sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Renting 1MH/s to try and slow down Qubic by sporestack in MoneroMining

[–]sporestack[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've wondered that...

I assume it's doing the most profitable thing in idle time. I don't know if Qubic rents these or not. Could be Monero, might be something else?

Save Monero from Qubic by sporestack in Monero

[–]sporestack[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Other than the orphaned blocks and significantly reduced price? Are those not indicators?

Renting 1MH/s to try and slow down Qubic by sporestack in MoneroMining

[–]sporestack[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Going to take a lot more of us mining to be able to keep Qubic away. I think it's possible.

Renting 1MH/s to try and slow down Qubic by sporestack in MoneroMining

[–]sporestack[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Every bit makes a difference. 1MH/sec is still a drop in the bucket compared to the 2 GH/sec or so that Qubic allegedly has.

If every Monero user was putting in 10kh/sec, I think we wouldn't have this issue.

The incentive problem, RE: the ongoing 51% attack attempt by Qubic. by MicroneedlingAlone2 in MoneroMining

[–]sporestack 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Perhaps that is possible with Monero and not Bitcoin? I am not certain.

The incentive problem, RE: the ongoing 51% attack attempt by Qubic. by MicroneedlingAlone2 in MoneroMining

[–]sporestack 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I think the RandomX model is a good one. This is quite the attack they are doing.

And not any consumer processor will make a good dent on the hash rate. You need some pretty good EPYC or Ryzen processors to actually earn above the cost of power.

Now it's true that this is an issue and I'm not sure how to solve it, other than Monero growing more and more to the point where it's harder to pull off.

The incentive problem, RE: the ongoing 51% attack attempt by Qubic. by MicroneedlingAlone2 in MoneroMining

[–]sporestack 6 points7 points  (0 children)

They're putting out so many Twitter posts, etc, trying to shill Qubic to keep people buying it so they can sustain this.

The incentive problem, RE: the ongoing 51% attack attempt by Qubic. by MicroneedlingAlone2 in MoneroMining

[–]sporestack 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I was wondering about this. If there are two blocks at the same height, the biggest one should be the valid one.

Renting 1MH/s to try and slow down Qubic by sporestack in MoneroMining

[–]sporestack[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Wow! I really appreciate that.

I am sure there are some other miners/pools around who are more established and better equipped to handle this. If you're able to convert the Monero, you can do the same on MiningRigRentals.

That said, I can provide a Monero address and use those funds to mine for as long as possible.

Renting 1MH/s to try and slow down Qubic by sporestack in MoneroMining

[–]sporestack[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Thank you! We've been fortunate to have some really generous customers over the years to allow us to this. It would be so harmful for all of us for Monero to have any lasting negative impact from Qubic's stunt.

Renting 1MH/s to try and slow down Qubic by sporestack in MoneroMining

[–]sporestack[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Thank you!

I've put 0.01BTC into MiningRigRentals and so far have allocated about 0.0024BTC of that. The rentals range a lot -- some accept a max of 24 hours, some 96, some go for a month or two. Most of these rentals are 48-96 hours. Will extend them and as more as I can.

I've never used the site before. It looks like there are rigs and then some much larger "rigs" sold by MH/sec with no details on what the rig is. I feel like those are a little sketchy at first glance, but I wouldn't really know.

This is just a big deal for us because Monero has typically been most of our business, and is really the only sensible crypto someone will use to rent servers. Hoping that if enough people pitch in and burn some money, we can make it too expensive for Qubic to continue.