Bitcoin Core version 0.12.0 released

Mimblewimble in IoT—Implementing privacy and anonymity in INT Transactions

Mimblewimble in IoT—Implementing privacy and anonymity in INT Transactions

https://preview.redd.it/kyigcq4j5p331.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=0584cd96378f51ead05b447397dcb0489995af4e

https://preview.redd.it/rfc3cw7q5p331.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=2b10b33defa0b354e0144745dd20c2f257812f29

The years of 2017 and ’18 were years focused on the topic of scaling. Coins forked and projects were hyped with this word as their sole mantra. What this debate brought us were solutions and showed us where we are right now satisfying the current need when paired with a plan for the future. What will be the focus of years to come will be anonymity and fungibility in mass adoption.
In the quickly evolving world of connected data, privacy is becoming a topic of immediate importance. As it stands, we trust our privacy to centralized corporations where safety is ensured by the strength of your passwords and how much effort an attacker dedicates to breaking them. As we grow into the new age of the Internet, where all things are connected, trustless and cryptographic privacy must be at the base of all that it rests upon. In this future, what is at risk is not just photographs and credit card numbers, it is everything you interact with and the data it collects.
If the goal is to do this in a decentralized and trustless network, the challenge will be finding solutions that have a range of applicability that equal the diversity of the ecosystem with the ability to match the scales predicted. Understanding this, INT has begun research into implementing two different privacy protocols into their network that conquer two of the major necessities of IoT: scalable private transactions and private smart contracts.

Mimblewimble

One of the privacy protocols INT is looking into is Mimblewimble. Mimblewimble is a fairly new and novel implementation of the same elements of Elliptic-Curve Cryptography that serves as the basis of most cryptocurrencies.

https://preview.redd.it/dsr6s6vt5p331.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=0249e76907c3c583e565edf19276e2afaa15ae08

In bitcoin-wizards IRC channel in August 2016, an anonymous user posted a Tor link to a whitepaper claiming “an idea for improving privacy in bitcoin.” What followed was a blockchain proposal that uses a transaction construction radically different than anything seen today creating one of the most elegant uses of elliptic curve cryptography seen to date.
While the whitepaper posted was enough to lay out the ideas and reasoning to support the theory, it contained no explicit mathematics or security analysis. Andrew Poelstra, a mathematician and the Director of Research at Blockstream, immediately began analyzing its merits and over the next two months, created a detailed whitepaper [Poel16] outlining the cryptography, fundamental theorems, and protocol involved in creating a standalone blockchain.
What it sets out to do as a protocol is to wholly conceal the values in transactions and eliminate the need for addresses while simultaneously solving the scaling issue.

Confidential Transactions

Let’s say you want to hide the amount that you are sending. One great way to hide information that is well known and quick: hashing! Hashing allows you to deterministically produce a random string of constant length regardless of the size of the input, that is impossible to reverse. We could then hash the amount and send that in the transaction.

X = SHA256(amount)
or
4A44DC15364204A80FE80E9039455CC1608281820FE2B24F1E5233ADE6AF1DD5 = SHA256(10)

But since hashing is deterministic, all someone would have to do would be to catalog all the hashes for all possible amounts and the whole purpose for doing so in the first place would be nullified. So instead of just hashing the amount, lets first multiply this amount by a private blinding factor*.* If kept private, there is no way of knowing the amount inside the hash.

X = SHA256(blinding factor * amount)

This is called a commitment, you are committing to a value without revealing it and in a way that it cannot be changed without changing the resultant value of the commitment.
But how then would a node validate a transaction using this commitment scheme? At the very least, we need to prove that you satisfy two conditions; one, you have enough coins, and two, you are not creating coins in the process. The way most protocols validate this is by consuming a previous input transaction (or multiple) and in the process, creating an output that does not exceed the sum of the inputs. If we hash the values and have no way validate this condition, one could create coins out of thin air.

input(commit(bf,10), Alice) -> output(commit(bf,9), BOB), outputchange(commit(bf,5), Alice)
Or
input(4A44DC15364204A80FE80E9039455CC1608281820FE2B24F1E5233ADE6AF1DD5, Alice) ->
output(19581E27DE7CED00FF1CE50B2047E7A567C76B1CBAEBABE5EF03F7C3017BB5B7, Bob)
output(EF2D127DE37B942BAAD06145E54B0C619A1F22327B2EBBCFBEC78F5564AFE39D, Alice)

As shown above, the later hashed values look just as valid as anything else and result in Alice creating 4 coins and receiving them as change in her transaction. In any transaction, the sum of the inputs must equal the sum of the outputs. We need some way of doing mathematics on these hashed values to be able to prove:

commit(bf1,x) = commit(bf2,y1) + commit(bf3,y2)

which, if it is a valid transaction would be:

commit(bf1,x) - commit(bf2+bf3,y1+y2) = commit(bf1-(bf2+bf3),0)

Or just a commit of the leftover blinding factors.

By the virtue of hashing algorithms, this isn’t possible. To verify this we would have to make all blinding factors and amounts public. But in doing so, nothing is private. How then can we make a valued public that is made with a private-value in such a way that you cannot reverse engineer the private value and still validate it satisfies some condition? It sounds a bit like public and private key cryptography…
What we learned in our primer on Elliptic-Curve Cryptography was that by using an elliptic curve to define our number space, we can use a point on the curve, G, and multiply it by any number, x, and what you get is another valid point, P, on the same curve. This calculation is quick but in taking the resultant point and the publically known generator point G, it is practically impossible to figure out what multiplier was used. This way we can use the point P as the public key and the number x as the private key. Interestingly, they also have the curious property of being additive and communicative.
If you take point P which is xG and add point Q to it which is yG, its resulting point, W = P + Q, is equal to creating a new point with the combined numbers x+y. So:
https://preview.redd.it/yv0knclr6p331.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=9a3abccdc164e615651147141736356013e4b829
This property, homomorphism, allows us to do math with numbers we do not know.
So if instead of using the raw amount and blinding factor in our commit, we use them each multiplied by a known generator point on an elliptic curve. Our commit can now be defined as:
https://preview.redd.it/aas2wm0u6p331.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=c3ebb5728f755f30e878ce5f1885397f6667d4f3
This is called a Pedersen Commitment and serves as the core of all Confidential Transactions.
Let’s call the blinding factors r, and the amounts v, and use H and G as generator points on the same elliptic curve (without going deep into Schnorr signatures, we will just accept that we have to use two different points for the blinding factor and value commits for validation purposes**). Applying this to our previous commitments:
https://preview.redd.it/zf246t8z6p331.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=17e2e155c59002f05f38ccb27082f79a5dd98a1f
and using the communicative properties:
https://preview.redd.it/km4fuf017p331.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=13541d62ec3f6e5728388b7a8d995c3829364a42
which for a valid transaction, this would equal:
with ri, vi being the values for the input, ro,vo being the values for the output and rco, vco being the values for the change output.

This resultant difference is just a commit to the excess blinding factor, also called a commitment-to-zero:
https://preview.redd.it/tqnwao667p331.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=9da5ecab5c670024f171a441e0d2477cf8f41a56
You can see that in any case where the blinding factors were selected randomly, the commit-to-zero will be non-zero and in fact, is still a valid point on the elliptic curve with a public key,
https://preview.redd.it/19ry9i297p331.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=4fb6628a01dc784816e1aea43cc0f5cfb025af52
And private key being the difference of the blinding factors.
So, if the sum of the inputs minus the sum of the outputs produces a valid public key on the curve, you know that the values have balanced to zero and no coins were created. If the resultant difference is not of the form
https://preview.redd.it/71mpdobb7p331.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=143d28da48d40208d5ef338444b3c7edea1fab9c
for some excess blinding factor, it would not be a valid public key on the curve, and we would know that it is not a balanced transaction. To prove this, the transaction is then signed with this public key to prove the transaction is balanced and that all blinding factors are known, and in the process, no information about the transaction have been revealed (the by step details of the signature process can be read in [Arvan19]).
All the above work assumed the numbers were positive. One could create just as valid of a balanced transaction with negative numbers, allowing users to create new coins with every transaction. Called Range Proofs, each transaction must be accompanied by a zero-knowledge argument of knowledge to prove that a private committed value lies within a predetermined range of values. Mimblewimble, as well as Monero, use BulletProofs which is a new way of calculating the proof which cuts down the size of the transaction by 80–90%.

*Average sizes of transactions seen in current networks or by assuming 2 input 2.5 output average tx size for MW

Up to this point, the protocol described is more-or-less identical between Mimblewimble and Monero. The point of deviation is how transactions are signed.
In Monero, there are two sets of keys/addresses, the spend keys, and the view keys. The spend key is used to generate and sign transactions, while the view key is used to “receive” transactions. Transactions are signed with what is called a Ring Signature which is derived from the output being spent, proving that one key out of the group of keys possesses the spend key. This is done by creating a combined Schnorr signature with your private key and a mix of decoy signers from the public keys of previous transactions. These decoy signers are all mathematically equally valid which results in an inability to determine which one is the real signer. Being that Monero uses Pedersen Commitments shown above, the addresses are never publically visible but are just used for the claiming, signing of transactions and generating blinding factors.
Mimblewimble, on the other hand, does not use addresses of any type. Yes. That’s right, no addresses. This is the true brilliance of the protocol. What Jedusor proved was that the blinding factors within the Pedersen commit and the commit-to-zero can be used as single-use public/private key pairs to create and sign transactions.
All address based protocols using elliptic-curve cryptography generate public-private key pairs in essentially the same way. By multiplying a very large random number (k_priv) by a point (G) on an elliptic curve, the result (K_pub) is another valid point on the same curve.
https://preview.redd.it/pt2xr33i7p331.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=1785cebcc842cab19b3987d848b2029032ae1195
This serves as the core of all address generation. Does that look familiar?
Remember this commit from above:
https://preview.redd.it/w9ooxudk7p331.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=d94ad3ac103352aa4c9653934d61cccc25a6bf8f
Each blinding factor multiplied by generator point G (in red) is exactly that! r•G is the public key with private key r! So instead of using addresses, we can use these blinding factors as proof we own the inputs and outputs by using these values to build the signature.
This seemingly minor change removes the linkability of addresses and the need for a scriptSig process to check for signature validity, which greatly simplifies the structure and size of Confidential Transactions. Of course, this means (at this time) that the transaction process requires interaction between parties to create signatures.

CoinJoin

Even though all addresses and amounts are now hidden, there is still some information that can be gathered from the transactions. In the above transaction format, it is still clear which outputs are consumed and what comes out of the transaction. This “transaction graph” can reveal information about the owners of the blinding factors and build a picture of the user based on seen transaction activity. In order to further hide and condense information, Mimblewimble implements an idea from Greg Maxwell called CoinJoin [Max13] which was originally developed for use in Bitcoin. CoinJoin is a trustless method for combining multiple inputs and outputs from multiple transactions, joining them into a single transaction. What this does is a mask that sender paid which recipient. To accomplish this in Bitcoin, users or wallets must interact to join transactions of like amounts so you cannot distinguish one from the other. If you were able to combine signatures without sharing private keys, you could create a combined signature for many transactions (like ring signatures) and not be bound by needing like amounts.

In this CoinJoin tx, 3 addresses have 4 outputs with no way of correlating who sent what
In Mimblewimble, doing the balance calculation for one transaction or many transactions still works out to a valid commit-to-zero. All we would need to do is to create a combined signature for the combined transaction. Mimblewimble is innately enabled to construct these combined signatures with the commit of Schnorr challenge transaction construction. Using “one-way aggregate signatures” (OWAS), nodes can combine transactions, while creating the block, into a single transaction with one aggregate signature. Using this, Mimblewimble joins all transactions at the block level, effectively creating each block as one big transaction of all inputs consumed and all outputs created. This simultaneously blurs the transaction graph and has the power to remove in-between transactions that were spent during the block, cutting down the total size of blocks and the size of the blockchain.

Cut-through

We can take this one step further. To validate this fully “joined” block, the node would sum all of the output commitments together, then subtract all the input commitments and validate that the result is a valid commit-to-zero. What is stopping us from only joining the transactions within a block? We could theoretically combine two blocks, removing any transactions that are created and spent in those blocks, and the result again is a valid transaction of just unspent commitments and nothing else. We could then do this all the way back to the genesis block, reducing the whole blockchain to just a state of unspent commitments. This is called Cut-through. When doing this, we don’t have any need to retain the range proofs of spent outputs, they have been verified and can be discarded. This lends itself to a massive reduction in blockchain growth, reducing growth from O*(number of txs)* to O*(number of unspent outputs)*.
To illustrate the impact of this, let’s imagine if Mimblewimble was implemented in the Bitcoin network from the beginning, with the network at block 576,000, the blockchain is about 210 GB with 413,675,000 total transactions and 55,400,000 total unspent outputs. In Mimblewimble, transaction outputs are about 5 kB (including range proof ~5 kB and Pedersen commit ~33 bytes), transaction inputs are about 32 bytes and transaction proof are about 105 bytes (commit-to-zero and signature), block headers are about 250 bytes (Merkle proof and PoW) and non-confidential transactions are negligible. This sums up to a staggering 5.3 TB for a full sync blockchain of all information, with “only” 279 GB of that being the UTXOs. When we cut-through, we don’t want to lose all the history of transactions, so we retain the proofs for all transactions as well as the UTXO set and all block headers. This reduces the blockchain to 322 GB, a 94% reduction in size. The result is basically a total consensus state of only that which has not been spent with a full proof history, greatly reducing the amount of sync time for new nodes.
If Bulletproofs are implemented, the range proof is reduced from over 5kB to less than 1 kB, dropping the UTXO set in the above example from 279 GB to 57 GB.

*Based on the assumptions and calculations above.

There is also an interesting implication in PoS blockchains with explicit finality. Once finality has been obtained, or at some arbitrary blockchain depth beyond it, there is no longer the need to retain range proofs. Those transactions have been validated, the consensus state has been built upon it and they make up the vast majority of the blockchain size. If we say in this example that finality happens at 100 blocks deep, and assume that 10% of the UTXO set is pre-finality, this would reduce the blockchain size by another 250 GB, resulting in a full sync weight of 73 GB, a 98.6% reduction (even down 65% from its current state). Imagine this. A 73 GB blockchain for 10 years of fully anonymous Bitcoin transactions, and one third the current blockchain size.
It’s important to note that cut-through has no impact on privacy or security. Each node may choose whether or not to store the entire chain without performing any cut-through with the only cost being increased disk storage requirements. Cut-through is purely a scalability feature resulting in Mimblewimble based blockchains being on average three times smaller than Bitcoin and fifteen times smaller than Monero (even with the recent implementation of Bulletproofs).

What does this mean for INT and IoT?

Transactions within an IoT network require speed, scaling to tremendous volumes, adapting to a variety of uses and devices with the ability to keep sensitive information private. Up till now, IoT networks have focused solely on scaling, creating networks that can transact with tremendous volume with varying degrees of decentralization and no focus on privacy. Without privacy, these networks will just make those who use it targets who feed their attackers the ammunition.
Mimblewimble’s revolutionary use of elliptic-curve cryptography brings us a privacy protocol using Pedersen commitments for fully confidential transactions and in the process, removes the dependence on addresses and private keys in the way we are used to them. This transaction framework combined with Bulletproofs brings lightweight privacy and anonymity on par with Monero, in a blockchain that is 15 times smaller, utilizing full cut-through. This provides the solution to private transactions that fit the scalability requirements of the INT network.
The Mimblewimble protocol has been implemented in two different live networks, Grin and Beam. Both are purely transactional networks, focused on the private and anonymous transfer of value. Grin has taken a Bitcoin-like approach with community-funded development, no pre-mine or founders reward while Beam has the mindset of a startup, with VC funding and a large emphasis on a user-friendly experience.
INT, on the other hand, is researching implementing this protocol either on the main chain, creating all INT asset transfer private or as an optional and add-on subchain, allowing users to transfer their INT from non-private chain to the private chain, or vice versa, at will.

Where it falls short?

What makes this protocol revolutionary is the same thing that limits it. Almost all protocols, like Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc., use a basic scripting language with a function calls out in the actual transaction data that tells the verifier what script to use to validate it. In the simplest case, the data provided with the input calls “scriptSig” and provides two pieces of data, the signature that matches the transaction and the public key that proves you own the private key that created it. The output scripts use this provided data with the logic passed with it, to show the validator how to prove they are allowed to spend it. Using the public key provided, the validator then hashes it, checks that it matches the hashed public key in the output, if it does, it then checks to make sure the signature provided matches the input signature.
https://preview.redd.it/5u6m1eiv7p331.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=3729eb12037107ae744d15cea9f9bc1e18a3c719
This verification protocol allows some limited scripting ability in being able to tell validators what to do with the data provided. The Bitcoin network can be updated with new functions allowing it to adapt to new processes or data. Using this, the Bitcoin protocol can verify multiple signatures, lock transactions for a defined timespan and do more complex things like lock bitcoin in an account until some outside action is taken.
In order to achieve more widely applicable public smart contracts like those in Ethereum, they need to be provided data in a non-shielded way or create shielded proofs that prove you satisfy the smart contract conditions.
In Mimblewimble, as a consequence of using the blinding factors as the key pairs, greatly simplifying the signature verification process, there are no normal scripting opportunities in the base protocol. What is recorded on the blockchain is just:

https://preview.redd.it/dwhiuc8y7p331.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=69ea0a7797bc94a9766a4b31a639666bf9f1ebc4
  • Inputs used — which are old commits consumed
  • New outputs — which are new commits to publish
  • Transaction kernel — which contains the signature for the transaction with excess blinding factor, transaction fee, and lock_height.
And none of these items can be related to one another and contain no useful data to drive action.
There are some proposals for creative solutions to this problem by doing so-called scriptless-scripts†. By utilizing the properties of the Schnorr signatures used, you can achieve multisig transactions and more complex condition-based transactions like atomic cross-chain swaps and maybe even lightning network type state channels. Still, this is not enough complexity to fulfill all the needs of IoT smart contracts.
And on top of it all, implementing cut-through would remove transactions that might be smart contracts or rely on them.
So you can see in this design we can successfully hide values and ownership but only for a single dimensional data point, quantity. Doing anything more complex than transferring ownership of coin is beyond its capabilities. But the proof of ownership and commit-to-zero is really just a specific type of Zero-knowledge (ZK) proof. So, what if, instead of blinding a value we blind a proof?
Part 2 of this series will cover implementing private smart contracts with zkSNARKs.

References and Notes

https://github.com/ignopeverell/grin/blob/mastedoc/intro.md
https://github.com/mimblewimble/grin/blob/mastedoc/pow/pow.md
https://github.com/mimblewimble/grin/wiki/Grin-and-MimbleWimble-vs-ZCash
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=30579
[poel16] http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/bitcoin/mimblewimble-andytoshi-INCOMPLETE-DRAFT-2016-10-06-001.pdf
** In order to prove that v=0 and therefore the commit to zero, in fact, has no Hcomponent without revealing r, we must use Schnorr protocol:
prover generates random integer n, computes and sends point 𝑇←n𝐻
verifier generates and sends random integer 𝑖
prover computes and sends integer 𝑠←𝑖𝑏+n modq, where q is the (public) order of the curve
verifier knowing point r𝐻 computes point 𝑖(r𝐻), then point 𝑖(r𝐻)+𝑇; computes point 𝑠𝐻; and ensures 𝑖(r𝐻)+𝑇=𝑠𝐻.
[Arvan19] https://medium.com/@brandonarvanaghi/grin-transactions-explained-step-by-step-fdceb905a853
[Bulletproofs] https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/1066.pdf
[Max13] https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=279249
[MaxCT]https://people.xiph.org/~greg/confidential_values.txt
[Back13]https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=305791.0
http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/grincon/2019/scriptless-scripts-with-mimblewimble/
https://tlu.tarilabs.com/cryptography/scriptless-scripts/introduction-to-scriptless-scripts.html#list-of-scriptless-scripts
http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/bitcoin/2017-03-mit-bitcoin-expo-andytoshi-mimblewmble-scriptless-scripts.pdf
submitted by INTCHAIN to INT_Chain [link] [comments]

Antminer S9 no longer hashing?

