What share difficulty should I set for ~3(MH/s) on X11. Also if I set Cryptsy integration to full auto how do you set it to auto trade to BTC and auto payout.
128 or 256 should be fine. You need to configure the autosell on the cryptsy side. This video was from before the Cryptsy integration was added but it explains it well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCF1oaRcD3o |
|
|
|
My past day has certainly not been well with the multipool.
I decided to try leasing some big SHA256 rigs for a day to try out leasing. Everything was going well and I thought I was actually going to make a little money since bitminter found a a block when I was at ~0.11 BTC as my estimated payout.
But that payout didn't come anywhere near soon enough. I eventually received 0.03 BTC but that was so little that instead of making profit I lost around 0.08 BTC. I wanted to reach out to someone on IRC about this but I couldn't get a hold of anyone.
I moved my remaining SHA256 miners to ghash because of this but I would like to keep them with the multipool as I have been with the pool since late last year.
Sorry you had a bad experience. Bitminter has had terrible luck over the past few days. We are off Bitminter for now and I have plans to diversify the hashrate amongst several of the larger pools and move to some kind of PPLNS-based scoring for Bitcoin. Didn't you earn any altcoins as well? We were on altcoins for almost 1/3 of the day. |
|
|
|
And expect to hear from me next time Koi hits a dry spell. Although I expect you'll both be conspicuously absent from the forum if that happens.
I can take it and I will still be here, but hopefully it does not happen until we are 2% of the pool. Let me know on those stats after you crunch the numbers. I will be interested to know (maybe you have some reason for me to "hear from you" now). As you have said, I am a moron that cannot do simple math so help me out here. Hopefully, everyone will become the neighborhood watchers, so I would encourage you to call out anomalies and let OOC tell you that it is not likely (although his 8X is more than anyone can really stomach from someone over 10% of a pool). Hopefully, you do not go 15 more days to get to the point where OOC would agree "something is likely strange..." I don't have any problem with Koi's numbers. He appears to be doing rather well lately. That said, if he's so confident in his ability to find blocks at a rate above statistical average over long periods of time, one might wonder why he doesn't just skip pooled mining altogether and solo mine.Now you are truly being a fucking idiot, stop while only a few people think you the fool. Show the quote where I said that. What idiot would believe that? I have absolute confidence that over the long run, KOI will solve the number of blocks consistent with our hash. Because we have tested the equipment we use and the software we use. Multipool? You cannot make that same assertion because you DO NOT KNOW. I did not think you could do the stats you demanded to do on Koi. Or are you too lazy? Like I said, put up or STFU. Why don't you give us the math on your claim that we all would make less if you left the pool? That should be interesting to learn for us all. I do know - I know how stratum works, I know how share submission works. If our hashes are being accepted, things are working. If our largest miner had broken hardware, that would be less than 10% of our hashrate and would be enough to be detectable on other currencies. Your hardware is tested, great. What happens if there's a brownout or surge at your data center and your chips are damaged? How would you know for sure they're still good? Do you really want to go down this road? Hey, don't worry bro, because I've already made the decision to diversify our hashrate. You'll see it dropping soon. There's really no reason for me to bother trying to convince fucktards like you of anything. |
|
|
|
Maybe you should say LTC has no future at all.
LTC has whatever future the devs want to make for it. Unfortunately that doesn't look like much. |
|
|
|
And expect to hear from me next time Koi hits a dry spell. Although I expect you'll both be conspicuously absent from the forum if that happens.
I can take it and I will still be here, but hopefully it does not happen until we are 2% of the pool. Let me know on those stats after you crunch the numbers. I will be interested to know (maybe you have some reason for me to "hear from you" now). As you have said, I am a moron that cannot do simple math so help me out here. Hopefully, everyone will become the neighborhood watchers, so I would encourage you to call out anomalies and let OOC tell you that it is not likely (although his 8X is more than anyone can really stomach from someone over 10% of a pool). Hopefully, you do not go 15 more days to get to the point where OOC would agree "something is likely strange..." I don't have any problem with Koi's numbers. He appears to be doing rather well lately. That said, if he's so confident in his ability to find blocks at a rate above statistical average over long periods of time, one might wonder why he doesn't just skip pooled mining altogether and solo mine. |
|
|
|
Looks like Entropy has more than one account at the pool. I apologize to Entropy for saying he's not mining here. It was stupid of me to assume he's not mining just because he's not mining with his old account.
