How to Choose a Mining Pool: 12 Best Bitcoin Mining Pools 2019
Bitcoin Mining Pools: Choose The Best Mining Pool for BTC
9 Best Bitcoin Mining Pools: Legit Sites (2020 Companies)
7 Best Bitcoin Mining Pool in 2020 Reviewed (+ Fees Compared)
Bitcoin mining is analogous to the mining of gold, but its digital form. The process involves specialized computers solving algorithmic equations or hash functions. These problems help miners to confirm blocks of transactions held within the network. Bitcoin mining provides a reward for miners by paying out in Bitcoin in turn the miners confirm transactions on the blockchain. Miners introduce new Bitcoin into the network and also secure the system with transaction confirmation.
Bitcoin Cash (BCH) brings sound money to the world. Merchants and users are empowered with low fees and reliable confirmations. The future shines brightly with unrestricted growth, global adoption, permissionless innovation, and decentralized development. All Bitcoin holders as of block 478558 are now owners of Bitcoin Cash. All Bitcoiners are welcome to join the Bitcoin Cash community as we move forward in creating sound money accessible to the whole world.
Bitcoin Core (BTC) mining is competitive and the goal is that you want to solve or “find” a block before anyone else’s miner does. Then you will get the block reward and transaction fees from the block. During the last several years we have seen an incredible amount of hashrate coming online which made it harder to have enough hashrate personally (individually) to solve a block, thus getting the payout reward. To compensate for this pool mining was developed. What a mining pool does is accept connections from miners anywhere in the world (if applicable and some are private) and pool their hashrate together thus mining with a higher total hashrate. In doing this the variance or luck of finding block is increased to the positive by having a larger total hashrate in trying to process a block the fastest.
bitcoin: slow, Chinese mining pools, energy consumption, not a safe haven, not a store of value. The bitcoin narrative is being eroded every day since this drop. So what is it great for?
Payments? Way to many better cryptos out there for that. Im tired of the BTC maxis saying bitcoin is made for this liquidity crunch. Its simply a speculative asset. Thats it, the space has moved too far ahead. That being said, I hodl and I think this is going to pump hard. If this is a truly manipulated market there has never been a time like right now for the manipulators to push this market up and drag money into the crypto sphere.
What many small block trolls like to say about Bitcoin Cash mining is that it's controlled by a single miner. This is false. The grey area in the pie chart is other mining pools (plural). These are all unknown mining pools, not a single pool.
What is better, joining a XT mining pool or purchasing a 21 bitcoin computer to mine BIP 101 blocks?
What do users do who want to help raise mining BIP 101 blocks but don't have professional mining hardware? If enough people have the same goal (BIP 101), can't we get a substantial percentage of hashing power?
What many small block trolls like to say about Bitcoin Cash mining is that it's controlled by a single miner. This is false. The grey area in the pie chart is other mining pools (plural). These are all unknown mining pools, not a single pool. /r/btc
CPU Power of the largest Mining Pool determines what is "REAL" bitcoin in the event of the fork. Not developers, Not exchanges, Not users. It's in Satoshi's paper. - explained inside (Also All Alt-coins are a waste of cpu) /r/Bitcoin
What good pools for bitcoin or any or merged are accepting gpu mining still and is there a new middlecoin type website? (ignore profitability concerns please)
Want to run some gpus or a while even though not currently profitable. Want to find some that will either accept micro contributions from gpus for bitcoin or S good merged .inig pool that kickz out other coins or something like the old middlecoin which autotrades ( or at least lets you manually trade) for coins of your choice. What is good out there today?
What good pools for bitcoin or any or merged are accepting gpu mining still and is there a new middlecoin type website? (ignore profitability concerns please)
Want to run some gpus for a while even though not currently profitable. Want to find some pools or websites that will either accept micro contributions from gpus for bitcoin or some good merged minig pool that kicks out other coins or something like the old middlecoin which autotrades ( or at least lets you manually trade) for coins of your choice. What is good out there today?