Good morning folks,
I have an Antminer S9 that has performed flawlessly. After I moved it to a better location, I noticed that it no longer seems to be working. The green light is flashing, but it doesn't seem to be hashing to my pool (Nicehash).
I'm fairly new to Bitcoining mining and can't make sense of some of the information on my status screen. Before I jump into Bitmain support, I was wondering if anyone could clue me in as to what the problem might be.
https://s15.postimg.cc/i0n5qsyoInked_Capture_LI.jpg
I'll post my Kernal Log here.
Thank you in advance!!!
KERNAL LOG: [ 0.000000] Booting Linux on physical CPU 0x0
[ 0.000000] Linux version 3.14.0-xilinx-ge8a2f71-dirty ([email protected]) (gcc version 4.8.3 20140320 (prerelease) (Sourcery CodeBench Lite 2014.05-23) ) #82 SMP PREEMPT Tue May 16 19:49:53 CST 2017
[ 0.000000] CPU: ARMv7 Processor [413fc090] revision 0 (ARMv7), cr=18c5387d
[ 0.000000] CPU: PIPT / VIPT nonaliasing data cache, VIPT aliasing instruction cache
[ 0.000000] Machine model: Xilinx Zynq
[ 0.000000] cma: CMA: reserved 128 MiB at 27800000
[ 0.000000] Memory policy: Data cache writealloc
[ 0.000000] On node 0 totalpages: 258048
[ 0.000000] free_area_init_node: node 0, pgdat c0740a40, node_mem_map e6fd8000
[ 0.000000] Normal zone: 1520 pages used for memmap
[ 0.000000] Normal zone: 0 pages reserved
[ 0.000000] Normal zone: 194560 pages, LIFO batch:31
[ 0.000000] HighMem zone: 496 pages used for memmap
[ 0.000000] HighMem zone: 63488 pages, LIFO batch:15
[ 0.000000] PERCPU: Embedded 8 pages/cpu @e6fc0000 s9088 r8192 d15488 u32768
[ 0.000000] pcpu-alloc: s9088 r8192 d15488 u32768 alloc=8*4096
[ 0.000000] pcpu-alloc: [0] 0 [0] 1
[ 0.000000] Built 1 zonelists in Zone order, mobility grouping on. Total pages: 256528
[ 0.000000] Kernel command line: noinitrd mem=1008M console=ttyPS0,115200 root=ubi0:rootfs ubi.mtd=1 rootfstype=ubifs rw rootwait
[ 0.000000] PID hash table entries: 4096 (order: 2, 16384 bytes)
[ 0.000000] Dentry cache hash table entries: 131072 (order: 7, 524288 bytes)
[ 0.000000] Inode-cache hash table entries: 65536 (order: 6, 262144 bytes)
[ 0.000000] Memory: 884148K/1032192K available (5032K kernel code, 283K rwdata, 1916K rodata, 204K init, 258K bss, 148044K reserved, 253952K highmem)
[ 0.000000] Virtual kernel memory layout:
[ 0.000000] vector : 0xffff0000 - 0xffff1000 ( 4 kB)
[ 0.000000] fixmap : 0xfff00000 - 0xfffe0000 ( 896 kB)
[ 0.000000] vmalloc : 0xf0000000 - 0xff000000 ( 240 MB)
[ 0.000000] lowmem : 0xc0000000 - 0xef800000 ( 760 MB)
[ 0.000000] pkmap : 0xbfe00000 - 0xc0000000 ( 2 MB)
[ 0.000000] modules : 0xbf000000 - 0xbfe00000 ( 14 MB)
[ 0.000000] .text : 0xc0008000 - 0xc06d1374 (6949 kB)
[ 0.000000] .init : 0xc06d2000 - 0xc0705380 ( 205 kB)
[ 0.000000] .data : 0xc0706000 - 0xc074cf78 ( 284 kB)
[ 0.000000] .bss : 0xc074cf84 - 0xc078d9fc ( 259 kB)
[ 0.000000] Preemptible hierarchical RCU implementation.
[ 0.000000] Dump stacks of tasks blocking RCU-preempt GP.
[ 0.000000] RCU restricting CPUs from NR_CPUS=4 to nr_cpu_ids=2.
[ 0.000000] RCU: Adjusting geometry for rcu_fanout_leaf=16, nr_cpu_ids=2
[ 0.000000] NR_IRQS:16 nr_irqs:16 16
[ 0.000000] ps7-slcr mapped to f0004000
[ 0.000000] zynq_clock_init: clkc starts at f0004100
[ 0.000000] Zynq clock init
[ 0.000015] sched_clock: 64 bits at 333MHz, resolution 3ns, wraps every 3298534883328ns
[ 0.000308] ps7-ttc #0 at f0006000, irq=43
[ 0.000618] Console: colour dummy device 80x30
[ 0.000658] Calibrating delay loop... 1325.46 BogoMIPS (lpj=6627328)
[ 0.040207] pid_max: default: 32768 minimum: 301
[ 0.040436] Mount-cache hash table entries: 2048 (order: 1, 8192 bytes)
[ 0.040459] Mountpoint-cache hash table entries: 2048 (order: 1, 8192 bytes)
[ 0.042612] CPU: Testing write buffer coherency: ok
[ 0.042974] CPU0: thread -1, cpu 0, socket 0, mpidr 80000000
[ 0.043036] Setting up static identity map for 0x4c4b00 - 0x4c4b58
[ 0.043263] L310 cache controller enabled
[ 0.043282] l2x0: 8 ways, CACHE_ID 0x410000c8, AUX_CTRL 0x72760000, Cache size: 512 kB
[ 0.121037] CPU1: Booted secondary processor
[ 0.210227] CPU1: thread -1, cpu 1, socket 0, mpidr 80000001
[ 0.210357] Brought up 2 CPUs
[ 0.210376] SMP: Total of 2 processors activated.
[ 0.210385] CPU: All CPU(s) started in SVC mode.
[ 0.211051] devtmpfs: initialized
[ 0.213481] VFP support v0.3: implementor 41 architecture 3 part 30 variant 9 rev 4
[ 0.214724] regulator-dummy: no parameters
[ 0.223736] NET: Registered protocol family 16
[ 0.226067] DMA: preallocated 256 KiB pool for atomic coherent allocations
[ 0.228361] cpuidle: using governor ladder
[ 0.228374] cpuidle: using governor menu
[ 0.235908] syscon f8000000.ps7-slcr: regmap [mem 0xf8000000-0xf8000fff] registered
[ 0.237440] hw-breakpoint: found 5 (+1 reserved) breakpoint and 1 watchpoint registers.
[ 0.237453] hw-breakpoint: maximum watchpoint size is 4 bytes.
[ 0.237572] zynq-ocm f800c000.ps7-ocmc: ZYNQ OCM pool: 256 KiB @ 0xf0080000
[ 0.259435] bio: create slab at 0
[ 0.261172] vgaarb: loaded
[ 0.261915] SCSI subsystem initialized
[ 0.262814] usbcore: registered new interface driver usbfs
[ 0.262985] usbcore: registered new interface driver hub
[ 0.263217] usbcore: registered new device driver usb
[ 0.263743] media: Linux media interface: v0.10
[ 0.263902] Linux video capture interface: v2.00
[ 0.264150] pps_core: LinuxPPS API ver. 1 registered
[ 0.264162] pps_core: Software ver. 5.3.6 - Copyright 2005-2007 Rodolfo Giometti <[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])>
[ 0.264286] PTP clock support registered
[ 0.264656] EDAC MC: Ver: 3.0.0
[ 0.265719] Advanced Linux Sound Architecture Driver Initialized.
[ 0.268708] DMA-API: preallocated 4096 debug entries
[ 0.268724] DMA-API: debugging enabled by kernel config
[ 0.268820] Switched to clocksource arm_global_timer
[ 0.289596] NET: Registered protocol family 2
[ 0.290280] TCP established hash table entries: 8192 (order: 3, 32768 bytes)
[ 0.290375] TCP bind hash table entries: 8192 (order: 4, 65536 bytes)
[ 0.290535] TCP: Hash tables configured (established 8192 bind 8192)
[ 0.290612] TCP: reno registered
[ 0.290633] UDP hash table entries: 512 (order: 2, 16384 bytes)
[ 0.290689] UDP-Lite hash table entries: 512 (order: 2, 16384 bytes)
[ 0.290971] NET: Registered protocol family 1
[ 0.291346] RPC: Registered named UNIX socket transport module.
[ 0.291359] RPC: Registered udp transport module.
[ 0.291368] RPC: Registered tcp transport module.
[ 0.291376] RPC: Registered tcp NFSv4.1 backchannel transport module.
[ 0.291391] PCI: CLS 0 bytes, default 64
[ 0.291857] hw perfevents: enabled with ARMv7 Cortex-A9 PMU driver, 7 counters available
[ 0.293945] futex hash table entries: 512 (order: 3, 32768 bytes)
[ 0.295408] bounce pool size: 64 pages
[ 0.296323] jffs2: version 2.2. (NAND) © 2001-2006 Red Hat, Inc.
[ 0.296525] msgmni has been set to 1486
[ 0.297330] io scheduler noop registered
[ 0.297343] io scheduler deadline registered
[ 0.297385] io scheduler cfq registered (default)
[ 0.308358] dma-pl330 f8003000.ps7-dma: Loaded driver for PL330 DMAC-2364208
[ 0.308380] dma-pl330 f8003000.ps7-dma: DBUFF-128x8bytes Num_Chans-8 Num_Peri-4 Num_Events-16
[ 0.434378] e0001000.serial: ttyPS0 at MMIO 0xe0001000 (irq = 82, base_baud = 3124999) is a xuartps
[ 1.006815] console [ttyPS0] enabled
[ 1.011106] xdevcfg f8007000.ps7-dev-cfg: ioremap 0xf8007000 to f0068000
[ 1.018731] [drm] Initialized drm 1.1.0 20060810
[ 1.036029] brd: module loaded
[ 1.045494] loop: module loaded
[ 1.055163] e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - 2.3.2-k
[ 1.060985] e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2013 Intel Corporation.
[ 1.068779] libphy: XEMACPS mii bus: probed
[ 1.073341] ------------- phy_id = 0x3625e62
[ 1.078112] xemacps e000b000.ps7-ethernet: pdev->id -1, baseaddr 0xe000b000, irq 54
[ 1.087072] ehci_hcd: USB 2.0 'Enhanced' Host Controller (EHCI) Driver
[ 1.093912] ehci-pci: EHCI PCI platform driver
[ 1.101155] zynq-dr e0002000.ps7-usb: Unable to init USB phy, missing?
[ 1.107952] usbcore: registered new interface driver usb-storage
[ 1.114850] mousedev: PS/2 mouse device common for all mice
[ 1.120975] i2c /dev entries driver
[ 1.127946] zynq-edac f8006000.ps7-ddrc: ecc not enabled
[ 1.133474] cpufreq_cpu0: failed to get cpu0 regulator: -19
[ 1.139426] Xilinx Zynq CpuIdle Driver started
[ 1.144261] sdhci: Secure Digital Host Controller Interface driver
[ 1.150384] sdhci: Copyright(c) Pierre Ossman
[ 1.154700] sdhci-pltfm: SDHCI platform and OF driver helper
[ 1.161601] mmc0: no vqmmc regulator found
[ 1.165614] mmc0: no vmmc regulator found
[ 1.208845] mmc0: SDHCI controller on e0100000.ps7-sdio [e0100000.ps7-sdio] using ADMA
[ 1.217539] usbcore: registered new interface driver usbhid
[ 1.223054] usbhid: USB HID core driver
[ 1.227806] nand: device found, Manufacturer ID: 0x2c, Chip ID: 0xda
[ 1.234107] nand: Micron MT29F2G08ABAEAWP
[ 1.238074] nand: 256MiB, SLC, page size: 2048, OOB size: 64
[ 1.244027] Bad block table found at page 131008, version 0x01
[ 1.250251] Bad block table found at page 130944, version 0x01
[ 1.256303] 3 ofpart partitions found on MTD device pl353-nand
[ 1.262080] Creating 3 MTD partitions on "pl353-nand":
[ 1.267174] 0x000000000000-0x000002000000 : "BOOT.bin-env-dts-kernel"
[ 1.275230] 0x000002000000-0x00000b000000 : "angstram-rootfs"
[ 1.282582] 0x00000b000000-0x000010000000 : "upgrade-rootfs"
[ 1.291630] TCP: cubic registered
[ 1.294869] NET: Registered protocol family 17
[ 1.299597] Registering SWP/SWPB emulation handler
[ 1.305497] regulator-dummy: disabling
[ 1.309875] UBI: attaching mtd1 to ubi0
[ 1.836565] UBI: scanning is finished
[ 1.848221] UBI: attached mtd1 (name "angstram-rootfs", size 144 MiB) to ubi0
[ 1.855302] UBI: PEB size: 131072 bytes (128 KiB), LEB size: 126976 bytes
[ 1.862063] UBI: min./max. I/O unit sizes: 2048/2048, sub-page size 2048
[ 1.868728] UBI: VID header offset: 2048 (aligned 2048), data offset: 4096
[ 1.875605] UBI: good PEBs: 1152, bad PEBs: 0, corrupted PEBs: 0
[ 1.881586] UBI: user volume: 1, internal volumes: 1, max. volumes count: 128
[ 1.888693] UBI: max/mean erase counter: 4/1, WL threshold: 4096, image sequence number: 1134783803
[ 1.897736] UBI: available PEBs: 0, total reserved PEBs: 1152, PEBs reserved for bad PEB handling: 40
[ 1.906953] UBI: background thread "ubi_bgt0d" started, PID 1080
[ 1.906959] drivers/rtc/hctosys.c: unable to open rtc device (rtc0)
[ 1.911038] ALSA device list:
[ 1.911042] No soundcards found.
[ 1.927420] UBIFS: background thread "ubifs_bgt0_0" started, PID 1082
[ 1.956473] UBIFS: recovery needed
[ 2.016970] UBIFS: recovery completed
[ 2.020709] UBIFS: mounted UBI device 0, volume 0, name "rootfs"
[ 2.026635] UBIFS: LEB size: 126976 bytes (124 KiB), min./max. I/O unit sizes: 2048 bytes/2048 bytes
[ 2.035771] UBIFS: FS size: 128626688 bytes (122 MiB, 1013 LEBs), journal size 9023488 bytes (8 MiB, 72 LEBs)
[ 2.045653] UBIFS: reserved for root: 0 bytes (0 KiB)
[ 2.050693] UBIFS: media format: w4/r0 (latest is w4/r0), UUID B079DD56-06BB-4E31-8F5E-A6604F480DB2, small LPT model
[ 2.061987] VFS: Mounted root (ubifs filesystem) on device 0:11.
[ 2.069184] devtmpfs: mounted
[ 2.072297] Freeing unused kernel memory: 204K (c06d2000 - c0705000)
[ 2.920928] random: dd urandom read with 0 bits of entropy available
[ 3.318860]
[ 3.318860] bcm54xx_config_init
[ 3.928853]
[ 3.928853] bcm54xx_config_init
[ 7.929682] xemacps e000b000.ps7-ethernet: Set clk to 124999998 Hz
[ 7.935787] xemacps e000b000.ps7-ethernet: link up (1000/FULL)
[ 22.563181] In axi fpga driver!
[ 22.566260] request_mem_region OK!
[ 22.569676] AXI fpga dev virtual address is 0xf01fe000
[ 22.574751] *base_vir_addr = 0x8c510
[ 22.590723] In fpga mem driver!
[ 22.593791] request_mem_region OK!
[ 22.597361] fpga mem virtual address is 0xf3000000
[ 23.408156]
[ 23.408156] bcm54xx_config_init
[ 24.038071]
[ 24.038071] bcm54xx_config_init
[ 28.038487] xemacps e000b000.ps7-ethernet: Set clk to 124999998 Hz
[ 28.044593] xemacps e000b000.ps7-ethernet: link up (1000/FULL)
This is XILINX board. Totalram: 1039794176
Detect 1GB control board of XILINX
DETECT HW version=0008c510
miner ID : 8118b4c610358854
Miner Type = S9
AsicType = 1387
real AsicNum = 63
use critical mode to search freq...
get PLUG ON=0x000000e0
Find hashboard on Chain[5]
Find hashboard on Chain[6]
Find hashboard on Chain[7]
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
Check chain[5] PIC fw version=0x03
Check chain[6] PIC fw version=0x03
Check chain[7] PIC fw version=0x03
chain[5]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
has freq in PIC, will disable freq setting.
chain[5] has freq in PIC and will jump over...
Chain[5] has core num in PIC
Chain[5] ASIC[15] has core num=5
Check chain[5] PIC fw version=0x03
chain[6]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
has freq in PIC, will disable freq setting.
chain[6] has freq in PIC and will jump over...
Chain[6] has core num in PIC
Chain[6] ASIC[17] has core num=8
Check chain[6] PIC fw version=0x03
chain[7]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
has freq in PIC, will disable freq setting.
chain[7] has freq in PIC and will jump over...
Chain[7] has core num in PIC
Chain[7] ASIC[8] has core num=13
Chain[7] ASIC[9] has core num=11
Chain[7] ASIC[13] has core num=11
Chain[7] ASIC[19] has core num=14
Chain[7] ASIC[30] has core num=6
Chain[7] ASIC[32] has core num=1
Chain[7] ASIC[42] has core num=2
Chain[7] ASIC[55] has core num=1
Chain[7] ASIC[57] has core num=2
Check chain[7] PIC fw version=0x03
get PIC voltage=108 on chain[5], value=880
get PIC voltage=74 on chain[6], value=900
get PIC voltage=108 on chain[7], value=880
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
chain[5] temp offset record: 62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[5] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[5] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
chain[6] temp offset record: 62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[6] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[6] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
chain[7] temp offset record: 62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[7] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[7] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
CRC error counter=0
set command mode to VIL
--- check asic number
After Get ASIC NUM CRC error counter=0
set_baud=0
The min freq=700
set real timeout 52, need sleep=379392
After TEST CRC error counter=0
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
search freq for 1 times, completed chain = 3, total chain num = 3
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
restart Miner chance num=2
waiting for receive_func to exit!
waiting for pic heart to exit!
bmminer not found= 1643 root 0:00 grep bmminer
bmminer not found, restart bmminer ...
This is user mode for mining
Detect 1GB control board of XILINX
Miner Type = S9
Miner compile time: Fri Nov 17 17:57:49 CST 2017 type: Antminer S9set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
miner ID : 8118b4c610358854
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
Checking fans!get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[5] speed=13440
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[5] speed=13440
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[5] speed=13440
chain[5]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
Chain[J6] has backup chain_voltage=880
Chain[J6] test patten OK temp=-126
Check chain[5] PIC fw version=0x03
chain[6]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
Chain[J7] has backup chain_voltage=900
Chain[J7] test patten OK temp=-120
Check chain[6] PIC fw version=0x03
chain[7]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
Chain[J8] has backup chain_voltage=880
Chain[J8] test patten OK temp=-125
Check chain[7] PIC fw version=0x03
Chain[J6] orignal chain_voltage_pic=108 value=880
Chain[J7] orignal chain_voltage_pic=74 value=900
Chain[J8] orignal chain_voltage_pic=108 value=880
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
Chain[J6] has 63 asic
Chain[J7] has 63 asic
Chain[J8] has 63 asic
Chain[J6] has core num in PIC
Chain[J6] ASIC[15] has core num=5
Chain[J7] has core num in PIC
Chain[J7] ASIC[17] has core num=8
Chain[J8] has core num in PIC
Chain[J8] ASIC[8] has core num=13
Chain[J8] ASIC[9] has core num=11
Chain[J8] ASIC[13] has core num=11
Chain[J8] ASIC[19] has core num=14
Chain[J8] ASIC[30] has core num=6
Chain[J8] ASIC[32] has core num=1
Chain[J8] ASIC[42] has core num=2
Chain[J8] ASIC[55] has core num=1
Chain[J8] ASIC[57] has core num=2
miner total rate=13999GH/s fixed rate=13500GH/s
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[5]
Chain:5 chipnum=63
Chain[J6] voltage added=0.2V
Chain:5 temp offset=0
Chain:5 base freq=487
Asic[ 0]:618
Asic[ 1]:631 Asic[ 2]:681 Asic[ 3]:618 Asic[ 4]:631 Asic[ 5]:681 Asic[ 6]:618 Asic[ 7]:631 Asic[ 8]:675
Asic[ 9]:618 Asic[10]:631 Asic[11]:681 Asic[12]:631 Asic[13]:637 Asic[14]:606 Asic[15]:487 Asic[16]:637
Asic[17]:675 Asic[18]:618 Asic[19]:637 Asic[20]:675 Asic[21]:631 Asic[22]:650 Asic[23]:687 Asic[24]:631
Asic[25]:537 Asic[26]:687 Asic[27]:631 Asic[28]:587 Asic[29]:687 Asic[30]:612 Asic[31]:650 Asic[32]:687
Asic[33]:631 Asic[34]:650 Asic[35]:687 Asic[36]:631 Asic[37]:662 Asic[38]:693 Asic[39]:631 Asic[40]:662
Asic[41]:662 Asic[42]:543 Asic[43]:668 Asic[44]:693 Asic[45]:568 Asic[46]:675 Asic[47]:700 Asic[48]:631
Asic[49]:568 Asic[50]:700 Asic[51]:631 Asic[52]:625 Asic[53]:700 Asic[54]:631 Asic[55]:675 Asic[56]:662
Asic[57]:631 Asic[58]:662 Asic[59]:687 Asic[60]:631 Asic[61]:681 Asic[62]:700
Chain:5 max freq=700
Chain:5 min freq=487
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[6]
