I had 2x6950 and 2x5830 on a 1200w PSU and it was drawing 675w from the wall. It seems like the headroom would be there. You should test it with a killawatt with 2 and then 3 cards before you try 4.
|
|
|
So do tell...what is the purpose of all definitions? To point a person towards the concept that a word names. Fair enough. So it seems like you've kind of proved my point. If a definition serves merely as the barest of guideposts and especially when addressing a specific audience it's goal is not to result in a mutually understood term . Then you are providing what I (and perhaps others) would call a poor definition. So yeah. You're bad at it.* QED baby. *Unless of course you meant that a mutually understood term is the goal and just said it badly...which also demonstrates my point. ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) What is the definition of pedantic? ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) Kinda depends, that word without looking it up probably has at least three pretty distinct senses. None appear to apply here. What made you think it did? I was referring to definition number two: overly concerned with minute details or formalisms I thought it might apply to a discussion in which two people are arguing over the definition of the word definition.
|
|
|
Just as an aside, I believe the Poisson test is not appropriate since the shares can interact with each other in the form of orphaned blocks. The since the events can interact with each other they are not completely independent from one another. The Poisson distribution is one of events that are independent from one another.
Invalid block solves or orphaned blocks, of which there was one in the period I showed above, is a completely different mechanism than the statistics of block finding. If your pool finds a block solution, but another pool finds another essentially simultaneously, the winner is the one who gets it published and distributed on the p2p network first and fastest, so that future block hashes are built on it. You don't get the 50BTC if your block is not included in the final blockchain. This generally means that the non-orphaned solution is the one found first, but it is also could be that the ultimate winner had higher connectivity and was able to get their solution to more p2p nodes faster. This is hard to statistically model, but we could at least say that if pool 1 had five orphaned block solves (which they can publish to prove that the invalid was actually found within seconds of the winner), and the block solve winner was always pool 2, we might suggest that pool 1 should optimize their connectedness or miner work pushes to get their block finds out sooner on the Bitcoin p2p network. I could run a exact confidence level model on several months of block finding, but I'm not enough of a math genius that I can immediately see how to also model the changing probability (difficulty) for the N trials in three months in code. It would probably involve making a data frame of all the block solves and running the vectors of shares and round difficulties through the poisson test though. We can see from my second code snippet above, with 100,000 difficulty 1 block solves (many more than the 2275 rounds) at a probability 1/2^32 (much lower than 1/difficulty) we still have a +/- 1% confidence window. Besides, it is improbable, but not impossible, for a pool to never solve another block in your lifetime. There are ephemeral effects that can take place which can degrade a pools ability to win this race. They can be both external and out of the operators control (DDoS or a macro-network failure) or internal and under control (such as a subsystem failure or degradation). Modelling the probability of these events is difficult since they are usually large and have few recurrences. It is also not clear what the impact for any particular event was on any particular pool. Also, a software patch applied to some pools but not others could degrade the ultimate process of obtaining the 50BTC without anyone quantifying the extent of the degradation or the period of occurrence at all. My point was that since block finds can collide, we cannot assume the events are independent. Nor can we assume that the variance of that dependence can be known at a given point of time with any certainty. Rather than supposing we understand how the distribution of rewards for found blocks may vary from one that is appropriate for Poisson, we can use a different method and be certain. However, it may not be necessary to model that. Instead we can look at how close each pool comes to the expected block solves for a perfect pool with zero hardware, software, and network failures. Then we can have a degree of confidence about expected performance in practice. This would be a very annoying data collection however, given that not all pools provide the data. If only we knew someone who had already compiled 3 months worth of data from the other pools and could post that data on the internet. Sadly, no such figure exists. The closest I have been able to find is at http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php. Of course, this analysis would only be useful as hindsight and have little in the way of predictive powers. One thing we can be absolutely certain of: no matter how many people explain to Vlad how his conclusions are flawed, he won't change his story in the slightest. The narrative is likely to increase the size of his pocketbook and thus have "zero variance". ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif)
