 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »
|
Seeing how all of you would know better than I would, is 0.01BTC in 8 days good at the current difficulty with just 5 antminer U1's? From all the numbers I'm seeing with them running at the stock settings I'm going to think it is. I know at this rate I wont hit ROI. All I'm wondering about is if I'm getting what I should be getting. I have had some issues with Windows updating on the laptop and restarting. I was able to get my cmd file to start when Windows boots up after finding that out. I also dropped from the 5 to 4 and I'm not sure for how long that was.
2 Things: 1) About your last post heres a tip in case you didn't know. I'm not sure about the antminers, but the Bitfury's will allow you to identify them with bfgminer. if your type "m" for manage devices ( you can then arrow up and down for to target which device you want ) and then "i" for identify. On the Bitfury's it will toggle the led from red to orange so you can see which device is in which slot on your usb hub. 2) 8 Days is not really a long enough time to gauge what you should expect. Especially with the 7 and 30 day luck % as it is now. You could extrapolate from 8 days but real life tells me you should look for the time between difficulty changes. I think every 2016 blocks. Just my opinion. |
|
|
|
Ok, since everyone is looking for something to blame, here is something to think about. The Pool's adjusted difficulty seems to be adjusted in steps. A certain hashrate range gets a certain difficulty. Cross the border by even one hash and you get then next difficulty. Does a hashrate at the low end of the range for a given difficulty receive fewer shares than the hashrate at the high end of the range because it has fewer finds to submit? An example, becuase i think i stated this awkwardly.
I have a miner that shows 36 Gh/s on CGminer and shows about 31 - 33 Gh/s on the Pool. This is about a 10% difference which i think is acceptable. But, all my other miners which are in the 10 - 12 Gh/s range show exactly the expected hashrate.
I'm thinking that perhaps if my 36 Gh/s miner were on the high side of the range for it's difficulty, it's hashrate would be more accurate.
factor in the HW error rate if your hashing is off. so even if your 36 says it's going 36 it still loses on hw failure. FYI, since i bailed, i have more than doubled what i would have made if i stayed with slush. i think there are other technical behind the scene issues at work other than "bad luck". but that is just my opinion. Where did you bail too that had this wondrous fortune that you speak of?  |
|
|
|
If this: http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/chart.php is to be believed then I think if you knew the hash power at GHash.IO which has 31.3% and Slush's which is 3.5% you could easily see if the "luck" is across the board. Does GHash.IO have roughly 10x the Ghash/s as we have here? |
|
|
|
Seriously, if you people think that Slush's pool is so bad, why do you stick around? This is the same for every pool and for Bitcoin as a whole - there are always people who are not happy with this or that, but I get enough assignments in grad school where I don't come here for additional formulas to compute. and they don't want to understand 'how it works', but then why are you in bitcoin and what do you expect from it i'll ask ?! The latest 'technical problem' with bitcoin is also a great example - it 'dropped the trust' and it's price because ... someone wrote so ... and no one wants to 'compute' what it means. In the last week i have explained to more than a dozen of friends that instead of depending on the txid one could simply check the receiving address transactions and the one from it's own address for the same value and at the same time to confirm it - it is just an ease to have it, but you don't need it. J_DubbsSomeone writes that 'pool problems' are causing 'the bad luck', then because no one wants to 'come here for additional formulas to compute' and accepts that as 'the sacred truth' moves away ... = Someone writes that there is a bug in bitcoin 'causing problems' ... are the problems real or imaginary no one wants to understand before 'jumping ship' My suggestion to those who don't want to 'compute' - get some one who want and can, someone you trust, ask him before you act ... but better still try to understand it yourself AMEN! |
|
|
|
|
I don't think it can be stressed enough to remind some people here:
The website that you are checking your stats on is a COMPLETELY different system than the actual pool hashing system. I have never lost any hashing when the website goes down. If the hashing servers go down, thats different, but that's not happened since I've been at this pool. There was a stratum server issue/interruption back on JAN 17th that affected a lot of people but not everyone. I never lost any connection but many others did. So yes, there are tech issues, and as mentioned earlier Slush has a great track record of rectifying these issues quickly. But IMO these issues play a very small part of the pool's "luck" as defined by CDF. In fact that day was rolling thru the blocks when that happened.
