xrv0: where did you get this? "stagenet.community.xmr.to:38084"

38081 is the correct port

so try "./monero-wallet-rpc --stagenet --daemon-host stagenet.community.xmr.to:38081 --rpc-bind-port 38084 --rpc-login rpc_user:abc123 --wallet-dir ./"

thanks selsta. I really don't know why I though 38084 was the correct port. It's still not working but it might be a bug in my code.

not sure how active the channel is, but just a quick question. I havnt been mining xmr since 2017, and back then xmrig was the go to for cpu mining

just wanted to see if that is still the case

their github is still up to date/recently updated

clarkz: still is the case, yes

nothing beats xmrig

ok, thanks

most guides understandably ignore the cpu mining aspect, but I have a 8 r740s from my homelab and free power, so figured id power those up/see what remains of my gpu mining days

2.5 GH/s? Ok then, somebody getting paid

u29601mg6ba93j[m, let's take that up on monero-markets. i have something to say

hello

hello

o/ manataw tertiary

im a complete beginner to crypto in general, but i had a few questions about what i was reading on the r/MoneroMining wiki

what's the difference between pool mining and solo mining?

pool mining u give your cpu power to others for having more possiblities to have block reward

pool mining is when people join toghether and split the reward

solo mining u try only with your cpu to have block reward

solo mining is like casino

no chances to win

the thing is wich is quite stupid, given it is a waste

when you mine most of the times you effort is done to the network not to win the actual block

if I made myself clear, so you need to start over

when you join with others you have more processing power

making for a higher chance you get the block

given you are faster tertiary

ah, that makes sense

RandomX a monero feauture evens out the field a bit, but nontheless pool mining is still better

tertiary: also many countries have their own comunity pools

so you might want ot join your own

probably there is a room in matrix that can point you in the right direction

theres a #monero-pools channel apparently which im guessing could help

It is not clear whether this is misrepresentation given "better" is subjective, but solo and pool mining give you about the same average income at first approximation.

Pool mining will have much less variance, typically, which is what many people want.

Solo mining avoids the pool fee, pool scam possibility, and give you privacy.

Pool mining avoids having to have the chain (the pool has it) and smoothes variance out.

Pool miners are faster, but you can use a pool miner to solo mine too.

i just have a spare computer lying around, im not that deep into building a rig or anything but i want to try it just for fun tbh, and from what ive read pool mining works better on normal hardware, is that true?

Now, variance is *very* high for solo mining unless large hash rate.

Depends on the actual abnormality the abnormal hardware exhibits I guess :)

how to test which  server is faster for mining

i have 2

solo mining

Run a miner on both, run mining_status from time to time, check hash rate.

tertiary: for reference when moneromooo refers to hash rate he means processing power or at least both are corelated that is why pool mining is better because hashrate is higher.

If you did not understood

because blockchain need hours to download what will be better      four  Xeon(R) CPU E7- 4870 with 32gbram  or two AMD Opteron(TM) Processor 6272  with 32gbram

When you say better, can you expand a bit ? It's not clear to me whether you are correct or wrong :)

bmore hash power

from personal experience moneromooo

not based on anything empirical

so

Block device speed is the biggest difference for chain sync speed. Get an SSD.

I totally acceppt someone proving me wrong with a based argument

i have ssd

I mean I'm just not sure what you mean by "better" here. If you mean much less variance, then you're right. If you mean substantially larger income on average, then you're wrong.

Many people make the latter mistake, that's why I'm wondering, it's not clear whether you did or not.

yes im talking about larger income on average

Then at first approximation, same income on long timelines.

But long here is dozens of years.

(typically)

Average income is the same for solo vs pool

Variance != larger income

that hasnt been my experience

but thanks to make me reconsider

my bias on that

most of people believe that pool mining is better than solo (me too)

It wouldn't make sense if it were otherwise

Because otherwise pools would be printing money out of nowhere

endor00: what "sense" are you refering to

o/ raecarruth

Logical sense

It's pretty likely you'll get zero solo mining for a good while. In the meantime, you'd get scraps with pool mining. Until you gt a block solo mining, in which case you typically get more than you'd have got pool mining all this time.