|
|
|
And now you can argue what are the chances of that and why Poisson distribution is not applicable or not accurate enough if you really want to.
@Vladimir Numerous people have, in multiple threads. You just fail to learn from your repeated schoolings. More appropriate treatment of your dataset has shown repeatedly in multiple threads that BTCguild performance is well within the expected behavior. Expanded datasets that include other pools have shown that you are completely off base. You deny datasets larger than your own as "insignificant" in attempts to warp the data to fit your hypothesis. You keep pasting your tired old story, and it never stops being wrong. You keep making yourself look foolish. At this point, anyone who trusts you with their bitcoins is even more foolish.
|
|
|
if the above is incorrect please show how and please show you math.
The first problem with your statistics is you are just using shares in your calculations. This is not how you would calculate the expected round length. Bitcoin is a binomial distribution based on the number of total hashes. What you are doing is equivalent to taking interest compounded monthly, using stats about the interest where it is compounded yearly, and trying to fit it to a curve that would be for interest compounded continuously. Actually, it looks like you are just adding up the total number of shares, instead of fitting them to a round quantile, which is even farther from what you should be doing. Here is an example of how percentile calculations using just the number of shares and ignoring the underlying difficulty 1 binomial distribution of share finding will skew your results. This is using real binomial percentile calculation instead of whatever you are doing... This is a table of all block finds for the last difficulty at BTCg. # Block Date/Time Duration Shares Total Hashes percentile share percentile 2362 141124 08/16/11 12:11 AM 04:56:00 7609114 02.656% 01.479% 2363 141125 08/16/11 12:37 AM 00:26:00 0681963 72.239% 68.546% 2364 141130 08/16/11 01:29 AM 00:52:00 1350501 52.520% 47.335% 2365 141135 08/16/11 02:25 AM 00:56:25 1484443 49.271% 43.951% 2366 141136 08/16/11 02:31 AM 00:05:30 0143481 93.387% 92.361% 2367 141147 08/16/11 05:31 AM 03:00:05 4832611 09.982% 06.882% 2368 141153 08/16/11 06:09 AM 00:38:01 1054539 60.481% 55.766% 2369 141160 08/16/11 07:12 AM 01:03:00 1735924 43.703% 38.237% 2370 141162 08/16/11 07:36 AM 00:24:31 0698169 71.683% 67.933% 2371 141165 08/16/11 07:56 AM 00:19:28 0529012 77.705% 74.605% 2372 141168 08/16/11 08:44 AM 00:48:00 1358208 52.328% 47.134% 2373 141170 08/16/11 09:07 AM 00:23:14 0667927 72.724% 69.080% 2374 141173 08/16/11 10:16 AM 01:08:56 1926729 39.902% 34.403% 2375 141179 08/16/11 11:05 AM 00:49:23 1385716 51.646% 46.421% 2376 141182 08/16/11 11:41 AM 00:35:28 0972989 62.879% 58.342% 2377 141183 08/16/11 11:46 AM 00:04:59 0135719 93.733% 92.759% 2378 141188 08/16/11 12:21 PM 00:35:54 1012043 61.719% 57.094% 2379 141198 08/16/11 01:41 PM 01:19:07 2209830 34.864% 29.411% 2380 141203 08/16/11 02:05 PM 00:23:59 0667575 72.737% 69.094% 2381 141209 08/16/11 02:38 PM 00:33:11 0942983 63.785% 59.320% 2382 141211 08/16/11 02:45 PM 00:06:49 0183003 91.644% 90.362% 2383 141215 08/16/11 03:10 PM 00:25:02 0700124 71.616% 67.860% 2384 141218 08/16/11 03:32 PM 00:21:58 0607330 74.856% 71.438% 2385 141220 08/16/11 03:53 PM 00:21:39 0616836 74.518% 71.063% 2386 141223 08/16/11 04:19 PM 00:25:21 0696526 71.739% 67.995% 2387 141230 08/16/11 05:49 PM 01:30:01 2501908 30.331% 25.018% 2388 141242 08/16/11 08:00 PM 02:11:00 3533660 18.545% 14.129% 2389 141245 08/16/11 08:21 PM 00:21:25 0578235 75.902% 72.598% 2390 141247 08/16/11 08:48 PM 00:27:14 0677616 72.389% 68.711% 2391 141252 08/16/11 09:42 PM 00:53:20 1266941 54.655% 49.577% 2392 141256 08/16/11 10:06 PM 00:24:05 0575149 76.014% 72.723% 2393 141266 08/16/11 11:48 PM 01:42:11 2462278 30.910% 25.573% 2394 141274 08/17/11 12:38 AM 00:49:44 1166794 57.329% 52.405% 2395 141277 08/17/11 01:25 AM 00:47:00 0946058 63.692% 59.219% 2396 141278 08/17/11 01:32 AM 00:07:01 0105215 95.107% 94.340% 2397 141279 08/17/11 01:42 AM 00:10:00 0206608 90.618% 89.188% 2398 141283 08/17/11 02:30 AM 00:47:59 1016167 61.598% 56.964% 2399 141295 08/17/11 04:55 AM 02:25:01 3412584 19.647% 15.109% 2400 141306 08/17/11 07:21 AM 02:26:52 3623270 17.769% 13.445% 2401 141308 08/17/11 07:29 AM 00:07:08 0173062 92.079% 90.861% 2402 141310 08/17/11 07:39 AM 00:10:30 0258664 88.396% 86.654% 2403 141326 08/17/11 11:04 AM 03:24:44 5139667 08.623% 05.806% 2404 141331 08/17/11 12:00 PM 00:56:01 1413260 50.972% 45.719% 2405 141333 08/17/11 12:52 PM 00:52:33 1350274 52.526% 47.341% 2406 141341 08/17/11 02:27 PM 01:34:12 2381984 32.116% 26.736% 2407 141342 08/17/11 02:33 PM 00:06:00 0145661 93.290% 92.250% 2408 141358 08/17/11 06:12 PM 03:39:04 5684853 06.649% 04.293% 2409 141380 08/17/11 09:04 PM 02:52:42 4480611 11.806% 08.363% 2410 141382 08/17/11 09:11 PM 00:07:00 0170823 92.177% 90.973% 2411 141384 08/17/11 09:40 PM 00:29:01 0756007 69.733% 65.792% 2412 141389 08/17/11 10:11 PM 00:30:46 0794891 68.452% 64.390% 2413 141392 08/17/11 10:39 PM 00:28:07 0727708 70.681% 66.831% 2414 141401 08/17/11 11:41 PM 01:01:20 1562514 47.470% 42.092% 2415 141411 08/18/11 01:18 AM 01:37:00 2482370 30.615% 25.291% 2416 141419 08/18/11 02:21 AM 01:02:55 1661534 45.281% 39.846% 2417 141430 08/18/11 03:28 AM 01:07:04 1768458 43.030% 37.555% 2418 141431 08/18/11 03:31 AM 00:03:01 