Chain:6 chipnum=63
Chain[J7] voltage added=0.1V
Chain:6 temp offset=0
Chain:6 base freq=687
Asic[ 0]:650
Asic[ 1]:650 Asic[ 2]:650 Asic[ 3]:650 Asic[ 4]:650 Asic[ 5]:650 Asic[ 6]:650 Asic[ 7]:650 Asic[ 8]:650
Asic[ 9]:650 Asic[10]:650 Asic[11]:650 Asic[12]:650 Asic[13]:650 Asic[14]:650 Asic[15]:650 Asic[16]:650
Asic[17]:650 Asic[18]:650 Asic[19]:650 Asic[20]:650 Asic[21]:650 Asic[22]:650 Asic[23]:650 Asic[24]:650
Asic[25]:650 Asic[26]:656 Asic[27]:656 Asic[28]:656 Asic[29]:656 Asic[30]:656 Asic[31]:656 Asic[32]:656
Asic[33]:656 Asic[34]:656 Asic[35]:656 Asic[36]:656 Asic[37]:656 Asic[38]:656 Asic[39]:656 Asic[40]:656
Asic[41]:656 Asic[42]:656 Asic[43]:656 Asic[44]:656 Asic[45]:656 Asic[46]:656 Asic[47]:656 Asic[48]:656
Asic[49]:656 Asic[50]:656 Asic[51]:656 Asic[52]:656 Asic[53]:656 Asic[54]:656 Asic[55]:656 Asic[56]:656
Asic[57]:656 Asic[58]:656 Asic[59]:656 Asic[60]:656 Asic[61]:656 Asic[62]:656
Chain:6 max freq=656
Chain:6 min freq=650
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[7]
Chain:7 chipnum=63
Chain[J8] voltage added=0.2V
Chain:7 temp offset=0
Chain:7 base freq=637
Asic[ 0]:656
Asic[ 1]:656 Asic[ 2]:656 Asic[ 3]:656 Asic[ 4]:656 Asic[ 5]:656 Asic[ 6]:656 Asic[ 7]:656 Asic[ 8]:637
Asic[ 9]:637 Asic[10]:656 Asic[11]:656 Asic[12]:656 Asic[13]:637 Asic[14]:656 Asic[15]:662 Asic[16]:662
Asic[17]:662 Asic[18]:662 Asic[19]:637 Asic[20]:662 Asic[21]:662 Asic[22]:662 Asic[23]:662 Asic[24]:662
Asic[25]:662 Asic[26]:662 Asic[27]:662 Asic[28]:662 Asic[29]:662 Asic[30]:637 Asic[31]:662 Asic[32]:662
Asic[33]:662 Asic[34]:662 Asic[35]:662 Asic[36]:662 Asic[37]:662 Asic[38]:662 Asic[39]:662 Asic[40]:662
Asic[41]:662 Asic[42]:650 Asic[43]:662 Asic[44]:662 Asic[45]:662 Asic[46]:662 Asic[47]:662 Asic[48]:662
Asic[49]:662 Asic[50]:662 Asic[51]:662 Asic[52]:662 Asic[53]:662 Asic[54]:662 Asic[55]:650 Asic[56]:662
Asic[57]:650 Asic[58]:662 Asic[59]:662 Asic[60]:662 Asic[61]:662 Asic[62]:662
Chain:7 max freq=662
Chain:7 min freq=637
Miner fix freq ...
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[5]
Chain:5 chipnum=63
Chain[J6] voltage added=0.2V
Chain:5 temp offset=0
Chain:5 base freq=487
Asic[ 0]:618
Asic[ 1]:631 Asic[ 2]:650 Asic[ 3]:618 Asic[ 4]:631 Asic[ 5]:656 Asic[ 6]:618 Asic[ 7]:631 Asic[ 8]:656
Asic[ 9]:618 Asic[10]:631 Asic[11]:656 Asic[12]:631 Asic[13]:637 Asic[14]:606 Asic[15]:487 Asic[16]:637
Asic[17]:656 Asic[18]:618 Asic[19]:637 Asic[20]:656 Asic[21]:631 Asic[22]:650 Asic[23]:656 Asic[24]:631
Asic[25]:537 Asic[26]:656 Asic[27]:631 Asic[28]:587 Asic[29]:656 Asic[30]:612 Asic[31]:650 Asic[32]:656
Asic[33]:631 Asic[34]:650 Asic[35]:656 Asic[36]:631 Asic[37]:656 Asic[38]:656 Asic[39]:631 Asic[40]:656
Asic[41]:656 Asic[42]:543 Asic[43]:656 Asic[44]:656 Asic[45]:568 Asic[46]:656 Asic[47]:656 Asic[48]:631
Asic[49]:568 Asic[50]:656 Asic[51]:631 Asic[52]:625 Asic[53]:656 Asic[54]:631 Asic[55]:656 Asic[56]:656
Asic[57]:631 Asic[58]:656 Asic[59]:656 Asic[60]:631 Asic[61]:656 Asic[62]:656
Chain:5 max freq=656
Chain:5 min freq=487
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[6]
Chain:6 chipnum=63
Chain[J7] voltage added=0.1V
Chain:6 temp offset=0
Chain:6 base freq=687
Asic[ 0]:631
Asic[ 1]:631 Asic[ 2]:631 Asic[ 3]:631 Asic[ 4]:631 Asic[ 5]:631 Asic[ 6]:631 Asic[ 7]:631 Asic[ 8]:631
Asic[ 9]:631 Asic[10]:631 Asic[11]:631 Asic[12]:631 Asic[13]:631 Asic[14]:631 Asic[15]:631 Asic[16]:631
Asic[17]:631 Asic[18]:631 Asic[19]:631 Asic[20]:631 Asic[21]:631 Asic[22]:631 Asic[23]:631 Asic[24]:631
Asic[25]:631 Asic[26]:631 Asic[27]:631 Asic[28]:631 Asic[29]:631 Asic[30]:631 Asic[31]:631 Asic[32]:631
Asic[33]:631 Asic[34]:631 Asic[35]:637 Asic[36]:637 Asic[37]:637 Asic[38]:637 Asic[39]:637 Asic[40]:637
Asic[41]:637 Asic[42]:637 Asic[43]:637 Asic[44]:637 Asic[45]:637 Asic[46]:637 Asic[47]:637 Asic[48]:637
Asic[49]:637 Asic[50]:637 Asic[51]:637 Asic[52]:637 Asic[53]:637 Asic[54]:637 Asic[55]:637 Asic[56]:637
Asic[57]:637 Asic[58]:637 Asic[59]:637 Asic[60]:637 Asic[61]:637 Asic[62]:637
Chain:6 max freq=637
Chain:6 min freq=631
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[7]
Chain:7 chipnum=63
Chain[J8] voltage added=0.2V
Chain:7 temp offset=0
Chain:7 base freq=637
Asic[ 0]:637
Asic[ 1]:637 Asic[ 2]:637 Asic[ 3]:637 Asic[ 4]:637 Asic[ 5]:637 Asic[ 6]:637 Asic[ 7]:637 Asic[ 8]:637
Asic[ 9]:637 Asic[10]:637 Asic[11]:637 Asic[12]:637 Asic[13]:637 Asic[14]:637 Asic[15]:637 Asic[16]:637
Asic[17]:637 Asic[18]:637 Asic[19]:637 Asic[20]:637 Asic[21]:637 Asic[22]:637 Asic[23]:637 Asic[24]:637
Asic[25]:637 Asic[26]:637 Asic[27]:637 Asic[28]:637 Asic[29]:637 Asic[30]:637 Asic[31]:637 Asic[32]:637
Asic[33]:637 Asic[34]:637 Asic[35]:637 Asic[36]:637 Asic[37]:637 Asic[38]:637 Asic[39]:637 Asic[40]:637
Asic[41]:637 Asic[42]:637 Asic[43]:637 Asic[44]:637 Asic[45]:637 Asic[46]:637 Asic[47]:637 Asic[48]:637
Asic[49]:643 Asic[50]:643 Asic[51]:643 Asic[52]:643 Asic[53]:643 Asic[54]:643 Asic[55]:643 Asic[56]:643
Asic[57]:643 Asic[58]:643 Asic[59]:643 Asic[60]:643 Asic[61]:643 Asic[62]:643
Chain:7 max freq=643
Chain:7 min freq=637
max freq = 656
set baud=1
Chain[J6] PIC temp offset=62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[5] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[5] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
Chain[J6] chip[244] use PIC middle temp offset=0 typeID=55
New offset Chain[5] chip[244] local:26 remote:27 offset:29
Chain[J6] chip[244] get middle temp offset=29 typeID=55
Chain[J7] PIC temp offset=62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[6] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[6] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
Chain[J7] chip[244] use PIC middle temp offset=0 typeID=55
New offset Chain[6] chip[244] local:26 remote:27 offset:29
Chain[J7] chip[244] get middle temp offset=29 typeID=55
Chain[J8] PIC temp offset=62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[7] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[7] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
Chain[J8] chip[244] use PIC middle temp offset=0 typeID=55
New offset Chain[7] chip[244] local:26 remote:28 offset:28
Chain[J8] chip[244] get middle temp offset=28 typeID=55
miner rate=13501 voltage limit=900 on chain[5]
get PIC voltage=880 on chain[5], check: must be < 900
miner rate=13501 voltage limit=900 on chain[6]
get PIC voltage=900 on chain[6], check: must be < 900
miner rate=13501 voltage limit=900 on chain[7]
get PIC voltage=880 on chain[7], check: must be < 900
Chain[J6] set working voltage=880 [108]
Chain[J7] set working voltage=900 [74]
Chain[J8] set working voltage=880 [108]
do heat board 8xPatten for 1 times
start send works on chain[5]
start send works on chain[6]
start send works on chain[7]
get send work num :57456 on Chain[5]
get send work num :57456 on Chain[6]
get send work num :57456 on Chain[7]
wait recv nonce on chain[5]
wait recv nonce on chain[6]
wait recv nonce on chain[7]
get nonces on chain[5]
require nonce number:912
require validnonce number:57456
asic[00]=912 asic[01]=912 asic[02]=912 asic[03]=912 asic[04]=912 asic[05]=912 asic[06]=912 asic[07]=912
asic[08]=912 asic[09]=912 asic[10]=912 asic[11]=912 asic[12]=912 asic[13]=912 asic[14]=912 asic[15]=912
asic[16]=912 asic[17]=912 asic[18]=912 asic[19]=912 asic[20]=912 asic[21]=912 asic[22]=912 asic[23]=912
asic[24]=912 asic[25]=912 asic[26]=912 asic[27]=912 asic[28]=912 asic[29]=912 asic[30]=912 asic[31]=912
asic[32]=912 asic[33]=912 asic[34]=912 asic[35]=912 asic[36]=912 asic[37]=912 asic[38]=912 asic[39]=912
asic[40]=912 asic[41]=912 asic[42]=912 asic[43]=912 asic[44]=912 asic[45]=912 asic[46]=912 asic[47]=912
asic[48]=912 asic[49]=912 asic[50]=912 asic[51]=912 asic[52]=912 asic[53]=912 asic[54]=912 asic[55]=912
asic[56]=912 asic[57]=912 asic[58]=912 asic[59]=912 asic[60]=912 asic[61]=912 asic[62]=912
Below ASIC's core didn't receive all the nonce, they should receive 8 nonce each!
freq[00]=618 freq[01]=631 freq[02]=650 freq[03]=618 freq[04]=631 freq[05]=656 freq[06]=618 freq[07]=631
freq[08]=656 freq[09]=618 freq[10]=631 freq[11]=656 freq[12]=631 freq[13]=637 freq[14]=606 freq[15]=487
freq[16]=637 freq[17]=656 freq[18]=618 freq[19]=637 freq[20]=656 freq[21]=631 freq[22]=650 freq[23]=656
freq[24]=631 freq[25]=537 freq[26]=656 freq[27]=631 freq[28]=587 freq[29]=656 freq[30]=612 freq[31]=650
freq[32]=656 freq[33]=631 freq[34]=650 freq[35]=656 freq[36]=631 freq[37]=656 freq[38]=656 freq[39]=631
freq[40]=656 freq[41]=656 freq[42]=543 freq[43]=656 freq[44]=656 freq[45]=568 freq[46]=656 freq[47]=656
freq[48]=631 freq[49]=568 freq[50]=656 freq[51]=631 freq[52]=625 freq[53]=656 freq[54]=631 freq[55]=656
freq[56]=656 freq[57]=631 freq[58]=656 freq[59]=656 freq[60]=631 freq[61]=656 freq[62]=656
total valid nonce number:57456
total send work number:57456
require valid nonce number:57456
repeated_nonce_num:0
err_nonce_num:25912
last_nonce_num:14370
get nonces on chain[6]
require nonce number:912
require validnonce number:57456
asic[00]=912 asic[01]=912 asic[02]=912 asic[03]=912 asic[04]=912 asic[05]=912 asic[06]=912 asic[07]=912
asic[08]=912 asic[09]=912 asic[10]=912 asic[11]=912 asic[12]=912 asic[13]=912 asic[14]=912 asic[15]=912
asic[16]=912 asic[17]=912 asic[18]=912 asic[19]=912 asic[20]=912 asic[21]=912 asic[22]=912 asic[23]=912
asic[24]=912 asic[25]=912 asic[26]=912 asic[27]=912 asic[28]=912 asic[29]=912 asic[30]=912 asic[31]=912
asic[32]=912 asic[33]=912 asic[34]=912 asic[35]=912 asic[36]=912 asic[37]=912 asic[38]=912 asic[39]=912
asic[40]=912 asic[41]=912 asic[42]=912 asic[43]=912 asic[44]=912 asic[45]=912 asic[46]=912 asic[47]=912
asic[48]=912 asic[49]=912 asic[50]=912 asic[51]=912 asic[52]=912 asic[53]=912 asic[54]=912 asic[55]=912
asic[56]=912 asic[57]=912 asic[58]=912 asic[59]=912 asic[60]=912 asic[61]=912 asic[62]=912
Below ASIC's core didn't receive all the nonce, they should receive 8 nonce each!
freq[00]=631 freq[01]=631 freq[02]=631 freq[03]=631 freq[04]=631 freq[05]=631 freq[06]=631 freq[07]=631
freq[08]=631 freq[09]=631 freq[10]=631 freq[11]=631 freq[12]=631 freq[13]=631 freq[14]=631 freq[15]=631
freq[16]=631 freq[17]=631 freq[18]=631 freq[19]=631 freq[20]=631 freq[21]=631 freq[22]=631 freq[23]=631
freq[24]=631 freq[25]=631 freq[26]=631 freq[27]=631 freq[28]=631 freq[29]=631 freq[30]=631 freq[31]=631
freq[32]=631 freq[33]=631 freq[34]=631 freq[35]=637 freq[36]=637 freq[37]=637 freq[38]=637 freq[39]=637
freq[40]=637 freq[41]=637 freq[42]=637 freq[43]=637 freq[44]=637 freq[45]=637 freq[46]=637 freq[47]=637
freq[48]=637 freq[49]=637 freq[50]=637 freq[51]=637 freq[52]=637 freq[53]=637 freq[54]=637 freq[55]=637
freq[56]=637 freq[57]=637 freq[58]=637 freq[59]=637 freq[60]=637 freq[61]=637 freq[62]=637
total valid nonce number:57456
total send work number:57456
require valid nonce number:57456
repeated_nonce_num:0
err_nonce_num:25987
last_nonce_num:14368
get nonces on chain[7]
require nonce number:912
require validnonce number:57456
asic[00]=912 asic[01]=912 asic[02]=912 asic[03]=912 asic[04]=912 asic[05]=912 asic[06]=912 asic[07]=912
asic[08]=907 asic[09]=912 asic[10]=912 asic[11]=912 asic[12]=912 asic[13]=912 asic[14]=912 asic[15]=912
asic[16]=912 asic[17]=912 asic[18]=912 asic[19]=909 asic[20]=912 asic[21]=912 asic[22]=912 asic[23]=912
asic[24]=912 asic[25]=912 asic[26]=912 asic[27]=912 asic[28]=912 asic[29]=912 asic[30]=912 asic[31]=912
asic[32]=912 asic[33]=912 asic[34]=912 asic[35]=912 asic[36]=912 asic[37]=912 asic[38]=912 asic[39]=912
asic[40]=912 asic[41]=912 asic[42]=912 asic[43]=912 asic[44]=912 asic[45]=912 asic[46]=912 asic[47]=912
asic[48]=912 asic[49]=912 asic[50]=912 asic[51]=912 asic[52]=912 asic[53]=912 asic[54]=912 asic[55]=911
asic[56]=912 asic[57]=912 asic[58]=912 asic[59]=912 asic[60]=912 asic[61]=912 asic[62]=912
Below ASIC's core didn't receive all the nonce, they should receive 8 nonce each!
asic[08]=907
core[049]=7 core[053]=5 core[056]=7
asic[19]=909
core[064]=7 core[112]=6
asic[55]=911
core[007]=7
freq[00]=637 freq[01]=637 freq[02]=637 freq[03]=637 freq[04]=637 freq[05]=637 freq[06]=637 freq[07]=637
freq[08]=637 freq[09]=637 freq[10]=637 freq[11]=637 freq[12]=637 freq[13]=637 freq[14]=637 freq[15]=637
freq[16]=637 freq[17]=637 freq[18]=637 freq[19]=637 freq[20]=637 freq[21]=637 freq[22]=637 freq[23]=637
freq[24]=637 freq[25]=637 freq[26]=637 freq[27]=637 freq[28]=637 freq[29]=637 freq[30]=637 freq[31]=637
freq[32]=637 freq[33]=637 freq[34]=637 freq[35]=637 freq[36]=637 freq[37]=637 freq[38]=637 freq[39]=637
freq[40]=637 freq[41]=637 freq[42]=637 freq[43]=637 freq[44]=637 freq[45]=637 freq[46]=637 freq[47]=637
freq[48]=637 freq[49]=643 freq[50]=643 freq[51]=643 freq[52]=643 freq[53]=643 freq[54]=643 freq[55]=643
freq[56]=643 freq[57]=643 freq[58]=643 freq[59]=643 freq[60]=643 freq[61]=643 freq[62]=643
total valid nonce number:57447
total send work number:57456
require valid nonce number:57456
repeated_nonce_num:0
err_nonce_num:26183
last_nonce_num:35748
chain[5]: All chip cores are opened OK!
Test Patten on chain[5]: OK!
chain[6]: All chip cores are opened OK!
Test Patten on chain[6]: OK!
chain[7]: All chip cores are opened OK!
Test Patten on chain[7]: OK!
setStartTimePoint total_tv_start_sys=217 total_tv_end_sys=218
restartNum = 2 , auto-reinit enabled...
do read_temp_func once...
do check_asic_reg 0x08
get RT hashrate from Chain[5]: (asic index start from 1-63)
Asic[01]=72.5110 Asic[02]=68.6020 Asic[03]=74.4230 Asic[04]=74.6750 Asic[05]=71.4540 Asic[06]=77.5610 Asic[07]=74.7760 Asic[08]=74.3900
Asic[09]=77.7790 Asic[10]=76.7220 Asic[11]=73.8020 Asic[12]=68.5850 Asic[13]=76.1680 Asic[14]=72.4770 Asic[15]=73.0470 Asic[16]=57.8810
Asic[17]=74.4740 Asic[18]=76.4530 Asic[19]=67.8800 Asic[20]=70.1280 Asic[21]=73.7520 Asic[22]=74.6580 Asic[23]=73.6850 Asic[24]=78.5170
Asic[25]=73.6850 Asic[26]=63.6860 Asic[27]=80.9660 Asic[28]=73.9200 Asic[29]=68.9870 Asic[30]=75.6310 Asic[31]=74.9770 Asic[32]=69.4570
Asic[33]=74.6580 Asic[34]=79.8930 Asic[35]=76.6710 Asic[36]=74.3730 Asic[37]=66.6050 Asic[38]=76.7380 Asic[39]=71.4540 Asic[40]=69.3060
Asic[41]=72.5610 Asic[42]=73.8530 Asic[43]=58.9210 Asic[44]=75.3800 Asic[45]=73.1310 Asic[46]=68.4000 Asic[47]=77.6780 Asic[48]=73.1150
Asic[49]=69.2890 Asic[50]=62.8130 Asic[51]=74.2720 Asic[52]=73.1480 Asic[53]=67.4440 Asic[54]=72.4940 Asic[55]=68.1990 Asic[56]=72.4100
Asic[57]=75.3460 Asic[58]=66.1350 Asic[59]=72.9800 Asic[60]=78.1480 Asic[61]=72.3260 Asic[62]=72.5610 Asic[63]=77.7950
get RT hashrate from Chain[6]: (asic index start from 1-63)
Asic[01]=67.6620 Asic[02]=75.9840 Asic[03]=70.3300 Asic[04]=75.5640 Asic[05]=62.8470 Asic[06]=70.2790 Asic[07]=74.5240 Asic[08]=72.9130
Asic[09]=70.6320 Asic[10]=72.5610 Asic[11]=73.9370 Asic[12]=77.3420 Asic[13]=72.4440 Asic[14]=68.8030 Asic[15]=73.0810 Asic[16]=73.8360
Asic[17]=73.5510 Asic[18]=73.9700 Asic[19]=71.0340 Asic[20]=71.1680 Asic[21]=72.1580 Asic[22]=78.8190 Asic[23]=71.9230 Asic[24]=69.4570
Asic[25]=67.7630 Asic[26]=71.7220 Asic[27]=76.4030 Asic[28]=71.1180 Asic[29]=68.7360 Asic[30]=69.7090 Asic[31]=77.5610 Asic[32]=70.1790
Asic[33]=67.9140 Asic[34]=72.3930 Asic[35]=64.5920 Asic[36]=72.1920 Asic[37]=74.6080 Asic[38]=75.4470 Asic[39]=73.8700 Asic[40]=73.9370
Asic[41]=66.2860 Asic[42]=79.4230 Asic[43]=75.8160 Asic[44]=68.6350 Asic[45]=74.7920 Asic[46]=70.7990 Asic[47]=71.2360 Asic[48]=73.8700
Asic[49]=66.5380 Asic[50]=70.6150 Asic[51]=72.6280 Asic[52]=75.7490 Asic[53]=71.8400 Asic[54]=76.5370 Asic[55]=73.5340 Asic[56]=69.2390
Asic[57]=75.1280 Asic[58]=74.3230 Asic[59]=73.4330 Asic[60]=72.3430 Asic[61]=77.6780 Asic[62]=82.4600 Asic[63]=69.5240
get RT hashrate from Chain[7]: (asic index start from 1-63)
Asic[01]=73.5510 Asic[02]=75.9160 Asic[03]=80.1110 Asic[04]=76.9900 Asic[05]=76.1510 Asic[06]=73.5170 Asic[07]=74.9940 Asic[08]=73.1150
Asic[09]=70.6650 Asic[10]=70.6990 Asic[11]=72.4770 Asic[12]=70.1450 Asic[13]=74.3060 Asic[14]=71.8060 Asic[15]=74.7420 Asic[16]=75.6650
Asic[17]=76.8220 Asic[18]=69.5240 Asic[19]=72.0910 Asic[20]=75.2620 Asic[21]=72.0240 Asic[22]=73.2660 Asic[23]=76.2690 Asic[24]=69.9440
Asic[25]=67.7290 Asic[26]=71.7050 Asic[27]=74.6250 Asic[28]=78.2320 Asic[29]=69.8430 Asic[30]=68.4670 Asic[31]=71.5210 Asic[32]=68.9540
Asic[33]=74.6250 Asic[34]=71.8730 Asic[35]=74.4400 Asic[36]=74.8760 Asic[37]=73.9030 Asic[38]=72.9300 Asic[39]=69.6250 Asic[40]=74.9430
Asic[41]=72.7620 Asic[42]=69.4910 Asic[43]=67.4270 Asic[44]=71.4870 Asic[45]=74.4570 Asic[46]=66.6550 Asic[47]=67.5450 Asic[48]=75.4800
Asic[49]=72.2590 Asic[50]=72.9300 Asic[51]=75.6820 Asic[52]=71.9070 Asic[53]=67.9640 Asic[54]=67.8470 Asic[55]=74.3900 Asic[56]=71.0010
Asic[57]=75.8490 Asic[58]=74.9270 Asic[59]=72.3930 Asic[60]=74.3730 Asic[61]=75.5310 Asic[62]=73.8190 Asic[63]=72.4440
Check Chain[J6] ASIC RT error: (asic index start from 1-63)
Check Chain[J7] ASIC RT error: (asic index start from 1-63)
Check Chain[J8] ASIC RT error: (asic index start from 1-63)
Done check_asic_reg
do read temp on Chain[5]
Chain[5] Chip[62] TempTypeID=55 middle offset=29
Chain[5] Chip[62] local Temp=60
Chain[5] Chip[62] middle Temp=70
Special fix Chain[5] Chip[62] middle Temp = 75
Done read temp on Chain[5]
do read temp on Chain[6]
Chain[6] Chip[62] TempTypeID=55 middle offset=29
Chain[6] Chip[62] local Temp=60
Chain[6] Chip[62] middle Temp=72
Special fix Chain[6] Chip[62] middle Temp = 75
Done read temp on Chain[6]
do read temp on Chain[7]
Chain[7] Chip[62] TempTypeID=55 middle offset=28
Chain[7] Chip[62] local Temp=62
Chain[7] Chip[62] middle Temp=72
Special fix Chain[7] Chip[62] middle Temp = 77
Done read temp on Chain[7]
set FAN speed according to: temp_highest=62 temp_top1[PWM_T]=62 temp_top1[TEMP_POS_LOCAL]=62 temp_change=0 fix_fan_steps=0
FAN PWM: 74
read_temp_func Done!
CRC error counter=0
submitted by Timsierramist to BitcoinMining [link] [comments]