So on short timescales, most people will see more income from pool mining.

ohai _I3^RELATIVISM

would you care to share the "logic" behind such "sense"

but moneromooo knows more

endor00:

Look at it this way: from the pov of the network, a mining pool looks like one single solo miner

so monero team must do better marketing

manataw: that is the wrong aproach

It's very clearly the same if you don't care about variance. If the pool divides the profits based on hashrate, and you're 1/n of it, then you mine n times as many blocks with 1/n the reward

people should take arguments fo hat they are

or you fall the risk of a authority falacy

moneromooo is very strong argument!

So for your claim to be true (average pool earning > solo mining) it would mean that the pool somehow managed to mine more than a solo miner with the same hashrate would earn. But that cannot be possible, because a pool *is* (as a whole entity) a solo miner

manataw: you are not helping that this conversation is productive

This is a contradiction, therefore average pool earning must be equal to average solo earning given the same hashrate

no that is incorrect

you are not helping that this conversation is productive??

given higher hash rate makes for faster aproximation to the block

therefore higher earnings

moneromooo is not strong argument?

randomx tries to mitigate this

check what he has done for monero

I think the common misunderstanding that might be due to the expectation that mining is more like a race per block, where the faster would consistently find all blocks. THis is not the case, mining is "memory less".

<_I3^RELATIVISM "given higher hash rate makes for"> You are mixing up concepts

but from my experience it doesnt has a whole

<moneromooo "I think the common misunderstand"> ^ this

endor00: and you havent yet been able to base your arguments

I3^RELATIVISM more blocks but less reward per person per block

moneromooo: ok great we are going somewhere

The basis of my argument is understanding how mining works and how pools split work

so then how do you earn a block or wish people do moneromooo

how is that determined

koork: sure that is true but from my experience the relation is not linear

The probability of anyone finding a block is a gamma distribution

Of which we adjust the mean such that the average block time is ~2m

that is the point I think endor00 fail to understand yet

It's a random search, similar to gold mining. Or how gold mining would be if all gold nuggets were the same size and no seams existed. Just random specks of gold equally distributed all over a river.

Two people will find twice as many specks on average. But not, say, three times.

and how does this differs from lets say bitcoin

It does not beyond details.

It doesn't differ from bitcoin

again disclamer I basing my argument on experience not real praxxis

You need to re-evaluate your experience

Did you find many solo blocks ?

And apply some mathematical rigor to it

so then what does randomx brng to the table, and why do ASICS produce more? eficciency of use of processing power?

Point being, few data points can give a very skewed picture.

endor00: sure that is why I continue discussing it

but i will not acept baseless arguments

if I wasting my time on it

I wish to understand it fully

Our arguments are not baseless, but they assume you understand the core mechanics of mining

ASICs hash much faster. Think of it as someone who can filter 100x as much water than others. That person will find 100x more gold on average.

not arguments like "mneromoo knows best as stated in the begining"

Monero is ASIC resistant

Randomx uses a CPU's strengths, where it's already fast (due to Intel/AMD/etc's research in making those parts fast).

Asics don't "produce" more, they are just much more efficient in terms of H/s/W, so they will drive out anyone with a lower efficiency

moneromooo: ok so it comes down to eficincy of processing power has stated before

Profitability is based on efficiency vs power cost

Yes, compared to other miners.

Again with the gold analogy:

so then how does randomx mitigates this

moving foward that is

RandomX makes it very hard to develop an asic, because to make one you basically have to make a full cpu

and doesnt that affect poolvssolo mining as well

And the assumption is that you're probably not gonna be better than intel and amd at their own job

oh I see

Alice can filter 1 cubic cm of water per second. Bob also can do so. They're the only people sifting for gold. Their income will be the same on average.

so to mitigate you ar allways changing it

The memory requirements of monero make ASIC not feasible.

