chain vaporware such as the so-called "Lightning Network" which has no mathematical definition and is missing crucial components such as decentralized routing) is doomed to failure, and will be out-competed by simpler on-chain "lightweight" distributed approaches such as distributed trustless Merkle trees or BUIP024's "Address Sharding" emerging from independent devs such as u/thezerg1 (involved with Bitcoin Unlimited). No one in their right mind would expect Google's vast search engine to fit entirely on a Raspberry Pi behind a crappy Internet connection - and no one in their right mind should expect Bitcoin's vast financial network to fit entirely on a Raspberry Pi behind a crappy Internet connection either. Any "normal" (ie, competent) company with $76 million to spend could provide virtually unlimited on-chain scaling for Bitcoin in a matter of months - simply by working with devs who would just go ahead and apply the existing obvious mature successful tried-and-true "recipes" for solving "embarrassingly parallel" search problems in massive search spaces, based on standard DISTRIBUTED COMPUTING approaches like Google Search (based on Google's MapReduce algorithm), or [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid (based on Berkeley's BOINC grid computing architecture). The fact that Blockstream / Core devs refuse to consider any standard DISTRIBUTED COMPUTING approaches just proves that they're "embarrassingly stupid" - and the only way Bitcoin will succeed is by routing around their damage. Proven, mature sharding architectures like the ones powering Google Search, [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid will allow Bitcoin to achieve virtually unlimited on-chain scaling, with minimal disruption to the existing Bitcoin network topology and mining and wallet software. Longer Summary: People who argue that "Bitcoin can't scale" - because it involves major physical / hardware requirements (lots of processing power, upload bandwidth, storage space) - are at best simply misinformed or incompetent - or at worst outright lying to you. Bitcoin mainly involves searching the blockchain to prevent double-spends - and so it is similar to many other projects involving "embarrassingly parallel" searching in massive search spaces - like Google Search, [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid. But there's a big difference between those long-running wildly successful massively distributed infinitely scalable parallel computing projects, and Bitcoin. Those other projects do their data storage and processing across a distributed network. But Bitcoin (under the misguided "leadership" of Core / Blockstream devs) instists on a fatally flawed design philosophy where every individual node must be able to download, store and verify the system's entire data structure. And it's even wore than that - they want to let the least powerful nodes in the system dictate the resource requirements for everyone else. Meanwhile, those other projects are all based on some kind of "distributed computing" involving "sharding". They achieve massive scaling by adding a virtually unlimited (and fault-tolerant) logical / software layer on top of the underlying resource-constrained / limited physical / hardware layer - using approaches like Google's MapReduce algorithm or Berkeley's Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC) grid computing architecture. This shows that it is a fundamental error to continue insisting on viewing an individual Bitcoin "node" as the fundamental "unit" of the Bitcoin network. Coordinated distributed pools already exist for mining the blockchain - and eventually coordinated distributed trustless architectures will also exist for verifying and querying it. Any architecture or design philosophy where a single "node" is expected to be forever responsible for storing or verifying the entire blockchain is the wrong approach, and is doomed to failure. The most well-known example of this doomed approach is Blockstream / Core's "roadmap" - which is based on two disastrously erroneous design requirements:
Core / Blockstream support convoluted, incomplete off-chain scaling approaches such as the so-called "Lightning Network" - which lacks a mathematical foundation, and also has some serious gaps (eg, no solution for decentralized routing).
Instead, the future of Bitcoin will inevitably be based on unlimited on-chain scaling, where all of Bitcoin's existing algorithms and data structures and networking are essentially preserved unchanged / as-is - but they are distributed at the logical / software level using sharding approaches such as u/thezerg1's BUIP024 or distributed trustless Merkle trees. These kinds of sharding architectures will allow individual nodes to use a minimum of physical resources to access a maximum of logical storage and processing resources across a distributed network with virtually unlimited on-chain scaling - where every node will be able to use and verify the entire blockchain without having to download and store the whole thing - just like Google Search, [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid and other successful distributed sharding-based projects have already been successfully doing for years. Details: Sharding, which has been so successful in many other areas, is a topic that keeps resurfacing in various shapes and forms among independent Bitcoin developers. The highly successful track record of sharding architectures on other projects involving "embarrassingly parallel" massive search problems (harnessing resource-constrained machines at the physical level into a distributed network at the logical level, in order to provide fault tolerance and virtually unlimited scaling searching for web pages, interstellar radio signals, protein sequences, or prime numbers in massive search spaces up to hundreds of terabytes in size) provides convincing evidence that sharding architectures will also work for Bitcoin (which also requires virtually unlimited on-chain scaling, searching the ever-expanding blockchain for previous "spends" from an existing address, before appending a new transaction from this address to the blockchain). Below are some links involving proposals for sharding Bitcoin, plus more discussion and related examples.
[Brainstorming] "Let's Fork Smarter, Not Harder"? Can we find some natural way(s) of making the scaling problem "embarrassingly parallel", perhaps introducing some hierarchical (tree) structures or some natural "sharding" at the level of the network and/or the mempool and/or the blockchain?
