That's false, or more accurately, it's just a wild assumption on your end, obviously, you did mention that you don't understand how TIDES work, which means you can't prove that your earnings were not going to be higher had you mined to another non PPS pool, if you provide all the numbers, I would be able to calculate things for you, but regardless, you just got lucky, your pool got lucky -- it means nothing more than that.


TIDES is just another fancy word for a modified PPLNS where the window is shares based instead of time based, any benefits it adds to miner A, it would contribute to a disadvantage to miner B, if you want to understand how TIDES work you need to understand how PPLNS work.

In a very simple way to explain it is that that pool would set a time window N (which is what N in PPLNS stands for), and let it be 1 hour,  if the pool finds a block at 11AM it would count all the work shares between 10AM and 11AM, and then calculate the % of each miner, so assuming there are only 2 miners, miner A sent 500 shares, and miner B sent 500 shares, the block subsidy + rewards was 10 BTC, the pool will give miner A 5 btc - fees and the same to miner B. simple right?

Now with TIDES, they don't have that N, but rather a pool of shares that is capped by the current difficulty  x 8 , this means if the current difficulty is 100T, then all new shares will go into that share pool without older shares having to leave until the maximum number of shares is reached, so once the number hits 800T, every new share will wipe out the oldest share, so it's "last share in - first share out", when a block is found, the same PPLNS principles are going to be applied in distributing shares.

Does this make miners earn more? Nop, it all depends on what happens during the time a pool finds a block.

Let's take a pool with 1 hour N, say there are 10 miners each sending 100 shares per hour, and the pool is small they can hit a block every day, so for the first day, only the 10 of them are there, block found, each get 10%, the next day, 1 hour before they hit the block, a large miner joins and adds 2300 shares in 1 hour, this means, the new miner would earn 50% of the rewards and the remining 10 old miners would share the 50% which you might want to label as "unfair" because the new miner was not there for the 23 hours, obviously, if you want to cherry pick a scenario like that and say PPLNS is not fair -- that's doable, but it makes no sense.

If the same pool used TIDES, the math is not going to be a lot different, assuming the pool hit a block every day, same miners, same shares, so at hour 23 of day X, the share pool has 2300 shares (we would assume those 2300 = than current diff  x  8 ), what's going to happen here? he  would be adding 2300 shares every hour, which means in 1 hour he would wipe out the 2300 worth of shares for the 10 miners, but given that they will also submit new shares, so once that hour is finished the new miner would have 2300 - 1000 shares which is 1300 shares and that would get him 56.52% of the block rewards.

In the above "valid" example TIDES favored the new miners at the expense of the old miners, it paid them 6.5% less, but obviously, depending on the pool hashrate, the timing of the new miner, the overall luck of the pool, every block is going to be different, if you point the same hashrate to two pools, one with TIDES and another with PPLNS, you are going to see days when TIDES pay you more, and other days when PPLNS pay you more.

In fact, the same logic applies to different PPLNS pools with different N value, it's all random, there is no such thing a new payout scheme that would pay out more to miners, such theory doesn't exist, unless the pool finds a way to play with consensus and manages to increase block subsidy, or reduce their fees, how would a different payout pay you more? where is the BTC going to come from?

---

@Kano, your math checks out, here is a simple python code for those interested in running their own numbers, you can plot the % straight away so you don't get confused by division.


50% for 12 blocks is 0.25%
80% for 12 blocks is 18.48%
50% for 36 blocks is 0.00% (given that I use :.2f.format in the code, so it's only 2 decimals)
80% for 36 blocks is 7.42%


Obviously, pool size is very important here, I also think or at least would like to think that most miners understand that variance goes both ways and it's only the fact that they don't want any variance is the reason why they use PPS pools, not with the assumption that PPLNS pools have  variance only to the downside.

With all things equal, non PPS pool would pay more in the long run, I believe that's somewhat undebatable, however, I disgree with this statment


Using a PPS pool only spares you the payout variance, however, mining in general is all about variance, the problem miners face is that fact that everything they pay for in their mining operations is valued in fiat, that's a greater value variance than what different pool sizes/payout scheme would cause, most traditional businesses don't operate this way, you can always gauge your expenses to your income and follow the market, with BTC, you can't just cut down on your expenses too easily, everything is directly related to how much fiat you can get for the BTC you mine, it doesn't matter if you pay your power bill daily or monthly, as a miner you are always limited by that factor.

Another point that recently emerged and helped the large pools grow larger is fees trends, like the once that happened around the halving, large pools have a higher probability of catching most of those trends than small pools, if there are 10 fat blocks starting from the next block, Antpool is likely to find 3 of them, Foundry another 3, the other small pools are a lot less unlikely to hit any of them, obviously, if they do, then miners of those small pools would hit the jackpot, but that's a lot of BTC to be risking to variance which is why most miners perfect to stick to large pools, not just because they pay in PPS.