0074000 96.533% 95.985% 2419 141445 08/18/11 03:31 AM 00:00:02 0001780 99.915% 99.901% 2420 141478 08/18/11 05:53 AM 02:21:57 3883147 15.698% 11.643% 2421 141450 08/18/11 06:53 AM 01:00:01 1699965 44.459% 39.006% 2422 141432 08/18/11 08:13 AM 01:19:59 2297726 33.433% 28.013% 2423 141457 08/18/11 09:15 AM 01:02:00 1725020 43.931% 38.469% 2424 141461 08/18/11 10:54 AM 01:39:51 2664088 28.074% 22.869% 2425 141470 08/18/11 12:08 PM 01:13:10 2005153 38.438% 32.941% 2426 141487 08/18/11 01:34 PM 01:25:59 2386828 32.042% 26.665% 2427 141496 08/18/11 03:20 PM 01:46:43 2997992 23.942% 19.008% 2428 141501 08/18/11 04:00 PM 00:39:40 1124282 58.503% 53.653% 2429 141510 08/18/11 05:30 PM 01:29:38 2507835 30.245% 24.936% 2430 141512 08/18/11 05:38 PM 00:08:01 0226044 89.782% 88.233% 2431 141514 08/18/11 05:47 PM 00:08:58 0257777 88.434% 86.696% 2432 141526 08/18/11 07:39 PM 01:52:10 3112459 22.670% 17.841% 2433 141532 08/18/11 08:20 PM 00:40:50 1120369 58.612% 53.770% 2434 141545 08/18/11 10:46 PM 02:26:13 3924076 15.395% 11.382% 2435 141546 08/18/11 11:28 PM 00:42:22 1175575 57.089% 52.151% 2436 141552 08/19/11 01:02 AM 01:33:25 2600589 28.937% 23.688% 2437 141558 08/19/11 01:45 AM 00:43:00 1188897 56.728% 51.767% 2438 141566 08/19/11 03:03 AM 01:18:12 2131499 36.190% 30.715% 2439 141569 08/19/11 03:32 AM 00:28:48 0775002 69.105% 65.103% 2440 141573 08/19/11 04:10 AM 00:38:01 1043501 60.800% 56.108% 2441 141574 08/19/11 04:26 AM 00:16:34 0467272 80.026% 77.200% 2442 141575 08/19/11 04:42 AM 00:15:25 0415757 82.017% 79.434% 2443 141586 08/19/11 06:27 AM 01:45:01 2984100 24.101% 19.155% 2444 141600 08/19/11 09:12 AM 02:45:39 4779202 10.240% 07.088% 2445 141605 08/19/11 09:39 AM 00:26:20 0753706 69.810% 65.875% 2446 141615 08/19/11 11:44 AM 02:05:04 3631839 17.697% 13.381% 2447 141616 08/19/11 12:00 PM 00:15:53 0482024 79.466% 76.571% 2448 141618 08/19/11 12:25 PM 00:25:03 0733702 70.479% 66.609% 2449 141619 08/19/11 12:32 PM 00:07:01 0205693 90.657% 89.234% 2450 141622 08/19/11 01:18 PM 00:46:11 1371842 51.989% 46.779% 2451 141628 08/19/11 01:46 PM 00:27:48 0797782 68.358% 64.287% 2452 141631 08/19/11 02:47 PM 01:01:00 1799350 42.401% 36.918% 2453 141644 08/19/11 04:51 PM 02:04:24 3688955 17.221% 12.965% 2454 141671 08/19/11 10:38 PM 05:46:41 9937498 00.875% 00.407% 2455 141673 08/19/11 10:53 PM 00:14:52 0430853 81.428% 78.772% 2456 141674 08/19/11 11:03 PM 00:10:28 0299371 86.697% 84.722% 2457 141695 08/20/11 02:28 AM 03:25:21 5818787 06.237% 03.986% 2458 141701 08/20/11 03:17 AM 00:48:15 1391035 51.515% 46.285% 2459 141703 08/20/11 03:54 AM 00:36:59 1074718 59.902% 55.146% 2460 141709 08/20/11 04:29 AM 00:35:01 1003017 61.985% 57.380% 2461 141711 08/20/11 04:44 AM 00:15:10 0449461 80.709% 77.965% 2462 Invalid 08/20/11 06:38 AM 01:53:50 3305441 20.677% 16.032% 2463 141733 08/20/11 08:25 AM 01:47:02 3212302 21.616% 16.881% 2464 141734 08/20/11 08:31 AM 00:06:34 0189122 91.377% 90.056% 2465 141747 08/20/11 10:14 AM 01:42:29 3054329 23.307% 18.424% 2466 141756 08/20/11 11:44 AM 01:30:44 2728916 27.219% 22.063% 2467 141759 08/20/11 11:50 AM 00:05:29 0157588 92.761% 91.643% 2468 141760 08/20/11 12:18 PM 00:27:47 0835741 67.132% 62.950% 2469 141780 08/20/11 02:20 PM 02:02:25 3677391 17.316% 13.048% 2470 141782 08/20/11 03:47 PM 01:26:34 2558765 29.520% 24.243% 2471 141784 08/20/11 03:56 PM 00:09:00 0274134 87.747% 85.915% 2472 141767 08/20/11 04:08 PM 00:12:00 0360555 84.204% 81.900% 2473 141781 08/20/11 04:10 PM 00:02:01 0039201 98.148% 97.852% 2474 141802 08/20/11 07:51 PM 03:41:47 6420919 04.681% 02.856% 2475 141810 08/20/11 09:23 PM 01:31:16 2588165 29.109% 23.851% 2476 141815 08/20/11 09:37 PM 00:13:56 0380546 83.405% 80.998% 2477 141818 08/20/11 09:48 PM 00:11:01 0308384 86.325% 84.300% 2478 141821 08/20/11 10:35 PM 00:47:01 1333068 52.959% 47.795% 2479 141828 08/20/11 11:29 PM 00:53:58 1546878 47.826% 42.458% 2480 141834 08/21/11 12:26 AM 00:57:00 1621428 46.155% 40.740% 2481 141836 08/21/11 12:53 AM 00:27:07 0782568 68.856% 64.831% 2482 141854 08/21/11 04:32 AM 03:38:53 6243885 05.093% 03.150% 2483 141855 08/21/11 04:46 AM 00:14:44 0444035 80.918% 78.199% 2484 141864 08/21/11 06:13 AM 01:26:55 2516246 30.124% 24.820% 2485 141869 08/21/11 06:34 AM 00:20:26 0580633 75.816% 72.502% 2486 141870 08/21/11 06:49 AM 00:14:45 0451507 80.630% 77.877% 2487 141874 08/21/11 07:36 AM 00:47:36 1400203 51.290% 46.050% 2488 141877 08/21/11 07:57 AM 00:21:03 0616930 74.515% 71.059% 2489 141894 08/21/11 10:35 AM 02:37:31 4647383 10.904% 07.625% 2490 141896 08/21/11 10:38 AM 00:02:51 0088585 95.864% 95.213% 2491 141901 08/21/11 11:24 AM 00:46:10 1363241 52.202% 47.003% 2492 141903 08/21/11 12:24 PM 00:59:59 1674707 44.998% 39.556% 2493 141911 08/21/11 01:23 PM 00:59:00 1711755 44.210% 38.753% 2494 141915 08/21/11 01:39 PM 00:16:00 0474834 79.738% 76.877% 2495 141914 08/21/11 01:40 PM 00:00:50 0021798 98.966% 98.800% 2496 141916 08/21/11 01:48 PM 00:08:10 0232932 89.488% 87.898% 2497 141923 08/21/11 03:09 PM 01:21:01 2249399 34.212% 28.773% 2498 141924 08/21/11 03:10 PM 00:01:00 0031841 98.493% 98.252% 2499 141935 08/21/11 05:03 PM 01:53:06 3301770 20.713% 16.065% 2500 141951 08/21/11 07:14 PM 02:11:24 3699692 17.133% 12.888% 2501 141955 08/21/11 07:40 PM 00:25:29 0668345 72.710% 69.064% 2502 141968 08/21/11 09:38 PM 01:58:07 3137588 22.400% 17.594% 2503 141980 08/21/11 11:11 PM 01:32:54 2377221 32.189% 26.807% 2504 141990 08/21/11 11:57 PM 00:46:09 1176870 57.054% 52.113% 2505 141991 08/21/11 11:59 PM 00:01:50 0045022 97.876% 97.538% 2506 141993 08/22/11 