"Braiding the Blockchain" (32 min + Q&A): We can't remove all sources of latency. We can redesign the "chain" to tolerate multiple simultaneous writers. Let miners mine and validate at the same time. Ideal block time / size / difficulty can become emergent per-node properties of the network topology
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4su1gf/braiding_the_blockchain_32_min_qa_we_cant_remove/ Some kind of sharding - perhaps based on address sharding as in BUIP024, or based on distributed trustless Merkle trees as proposed earlier by u/thezerg1 - is very likely to turn out to be the simplest, and safest approach towards massive on-chain scaling. A thought experiment showing that we already have most of the ingredients for a kind of simplistic "instant sharding" A simplistic thought experiment can be used to illustrate how easy it could be to do sharding - with almost no changes to the existing Bitcoin system. Recall that Bitcoin addresses and keys are composed from an alphabet of 58 characters. So, in this simplified thought experiment, we will outline a way to add a kind of "instant sharding" within the existing system - by using the last character of each address in order to assign that address to one of 58 shards. (Maybe you can already see where this is going...) Similar to vanity address generation, a user who wants to receive Bitcoins would be required to generate 58 different receiving addresses (each ending with a different character) - and, similarly, miners could be required to pick one of the 58 shards to mine on. Then, when a user wanted to send money, they would have to look at the last character of their "send from" address - and also select a "send to" address ending in the same character - and presto! we already have a kind of simplistic "instant sharding". (And note that this part of the thought experiment would require only the "softest" kind of soft fork: indeed, we haven't changed any of the code at all, but instead we simply adopted a new convention by agreement, while using the existing code.) Of course, this simplistic "instant sharding" example would still need a few more features in order to be complete - but they'd all be fairly straightforward to provide:
A transaction can actually send from multiple addresses, to multiple addresses - so the approach of simply looking at the final character of a single (receive) address would not be enough to instantly assign a transaction to a particular shard. But a slightly more sophisticated decision criterion could easily be developed - and computed using code - to assign every transaction to a particular shard, based on the "from" and "to" addresses in the transaction. The basic concept from the "simplistic" example would remain the same, sharding the network based on some characteristic of transactions.
If we had 58 shards, then the mining reward would have to be decreased to 1/58 of what it currently is - and also the mining hash power on each of the shards would end up being roughly 1/58 of what it is now. In general, many people might agree that decreased mining rewards would actually be a good thing (spreading out mining rewards among more people, instead of the current problems where mining is done by about 8 entities). Also, network hashing power has been growing insanely for years, so we probably have way more than enough needed to secure the network - after all, Bitcoin was secure back when network hash power was 1/58 of what it is now.
This simplistic example does not handle cases where you need to do "cross-shard" transactions. But it should be feasible to implement such a thing. The various proposals from u/thezerg1 such as BUIP024 do deal with "cross-shard" transactions.
(Also, the fact that a simplified address-based sharding mechanics can be outlined in just a few paragraphs as shown here suggests that this might be "simple and understandable enough to actually work" - unlike something such as the so-called "Lightning Network", which is actually just a catchy-sounding name with no clearly defined mechanics or mathematics behind it.) Addresses are plentiful, and can be generated locally, and you can generate addresses satisfying a certain pattern (eg ending in a certain character) the same way people can already generate vanity addresses. So imposing a "convention" where the "send" and "receive" address would have to end in the same character (and where the miner has to only mine transactions in that shard) - would be easy to understand and do. Similarly, the earlier solution proposed by u/thezerg1, involving distributed trustless Merkle trees, is easy to understand: you'd just be distributing the Merkle tree across multiple nodes, while still preserving its immutablity guarantees. Such approaches don't really change much about the actual system itself. They preserve the existing system, and just split its data structures into multiple pieces, distributed across the network. As long as we have the appropriate operators for decomposing and recomposing the pieces, then everything should work the same - but more efficiently, with unlimited on-chain scaling, and much lower resource requirements. The examples below show how these kinds of "sharding" approaches have already been implemented successfully in many other systems. Massive search is already efficiently performed with virtually unlimited scaling using divide-and-conquer / decompose-and-recompose approaches such as MapReduce and BOINC. Every time you do a Google search, you're using Google's MapReduce algorithm to solve an embarrassingly parallel problem. And distributed computing grids using the Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC) are constantly setting new records searching for protein combinations, prime numbers, or radio signals from possible intelligent life in the universe. We all use Google to search hundreds of terabytes of data on the web and get results in a fraction of a second - using cheap "commodity boxes" on the server side, and possibly using limited bandwidth on the client side - with fault tolerance to handle crashing servers and dropped connections. Other examples are [email protected], [email protected] and PrimeGrid - involving searching massive search spaces for protein sequences, interstellar radio signals, or prime numbers hundreds of thousands of digits long. Each of these examples uses sharding to decompose a giant search space into smaller sub-spaces which are searched separately in parallel and then the resulting (sub-)solutions are recomposed to provide the overall search results. It seems obvious to apply this tactic to Bitcoin - searching the blockchain for existing transactions involving a "send" from an address, before appending a new "send" transaction from that address to the blockchain. Some people might object that those systems are different from Bitcoin. But we should remember that preventing double-spends (the main thing that the Bitcoin does) is, after all, an embarrassingly parallel massive search problem - and all of these other systems also involve embarrassingly parallel massive search problems. The mathematics of Google's MapReduce and Berkeley's BOINC is simple, elegant, powerful - and provably correct. Google's MapReduce and Berkeley's BOINC have demonstrated that in order to provide massive scaling for efficient searching of massive search spaces, all you need is...