And I could not agree more with this statement :
"Seriously, if you people think that Slush's pool is so bad, why do you stick around? "
|
|
|
|
bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch
Seriously, if you people think that Slush's pool is so bad, why do you stick around?
LEAVE
Find another pool.
But have you ever heard the quote that starts out with "the grass is always greener...."
Me? I started here and I'm staying here.
Can't we all just, get along?
The grass is always greener where you water it! |
|
|
|
Website down for anyone else?
Things that make you go hmmmmm... "luck" my ass
Touché Dubbs! |
|
|
|
My guess would be that the Mhash/s* is adjusting since it's on to a new block. That hash rate number is based on "shares so far" on the current block so the bigger rigs probably take over a little faster and then it smooths out as time goes on. Just my theory. I guess it would only be problematic in really fast solved blocks? But I don't think your equipment has any issues if it comes back over a short time.
Thanks for the reply - I may not have explained as well as I could have. It doesn't seem to me to be a short time (relatively speaking I guess) and not just in blocks that are solved quickly. I usually am running between 96 and 101 Gh/s and my miners are steady within that range until a block is found. Once a block is found and the stat page has the block in 'processing', I am hashing between 85 and 89 Gh/s for the 35 - 40 minutes (or so) it takes to finish processing. I watch for a recovery to the 96 to 101 Gh/s rate and it only comes back after I have a reward posted and 'processing' is no longer displayed for the block. This has happened 7 times in a row that I have made sure to watch. I was going to wait for the current block to finish before posting, but its taking forever  I originally thought it might be adjustment to the new block...and I guess it is still possible, but it just seemed odd that the hash rate dropped right when the block was found and processing started, then came back when processing was finished for every block I watched, no matter the speed of the block. I guess I will make some more observations that are better timed to see if I find more clues. Thanks again... Actually I get the opposite effect. When a new block is found my rate seems higher for a little while. It'll show 210-20 at times when I know I am running at a pretty solid 206. I guess the best way to see if it's really affecting your payout is to average shares over time and see if the payouts you are getting equal the average number of shares you are getting? There may be a lag in the database when a new block is found? EDIT: Just as that block cleared my hash rate went to 220429.682. I only have 206-207 tops here. So I think it needs to recalibrate after each round. Also the pool has gone from 80- 82,?  Ghash/s to 868210.711 Ghash/s over the last 2 days or so. I think a lot of people bailed and then came back. Imagine the work the database has to do to calculate all of these statistics in near real time. I think Slush does a pretty good job. But it's not NASA. There are sure to be some anomoly's. |
|
|
|
Luck always looks worse if you average over days instead of blocks. The long rounds take longer, so "luck" looks worse than it should be.
No doubt.. . I check once a day or so. . . If I see 6 blocks looking for confirmations (about 36 hours worth of stuff), then its about average. . . If you only see two or one (like right now), then that means there haven't been a lot of blocks done. . . right now its one block, which means the current block was long enough for most of the earlier rounds to all be confirmed. . . 19 more confirmations and I'm tapped out! Have not seen that since I started mining. This surely has been a funky couple of weeks! EDIT: Well that 15:25:45 block came in before all my confirmations, so I've still yet to be Tapped! |
|
|
|
|
My guess would be that the Mhash/s* is adjusting since it's on to a new block. That hash rate number is based on "shares so far" on the current block so the bigger rigs probably take over a little faster and then it smooths out as time goes on. Just my theory. I guess it would only be problematic in really fast solved blocks? But I don't think your equipment has any issues if it comes back over a short time.
|
|
|
|
...........
Thanks for the Formula's and explanation. I for one will try this. Probably not until the weekend, But I will get back to you with my results.
