5600-6000 on BTC Guild during any given shift in the last week.  It's a bit harder to tell these days because I know there are some people *still* trying to mine on CPU/GPU, and due to increases in minimum difficulty they only get a share in once every few hours.

It was closer to 10,000-12,000 about 6 months ago, if that's any indication of current mining trends.  The pool speed is up, but the number of mining accounts in a given shift is cut in half.

If only it was possible to ban somebody for repeated incidents of complete stupidity...

cyberpinoy:  Your own "proof" shows how ignorant you are you are.  SHIFTS DO NOT EQUAL BLOCK SOLVES.  A shift can be paid for MANY block solves.  Additionally, a block solve is paid to MANY SHIFTS!  On GHash.io, a block solve is split among TEN shifts, the shares in each of those shifts getting paid.



If you don't understand how something works, shut the fuck up or learn how it works.  Don't spread bullshit and constantly attempt to refute people who actually know how shit works.



EDIT:  The fact that you're calling PPLNS an "equation" similarly shows you're fucking clueless.  It's not an equation.  It's a process.

Shares are submitted.  Shares are grouped into shifts to make accounting easy to calculate AND easy to audit for a user that knows what they're doing [maybe not applicable to GHash since their history/stats are garbage].  A block eventually gets solved.  The payment for that block (minus any pool fee if applicable) is split among the open shifts.


EDIT2:  Maybe your problem is that your only exposure to PPLNS is GHash, which has one of the worst presentations of PPLNS, with no ability to dig into shift details and see which blocks paid into which shifts.

And only 250,000 or so are bots

And never, ever, ever, re-use a same or similar password unless it's a specific one used for sites where somebody else getting your account means absolutely nothing.

It's not just the Bitcointalk hacks.  Especially when it comes to long time Bitcoin users, repeating the use of passwords anywhere probably means your password is known.  There was bitcoinpool.com which had a plaintext leak of all usernames and passwords.  There was the earlier MtGox hack that had a leak where many early accounts had easily reversible hashes due to lack of a proper salt, and no doubt there were *many* other Bitcoin site leaks that went unreported.  There have also bee in the last 3 years leaks from Adobe and LinkedIn (and more, those are just the two that come to mind).

I know that the brute force attacks that are always taking place against BTC Guild are not "brute force".  They're not guessing passwords, they're using username+password combinations from a database that has been compiled over many years, with millions of username+password combinations, and tunnel it through infected computers from all over the world to prevent any kind of pattern analysis from hitting them without false positives.

He was referring to the math prodigy known as cyberpiony, who has no clue how PPLNS works and therefor assumes it's a scam even though most PPLNS pools offer the statistics needed for any user to audit how their reward was calculated if they have the desire to do so (and a functional brain).


cyberpiony (to DrHaribo): "So tell me respected leader in pools and software developments what is the real need for any pool to have to make 40% or more of the BTC per block mined in order to be a truly profitable pool?"

Obviously he didn't say" 1% of 25 bitcoins is 40%", but based on the rest of cyberpiony's posts (and that one in particular, located on page 2), it definitely read like it was directed at his pool (Bitminter, which runs PPLNS @ 1% fee).

4320 blocks is not your sample size.  Eligius is ~3% of the network, putting the expected blocks closer to 129 or 130.

There was a bug introduced in the wallet confirmation email function last night that was just recently corrected.  If you've had problems changing your wallet in the last 24 hours, you will have to try changing it again on your Settings page to trigger a new email confirmation.

There's no way to legitimately get to that page in the UI, but if you force POST data into the page as if you clicked the button, it will still trigger the email, which is what happened in this case.  However, even clicking the confirmation link would not change your locked address (the code was validly generated, the email validly sent, but the actual change can't happen due to the lock).

Assuming the email is valid, the only way for that to happen is if somebody has your login credentials.  The code to generate a wallet change code and send off an email only works if there is a valid login.  I'm looking into that address, and it looks like there was a number of accounts hit by that address, but the percentage is so low (and the majority were accounts that had a 0 balance), that it's likely the end result of the login brute force attacks (using username+password leaks from other sites) that have been happening over the last year.  The current IP blacklist in fighting those repeated attacks exceeds 1 million unique IPs [and likely a <0.01% false positive].

2nd worst.  We've had 2 blocks ever last more than 20 hours.  Yesterday's was 23 hours, the record was 25.

There was a bug this morning which was preventing users from changing a worker's difficulty manually through the website.  It has been corrected and now works properly again.

Please take discussions about GAW to an appropriate thread/subforum.  I'm not quite sure why they're being brought up on the BTC Guild thread.

Automatic Payouts operate under the assumption you're continuing to use the pool, otherwise you would just cash out manually and leave.  By design, they are setup so users can keep their wallet clean of "dust" amounts due to getting paid every last satoshi.  In the long run, it saves users fees (not pool fees, Bitcoin transaction fees) because they won't be constantly moving around a bunch of loose change which causes their transactions to be larger in size.

The intent to change it to the full amount was to avoid users who used automatic payouts being stuck with funds they couldn't withdraw after the pool was closing/closed.  Since the pool isn't closing, it is being kept as is.

That was under the assumption the pool was closing, something which was announced as *not* happening a month ago.

It's not the first.  It happened many times in late 2011/2012.

EDIT:  It actually happened 8 consecutive times near the end of 2011.

Good luck on that wish.  Based on their thread(s), it's nothing but people who can't spell, perform basic arithmetic, or understand that -10% fee PPS is going to end in a lot of people getting fucked over if they're not already.

Thanks for the clarification kano.  I figured it was something like that when you mentioned "the pool's last N shares (plus a bit)".  It's still "shift based" PPLNS, but you have a fixed time length for "shifts" (~30s), and instead of varying up "shift" length, you vary up the number of "shifts" so that the total shares paid out are your 'N', plus a little overflow for the other shares in the "shift" that pushed it above N.

No, it's not.

PPLNS in its purest form is a specific number of shares.  p2pool for example uses share based PPLNS where a specific number of shares are paid for each block.  When a new share is submitted on p2pool, the oldest share is pushed off.  Shifts are used to dramatically reduce the amount of data you need to store when using a very large N value.  p2pool gets around it by adjusting the difficulty needed to be part of the sharechain.


Would love to hear from kano exactly how he manages the accounting of a block payout with a 30 billion entry list of shares.  I would assume in the background there's some kind of grouping of shares every minute [which in effect would be shifts, just not visible as such on the front end], rather than a list of 30 billion entries that is constantly being churned.


EDIT:  It wouldn't actually be 30 billion entries since there's no need to store [for example] a diff=128 submission 128 times.  But it would still be a huge amount of churn.

EDIT2: At least for your comparison, BTC Guild uses shifts to reduce database churn (no need to store a huge list of shares using FIFO), and also have clean auditing of how any specific block was paid that can be audited by users.