Search content
Sort by
Showing 18 of 18 results by ma_bit
Re: [100 TH] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
21027 272726 2013-12-02 18:04:34 00:03:35:56 00:05:49:17 0.00000637 78
Low round for me too.
Low round for me too.
+1
Re: [100 TH] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
Did anyone try to change his pool website password lately (not the one for the miners) ?
After entering my email and hiting send simply nothing happens...
After entering my email and hiting send simply nothing happens...
I changed it (this way) yesterday.
Re: [100 TH] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
Just to make you all feel a little bit better:
Next Projected difficulty: 275,075,241
+45.3%
+85,793,992
Quite amazing.
Next Projected difficulty: 275,075,241
+45.3%
+85,793,992
Quite amazing.
I saw this one:
Estimated next difficulty: 241211308 (+27.4%) in 4 days and 5.6 hours
a little bit better but still
Re: [520 TH] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees, Stratum, MergedMining, Private Servers
Invalid certificate errors are expected for people who use DNS resolvers which are still using the cloudflare nameservers. It's been about 18 hours since moving to a new nameserver, ideally you would be updated already. It only took about 4 hours to update on my PC using Google's DNS servers. There's absolutely nothing I can do on my end to fix the cloudflare certificates, it's just a waiting game for your DNS resolvers to use the proper nameservers.
I think you can
... not now, but for next time, you can set shorter validity (or shorter refresh) of DNS records ... but you can have good reason to keep it the same as today 
@ IN SOA nameserver.place.dom. postmaster.place.dom. (
1 ; serial number
3600 ; refresh [1h]
600 ; retry [10m]
86400 ; expire [1d]
3600 ) ; min TTL [1h]
Re: [100 TH] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
20352 2013-10-11 17:14:40 0:46:18 85167670 77196 0.02460645 262973 25.39866404 confirmed
Seems ok to me. Actually slightly higher than usual.
Seems ok to me. Actually slightly higher than usual.
I think it is correct (slightly higher) for that block, because reward for transactions in this block is sligthly higher as well ... or is it wrong idea?
Re: [520 TH] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees, Stratum, MergedMining, Private Servers
DNS issues should be over now, I have moved the DNS off of Cloudflare due to their withholding the records for 'www.btcguild.com' from many DNS requests, effectively removing the site from the internet for random people using their ISP as the DNS resolver. It may take a little longer for the nameserver change to propagate.
The site is moving a little bit slower as a result, mostly on the *first* page load, since you're now retrieving all the JS/CSS/images from the site instead of the cloudflare CDN. Subsequent page loads aren't quite as quick as it was for me on Cloudflare, but are not too bad, at least coming from California (which is one of the slowest locations to access it from within the US). I'll be working on tweaking things with the site this weekend to help speed it up. Most of the slowdown is that I'm forced to proxy the site through another server in order to protect it from direct DDoS attacks.
The site is moving a little bit slower as a result, mostly on the *first* page load, since you're now retrieving all the JS/CSS/images from the site instead of the cloudflare CDN. Subsequent page loads aren't quite as quick as it was for me on Cloudflare, but are not too bad, at least coming from California (which is one of the slowest locations to access it from within the US). I'll be working on tweaking things with the site this weekend to help speed it up. Most of the slowdown is that I'm forced to proxy the site through another server in order to protect it from direct DDoS attacks.
Is it related with that? I got it from my Firefox today:
This Connection is Untrusted
You have asked Firefox to connect securely to www.btcguild.com, but we can't confirm that your connection is secure.
Technical Details:
www.btcguild.com uses an invalid security certificate. The certificate is only valid for the following names: ssl2493.cloudflare.com , *.motorcycleinsurance.com , lifehighlights.com , *.rawissue.com , *.landsalesco.com , clickindia.in , bobsbets.com.au , premiermaldives.com , *.efesti.com , bitaccel.com , *.tisaddis.com , *.clickindia.in , *.hhclone.com , *.onlc.eu , rawissue.com , *.onlc.fr , *.lifehighlights.com , efesti.com , *.bobsbets.com.au , yoledoy.com , onlc.eu , *.premiermaldives.com , tisaddis.com , *.dutchshopbrighton.com.au , *.bitaccel.com , dutchshopbrighton.com.au , landsalesco.com , *.yoledoy.com , motorcycleinsurance.com , hhclone.com , mijntasenik.nl , *.mijntasenik.nl , onlc.fr (Error code: ssl_error_bad_cert_domain)
Re: [65000 GH/s] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
It's invalid.
well, do you have any a bit longer explanation or link to it ? please
Re: [65000 GH/s] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
What is wrong with this block?
20271 2013-10-05 08:25:31 261795 http://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000002c4d92067c21767eea88d34ae7a61bc9b54482a9ff23bf509?site=slush 25.13406521 invalid
20271 2013-10-05 08:25:31 261795 http://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000002c4d92067c21767eea88d34ae7a61bc9b54482a9ff23bf509?site=slush 25.13406521 invalid
Re: [65000 GH/s] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
My miners switched to a backup pool, now Slush's rate is getting back, at 59 TH now...
what do you use as backup (that works)?
Re: [65000 GH/s] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
Re: [65000 GH/s] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
We're gaining hashing power quickly because BTC Guild is under DDoS attack and last I checked they were down to 150,000GHs - so all that power is spreading to other pools that people have setup as backups.
the same for 50BTC
Re: [65000 GH/s] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
There it is. 15h round done. I hope it will be valid.
keep panic
Re: [65000 GH/s] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
What is up with these invalid blocks ??
258617 is claimed by BTCGuild
258589 is claimed by EclipseMC
What happened is: We found a block nearly at the same time as someone else, and they were lucky enough to have the next block found based upon their block instead of ours.
So our blocks are orphaned (not part of the main chain) and thus invalid.
Its bad luck, but happens from time to time, because the info that some block was found does not appear at instant speed at all nodes.
The time needed for the block to propagate through the network leaves a small time window for another block with same block # to be found.
and what is wrong with block # 20053 ~ 258135
Re: [65000 GH/s] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
I'm getting This is not a valid Bitcoin address. Please install Bitcoin client or register some web wallet to get one. message. I didn't change anything and double checked the address as well. Also tried changing the address but it won't take it either.
anyone else having issues today?
anyone else having issues today?
same
stats and profile seems to be ok
Re: [65000 GH/s] Slush's Pool (mining.bitcoin.cz); TX FEES + UserDiff; ASIC tested
I'm getting This is not a valid Bitcoin address. Please install Bitcoin client or register some web wallet to get one. message. I didn't change anything and double checked the address as well. Also tried changing the address but it won't take it either.
anyone else having issues today?
anyone else having issues today?
same