|
An updated namecoind will be deployed on all servers tomorrow in preparation for the hardfork to fix the bug that was discovered a few months ago. This should be completely transparent (all the servers are setup to ignore namecoind if it fails), but just giving everybody a heads up in case something does go wrong during that update.
I've already given it a test update on the DDoS filtering server, and everything went smooth even with a somewhat shaky update on that server (took a few tries to remember which RPC calls I modified in namecoind to make it work just like bitcoind).
|
|
|
|
|
So, I zoomed in on the graph just out of curiosity. To bring some perspective in here, this "terrible" bad luck has only been going on the last ~11 hours as of this post.
|
|
|
|
I don't envy this "fun" part of your job. The fact that it never ends has to be an added bonus.
The pay is great, but it does get a little boring having to go through the same thing any time luck takes a real nose dive. Let's put it in simple terms though: We had a week at something like 115% luck, including two shifts paying > 200% PPS. Up until this morning the 5-week average was approximately 105%. That is *unusually* high for a 5-week period. Even with today's terrible luck, our average is *above* 104%. That is actually a significant deviation from expectation given the size of BTC Guild and a ~5-week evaluation as far as I'm aware. Last week's post by organofcorti showed BTC Guild's average at 90% of difficulty (lower is better), a CDF of 2%. That's pretty amazing. But the downside is, people see massive rewards, then they see bad luck, and it looks *even worse* because their most recent comparison was heavily inflated above expectation. |
|
|
|
Ah the joy of two independent events. No, there is nothing sinister at stake. It can be proven as well. BTC Guild only works over Stratum. This means you can see the coinbase for every piece of work you're given. In that coinbase you can clearly see that the wallet every block BTC Guild mines to is still the same (along with the Mined by BTC Guild tag). There's no way to hide those blocks from the world or change the wallet/coinbase without miners seeing it. |
|
|
|
Ah the joy of two independent events. No, there is nothing sinister at stake. It can be proven as well. BTC Guild only works over Stratum. This means you can see the coinbase for every piece of work you're given. In that coinbase you can clearly see that the wallet every block BTC Guild mines to is still the same (along with the Mined by BTC Guild tag). There's no way to hide those blocks from the world. |
|
|
|
Ya, I saw that stat where they claim 70% of all bitcoins mined today are thru their machinery. Insanity.
Which is immediately bullshit when you factor in 15-20% of the network is GHash.io's *private* farm (not counting public miners), which are purely BitFury. Another huge portion miners are also on BitFury. BFL, while a shitty company, has also delivered massive hash rate. And then you have ASICMINER, who has actually shipped a massive amount of hashrate via 333 MH/s and 10 GH/s units in bulk. KNC is not even half the current mining landscape. That may change if they are able to ship this second batch in full before the end of the year. |
|
|
|
Do BTC exchanges post all transactions to the Blockchain immediately or is there a delay with the exchanges?
Also, What is the most dependable, trustworthy, and secure online exchange?
Thanks!
Not sure quite what you mean on this one. Exchange transactions never take place on the blockchain. Only deposits/withdrawals to/from the exchange do. The internal trades are all just entries in a database. |
|
|
|
Is this the shelfish pool I need to defend myself against? Just wondering.
Any pool attempting to do what that article claimed would be dead instantly. Moreso in the case of BTC Guild, since we pay for orphans. Their strategy forces you to enter into multiple orphan races, with the assumption that you'll eventually hit a big payoff. The difference here is, if BTC Guild has an orphan, I -lose- ~24.25 BTC. It's not just losing the income from the block itself, I have to pay it as though it was found in the first place. The article really overblows the effectiveness, they make many assumptions (like you could just push out your competing blockchain if the network catches up and you'd still have a decent chance at having your block succeed). Our short term luck took a nosedive, dwdoc. It's on the rebound, but was subpar by almost a full day. It just happened to be the last day of this difficulty. The five week average is still over 104%, so hooray for medium-term variance.  Where is btc guild luck per unit time listed? Right now you can't get a specific unit of time. But the PPLNS stats does show you the luck per shift (as a date/time). It currently goes back about 5-6 weeks. The "average" luck line is from the beginning of that time. You can zoom in on a few days and eyeball it to get an idea of luck was good or bad (the average line doesn't update based on your zoom). |
|
|
|
This hiccup is only present during times of continual/rapid network difficulty growth.
you mean like almost always...lol Latter half of 2011 and majority of 2012 were pretty steady in general. Not enough rapid growth to cause variance to have a lasting effect. |
|
|
|
You could make *significantly* more on a small pool. You can also make *significantly* less on a small pool. The smaller the pool, the bigger the gamble (and bigger the payoff).
Its only a gamble if you're only mining at a certain pool for a short period of time. The statement "make significantly more / less" is misleading. Its correct for a particular short time period, but your statement might make people think their yearly income is influenced by pool size and that's simply not the case. I'm sure you know this eluthria, but its not clear from your post. I can't believe some people on here who have obviously invested significant (but perhaps worthless in the future) amounts of fiat currency in mining hardware and don't understand the simple basics of pooled mining. Over a long enough time frame, the only income differentiation between pools is governed by fees, reward system, and uptime. It only becomes a gamble if you're pool hopping or if a pool's hashrate is so low that they don't offer a significant reduction in risk beyond solo mining. xzempt is so misguided its not even funny. The "dummies" he speaks of are off mining at lower fee pools mitigating downtime risk with failover to other low fee pools - over the course of a month making a couple percentage points more income than with the guild. Now if your goals are to mine BTC and sell it off for fiat as quickly as possible, then the lower variance of a big pool is more attractive. If your goals are to accumulate BTC for saving, spending, and the occasional exchange to fiat, lower fee pools might be more attractive. There is one slight hiccup in the "long term it evens out" mantra, which I myself *normally* use when recommending people use PPLNS over PPS. Neutral/good luck today is worth a lot more than it will be next difficulty. Similarly, bad luck today will hurt you a lot more than it will next difficulty. So there is a potential gain/loss due to variance. Again, the odds are just as likely one way or another. It's a matter of risk assessment. This hiccup is only present during times of continual/rapid network difficulty growth. |
|
|
|
I'd very much appreciate some insight on these trends from folks that know more and have been around longer than little ol' me.