12:07 AM 00:08:01 0205596 90.662% 89.238% 2507 142001 08/22/11 12:54 AM 00:47:44 1245173 55.226% 50.179% 2508 142003 08/22/11 01:02 AM 00:07:15 0174270 92.026% 90.800% 2509 142004 08/22/11 01:07 AM 00:05:00 0136568 93.695% 92.716% 2510 142005 08/22/11 01:21 AM 00:14:39 0388225 83.100% 80.654% 2511 142011 08/22/11 02:12 AM 00:50:22 1298670 53.835% 48.714% 2512 142015 08/22/11 02:42 AM 00:30:38 0813555 67.846% 63.728% 2513 142016 08/22/11 02:45 AM 00:02:21 0049561 97.664% 97.293% 2514 142025 08/22/11 04:23 AM 01:38:01 2551980 29.615% 24.334% 2515 142033 08/22/11 05:20 AM 00:57:38 1542625 47.923% 42.558% 2516 142055 08/22/11 07:48 AM 02:27:22 4054779 14.465% 10.587% 2517 142059 08/22/11 08:38 AM 00:50:20 1424492 50.700% 45.435% 2518 142061 08/22/11 09:42 AM 01:03:54 1845962 41.469% 35.977% 2519 142064 08/22/11 09:53 AM 00:10:45 0284980 87.294% 85.400% 2520 142065 08/22/11 10:00 AM 00:07:02 0195652 91.093% 89.731% 2521 142088 08/22/11 12:55 PM 02:54:58 4960234 09.393% 06.412% 2522 142099 08/22/11 03:04 PM 02:09:43 3686401 17.242% 12.983% 2523 142116 08/22/11 05:49 PM 02:44:55 4656867 10.855% 07.585% 2524 142118 08/22/11 06:09 PM 00:19:22 0543406 77.173% 74.012% 2525 142121 08/22/11 06:31 PM 00:22:36 0635583 73.855% 70.329% 2526 142129 08/22/11 08:03 PM 01:31:24 2545096 29.713% 24.427% 2527 142140 08/22/11 09:28 PM 01:25:00 2364648 32.383% 26.994% 2528 142141 08/22/11 09:36 PM 00:08:04 0233339 89.470% 87.878% 2529 142143 08/22/11 09:50 PM 00:14:00 0375147 83.620% 81.240% 2530 142146 08/22/11 10:00 PM 00:09:56 0271610 87.852% 86.035% 2531 142168 08/23/11 12:57 AM 02:57:12 4958392 09.401% 06.419% 2532 142173 08/23/11 01:58 AM 01:01:36 1762323 43.156% 37.682% 2533 142174 08/23/11 02:06 AM 00:07:03 0200533 90.881% 89.489% 2534 142184 08/23/11 02:48 AM 00:42:09 1185587 56.817% 51.862% 2535 142194 08/23/11 04:43 AM 01:54:50 3324331 20.491% 15.866% 2536 142195 08/23/11 04:50 AM 00:07:26 0216254 90.202% 88.713% 2537 142202 08/23/11 05:56 AM 01:05:37 1913737 40.150% 34.651% 2538 142211 08/23/11 07:16 AM 01:20:48 2284651 33.642% 28.217% 2539 142213 08/23/11 07:42 AM 00:25:52 0753785 69.807% 65.873% 2540 142221 08/23/11 08:30 AM 00:47:27 1348127 52.580% 47.398% 2541 142230 08/23/11 09:33 AM 01:03:01 1811406 42.158% 36.672% 2542 142231 08/23/11 09:39 AM 00:06:00 0170895 92.174% 90.970% 2543 142244 08/23/11 10:59 AM 01:20:00 2283738 33.656% 28.231% 2544 142251 08/23/11 12:14 PM 01:15:21 2200739 35.015% 29.559% 2545 142258 08/23/11 01:06 PM 00:51:53 1510217 48.669% 43.328% 2546 142278 08/23/11 03:21 PM 02:15:12 3917862 15.440% 11.421% 2547 142300 08/23/11 08:49 PM 05:28:01 6801826 03.903% 02.312% 2548 142301 08/23/11 08:56 PM 00:06:28 1028646 61.232% 56.571% 2549 142303 08/23/11 09:30 PM 00:34:01 2438248 31.266% 25.916% 2550 142322 08/24/11 12:33 AM 03:03:04 5186095 08.434% 05.658% 2551 142328 08/24/11 02:03 AM 01:29:59 2511933 30.186% 24.880% 2552 142333 08/24/11 02:45 AM 00:42:00 1156510 57.610% 52.704% 2553 142346 08/24/11 05:23 AM 02:38:00 4420084 12.152% 08.648% 2554 142349 08/24/11 05:36 AM 00:13:00 0358914 84.270% 81.974% 2555 142358 08/24/11 07:08 AM 01:32:15 2660622 28.120% 22.913% 2556 142363 08/24/11 07:34 AM 00:26:28 0756036 69.732% 65.791% 2557 142365 08/24/11 07:42 AM 00:08:01 0228131 89.693% 88.132% 2558 142368 08/24/11 07:58 AM 00:15:09 0435106 81.263% 78.587% 2559 142376 08/24/11 09:49 AM 01:50:58 3195791 21.787% 17.036% 2560 142391 08/24/11 11:35 AM 01:46:10 3025469 23.630% 18.721% 2561 142408 08/24/11 02:58 PM 03:22:58 5791868 06.318% 04.046% 2562 142421 08/24/11 06:26 PM 03:28:18 5851416 06.141% 03.914% 2563 142425 08/24/11 08:07 PM 01:40:54 2775808 26.617% 21.497% 2564 142427 08/24/11 08:23 PM 00:15:49 0418619 81.905% 79.308% 2565 142439 08/24/11 09:51 PM 01:28:24 2402909 31.797% 26.428% 2566 142445 08/24/11 11:27 PM 01:35:36 2540231 29.782% 24.493% 2567 142456 08/25/11 01:05 AM 01:38:00 2559087 29.515% 24.239% 2568 142466 08/25/11 02:26 AM 01:21:04 2116696 36.447% 30.968% 2569 142472 08/25/11 04:17 AM 01:50:57 2931173 24.717% 19.725% 2570 142478 08/25/11 04:43 AM 00:26:17 0715194 71.104% 67.296% 2571 142485 08/25/11 05:35 AM 00:51:42 1379627 51.796% 46.578% 2572 142489 08/25/11 06:23 AM 00:48:00 1294650 53.938% 48.822% 2573 142495 08/25/11 07:31 AM 01:08:00 1824487 41.896% 36.407% 2574 142501 08/25/11 08:36 AM 01:05:47 1772265 42.952% 37.475% 2575 142503 08/25/11 08:45 AM 00:08:13 0202233 90.807% 89.405% 2576 142504 08/25/11 08:51 AM 00:06:39 0188678 91.396% 90.078% 2577 142509 08/25/11 09:33 AM 00:41:31 1112043 58.845% 54.018% 2578 142520 08/25/11 11:11 AM 01:37:50 2622165 28.641% 23.406% 2579 142525 08/25/11 12:29 PM 01:18:22 2152234 35.834% 30.364% 2580 142536 08/25/11 03:07 PM 02:37:40 4291742 12.919% 09.285% 2581 142542 08/25/11 05:03 PM 01:56:19 3162430 22.136% 17.354% 2582 142549 08/25/11 06:35 PM 01:31:39 2456122 31.000% 25.661% 2583 142563 08/25/11 09:01 PM 02:26:00 3838146 16.039% 11.936% 2584 142564 08/25/11 09:03 PM 00:02:01 0054250 97.446% 97.040% 2585 142572 08/25/11 10:09 PM 01:05:59 1697227 44.517% 39.066% 2586 142580 08/25/11 11:05 PM 00:56:20 1440643 50.311% 45.030% 2587 142579 08/25/11 11:05 PM 00:00:17 0005253 99.750% 99.710% 2588 142585 08/26/11 12:03 AM 00:57:23 1457687 49.903% 44.607% 2589 142589 08/26/11 12:24 AM 00:21:14 0549533 76.948% 73.762% 2590 142591 08/26/11 12:50 AM 00:25:46 0657659 73.081% 69.474% 2591 142601 08/26/11 01:40 AM 00:50:00 1268784 54.607% 49.527% 2592 142614 08/26/11 03:08 AM 01:28:01 2284627 33.642% 28.217% 2593 142625 08/26/11 05:27 AM 02:18:59 3666314 17.408% 13.128% 2594 