Antminer S9 not hashing?

Good morning folks,
I have an Antminer S9 that has performed flawlessly. After I moved it to a better location, I noticed that it no longer seems to be working. The green light is flashing, but it doesn't seem to be hashing to my pool (Nicehash).
I'm fairly new to Bitcoining mining and can't make sense of some of the information on my status screen. Before I jump into Bitmain support, I was wondering if anyone could clue me in as to what the problem might be.
https://s15.postimg.cc/i0n5qsyoInked_Capture_LI.jpg
I'll post my Kernal Log here.
Thank you in advance!!!
KERNAL LOG: [ 0.000000] Booting Linux on physical CPU 0x0
[ 0.000000] Linux version 3.14.0-xilinx-ge8a2f71-dirty ([email protected]) (gcc version 4.8.3 20140320 (prerelease) (Sourcery CodeBench Lite 2014.05-23) ) #82 SMP PREEMPT Tue May 16 19:49:53 CST 2017
[ 0.000000] CPU: ARMv7 Processor [413fc090] revision 0 (ARMv7), cr=18c5387d
[ 0.000000] CPU: PIPT / VIPT nonaliasing data cache, VIPT aliasing instruction cache
[ 0.000000] Machine model: Xilinx Zynq
[ 0.000000] cma: CMA: reserved 128 MiB at 27800000
[ 0.000000] Memory policy: Data cache writealloc
[ 0.000000] On node 0 totalpages: 258048
[ 0.000000] free_area_init_node: node 0, pgdat c0740a40, node_mem_map e6fd8000
[ 0.000000] Normal zone: 1520 pages used for memmap
[ 0.000000] Normal zone: 0 pages reserved
[ 0.000000] Normal zone: 194560 pages, LIFO batch:31
[ 0.000000] HighMem zone: 496 pages used for memmap
[ 0.000000] HighMem zone: 63488 pages, LIFO batch:15
[ 0.000000] PERCPU: Embedded 8 pages/cpu @e6fc0000 s9088 r8192 d15488 u32768
[ 0.000000] pcpu-alloc: s9088 r8192 d15488 u32768 alloc=8*4096
[ 0.000000] pcpu-alloc: [0] 0 [0] 1
[ 0.000000] Built 1 zonelists in Zone order, mobility grouping on. Total pages: 256528
[ 0.000000] Kernel command line: noinitrd mem=1008M console=ttyPS0,115200 root=ubi0:rootfs ubi.mtd=1 rootfstype=ubifs rw rootwait
[ 0.000000] PID hash table entries: 4096 (order: 2, 16384 bytes)
[ 0.000000] Dentry cache hash table entries: 131072 (order: 7, 524288 bytes)
[ 0.000000] Inode-cache hash table entries: 65536 (order: 6, 262144 bytes)
[ 0.000000] Memory: 884148K/1032192K available (5032K kernel code, 283K rwdata, 1916K rodata, 204K init, 258K bss, 148044K reserved, 253952K highmem)
[ 0.000000] Virtual kernel memory layout:
[ 0.000000] vector : 0xffff0000 - 0xffff1000 ( 4 kB)
[ 0.000000] fixmap : 0xfff00000 - 0xfffe0000 ( 896 kB)
[ 0.000000] vmalloc : 0xf0000000 - 0xff000000 ( 240 MB)
[ 0.000000] lowmem : 0xc0000000 - 0xef800000 ( 760 MB)
[ 0.000000] pkmap : 0xbfe00000 - 0xc0000000 ( 2 MB)
[ 0.000000] modules : 0xbf000000 - 0xbfe00000 ( 14 MB)
[ 0.000000] .text : 0xc0008000 - 0xc06d1374 (6949 kB)
[ 0.000000] .init : 0xc06d2000 - 0xc0705380 ( 205 kB)
[ 0.000000] .data : 0xc0706000 - 0xc074cf78 ( 284 kB)
[ 0.000000] .bss : 0xc074cf84 - 0xc078d9fc ( 259 kB)
[ 0.000000] Preemptible hierarchical RCU implementation.
[ 0.000000] Dump stacks of tasks blocking RCU-preempt GP.
[ 0.000000] RCU restricting CPUs from NR_CPUS=4 to nr_cpu_ids=2.
[ 0.000000] RCU: Adjusting geometry for rcu_fanout_leaf=16, nr_cpu_ids=2
[ 0.000000] NR_IRQS:16 nr_irqs:16 16
[ 0.000000] ps7-slcr mapped to f0004000
[ 0.000000] zynq_clock_init: clkc starts at f0004100
[ 0.000000] Zynq clock init
[ 0.000015] sched_clock: 64 bits at 333MHz, resolution 3ns, wraps every 3298534883328ns
[ 0.000308] ps7-ttc #0 at f0006000, irq=43
[ 0.000618] Console: colour dummy device 80x30
[ 0.000658] Calibrating delay loop... 1325.46 BogoMIPS (lpj=6627328)
[ 0.040207] pid_max: default: 32768 minimum: 301
[ 0.040436] Mount-cache hash table entries: 2048 (order: 1, 8192 bytes)
[ 0.040459] Mountpoint-cache hash table entries: 2048 (order: 1, 8192 bytes)
[ 0.042612] CPU: Testing write buffer coherency: ok
[ 0.042974] CPU0: thread -1, cpu 0, socket 0, mpidr 80000000
[ 0.043036] Setting up static identity map for 0x4c4b00 - 0x4c4b58
[ 0.043263] L310 cache controller enabled
[ 0.043282] l2x0: 8 ways, CACHE_ID 0x410000c8, AUX_CTRL 0x72760000, Cache size: 512 kB
[ 0.121037] CPU1: Booted secondary processor
[ 0.210227] CPU1: thread -1, cpu 1, socket 0, mpidr 80000001
[ 0.210357] Brought up 2 CPUs
[ 0.210376] SMP: Total of 2 processors activated.
[ 0.210385] CPU: All CPU(s) started in SVC mode.
[ 0.211051] devtmpfs: initialized
[ 0.213481] VFP support v0.3: implementor 41 architecture 3 part 30 variant 9 rev 4
[ 0.214724] regulator-dummy: no parameters
[ 0.223736] NET: Registered protocol family 16
[ 0.226067] DMA: preallocated 256 KiB pool for atomic coherent allocations
[ 0.228361] cpuidle: using governor ladder
[ 0.228374] cpuidle: using governor menu
[ 0.235908] syscon f8000000.ps7-slcr: regmap [mem 0xf8000000-0xf8000fff] registered
[ 0.237440] hw-breakpoint: found 5 (+1 reserved) breakpoint and 1 watchpoint registers.
[ 0.237453] hw-breakpoint: maximum watchpoint size is 4 bytes.
[ 0.237572] zynq-ocm f800c000.ps7-ocmc: ZYNQ OCM pool: 256 KiB @ 0xf0080000
[ 0.259435] bio: create slab at 0
[ 0.261172] vgaarb: loaded
[ 0.261915] SCSI subsystem initialized
[ 0.262814] usbcore: registered new interface driver usbfs
[ 0.262985] usbcore: registered new interface driver hub
[ 0.263217] usbcore: registered new device driver usb
[ 0.263743] media: Linux media interface: v0.10
[ 0.263902] Linux video capture interface: v2.00
[ 0.264150] pps_core: LinuxPPS API ver. 1 registered
[ 0.264162] pps_core: Software ver. 5.3.6 - Copyright 2005-2007 Rodolfo Giometti <[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])>
[ 0.264286] PTP clock support registered
[ 0.264656] EDAC MC: Ver: 3.0.0
[ 0.265719] Advanced Linux Sound Architecture Driver Initialized.
[ 0.268708] DMA-API: preallocated 4096 debug entries
[ 0.268724] DMA-API: debugging enabled by kernel config
[ 0.268820] Switched to clocksource arm_global_timer
[ 0.289596] NET: Registered protocol family 2
[ 0.290280] TCP established hash table entries: 8192 (order: 3, 32768 bytes)
[ 0.290375] TCP bind hash table entries: 8192 (order: 4, 65536 bytes)
[ 0.290535] TCP: Hash tables configured (established 8192 bind 8192)
[ 0.290612] TCP: reno registered
[ 0.290633] UDP hash table entries: 512 (order: 2, 16384 bytes)
[ 0.290689] UDP-Lite hash table entries: 512 (order: 2, 16384 bytes)
[ 0.290971] NET: Registered protocol family 1
[ 0.291346] RPC: Registered named UNIX socket transport module.
[ 0.291359] RPC: Registered udp transport module.
[ 0.291368] RPC: Registered tcp transport module.
[ 0.291376] RPC: Registered tcp NFSv4.1 backchannel transport module.
[ 0.291391] PCI: CLS 0 bytes, default 64
[ 0.291857] hw perfevents: enabled with ARMv7 Cortex-A9 PMU driver, 7 counters available
[ 0.293945] futex hash table entries: 512 (order: 3, 32768 bytes)
[ 0.295408] bounce pool size: 64 pages
[ 0.296323] jffs2: version 2.2. (NAND) © 2001-2006 Red Hat, Inc.
[ 0.296525] msgmni has been set to 1486
[ 0.297330] io scheduler noop registered
[ 0.297343] io scheduler deadline registered
[ 0.297385] io scheduler cfq registered (default)
[ 0.308358] dma-pl330 f8003000.ps7-dma: Loaded driver for PL330 DMAC-2364208
[ 0.308380] dma-pl330 f8003000.ps7-dma: DBUFF-128x8bytes Num_Chans-8 Num_Peri-4 Num_Events-16
[ 0.434378] e0001000.serial: ttyPS0 at MMIO 0xe0001000 (irq = 82, base_baud = 3124999) is a xuartps
[ 1.006815] console [ttyPS0] enabled
[ 1.011106] xdevcfg f8007000.ps7-dev-cfg: ioremap 0xf8007000 to f0068000
[ 1.018731] [drm] Initialized drm 1.1.0 20060810
[ 1.036029] brd: module loaded
[ 1.045494] loop: module loaded
[ 1.055163] e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - 2.3.2-k
[ 1.060985] e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2013 Intel Corporation.
[ 1.068779] libphy: XEMACPS mii bus: probed
[ 1.073341] ------------- phy_id = 0x3625e62
[ 1.078112] xemacps e000b000.ps7-ethernet: pdev->id -1, baseaddr 0xe000b000, irq 54
[ 1.087072] ehci_hcd: USB 2.0 'Enhanced' Host Controller (EHCI) Driver
[ 1.093912] ehci-pci: EHCI PCI platform driver
[ 1.101155] zynq-dr e0002000.ps7-usb: Unable to init USB phy, missing?
[ 1.107952] usbcore: registered new interface driver usb-storage
[ 1.114850] mousedev: PS/2 mouse device common for all mice
[ 1.120975] i2c /dev entries driver
[ 1.127946] zynq-edac f8006000.ps7-ddrc: ecc not enabled
[ 1.133474] cpufreq_cpu0: failed to get cpu0 regulator: -19
[ 1.139426] Xilinx Zynq CpuIdle Driver started
[ 1.144261] sdhci: Secure Digital Host Controller Interface driver
[ 1.150384] sdhci: Copyright(c) Pierre Ossman
[ 1.154700] sdhci-pltfm: SDHCI platform and OF driver helper
[ 1.161601] mmc0: no vqmmc regulator found
[ 1.165614] mmc0: no vmmc regulator found
[ 1.208845] mmc0: SDHCI controller on e0100000.ps7-sdio [e0100000.ps7-sdio] using ADMA
[ 1.217539] usbcore: registered new interface driver usbhid
[ 1.223054] usbhid: USB HID core driver
[ 1.227806] nand: device found, Manufacturer ID: 0x2c, Chip ID: 0xda
[ 1.234107] nand: Micron MT29F2G08ABAEAWP
[ 1.238074] nand: 256MiB, SLC, page size: 2048, OOB size: 64
[ 1.244027] Bad block table found at page 131008, version 0x01
[ 1.250251] Bad block table found at page 130944, version 0x01
[ 1.256303] 3 ofpart partitions found on MTD device pl353-nand
[ 1.262080] Creating 3 MTD partitions on "pl353-nand":
[ 1.267174] 0x000000000000-0x000002000000 : "BOOT.bin-env-dts-kernel"
[ 1.275230] 0x000002000000-0x00000b000000 : "angstram-rootfs"
[ 1.282582] 0x00000b000000-0x000010000000 : "upgrade-rootfs"
[ 1.291630] TCP: cubic registered
[ 1.294869] NET: Registered protocol family 17
[ 1.299597] Registering SWP/SWPB emulation handler
[ 1.305497] regulator-dummy: disabling
[ 1.309875] UBI: attaching mtd1 to ubi0
[ 1.836565] UBI: scanning is finished
[ 1.848221] UBI: attached mtd1 (name "angstram-rootfs", size 144 MiB) to ubi0
[ 1.855302] UBI: PEB size: 131072 bytes (128 KiB), LEB size: 126976 bytes
[ 1.862063] UBI: min./max. I/O unit sizes: 2048/2048, sub-page size 2048
[ 1.868728] UBI: VID header offset: 2048 (aligned 2048), data offset: 4096
[ 1.875605] UBI: good PEBs: 1152, bad PEBs: 0, corrupted PEBs: 0
[ 1.881586] UBI: user volume: 1, internal volumes: 1, max. volumes count: 128
[ 1.888693] UBI: max/mean erase counter: 4/1, WL threshold: 4096, image sequence number: 1134783803
[ 1.897736] UBI: available PEBs: 0, total reserved PEBs: 1152, PEBs reserved for bad PEB handling: 40
[ 1.906953] UBI: background thread "ubi_bgt0d" started, PID 1080
[ 1.906959] drivers/rtc/hctosys.c: unable to open rtc device (rtc0)
[ 1.911038] ALSA device list:
[ 1.911042] No soundcards found.
[ 1.927420] UBIFS: background thread "ubifs_bgt0_0" started, PID 1082
[ 1.956473] UBIFS: recovery needed
[ 2.016970] UBIFS: recovery completed
[ 2.020709] UBIFS: mounted UBI device 0, volume 0, name "rootfs"
[ 2.026635] UBIFS: LEB size: 126976 bytes (124 KiB), min./max. I/O unit sizes: 2048 bytes/2048 bytes
[ 2.035771] UBIFS: FS size: 128626688 bytes (122 MiB, 1013 LEBs), journal size 9023488 bytes (8 MiB, 72 LEBs)
[ 2.045653] UBIFS: reserved for root: 0 bytes (0 KiB)
[ 2.050693] UBIFS: media format: w4/r0 (latest is w4/r0), UUID B079DD56-06BB-4E31-8F5E-A6604F480DB2, small LPT model
[ 2.061987] VFS: Mounted root (ubifs filesystem) on device 0:11.
[ 2.069184] devtmpfs: mounted
[ 2.072297] Freeing unused kernel memory: 204K (c06d2000 - c0705000)
[ 2.920928] random: dd urandom read with 0 bits of entropy available
[ 3.318860]
[ 3.318860] bcm54xx_config_init
[ 3.928853]
[ 3.928853] bcm54xx_config_init
[ 7.929682] xemacps e000b000.ps7-ethernet: Set clk to 124999998 Hz
[ 7.935787] xemacps e000b000.ps7-ethernet: link up (1000/FULL)
[ 22.563181] In axi fpga driver!
[ 22.566260] request_mem_region OK!
[ 22.569676] AXI fpga dev virtual address is 0xf01fe000
[ 22.574751] *base_vir_addr = 0x8c510
[ 22.590723] In fpga mem driver!
[ 22.593791] request_mem_region OK!
[ 22.597361] fpga mem virtual address is 0xf3000000
[ 23.408156]
[ 23.408156] bcm54xx_config_init
[ 24.038071]
[ 24.038071] bcm54xx_config_init
[ 28.038487] xemacps e000b000.ps7-ethernet: Set clk to 124999998 Hz
[ 28.044593] xemacps e000b000.ps7-ethernet: link up (1000/FULL)
This is XILINX board. Totalram: 1039794176
Detect 1GB control board of XILINX
DETECT HW version=0008c510
miner ID : 8118b4c610358854
Miner Type = S9
AsicType = 1387
real AsicNum = 63
use critical mode to search freq...
get PLUG ON=0x000000e0
Find hashboard on Chain[5]
Find hashboard on Chain[6]
Find hashboard on Chain[7]
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
Check chain[5] PIC fw version=0x03
Check chain[6] PIC fw version=0x03
Check chain[7] PIC fw version=0x03
chain[5]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
has freq in PIC, will disable freq setting.
chain[5] has freq in PIC and will jump over...
Chain[5] has core num in PIC
Chain[5] ASIC[15] has core num=5
Check chain[5] PIC fw version=0x03
chain[6]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
has freq in PIC, will disable freq setting.
chain[6] has freq in PIC and will jump over...
Chain[6] has core num in PIC
Chain[6] ASIC[17] has core num=8
Check chain[6] PIC fw version=0x03
chain[7]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
has freq in PIC, will disable freq setting.
chain[7] has freq in PIC and will jump over...
Chain[7] has core num in PIC
Chain[7] ASIC[8] has core num=13
Chain[7] ASIC[9] has core num=11
Chain[7] ASIC[13] has core num=11
Chain[7] ASIC[19] has core num=14
Chain[7] ASIC[30] has core num=6
Chain[7] ASIC[32] has core num=1
Chain[7] ASIC[42] has core num=2
Chain[7] ASIC[55] has core num=1
Chain[7] ASIC[57] has core num=2
Check chain[7] PIC fw version=0x03
get PIC voltage=108 on chain[5], value=880
get PIC voltage=74 on chain[6], value=900
get PIC voltage=108 on chain[7], value=880
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
chain[5] temp offset record: 62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[5] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[5] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
chain[6] temp offset record: 62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[6] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[6] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
chain[7] temp offset record: 62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[7] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[7] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
CRC error counter=0
set command mode to VIL
--- check asic number
After Get ASIC NUM CRC error counter=0
set_baud=0
The min freq=700
set real timeout 52, need sleep=379392
After TEST CRC error counter=0
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
search freq for 1 times, completed chain = 3, total chain num = 3
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
restart Miner chance num=2
waiting for receive_func to exit!
waiting for pic heart to exit!
bmminer not found= 1643 root 0:00 grep bmminer
bmminer not found, restart bmminer ...
This is user mode for mining
Detect 1GB control board of XILINX
Miner Type = S9
Miner compile time: Fri Nov 17 17:57:49 CST 2017 type: Antminer S9set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
miner ID : 8118b4c610358854
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
Checking fans!get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[5] speed=13440
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[5] speed=13440
get fan[2] speed=6120
get fan[5] speed=13440
chain[5]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
Chain[J6] has backup chain_voltage=880
Chain[J6] test patten OK temp=-126
Check chain[5] PIC fw version=0x03
chain[6]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
Chain[J7] has backup chain_voltage=900
Chain[J7] test patten OK temp=-120
Check chain[6] PIC fw version=0x03
chain[7]: [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255] [63:255]
Chain[J8] has backup chain_voltage=880
Chain[J8] test patten OK temp=-125
Check chain[7] PIC fw version=0x03
Chain[J6] orignal chain_voltage_pic=108 value=880
Chain[J7] orignal chain_voltage_pic=74 value=900
Chain[J8] orignal chain_voltage_pic=108 value=880
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x0000ffff
set_reset_allhashboard = 0x00000000
Chain[J6] has 63 asic
Chain[J7] has 63 asic
Chain[J8] has 63 asic
Chain[J6] has core num in PIC
Chain[J6] ASIC[15] has core num=5
Chain[J7] has core num in PIC
Chain[J7] ASIC[17] has core num=8
Chain[J8] has core num in PIC
Chain[J8] ASIC[8] has core num=13
Chain[J8] ASIC[9] has core num=11
Chain[J8] ASIC[13] has core num=11
Chain[J8] ASIC[19] has core num=14
Chain[J8] ASIC[30] has core num=6
Chain[J8] ASIC[32] has core num=1
Chain[J8] ASIC[42] has core num=2
Chain[J8] ASIC[55] has core num=1
Chain[J8] ASIC[57] has core num=2
miner total rate=13999GH/s fixed rate=13500GH/s
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[5]
Chain:5 chipnum=63
Chain[J6] voltage added=0.2V
Chain:5 temp offset=0
Chain:5 base freq=487
Asic[ 0]:618
Asic[ 1]:631 Asic[ 2]:681 Asic[ 3]:618 Asic[ 4]:631 Asic[ 5]:681 Asic[ 6]:618 Asic[ 7]:631 Asic[ 8]:675
Asic[ 9]:618 Asic[10]:631 Asic[11]:681 Asic[12]:631 Asic[13]:637 Asic[14]:606 Asic[15]:487 Asic[16]:637
Asic[17]:675 Asic[18]:618 Asic[19]:637 Asic[20]:675 Asic[21]:631 Asic[22]:650 Asic[23]:687 Asic[24]:631
Asic[25]:537 Asic[26]:687 Asic[27]:631 Asic[28]:587 Asic[29]:687 Asic[30]:612 Asic[31]:650 Asic[32]:687
Asic[33]:631 Asic[34]:650 Asic[35]:687 Asic[36]:631 Asic[37]:662 Asic[38]:693 Asic[39]:631 Asic[40]:662
Asic[41]:662 Asic[42]:543 Asic[43]:668 Asic[44]:693 Asic[45]:568 Asic[46]:675 Asic[47]:700 Asic[48]:631
Asic[49]:568 Asic[50]:700 Asic[51]:631 Asic[52]:625 Asic[53]:700 Asic[54]:631 Asic[55]:675 Asic[56]:662
Asic[57]:631 Asic[58]:662 Asic[59]:687 Asic[60]:631 Asic[61]:681 Asic[62]:700
Chain:5 max freq=700