I encourage those who called flound1129 a scammer as soon as he hit slightly bad luck to apologize as well. That wasn't a good assumption either.
No one has called him a scammer. I have suggested many reasons for his bad luck though. Scamming would require knowing. Freeriding is very different. Just PM me when he hits 6 blocks in the next week (that should be about neutral correct?) And expect to hear from me next time Koi hits a dry spell. Although I expect you'll both be conspicuously absent from the forum if that happens. |
|
|
|
You say he's Koi, DrH says he doesn't mine here?
So who's correct?
You misunderstand what people write quite often. Put the quote in to help the rest of us try to explain to you what was meant. He is Koi because I own part of Koi so I know. DrH did not say anything of the sort. Now bless us with the analysis on Koi. Remember it took us weeks to move over the machines that we did (but you can figure that out I am sure). A long time ago the pool hit some bad luck. There was a similar discussion about how bad luck can never happen unless there are bugs (or block withholding attacks). Entropy decided that since the pool was having bad luck that must mean it is broken and so he left for another pool. He's not carrying any asses, fat or not.  Sometimes bad luck is just bad luck. Most people can do simple math but have no understanding whatsoever of probability theory. Listen to what Organofcorti is saying. He is one of the very few people on this forum who does understand it. |
|
|
|
I do not believe in block withholding attacks and I think that people are focusing on the WRONG issue. The problem that was discovered was the miner did not work correctly (please see below). Whether it was software (that was easily fixed or hardware which could never be fixed is not known but the owner of the miners said it was a simple software fix). Also, it should be noted that the most recent example of this attack was apparently not an attack, rather it was probably a software problem - although this should have already been detected during testing on the testnet, so I'm not sure how "unknown" it could have been.
The problem was their software discarding shares that matched 2^32-1 difficulty or better. Anything UNDER that, they worked fine. So testnet would not have detected anything wrong. So, I put it to you all: 1. We have someone that has bad luck (lots of people have bad luck runs and there is a 1 in 11 chance of this happening by chance so far). 2. The person is mining using tons of different hardware (so unless all his clients use the same miner brand and that brand is bad it is not likely the miners) 3. The person has software that jumps between pools to mine other coins when prices dictate. Please read the above quote. SOFTWARE problem. Their custom software did not work. But, why would they have been able to even solve one block then? So the question is: could it be a software problem? Still waiting to hear what Entropy's username on Bitminter is so I can take a look at his mining stats.
KOI. Work away and let us all know (my guess is you are too lazy to do it). Information is all visible and available (if you looked instead of shooting your mouth off). Do KOI's miners work? yes. All of them? Yes. How do they know? Because they have solo mined with them all. And then, they separated them into accounts by type of miner at pools (to make sure different miners all work). Why do you think he was so vocal at BTCGuild insisting that someone's miners DID NOT WORK? You say he's Koi, DrH says he doesn't mine here? So who's correct? |
|
|
|
Yesterday I got a new A2 script machine with a Corsair HX1050 PSU....it runs on avg. at 29+mhs as reported by the sw, somewhat less at the pool. I let it mine at Coinking for about 8 hours using the 'most profitable' coin setting. Just tallied my confirmed and unconfirmed earnings, which will only be about $4.00 (yes, a couple more cents will filter through), for a 24 hour avg. of about $12. Are you kidding me? At Scyptguild or Clevermining the payout (again on average) is TWICE that! While I like the Coinking UI, I also have built in radar for being ripped off, and my alarms went off.
It's possible they were mining LTC for some or all of the time you were connected, for which it seems they haven't found a block yet. That said they do report very high profits (via poolpicker.eu) for a pool that mines mostly DOGE. |
|
|
|
BTW, its possible multipool is being (ab)used as one of many proxies by this dominant entity.
Highly unlikely, as our average worker hashrate is under a few hundred GH. They'd have to have hundreds of accounts setup in a very specific way using custom software to do what you're talking about. |
|
|
|
I'll shut up when I'm no longer being attacked.
Essentially what you're saying is: "You better make this completely random even happen more often or we won't trust you!"
I've done my due diligence. My miners find blocks on every other currency we mine. If there was some kind of issue it would have shown up way before today. What you are suggesting is ludicrous on just about every level.