I understand that 51% Attack is very costly and probably won't probably much financial incentive to the one who orchestrates it. I came across this blog post called How China can kill bitcoin and thought that the author does have quite a good point (despite the tone of the blog post). He argued that the top 4 Chinese mining pools alone represent more than 51% of the hashrate and if the Chinese government are to forcibly commandeer these top 4 mining pools (without having to buy new mining equipment) then they can easily orchestrate the 51% attack within an hour and a double-spend would have been successful. A few questions:
If this all is true, wouldn't you say that China is quite a big threat to the existence of bitcoin? Isn't this something we should be more worried about? (it seems that most of bitcoin community just assumed that no one will attempt the 51% attack and it has been debunked many times). I don't know what could be the incentives for China to do this (cracking down money laundering?) but does the fact that they could do this if they want to concern you?
Will bitcoin mining be more decentralized (esp away from China) in the future? It seems that miners should go wherever there is cheap electricity, why haven't more countries jumped in?
Can anyone comment about Stratum V2? Will it help address the problem by giving the control to miners o select their own transaction sets? When will it be ready?
I'm trying to be positive but GL's actions are the opposite of intelligence. This is the worst update in A9 history. I'll explain why...
It's a pretty long rant. You have been warned...
Worsened graphics. Same device, much worse graphics for no reason. They literally made the game engine worse.
Frame skipping and lagging everywhere. Also game crashes. They said they optimized the game. I bet they forgot to mention that you need a quantum computer to play their casino racing masterpiece.
The older bug with the mini map (tap do steer players can't tap in that area) is back.
The infamous lagging screen after every freaking race (what the hell are they doing in background that the phones become so hot? bitcoin mining?). They still didn't fix it after the recent hotfix! Who pays these clowns who can't even revert some dumb changes?
The unfair SE. There are hardly tokens offered. They keep reducing the rewards until there will be nothing left except uncommon parts and a few credits. They expect us to play hundreds of races for peanuts. The finest greediness. Also how come SE still shares the same tickets pool with daily events? They are different things!
Same old stinky GP. Everyone knows what is wrong with this thing that has nothing in common with real grand prixes except the name. Most regular players don't win keys. Why should we even bother anymore?
The hard Unleashed event. They put the same required time 0:51 despite the cars having different rankings. They don't have the expression "fair play" in their dictionary.
Credits heist is good in theory. In practice they added the awful police besides the aggressive AI to make sure you can't get those credits. They also added stars requirements for good measure. Also they made it that way you need to play too many races if you want all rewards. Efficiency is again not in their dictionary.
The new MP format which encourages dumb grinding to get some decent milestones.
The club rewards remain a joke.
You need to complete 250 conditions in SE just to have the chance to buy packs! Whatever GL idiot who thought of that should have his head smashed on his monitor.
They still didn't fix that stupid error with no internet connection! My internet is working, it's not my fault you can't code a decent internet connection algorithm.
The cheaters are still dominating MP. The Android version has such a poor security that every schmuck can abuse the game. I wonder if anyone even reads those in game reports or are there as placebo effect.
Did you check how much internet traffic this game consumes? What the fxx-k they transfer that A9 needs gigabytes of data every month just to play it?
Should I mention the bunch of useless employees called Customer Care? An appendix is more useful than them.