Chain:5 min freq=487
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[6]
Chain:6 chipnum=63
Chain[J7] voltage added=0.1V
Chain:6 temp offset=0
Chain:6 base freq=687
Asic[ 0]:650
Asic[ 1]:650 Asic[ 2]:650 Asic[ 3]:650 Asic[ 4]:650 Asic[ 5]:650 Asic[ 6]:650 Asic[ 7]:650 Asic[ 8]:650
Asic[ 9]:650 Asic[10]:650 Asic[11]:650 Asic[12]:650 Asic[13]:650 Asic[14]:650 Asic[15]:650 Asic[16]:650
Asic[17]:650 Asic[18]:650 Asic[19]:650 Asic[20]:650 Asic[21]:650 Asic[22]:650 Asic[23]:650 Asic[24]:650
Asic[25]:650 Asic[26]:656 Asic[27]:656 Asic[28]:656 Asic[29]:656 Asic[30]:656 Asic[31]:656 Asic[32]:656
Asic[33]:656 Asic[34]:656 Asic[35]:656 Asic[36]:656 Asic[37]:656 Asic[38]:656 Asic[39]:656 Asic[40]:656
Asic[41]:656 Asic[42]:656 Asic[43]:656 Asic[44]:656 Asic[45]:656 Asic[46]:656 Asic[47]:656 Asic[48]:656
Asic[49]:656 Asic[50]:656 Asic[51]:656 Asic[52]:656 Asic[53]:656 Asic[54]:656 Asic[55]:656 Asic[56]:656
Asic[57]:656 Asic[58]:656 Asic[59]:656 Asic[60]:656 Asic[61]:656 Asic[62]:656
Chain:6 max freq=656
Chain:6 min freq=650
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[7]
Chain:7 chipnum=63
Chain[J8] voltage added=0.2V
Chain:7 temp offset=0
Chain:7 base freq=637
Asic[ 0]:656
Asic[ 1]:656 Asic[ 2]:656 Asic[ 3]:656 Asic[ 4]:656 Asic[ 5]:656 Asic[ 6]:656 Asic[ 7]:656 Asic[ 8]:637
Asic[ 9]:637 Asic[10]:656 Asic[11]:656 Asic[12]:656 Asic[13]:637 Asic[14]:656 Asic[15]:662 Asic[16]:662
Asic[17]:662 Asic[18]:662 Asic[19]:637 Asic[20]:662 Asic[21]:662 Asic[22]:662 Asic[23]:662 Asic[24]:662
Asic[25]:662 Asic[26]:662 Asic[27]:662 Asic[28]:662 Asic[29]:662 Asic[30]:637 Asic[31]:662 Asic[32]:662
Asic[33]:662 Asic[34]:662 Asic[35]:662 Asic[36]:662 Asic[37]:662 Asic[38]:662 Asic[39]:662 Asic[40]:662
Asic[41]:662 Asic[42]:650 Asic[43]:662 Asic[44]:662 Asic[45]:662 Asic[46]:662 Asic[47]:662 Asic[48]:662
Asic[49]:662 Asic[50]:662 Asic[51]:662 Asic[52]:662 Asic[53]:662 Asic[54]:662 Asic[55]:650 Asic[56]:662
Asic[57]:650 Asic[58]:662 Asic[59]:662 Asic[60]:662 Asic[61]:662 Asic[62]:662
Chain:7 max freq=662
Chain:7 min freq=637
Miner fix freq ...
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[5]
Chain:5 chipnum=63
Chain[J6] voltage added=0.2V
Chain:5 temp offset=0
Chain:5 base freq=487
Asic[ 0]:618
Asic[ 1]:631 Asic[ 2]:650 Asic[ 3]:618 Asic[ 4]:631 Asic[ 5]:656 Asic[ 6]:618 Asic[ 7]:631 Asic[ 8]:656
Asic[ 9]:618 Asic[10]:631 Asic[11]:656 Asic[12]:631 Asic[13]:637 Asic[14]:606 Asic[15]:487 Asic[16]:637
Asic[17]:656 Asic[18]:618 Asic[19]:637 Asic[20]:656 Asic[21]:631 Asic[22]:650 Asic[23]:656 Asic[24]:631
Asic[25]:537 Asic[26]:656 Asic[27]:631 Asic[28]:587 Asic[29]:656 Asic[30]:612 Asic[31]:650 Asic[32]:656
Asic[33]:631 Asic[34]:650 Asic[35]:656 Asic[36]:631 Asic[37]:656 Asic[38]:656 Asic[39]:631 Asic[40]:656
Asic[41]:656 Asic[42]:543 Asic[43]:656 Asic[44]:656 Asic[45]:568 Asic[46]:656 Asic[47]:656 Asic[48]:631
Asic[49]:568 Asic[50]:656 Asic[51]:631 Asic[52]:625 Asic[53]:656 Asic[54]:631 Asic[55]:656 Asic[56]:656
Asic[57]:631 Asic[58]:656 Asic[59]:656 Asic[60]:631 Asic[61]:656 Asic[62]:656
Chain:5 max freq=656
Chain:5 min freq=487
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[6]
Chain:6 chipnum=63
Chain[J7] voltage added=0.1V
Chain:6 temp offset=0
Chain:6 base freq=687
Asic[ 0]:631
Asic[ 1]:631 Asic[ 2]:631 Asic[ 3]:631 Asic[ 4]:631 Asic[ 5]:631 Asic[ 6]:631 Asic[ 7]:631 Asic[ 8]:631
Asic[ 9]:631 Asic[10]:631 Asic[11]:631 Asic[12]:631 Asic[13]:631 Asic[14]:631 Asic[15]:631 Asic[16]:631
Asic[17]:631 Asic[18]:631 Asic[19]:631 Asic[20]:631 Asic[21]:631 Asic[22]:631 Asic[23]:631 Asic[24]:631
Asic[25]:631 Asic[26]:631 Asic[27]:631 Asic[28]:631 Asic[29]:631 Asic[30]:631 Asic[31]:631 Asic[32]:631
Asic[33]:631 Asic[34]:631 Asic[35]:637 Asic[36]:637 Asic[37]:637 Asic[38]:637 Asic[39]:637 Asic[40]:637
Asic[41]:637 Asic[42]:637 Asic[43]:637 Asic[44]:637 Asic[45]:637 Asic[46]:637 Asic[47]:637 Asic[48]:637
Asic[49]:637 Asic[50]:637 Asic[51]:637 Asic[52]:637 Asic[53]:637 Asic[54]:637 Asic[55]:637 Asic[56]:637
Asic[57]:637 Asic[58]:637 Asic[59]:637 Asic[60]:637 Asic[61]:637 Asic[62]:637
Chain:6 max freq=637
Chain:6 min freq=631
read PIC voltage=940 on chain[7]
Chain:7 chipnum=63
Chain[J8] voltage added=0.2V
Chain:7 temp offset=0
Chain:7 base freq=637
Asic[ 0]:637
Asic[ 1]:637 Asic[ 2]:637 Asic[ 3]:637 Asic[ 4]:637 Asic[ 5]:637 Asic[ 6]:637 Asic[ 7]:637 Asic[ 8]:637
Asic[ 9]:637 Asic[10]:637 Asic[11]:637 Asic[12]:637 Asic[13]:637 Asic[14]:637 Asic[15]:637 Asic[16]:637
Asic[17]:637 Asic[18]:637 Asic[19]:637 Asic[20]:637 Asic[21]:637 Asic[22]:637 Asic[23]:637 Asic[24]:637
Asic[25]:637 Asic[26]:637 Asic[27]:637 Asic[28]:637 Asic[29]:637 Asic[30]:637 Asic[31]:637 Asic[32]:637
Asic[33]:637 Asic[34]:637 Asic[35]:637 Asic[36]:637 Asic[37]:637 Asic[38]:637 Asic[39]:637 Asic[40]:637
Asic[41]:637 Asic[42]:637 Asic[43]:637 Asic[44]:637 Asic[45]:637 Asic[46]:637 Asic[47]:637 Asic[48]:637
Asic[49]:643 Asic[50]:643 Asic[51]:643 Asic[52]:643 Asic[53]:643 Asic[54]:643 Asic[55]:643 Asic[56]:643
Asic[57]:643 Asic[58]:643 Asic[59]:643 Asic[60]:643 Asic[61]:643 Asic[62]:643
Chain:7 max freq=643
Chain:7 min freq=637
max freq = 656
set baud=1
Chain[J6] PIC temp offset=62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[5] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[5] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
Chain[J6] chip[244] use PIC middle temp offset=0 typeID=55
New offset Chain[5] chip[244] local:26 remote:27 offset:29
Chain[J6] chip[244] get middle temp offset=29 typeID=55
Chain[J7] PIC temp offset=62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[6] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[6] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
Chain[J7] chip[244] use PIC middle temp offset=0 typeID=55
New offset Chain[6] chip[244] local:26 remote:27 offset:29
Chain[J7] chip[244] get middle temp offset=29 typeID=55
Chain[J8] PIC temp offset=62,0,0,0,0,0,35,28
chain[7] temp chip I2C addr=0x98
chain[7] has no middle temp, use special fix mode.
Chain[J8] chip[244] use PIC middle temp offset=0 typeID=55
New offset Chain[7] chip[244] local:26 remote:28 offset:28
Chain[J8] chip[244] get middle temp offset=28 typeID=55
miner rate=13501 voltage limit=900 on chain[5]
get PIC voltage=880 on chain[5], check: must be < 900
miner rate=13501 voltage limit=900 on chain[6]
get PIC voltage=900 on chain[6], check: must be < 900
miner rate=13501 voltage limit=900 on chain[7]
get PIC voltage=880 on chain[7], check: must be < 900
Chain[J6] set working voltage=880 [108]
Chain[J7] set working voltage=900 [74]
Chain[J8] set working voltage=880 [108]
do heat board 8xPatten for 1 times
start send works on chain[5]
start send works on chain[6]
start send works on chain[7]
get send work num :57456 on Chain[5]
get send work num :57456 on Chain[6]
get send work num :57456 on Chain[7]
wait recv nonce on chain[5]
wait recv nonce on chain[6]
wait recv nonce on chain[7]
get nonces on chain[5]
require nonce number:912
require validnonce number:57456
asic[00]=912 asic[01]=912 asic[02]=912 asic[03]=912 asic[04]=912 asic[05]=912 asic[06]=912 asic[07]=912
asic[08]=912 asic[09]=912 asic[10]=912 asic[11]=912 asic[12]=912 asic[13]=912 asic[14]=912 asic[15]=912
asic[16]=912 asic[17]=912 asic[18]=912 asic[19]=912 asic[20]=912 asic[21]=912 asic[22]=912 asic[23]=912
asic[24]=912 asic[25]=912 asic[26]=912 asic[27]=912 asic[28]=912 asic[29]=912 asic[30]=912 asic[31]=912
asic[32]=912 asic[33]=912 asic[34]=912 asic[35]=912 asic[36]=912 asic[37]=912 asic[38]=912 asic[39]=912
asic[40]=912 asic[41]=912 asic[42]=912 asic[43]=912 asic[44]=912 asic[45]=912 asic[46]=912 asic[47]=912
asic[48]=912 asic[49]=912 asic[50]=912 asic[51]=912 asic[52]=912 asic[53]=912 asic[54]=912 asic[55]=912
asic[56]=912 asic[57]=912 asic[58]=912 asic[59]=912 asic[60]=912 asic[61]=912 asic[62]=912
Below ASIC's core didn't receive all the nonce, they should receive 8 nonce each!
freq[00]=618 freq[01]=631 freq[02]=650 freq[03]=618 freq[04]=631 freq[05]=656 freq[06]=618 freq[07]=631
freq[08]=656 freq[09]=618 freq[10]=631 freq[11]=656 freq[12]=631 freq[13]=637 freq[14]=606 freq[15]=487
freq[16]=637 freq[17]=656 freq[18]=618 freq[19]=637 freq[20]=656 freq[21]=631 freq[22]=650 freq[23]=656
freq[24]=631 freq[25]=537 freq[26]=656 freq[27]=631 freq[28]=587 freq[29]=656 freq[30]=612 freq[31]=650
freq[32]=656 freq[33]=631 freq[34]=650 freq[35]=656 freq[36]=631 freq[37]=656 freq[38]=656 freq[39]=631
freq[40]=656 freq[41]=656 freq[42]=543 freq[43]=656 freq[44]=656 freq[45]=568 freq[46]=656 freq[47]=656
freq[48]=631 freq[49]=568 freq[50]=656 freq[51]=631 freq[52]=625 freq[53]=656 freq[54]=631 freq[55]=656
freq[56]=656 freq[57]=631 freq[58]=656 freq[59]=656 freq[60]=631 freq[61]=656 freq[62]=656
total valid nonce number:57456
total send work number:57456
require valid nonce number:57456
repeated_nonce_num:0
err_nonce_num:25912
last_nonce_num:14370
get nonces on chain[6]
require nonce number:912
require validnonce number:57456
asic[00]=912 asic[01]=912 asic[02]=912 asic[03]=912 asic[04]=912 asic[05]=912 asic[06]=912 asic[07]=912
asic[08]=912 asic[09]=912 asic[10]=912 asic[11]=912 asic[12]=912 asic[13]=912 asic[14]=912 asic[15]=912
asic[16]=912 asic[17]=912 asic[18]=912 asic[19]=912 asic[20]=912 asic[21]=912 asic[22]=912 asic[23]=912
asic[24]=912 asic[25]=912 asic[26]=912 asic[27]=912 asic[28]=912 asic[29]=912 asic[30]=912 asic[31]=912
asic[32]=912 asic[33]=912 asic[34]=912 asic[35]=912 asic[36]=912 asic[37]=912 asic[38]=912 asic[39]=912
asic[40]=912 asic[41]=912 asic[42]=912 asic[43]=912 asic[44]=912 asic[45]=912 asic[46]=912 asic[47]=912
asic[48]=912 asic[49]=912 asic[50]=912 asic[51]=912 asic[52]=912 asic[53]=912 asic[54]=912 asic[55]=912
asic[56]=912 asic[57]=912 asic[58]=912 asic[59]=912 asic[60]=912 asic[61]=912 asic[62]=912
Below ASIC's core didn't receive all the nonce, they should receive 8 nonce each!
freq[00]=631 freq[01]=631 freq[02]=631 freq[03]=631 freq[04]=631 freq[05]=631 freq[06]=631 freq[07]=631
freq[08]=631 freq[09]=631 freq[10]=631 freq[11]=631 freq[12]=631 freq[13]=631 freq[14]=631 freq[15]=631
freq[16]=631 freq[17]=631 freq[18]=631 freq[19]=631 freq[20]=631 freq[21]=631 freq[22]=631 freq[23]=631
freq[24]=631 freq[25]=631 freq[26]=631 freq[27]=631 freq[28]=631 freq[29]=631 freq[30]=631 freq[31]=631
freq[32]=631 freq[33]=631 freq[34]=631 freq[35]=637 freq[36]=637 freq[37]=637 freq[38]=637 freq[39]=637
freq[40]=637 freq[41]=637 freq[42]=637 freq[43]=637 freq[44]=637 freq[45]=637 freq[46]=637 freq[47]=637
freq[48]=637 freq[49]=637 freq[50]=637 freq[51]=637 freq[52]=637 freq[53]=637 freq[54]=637 freq[55]=637
freq[56]=637 freq[57]=637 freq[58]=637 freq[59]=637 freq[60]=637 freq[61]=637 freq[62]=637
total valid nonce number:57456
total send work number:57456
require valid nonce number:57456
repeated_nonce_num:0
err_nonce_num:25987
last_nonce_num:14368
get nonces on chain[7]
require nonce number:912
require validnonce number:57456
asic[00]=912 asic[01]=912 asic[02]=912 asic[03]=912 asic[04]=912 asic[05]=912 asic[06]=912 asic[07]=912
asic[08]=907 asic[09]=912 asic[10]=912 asic[11]=912 asic[12]=912 asic[13]=912 asic[14]=912 asic[15]=912
asic[16]=912 asic[17]=912 asic[18]=912 asic[19]=909 asic[20]=912 asic[21]=912 asic[22]=912 asic[23]=912
asic[24]=912 asic[25]=912 asic[26]=912 asic[27]=912 asic[28]=912 asic[29]=912 asic[30]=912 asic[31]=912
asic[32]=912 asic[33]=912 asic[34]=912 asic[35]=912 asic[36]=912 asic[37]=912 asic[38]=912 asic[39]=912
asic[40]=912 asic[41]=912 asic[42]=912 asic[43]=912 asic[44]=912 asic[45]=912 asic[46]=912 asic[47]=912
asic[48]=912 asic[49]=912 asic[50]=912 asic[51]=912 asic[52]=912 asic[53]=912 asic[54]=912 asic[55]=911
asic[56]=912 asic[57]=912 asic[58]=912 asic[59]=912 asic[60]=912 asic[61]=912 asic[62]=912
Below ASIC's core didn't receive all the nonce, they should receive 8 nonce each!
asic[08]=907
core[049]=7 core[053]=5 core[056]=7
asic[19]=909
core[064]=7 core[112]=6
asic[55]=911
core[007]=7
freq[00]=637 freq[01]=637 freq[02]=637 freq[03]=637 freq[04]=637 freq[05]=637 freq[06]=637 freq[07]=637
freq[08]=637 freq[09]=637 freq[10]=637 freq[11]=637 freq[12]=637 freq[13]=637 freq[14]=637 freq[15]=637
freq[16]=637 freq[17]=637 freq[18]=637 freq[19]=637 freq[20]=637 freq[21]=637 freq[22]=637 freq[23]=637
freq[24]=637 freq[25]=637 freq[26]=637 freq[27]=637 freq[28]=637 freq[29]=637 freq[30]=637 freq[31]=637
freq[32]=637 freq[33]=637 freq[34]=637 freq[35]=637 freq[36]=637 freq[37]=637 freq[38]=637 freq[39]=637
freq[40]=637 freq[41]=637 freq[42]=637 freq[43]=637 freq[44]=637 freq[45]=637 freq[46]=637 freq[47]=637
freq[48]=637 freq[49]=643 freq[50]=643 freq[51]=643 freq[52]=643 freq[53]=643 freq[54]=643 freq[55]=643
freq[56]=643 freq[57]=643 freq[58]=643 freq[59]=643 freq[60]=643 freq[61]=643 freq[62]=643
total valid nonce number:57447
total send work number:57456
require valid nonce number:57456
repeated_nonce_num:0
err_nonce_num:26183
last_nonce_num:35748
chain[5]: All chip cores are opened OK!
Test Patten on chain[5]: OK!
chain[6]: All chip cores are opened OK!
Test Patten on chain[6]: OK!
chain[7]: All chip cores are opened OK!
Test Patten on chain[7]: OK!
setStartTimePoint total_tv_start_sys=217 total_tv_end_sys=218
restartNum = 2 , auto-reinit enabled...
do read_temp_func once...
do check_asic_reg 0x08
get RT hashrate from Chain[5]: (asic index start from 1-63)
Asic[01]=72.5110 Asic[02]=68.6020 Asic[03]=74.4230 Asic[04]=74.6750 Asic[05]=71.4540 Asic[06]=77.5610 Asic[07]=74.7760 Asic[08]=74.3900
Asic[09]=77.7790 Asic[10]=76.7220 Asic[11]=73.8020 Asic[12]=68.5850 Asic[13]=76.1680 Asic[14]=72.4770 Asic[15]=73.0470 Asic[16]=57.8810
Asic[17]=74.4740 Asic[18]=76.4530 Asic[19]=67.8800 Asic[20]=70.1280 Asic[21]=73.7520 Asic[22]=74.6580 Asic[23]=73.6850 Asic[24]=78.5170
Asic[25]=73.6850 Asic[26]=63.6860 Asic[27]=80.9660 Asic[28]=73.9200 Asic[29]=68.9870 Asic[30]=75.6310 Asic[31]=74.9770 Asic[32]=69.4570
Asic[33]=74.6580 Asic[34]=79.8930 Asic[35]=76.6710 Asic[36]=74.3730 Asic[37]=66.6050 Asic[38]=76.7380 Asic[39]=71.4540 Asic[40]=69.3060
Asic[41]=72.5610 Asic[42]=73.8530 Asic[43]=58.9210 Asic[44]=75.3800 Asic[45]=73.1310 Asic[46]=68.4000 Asic[47]=77.6780 Asic[48]=73.1150
Asic[49]=69.2890 Asic[50]=62.8130 Asic[51]=74.2720 Asic[52]=73.1480 Asic[53]=67.4440 Asic[54]=72.4940 Asic[55]=68.1990 Asic[56]=72.4100
Asic[57]=75.3460 Asic[58]=66.1350 Asic[59]=72.9800 Asic[60]=78.1480 Asic[61]=72.3260 Asic[62]=72.5610 Asic[63]=77.7950
get RT hashrate from Chain[6]: (asic index start from 1-63)
Asic[01]=67.6620 Asic[02]=75.9840 Asic[03]=70.3300 Asic[04]=75.5640 Asic[05]=62.8470 Asic[06]=70.2790 Asic[07]=74.5240 Asic[08]=72.9130
Asic[09]=70.6320 Asic[10]=72.5610 Asic[11]=73.9370 Asic[12]=77.3420 Asic[13]=72.4440 Asic[14]=68.8030 Asic[15]=73.0810 Asic[16]=73.8360
Asic[17]=73.5510 Asic[18]=73.9700 Asic[19]=71.0340 Asic[20]=71.1680 Asic[21]=72.1580 Asic[22]=78.8190 Asic[23]=71.9230 Asic[24]=69.4570
Asic[25]=67.7630 Asic[26]=71.7220 Asic[27]=76.4030 Asic[28]=71.1180 Asic[29]=68.7360 Asic[30]=69.7090 Asic[31]=77.5610 Asic[32]=70.1790
Asic[33]=67.9140 Asic[34]=72.3930 Asic[35]=64.5920 Asic[36]=72.1920 Asic[37]=74.6080 Asic[38]=75.4470 Asic[39]=73.8700 Asic[40]=73.9370
Asic[41]=66.2860 Asic[42]=79.4230 Asic[43]=75.8160 Asic[44]=68.6350 Asic[45]=74.7920 Asic[46]=70.7990 Asic[47]=71.2360 Asic[48]=73.8700
Asic[49]=66.5380 Asic[50]=70.6150 Asic[51]=72.6280 Asic[52]=75.7490 Asic[53]=71.8400 Asic[54]=76.5370 Asic[55]=73.5340 Asic[56]=69.2390
Asic[57]=75.1280 Asic[58]=74.3230 Asic[59]=73.4330 Asic[60]=72.3430 Asic[61]=77.6780 Asic[62]=82.4600 Asic[63]=69.5240
get RT hashrate from Chain[7]: (asic index start from 1-63)
Asic[01]=73.5510 Asic[02]=75.9160 Asic[03]=80.1110 Asic[04]=76.9900 Asic[05]=76.1510 Asic[06]=73.5170 Asic[07]=74.9940 Asic[08]=73.1150
Asic[09]=70.6650 Asic[10]=70.6990 Asic[11]=72.4770 Asic[12]=70.1450 Asic[13]=74.3060 Asic[14]=71.8060 Asic[15]=74.7420 Asic[16]=75.6650
Asic[17]=76.8220 Asic[18]=69.5240 Asic[19]=72.0910 Asic[20]=75.2620 Asic[21]=72.0240 Asic[22]=73.2660 Asic[23]=76.2690 Asic[24]=69.9440
Asic[25]=67.7290 Asic[26]=71.7050 Asic[27]=74.6250 Asic[28]=78.2320 Asic[29]=69.8430 Asic[30]=68.4670 Asic[31]=71.5210 Asic[32]=68.9540
Asic[33]=74.6250 Asic[34]=71.8730 Asic[35]=74.4400 Asic[36]=74.8760 Asic[37]=73.9030 Asic[38]=72.9300 Asic[39]=69.6250 Asic[40]=74.9430
Asic[41]=72.7620 Asic[42]=69.4910 Asic[43]=67.4270 Asic[44]=71.4870 Asic[45]=74.4570 Asic[46]=66.6550 Asic[47]=67.5450 Asic[48]=75.4800
Asic[49]=72.2590 Asic[50]=72.9300 Asic[51]=75.6820 Asic[52]=71.9070 Asic[53]=67.9640 Asic[54]=67.8470 Asic[55]=74.3900 Asic[56]=71.0010
Asic[57]=75.8490 Asic[58]=74.9270 Asic[59]=72.3930 Asic[60]=74.3730 Asic[61]=75.5310 Asic[62]=73.8190 Asic[63]=72.4440
Check Chain[J6] ASIC RT error: (asic index start from 1-63)
Check Chain[J7] ASIC RT error: (asic index start from 1-63)
Check Chain[J8] ASIC RT error: (asic index start from 1-63)
Done check_asic_reg
do read temp on Chain[5]
Chain[5] Chip[62] TempTypeID=55 middle offset=29
Chain[5] Chip[62] local Temp=60
Chain[5] Chip[62] middle Temp=70
Special fix Chain[5] Chip[62] middle Temp = 75
Done read temp on Chain[5]
do read temp on Chain[6]
Chain[6] Chip[62] TempTypeID=55 middle offset=29
Chain[6] Chip[62] local Temp=60
Chain[6] Chip[62] middle Temp=72
Special fix Chain[6] Chip[62] middle Temp = 75
Done read temp on Chain[6]
do read temp on Chain[7]
Chain[7] Chip[62] TempTypeID=55 middle offset=28
Chain[7] Chip[62] local Temp=62
Chain[7] Chip[62] middle Temp=72
Special fix Chain[7] Chip[62] middle Temp = 77
Done read temp on Chain[7]
set FAN speed according to: temp_highest=62 temp_top1[PWM_T]=62 temp_top1[TEMP_POS_LOCAL]=62 temp_change=0 fix_fan_steps=0
FAN PWM: 74
read_temp_func Done!
CRC error counter=0
submitted by Timsierramist to BITMAIN [link] [comments]