142677 08/26/11 05:27 AM 00:00:03 0000663 99.968% 99.963% 2595 142641 08/26/11 06:20 AM 00:52:58 1410142 51.048% 45.798% 2596 142626 08/26/11 07:08 AM 00:47:59 1265316 54.698% 49.622% 2597 142632 08/26/11 01:53 PM 06:45:37 10648774 00.623% 00.275% 2598 142685 08/26/11 04:05 PM 02:11:23 3311627 20.616% 15.978% 2599 142690 08/26/11 04:40 PM 00:35:00 0856172 66.481% 62.241% 2600 142699 08/26/11 06:03 PM 01:22:50 2045320 37.709% 32.216% 2601 142698 08/26/11 06:16 PM 00:13:09 0224481 89.849% 88.310% 2602 142700 08/26/11 06:35 PM 00:19:20 0559432 76.586% 73.358% 2603 142712 08/26/11 08:05 PM 01:30:30 2196947 35.078% 29.621% 2604 142715 08/26/11 08:43 PM 00:37:57 0925473 64.320% 59.898% 2605 142731 08/26/11 11:33 PM 02:49:44 4061634 14.417% 10.547% 2606 142737 08/27/11 12:46 AM 01:12:30 1704244 44.368% 38.914% 2607 142740 08/27/11 01:40 AM 00:54:01 1269611 54.586% 49.504% 2608 142747 08/27/11 04:00 AM 02:19:59 3332412 20.413% 15.795% 2609 142748 08/27/11 04:20 AM 00:19:57 0475795 79.702% 76.836% 2610 142759 08/27/11 05:08 AM 00:48:08 1141242 58.031% 53.152% 2611 142760 08/27/11 05:30 AM 00:22:14 0545689 77.089% 73.919% 2612 142767 08/27/11 06:31 AM 01:00:36 1461931 49.803% 44.503% 2613 142775 08/27/11 08:50 AM 02:19:05 3378500 19.969% 15.397% 2614 142793 08/27/11 11:52 AM 03:02:00 4441617 12.028% 08.545% 2615 142801 08/27/11 01:28 PM 01:36:01 2381076 32.130% 26.750% 2616 142811 08/27/11 03:21 PM 01:52:56 2817633 26.092% 21.005% 2617 142824 08/27/11 04:36 PM 01:15:04 1852772 41.335% 35.841% 2618 142825 08/27/11 04:59 PM 00:22:59 0586722 75.596% 72.258% 2619 142837 08/27/11 07:55 PM 02:56:00 4293643 12.907% 09.275% 2620 142840 08/27/11 08:07 PM 00:12:18 0293147 86.955% 85.015% 2621 142842 08/27/11 08:34 PM 00:26:50 0642278 73.619% 70.069% 2622 142847 08/27/11 10:18 PM 01:43:48 2473242 30.748% 25.419% 2623 142850 08/27/11 11:20 PM 01:02:07 1454249 49.985% 44.692% 2624 142852 08/27/11 11:30 PM 00:10:02 0241919 89.105% 87.461% 2625 142854 08/28/11 12:02 AM 00:32:22 0759580 69.615% 65.662% 2626 142862 08/28/11 02:38 AM 02:35:48 3650511 17.540% 13.244% 2627 142863 08/28/11 02:46 AM 00:07:56 0183507 91.622% 90.337% 2628 142865 08/28/11 03:01 AM 00:15:12 0356376 84.372% 82.089% 2629 142866 08/28/11 03:04 AM 00:02:51 0063392 97.022% 96.550% 2630 142897 08/28/11 08:44 AM 05:39:46 8016526 02.187% 01.180% 2631 142907 08/28/11 11:09 AM 02:24:50 3461476 19.194% 14.705% 2632 142913 08/28/11 12:59 PM 01:50:06 2670659 27.986% 22.786% 2633 142917 08/28/11 01:27 PM 00:27:57 0675141 72.475% 68.805% 2634 142921 08/28/11 02:49 PM 01:22:33 1998135 38.567% 33.069% 2635 142934 08/28/11 04:26 PM 01:36:34 2294743 33.480% 28.060% 2636 142954 08/28/11 08:24 PM 03:58:00 5595685 06.937% 04.510% 2637 142957 08/28/11 08:44 PM 00:20:12 0494324 79.001% 76.052% 2638 142964 08/28/11 10:56 PM 02:11:48 3201088 21.732% 16.986% 2639 142967 08/28/11 11:22 PM 00:26:10 0654882 73.178% 69.581% 2640 142972 08/29/11 12:11 AM 00:49:36 1232654 55.556% 50.528% 2641 142974 08/29/11 12:40 AM 00:28:14 0699448 71.640% 67.885% 2642 142984 08/29/11 01:56 AM 01:16:40 1928985 39.859% 34.360% 2643 142990 08/29/11 02:41 AM 00:44:20 1098627 59.223% 54.421% 2644 142993 08/29/11 03:06 AM 00:25:04 0648936 73.386% 69.811% 2645 142994 08/29/11 03:14 AM 00:08:00 0201389 90.844% 89.446% 2646 142996 08/29/11 03:44 AM 00:30:19 0768774 69.310% 65.328% 2647 143002 08/29/11 05:57 AM 02:12:50 3437147 19.418% 14.905% 2648 143016 08/29/11 09:12 AM 03:14:48 5176607 08.472% 05.688% 2649 143028 08/29/11 10:55 AM 01:43:31 2795485 26.369% 21.264% 2650 143043 08/29/11 12:02 PM 01:06:57 1796155 42.466% 36.983% 2651 143048 08/29/11 12:40 PM 00:37:39 1030350 61.182% 56.518% 2652 143052 08/29/11 01:36 PM 00:56:22 1550462 47.744% 42.373% 2653 143062 08/29/11 04:16 PM 02:39:51 4299717 12.870% 09.244% 2654 143074 08/29/11 06:44 PM 02:27:59 3974780 15.027% 11.067% 2655 143087 08/29/11 09:11 PM 02:27:11 3895349 15.607% 11.564% 2656 143091 08/29/11 10:14 PM 01:02:23 1644946 45.641% 40.213% 2657 143092 08/29/11 10:23 PM 00:09:27 0261903 88.260% 86.499% 2658 143093 08/29/11 10:30 PM 00:06:59 0184834 91.564% 90.270% 2659 143110 08/30/11 01:08 AM 02:38:13 4194390 13.533% 09.799% 2660 143111 08/30/11 01:17 AM 00:08:21 0214580 90.274% 88.795% 2661 143114 08/30/11 01:41 AM 00:24:31 0650079 73.346% 69.767% 2662 143115 08/30/11 01:50 AM 00:09:10 0242691 89.072% 87.424% 2663 143120 08/30/11 02:48 AM 00:57:39 1536122 48.072% 42.711% 2664 143127 08/30/11 03:58 AM 01:10:14 1872587 40.946% 35.450% Mean percentile using estimated total hashes: 52.41% Mean percentile using shares vs difficulty: 48.60% Mean # of shares:1831414.1320132
(We can see above that accusations of the pool being unlucky are already specious, as the pool found blocks with 101.4% of the expected shares, pretty darn close.) As you can see, the last two columns do not match, in the first, I have estimated the number of shares per difficulty 1 block solve to get the total hashes computed at that round's difficulty, and then determined the percentile for the full probability; in the second I have naively just used the number of shares. You can see that I get different results. This is the problem with just using somebody's CDF calculator without understanding the statistics behind it. Secondly, you are making some kind of statement that BTC guild has been improbably unlucky. Could we can blame the luck of the miners? Maybe their submitted shares are unlucky? We must first analyze if we can expect the difficulty 1 block solves to correlate to hash rate. For this I use the R statistics package. The probability of a single hash producing a block solve at difficulty 1 is 2^-32, and I am going to find the 95% confidence interval of probability for a single block find: R version 2.13.1 (2011-07-08) Copyright (C) 2011 The R Foundation for Statistical Computing