an appropriate "decompose" operation,
an appropriate "recompose" operation,
the necessary coordination mechanisms
...in order to distribute a single problem across multiple, cheap, fault-tolerant processors. This allows you to decompose the problem into tiny sub-problems, solving each sub-problem to provide a sub-solution, and then recompose the sub-solutions into the overall solution - gaining virtually unlimited scaling and massive efficiency. The only "hard" part involves analyzing the search space in order to select the appropriate DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations which guarantee that recomposing the "sub-solutions" obtained by decomposing the original problem is equivalent to the solving the original problem. This essential property could be expressed in "pseudo-code" as follows:
(DECOMPOSE ; SUB-SOLVE ; RECOMPOSE) = (SOLVE)
Selecting the appropriate DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations (and implementing the inter-machine communication coordination) can be somewhat challenging, but it's certainly doable. In fact, as mentioned already, these things have already been done in many distributed computing systems. So there's hardly any "original work to be done in this case. All we need to focus on now is translating the existing single-processor architecture of Bitcoin to a distributed architecture, adopting the mature, proven, efficient "recipes" provided by the many examples of successful distributed systems already up and running like such as Google Search (based on Google's MapReduce algorithm), or [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid (based on Berkeley's BOINC grid computing architecture). That's what any "competent" company with $76 million to spend would have done already - simply work with some devs who know how to implement open-source distributed systems, and focus on adapting Bitcoin's particular data structures (merkle trees, hashed chains) to a distributed environment. That's a realistic roadmap that any team of decent programmers with distributed computing experience could easily implement in a few months, and any decent managers could easily manage and roll out on a pre-determined schedule - instead of all these broken promises and missed deadlines and non-existent vaporware and pathetic excuses we've been getting from the incompetent losers and frauds involved with Core / Blockstream. ASIDE: MapReduce and BOINC are based on math - but the so-called "Lightning Network" is based on wishful thinking involving kludges on top of workarounds on top of hacks - which is how you can tell that LN will never work. Once you have succeeded in selecting the appropriate mathematical DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations, you get simple massive scaling - and it's also simple for anyone to verify that these operations are correct - often in about a half-page of math and code. An example of this kind of elegance and brevity (and provable correctness) involving compositionality can be seen in this YouTube clip by the accomplished mathematician Lucius Greg Meredith presenting some operators for scaling Ethereum - in just a half page of code: https://youtu.be/uzahKc_ukfM?t=1101 Conversely, if you fail to select the appropriate mathematical DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations, then you end up with a convoluted mess of wishful thinking - like the "whitepaper" for the so-called "Lightning Network", which is just a cool-sounding name with no actual mathematics behind it. The LN "whitepaper" is an amateurish, non-mathematical meandering mishmash of 60 pages of "Alice sends Bob" examples involving hacks on top of workarounds on top of kludges - also containing a fatal flaw (a lack of any proposed solution for doing decentralized routing). The disaster of the so-called "Lightning Network" - involving adding never-ending kludges on top of hacks on top of workarounds (plus all kinds of "timing" dependencies) - is reminiscent of the "epicycles" which were desperately added in a last-ditch attempt to make Ptolemy's "geocentric" system work - based on the incorrect assumption that the Sun revolved around the Earth. This is how you can tell that the approach of the so-called "Lightning Network" is simply wrong, and it would never work - because it fails to provide appropriate (and simple, and provably correct) mathematical DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations in less than a single page of math and code. Meanwhile, sharding approaches based on a DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operation are simple and elegant - and "functional" (ie, they don't involve "procedural" timing dependencies like keeping your node running all the time, or closing out your channel before a certain deadline). Bitcoin only has 6,000 nodes - but the leading sharding-based projects have over 100,000 nodes, with no financial incentives. Many of these sharding-based projects have many more nodes than the Bitcoin network. The Bitcoin network currently has about 6,000 nodes - even though there are financial incentives for running a node (ie, verifying your own Bitcoin balance. [email protected] and [email protected] each have over 100,000 active users - even though these projects don't provide any financial incentives. This higher number of users might be due in part the the low resource demands required in these BOINC-based projects, which all are based on sharding the data set. [email protected]
As part of the client-server network architecture, the volunteered machines each receive pieces of a simulation (work units), complete them, and return them to the project's database servers, where the units are compiled into an overall simulation. In 2007, Guinness World Records recognized [email protected] as the most powerful distributed computing network. As of September 30, 2014, the project has 107,708 active CPU cores and 63,977 active GPUs for a total of 40.190 x86 petaFLOPS (19.282 native petaFLOPS). At the same time, the combined efforts of all distributed computing projects under BOINC totals 7.924 petaFLOPS.
Using distributed computing, [email protected] sends the millions of chunks of data to be analyzed off-site by home computers, and then have those computers report the results. Thus what appears an onerous problem in data analysis is reduced to a reasonable one by aid from a large, Internet-based community of borrowed computer resources. Observational data are recorded on 2-terabyte SATA hard disk drives at the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico, each holding about 2.5 days of observations, which are then sent to Berkeley. Arecibo does not have a broadband Internet connection, so data must go by postal mail to Berkeley. Once there, it is divided in both time and frequency domains work units of 107 seconds of data, or approximately 0.35 megabytes (350 kilobytes or 350,000 bytes), which overlap in time but not in frequency. These work units are then sent from the [email protected] server over the Internet to personal computers around the world to analyze. Data is merged into a database using [email protected] computers in Berkeley. The [email protected] distributed computing software runs either as a screensaver or continuously while a user works, making use of processor time that would otherwise be unused. Active users: 121,780 (January 2015)
PrimeGrid is a distributed computing project for searching for prime numbers of world-record size. It makes use of the Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC) platform. Active users 8,382 (March 2016)
A MapReduce program is composed of a Map() procedure (method) that performs filtering and sorting (such as sorting students by first name into queues, one queue for each name) and a Reduce() method that performs a summary operation (such as counting the number of students in each queue, yielding name frequencies).