This isn't exactly cheap or efficient. Anything that relies on infinite resources is deemed to fail. In fact, if adding more resources were actually a good "fix," then we would never be talking about the UTXO set. The whole idea of the UTXOs set was never a part of the original Bitcoin software. It only came into existence when "adding more RAM" was no longer feasible. The original method of verifying transactions involved searching the entire blockchain, and then we hit a brick wall and had to find a meaningful solution, which was the UTXO set (not more RAM).

The ideal scenario for outputs is to never be stored on your disk. They should be in the memory buffer, then wiped out as soon as they are spent. But because the set has grown too much, we need to flush them to the disk. Obviously, having more of them needing to be in the memory buffer or even on disk makes transaction verification, block reorgs, and everything else more time and resource-consuming.


Glad you mentioned this; it's another issue with the UTXO set. The set is never downloaded; it gets extracted from the blocks. You need to download the block, verify it, extract the UTXO set from it, and move to the next block. The number of iterations you have to do is going to be similar regardless of which way you decide to sync your node. The more UTXOs, the slower the process. Even if you manage to magically have the entire blockchain copied to your drive in 3 seconds, digging into every block to construct the UTXO set is most certainly going to take forever.

Another point worth mentioning is that spending 2x on your RAM or anything else isn't going to make running your node 2 times faster. Things don't scale this way, and the most important thing you need to remember is that aside from central exchanges, some wallets, and mining pools, everyone else is running their node at a net loss. So why would you want to make life more difficult for those maintaining the ecosystem just so that the Orindals' fools get to protect their useless shit from pruning?"

Ok, so there is no other catch? I mean, from what I understand, these cash-backs come from the merchants, the bank charges them x % to process your payment, and then the bank gives you some of that x %, so in reality, the end consumer is the one paying for the cash-backs, otherwise, if I was selling something for $10 and the bank charges me $2 only to give you 1$, I could have sold it to you for $9 if the bank charged me 1$ and didn't give you the cash-back, so to me, it seems all illusional to make credit cards users buy more. correct me if I am wrong.

Back to topic for now, we are still flat after 785 blocks

Yup, those large U.S. players who don't mine using their own money are very hard to predict, I am done being sure of their next move, impossible to know what someone who isn't investing their own hard-earned money would do with their mining investment.


So what's the catch? I mean where do things go south, if the way money works in the U.S. is so pretty this way, why aren't other countries doing the same? is whatever you described above the cause for the 30 trillion-something debt?

Don't take this personally, however, just a warning for those who plan on searching for their own address, if you want to stay anonymous use a VPN or anything to hide your IP, the website operator can link your BTC address to your IP address.

Anyway, that's a very nice-looking GUI, I used it, and I like it, thanks for making it.

I do, it's called variance, assuming whatever he says is correct "which could be" then it's just the result of the huge variance that small pools face, with 1EH worth of hashrate the pool is supposed to hit a block every 4 days, with a small variance in luck, they could hit 2 in a week which makes them lucky and earn a lot more than having mined to other pools, but also, they are subject to hitting only 1 block in a whole week which makes them subject to earning a lot less than miners with the same hashrate on other pools.

You can't cherry-pick a certain period of time and say this pool earns me more than that pool, I did mine for a very short period of time on Kano.is and I made more BTC there than I could have made on the other large pool I used, I made like a dozen more profit because I was just lucky, it's all but variance and luck which eventually evens out across all pools.

لا اعتقد ان تأثير المعروض من البتكوين المتعلق بالتعدين له تأثير فعلي على السعر, نحن نتكلم عن رقم صغير جدا تم انقاصه وهوا تقريبا 450 بتكوين يوميا, حسابا بسعر اليوم يعني حوالي 30 مليون دولار فقط, في المقابل حجم التداول اليومي للبتكوين لهدا اليوم على سبيل المثال 26,233,682,550 اي اكثر من 26 مليار دولار, لاحظ انه حتى في السنوات السابقة زيادة السعر تأتي بعد فترة لاباس بها من الانقسام, اي ان الامر عبارة عن دورات سعرية يكون الانقسام من ضمنها ولكنه ليس الفاعل الرئيسي.