> dif1prob <- 2^-32 > dif1trials <- 2^32 > oneblock <- 1 > binom.test(x = oneblock, n = dif1trials, p = dif1prob, conf.level = 0.95)
Exact binomial test
data: oneblock and dif1trials number of successes = 1, number of trials = 4294967296, p-value = 1 alternative hypothesis: true probability of success is not equal to 2.328306e-10 95 percent confidence interval: 5.894762e-12 1.297249e-09 sample estimates: probability of success 2.328306e-10 Here we can see that if we find a single block at difficulty 1 with the expected average number of hashes, we would have a very wide number of hashes possible for a block solve where we can still say with 95% confidence that the probability is correct. We also know intuitively that a lucky person could find a block in just a few hashes, which would lie outside the confidence interval, showing that even statistics can't absolutely doubt random events. How about if we increase this to 100,000 blocks at the same block solve rate?: > binom.test(x = oneblock*100000, n = dif1trials*100000, p = dif1prob, conf.level = 0.95)
Exact binomial test
data: oneblock * 1e+05 and dif1trials * 1e+05 number of successes = 1e+05, number of trials = 4.294967e+14, p-value = 1 alternative hypothesis: true probability of success is not equal to 2.328306e-10 95 percent confidence interval: 2.313898e-10 2.342786e-10 sample estimates: probability of success 2.328306e-10 Here we can see that the confidence interval lies between 2.31 and 2.34 (x 10^-10), a much smaller range, so we can intuit that with over 100,000 shares submitted, with 95% confidence that the luck of share finding shouldn't deviate more than 1% (but in 1 of 20 cases we can predict it will). So now we look at the blocks of BTC guild and see if we have enough statistics to make any conclusion. Let's pick a rather "unlucky" day, 8/24, where 17 blocks were found with 43715542 shares (an average of 2571502 shares per round, at difficulty 1805700.83). I'm going to compute with just shares first so I don't run out of memory...: > x<-17 > N<-43715542 > prob<-(1/1805700.83) > dbinom(x, N, prob) [1] 0.02901398
Here we get the percentile of 2.9%; these odds can be expected averaging 1 in 34 days. Can we say though that the game is "fixed", that the probability this day is not what is expected? > binom.test(x, N, prob)
Exact binomial test
data: x and N number of successes = 17, number of trials = 43715542, p-value = 0.1547 alternative hypothesis: true probability of success is not equal to 5.538016e-07 95 percent confidence interval: 2.265356e-07 6.226308e-07 sample estimates: probability of success 3.888777e-07 The "alternative hypothesis" as represented above is what would be outside the confidence level, that the probability is not the Bitcoin probability, maybe luck being affected by the pool op. We can see that both the bitcoin probability and the probability estimate from the results are both within the confidence interval, meaning that these results do not deviate outside an expected block solve rate for the day. These numbers are now large enough that the discrete binomial distribution has approached the continuous poisson model for the same data (shown below), and we can then do even bigger math: > poisson.test(x, N, prob)
Exact Poisson test
data: x time base: N number of events = 17, time base = 43715542, p-value = 0.1547 alternative hypothesis: true event rate is not equal to 5.538016e-07 95 percent confidence interval: 2.265356e-07 6.226309e-07 sample estimates: event rate 3.888777e-07 Now let's look at the data for the whole two-week difficulty period where 303 blocks were found with 554918482 shares: > x2w <-303 > N2w <-554918482 > poisson.test(x2w, N2w, prob)
Exact Poisson test
data: x2w time base: N2w number of events = 303, time base = 554918482, p-value = 0.8417 alternative hypothesis: true event rate is not equal to 5.538016e-07 95 percent confidence interval: 4.862695e-07 6.110991e-07 sample estimates: event rate 5.460261e-07 Lets do the full expansion based on the total hashrate, and even go a step further and say that the shares being submitted this whole time were 0.5% luckier than expected, resulting in more hashrate trials per submitted share: > poisson.test(x2w, ((N2w*2^32)*1.005), (prob*2^-32))
Exact Poisson test
data: x2w time base: ((N2w * 2^32) * 1.005) number of events = 303, time base = 2.395274e+18, p-value = 0.776 alternative hypothesis: true event rate is not equal to 1.28942e-16 95 percent confidence interval: 1.126552e-16 1.415747e-16 sample estimates: event rate 1.264991e-16 I think you get the idea, the estimated block win rate of BTC Guild is well within the expected confidence range, the Vladimir hypothesis is busted. Well done. Just as an aside, I believe the Poisson test is not appropriate since the shares can interact with each other in the form of orphaned blocks. The since the events can interact with each other they are not completely independent from one another. The Poisson distribution is one of events that are independent from one another. Also, extra funny is Vladimir using the Poisson distribution, which is also known as Poisson's law of small numbers, and then demanding large numbers. The Vladimir myth is thoroughly busted.