How can we go about developing sharding approaches for Bitcoin? We have to identify a part of the problem which is in some sense "invariant" or "unchanged" under the operations of DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE - and we also have to develop a coordination mechanism which orchestrates the DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations among the machines. The simplistic thought experiment above outlined an "instant sharding" approach where we would agree upon a convention where the "send" and "receive" address would have to end in the same character - instantly providing a starting point illustrating some of the mechanics of an actual sharding solution. BUIP024 involves address sharding and deals with the additional features needed for a complete solution - such as cross-shard transactions. And distributed trustless Merkle trees would involve storing Merkle trees across a distributed network - which would provide the same guarantees of immutability, while drastically reducing storage requirements. So how can we apply ideas like MapReduce and BOINC to providing massive on-chain scaling for Bitcoin? First we have to examine the structure of the problem that we're trying to solve - and we have to try to identify how the problem involves a massive search space which can be decomposed and recomposed. In the case of Bitcoin, the problem involves:
sequentializing (serializing) APPEND operations to a blockchain data structure
in such a way as to avoid double-spends
Can we view "preventing Bitcoin double-spends" as a "massive search space problem"? Yes we can! Just like Google efficiently searches hundreds of terabytes of web pages for a particular phrase (and [email protected], [email protected], PrimeGrid etc. efficiently search massive search spaces for other patterns), in the case of "preventing Bitcoin double-spends", all we're actually doing is searching a massive seach space (the blockchain) in order to detect a previous "spend" of the same coin(s). So, let's imagine how a possible future sharding-based architecture of Bitcoin might look. We can observe that, in all cases of successful sharding solutions involving searching massive search spaces, the entire data structure is never stored / searched on a single machine. Instead, the DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations (and the coordination mechanism) a "virtual" layer or grid across multiple machines - allowing the data structure to be distributed across all of them, and allowing users to search across all of them. This suggests that requiring everyone to store 80 Gigabytes (and growing) of blockchain on their own individual machine should no longer be a long-term design goal for Bitcoin. Instead, in a sharding environment, the DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations (and the coordination mechanism) should allow everyone to only store a portion of the blockchain on their machine - while also allowing anyone to search the entire blockchain across everyone's machines. This might involve something like BUIP024's "address sharding" - or it could involve something like distributed trustless Merkle trees. In either case, it's easy to see that the basic data structures of the system would remain conceptually unaltered - but in the sharding approaches, these structures would be logically distributed across multiple physical devices, in order to provide virtually unlimited scaling while dramatically reducing resource requirements. This would be the most "conservative" approach to scaling Bitcoin: leaving the data structures of the system conceptually the same - and just spreading them out more, by adding the appropriately defined mathematical DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operators (used in successful sharding approaches), which can be easily proven to preserve the same properties as the original system. Conclusion Bitcoin isn't the only project in the world which is permissionless and distributed. Other projects (BOINC-based permisionless decentralized [email protected], [email protected], and PrimeGrid - as well as Google's (permissioned centralized) MapReduce-based search engine) have already achieved unlimited scaling by providing simple mathematical DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations (and coordination mechanisms) to break big problems into smaller pieces - without changing the properties of the problems or solutions. This provides massive scaling while dramatically reducing resource requirements - with several projects attracting over 100,000 nodes, much more than Bitcoin's mere 6,000 nodes - without even offering any of Bitcoin's financial incentives. Although certain "legacy" Bitcoin development teams such as Blockstream / Core have been neglecting sharding-based scaling approaches to massive on-chain scaling (perhaps because their business models are based on misguided off-chain scaling approaches involving radical changes to Bitcoin's current successful network architecture, or even perhaps because their owners such as AXA and PwC don't want a counterparty-free new asset class to succeed and destroy their debt-based fiat wealth), emerging proposals from independent developers suggest that on-chain scaling for Bitcoin will be based on proven sharding architectures such as MapReduce and BOINC - and so we should pay more attention to these innovative, independent developers who are pursuing this important and promising line of research into providing sharding solutions for virtually unlimited on-chain Bitcoin scaling.
If Blockstream were truly "conservative" and wanted to "protect Bitcoin" then they would deploy SegWit AS A HARD FORK. Insisting on deploying SegWit as a soft fork (overly complicated so more dangerous for Bitcoin) exposes that they are LYING about being "conservative" and "protecting Bitcoin".
Oh... the irony. The whole purpose of SegWit was to clean up Bitcoin's code. But, by attempting to deploy SegWit as a soft fork, Blockstream had to make the code needlessly overcomplicated and less safe - because they had to make the code messy in order to shoehorn it into a soft fork. (This is also sometimes referred to as "technical debt.") For years they've been telling us that we can't have bigger blocks because "someone's Raspberry Pi on a slow internet connection might get kicked off the network". But when Blockstream decides that it's ok to:
kick most existing wallet and exchange software off the network (until it gets rewritten for SegWit),
do all this as a messier, less-safe, more-complicated soft fork...
Now suddenly Blockstream is fine with deploying messier, less-safe, more-complicated, less-compatible code. But I thought Blockstream was "conservative" and wanted to "protect Bitcoin"? Yeah, that's what they say. But let's look at what they do. Like any corporation, Blockstream's first duty is to its owners - such as AXA, PwC - all of whom would benefit if Bitcoin (a) fails or (b) becomes centralized in Lightning banking hubs. Blockstream's first duty is not to you - Bitcoin users and miners. Whenever the interests of Blockstream's corporate owners diverge from the interests of Bitcoin users and miners - Blockstream's owners prevail. That is actually how the law works. As CEO of Blockstream, Adam Back's primary duty is no longer to "do the math". His primary duty is to "maximize shareholder value". It would in fact be illegal for Blockstream to prioritize the needs of Bitcoin's users and miners over the needs of Blockstream's owners. You (Bitcoin users and miners) do not own Blockstream. AXA and PwC do. Blockstream doesn't care about you. They. Don't. Care. About. You. This is why Blockstream keeps screwing you over (Bitcoin users and miners). And Blockstream will continue to screw you over until you reject Blockstream's inferior, dangerous, messy code. The first step is to reject SegWit-as-a-soft-fork. Blockstream's implementation of SegWit-as-a-soft-fork is overly complicated and dangerous - and selfish. ViaBTC is one of the first big smart powerful miners to reject SegWit. Some people might say, "But we need SegWit!" I agree - SegWit is great - as a hard fork. SegWit ain't rocket science folks - it's just a code refactoring: re-arranging or "segregating" transaction validation data separate from transaction sender, receiver and amount data in the Merkle tree. I also think Pieter Wuille is a great programmer and I was one of the first people to support SegWit after it was announced at a congress a few months ago. But then Blockstream went and distorted SegWit to fit it into their corporate interests (maintaining their position as the dominant centralized dev team - which requires avoiding hard-forks). And Blockstream's corporate interests don't always align with Bitcoin's interests. Luke-Jr figured out a way to sneak SegWit onto the network as a soft-fork - a needlessly over-complicated and less-safe way of doing things. Why is Blockstream against hard forks? Blockstream is following their own selfish road map and business plan for Bitcoin - which involves avoiding hard forks at all costs. This is because Blockstream wants to avoid any "vote" where the network might prefer some other team's code. If a dev team such as Blockstream offers you an inferior product... ... and if they're lying to your face about why they're offering you an inferior product... ... because they have a conflict of interest where they're actually trying to help their owners and not help you... ...and they probably are under some kind of "non-disclosure" agreement where they can't even tell you any of this... Then you can and should reject these inferior code offerings from Blocksteam. If you truly want to be "conservative" and "protect Bitcoin", then:
You should reject Blockstream's messy, unsafe, selfish, hypocritical plan to implement SegWit more dangerously and more sloppily as a soft fork; and
You should support implementing SegWit as a clean, safe hard fork.