Estimating the marginal cost of a transaction on the Bitcoin (Cash) network

Recently, the mempool has not been clearing with every block found. Should we immediately raise the block-size? Perhaps put plans to make the easy relay of sub satoshi/byte transaction on hold?
Assumptions:
Step 1: find the price of storing a transaction
Searching NCIX:
Calculate the price per TB, assuming 1 is 6 drives are used for parity (30 bays usable storage)
Estimate the UTXO premium:
As you can see. miners have a strong incentive to offer free UTXO consolidation transactions: and require bulk UTXO fanning transaction to pay a fee of 494.86sat/kB -- about 0.5 sat/byte. ((0.01249USD/kB)/(2523.96USD/BCH)*100,000,000sat/BCH)
Fees are no where near that high due to the block subsidy. For an 8MB block: 1,250,000,000 satoshies/ 8000 kB -> 156,250sat/kB; or more conventionally: 157satosies/byte.. Note that the block subsidy per kB goes down with larger block-sizes.
Step 2: Estimate Bandwidth costs
Disclaimer: I am not too familiar with commercial bandwidth plans
Exercise to the reader:
Re-do these calculations for hobbyist hardware and internet connections. You probably have to assume a smaller block size: such as 100MB.
Disclaimer: I later learned the site I was using for prices (NCIX) was bankrupt. Not sure how much that would skew prices.
submitted by phillipsjk to btc [link] [comments]

BIP99½ - An Optimized Procedure to Increase the Block Size Limit

BIP: 99½
Title: An Optimized Procedure to Increase the Block Size Limit
Author: Jorge Stolfi jstolfi
Status: Crufty Draft
Created: 2015-08-30
EDIT: Changed the critical block number from 385000 to 390000 (~2016-01-02).
EDIT2: Slight wording changes ("hopefully" "assuming" as per tsontar).
EDIT3: Changed again critical block number to 395000 (~2016-02-06). Note that the traffic has increased faster than expected, so all predictions would have to be updated.
ABSTRACT
This BIP proposes setting the maximum block size to 8 MB starting with block number 395000.
MOTIVATION
This proposal aims to postpone by a few years the imminent congestion of the Bitcoin network, which is expected to occur in 2016 if traffic continues to increase at the present rate. It also aims to reduce the risk of a crippling "spam attack", that could delay a large fraction of the legitimate traffic for hours or days at a relatively modest cost for the attacker.
Congestion
The current average traffic T is ~120'000 transactions issued by all clients, per day (~1.38 tx/s, ~0.45 MB/block, ~830 tx/block assuming ~530 bytes/tx).
The maximum network capacity C with 1 MB blocks, revealed by the recent "stress tests", is ~200'000 tx/day (~2.32 tx/s, ~0.75 MB/block, ~1390 tx/block). Presumably, the main reason why it is less than 1 MB/block is because certain shortcuts taken by miners often force them to mine empty blocks. Note that the traffic now is 60% of the effective capacity.
Since the traffic rate has weekly, daily, and random fluctuations by several tens of percent, recurrent "traffic jams" (when T is higher than C for several tens of minutes) will start to occur when the average daily traffic is still well below the capacity -- say 80% (160'000 tx/day) or even less. For transactions issued during a traffic jam, the average wait time for first confirmation, which is normally 10-15 minutes, will jump to hours or even days. Fee adjustments may change the order in which individual transactions are confirmed, but the average delay will not be reduced by a single second.
Over the past 12 months, the traffic has approximately doubled, from ~60'000 tx/day. The growth seems to be linear, at the rate of 5000 tx/day per month. If the growth continues to be linear, it should reach 160'000 tx/day in ~8 months (before May 2016). If the growth is assumed to be exponential, it should reach that level in ~5 months, in February 2016.
If the maximum block size were lifted to 8 MB, assuming that empty and partial blocks would continue to be mined in about the same proportion as today, the effective capacity of the network should rise in proportion, to ~6 MB/block (1'600'000 tx/day, 5.90 tx/s). Based on last year's growth, the 80% capacity level (1'280'000 tx/day) will be reached in ~19 years assuming linear growth, and ~3.4 years assuming exponential growth.
Spam attacks
An effective spam attack would have to generate enough spam transactions, with suitable fees, to reduce the effective capacity of the network to a fraction of the legitimate traffic. Then the fraction of the traffic that cannot be serviced will pile up in the queues, forming a growing backlog until the spam attack ends; and the backlog will then clear at the rate limited by the free capacity C - T.
With the current capacity C (200'000 tx/day) and traffic T (120'000 tx/day) a spam attack that blocks half the legitimate traffic would require a spam rate S of at least C - T/2 = 140'000 tx/day (1.62 tx/s, 0.52 MB/block). The fee F per kB offered by those transactions would have to be larger than all but the top ~420 transactions in the queue. If that fee were to be 1 USD/tx, the attack may cost as little as 140'000 USD/day. The backlog of legitimate transactions would grow at the rate of T/2 = ~2500 tx/hour, and, when the attack stops, will be cleared at the maximum rate C - T = ~3300 tx/hour.
With 8 MB block limit, assuming that the effective capacity C will be 1.6 M tx/day and traffic T at 60% of the capacity (like today; expected to be the case 3 years from now), a spam attack that blocks half the traffic would require C - T/2 = 1.12 M tx/day of spam (8 times what an attack would require today). If the required fee F were to be 1 USD/tx, the attack would cost 1.12 million USD per day (ditto).
DEPLOYMENT
The maximum block size would be programmed to be 1 MB until block number 394999, and 8 MB starting with block 395000; which, at 144 blocks/day, is expected to be mined around 2016-02-06.
On the test network, the increase will start with block 390000, which is expected to be mined around 2016-01-02.
In the interest of a quick and uneventful passage through that block number, major miners should publicly state their approval or rejection of it as soon as possible.
If and when the plan is approved by miners comprising a majority of the hashpower, all miners and clients should be alerted and urged to upgrade or modify their software so that it accepts blocks up to 8 MB after the stated block number.
If and when the plan is rejected by miners comprising a majority of the hashpower, all miners and clients shoudl be alerted and warned that this BIP will not be implemented.
RATIONALE
The proposal should have a good chance to be approved and implemented, since the five largest Chinese miners (who have more than 50% of the total hash rate) have already stated in writing that they would agree to an increase of the limit to 8 MB by the end of the year, even theough they did not approve futher increases (in particular, the doublings specified by BIP101). Several major services and other miners have expressed approval for such an increase in the net.
OBJECTIONS TO THIS PROPOSAL
There have been claims that increasing the block size beyond 1 MB would have negative consequences for the health of the network. However, no serious effects were demonstrated, by argument or experimentally. There are worrisome trends in sme parameters, such as the number of full nodes and and the centralization of mining; but those trends obviously are not related to the block size limit, and there is no reason to expect that they would be halted or reversed by imposing a 1 MB cap on the block size starting next year.
It should be noted that the increase is only on the block size limit; the actual block sizes will continue to be determined by the traffic. Even with optimistic forecasts, the average block size should not exceed the 1 MB limit before the end of 2016. If any harmful effects of larger blocks are demonstrated until then, the limt can be reduced again by decision of a majority of the miners.
It has been claimed that netowrk congestion would be beneficial since it would create a "fee market" whereby clients would compete for space in the blocks by paying higer transaction fees. It has been claimed that those fees would compensate for the drop in miners revenue that will follow the next reward halving in 2016. It has also been claimed that the higher fees will inhibit spam and other undesirable uses of the blockchain. However, the "fee market" would be a fundamental totally untested change in the client view of the system. It proposes a novel pricing mecanism that is not used by any existing commercial service, physical or internet-based. There is no evidence that the "fee market" would work as claimed, or that it would achieve any of its expected results. (Rather, there are arguments that it would not.) Congestion would defintely put a cap on usage of the protocol, reduce its value as a payment system, and drive away much legitimate traffic. Congestion, and the unpredictable delays that result from it, are also unlikely to make bitcoin attractive to high-value non-payment uses, such as settlements of other networks or notarization of asset trades. And, mainly, there is no reason to expect that the fee market will generate enough fees to cover the 500'000 USD/day that the miners will lose with the next halving.
COMPATIBILITY
If this change to the Bitcoin protocol gets implemented by a majority of the miners, all players will have to replace or modify their software so that it accepts blocks up to 8 MB after block 395000.
Miners who fail to do so may soon find themselves mining a minority branch of the blockchain, that grows at a much slower rate, will probably be congested from the start, and will probably die soon. That branch will probably be ignored by all major services, therefore any rewards that they earn on that branch will probably be worthless and soon unspendable.
Clients who fail to upgrade or fix their software will not "see" the majority-mined chain once someone creates a block with more than 1 MB. Then, those clients will either be unable to move their coins until they fix their software, or may see only the minority branch above. Transactions that they issue before the fix may get confirmed on the main branch, but may appear to remain unconfirmed on the minority chain. Useof tools like replace-by-fee or child-pays-for-parent while in that state may give confusing results.
DISCLAIMER
The author has never owned or used bitcoin, and has a rather negative view of it. In fact, he is a regular contributor to /buttcoin. While he sees bitcoin as a significant advance toward its stated goal ("a peer-to-peer payment system that does not depend on trusted third parties"), and finds bitcoin interesting as a computer science experiment, he is quite skeptical about its chances of widespread adoption. He also deplores the transformation of bitcoin into a negative-sum pyramid investment schema, which not only has spread much misery and distress allover the world, but has also spoiled the experiment by turning mining into an industrial activity controlled by half a dozen large companies. He hopes that the pyramid will collapse as soon as possible, and that the price will drop to the level predicted by the money velocity equation, so that the aberrant mining industry will disappear. (However, he does not think that this BIP will help to achieve this goal; quite the opposite, unfortunately.)
submitted by jstolfi to bitcoin_uncensored [link] [comments]

What the hell is going on in BTC FAQ: Noobs come here!