|
|
|
experiment is successful. it works. k9quaint just followed up with another set of BS. It was fun, but I have only some much time. Good bye, k9quaint. (I might unignore you tomorrow, so do not despair). I am glad to hear I finally ran you off the boards. Next time you come back with stuff of this nature, you may expect the same treatment. Don't worry, I will keep this thread alive so people can see you as you really are. P.S. I will also keep my eyes peeled for that process server you promised me with a libel lawsuit in tow. ![Roll Eyes](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
|
|
|
More dodging and backpedaling from Vladimir. http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php clearly shows that BTCguild is middle of the road at worst for pool luck. This directly contradicts your claims to the contrary. You claimed you have data to back this up but you refuse to post it. The data at http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php is compiled out of more than 3000 blocks found. We are to believe Vladimir that 2400 blocks is significant when it shows what he likes but 3000+ blocks is not significant when it shows something he doesn't like? It must be so humiliating for you to be shown to have plagiarized your article from Mad7Scientist at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=35505.0 and caught misrepresenting the data you compiled in support of it.
|
|
|
there is no smoke without the fire, I suppose. this It is quite possible that either data at https://www.btcguild.../all_blocks.php is somehow incorrect or maybe I made some huge mistake somewhere, therefore do not jump to any conclusions before double checking all the data, calculations and asking your pool operator to comment on your findings. Please note the results are only as good as data is.
Anyway, for those who is too lazy to look into the large and boring spreadsheet here are results I've got using this data for period 1st of June - 21st of Aug 2011. It appears that we have:
Blocks solved: 2275 Blocks expected: 2432.53 Probability of at most 2275 blocks solved when 2432.53 are expected: 0.0675% Probability of something being badly wrong: 99.9325% Number of blocks swallowed by "bad luck": 157.53 Amount of bitcoin swallowed by "bad luck": 7876.74 (not counting pool fees, block fees and pool donations) Amount of US$ swallowed by "bad luck": 90582.50$ (at 11.5 $/BTC)
In other words these calculations show that, given such data, collectively, miners during Summer 2011 would be 90k$ better off mining solo than in this particular pool. out to be noticed by someone else too if the above is incorrect please show how and please show you math. Another example of Vladimir plagiarizing Mad7Scientist and passing off that individuals efforts as his own. Another example of Vladimir refusing to show work he claims to have done. Another example of Vladimir dodging and hoping to smear BTCguild for his own gain. I am happy to point out your bad behavior as long as you would like to continue to engage in it.
|
|
|
20 days of data you are referring to is simply statistically insignificant.
So you claim. You refuse to post the data you claim to have, that you claim is more significant, that you claim BTCguild was the worst out of, and that you claimed contradicted the data I have posted. You alleged you compiled 3 months worth of data on many other pools from which you selected BTCguild. Where is this data and why do you refuse to upload it to the internet? Why won't you release the rest of the data? Perhaps you should contact Mad7Scientist who first brought this exact issue to light on these boards in this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=35505.0His claims are nearly identical to yours, and you participated in that thread, but you did not credit him for bringing this issue to light. Curiouser and curiouser. Could it be that his claims did not receive a good reception either? Or did you want your representations of BTCguild to gain a wider circulation?
|
|
|
@Vladimir: I see you have edited your post to include the data you already presented about BTCguild. That is not the data from the other pools you compiled stats for. The data from which you supposedly selected BTCguild as the one pool having extraordinary bad luck. The data which you claimed contradicts http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php. I have to assume you never actually compiled it. That would leave you making false statements about BTCguild, from which you are likely to benefit materially. Not good.
|
|
|
Worst pool out of those which I tried. And I have just published for you one more. Your silly argument fails again.
You forgot the link to the "one more". You said: "I actually have started from that chart, and than I have calculated odds for 3 month performance of some pools on that chart. However, one pool have shown extremely high "bad luck" while others, even though, below average in last few weeks over longer period of time hit almost exactly 0 luck line."All you have to do is post the 3 month datasets for the pools you compiled data for which supposedly contradicts the data from http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php (which I posted and you refute) and shows those pools having zero luck instead of a bias toward negative luck.
|
|
|
li·bel [lahy-buhl] Show IPA noun, verb, -beled, -bel·ing or ( especially British ) -belled, -bel·ling. noun 1. Law . a. defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words or gestures. b. the act or crime of publishing it. c. a formal written declaration or statement, as one containing the allegations of a plaintiff or the grounds of a charge. 2. anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
Here you. k9quaint has accused me to be a fraudster. Fraud is a criminal offence. This is defamation in written form. I think that such baseless accusation damages my reputation. The only valid defence would be truth. And since it is not true, and you trolls are probably hide behind 7 proxies anyway unfortunately I do not see cost effective ways to pursue you at the moment and out of respect to operators of this forums I surely will not pursue them either, even though it is technically possible.
Let me raise the ante and post the statute that you appear to have violated by your actions in this thread: Title 18 U.S.C. § 1343 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1343.htmlSpecifically, the part about transmitting false representations for the purpose of obtaining money. You won't post the data on the other pools you claim to have compiled in order to determine that BTCguild is the "worst pool". You now are backpedaling from your claim of libel, wisely as it turns out. You should quit while you are behind.
|
|
|
Clearly, this is all the work of the Illuminati.
|
|
|
pay me 100 BTC and I'll publish the data prepared using the same method for Summer 2011 period for every bitcoin pool in top 10, which publishes historical data on solved blocks and shares, with exceptions of slush's' and deepbit.
pay another 100 BTC and I will do slush's and deepbit for you.
simple really.
