yeha but if i cant get my wallet to work how will it ever load my mined monero? surely there must be some1 who knows why this error keeps coming up

Still no payout from moneropool.org for the last blocks..?

How to open 4 instanced?

Is there a thread to discuss attack vectors and slowly specify the protocol? Right now the code is the spec and that's a recipe for black swans (see BTC hard fork in 2013).

I think it's important to start the discussion early because there's a lot of work to be done before it's time to code. We need documentation, we need to audit all code and we need to think about attacks.

Where should such a thread be created?

I've got a couple of questions.

First, I'm mining on extremepool.org. "My Stats" shows that my hash rate is only 2 H/sec with a single core processor. Yet if I solo mine with the daemon, it shows my hash  rate as 9 H/sec (with the newest update from 17 May). What could be going on with that? Is the pool miner using the older, less-optimized code? At 2 H/sec, it seems I am wasting my time.

Second (and more importantly, I think), where the heck is all this hash power coming from?? It looks to me as though all of the pools combined account for only a very small percentage of the total hashing. It makes me wonder whether someone (or several someones) have figured out how to GPU mine Monero, and are grabbing most of the coins. If so, that is functionally equivalent to a private pre-mine, and I predict it will be bad for the long-term viability of the coin. And that would be a shame.

Any ideas?

I can't answer the first question because I don't mine.

I am not too worried about the hashrate.

1.If you look at the chart it grows on a noisy exponential. It's faster than I expected, but it is more consistent with strong interest (and high price) than a secret GPU miner.

2. I have just started studying CryptoNight in detail, but so far it looks like GPUs are not going to be a killer if they do happen.

 A. CryptoNight is indeed almost memory-bound in theory, and monero miner is indeed almost memory-bound in practice (after Noodle's un-de-optimization). This means there is no uberminer, maybe a heavy optimization can double the rate again. The other CryptoNote coins are afaik still de-optimized so someone mines at 4x the rate others have.

 B. On a GPU the high latency of GDDR3/5 and the tiny caches of the shaders means that most time will be spent waiting for the RAM, to a much larger degree than on a CPU. This is not too say there is no compute, but there is not a lot of mindless compute like in BTC. CryptoNote is more computationally intensive than BTC on the crypto side and it is latency-bound (i.e. it does a lot of mindless memory access) instead of compute-bound, so that's why typical hashrates are so low compared to anything else.

 C. Slow-hash uses AES at some point. Most modern CPUs have dedicated hardware for it, but GPUs are terribly slow at large integer arithmetic.

It could be possible that CryptoNote is indeed CPU-only for a few years at least. This doesn't mean it doesn't have it's own problems, and that's one reason I asked about the attack vector thread.

3. IMO monero is overpriced for now. Botnets don't hoard, so they tend to keep the price low. I don't have a problem with this. On the other hand they do secure the network. Someone rightly said upthread that the miner network is itself a botnet.

4. I believe a large part of the network hashrate is individuals with 1-10 kH/s mining alone. I don't think this is a problem either.

Maybe your last point is the part I don't understand. How does an individual get to 1 - 10 kH/s? I know the processor I am running now is pretty lame, and I am about to install a much faster (8-core) CPU. Let's say the new CPU doubles my clock speed, and that I can go from mining one thread to 15. That still only increases my hash rate from 9 H/sec to 270 H/sec. How does an individual get to 10 kH/s without running 40 - 100 machines? Is the something wrong with my math? Is there some other factor I am missing? I would love to be wrong about this.

The "insecurity" is that I am running httpd on the same machine as the wallet daemon. It is not a critical issue. However, because running apache exposes the server to unnecessary vulnerabilities, I am going to run it on a separate server.

Payments have gone out for the last 6 blocks. The pool software still tries to pay out for orphans, so the wallet was not sending the transaction due to lack of funds.

Well you kinda answered yourself, only the numbers can be smaller. My home server is 24-thread and its a pretty common rig. I suppose i could squeze say 500 H/s. If i had 2 I would be at the lower bound of my interval. If i had a rack of them I would be close to the upper bound. Similarly for say, a school computer lab.