Hello, I'm seeing a lot of confusing about what segwit is and what it actually does for the network. Hopefully this post can clear things up for some people. This is targeted at the noobs of the subreddit
Everyone told me that segwit would decrease the fees, wtf is going on???
So you've probably read about how when segwit is activated we'll have an increased blocksize. This isnt entirely true. Segwit actually does away with the whole concept of a blocksize, replacing it with a new parameter, "block weight."
Bitcoin blocks will now have a "blockweight" limit of 4,000,000. The reason for the switch from size to weight is the way it handles the different type of data in a transaction.
Inside a transaction, there are two types of data that is included. The first being whats called "witness data." This is signature of a transaction. The signature proves that the transaction is completely valid. The other type of data is the transaction data, which includes who you're sending the funds too and how much you're sending. This is going to get slightly mathy from here on in, sorry.
We can simply convert bytes of data to weighted units by saying every 1 byte of data is worth 4 weighted units. However, this is only the case for transaction data, witness data is converted on a scale of every 1 byte of witness data is worth only 1 weighted unit.
Lets give an example. Lets say the mempool (mempool - a big pool of all the transactions that are currently unconfirmed and waiting to be included in a block) has 1000 transactions in it, each transaction being 1 KB of data.
Now lets have each one of these transactions be 400 bytes of witness data, and 600 bytes of transaction data. If segwit wasn't a factor here, 1000 one kilobyte transactions would fill up a 1MB block. There would be no room for other transactions.
Lets convert these transactions to weighted units. The transaction data would be worth 2,400 units, and since the witness data is discounted its only worth 400 weighted units. Giving it a combined weight of 2,800 1000 of these transactions would give us a total weight of 2,800,000. with 1,200,000 units of space left, we can fit in a bunch more transactions!
If any of this makes absolutely no sense, leave a comment down below. I'll try to help as many people understand as possible
Okay so I get kinda how it works, why have fees this week been so high if it was activated? Why have they been only coming down in the past day or two?
Segwit isn't instantly available for everyone to use right away. To send a Segwit transaction, you first need to send it to a Segwit compatible wallet. From that wallet you'll be able to send Segwit transactions. To fully realize the affect of Segwit, it will probably take weeks and weeks if not months to have all the coins that are transacted regularly to be moved to Segwit wallets.
Another problem with the network at the moment is the huge hashpower oscillations. Many of you have probably heard about the fork that happened have at the beginning of August. Currently, the other network is having problems due to something called EDA, or emergency difficulty adjustment.
See, Bitcoin works so that if a bunch of people turned on mining hardware, after a certain number of time it would become harder to create a block. This keeps the average block creation time to an average of 10 minutes. The "other coin's" EDA system works so that if the average block creation time is below two per hour for twelve hours, the difficulty will go down so that the average is once again 10 minutes.
Here's where the problem comes in. Miners are taking advantage of this by mining the the other chain when the difficulty is super low after an EDA, making it much more profitable. And once the difficult adjusts again through normal means, they switch back to the Bitcoin chain until another EDA happens.
Again, I'd love to help out as many people as possible get informed about what the tf is going on right now in the community because for a new comer this is probably massively overwhelming.
Whats all this Segwit2x cheese I've been hearing about?
So the 2x part is the second half of a scaling agreement known as the New York Agreement. It was a compromise between dozens of Bitcoin business and over 80% of the hashpower. This is an unprecedented amount of support, the likes of which really haven't been seen in Bitcoin.
The original agreement was to activate Segwit ASAP and roughly three months after increase the blocksize to 2MB. With Segwit it would be a new blockweight of 8,000,000.
I suggest investigating the pros and cons of a 2x blockweight increase for yourself. There are a LOT of conflicting opinions, and you shouldn't be blindly believing anyone.
Leave a comment below if you have any further questions, I'll do my best to answer most.
If you appreciated this FAQ, feel free to send a tip :) 1Gi9uberSWjPnWT6UUKePUFUWWryqUxaPk
submitted by hrones to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

CoinWallet.eu Stress Test Analysis

Yesterday, CoinWallet.eu conducted a stress test of the Bitcoin blockchain. Not only was our plan to see the outcome, but also to see how easy it would be for a malicious entity or government to create havoc for the Bitcoin community. As you will see from the analysis below, delayed transactions are not the only issue that Bitcoin users experienced.
Surprisingly, executing tens of thousands of transactions that correctly propagate to the network simultaneously is not as easy as we had expected. One of the methods that was used to increase the kb size of our transactions was to send transactions consisting of numerous small outputs (usually 0.0001) to make a single transaction of 0.01. A simple transaction is usually 225-500 bytes, while many of our transactions were 18 kb (A number which limits the blockchain to 5 transactions per minute). In our preliminary testing this was effective, however in practice it caused our servers to crash. Throughout the day and evening, our strategy and methodology changed multiple times.
Initially the plan was to spend 20 BTC on transaction fees to flood the network with as many transactions as possible. Due to technical complications the test was concluded early, with less than 2 BTC spent on fees. The events of yesterday were accomplished with less than €500.
Timeline
The following graph depicts the entire test from start to finish: https://anduck.net/bitcoin/mempool.png
Observations
Delayed confirmation times and large mempool buildups were not the only observation that came from our testing. Many more services were impacted than we had initially envisioned.
Blockchain.info
Over the past few months, Blockchain.info has become increasingly unreliable, however we are confident that yesterday's stress test had an impact on their website being offline or broken for 1/3 of the day. During periods where we sent excessive transactions, Blockchain.info consistently froze. It appeared as though their nodes were overwhelmed and simply crashed. Each time this occurred, the site would re-emerge 10-30 minutes later only to fail again shortly thereafter. Users of the blockchain wallet were unable to send transactions, login or even view balances during the downtimes. In response to our heavy Bitcoin usage, blockchain.info began to exclude certain transactions from their block explorer. This issue is explored further by the creators of Multibit, who can confirm that some transactions sent from their software were ignored by Blockchain, but were picked up by Blockr.
Bitcoin ATMs
Many ATMs operate as full nodes, however some ATMs rely on third party wallet services to send and receive transactions. The most prominent Bitcoin ATM of this type is Lamassu, which uses the blockchain.info API to push outgoing transactions from a blockchain.info wallet. Due to the blockchain.info issues, all Lamassu ATMs that use blockchain.info's wallet service were unavailable for the day.
MultiBit
Both versions of MultiBit suffered delayed transactions due to the test. Gary and Jim from MultiBit have created a full analysis from Multibit's perspective which can be read at https://multibit.org/blog/2015/06/23/bitcoin-network-stress-test.html
The outcome was that transactions with the standard fee in Multibit HD took as many as 80 blocks to confirm (Approximately 13 hours). Standard 10000 satoshi fee transactions took an average of 9 blocks to get confirmed. Multibit has stated that they will be making modifications to the software to better cope with this type of event in the future.
Tradeblock
With Blockchain.info broken, we frequently referred to Tradeblock to track the backlog. Unfortunately Tradeblock was less than perfectly reliable and often failed to update when a new block had been mined. Regardless, at one point 15,000 unconfirmed transactions were outstanding.
Bitpay
Users reported issues with Bitpay not recognizing transactions during the test.
Price
Increase of $2. Contrary to some predictions, we did not short Bitcoin.
Green Address
While this app was not hindered directly by our test, we did send a series of 0.001 payments to a green address wallet. When attempting to craft a transaction from the wallet, an error occurs stating that it is too large. It appears that the coins that were sent to this wallet may be lost.
Conclusions
From a technical perspective, the test was not a success. Our goal of creating a 200mb backlog was not achieved due to miscalculations and challenges with pushing the number of transactions that we had desired. We believe that future tests may easily achieve this goal by learning from our mistakes. There are also numerous vulnerable services that could be exploited as part of a test, including Bitcoin casinos, on-chain gambling websites, wallets (Coinbase specifically pointed out that a malicious user could take advantage of their hosted wallet to contribute to the flooding), exchanges, and many others. Users could also contribute by sending small amounts to common brain wallets.
We also learned that the situation could have been made worse by sending transactions with larger fees. We sent all transactions with the standard fee of 10000 satoshis per kb. If we had sent with 20000 satoshis per kb, normal transactions would have experienced larger delays. In our future stress tests, these lessons will be used to maximize the impact.
submitted by CoinWalleteu to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

08-27 17:52 - 'Bitcoin Current Affairs FAQ: Segwit, fees, EDA, and 2x' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/hrones removed from /r/Bitcoin within 0-10min

'''
Hello, I'm seeing a lot of confusing about what segwit is and what it actually does for the network. Hopefully this post can clear things up for some people. This is targeted at the noobs of the subreddit
Everyone told me that segwit would decrease the fees, wtf is going on??? So you've probably read about how when segwit is activated we'll have an increased blocksize. This isnt entirely true. Segwit actually does away with the whole concept of a blocksize, replacing it with a new parameter, "block weight."
Bitcoin blocks will now have a "blockweight" limit of 4,000,000. The reason for the switch from size to weight is the way it handles the different type of data in a transaction.
Inside a transaction, there are two types of data that is included. The first being whats called "witness data." This is signature of a transaction. The signature proves that the transaction is completely valid. The other type of data is the transaction data, which includes who you're sending the funds too and how much you're sending.
This is going to get slightly mathy from here on in, sorry.
We can simply convert bytes of data to weighted units by saying every 1 byte of data is worth 4 weighted units. However, this is only the case for transaction data, witness data is converted on a scale of every 1 byte of witness data is worth only 1 weighted unit.
Lets give an example. Lets say the mempool (mempool - a big pool of all the transactions that are currently unconfirmed and waiting to be included in a block) has 1000 transactions in it, each transaction being 1 KB of data.
Now lets have each one of these transactions be 400 bytes of witness data, and 600 bytes of transaction data. If segwit wasn't a factor here, 1000 one kilobyte transactions would fill up a 1MB block. There would be no room for other transactions.
Lets convert these transactions to weighted units. The transaction data would be worth 2,400 units, and since the witness data is discounted its only worth 400 weighted units. Giving it a combined weight of 2,800 1000 of these transactions would give us a total weight of 2,800,000. with 1,200,000 units of space left, we can fit in a bunch more transactions!
If any of this makes absolutely no sense, leave a comment down below. I'll try to help as many people understand as possible
Okay so I get kinda how it works, why have fees this week been so high if it was activated? Why have they been only coming down in the past day or two?
Segwit isn't instantly available for everyone to use right away. To send a Segwit transaction, you first need to send it to a Segwit compatible wallet. From that wallet you'll be able to send Segwit transactions. To fully realize the affect of Segwit, it will probably take weeks and weeks if not months to have all the coins that are transacted regularly to be moved to Segwit wallets.
Another problem with the network at the moment is the huge hashpower oscillations. Many of you have probably heard about the fork that happened have at the beginning of August. Currently, the other network is having problems due to something called EDA, or emergency difficulty adjustment. See, Bitcoin works so that if a bunch of people turned on mining hardware, after a certain number of time it would become harder to create a block. This keeps the average block creation time to an average of 10 minutes. the "other coins's" EDA system works so that if the average block creation time is below two per hour for twelve hours, the difficulty will go down so that the average is once again 10 minutes.
Here's where the problem comes in. Miners are taking advantage of this by mining the other chain when the difficulty is super low after an EDA, making it much more profitable. And once the difficult adjusts again through normal means, they switch back to the Bitcoin chain until another EDA happens.
Again, I'd love to help out as many people as possible get informed about what the tf is going on right now in the community because for a new comer this is probably massively overwhelming.
Whats all this Segwit2x cheese I've been hearing about?
So the 2x part is the second half of a scaling agreement known as the New York Agreement. It was a compromise between dozens of Bitcoin business and over 80% of the hashpower. This is an unprecedented amount of support, the likes of which really haven't been seen in Bitcoin.
The original agreement was to activate Segwit ASAP and roughly three months after increase the blocksize to 2MB. With Segwit it would be a new blockweight of 8,000,000.
I suggest investigating the pros and cons of a 2x blockweight increase for yourself. There are a LOT of conflicting opinions, and you shouldn't be blindly believing anyone.
Leave a comment below if you have any further questions, I'll do my best to answer most.
If you appreciated this FAQ, feel free to send a tip :) 1Gi9uberSWjPnWT6UUKePUFUWWryqUxaPk
'''
Bitcoin Current Affairs FAQ: Segwit, fees, EDA, and 2x
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: hrones
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

While /r/bitcoin discusses the price

While /bitcoin discusses the price, Eligius is having a meeting at #eligius discussing what transactions are to be included in Eligius blocks i.e. the core bitcoiners are busy with work not worrying about exchange rates.
Don't get too concentrated on the price.
Transaction filtering: Mark outputs spent in others’ mempools for not mining (prevent policy abuse)
Spam pkh matching: current policies
Dust: ban regardless of fee
Bare multisig: ban
Non-softfork-safe: ban
Non-shortest-pushop: ban
Standard transactions:
OP_RETURN: allow up to 80 bytes
Transaction priority: p2pkh/p2sh: deprioritise address reuse
Hash randomness testing: influence priority
Non-standard transactions:
P2SH, by request at admin discretion, or 100 TBC per 512 bytes rounded up
Transaction fees: 0.1 TBC per 512 bytes, without rounding, up to 128 KB block
">"128 KB blocks, logarithmically increase min fee rate to 10 TBC Tx size discounts for UTXO reduction: not for the moment
submitted by throwaway43572 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: btc top posts from 2017-01-09 to 2017-02-07 22:40 PDT

Period: 29.80 days
Submissions Comments
Total 999 28052
Rate (per day) 33.52 904.13
Unique Redditors 409 2067
Combined Score 56126 117584