https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Research/releases/tag/184.108.40.206 Finally! After over ten months of development and testing, "Fern" has arrived! This is a whopper. 240 pull requests merged. Essentially a complete rewrite that was started with the scraper (the "neural net" rewrite) in "Denise" has now been completed. Practically the ENTIRE Gridcoin specific codebase resting on top of the vanilla Bitcoin/Peercoin/Blackcoin vanilla PoS code has been rewritten. This removes the team requirement at last (see below), although there are many other important improvements besides that. Fern was a monumental undertaking. We had to encode all of the old rules active for the v10 block protocol in new code and ensure that the new code was 100% compatible. This had to be done in such a way as to clear out all of the old spaghetti and ring-fence it with tightly controlled class implementations. We then wrote an entirely new, simplified ruleset for research rewards and reengineered contracts (which includes beacon management, polls, and voting) using properly classed code. The fundamentals of Gridcoin with this release are now on a very sound and maintainable footing, and the developers believe the codebase as updated here will serve as the fundamental basis for Gridcoin's future roadmap. We have been testing this for MONTHS on testnet in various stages. The v10 (legacy) compatibility code has been running on testnet continuously as it was developed to ensure compatibility with existing nodes. During the last few months, we have done two private testnet forks and then the full public testnet testing for v11 code (the new protocol which is what Fern implements). The developers have also been running non-staking "sentinel" nodes on mainnet with this code to verify that the consensus rules are problem-free for the legacy compatibility code on the broader mainnet. We believe this amount of testing is going to result in a smooth rollout. Given the amount of changes in Fern, I am presenting TWO changelogs below. One is high level, which summarizes the most significant changes in the protocol. The second changelog is the detailed one in the usual format, and gives you an inkling of the size of this release.
Note that the protocol changes will not become active until we cross the hard-fork transition height to v11, which has been set at 2053000. Given current average block spacing, this should happen around October 4, about one month from now. Note that to get all of the beacons in the network on the new protocol, we are requiring ALL beacons to be validated. A two week (14 day) grace period is provided by the code, starting at the time of the transition height, for people currently holding a beacon to validate the beacon and prevent it from expiring. That means that EVERY CRUNCHER must advertise and validate their beacon AFTER the v11 transition (around Oct 4th) and BEFORE October 18th (or more precisely, 14 days from the actual date of the v11 transition). If you do not advertise and validate your beacon by this time, your beacon will expire and you will stop earning research rewards until you advertise and validate a new beacon. This process has been made much easier by a brand new beacon "wizard" that helps manage beacon advertisements and renewals. Once a beacon has been validated and is a v11 protocol beacon, the normal 180 day expiration rules apply. Note, however, that the 180 day expiration on research rewards has been removed with the Fern update. This means that while your beacon might expire after 180 days, your earned research rewards will be retained and can be claimed by advertising a beacon with the same CPID and going through the validation process again. In other words, you do not lose any earned research rewards if you do not stake a block within 180 days and keep your beacon up-to-date. The transition height is also when the team requirement will be relaxed for the network.
Besides the beacon wizard, there are a number of improvements to the GUI, including new UI transaction types (and icons) for staking the superblock, sidestake sends, beacon advertisement, voting, poll creation, and transactions with a message. The main screen has been revamped with a better summary section, and better status icons. Several changes under the hood have improved GUI performance. And finally, the diagnostics have been revamped.
The wallet sync speed has been DRASTICALLY improved. A decent machine with a good network connection should be able to sync the entire mainnet blockchain in less than 4 hours. A fast machine with a really fast network connection and a good SSD can do it in about 2.5 hours. One of our goals was to reduce or eliminate the reliance on snapshots for mainnet, and I think we have accomplished that goal with the new sync speed. We have also streamlined the in-memory structures for the blockchain which shaves some memory use. There are so many goodies here it is hard to summarize them all. I would like to thank all of the contributors to this release, but especially thank @cyrossignol, whose incredible contributions formed the backbone of this release. I would also like to pay special thanks to @barton2526, @caraka, and @Quezacoatl1, who tirelessly helped during the testing and polishing phase on testnet with testing and repeated builds for all architectures. The developers are proud to present this release to the community and we believe this represents the starting point for a true renaissance for Gridcoin!
Most significantly, nodes calculate research rewards directly from the magnitudes in EACH superblock between stakes instead of using a two- or three- point average based on a CPID's current magnitude and the magnitude for the CPID when it last staked. For those long-timers in the community, this has been referred to as "Superblock Windows," and was first done in proof-of-concept form by @denravonska.