Global hashrate always cycles around in a sine wave nature. I'm not sure why, but it has as long as I've watched it. M The "network hash rate" charts are estimates based on recent block solving activity. Just like each miner/pool has fluctuating luck (variance), the entire network does as well. There are times where no blocks are found on the network for over an hour. There are also times where there are 6 blocks found in 10 minutes. The overall network variance can swing quite significantly. For example, if BTC Guild is having a bad day (like it did yesterday), that's ~300-500 GH/s (0.5 PH/s) that is "missing" from the overall network speed estimates. It's still there, it's still hashing away, it's just having bad luck. If multiple pools have bad luck simultaneously, it can cause a huge shift. Alternatively, if BTC Guild has an amazing day (like it did about a week ago), it can appear to be an extra 300-500 GH/s of network speed even though it hasn't changed. It doesn't help that most sites that display "network speed" are using a 24-hour statistic. The shorter the window, the more it can swing up/down. |
|
|
|
I got a question. In the active worker summary where it shows.....stale/dupe/other, what is dupe? Since I hooked up my second BFL 60gh single im getting those now. Never got them when I was just running one single. I have them both pointed to the same worker. Could that be the reason? Hope not cause im not sure how to point each single to thier own worker name.
Dupe means you submitted the same share twice. It's normally a firmware issue. As far as I know, you're not actually wasting time doing the same hash twice, it's something not getting cleared out of memory and being resent. |
|
|
|
lol the question is why isnt btcguild bigger? who are the dummys mining at smaller pools earning less money?
And that is nonsense too. More variance, yes, less money? Wrong. If you're arguing about stability or something else, that's a different story, but being smaller doesn't make you earn less money. btcguild has less downtime of any pool ive ever tried, they get the most blocks, most up time, therefore more to share among the miners, math doesnt lie my 60ghs on btcguild for the last 7 days has earned more than my 65ghs on ghash.io #justsaying Eleutheria rocks! Just going to reinforce ckolivas' post, even though yours is Pro-Guild. The uptime/stability is true, so is the fact that we find the most blocks. However, we split it more ways than other pools. You'll get smaller payments, but much more frequently. You could make *significantly* more on a small pool. You can also make *significantly* less on a small pool. The smaller the pool, the bigger the gamble (and bigger the payoff). |
|
|
|
I just don't understand why anyone would join a guild that's so big. We all know a 51% attack isn't exactly that dangerous, but that doesn't mean there aren't other types of effects from giving so much power to one group.
And thus the cycle continues. Now even 30% warrants outrage, a value that nobody had seemed to have an issue with for all of 2011 and 2012 when it was Slush or Deepbit with 30%. Hell, for a long time it was 2 pools controlling 30%+ each, double the danger! i remember a lot of bitching about deepbit in 2011. not so much slush The bitching about Deepbit was when they were ~45%. And it wasn't even that loud until they actually *had* 51%. BTC Guild is 29.8% ( http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/chart.php). |
|
|
|
I just don't understand why anyone would join a guild that's so big. We all know a 51% attack isn't exactly that dangerous, but that doesn't mean there aren't other types of effects from giving so much power to one group.
And thus the cycle continues. Now even 30% warrants outrage, a value that nobody had seemed to have an issue with for all of 2011 and 2012 when it was Slush or Deepbit with 30%. Hell, for a long time it was 2 pools controlling 30%+ each, double the danger! |
|
|
|
|
Blockchain.info seems to be stuck at 268115 at the moment. The network is quite a ways ahead of that now.
|
|
|
|
I'm on a pool with 750-930GH/s (it varies alot) and on bitminter 230TH
for the past 36 hours, both pools are ***really*** down on block finding. In fact the whole network apart from btcguild seems down on its luck !
BTC Guild's luck is negative if you use a 36 hour window. It's only started to pick up in the last 8 hours or so. |
|
|
|
|
We found 6 blocks in 30 minutes. Thats a pretty unusual burst (not unheard of though). It just happened to be at a time where the rest of the network hasn't found *one*. The entire network (BTC Guild included) has had many times where it's more than an hour between blocks, so it's just a mixture of one pool having good luck while the rest isn't.
|
|
|
|
My 24 hour earnings appear to be way down at BTC Guild although the next jump in difficulty (~33%) is not due for another 13 hrs.  Our short term luck took a nosedive, dwdoc. It's on the rebound, but was subpar by almost a full day. It just happened to be the last day of this difficulty. The five week average is still over 104%, so hooray for medium-term variance. Five-week variance over 104%, and this difficulty is something like 109%. Yes, earnings are down a lot yesterday. However, your earnings were HUGE earlier this week compared to what you would have made at neutral luck. |
|
|
|
This ghash.io keeps growing at an alarming rate. Who are they?
its them:  cex.io doesn't make ghash.io grow. They're the same company. They already own that hashrate. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