It doesn't matter who provides Segwit-as-a-hard-fork - it could be some independent devs, or it could even be some devs who break away from Blockstream. This kinda sorta almost happened with the Hong Kong agreement - and the fact that it ended up getting broken is... "interesting". Smart users and miners who really care about Bitcoin will insist on using the cleanest and safest approach to refactoring Bitcoin to solve transaction malleability And that means:
Reject Blockstream's SegWit-as-a-soft-fork
Support a better, safer, cleaner transaction malleability fix, implemented as a hard fork.
ViaBTC is the first big mining pool to stand up to Blockstream:
ViaBTC: "Drop the matter of SegWit, let's hard fork together."
ViABTC: "Why I support BU: We should give the question of block size to the free market to decide. It will naturally adjust to ever-improving network & technological constraints. Bitcoin Unlimited guarantees that block size will follow what the Bitcoin network is capable of handling safely."
Fun facts about ViaBTC: Founded by expert in distributed, highly concurrent networking from "China's Google". Inspired by Viaweb (first online store, from LISP guru / YCombinator founder Paul Graham). Uses a customized Bitcoin client on high-speed network of clusters in US, Japan, Europe, Hong Kong.
-A Raspberry Pi -Keyboard, mouse, network cable -A PC for the wallet -SD card (8 GB+) -Patience
I'm personally using a Pi 2, however I'd be interested to know if there are hurdles/hashrate differences with any of the other Pi models.
I also have a few Pi heatsinks on order, and it seems you may even be able to overclock your Pi for this - I'll have a look into this and report back if there is any interest in running the Pi mining, overclocked with a heatsink. Commonly these machines are used to control Bitcoin ASICs, so this should be interesting!
N.B. Some of the initial steps are similar (or even identical) to the earlier guides. I recommend reading through it from start to finish, even if you think you're far ahead of me - sometimes there's a simple error that can be corrected by making sure all the steps are done in order.
Sign up for an account on a mining pool that takes Myriadcoin - Yescrypt. "Yescrypt" is the code that allows your Pi to search for coins on the network, and should only work with a CPU (central processing unit). The one I've been using for my guides is https://miningpoolhub.com/ . Once you sign up, click "Myriadcoin - Yescrypt pool" on the left, then click on "workers". Add a new worker - I called my first one CPU1, CPU2 etc for each new CPU, then Pi1, Pi2 etc for each Raspberry Pi. Password doesn't matter. In the difficulty box, you can put "sd=0.01" for a Pi 2 - thanks smatdesa , however sometimes just leaving it to auto-adjust can work better.
After this click "wallet" on the left. Enter your "payment address" from step 1 and your PIN, as well as "20" for automatic payout of coins you mine, so you see some coin in your wallet every day or two. Please note, some pools charge a fee for this. 0.1 is the fee for my pool, and I'm happy to pay it to have the coins safely with me, as I don't donate - I have far too few Myriad to do so.
This is where the guide diverges from the previous guides. If you're following along at home, this is a good place to start if you're in a hurry to get mining.
So, let's continue getting software ready. Install 7-zip by double-clicking on your downloaded file. Also grab yourself a copy of Etcher - for writing our Raspbian to our Pi SD card from this linK: https://etcher.io/ . Click "download for Windows x64". If this one doesn't work/install, click the little arrow to the right, and click "Etcher for Windows x64 (32-bit) (Installer).
Now, with all of the required software in place to install Raspbian, let's write it to our SD card. Double click your Raspbian-Jessie .zip file, and drag the .img file inside into a foldeonto your desktop. After it extracts, open up your copy of Etcher, and click "select image" - pick the .img you just dropped. Select your SD card be careful here! make sure it's actually your SD card and click Flash.
Start your Pi Once this is done, plonk your SD into your Pi, connect power, keyboard, mouse, and HDMI, and watch the pretty lights flashing! The next step is acquiring the mining software to get your Pi mining. On the desktop, which has a lovely picture of a road and some nature, if that's your thing. But we're here to get mining! Click on the fourth icon from the left (default) - Terminal - a little icon with a window and blue menu bar . You're presented with a CLI (command line interface) in lovely black and green.
This should echo the following: "cloning into 'cpuminer-multi'...", and could potentially take a while - on my Pi 2 running Raspbian Jessie, it took me somewhere along the lines of half an hour for this step alone. You should end with "Checking out files: 100%" or something along these lines, and be returned to your blue $ CLI prompt. Next command is as follows:
Hit "y" at the prompt to begin installation of the required packages.
The **next command happens to be the simple build command:
All done. Make yourself a cup of tea, and feel excited that your Pi is doing a thing (compiling). The next thing you know, it's all complete, and you're left staring at your lovely blue $ prompt. So let's get it working!