Network magnitude unit pinned to a static value of 0.25
Max research reward allowed per block raised to 16384 GRC (from 12750 GRC)
New CPIDs begin accruing research rewards from the first superblock that contains the CPID instead of from the time of the beacon advertisement
500 GRC research reward limit for a CPID's first stake
6-month expiration for unclaimed rewards
10-block spacing requirement between research reward claims
Rolling 5-day payment-per-day limit
Legacy tolerances for floating-point error and time drift
The need to include a valid copy of a CPID's magnitude in a claim
10-block emission adjustment interval for the magnitude unit
One-time beacon activation requires that participants temporarily change their usernames to a verification code at one whitelisted BOINC project
Verification codes of pending beacons expire after 3 days
Self-service beacon removal
Burn fee for beacon advertisement increased from 0.00001 GRC to 0.5 GRC
Rain addresses derived from beacon keys instead of a default wallet address
Beacon expiration determined as of the current block instead of the previous block
The ability for developers to remove beacons
The ability to sign research reward claims with non-current but unexpired beacons
As a reminder:
Beacons expire after 6 months pass (180 days)
Beacons can be renewed after 5 months pass (150 days)
Renewed beacons must be signed with the same key as the original beacon
Magnitudes less than 1 include two fractional places
Magnitudes greater than or equal to 1 but less than 10 include one fractional place
A valid superblock must match a scraper convergence
Superblock popularity election mechanics
Yes/no/abstain and single-choice response types (no user-facing support yet)
To create a poll, a maximum of 250 UTXOs for a single address must add up to 100000 GRC. These are selected from the largest downwards.
Burn fee for creating polls scaled by the number of UTXOs claimed
50 GRC for a poll contract
0.001 GRC per claimed UTXO
Burn fee for casting votes scaled by the number of UTXOs claimed
0.01 GRC for a vote contract
0.01 GRC to claim magnitude
0.01 GRC per claimed address
0.001 GRC per claimed UTXO
Maximum length of a poll title: 80 characters
Maximum length of a poll question: 100 characters
Maximum length of a poll discussion website URL: 100 characters
Maximum number of poll choices: 20
Maximum length of a poll choice label: 100 characters
Magnitude, CPID count, and participant count poll weight types
The ability for developers to remove polls and votes
[220.127.116.11] 2020-09-03, mandatory, "Fern"
Backport newer uint256 types from Bitcoin #1570 (@cyrossignol)
Implement project level rain for rainbymagnitude #1580 (@jamescowens)
Upgrade utilities (Update checker and snapshot downloadeapplication) #1576 (@iFoggz)
Provide fees collected in the block by the miner #1601 (@iFoggz)
Add support for generating legacy superblocks from scraper stats #1603 (@cyrossignol)
Port of the Bitcoin Logger to Gridcoin #1600 (@jamescowens)
Implement zapwallettxes #1605 (@jamescowens)
Implements a global event filter to suppress help question mark #1609 (@jamescowens)
Add next target difficulty to RPC output #1615 (@cyrossignol)
Add caching for block hashes to CBlock #1624 (@cyrossignol)
Make toolbars and tray icon red for testnet #1637 (@jamescowens)
Add an rpc call convergencereport #1643 (@jamescowens)
Implement newline filter on config file read in #1645 (@jamescowens)
Implement beacon status icon/button #1646 (@jamescowens)
Add gridcointestnet.png #1649 (@caraka)
Add precision to support magnitudes less than 1 #1651 (@cyrossignol)
Replace research accrual calculations with superblock snapshots #1657 (@cyrossignol)
Publish example gridcoinresearch.conf as a md document to the doc directory #1662 (@jamescowens)
Add options checkbox to disable transaction notifications #1666 (@jamescowens)
Add support for self-service beacon deletion #1695 (@cyrossignol)
Add support for type-specific contract fee amounts #1698 (@cyrossignol)
Add verifiedbeaconreport and pendingbeaconreport #1696 (@jamescowens)
Add preliminary testing option for block v11 height on testnet #1706 (@cyrossignol)
Add verified beacons manifest part to superblock validator #1711 (@cyrossignol)
Implement beacon, vote, and superblock display categories/icons in UI transaction model #1717 (@jamescowens)
Inspired by the discussion on the cc subreddit (which I won't link to), I have some questions.