يوجد معلومة اخرى يجهلها الكثير من الناس وهوا ان المعدنين محتاجين لبيع نفس كمية البتكوين بعد الانقسام, فمثلا لو كانت المزرعة تتحصل على بتكوين واحدة كل يوم, وفاتورة الكهرباء لديها 15 الاف دولار, يعني لو كان سعر البتكوين 60,000 فانه قبل الانقسام كانت تحتاج  ان تبيع ربع بتكوين يوميا لتغطية فواتير الكهرباء, اما بعد الانقسام فسوف تتحصل فقط على نصف بتكوين بقيمة 30 الف دولار, وهنا سوف تحتاج لبيع نصف بتكوين ايضا, طبعا الارقام تختلف من مزرعة لاخرى ولكن فقط هدا المثال لتوضيح ان المعروض للبيع بعد الانقسام ليس بالفارق الكبير, ولكن اعتقد انه سايكولوجية البشر لها تأثير كبير, فالكثير من الناس يعتقدون ان سعر البتكوين سوف يصعد بعد الانقسام فهنا يزيد الشراء ومع الوقت يصعد السعر.

Power is the main factor, but still, mining is risker than just buy and hodl, when you buy BTC, your only risk is losing it, all you have to do is just keep it safe, it's only two tasks job, store safe + be patient.. with mining it's a lot of things involved, maintaining a mining farm is no easy job and you have been there, you are always at risk of gears falling, cooling issues, electricity infrastructure, difficulty growing way too fast.

Also with mining, there is another downside, you have to constantly sell BTC to pay the power bill, even if the price is low you don't have the option of holding during downside markets, in fact, it's even worse, the lower the price goes the more BTC you have to sell to maintain your mining operations, obviously, not all mining operations end up losing money, but as I said, for mining to beat hodl you need a lot of stars to align. one thing goes south and the whole project is rekt.

Bro, the clock is ticking, you have 53 days for Q2 to finish, and you are going to need a lot of hashrate for the difficulty to make a new ATH, 

Anyway, I think we are already in the middle of the chicken game, we just don't know who is going to crash into who, and how fast is it going to happen, again based on the last halving, we should get at least a 13% drop from before the halving diff, however, the main difference between now and then is the source of that hashrate, as you know, those U.S miners are pretty different from the Chinese, the way money works in the U.S is different, so we may end up with less drop or even a lot larger drop.

Here is an interesting chart from coinshares for BTC production cost for publically listed companies using sec fillings which is somewhat accurate, most large miners don't seem to be in deep trouble according to the data, however, this is a bit old, and things have probably changed.

Here is what I think about the whole situation, and I could be wrong.

I don't know your exact intention but you ended up being viewed as that kid who would snitch to the teacher that the other students are cheating on the exam, while you may view that as a good thing -- the majority of people view it as a terrible thing, it doesn't matter how anyone labels it, it would still be assumed "snitching".

Now up to the point where you were just discussing the subject, I would assume that many members viewed it as a normal discussion, I don't know you well enough but I know hugeblack well enough to assume that he had no bad intentions in that discussion, but I would just assume you had no real intention up to that point, so when did shit hit the fan? it was when you left the feedback on Icopress, that was the turning point, at that point it became clear that your intention was not to have a normal healthy discussion about Jambler but it was rather done for either one of two

A- You just wanted to snitch.
B- You hated Icopress and you wanted to score a point against him at the expense of everything else.

Unfortunately, regardless of which scenario you choose, most people viewing this from the outside would dislike you for that.

Things got worse when other members who already disliked you took this opportunity to attack you and draw the attention of other members to what you did, I believe you would do the same if you had the chance, it's just terrible human nature that we have to live with.

As for Icopress sending a PM to those members who get some special treatment from him, I can confirm that I did not receive any PM from him nor anyone else regarding anything related to you, I did not exclude you from my trust my list, I still like you and think you are generally a good person but I do honestly believe what you did was bad, despite your intentions, the end result was the ending of a legit campaign that was paying forum members, the forum as a whole gained nothing from all of this, I am not saying it was you who caused this, but your actions made it seem like you were so happy about it.

IMO you all should have avoided that discussion, you found out Jambler was a mixer? great!, theymos didn't know, he didn't have to know, and he probably didn't want to know.


Anyway, I think you should let this cool down for a while, pouring more gas on this fire isn't going to fix it, time will.


 

So you want to ignore the obvious facts that exist on the longest blockchain the world has ever known and assume some things that only exist in your imagination? how does that work? Ocean pool leaves a ton of money on the table, look at this block https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000002509da9476db6f578ae8d2bd81d83b992ea37b68db8d1

it has a terrible health score, the pool included some 50+ sat/vByte transactions and left some 140+ sat transactions, anyone who thinks they are somehow magically making more profit mining on Ocean is either clueless or plain stupid, you may argue that they are doing this for the sake of BTC because they think inscription are bad, but you can't just claim they are somehow making a good profit by not mining high paying transactions.