If Alice gets better sifting hardware, and can do 2 ccm/s, she'll get twice as much as Bob.

sure how do you change it though

But if Bob gets that same hw, they'll get the same income again.

Change what?

understand you last argument

I moved foward know

now

The difference is that they'll both get more, but with monero it's a fixed amount per time due to the difficulty algorithm.

"so then how does randomx mitigates this

moving foward that is"

"and doesnt that affect poolvssolo mining as well

"

^^

You can see the diff algorithm as something that adjusts the concentration of gold specks in the water in real time.

ok you mean way from asics?

So as Alice and Bob both get faster sifting hardware, they'll sift twice as fast in a river that's got only half the gold -> same income.

how do you clasify what are asics and what are not

that seams a rabit hole waiting for security holes

ASIC = Application Specific Integrated Circuit

endor00: I understand what a ASIC is

That means a piece of hardware designed for one single purpose

That is how you classify asics

endor00: please focus on my specific questions

if you wish to answer them

Dude you are contradicting yourself

If you actually understand what an ASIC is, then you understand what makes it different from a cpu

FWIW endor00[m] has been consistently correct, you may want to re-read maybe, you might have misunderstood some bits.

moneromooo: I agree that endor00 has been correct

the problem is that peer rambles on relating questions I never asked

Classification can be subjcetive, if that's what you're trying to get at.

in efect destroying the discussion

and making it dificult to continue a train of though

Then perhaps you are unaware how un-specific your questions are

yes that is

Well, you're not super clear in your questions, so... :)

classicfication

The classification is implied in the definition

moneromooo: sorry about that english is not my native language

That is what my answer says

1. RandomX protocol has not changed since it was launched in Nov 2019, 2. But it runs a random set of instructions, which is what general purpose CPU's are good at - and very hard to optimize better than the general purpose CPU manufacturers, 3. having general-purpose CPU's being used for mining means that it is available all over the world, to regular people, and not limited to specific hw vendors = better

decentralization

^

ok great I understood that

cool

my questions is how are intructions diferentiated between ASICS and general porpouse CPUs

Pro tip: if someone is telling you that you're wrong when you are asking them to explain things to you, you need to be humble and accept that

there is the need for classification

<_I3^RELATIVISM "my questions is how are intructi"> you are asking the wrong question

ASICs typically don't have instructions.

you assumption of humility is incorrect please stop spamming with unrelated topics

moneromooo: exactly

so that is why my question remains

They have the circuitry for a particular computation. Instructions are for building an algorithm out of simple building blocks.

how is classification defined

* endor00: you assumption of humility is incorrect please stop spamming with unrelated topics

my problem with endor00 engagement is that he has no problem in making falacies of authority

wish to me is a problem

because it becomes a non discussion

one will acept another argument

based on their argument nothing else

so ther is no point in trying to prov superiority

I don't really understand what question you are trying to get answered.

this is not lack of humility

but embrassing the discussion with a critical mind

my problem with you is that you're an entitled jackass who is not capable of engaging a different point of view and expects others to follow his every whim but shits on the people trying to explain things to him

moneromooo: "ASICs typically don't have instructions."

_I3^RELATIVISM  is spamming

ahah you are funny

The only answer I have left to give you is: read a fucking book and learn how shit works before asking another question

I sad you fall under such assumption

If you're not qualified to hold a technical conversation, then you are not part of the conversation

just because I didnt acepted you arguments until you provide base for them

anyway

I wish you are not so defensive next time

Isn't it nice, to be able to arbitrarily reject arguments as "baseless" when you know fuck-all about a topic?

whoa.

that is why people have arguments to learn from others

but endor00 you are showing your true collours now

I wish you the best of luck in solving you insecurity problems

Stop being a jerk please. If people miss your question, try to rephrase rather than insulting them.