Also, fuck you.
Then you will continue to appear the fool. Yes. Make the statistically PROBABLE start to happen... Perhaps there is a flaw in your software with this coin switching that messes something up? Perhaps you made a mistake? Not possible? Maybe think about it. Maybe it's my profession to think about these things. Maybe you wouldn't understand what that means. If you did, you would have shut up a long time ago. And considering you've been borderline stalking me since I entered the thread, I don't think you should be making any statements about my character. Then think hard about those things, because your words betray you. It is late there go to bed and try to wake up kinder. It is morning here and the sun it out, so I need to go and see some sights. Trying to imply that I do not have a profession or that I am stupid is not your best argument. Take some time to reflect on your behavior, it will be a good investment. I don't report to you or anyone else here. I'll provide info I deem appropriate to relevant and reasonable parties [hint: not you] as I see fit. Still waiting to hear what Entropy's username on Bitminter is so I can take a look at his mining stats. |
|
|
|
I'll shut up when I'm no longer being attacked.
Essentially what you're saying is: "You better make this completely random even happen more often or we won't trust you!"
I've done my due diligence. My miners find blocks on every other currency we mine. If there was some kind of issue it would have shown up way before today. What you are suggesting is ludicrous on just about every level.
Also, fuck you.
Then you will continue to appear the fool. Yes. Make the statistically PROBABLE start to happen... Perhaps there is a flaw in your software with this coin switching that messes something up? Perhaps you made a mistake? Not possible? Maybe think about it. Maybe it's my profession to think about these things. Maybe you wouldn't understand what that means. If you did, you would have shut up a long time ago. And considering you've been borderline stalking me since I entered the thread, I don't think you should be making any statements about my character. |
|
|
|
That's nice for you. If I wait for that level of proof I'm out enough money to buy a luxury car, or a small house.
Flound can't even vouch for who his users are. So how can he attest that they aren't using defective gear, or intentionally withholding?
Your numbers say that 92% of the time a honest contributor would not have performed so poorly. That's is enough reason to freeze payments until more information is available.
Wait you're not even mining here? Your motives just became even more questionable. LOL. You really are a fucking idiot. First, you call someone insane that had read news/facts that you had not even read even though it CLEARLY is something that someone running a business like yours should be on top off and, NOW you are accusing the person that is carrying your fat ass as no mining here? What's his username? I see no entropy on the stats page. |
|
|
|
Your numbers say that 92% of the time a honest contributor would not have performed so poorly. That's is enough reason to freeze payments until more information is available.
If DrH was to freeze funds for every miner that ever had reached the point where they had submitted 2.5*D shares and only solved one block, nearly everyone who has solved more than one block would be very pissed off. I can almost guarantee you that at some point you will have submitted 2.5D shares for one block. I can guarantee you we have solved blocks worth substantially more than we have been paid. Multipool has been paid 4x what they have contributed to the pool. Maybe you think a $50k donation from all the other users of this pool is trivial. I do not. We are up about 58BTC right now. Apparently you would have us take those earnings and leave, rather than stay around long enough for our luck to even out. That would be bad for Bitminter. Good for whom, I wonder? |
|
|
|
3. Multipool, take your scratch ticket analogy and shove it. That is stupid. How about this. It is like one (very fat) member of the community eating every day but only contributing to the food budget one in 11 days when over time everyone must contribute equally (to their percentage of consumption). Koi has NEVER gone that long without contributing. So, why don't you shut up until you have hit a block EVERY day for 6 days and are on the other side of this luck curve.
I'll shut up when I'm no longer being attacked. Essentially what you're saying is: "You better make this completely random even happen more often or we won't trust you!" I've done my due diligence. My miners find blocks on every other currency we mine. If there was some kind of issue it would have shown up way before today. What you are suggesting is ludicrous on just about every level. Also, fuck you. |
|
|
|
That's nice for you. If I wait for that level of proof I'm out enough money to buy a luxury car, or a small house.
Flound can't even vouch for who his users are. So how can he attest that they aren't using defective gear, or intentionally withholding?
Your numbers say that 92% of the time a honest contributor would not have performed so poorly. That's is enough reason to freeze payments until more information is available.
Wait you're not even mining here? Your motives just became even more questionable. |
|
|
|
Here are the times and share totals for our last 11 payouts. I am not including the first payout because there are some cex.io shares in there.