PM me your mailing address if you really looking forward to defend a lawsuit and it can be arranged.
It should be even more simple than that. Since you claimed to have already prepared the data, you can just upload it to the internet and post a link to it here. Or was that claim false? Your claim: "I actually have started from that chart, and than I have calculated odds for 3 month performance of some pools on that chart." https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38785.60 (post #80) I already told you how to go about finding me with the courts. Any competent lawyer should be able to accomplish it.
|
|
|
Another one with illogical and incoherent arguments, taken out of content quotes and all the stupid dirty tricks. Not worth my time responding really.
Translation: Vlad will not post the data he claimed to have for reasons he does not want to get into. I am waiting for the process server to notify me I am the defendant in a lawsuit.
|
|
|
Since there is no known way to consistently find blocks faster than the difficulty level and there are many ways to lower the over all return (DDoS, bugs, fees, latency, etc) there is a persistent negative bias on the distribution of pool performance. Let's see: DDoS: Might make accepting shares difficult/impossible, maybe even sending out valid blocks to the network --> more invalids, but surely not more shares/block Bugs: They could lead to accepting + paying solutions twice, acepting + paying invalid solutions etc --> Might increase the shares per block Fees: Are an arbitrary concept, do not influence the shares per block, only the payment per share Latency: Maybe from miner <--> pool? Increases the stale share rate and might even cause some valid solutions not being pushed to the net (if pushpoold is not "brave" enough to dare to cause a chain split) --> might lead to more invalid blocks or even more shares/block The real question is: How high is this persistent negative bias (that HAS to exist, with solo mining on a very well connected node as a baseline) throughout all pools and which pool is best there? Also: Why do some pools have a bigger negative bias consistently? Oh and by the way: Long Polls are also far too often VERY ineffective or too late, if you look at statistics by pool hoppers! These are the main cause for stale shares and can lead to significantly lower payouts, if you have a pool that performs porly there. Vlad the Petulant had cited overall return as the gold standard for pools. I was pointing out that overall returns are likely never to be perfectly efficient for pools given all the things that can go wrong and the lack of known incidents/methods/etc that increase positive luck. That was why I was interested in the distribution of all the other pools Vladdie searched through. The data at http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php shows this bias for the previous 20 days and as more data is gathered, it should give us an idea of the size of the bias. As for Vladdums claims to not understand how system failures could lead to invalid blocks, Mainframe Mining Cooperative cited the following: "...with some unfortunate side effects of reduced I/O to one of the storage array disk clusters the pool cluster is using which was causing some latency and load issues for the pool. At the very moment we found block 142,496 we were getting this array back up to speed and im convinced that everything running a bit slower is what caused us to lose our first race."https://bitcoin.org.uk/forums/topic/125-the-story-behind-our-little-orphan-block-142496/@Vlad, now that you cry libel defense you can either come at me with a lawyer by filing a john doe lawsuit and compel bitcointalk.org to reveal my IP address and then subpoena my ISP for my identity and then proceed with the lawsuit to recover damages. Or you can add your claims of a libel defense to the list of things you have posted in this thread that are not correct. ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) If Vlad ever bothers to post the data he supposedly gathered on the other pools we might get to the bottom of this. I doubt he will, since it will likely make his claims look baseless. Until that time, http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php speaks volumes with nothing to refute it.
|
|
|
Fill your hottub with mineral oil and submerse the PC in it. Don't turn the hottub on.
|
|
|
We have nothing to fear, but fear itself and spiders.
|
|
|
So do tell...what is the purpose of all definitions? To point a person towards the concept that a word names. Fair enough. So it seems like you've kind of proved my point. If a definition serves merely as the barest of guideposts and especially when addressing a specific audience it's goal is not to result in a mutually understood term . Then you are providing what I (and perhaps others) would call a poor definition. So yeah. You're bad at it.* QED baby. *Unless of course you meant that a mutually understood term is the goal and just said it badly...which also demonstrates my point. ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) What is the definition of pedantic? ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif)
|
|
|
I think what he meant is:
You do calculate the probability of finding a valid hash but comparing it with finding a valid block (which is lower by design because of the probability of chainsplits/orphans being > 0).
Yep that is, "you treat invalid blocks incorrectly" stance. I got it. But how am I supposed to handle it? From my point of view, if a pool got invalid block it is pool operator's fault, get the heck better connected and do not run it on some overloaded VPS, this might help. If anyone think that I should have ignored invalid blocks and shares that went into them instead of adding invalid blocks shares to the next blocks, than I am ready to start a new pool which will declare 99% of all blocks invalid and this pool will have a perfect good luck on the rest 1% of accepted shares. I'll even throw in some guaranteed good luck into it, lol. Anyone wants to mine in such a pool? In the end of the day there are 3 variables involved, the difficulty, number of accepted shares and number of solved blocks. That's it. There is no variable for "how lame is the excuse" and such. So, if I DDoS the smaller pools that can't afford to buy as much bandwidth in perpetuity as I can afford to rent from botnets for a week and they experience degraded performance as a result. This is either bad luck or the pool operators fault according to you. I don't agree with that assessment. Does it degrade performance and harm miners? Absolutely. Is it predictable according to expected performance by a bitcoin pool? Not in my opinion. Did I ever said that I am calculating odds of future performance? How is presenting 3 month worth of data out of 3 month worth of data is cherry picking?
Do not answer that, the questions are rhetorical. End of conversation with you, k9quaint.
You don't want me to answer the first question because it would be in the form of your quotes: As an example, of a simple check any miner could to do in order to be confident in his poolI do not see anything wrong with my suggestion to avoid pools which had extremely bad yield in the past.And of course, this all started with your essay on "Is your pool cheating you." You don't want me to answer the second question because it would also be in the form of your quotes: I have specifically chosen the most "unlucky" pool to illustrate my point.I have calculated odds for 3 month performance of some pools on that chart.."Chosen the most unlucky pool" from what dataset? The dataset ( http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php) I posted shows a strong negative bias over the last 20 days against the theoretical 0 luck line. Does the set of data that you examined (and then presented us only the small cherry flavored segment) correspond exactly to the theoretical 0 luck? And what do you have against BTCguild anyway? You seem inordinately hostile and intransigent on this subject, declaring repeatedly that "excuses" do not change the yield". Well, nobody here is offering excuses. I am offering explanations. Bitcoin probability does not account for faulty software patch probabilities. You presenting the aftereffects of one as "some mysterious force" or "excuses" or "incompetence" makes it seem like you have a vendetta against this pool you have chosen. You can't even calculate the odds of finding an "unlucky pool" when you go looking for one. Why should any of us believe you can find one that is cheating you?
|
|
|
|