This will get you into your folder. The following command should get you mining happily (yes!):
cpuminer -o stratum+tcp://hub.miningpoolhub.com:20577 -a yescrypt -u username.workername -p x -t 4
Explanation: We are using cpuminer to connect to the mining pool we joined in step 2. -a yescrypt is the algorithm we are using, username is the user name you joined the pool with, workername is the worker we added, all in step 2. -p is your password (it shouldn't matter - you could potentially put myriad2them00n, but let's not complicate things), and -t 4 is the number of threads - you can experiment with this, depending on your Pi - for my Pi 2, I get the most submitted shares with 4 threads.
Mining speed: To give you an idea of my experience: if you lined up 15 of these, all overclocked to 1 GHz, they would produce around the same hashrate as a modern i5 laptop (1.5 kH/s).
And that's it!. Shout out to smatdesa, who got me excited about working on this guide! Please post any new configurations, questions or comments below! Happy Myriad mining. And if your 3,166 Raspberry Pis are burning rubber and overflowing your coffers with XMY, or you just like what you see here, I'm humbly accepting: Donations (XMY only please):
You know it started out innocent enough. One friend at work started talking innocently about Monero and before I knew it I had hooked the work PC up to Minergate and had started mining. After I day I saw Moneros slowly ticking in and felt that it needed to go faster, so I downloaded the client as well on my gaming PC at home, but I wasn't able to use the graphic card, the Moneros were still ticking in at a too slow rate. I did some more reading and found out that Minergate was the devil, that the way to go about this was to set up my own wallet and mine using a client, directly toward a pool. First I created a web-wallet, but then I remember MtGox and all the trouble with bitcoins being lost, so I created a shell wallet on my file server at home and downloaded a few clients, compiled, compared, tuned and after a while I started to see some real Monero dripping in. I managed to get the NVidia miner up on my gaming rig with the juicy 980Ti card and that really made the difference, but I wanted more. I work with grid solutions/high performance computing and at work we have a lab where I can basically set up whatever equipment that I want (within reason) and latch on to work's power grid. I decided to set up a dual GPU system and just leave it running in the lab area where we have the consoles and do general close proximity work to make things work in the real lab. I did not have a casing so I ordered everything I needed and after some troubleshooting (BIOS did not support the Kaby Lake CPU) I got things up and running on 2xRX480 cards, nicely hashing in on about 630H/s on each card. In the mean time, to maximize my Monero flow I had turned every device, work and private into CPU and GPU miners, every clock tick squeezed for maximum utilization and at one point I even ran clients on useless Raspberry PIs, slow file servers and Beagle Bone Internet of Things cards, yielding no more than 3-6 H/s. It all added up, but I still needed more. I started looking into building a real mining rig. I ordered an AMD Motherboard, more PSUs, CPU, RAM, USB risers, etc. and I got a rig frame flown in from China at a reasonable price. In the meantime I had already ordered another RX480 which were idling on my work desk while I was building the rig. The rig was being set up at my work desk, sitting next to my work PC which also was mining Monero at full capacity when I wasn't at work. GPU mining needs to be off if the system is to be used without severe graphics lag. I had installed 2 GPU clients on my home system as well, one that really bogged down the system, rendering it unusable for anything except mining, the other setting I could easily do other work, web-browsing and such without too much lag from the graphic cards. Whenever I left for work or went to sleep I put the heavy load version on, and when I got home from work or woke up in the morning, my living room was warm and cozy, at least 4-5'C above the usual. By now I had gathered 5 GPUs which had completely filled up my mining rig. Achievement unlocked! Although I still had some debugging work to do on it (random crashes) it still would run smoothly most of the time. The Monero is pouring in, about $10 USD worth of Monero each day, from both my rig and the myriad of fileservers, gaming and work PCs, and stupid little devices that were designed for completely different things. The value of Monero had increased from about $12 USD to $30 USD during this time, everything was with a promising outlook. Then, yesterday it occurred to me, I did move 2 cards from the first PC that I bought, to the mining rig, which means that I could get two new cards and put into that one. So, I have just ordered myself two more RX480 (which by the way are much nicer for Monero mining than the RX580s) and as I am sitting here, having just ordered those cards, I am already planning the next step, moving the first motherboard out of the PC and latch it on to a rig and connect 2 more cards (it's a mATX motherboard with 4 PCI-e slots) But now, I am wondering, where will this all end? Have I become a Monero mining addict? How many rigs and graphic cards do I need to finally feel satisfied? When do I get enough? And will this short term bankrupt me completely? Well, at least I am not using money on booze, drugs or hookers, but it still feels like an addiction. Any words of advice or comfort appreciated...
Because it helps to decentralize centralization. It does not matter if you are not making a profit because the success of bitcoin is the profit. Go buy a raspberry pi and setup a cheap ass miner. The more decentralized nodes, the better. I bet there will even be a real market for cheap solo miners that people just plug and play. Great way to vote. This shit needs to be more accessible to those who don't fully understand the back-end side of bitcoin, but understand it's importance. Edit: In fact, someone who wants to see bitcoin succeed should only be investing in this. We have to spread out the mining pool. If I had money to invest I would.
Hey just wanted to say WOOOOO! After about a year and a half of contributing to slush's pool and the ant pool I finally mined 1 full bitcoin! I am so stoked about this, mostly because it's unlikely I'll ever make it to 2 at the rate the difficulty has climbed and the electricity costs and so on. But whatever I mined 1 full bitcoin and feel like it's some sort of achievement worth sharing. [Edit] Several people ask so I'll put it in the body of my post: my main hardware now is an antminer s3 and a cx750 psu. For a while it was just a gtx 660 in my desktop and I played around with a raspberry pi setup for a month or so before going asic. Its still just mining away at home.
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 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 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:
GBT is bandwidth-hungry compared to Stratum.
GBT, to be effective. requires a miner to run a fully validating node. Most miners run very small computers as hosts for their hardware (think Raspberry PI).