I'll be interested to see how you go. Keep us posted? OK so here is what I got: Round 21628 Thru 21657 = 30 RoundsTotal Shares = 78149042396All blocks solved at Difficulty - 2,621,404,453.06 2,621,404,453.06 * 30 = 78,642,133,591.8So Total Shares - 78149042396/ 78,642,133,591.8 (Difficulty * 30) = x x = .993729936189684k=30, lambda=30, x=.993729936189684 RESULT = .5105800139110OK! Now it's up to you to tell me/us what this number means Thanks I went trough the same drill and got the same numbers just to corroborate the effort of PostMixer! Except on Pr(x <= 0.99) , k=30, lambda=30 calculation at http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Pr%28x+%3C%3D+0.99%29+%2C+k%3D30%2C+lambda%3D30 which says 0.839823 ... I used: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=erlang+distribution+Pr%28x+%3C%3D+1.1%29+%2C+k%3D10%2C+lambda%3D10Replacing (x <= 1.1) with x=.993729936189684 |
|
|
|
...........
Thanks for the Formula's and explanation. I for one will try this. Probably not until the weekend, But I will get back to you with my results.
I'll be interested to see how you go. Keep us posted? OK so here is what I got: Round 21628 Thru 21657 = 30 RoundsTotal Shares = 78149042396All blocks solved at Difficulty - 2,621,404,453.06 2,621,404,453.06 * 30 = 78,642,133,591.8So Total Shares - 78149042396/ 78,642,133,591.8 (Difficulty * 30) = x x = .993729936189684k=30, lambda=30, x=.993729936189684 RESULT = .5105800139110OK! Now it's up to you to tell me/us what this number means Thanks The RESULT is the Erlang distribution cumulative distribution function. From Wikipedia, the CDF "is the probability of observing a test statistic at least as extreme as the one observed". In this case results refer to the lower tail probability, so given a value of 0.5105 this means that there is a probability of 0.5105 of observing actual shares/expected shares of 0.9937 or less. In other words: If you did the same thing for one hundred other group of 30 blocks, you'd get better luck 51.05% of the time (and worse luck 49.95% of the time). So the 30 blocks that you tested were very very close to perfectly neutral luck. Well again Organofcorti, thank you for that! It's the most tangible explanation I have seen to date regarding the pool "luck". I hope others grasp this as well and realize that things seem pretty neutral. I know it sucks to have these LONG blocks, but I do think it's right in line with the "luck" of this pool overtime. Translation, I don't think there is any monkey business going on behind the curtain  |
|
|
|
...........
Thanks for the Formula's and explanation. I for one will try this. Probably not until the weekend, But I will get back to you with my results.
I'll be interested to see how you go. Keep us posted? OK so here is what I got: Round 21628 Thru 21657 = 30 RoundsTotal Shares = 78149042396All blocks solved at Difficulty - 2,621,404,453.06 2,621,404,453.06 * 30 = 78,642,133,591.8So Total Shares - 78149042396/ 78,642,133,591.8 (Difficulty * 30) = x x = .993729936189684k=30, lambda=30, x=.993729936189684 RESULT = .5105800139110OK! Now it's up to you to tell me/us what this number means Thanks |
|
|
|
(pushes eoakland to the side}
Nice job, organofcorti. Much appreciated.
@chopsticks, i seriously doubt you have ever pushed anyone. you have more than likely been on the receiving end of one too many pushes and pelvic thrusts bottom boy. @eokland, What's up with the trust warnings on your profile? Not trying to be an ass, I just have never seen that before. Extreme Caution sounds serious? that's funny you ask bro, click on the trust section. i sold/fronted without payment something to someone, double-checked that they were sure, they confirmed, i shipped, next thing i know the dude refused it, and instead of sending back 2 day priority....my miner is stuck in USPS return limbo for 21 days.....the buyer did not keep his word one too many times. so i finally left him negative feedback and he returned the favor. if you click on my feedback you can see the story and reference link. Got It. I never new you could click on that trust (feedback ) link. Sounds like you got a bad rap on that one. Hope things work out for you. |
|
|
|
(pushes eoakland to the side}
Nice job, organofcorti. Much appreciated.