^

moving foward if there is still any wish in such

moneromooo: are you refering to me or endor00 dont really understand

Yes, you. Poissiblt the language barrier, but you come off as arrogant and self satisfied.

given that peer seams to be the one to be a jerk when one points out his arguments werent based

moneromooo: that is a ssumption

to have a productive discourse one must not make judgment like that

so have were not born in a english speaking contry

Language barrier possibility is you mentioning it before, my opinion is from my own experience,

so would be helpful not to do so

endor00: was extremely defensive

just because I pointed out his falacies

when it relates to authorithy

and unrelated refutations

no need to be a "jerk" and uncordial by ofending people

Ok I'm out. I don't have time for all the personal philosphy. _I3^RELATIVISM do know that people here generally try really hard to answer good questions and help people who apply themselves to learn. But probably NOBODY here has the patience for your lecturing.

A few hours on /ignore should do it ^_^ See you.

is not lecturing

whatever you are not doing, you can now do it without taking up our time o/`

I see why there were problems in this comuity before

the disregard for logic is astonashing

I now you are probabbly all friends

sad

finally any channel owner here to make a stop to this

manataw: /ignore also works wonders.

anyway if anybody else is interested in my original question

before endor00

Omg what a retard.

destroyed it

Fuck off troll.

?

no ignore block please

elliot: I see you are not much diferent that endor00

block we are searching this channel for quality things and he destroyed with shit

please block

is sad the level of entitlement, when you cannot admit you arguments were falacies

anyway you are only icnetivizing further atitudes like endor00 showed

I understand Anonimal now

are people that insecure?

I wouldn't. Just let it blow off, people usually take some time to get back to good sense when annoyed.

I should be the one anoyed

moneromooo: given I had a valid question before this people hijacked

Am I late to the party?

bcause of stupid assumptions

What was the question?

sech1: no party at all very concerning judgment by some of the members

This piece of shit is a troll. All you need know.

what's called ASIC? It depends on who you ask

GPU engineers calls GPU ASICs too

no for randomx

*call

and mining

sech1:

what determines in randomx what is classified has a ASICS and what is not

Omg learn English...

for mining? It's just a chip that can do only one algorithm (or possible same algorithm with different parameters or slight variations)

sure I understand that

my questions is regarding something diferent though

elliot[m]: no need to inflame things

sorry english is not my native language

now that all the nonsense has stopped maybe I can explain it better

so RandomX makes it hard for ASICS to mine given you would have be constantly upgrading the ASICS

wish makes it not worth the money obviously

but my question is sech1 how does such classification happend with such mitigation

Uh yes.

so that you can pull way block from ASICS

it is possible to make ASIC for RandomX

But not efficient.

sure true

but at this point it will be universal enough to serve as a regular CPU

ASICS is hardware built to perform very specific operations really fast. RandomX requires performing MANY kinds of operations, and thus is hard to optimize hardware for

_I3^RELATIVISM: ^

I undrstand what a ASICs is koork

so ASIC for RandomX = CPU with on-chip memory instead of caches and optimized instruction set

My question is regarding RandomX in specific

^ he cannot understand the answer

Randomx was designed for CPU. Algo can be changed in case of ASIC. Rendering useless.

I only started learning how to programme last year, if not i would just check source cde of randomx

classic understanding of "mining ASIC" is not relevant for RandomX. You can't get 1000x speedup at all

Imor asking how randomx is implemented

what is it actual way to be "random etc"

if you know what I mean

then read the design doc

you don't need to know how to program to read a document

geez I feel sorry for anonimal

if this is what he had to endure

^ troll

Blocked... Reason: troll.

funny when the people doing the troll call other such

anyway wasted enough of my effort and time tying to explain myself

is there anyway i can approximate how much i will get from mining on certain hardware?

if this is how the most part of the monero comunity reacts when putted on the spot, I fear for its future

Mining calculators. Google it.

mining_status should tell you.

It's expected average over a looong time though.