+------------+------------+
| time | diff | hashrate
+------------+------------+
| 1402976440 | 4994809796 | 232TH
| 1402884360 | 1001667156 | 213TH
| 1402864221 | 816766904 | 151TH
| 1402841060 | 5430841828 | 256TH
| 1402750091 | 1868165592 | 222TH
| 1402714003 | 786003908 | 191TH
| 1402696412 | 596053444 | 144TH
| 1402678654 | 1687252668 | 165TH
| 1402634828 | 4918289664 | 232TH
| 1402544157 | 1333388092 | 179TH
| 1402512186 | 5877865492 | 283TH
I calculate an average hashrate of 217TH.
Using the difficulties for each day and the sum of work difficulties, I get submitted/expected= 2.493172. This has an upper tail probability of 0.08264739, meaning that once out of every 12 reruns of those eleven days you'd see multipool have this level of luck. Not very unlucky. 2.5*diff shares per round happens multiple times per day for many different pools (well, those that solve multiple blocks per day, anyway), so it shouldn't surprise us when a particular miner submits work equivalent to 2.5*network difficulty and only solves on block. Sorry, Entropy-uc, I'm not seeing a problem here. There might be a problem but statistically there's nothing unusual going on. If submitted/expected reach 7.0 (one in a thousand) or 8.0 (one in three thousand), I'd start to worry. That's nice for you. If I wait for that level of proof I'm out enough money to buy a luxury car, or a small house. Flound can't even vouch for who his users are. Are you suggesting DrHaribo or any public pool operator knows every user that hashes on his pool? How exactly would you propose I 'vouch for' 1000 different users? You ask for the impossible. Your numbers say that 92% of the time a honest contributor would not have performed so poorly. That's is enough reason to freeze payments until more information is available.
No it isn't. And the second that happens we're gone. So how can he attest that they aren't using defective gear, or intentionally withholding?
I can attest to that because we spend about 25-30% of the time mining other currencies and find blocks just fine and at a statistically normal rate. It would be quite an elaborate scheme for someone to create hundreds of user accounts and configure them to do what you're suggesting. I suspect you've either got paranoia issues, or you're just trying to justify to yourself moving to some other pool with lower payout variance. I don't blame you, if I spent a million on hardware I'd think about doing the same thing every time the pool I was using had an unlucky streak. But there's no need for you to involve me in it. Biitminter is struggling enough to grow as it is, I know if I was a new user considering using this pool and came into this thread and read the last few pages, I probably wouldn't be putting my hash here. You people are vicious. |
|
|
|
If flound1129 posts the daily totals of d1 equivalent shares sent to Bitminter, I'll work it out for you.
Dude I like you, but you don't have over $1M invested in hardware. You also haven't been cheated out of over 100 BTC by the withholder on BTCguild. I'm not going to hang around for months of 'bad luck'. If Flound wants to put all his rewards into escrow until we see several weeks of expected or better solved blocks that's great. Otherwise we will move on if nothing is done to ensure everything is above board. Sure, I don't have a huge investment mining investment, and I can understand how worried you might be about not making a return on that investment. But when you have that much cash on the line, the last thing you want is to be forced into an action without being certain that it's the right action. Here's what I'd do if I had that much of an investment: 1. Mine at multiple pools, and not just some of the larger ones. It will reduce your variance further, and if you mine at multiple small pools you'll be helping the network (at the cost of extra accounting, I guess). 2. Get good at calculating statistics and making decisions based on those stats. I'm be happy to help you with that, it's not hard once you get some basic ideas. I hope this doesn't come off as smart-assery, it's not. I just hate to see people make decisions that are not based on facts. I'll help you calculate the results that should inform the facts if you like. Sigh. I understand the statistics just fine. Go ahead and calculate the probability of 250 Th/s solving only one block in that last 2 weeks if you want to put an exact number on the situation. I don't need to do that. It's serious enough, and there is enough solid information that there are active bad actors in play that the default assumption is that there is a problem. I don't need to prove something in court. I need to protect my investments. If Bitminter can't do that, we will move on. We have not had 250TH on for 2 weeks. Let's get some facts straight here. - We have been on