These Nakamoto coefficients aren't very comparable. Miners can reassign their hashrate at any time. Hashrate also has an ongoing, real expense. Nano votes can't be reassigned if the network is controlled, and there's no out of band "real" cost to acquire or maintain control. Thus, it's extremely misleading to try and compare these.
I would say that indeed hashrate has an ongoing, real expense so indeed, performing a 51% attack on Bitcoin will cost you on a per hour basis. On the other hand, get a 51% majority of Nano and you essentially block the network for eternity from what I understand. Bitcoin would most likely also collapse in value if a 51% attack was successfully performed, because even if it were to go offline for an hour and just a few doublespends were performed, it would undermine the store of value mantra quite strongly. Some sides notes here are, of course, that getting a 51% majority delegates for Nano is extremely difficult or expensive, as you need to buy up a large percentage of the supply yourself or you need to convince a lot of people to delegate to you, which hopefully only works if you build services that use Nano and therefore, in both cases, you have a vested interest in ensuring the Nano network remains valuable. On the other hand, Bitcoin miners have made large investments in ASICs which means they are strongly incentivized in the same sense, they want the Bitcoin network to remain valuable. Convincing either enough large Nano holders, or large swathes of Bitcoin hash power, would therefore be difficult. However, wouldn't it, generally, not be easier to find hash power outside the large miners currently mining than it would be to find Nano to give yourself a majority? I'm thinking that to get a 51% majority in Nano as said earlier you need to buy up enough of the outstanding Nano, or convince holders with a vested interest in the value of the Nano network. For Bitcoin however, I could rent out a chunk of Amazon's computing power and set up my own temporary mining operation to compete with the mining pools currently available. It would still be expensive, but, I am assuming, less so than taking the Nano option (even with current market caps). Is this a fair comparison? Or am I misrepresenting how easy it would be to get a Nano majority, or misrepresenting how difficult it would be to find alternative hash power to mine Bitcoin? Edit: Comparing to Bitcoin because it has the most hash power, this goes for all PoW crypto.
SlushPool. Pros: Established medium+ pool, score-based method reduces risk of cheating, user-friendly dashboard Cons: 2% fee may be too much for some people Announced in 2010, SlushPool was the very first Bitcoin mining pool and undoubtedly led the way for many other mining pools to come. Founded by SatoshiLabs current CEO Marek Palatinus (aka Slush), it’s based in the Czech Republic and ... What is a Bitcoin Mining Pool? If you already read our guide on Bitcoin mining, you know that new Bitcoins enter the circulation as a “prize” for a miner who manages to guess the solution to a mathematical problem.The winning miner get to add the latest block to the blockchain and update the ledger.. By design, the more miners you have, the more difficult the problem gets, and vice versa. 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. According to BlockTrail, Bitfury is the third largest Bitcoin mining pool and mines about 11% of all blocks. The main difference between the Bitfury pool and other mining pools is that Bitfury is a private pool. Bitfury, the company, makes its own mining hardware and runs its own pool. So, unlike Slush or Antpool, Bitfury cannot be joined if ... Mining in a pool is the best way for small to average bitcoin miners to achieve better results. When miners combine their hash power and split the rewards, all of them will receive a constant income proportional to their hash rate.
What is a Bitcoin Mining Pool... as Bitcoin mining has become increasingly difficult, individuals join mining pools. You would be required to invest in your own mining equipment and then join a ... Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. The creation of a bitcoin takes only 10 minutes that's helped with a formula and the count for the bitcoins cannot exceed Twenty one million cash. This is also the utmost count that has been ... Let's Review The Different Bitcoin Mining Pool 1. https://slushpool.com/home/ 2. https://www.antpool.com/ 3. https://pool.btc.com/ 4. https://www.f2pool.com/... Bitcoin & Cryptocurrency Mining Pools Explained Best Mining Pools PPS vs PPLNS - Duration: 18:17. VoskCoin 9,965 views. 18:17. They Watched Us With Webcams And Rewrote Our Code!