I apreciate everybody that gave based arguments though and didnt try to make a mess of it of the discourse like moneromooo sech1 Inge- among others

just because of judgemnet or their own ego

so cheers for valuing logic

is sad you protected the wrong actors just because you know them, but I cant do much about that

<tertiary "is there anyway i can approximat"> cryptocompare.com/mining/calculator/xmr

ty

also .mine 38000 in #monero-pools

for new blockchain when i have transfer > 3 like "transfer address1 amount1  address2 amount2 address3 amount3"  there is an error like

transaction fee is not enough: " << print_money(fee) << ", minimum fee: " << print_money(needed_fee)

"fee too low"

if transfer < 3 everything work

sounds like a known bug

... pro tip, for a few minutes prior: when you walk into a new place and suddenly have to ask "why is everyone beng an asshole to me" it usually means you're the asshole.

lets try his commit?

yes, worth trying it out, report your results

good resources for others interested, regarding the previous conversation before it was derailed by endor00 's ego:

yeah, that howard chu guy, he really knows this randomx stuff

lol :D

hyc I see that Howard chu guy also has a big ego

hyc:

ohh!!!

just because I dont agree with your previous attitude that doesnt mean I dont apreciate you work on RandomX, but your previous comment was unecessary and it would have been better if you stayed silent, given it proves you are more concerned about a useleus fud than actual logic and productive discourse hyc

Why does the Saviour of NASA take a group achievement award and present it as a proof of individual glory? twitter.com/hyc_symas/status/1203709575226183683

hyc i confirm that #7337  work!!

`Attempt to get hash from height 1859411 failed -- hash not in db`

What would cause this? Never seen the error before.

that's an odd one. it means the DB doesn't have a record for the hash of the block at that height

thnk you hyc, good to see is not all you had. Have a good day

<hyc "that's an odd one. it means the "> Got it three times in logs recently on one node, but the node seems operational and healthy otherwise.

sethsimmons, can you ask the daemon for that block info ( print_block 1859411 )

or the blocks before and after it

docker exec monerod monerod print_block 1859411 2021-01-24 14:58:49.355 I Monero 'Oxygen Orion' (v0.17.1.9-release) Error: Unsuccessful -- json_rpc_request: ➜ ~ docker exec monerod monerod status 2021-01-24 14:59:09.007I Monero 'Oxygen Orion' (v0.17.1.9-release)