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 3835 points, 41 submissions: Egon_1
    1. "One miner loses $12k from BU bug, some Core devs scream. Users pay millions in excessive tx fees over the last year "meh, not a priority" (529 points, 262 comments)
    2. Charlie Shrem: "Oh cmon. @gavinandresen is the reason we are all here today. Stop attacking people, ...." (256 points, 61 comments)
    3. The core developers don't care about you. Let's fire them by hard fork to Bitcoin unlimited! (231 points, 83 comments)
    4. Bitcoin Core Hashrate Below 80% (211 points, 27 comments)
    5. "Bitcoin is an P2P electronic cash system, not digital gold. If Bitcoin's usefulness as cash is undermined, its value will be undermined too." (198 points, 196 comments)
    6. I like these ads (194 points, 25 comments)
    7. "ViaBTC Transaction Accelerator already help more than 5K delayed transactions got confirmed." (142 points, 27 comments)
    8. Bitcoin Unlimited: Over 800 PH/s (128 points, 21 comments)
    9. ViaBTC produces ZERO empty block in the last month. Best in SPV base mining pool. (117 points, 2 comments)
    10. New ATL (All Time Low) For Bitcoin Core Blocks (114 points, 59 comments)
  2. 2876 points, 24 submissions: ydtm
    1. The debate is not "SHOULD THE BLOCKSIZE BE 1MB VERSUS 1.7MB?". The debate is: "WHO SHOULD DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE?" (1) Should an obsolete temporary anti-spam hack freeze blocks at 1MB? (2) Should a centralized dev team soft-fork the blocksize to 1.7MB? (3) OR SHOULD THE MARKET DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE? (354 points, 116 comments)
    2. BU-SW parity! 231 vs 231 of the last 1000 blocks! Consensus will always win over censorship! MARKET-BASED blocksize will always win over CENTRALLY-PLANNED blocksize! People want blocksize to be determined by the MARKET - not by Greg Maxwell & his 1.7MB anyone-can-spend SegWit-as-a-soft-fork blocks. (271 points, 66 comments)
    3. The number of blocks being mined by Bitcoin Unlimited is now getting very close to surpassing the number of blocks being mined by SegWit! More and more people are supporting BU's MARKET-BASED BLOCKSIZE - because BU avoids needless transaction delays and ultimately increases Bitcoin adoption & price! (185 points, 80 comments)
    4. "Notice how anyone who has even remotely supported on-chain scaling has been censored, hounded, DDoS'd, attacked, slandered & removed from any area of Core influence. Community, business, Hearn, Gavin, Jeff, XT, Classic, Coinbase, Unlimited, ViaBTC, Ver, Jihan, Bitcoin.com, btc" ~ u/randy-lawnmole (176 points, 114 comments)
    5. "Why is Flexible Transactions more future-proof than SegWit?" by u/ThomasZander (175 points, 110 comments)
    6. "You have to understand that Core and their supporters eg Theymos WANT a hardfork to be as messy as possible. This entire time they've been doing their utmost to work AGAINST consensus, and it will continue until they are simply removed from the community like the cancer they are." ~ u/singularity87 (170 points, 28 comments)
    7. Blockstream/Core don't care about you. They're repeatedly crippling the network with their DEV-CONTROLLED blocksize. Congestion & delays are now ROUTINE & PREDICTABLE after increased difficulty / time between blocks. Only we can fix the network - using MARKET-CONTROLLED blocksize (Unlimited/Classic) (168 points, 60 comments)
    8. 3 excellent articles highlighting some of the major problems with SegWit: (1) "Core Segwit – Thinking of upgrading? You need to read this!" by WallStreetTechnologist (2) "SegWit is not great" by Deadalnix (3) "How Software Gets Bloated: From Telephony to Bitcoin" by Emin Gün Sirer (146 points, 59 comments)
    9. This trader's price & volume graph / model predicted that we should be over $10,000 USD/BTC by now. The model broke in late 2014 - when AXA-funded Blockstream was founded, and started spreading propaganda and crippleware, centrally imposing artificially tiny blocksize to suppress the volume & price. (143 points, 97 comments)
    10. Now that BU is overtaking SW, r\bitcoin is in meltdown. The 2nd top post over there (sorted by "worst first" ie "controversial") is full of the most ignorant, confused, brainwashed comments ever seen on r\bitcoin - starting with the erroneous title: "The problem with forking and creating two coins." (142 points, 57 comments)
  3. 2424 points, 31 submissions: realistbtc
    1. Remember this picture ? It was a very strong and cool message from around 2014 . Well, sadly it's not true anymore. But it was universally liked in the Bitcoin space , and probably brought here some of us . I remember even luke-jr reposting it somewhere (oh , the hypocrysis!! ). (249 points, 55 comments)
    2. Emin Gun Sirer on Twitter ' My take is the exact opposite: we are now finding out that Segwit isn't necessary and we can get the same benefits via simpler means. " (248 points, 46 comments)
    3. Gavin Andresen on Twitter : ' The purpose of a consensus system is to arrive at one outcome. Participating means accepting the result even if you initially disagree. ' (204 points, 56 comments)
    4. enough with the blockstream core propaganda : changing the blocksize IS the MORE CAUTIOUS and SAFER approach . if it was done sooner , we would have avoived entirely these unprecedented clycles of network clogging that have caused much frustrations in a lot of actors (173 points, 15 comments)
    5. Gavin Andresen on Twitter - 'This can't be controversial... can it? - a definition of Bitcoin' (136 points, 38 comments)
    6. adam back on twitter "contentious forks are bad idea for confidence & concept of digital scarcity. wait for the ETFs. profit. mean time deploy segwit & lightning" - no! a corrupt company like blockstream with a washed out ex cypherpunk like adam are what's bad for Bitcoin . (122 points, 115 comments)
    7. "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" - if you stray from that , you don't get to keep calling it Bitcoin. call it blockstreamcoin, adamcoin, gregcoin, theymoscoin or whatever and go fork off yourself . (112 points, 19 comments)
    8. soon 21 will have to change the scale , because 180 satoshi/KB won't be enough anymore - madness - feel free to send your complaints to greg maxwell CTO of blockstream (112 points, 31 comments)
    9. PSA : if you use a ledger wallet , you risk paying an absurdly high free - see here : 10$ for a 225 bytes 150$ tx - but remember , it's all fine for your elitist and gregonomic friends at blockstream (109 points, 111 comments)
    10. Luke 'the liar' Dashjr : ' My BIP draft didn't make progress because the community opposes any block size increase hardfork ever. ' -- yes , he wrote exactly that !! (96 points, 33 comments)
  4. 2129 points, 43 submissions: increaseblocks
    1. After failing to get 10K bitcoins for stolen NSA exploits, Shadow Brokers post farewell message, dump a cache of Windows hacking tools online (181 points, 23 comments)
    2. Coinbase and the IRS (146 points, 69 comments)
    3. Ryan X. Charles on Twitter - There is a leadership gap in bitcoin left by technical community members who didn't listen to miners, businesses or users. (117 points, 44 comments)
    4. Blockstream Core developer says you should "pay a $5 fee" to get your transaction to go through! (116 points, 32 comments)
    5. $2.50 transaction FEE paid on $37 transaction, still unconfirmed for 24 hours!! (109 points, 37 comments)
    6. Blockstream shareholder gives a little more insight into the company (107 points, 33 comments)
    7. Finished setting up my Unlimited full node. Took just over 24 hrs to sync with a 5 yr old laptop and standard U.S. connection + $50 1TB hard drive! (96 points, 46 comments)
    8. Matt Corallo/TheBlueMatt leaves Blockstream to go work for Chaincode Labs... is the Blockstream house of cards beginning to crumble? (86 points, 175 comments)
    9. 53,000 transactions in the backlog! (75 points, 79 comments)
    10. Doctor ₿ Goss on Twitter: Spending a year on #segwit instead of coordinating blocksize increase may not have been wise. Money that doesn't work is worthless (70 points, 11 comments)
  5. 1590 points, 9 submissions: parban333
    1. Dear Theymos, you divided the Bitcoin community. Not Roger, not Gavin, not Mike. It was you. And dear Blockstream and Core team, you helped, not calling out the abhorrent censorship, the unforgivable manipulation, unbecoming of supposed cypherpunks. Or of any decent, civil persons. (566 points, 87 comments)
    2. nullc disputes that Satoshi Nakamoto left Gavin in control of Bitcoin, asks for citation, then disappears after such citation is clearly provided. greg maxwell is blatantly a toxic troll and an enemy of Satoshi's Bitcoin. (400 points, 207 comments)
    3. Remember: while the blockstream trolls take Peter R out of context, Peter Todd really think Bitcoin should have a 1%/security tax via inflation. (146 points, 92 comments)
    4. So, Alice is causing a problem. Alice is then trying to sell you a solution for that problem. Alice now tell that if you are not buying into her solution, you are the cause of the problem. Replace Alice with Greg & Adam.. (139 points, 28 comments)
    5. SegWit+limited on-chain scaling: brought to you by the people that couldn't believe Bitcoin was actually a sound concept. (92 points, 47 comments)
    6. Remember: the manipulative Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, want to fool every newcomer that doesn't know better into thinking that he practically invented Bitcoin. (91 points, 22 comments)
    7. Not only segwit support is laughable at the moment for something targeting 95% adoption, but it's actually diminishing. Wallet devs and people that spent resources implementing that ridiculous contraption must feel a bit silly at the moment.... (83 points, 143 comments)
    8. It's ironic that blockstream's concerns about hard forks security are what's actually caused concerns about hard forks security. (46 points, 5 comments)
    9. The Intercept - "Hidden loopholes allow FBI agents to infiltrate political and religious groups" - Just something to consider, right? (27 points, 2 comments)
  6. 1471 points, 10 submissions: sandakersmann
    1. Charlie Shrem on Twitter: "If we don't implement bigger blocks ASAP, Paypal will be cheaper than #bitcoin. I already pay a few dollars per tx. Stop hindering growth." (472 points, 254 comments)
    2. Olivier Janssens on Twitter: "Do you like Bitcoin? Then you like an unlimited block size. The limit was put in place as a temp fix and was never hit before last year." (252 points, 189 comments)
    3. Ryan X. Charles on Twitter: "Bigger blocks will allow more people access to every aspect of bitcoin, enhancing decentralization" (213 points, 179 comments)
    4. Is Bitcoin Unlimited Headed for Activation? (149 points, 38 comments)
    5. Marius Kjærstad on Twitter: "High fees push real economy out of #Bitcoin and makes price driven by speculation. Result is a lower real economy floor to catch the knife." (132 points, 37 comments)
    6. No Primary Litecoin Pool Will Upgrade to Segwit, Says LTC1BTC's Founder (103 points, 60 comments)
    7. Charlie Shrem: "Bitcoin is been built to appreciate or die. That's how it is. It has to continue to grow. If it doesn't grow then it's just gonna go away." (76 points, 15 comments)
    8. G. Andrew Stone & Andrew Clifford: Bitcoin Unlimited (Episode 166) (36 points, 1 comment)
    9. Joseph VaughnPerling on Twitter: "#SegWit on $LTC's safe b/c low TX vol. AnyoneCanSpend TX UTXO unlikely to hit 51% attack cost. On $BTC it'd be insidiously fatal. @SegWit" (21 points, 8 comments)
    10. Bitcoin Plummets After China Launches "Market Manipulation" Investigations Of Bitcoin Exchanges (17 points, 0 comments)
  7. 1408 points, 7 submissions: BeijingBitcoins
    1. LOL - /bitcoin user claims that people aren't being actively silenced; is actively silenced. (307 points, 142 comments)
    2. Reality check: today's minor bug caused the bitcoin.com pool to miss out on a $12000 block reward, and was fixed within hours. Core's 1MB blocksize limit has cost the users of bitcoin >$100k per day for the past several months. (270 points, 173 comments)
    3. Satoshi: "The eventual solution will be to not care how big [block size] gets." (250 points, 75 comments)
    4. Top post on /bitcoin about high transaction fees. 709 comments. Every time you click "load more comments," there is nothing there. How many posts are being censored? The manipulation of free discussion by /bitcoin moderators needs to end yesterday. (229 points, 91 comments)
    5. Bitcoin Unlimited blocks at all time high! (143 of last 1000) (191 points, 56 comments)
    6. Censored in bitcoin: "Bitcoin Core hashrate reaches 79.7%" (91 points, 61 comments)
    7. Bitcoin Transaction Fees - All Time (70 points, 18 comments)
  8. 1235 points, 40 submissions: chinawat
    1. Julian Assange just used the bitcoin block number 447506 as a proof of life. (199 points, 42 comments)
    2. "$3000 donated anonymously to the @internetarchive in bitcoin just now. Made our day!" -- Brewster Kahle on Twitter (97 points, 3 comments)
    3. ‘Barclays took my £440,000 and put me through hell’ | Money (76 points, 22 comments)
    4. Venezuelan Police Arrest Eight Bitcoin Miners in Two Weeks, and the Country's Leading Bitcoin Exchange Suspends Operations (52 points, 2 comments)
    5. The Path To $10,000 Bitcoin (46 points, 11 comments)
    6. How Deutsche Bank Made a $462 Million Loss Disappear (44 points, 6 comments)
    7. "The plan (#mBTC units) has been discussed amongst local #Chinese exchanges, & we believe it will appease the regulators, w/ "lower" prices." -- Bobby Lee on Twitter (43 points, 36 comments)
    8. "Everyone knows that we need to reduce the max block size, but is a one-time drop to 300 kB really the best way?" -- theymos (40 points, 68 comments)
    9. Buy bitcoin from any 7-11 in the Philippines (36 points, 0 comments)
    10. The Race Is On for a Bitcoin ETF (31 points, 14 comments)
  9. 1010 points, 17 submissions: 1and1make5
    1. Last 1000 Blocks - Bitcoin Unlimited overtakes soft-fork-segwit signaling (165 points, 25 comments)
    2. Again: Bigger Blocks Mean More Decentralization - Roger Ver (101 points, 59 comments)
    3. cnLedger on Twitter - "@todu77 Contacted http://BTC.TOP . A different logic was used when dealing w/ (very occasional) empty blc. They'll update to BU only" (94 points, 6 comments)
    4. Controlling your own wealth as a basic human right - Brian Armstrong (93 points, 30 comments)
    5. Last 1000 Blocks - 20% of the Bitcoin mining network supports Bitcoin Unlimited (89 points, 4 comments)
    6. BTC.top current hashrate: ~100 Ph/s (71 points, 5 comments)
    7. Throwback Thursday: BTC.top mined their first BU block 1 month ago with ~31 Ph/s, today they have ~149 Ph/s (68 points, 6 comments)
    8. Epicenter Bitcoin 166 - G. Andrew Stone & Andrew Clifford: Bitcoin Unlimited (63 points, 50 comments)
    9. Coinbase Obtains the Bitlicense (53 points, 19 comments)
    10. Fun fact (doesn't mean anything): In the last 24 hours more blocks have signaled support for Bitcoin Unlimited than soft-fork-segwit (53 points, 5 comments)
  10. 984 points, 20 submissions: seweso
    1. Bitcoin unlimited is an expression of freedom. And freedom will always be misconstrued by paternalists/statists as something dangerous. (120 points, 64 comments)
    2. My hope for Bitcoin Unlimited is not to force a hardfork upon everyone, but to break through the censorship, to open minds. (106 points, 88 comments)
    3. Core threatening a POW change makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. (97 points, 58 comments)
    4. "We will run a SegWit release in production by the time [a 2MB hardfork] is released in a version of Bitcoin Core." (94 points, 84 comments)
    5. Blocked by Peter Todd for pointing out he started the propaganda war with his slippery slope video. (92 points, 41 comments)
    6. I can't wait to spend everyone's SegWit funds on a hard-forked >1Mb chain. ~ Seweso (72 points, 72 comments)
    7. BashCo putting his Bitcoin ignorance on display by stating "60,000 #Bitcoin transactions don't just magically appear out of thin air. #spam" (66 points, 12 comments)
    8. Bitcoin Core developers discussing and deciding on Bitcoin economics again (47 points, 13 comments)
    9. Reaction to: why-bitcoin-unlimiteds-emergent-consensus-gamble (46 points, 9 comments)
    10. "@seweso Show me an instance where core pushed out a change and cost miners a block reward." ~ I can do that ;) (37 points, 6 comments)
  11. 883 points, 16 submissions: Shock_The_Stream
    1. Emin Gün Sirer: Finally getting to the crux of the battle. LN/Segwit/fee-market are a synonym for "high fees." Nothing about this tech requires high fees. (155 points, 78 comments)
    2. BTC.TOP !! - New Alltime High for BU blocks @199 ! BTC.TOP alone just mined 4 BU blocks within 47 minutes (115 points, 26 comments)
    3. The great halvening of Samson's Segwit Pool: Mission accomplished! 1 yr: 12.50%, 6 month: 11.10%, 1 month: 7.83%, 1week: 6.67%, 4 days: 6% (107 points, 56 comments)
    4. Surpise: SegWit SF becomes more and more centralized - around half of all Segwit signals come from Bitfury ... (107 points, 45 comments)
    5. BS of the week by Rusty Russell: "If segwit doesn't activate, something is badly broken in Bitcoin" (102 points, 97 comments)
    6. Slush pool: Incredible bad luck for the Bitcoin Unlimited voters (43 points, 26 comments)
    7. The Bitfury Attack (43 points, 38 comments)
    8. 799! Jiang Zhuo'er teared down this wall! (40 points, 13 comments)
    9. Did Slush just stop mining segwit with the 'don't care' voters? (39 points, 36 comments)
    10. Fortune favours the bold: BTC.TOP with 300% luck today (30 points, 2 comments)
  12. 754 points, 10 submissions: AQuentson
    1. Price Shoots Up as Miners Checkmate and Bitcoin Unlimited Surpasses Segwit. (113 points, 28 comments)
    2. One Transaction Will Cost $400 if Bitcoin Hits $10,000 According to Jameson Lopp (104 points, 39 comments)
    3. Bitcoin Core Developer: Satoshi's Design Doesn't Work (100 points, 78 comments)
    4. Wow! Had no idea the BitcoinMarkets subreddit is completely censored. (90 points, 29 comments)
    5. F2Pool Will Not Upgrade Its Bitcoin Pool to Segwit "Anytime Soon" (89 points, 21 comments)
    6. The Bitcoin Market Needs Big Blocks, Says Founder of BTC.TOP Mining Pool (82 points, 21 comments)
    7. Almost $1 Billion Worth of Bitcoins Stuck in Transaction Backlog (72 points, 8 comments)
    8. ViaBTC's Hashrate Increases to 12 Percent (58 points, 2 comments)
    9. “The protocol debate is not my priority." - Jihan Wu, Bitmain's Founder (24 points, 13 comments)
    10. Wow! Almost $1 Billion Worth of Bitcoin is Stuck, Can't Move - What Happens if no Block is Found in One Hour (as has happened before) Will Bitcoin Literally Break Down? (22 points, 14 comments)
  13. 744 points, 10 submissions: BobsBurgers3Bitcoin
    1. Bitcoin Unlimited 1.0.0 has been released (274 points, 130 comments)
    2. Censored in r\Bitcoin: "35.8 Cents: Average Transaction Fee so far in 2017. The Average Transaction Fee in 2016 was 16.5 Cents" (260 points, 123 comments)
    3. 35.8 Cents: Average Transaction Fee so far in 2017. The Average Transaction Fee in 2016 was 16.5 Cents (74 points, 18 comments)
    4. Former Fed Employee Fined $5,000 for Using Computer for Bitcoin (37 points, 5 comments)
    5. Bitcoin: Why It Now Belongs in Every Portfolio (26 points, 0 comments)
    6. Bitcoin is 'a great hedge against the system' and could be the new gold (18 points, 1 comment)
    7. Bitcoin Will Change Money Like the Internet Changed Video (15 points, 0 comments)
    8. Is Warren Buffett Wrong About Bitcoin? (14 points, 3 comments)
    9. Bitseed Review – A Plug & Play Full Bitcoin Node (13 points, 2 comments)
    10. Bitcoin is soaring (and Business Insider does not change the title of the almost identical article published 3 weeks ago by the same author) (13 points, 1 comment)
  14. 732 points, 10 submissions: specialenmity
    1. Fantasy land: Thinking that a hard fork will be disastrous to the price, yet thinking that a future average fee of > $1 and average wait times of > 1 day won't be disastrous to the price. (209 points, 70 comments)
    2. "Segwit is a permanent solution to refuse any blocksize increase in the future and move the txs and fees to the LN hubs. The chinese miners are not as stupid as the blockstream core devaluators want them to be." shock_the_stream (150 points, 83 comments)
    3. In response to the "unbiased" ELI5 of Core vs BU and this gem: "Core values trustlessness and decentralization above all. Bitcoin Unlimited values low fees for on-chain transactions above all else." (130 points, 45 comments)
    4. Core's own reasoning doesn't add up: If segwit requires 95% of last 2016 blocks to activate, and their fear of using a hardfork instead of a softfork is "splitting the network", then how does a hardfork with a 95% trigger even come close to potentially splitting the network? (96 points, 130 comments)
    5. luke-jr defines "using bitcoin" as running a full node. Dictates that the cost of moving money ( a transaction) should exceed "using bitcoin". Hah (38 points, 17 comments)
    6. If it's not activating that is a strong evidence that the claims of it being dire were and continue to be without substance. nullc (36 points, 23 comments)
    7. I'm more concerned that bitcoin can't change than whether or not we scale in the near future by SF or HF (26 points, 9 comments)
    8. "The best available research right now suggested an upper bound of 4MB. This figure was considering only a subset of concerns, in particular it ignored economic impacts, long term sustainability, and impacts on synchronization time.." nullc (20 points, 4 comments)
    9. At any point in time mining pools could have increased the block reward through forking and yet they haven't. Why? Because it is obvious that the community wouldn't like that and correspondingly the price would plummet (14 points, 14 comments)
    10. The flawed mind of jstolfi (13 points, 17 comments)
  15. 708 points, 7 submissions: knight222
    1. BTC.TOP operator: “We have prepared $100 million USD to kill the small fork of CoreCoin, no matter what POW algorithm, sha256 or scrypt or X11 or any other GPU algorithm. Show me your money. We very much welcome a CoreCoin change to POS.” (241 points, 252 comments)
    2. For those who missed it, this is how the hardfork with Bitcoin Unlimited will happen. (173 points, 79 comments)
    3. Blocks mined with Bitcoin Unlimited reaching 18% (133 points, 28 comments)
    4. Bitcoin Unlimited is less than 1% away from outpacing Segwit for the last 1000 blocks mined (90 points, 44 comments)
    5. BU nodes peaked in the last days (28 points, 6 comments)
    6. Blockstream never tried to compromise but they will (too late). This is why: (22 points, 4 comments)
    7. BTC.TOP is having a good day (21 points, 6 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. Adrian-X (3622 points, 821 comments)
  2. H0dl (3157 points, 563 comments)
  3. Bitcoinopoly (2732 points, 345 comments)
  4. knight222 (2319 points, 361 comments)
  5. MeTheImaginaryWizard (2043 points, 429 comments)
  6. Ant-n (1818 points, 387 comments)
  7. todu (1756 points, 265 comments)
  8. seweso (1742 points, 328 comments)
  9. awemany (1690 points, 401 comments)
  10. Shock_The_Stream (1647 points, 217 comments)
  11. Helvetian616 (1578 points, 206 comments)
  12. Egon_1 (1478 points, 162 comments)
  13. realistbtc (1299 points, 95 comments)
  14. BitcoinIsTehFuture (1231 points, 139 comments)
  15. LovelyDay (1226 points, 196 comments)
  16. thcymos (1172 points, 117 comments)
  17. BeijingBitcoins (1098 points, 58 comments)
  18. Yheymos (1061 points, 69 comments)
  19. steb2k (1058 points, 238 comments)
  20. ydtm (987 points, 132 comments)
  21. dontcensormebro2 (975 points, 106 comments)
  22. chinawat (972 points, 223 comments)
  23. increaseblocks (934 points, 73 comments)
  24. segregatedwitness (921 points, 101 comments)
  25. Annapurna317 (874 points, 146 comments)
  26. DaSpawn (817 points, 162 comments)
  27. insette (808 points, 91 comments)
  28. TanksAblazment (803 points, 150 comments)
  29. blockstreamcoin (787 points, 133 comments)
  30. MeatsackMescalero (774 points, 95 comments)
  31. satoshis_sockpuppet (745 points, 126 comments)
  32. BitcoinXio (739 points, 50 comments)
  33. jstolfi (734 points, 183 comments)
  34. singularity87 (720 points, 90 comments)
  35. Richy_T (704 points, 163 comments)
  36. redlightsaber (690 points, 138 comments)
  37. Leithm (686 points, 74 comments)
  38. ErdoganTalk (668 points, 252 comments)
  39. BitcoinPrepper (665 points, 89 comments)
  40. reddaxx (664 points, 105 comments)
  41. r1q2 (660 points, 110 comments)
  42. papabitcoin (653 points, 79 comments)
  43. 2ndEntropy (632 points, 76 comments)
  44. FormerlyEarlyAdopter (608 points, 92 comments)
  45. Coolsource (595 points, 116 comments)
  46. Peter__R (589 points, 43 comments)
  47. timepad (570 points, 62 comments)
  48. Rawlsdeep (564 points, 109 comments)
  49. themgp (560 points, 46 comments)
  50. ForkiusMaximus (558 points, 89 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. Dear Theymos, you divided the Bitcoin community. Not Roger, not Gavin, not Mike. It was you. And dear Blockstream and Core team, you helped, not calling out the abhorrent censorship, the unforgivable manipulation, unbecoming of supposed cypherpunks. Or of any decent, civil persons. by parban333 (566 points, 87 comments)
  2. "One miner loses $12k from BU bug, some Core devs scream. Users pay millions in excessive tx fees over the last year "meh, not a priority" by Egon_1 (529 points, 262 comments)
  3. Charlie Shrem on Twitter: "If we don't implement bigger blocks ASAP, Paypal will be cheaper than #bitcoin. I already pay a few dollars per tx. Stop hindering growth." by sandakersmann (472 points, 254 comments)
  4. nullc disputes that Satoshi Nakamoto left Gavin in control of Bitcoin, asks for citation, then disappears after such citation is clearly provided. greg maxwell is blatantly a toxic troll and an enemy of Satoshi's Bitcoin. by parban333 (400 points, 207 comments)
  5. The debate is not "SHOULD THE BLOCKSIZE BE 1MB VERSUS 1.7MB?". The debate is: "WHO SHOULD DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE?" (1) Should an obsolete temporary anti-spam hack freeze blocks at 1MB? (2) Should a centralized dev team soft-fork the blocksize to 1.7MB? (3) OR SHOULD THE MARKET DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE? by ydtm (354 points, 116 comments)
  6. LOL - /bitcoin user claims that people aren't being actively silenced; is actively silenced. by BeijingBitcoins (307 points, 142 comments)
  7. Massive censorship on "/bitcoin" continues by BitcoinIsTehFuture (296 points, 123 comments)
  8. Charlie Shrem on Twitter: "You can talk about anything in BTC and it won't be auto deleted" by BitcoinXio (291 points, 69 comments)
  9. Bitcoin Unlimited blocks exceed Core for first time, 232 vs. 231 of last 1,000 by DNVirtual (282 points, 84 comments)
  10. As relevant as it's always been by iopq (276 points, 15 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 151 points: nicebtc's comment in "One miner loses $12k from BU bug, some Core devs scream. Users pay millions in excessive tx fees over the last year "meh, not a priority"
  2. 123 points: 1DrK44np3gMKuvcGeFVv's comment in "One miner loses $12k from BU bug, some Core devs scream. Users pay millions in excessive tx fees over the last year "meh, not a priority"
  3. 117 points: cryptovessel's comment in nullc disputes that Satoshi Nakamoto left Gavin in control of Bitcoin, asks for citation, then disappears after such citation is clearly provided. greg maxwell is blatantly a toxic troll and an enemy of Satoshi's Bitcoin.
  4. 117 points: seweso's comment in Roger Ver banned for doxing after posting the same thread Prohashing was banned for.
  5. 113 points: BitcoinIsTehFuture's comment in Dear Theymos, you divided the Bitcoin community. Not Roger, not Gavin, not Mike. It was you. And dear Blockstream and Core team, you helped, not calling out the abhorrent censorship, the unforgivable manipulation, unbecoming of supposed cypherpunks. Or of any decent, civil persons.
  6. 106 points: MagmaHindenburg's comment in bitcoin.com loses 13.2BTC trying to fork the network: Untested and buggy BU creates an oversized block, Many BU node banned, the HF fails • /Bitcoin
  7. 98 points: lon102guy's comment in bitcoin.com loses 13.2BTC trying to fork the network: Untested and buggy BU creates an oversized block, Many BU node banned, the HF fails • /Bitcoin
  8. 97 points: bigboi2468's comment in contentious forks vs incremental progress
  9. 92 points: vbuterin's comment in [Mark Friedenbach] There is a reason we are generally up in arms about "abusive" data-on-blockchain proposals: it is because we see the potential of this tech!
  10. 89 points: Peter__R's comment in contentious forks vs incremental progress
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats (Donate)
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

Bitcoin 80% Crash after the Halving! 80 Trillion Dollar Bitcoin Exit Plan - YouTube The How to Calculate Bitcoin Transaction Size BITCOIN CASH: TUTORIAL - MOONCASH [BTC CASH] MOON CASH (MOON BITCOIN CASH) BITCOIN CASH (COINPOT)

Apart from those 6 bytes per transaction necessary to order the transactions into a block, Bitcoin only emits ~80 bytes of data every ten minutes for consensus to be reached. If you convert those hex bytes to Unicode, you get the string 3Nelson-Mandela.jpg?, representing the image filename. Similarly, the following addresses encode the data for the image. Thus, text, images, and other content can be stored in Bitcoin by using the right fake addresses. Secret message in the first Bitcoin block It is well known that the Genesis block, the very first block of data in ... Bitcoin Core will relay transactions with insufficient fees depending on the setting of -limitfreerelay=<r> (default: r=15 kB per minute) and -blockprioritysize=<s>. In Bitcoin Core 0.12, when mempool limit has been reached a higher minimum relay fee takes effect to limit memory usage. Transactions which do not meet this higher effective ... Bitcoin full nodes maintain a local copy of the blockchain, starting at the genesis block. The local copy of the blockchain is constantly updated as new blocks are found and used to extend the chain. As a node receives incoming blocks from the network, it will validate these blocks and then link them to the existing blockchain. To establish a link, a node will examine the incoming block header ... 0.08 KB (80 bytes) 0.22 KB (222 bytes) 100KB (100000 bytes) Instant transactions (zero confirmation) No, due to RBF (Replace By Fee) Yes . Yes . Total transactions in 2020* 62 Million (62,455,497) 7 Million (7,426,837) 129 Million (129,873,038) Average daily transactions in 2020* 306,154 . 36,406 . 636,632 . Average daily transaction fee* 1.43 ...

[index] [50480] [50737] [7046] [9557] [28935] [36504] [3039] [49898] [11960] [174]

Bitcoin 80% Crash after the Halving!

Malwarebytes is the next-gen cybersecurity company that millions worldwide trust. Malwarebytes proactively protects people and businesses against dangerous t... Bitcoin - 80 Trillion Dollar Exit. I talk about how Bitcoin will eventually become an exit ramp from the crashing 80 trillion dollar financial system, the ec... Bitcoin, Ethereum & Much More Daily Cryptocurrency News Crypt0 1,024 watching. Live now; Robert Kiyosaki 2019 - The Speech That Broke The Internet!!! KEEP THEM POOR! - Duration: 10:27. Sign in to like videos, comment, and subscribe. Sign in. Watch Queue Queue Share your videos with friends, family, and the world

#