Supporting GBT requires both the pool and the miner to use it (and GHash.io doesn't support it, according to the wiki).
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:
Building on a block not on top of the longest chain (51% attack/history rewriting).
Keeping the longest chain private and continuing to work on it alone (Selfish mining).
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.
By bundling an SPV client into mining software, all miners can verify that they're building on top of a block that is:
Known to the network (blocking selfish mining).
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:
SPV is very low on resource usage, so the cost of using it is negligible. It could just be bundled into all mining software by default.
We can stop relying on "a pool would lose all its miners if it tried" and rely instead on "a pool can't get its miners to help".
Game theory wise, running such a failsafe costs nothing/nearly nothing, and it only makes you switch away from a pool when it is attacking the network, as opposed to having to switch when the pool gets too big (even if it's benign).
A pool can't tell the difference between a miner that runs this check and one that doesn't, so it can't encourage miners not to run it.
It incentivizes pools, even large ones, to get their blocks broadcast as fast as possible (so that their miners will start working on it).
Certain types of attacks against 0-conf transactions (Finney attack, Race attack) will still be possible. However, those are a risk even with 20% pools (success is at most linearly proportional to hash rate).
The best tested SPV client is built in Java (bitcoinj), so it can't be bundled into mining software easily. We'd have to find a solid implementation in C/C++ (looks like picocoin might work), or write one.
The system would have to be extremely reliable before miners are willing to use it (it shouldn't have false positives at a rate much higher than the likelyhood of attack). We could start by having it send a warning to the operator instead, and see how frequently mistakes happen.
To deal with propagation delays, the mining software would probably be willing to mine for ~30-60 seconds before triggering the failover. If blocks get so large that propagation times are close to the block interval, this will break (it will be far from the only problem they'll have).
Because SPV clients don't relay blocks, it might be possible for an evil pool to run a bunch of nodes (so that their miners connect to those), and block any IP that's not from their miners, in order to continue being able to do selfish mining. This could be addressed by verifying that multiple nodes know about the block or by getting the block from a node that knows it and relaying it to all others.
This only works against pooled mining attacks, where the hashing power belongs to people who don't want to attack the network.
If the longest chain is invalid, somehow, then miners will refuse not to build on it. This could be really bad.
Does this work, or am I missing something obvious?
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…
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
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
12 Picture tours
Bitcoin for beginners
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
The 21.co "computer" certainly deserves a place in the VC world, along with the other products consisting of wild promises and inane use cases. For the price of 4 Raspberry Pi computer kits, you get the following:
A Raspberry Pi. You can do a lot with this. One thing you can't do, however, is reliably run a Bitcoin node: the single gigabyte of RAM gets crowded with the bitcoin memory pool (normally up to 100 megabytes, or more when a "stress test" is taking place).
A 128 GB micro-SD card. Used to store the block chain, which is about 32 gigabytes in size right now, and growing at about 144 megabytes per day. Unfortunately, the copy of the block chain 21 Inc. includes is obsolete the second they ship the product, so you have to wait a few hours for the block chain to synchronize. This uses those valuable limited write cycles you have on your SD card.
(If you have a remote desire to develop applications that use bitcoin, stop here. Go through that list and buy just those items above. You don't need anything else. If you're looking for comedy, or if you're a sucker with too much money, read on...)
Is that all I get for my money?
Those products alone don't allow you to make Bitcoin applications, apparently. You need these things, too:
An ASIC chip and a giant fan. Bitcoin mining hardware has a propensity for running hot, so you need a fan. Unfortunately, the Raspberry Pi can't power those two items. The Pi uses a standard 5 volt mini-USB connector for power, and draws at most 2 amps. The fan alone uses three times the maximum current that the Raspberry Pi can handle. Also, a tiny fan like this emits lots of noise, so you may want to include some earplugs in your Amazon.com shopping cart. Free up another outlet for you to use, because there are two power supplies!
It's difficult to justify developing a $400 computer that can't do much. So, to entice some customers, 21 Inc. included demos that try really hard to make customers feel inspired. Here are just a few things that 21 Inc. claims were totally impossible before their product existed:
Web proxies, but with bitcoin! Gone are the days where you would pay a small fee (normally, no more than $9 per month) to access a wide array of private proxies. Now you can build your own service where you charge customers 1 cent per request to use a single public proxy. If that doesn't seem absurd yet, consider the following: loading this page probably used 60 requests for images, fonts, and various code to make the page work.
Online SMS gateways, but with bitcoin! Don't pay your phone company fifteen cents to send a single short message, and definitely don't pay a monthly fee to send unlimited messages! Be your own phone company and lure people into using your gateway. Granted, developers can use the same third-party messaging API for free, but that isn't the bitcoin way. Also, you may want to make sure you're legally a company and not an individual, just in case people want to use your message service for sending death threats to those who defame Satoshi and a few three-letter agencies charge you as being responsible.
I made a post yesterday about mining with the RPI3 [Here], I stated that it was getting 20 H/s. While at the time this was true. It must have been because it was new. I plugged it in for 5 minutes to get the numbers again just now and it's around 6 H/s. Here is the proof: https://imgur.com/a/zRhDp I used raspbian stretch for the OS and xmrig to mine monero. After a little bit, the RPi3 got very hot, you can see that in the image in the grey square where it says 100%. It's the CPU usage monitor, which I usually see mine running at around 1%-10% between idle and normal usage. It's a simple install to get it up and running. The only problem I found was remembering to sudo -i and cd into the proper folder (build) and then I could run xmrig without getting an error. I still don't know how to change the config folder so I can just have 1 rather than 4 threads running. Based on this and plugging this into Cryptocompare , (I have free electricity) I would be making 0.001560 XMR a day, roughly 50 cents a month, and 5.70 USD a year. Not much. I next want to take on making a raspberry pi mircocluster. With my RPi3 as the controller and 4 RPi0's as the nodes. I am currently downloading the software to make it and flashing the sd cards, just waiting for the RPi0's to come in the mail, along with the cluster hat. I was also thinking of making a RPi3 miner that can mine in a pool and if your feeling lucky, you flip a switch and the RPi3 solo mines for that current block. A short bit about me, I know nothing about computers, I know nothing about cryptocurrency(and I still understand that I'm not going to make a profit!). If you ran into me on the street, this stuff would be the last thing I would talk about, I'm more into the gym/fitness. I figured I would expand my mind into something I probably wouldn't like. But I am enjoying all of this! I have bought into XMR,BTC, and Raiblocks. What got me into this was reading about bitcoin a few years ago, I messed around with faucets and got 30$, I heard about bitcoin on the news again and I was able to get back into my wallet which was then 200$. I used that money to buy into XMR,BTC, and Raiblocks. Ill keep posting my findings and projects I'm looking into next! I would like to see more people posting projects, I enjoy seeing people helping each other on here and what others are doing. Thanks!