Bitminter since 6/8. That's TEN DAYS, not two weeks. - Our full BTC hashpower when the multiport is on BTC has been around 250-260TH only for about the past 3-4 days. We started around 250, but quicky dropped to 180 or so due to issues with some of our largest hashers (share difficulty and lack of payments as we got into Bitminter's PPLNS). We did not return to 250-260 until a few days ago when a couple of large miners moved back on. We are also only on BTC about 75% of the time. When we are not on BTC, we drop to about 60-80TH. Here are the times and share totals for our last 11 payouts. I am not including the first payout because there are some cex.io shares in there. +------------+------------+ | time | diff | hashrate +------------+------------+ | 1402976440 | 4994809796 | 232TH | 1402884360 | 1001667156 | 213TH | 1402864221 | 816766904 | 151TH | 1402841060 | 5430841828 | 256TH | 1402750091 | 1868165592 | 222TH | 1402714003 | 786003908 | 191TH | 1402696412 | 596053444 | 144TH | 1402678654 | 1687252668 | 165TH | 1402634828 | 4918289664 | 232TH | 1402544157 | 1333388092 | 179TH | 1402512186 | 5877865492 | 283TH I calculate an average hashrate of 217TH. We have found: 1 BTC block (difficulty 11,756,551,916) 3 NMC blocks (difficulty 2x 8,769,848,379, 1x7,400,501,702) Now you are proposing that some large percentage of over 1000 miners whose average hashrate is well under 200GH are not only block withholding, but selectively withholding only when we're on BTC. And only sometimes. Also they're not withholding NMC blocks. Do you realize how ridiculous this all sounds? Do you realize that eventually the luck will even out, and we'll find a larger than average number of blocks in some abitrary time period? And you'd rather us be on some other pool when that happens? Maybe you should sit back, relax and let the law of averages that is the main fucking reason for pool mining in the first place do its job. And call off this stupid witch hunt. Or I will take my hash elsewhere, and you will miss out. This is like a guy beating his wife because she brought home scratch offs that didn't win him anything and telling her she better bring back more winners next time. |
|
|
|
SUPER is now available for mining on Multipool.us port 3377. Features: - Over 1 year in operation
- Proportional reward system
- Redundant EU and US Servers
- User-selectable share difficulty from 16 to 16384 (automatically switches to equivalent X11 difficulty)
- Load Balancing - High capacity and redundant
- Transparent, detailed block payout stats
- Fee-free daily payouts and low threshold auto payouts
- Android and iPhone app available! http://multistat.yovu.co/
|
|
|
|
I currently have four types of ASICs in my mining rig: Bitfury, BFL, Antminer, and Gridseed. The Antminers are self-contained, while the others all run off of the Raspberry Pi in the Bitfury rig.
bfgminer seems to work well enough with my Gridseeds for scrypt mining on Multipool, but it seems to have problems on the SHA-256 side when the pool switches coins. It gets stuck, and never appears to get unstuck. The Antminers shipped with cgminer, which doesn't appear to have this problem.
Supposedly cgminer was never going to be updated to work with BitfuryStrikesBack rigs because they were limited to running on the Raspberry Pi, connected through its GPIO port. At some point, though, support was added for the Bitfury-based hardware from Black Arrow, which is AFAICT functionally identical to BFSB hardware (they both support four groups of hashing boards per RPi, with the chips in each group chained together over SPI). I built the latest cgminer yesterday, tweaked the config file a little (took stuff out, mostly), and fired it up. It's working much better now with Multipool. It's been running since sometime yesterday evening, switching between coins (network difficulty keeps switching from ~11 billion for Bitcoin to somewhere in the low hundreds of thousands for the SHA-256 altcoins) without an issue. As a bonus, it's also tweaking speeds on the Bitfury ASICs to squeeze more speed out of them while keeping errors low. If a chip got pushed too far with bfgminer, it would start spewing nonstop errors until it was restarted.
With all of that said, is there some reason why the SHA-256 side of Multipool runs better with cgminer than with bfgminer? Given that the scrypt side of Multipool works fine with bfgminer (good thing it does, as you can't mine scrypt at all with recent versions of cgminer), this seems a little odd.
The SHA-256 pool is the only pool that still disconnects when switching coins, this is necessary due to the BTC hash being proxied to another pool. That is likely the source of your issues. That said I also run bfgminer with my SHA gear and I've never had any major issues with it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
