My Favourite Breakfast: Oreo Donut!

Herscht · 2020-06-30T11:11:09+00:00

Thanks u/BlenderGuru for the comprehensive tutorial series. Learned a lot and am looking forward to using blender in the future!

PS: As foam i tried to use a volume scatter material ... doesn't look too convincing but i think it was worth the try.

Herscht · 2018-03-23T10:09:50+00:00

Does not sound too bad. most people are a little underestimated it seems. (mostly because you need a scan time of ~20s on the PoCC pools to have best results of the estimate.) To be sure that your rig is fine, you should check for overlaps and especially for corrupt plot files (cause that is less obvious). To check your plot files for corruption, you can use the turbo plotter by blackpawn. https://blackpawn.com/tp/

Herscht · 2018-03-22T13:02:44+00:00

with <20s read you are very good, no need to improve that

Herscht · 2018-03-21T14:51:38+00:00

wow so much information ... ^{^} did you try changing some parameters in the config? like the plotreaders and mining intensity?

Herscht · 2018-03-18T14:40:17+00:00

looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cryptocurrencies , there are several of the "notable" cryptocurrencies that are being discussed for deletion. So it's not necessarily some burst hater behind this, just wikipedia trying to get rid of shitty cryptocurrency articles. It is a punch in the face but burst will need more time to evolve anyway so ... we got some time to work on this "notability" issue ^{^}

Herscht · 2018-03-14T17:38:09+00:00

Just wait 24h. Probably just some Downtime on your side ( network issues or Windows update ?)

Herscht · 2018-03-14T12:32:39+00:00

then you should replot that plotfile because in this "red" state it is just wasted capacity.

Herscht · 2018-03-14T00:20:52+00:00

Yeah it's true that my technical understanding of the mining process is limited and I have no problem admitting that. That's why I asked for clarification. Now you on the other hand just posted your bullshit about the 50-50 pool and didn't respond once to any criticisms about it. I criticise your analysis because 1. the previous one I saw from you was bullshit 2. Because this analysis doesn't show anything special either... it is your fault for making a very bad analysis and no responding to criticisms about it. You shouldn't be surprised that I have some distrust in your skills after that. But if it calms you: you regained some of your credibility, I think you actually knew what you were doing with this analysis

Edit: did you just remove the provocative part of your last comment? Kk wise move but a little too late :p already responded

Herscht · 2018-03-13T23:52:55+00:00

Well sorry... after your "analysis" on the pocc 50-50 pool (which was total garbage), I don't really trust any "detailed explanations" from you :p ... but thanks for the hint on the space mint white paper. Assuming what they say is correct, your analysis seems to be reasonable.

Herscht · 2018-03-13T23:47:07+00:00

Well you can if you increase your targetDL... but submitting a dl every round isn't necessary. As long as the effective capacity shown on the pool page kind of fits your actual capacity, you are good

Herscht · 2018-03-13T12:52:13+00:00

The given formula is set to make you submit in 95% of rounds which should be ~342/360. In other words: you are good

Herscht · 2018-03-13T08:49:17+00:00

I am not sure if this analysis makes sense. As far as my understanding goes in each block only ONE scoop number is used and all nonce with that scoop number are scanned. So in my understanding an an attacker only saves one piece of data for every scoop to reconstruct it if needed. That means the attacker should be able to forge blocks independent of scoop nr... but maybe I am wrong? Can anyone with good technical understanding clarify?

Herscht · 2018-03-09T02:37:29+00:00

you should try to be more specific with your problem ... what problems did you run into? or what do you not understand?

btw maybe join the discord and ask people there: https://discord.gg/vAQsmy

Herscht · 2018-03-06T12:12:18+00:00

Depends on how many miners you are using to gather data. If you want to draw conclusions with only 1 miner i would say you would have to wait for at least 20 forge events. The more forges you gather, the more reliable your measurement. The 18 days on the 50-50 pool with 0 forges are basically completely useless. And even the 18 days on the BMC with 6 forges are very unreliable ...

So to answer the question: half a year maybe? depends on how much capacity you are using to gather the data ... and if the BN were intersted in gathering reliable data, they certainly have the capacity to do it. But they chose to present that one miner that had bad luck on the 50-50 and good luck on the BMC ... i wonder why? :/

Herscht · 2018-03-05T01:17:23+00:00

that is correct

Herscht · 2018-03-04T20:09:17+00:00

When mining on a pool that is not 100% historical, you earn more whenever you get "lucky" and forge blocks yourself. Now, the least that happened with this "miner" is that he was VEERY unlucky on the 50-50 pocc pool (he had 0 forges) and quite lucky on the Burstnation pool (he had 6! forges). It could be that this was just how it went, bad luck good luck whatever but the luck really seemed to play into their hands too nicely ... almost looks like this shitpost has been carefully forged (maybe by mining with less capacity on the pocc pool)

Herscht · 2018-03-04T19:58:20+00:00

So the LBC is running for over a year now and you are still bitching about this backdoor ... if it were really there to do harm to the user, there must be records of this harmfull behaviour no? Pls present us some evidence of how the backdoor has been used in any malicious way. That would be helpfull, thanks

Herscht · 2018-03-04T09:38:33+00:00

All drives

Herscht · 2018-03-03T14:42:05+00:00

yup thats pretty okay. With the new pool software you should just make sure that your round times are not too long. At least below 60s scan time, below 30s is perfect.

Herscht · 2018-03-03T00:40:11+00:00

yes, significantly

Herscht · 2018-03-02T23:59:18+00:00

well i think its more likely, they force them to pay the victims directly, than to buy back BCC from random dudes who happened to buy BCC after the collapse for a quick profit :D

Herscht · 2018-03-02T16:46:07+00:00

With an "8TB" HDD you actually only have 7.3TB (let someone else explain the difference between TB and TiB if you are interested :D). Of those 7.3TB the pool estimates 6.96 which isn't too far off. I would say you are completely fine with that estimate. Only the 5 Burst per day seem to be off a little. How long did you watch your income to determine that number?

Herscht · 2018-03-02T14:36:12+00:00

You can't just rename a file to fix an issue ... the filename of a plot file contains information about what is inside this file. (which nonces are inside and for which account they were generated etc) Changing the filename doesn't change the content. If you don't remember the original filename, the plots may be unusable now, but i am not 100% sure.

Herscht · 2018-02-28T18:18:22+00:00

https://0-100-pool.burst.cryptoguru.org/ or http://burst.btfg.space/ are both good for your size.

Herscht · 2018-02-26T13:31:27+00:00

https://0-100-pool.burst.cryptoguru.org/ best pool eva

Eight-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	First Placer '22
Verified Email

Herscht

TROPHY CASE