This thread is built to help users joining STRAKS and the STRAKS community. Please make sure to follow our rules (posted in the sidebar and below). Feel free to use this thread to introduce yourself and ask questions no matter how dumb :). This thread should be considered up to date. However, if you find something that is incorrect, out of date, or simply missing then please contact me or other moderators so we can update it. Thank you!
What is STRAKS?
STRAKS (STAK) is a cryptocurrency platform with only one goal in mind. Innovate e-commerce with the use of digital currency to facilitate smooth, instant, and secure e-commerce transactions. With e-commerce sales projected to reach over $2.8 trillion in 2018 and $4.8 trillion in 2021 and Bitcoin showing signs of failure due to increasing fees and the inability to process large amounts of transactions, STRAKS seeks to take hold with the ability to process over 11 million transactions a day, 40 times the amount Bitcoin can process. This ensures that STRAKS will be able to handle every single transaction with a low fee. This keeps your transactions in a secure and trusted blockchain where miners keep your transactions and the networks secure and safe, making it the easiest and cheapest way to securely purchase goods online.
The main attributes of STRAKS are:
With quickly growing global e-commerce sales STRAKS seeks to assert itself by implementing relevant technologies achieved through development that will help make sure e-commerce transactions are smooth and quick.
Open Source development allows anyone to contribute by simply making a pull request through GitHub. With anyone contributing innovation will lead to rapid product enhancements that will strengthen STRAKS market relevance.
Devolved ownership and access rights, this ensures that the application and STRAKS lifespan are not dependent on a single individual. This allows STRAKS future to be safeguarded, but also your investment and partnerships.
Focusing on the importance of its community, the STRAKS development team is collecting feedback and suggestions from the community. Future implementations such a STRAKS-Vote is on the road-map that will allow STRAKS users to propose suggestions then vote on them. Coins collected from voting will form the basis of funding the idea.
With constant optimization towards transaction speeds you can send and receive STRAKS instantly. With the inclusion of Segwit that increase block-size and capacity it will ensure that the network grows. Segwit with the combination of a block interval of just 60 seconds ensures that your transaction with be confirmed quickly and safely.
Nothing is more important to STRAKS than its community and investors. Safe-guarding both is key. To ensure that the currency remains fungible the Zerocoin protocol will be implemented. The currency will maintain equal values irrespective of past transactions, as transactions will remain untraceable and anonymous. This allows STRAKS to protect its long-term market position.
STRAKS seeks to be 100% self-funded, it has one of the lowest PoW fees on the market. A 5% fee on PoW insures that STRAKS is well-funded through its entire lifespan. This will allow STRAKS to support product development, business development, and operational expenses.
Das Mining mit dem Raspberry Pi Dass sich Kryptowährungen einer nie da gewesenen Popularität erfreuen, ist mittlerweile bekannt. So versuchen sich viele User im Einstieg in die verschiedenen Netzwerke über das Mining. Man könnte natürlich auch einfach die verschiedenen Onlinewährungen auf anderen Wegen erwerben, wie beispielsweise auf Einkaufsplattformen oder alternativen Marktplätzen ... Mining Pool; Los geht’s… Schritt 1: Betriebssystem installieren. Als erstes muss ein Betriebssystem auf dem Raspberry Pi installiert werden. Zuerst hatte ich Raspbian lite (32 Bit) installiert, hier erreichte der Raspberry Pi 3 eine Hashrate von ca. 5-6 khash/s. Danach wechselte ich auf ein 64 Bit Betriebssystem und konnte die Hashrate auf ... Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency, a form of electronic cash.It is a decentralized digital currency without a central bank or single administrator that can be sent from user to user via the bitcoin network.. There are two main methods for obtaining bitcoin: mining and purchasing. In this tutorial we will focus on cryptocurrency mining on the Raspberry Pi! ... 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. Raspberry Pi Bitcoin Mining with AntMiner U2 Since this guide has been written the difficulty involved in mining Bitcoin has increased significantly. The techniques presented here are no longer profitable and you will spend more on electricity than you would ever hope to gain through mining.
USB Bitcoin Miner - The Power of 1000's Computers - YouTube
SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE HOW MUCH - http://shorturl.at/arBHL GekkoScience NewPac USB Miner - https://bit.ly/2RIQgdX GekkoScience 8 Port USB Hub - https://bit.ly/2x... Jumping head first into mining. Sending 105Gh/s up to Slush's pool. Get an additional $10 in Bitcoins from Coinbase when purchasing through my referral link http://fredyen.com/get/Bitcoins Raspberry Pi: http://amzn.to/2l6yrW7... Code to copy URL: https://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=103046 How to setup Raspbian & Putty: https://youtu.be/vHJ4ZeXT_Zc How to setup a B... How to Install on Raspberry Pi http://raspberrypi4u.blogspot.com/2017/11/raspberry-pi-bitcoin-miner-monero-xmr.html email : [email protected][email protected]