Why are you still here? Is it because you cant figure out the wallet and are just waiting to dump your airdrop? You can create account and test mining here: cgminer-decred. Pool last night because it was dead all the way from block.

I'm trying to dual mine Ether and Decred because why not, but it only works when I remove the code concerning the Decred part. Here is the start file(with the Decred): setx GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR 0 setx GPU_MAX_HEAP_SIZE 100 setx GPU_USE_SYNC_OBJECTS 1 setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT 100 setx GPU_SINGLE_ALLOC_PERCENT 100 ethdcrminer64.exe -epool eu1.ethermine.org:14444 -ewal 0x49C5405ed772C3039A5df5835E88c14Df2c01E10.Eth1070 -epsw x -esm 3 -dpool dcr.suprnova.cc:3252 -dwal MnMWizard.1070test -dpsw 1070worker -allpools 1 Anyone know what the problem is? MnMWizard is my site username, 1070test is my worker name and 1070worker is my worker password.

PS, could someone give me an example of what a decred wallet ID looks like? For starters, for the love of us all don't use supernova!

They have 40% of the hashrate, coinmine has 54%. They're both a huge threat as far as we should be concerned.

Mining is far too centralized as a result. Do your part and allocate your hashrate to any of the other pools so they can grow their hashrate and decentralize the network further putting the two biggest pools in check. It's just irresponsible to use supernova. Myself I use pool.mn/dcr you can view hashrate distribution by pools here.

You'll probably want to avoid MaxMiners as they're so small variance will be extreme. But any other small pool hash enough hashrate that you should expect at least one block to be solved daily. If decred has no hashrate then it probably failed to authenticate with the pool. When you first start up the miner it probably says a warning about this. It only shows up at the begging so you probably didn't notice. Here's how my stuff looks for pool.mn -dpool stratum+tcp://dcr.pool.mn:4801 -dwal user.rig -dpsw password Notice how stratum+tcp:// is specified. This might be why it's not working for you.

The best dcri will value based on card, overclock, market prices, and electrical expenses (as dual mining uses more electricity). Anyways if your dcri is low or high then it take up same electricity but I'll be more than just Ethereum mining (unless you set dcri super low like 5 then it'll probably use less electricity but anything above 20 id exact to take up the same amount of watts).

Go on Whattomine.com they have a dual mining calculator. Here's the Ether Decred one With Claymore open it can press +/- keys to increase/reduce the dcri while it's running. Find an optimal one by calculating the rests on the calculator. Myself I have dcri set to 40.

This seems optimal. It looses me about 5 mh/s on Ether on my otherwise 205 mh/s rig. But it increases decred profitability enough on my rig to make it more profitable than 5 mh/s on Ether is worth.

I feel strongly against having PoS voters earning a portion of the transaction fees for each block. The reason is quite simple; it is that it introduces an economical incentive for voters to take a certain voting direction. As it works out today, voters have no economical incentive to vote 0 or 1. The only incentive is to express some vote. On the other hand, I completely agree with the understanding that eventually, block rewards will be too low to justify/incentivize voting (as rewards might approach, or even be?lower? Than the ticket purchase fee).

This is definitely an issue. My preferred solution would be something of a tail emission such as some other currencies have defined. This addresses the long term incentive to vote, but also long term incentive to mine (which I feel is inadequately expressed if miners are only earning transaction fees). Perhaps some future voting round could be presented with a few options to decide on this matter? With Decred, we have the ideal platform to deal with these issues. Click to expand.Oh. I don't think I had wrapped around my head yet on the sequencing of the vote issue and fee distribution (vote concerns block X-1, fees are earned from block X).

If a voting direction does not have a direct impact on that voter's earnings from fees, it does make a lot more sense, though I'm not quite confident that this does not introduce some evil thinking/voting opportunities. All things considered, I continue to prefer a tail emission (for how it addresses long term incentives for both PoW & PoS), but perhaps that's not a popular approach here, I really don't know. In effect, a tail emission might perhaps be an independent matter of discussion, since fee splitting has its own merits and reasoning, regardless of the former. Yeah, I would also be in favour of tail emission system. We will be losing a lot of DCR for blocks with only 3/4 votes. If you add in dead airdrop acounts, we'll end up short of the 21million DCR.

Having the minimum stake vote reward be say, 0.1 DCR we would only be inflating the DCR by 0.5 DCR / block or 6000 DCR / year. The main people who lose out to inflation are people who hold DCR, and those are the people who would get the stake rewards, so it would cancel out.

As long as there is a long-term incentive to PoS to secure the network, I don't really mind if it takes the form of transaction fee sharing or a fixed lower reward, or the elimination of the minimum 0.01 DCR / KB fee for PoS ticket purchases. That makes me think of another issue actually, when the block reward is negligable, will PoW miners be penalised a share of the transaction fees for only including 3 or 4 votes? If so, then there will be perpetual leak of DCR to lost fees, and if not, then there is no disincentive for miners to manipulate votes by omission. If and when we reach a stage where PoS/PoW rewards in DCR are small enough, price wouldn't be $2 and technology might have moved forward so much that i am sure PoS will only depend on if you have decred in your wallet or not, i.e. There won't be a cost to do it.

It will purely depend on whether you want to be involved in voting & deciding things. Internet & devices needed for PoS are quite cheap even now and it will be even more so in future IMO. PoW rewards and incentive to mine would be what i will worry about as its not as trivial as PoS, which also has support of stakepools.

PoW requires certain infrastructure and regular expenditure to keep going and so we need incentives for people to keep doing that. For the starting phase of say 5 years, price should do the trick if development keeps chugging along. Beyond that we will see how the scene changes. This problem requires more math and hardwork, solution is not easy and we don't have much time left (if we are thinking long term).

With no incentive people will keep selling DCR. Also, exchange price of DCR has nothing to do with this. It is all about fees and rewards, how to ensure reward pays the PoS fee + Maintenance costs and lets a profit margin. PoW is out of discussion here because even BTC is sometimes unprofitable for miners, yet big players keep mining it because they managed to get cheap electricity, cheap infrastructure and low maintenance costs, that is their business so they will figure it out. PoS is instead a business for everyone, it democratizes mining by lowering entry barrier, this is the reason why many people bid for DCR including me. If we are thinking long term let's include PoS pools in this discussion, they will become the big players anytime soon, that will lower maintenance costs and will easy PoS mining even more.

Cloud hosting gets cheaper and cheaper so we can let PoS pools figure out how to stay competitive. The thing is should we care about low capital solo-miners? PoS pools will always have more capital so ticket price will keep increasing, that means less people with chance to buy tickets, and less number of tickets out there. Guess you get the rest of this. Let's talk in these terms five years in the future, current times are yet boring. Siacoin SC Mining Computer Setup.