Large pools that found most of the halving blocks have mined more BTC in a single day than they would in weeks, you know how terrible Ocean's rewards would seem if they found a block around the halving when inscriptions were paying 35-40BTC/block? just imagine that you have a 100ph of the 1000ph Ocean has and on that day you received your 0.325BTC when you could have made 4BTC on that same day had your pool mined those transactions.! Ocean Pool was very lucky they didn't mine any of those blocks.

There is nothing predictable when it comes to mining, take a look at our difficulty speculation thread and you will see that most things in mining happen out of order, however, with that being said, Sha258 is the most saturated algorithm, there are billions of dollars worth of gears that are already online and running, so it's physically impossible for difficulty to do 2x in a month, whereby with almost all other algorithms, a 2x jump in a very short period is doable.

The next thing to BTC would be anything LTC, although it's a lot less saturated and still has a huge potential to grow, it's the second best and far better than all other algos, with that said, I second NFW and Phill, if your power rate is not below 6 cents, forget it, in fact, if you backtest the past decade mining yields vs buying coins and holding, you would probably find that in 90% of cases those who bought the coin and did nothing ended up making more profit, you need to be very lucky to buy mining gears at the perfect time and be met with the perfect conditions to end up making some real profit otherwise -- it's a waste of time.

Not to long ago when the S19 was first sold, for 0.5BTC, I dare anyone to say they made their ROI on that 0.5BTC investment, there is no way on earth that an S19 made half a bitcoin after paying the power bill, go a little further, S17 went for like 0.4BTC, probably only a few S17s on planet earth made as much up to today's date, it's all just psychological effects, mining gives you the illusion that you are somehow increasing your wealth, because you see incoming BTC every day, it's a lot easier for your brain to mine than to hodl, but in the vast majority of cases, after a few years have passed, you will always regret not buying coins instead.

The above is based on my very long experience with mining, I have a very good power rate, probably better than 90% of miners, but looking back at how much BTC I spent, had I just kept those BTC I would have been freaking rich by now, however, with all the gears I run now -- I am just way too far from rich.

I assume many of those online calculators use some long average to estimate profits and they probably still take those 40btc blocks into account, as for today's actual payout, M63 would get you exactly $16.64 which rounds to nearly $500 just like you mentioned, not even close to $1000.

I think many of the comments above overthink their mining plans,  solar, wind, do this, do that! it's rather simple, you need 5 cents/kWh or less power rate, and a lot of money to start a meaningful mining operation, I'd say anything below 50-100k is not worth the efforts and you are likely better off just buying BTC and sit on your hands for 2-3 years.

The prices on Ebay are still pretty high IMO, S19 xp goes for $2500++, it's about 22w/th , and costs roughly $18 per TH, on the other side, a brand new Whatsminer M60 which is a 19w/th sells for $22/th , so that's just about $4 per TH but it is 13% more efficient and is brand new.

For it to sell at these prices, the difference needs to be worth it, i would say a fair price for a used S19 xp in todays world would be in the $14/th range.

You may end up being right, but it's too early to judge, I did mention in my "before the halving post"


We would need to wait for 4 epochs to be certain of the halving effect, and as for this halving, we may have to wait for a bit longer because transaction fees during and after the halving changed everything and made mining more profitable than before the halving, it makes no sense for us not to drop that 13% or even more, I still think we will do just that in 4 epochs when the chicken game is over, as for the numbers phill laid out above, they are correct but they don't take into account any other expenses, those large miners can't survive with a few cents profit post power bill, their expences are far greater than just that, they would get to the point where they have to liquidate just to pay interest.

Also, most importantly, Phill I pray for your fast recovery, get well soon my friend.

Many people don't even know that other pools are paying differently, in fact, 90% of miners don't understand how the payouts are generated and what formula the pool uses to calculate the rewards, I am willing to guess that nearly nobody that uses Antpool understands how they calculate their FPPS, there is no mentioned about it online, and the average support folks don't know the answer, it takes too much effort to figure out how these payouts originate for every pool, but again, most people are clueless.

The folks behind Ocean Pool are pretty rich, they will probably continue to lose potential profit just to "prove their point", I won't be surprised to see this pool run for many years to come, also, you can't just assume that all miners know what mining is, many folks who already mine on that pool probably don't even know or understand how are they leaving money on the table by mining to this pool, it's wrong to assume that everyone is smart.

I don't think that is an option, Lower Power Mode LPM comes with it's own default settings which is lower votlage and frewuency, if you have a certain voltage you want to try then why use Low Power Mode in the first place? Also what mining gear are you using? The same one you mentioned in the topic or a different one?

It would be pretty awkward if Wasabi faced the same end, it would only mean that all the bending over to the government never paid off.