Height: 2281578/2281578 (100.0%) on mainnet, not mining, net hash 2.08 GH/s, v14, 11(out)+55(in) connections, uptime 0d 0h 52m 4s

```

docker exec monerod monerod print_block 1859411 2021-01-24 14:58:49.355 I Monero 'Oxygen Orion' (v0.17.1.9-release) Error: Unsuccessful -- json_rpc_request: ➜ ~ docker exec monerod monerod status 2021-01-24 14:59:09.007I Monero 'Oxygen Orion' (v0.17.1.9-release)

Height: 2281578/2281578 (100.0%) on mainnet, not mining, net hash 2.08 GH/s, v14, 11(out)+55(in) connections, uptime 0d 0h 52m 4s

Mochi101: hyc ^

1859412 has the same issue, unprintable

Everything before and after 11/12 seems fine

Sounds like a borked DB page maybe.

AFK for a bit but happy to troubleshoot however is helpful later, and let me know if this is worthy of an issue.

yeah, sounds like a corrupted page

the height->hash table is pretty compact, so the records for those heights should all be contiguous

Maybe the contents of that page might shed some light. ie, if thre's a "unbound: w00t" message in it.

might try reading it in py-lmdb, seek to 1859410, then cursor_next thru the next 3 slots

Did that bug get fixed ? The one with some unbound message written to the db...

oh, yeah, that's always a possibility

I thought it did

I mean, we definitely updated libunbound once, because of that issue

and it's been a while since anyone else has mentioned the problem

Ah, so not fixed, but poked enough to hope.

I see the "Attempt to get hash from height ... failed" report from tme to time.

And usually just tell people to sync again.

can't remember the last time I've seen it here

Sounds hard to debug. strace can't see anyuthing wrong presimably since mmap.

Maybe we could keep all mmapped regions without W, and only temporarily switch W upon a txn commit. That'd be slow, presumably...

Then with luck we'd get a SIGBUS or SIGSEGV if something pokes.

the mmap is always read-only

Txn commits write via syscalls ?

writes are only done using standard write syscalls

except in db-sync-mode=fastest, which makes the mmap writable

but I've only ever recommended people to use db-sync-mode=fast

so the only way for that libunbound bug to happen is either it's writing to the DB fd itself, or it's writing to one of LMDB's write buffers

Default seems fast, so I guess that kills the stray write to mmap region theory.

we tried lots of tricks to detect stray writes to the DB fd and they never triggered

Was it happening on at least two OSes ?

ah, dunno

I assumed just linux

Maybe put pages without W on both sides of the write buffers, see if something ploughs into them.

ala electricfence

good idea...

well. the overwrites we saw began exactly at the beginning of a page

so there may not be any underrun to catch

but I guess anything's possible if it's just scribbling over RAM

lol btcdragonlord is reality-challenged

yeah

fluffypony: is this you youtube.com/watch?v=qRC4Vk6kisY

rofl

it's perfect

now I've got the song stuck in my head

lol I'm glad I'm not on twitter and had no idea who it was until today twitter.com/btcdragonlord/status/1353359793776332800

if you don't follow fluffypony on twitter you're losing 0.25% of the fun of the internet

where's fluffypony's twittor

jess: twitter.com/fluffypony

whoa

smash that subscribe button

sech1: he blocked me, guess he didn't like being muted

you can always read tweets in private tab

yeah I know

<fluffypony "yeah"> How dare you

He's trying to save you from Guantanamo

for epic no javascript and moar privacy you can also use nitter.net

😂😂😂

diverter[m]: yeah that was such a bizarre take

is zcash related to zcoin

jess: no - ZCoin became Firo

oh.

after ZCash went after them for trademark infringement I think

<fluffypony "diverter: yeah that was such a b"> He's been doing this #NumberGoGuantanamo thing to a bunch of us Samourai users since we banned him for posting furry porn (you read that correctly) in Telegram chat

or did ZCoin become Zen, I can't even keep tabs any more

firo used to zcoin

they got attacked recently

Saw that

diverter[m]: he also believes Trump won the election ...

Wasn't someone from that camp supposedly involved in the network attacks on XMR lately?

<Inge- "diverter: he also believes Trump"> How dare you too sir! Trump 20forever

diverter[m]: from Firo? no, I like the Firo people, they're solid

they spoke at MoneroKon about Lelantus

I get confused with all the names anymore, my bad lol

<fluffypony "they spoke at MoneroKon about Le"> Nice.

<diverter[m] "Wasn't someone from that camp su"> On a side note, my node been up for nearly 2 weeks straight now 🙌

* firo used to be zcoin

I was a little saddened that he used Sarah's thread to post that

lol yeah

16:04 <moneromooo> Did that bug get fixed ? The one with some unbound message written to the db... <-- no it never got fixed but it also stopped showing IIRC

hi

I'm reading Zero to Monero v2 (web.getmonero.org/library/Zero-to-Monero-2-0-0.pdf). Could someone help me understand the last paragraph of page 22? (the 2^c coefficient in the EdDSA signature scheme)

Glad to see Ansible playbooks to provision Monero nodes ( github.com/lalvarezguillen/monerod-node-vps , github.com/mrWhiteCrow/monero-nodes-ansible )

fluffypony, even Michael Saylor is saying it's possible to lose keys in a boating accident now: reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/l42ku…or_people_can_go_fk_themselves_they

It's almost unbelievable that Bitcoin is one of the more popular symbols at CNBC, alongside Apple, Tesla, NIO etc