@chopsticks, i seriously doubt you have ever pushed anyone. you have more than likely been on the receiving end of one too many pushes and pelvic thrusts bottom boy. @eokland, What's up with the trust warnings on your profile? Not trying to be an ass, I just have never seen that before. Extreme Caution sounds serious? |
|
|
|
seriously smart stuffs
I'm not really interested in kudos, I'm just keen for someone to try it and report back. I'm hoping that if a few regular posters learn how to do this it will help keep freak outs to a minimum. Give it a try, Scyntech. If there's anything you didn't understand I'll explain it again. Anyone should be able to do this just by following the steps and using wolframalpha, but only if I explained it properly. Organofcorti, you do realize that to many the formula you speak of, and the terms you use are a foreign language right ? (me included) I took a look at it, but quickly turned away because it reminds me of something I would need a TI-83 calculator for =) OK, thanks for the feedback. Here's a simplified version: 1. Got to http://mining.bitcoin.cz/stats/2. Add up all the numbers in the "Total shares" column. 3. Follow each link under "Block #" to find the difficulty at which each block was solved. (For orphaned blocks, assume the same as the last difficulty). Add up all the difficulties from each block. 4. Divide the result of step 2 by the result of step 3. Call this number " X" 5. Go to http://www.wolframalpha.com/6. In the text box, enter the following, substituting your value for X: erlang distribution Pr(x <= X) , k=20, lambda=20 So if you calculated X as 1.1, you'd enter: erlang distribution Pr(x <= 1.1) , k=20, lambda=20 We use k=20 and lambda=20 since there are twenty blocks on the basic stats page. If you were to use one hundred blocks, change the values to k=100 and lambda=100. I think if you follow that step by step you should be fine. After that you just need to understand the results, but I'll help you with that once you get this part done. Thanks for the Formula's and explanation. I for one will try this. Probably not until the weekend, But I will get back to you with my results. |
|
|
|
This current "Luck"....is outright RETARDED. Huge % drops in 7 & 30 DMA.
It's funny because a few pages back, well maybe a few weeks ago, someone was giving me a bunch of shit because I was saying that complaining about "luck" is on topic. They were trying to say comments about luck were meaningless. I dunno, I've long speculated that our luck drops heavily when there is a technical problem backstage that we are unaware of, part of this has to do with the consecutive long blocks and when they clear up we usually have a run of incredibly good luck. I've also noticed, for whatever reason, blocks seem longer on the weekends. These types of pattern always seem to me like there's more to it than pure forces of luck. I do wonder right now if there's some issue with our pool that we just don't know about... Luck :success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions. And I still say complaining about "luck" is meaningless. I never said complaining about technical issues was! And if your own analysis of patterns of slow weekends, ect… leads you to believe that there are background issues then I respect that. I think my broader point was "luck" as defined above, isn't something you really can complain about, because it's by chance rather than by action. Either way I see you are still here so you must have "Faith" and that's a WHOLE different thing |
|
|
|
@ shazo, You nailed all the answers in your own question  IMO this is first and foremost a hobby for the majority. I too started w/CPU + GPU. Saw GPU results, so I got a better GRX card. Then I heard about the Bit Fury's. Started 1 by 1 accumulating those and now have 15 @ 35.8 Gs/h. Now I really started actually seeing some rewards. Long story short w/ a few BFL units I'm now running @ 207 Gh/s. The ONLY way this will ever pay for itself is if BTC hits around $2100 - $2300 in 2014. That is a rough estimate based on my average reward so far this year, and the fact that the difficulty will only go up. I am having fun! I like this pool and the people on these boards. And I've learned A LOT. I am investing in a hobby that I think can pay off. In fact I believe it will, but only time will tell. I fully agree that your investment philosophy changes greatly when you mine as opposed to buy BTC. That said, welcome to the group. My best advice is to not spend more money mining than you are prepared to write off as a hobby that you enjoy. Like you said " you won't retire" from it but you may enjoy it, and it COULD pay off! A few thoughts: The LUCK of the pool is VERY important. The bigger the pool gets, the smaller the rewards per round. And as difficulty increases, there will become a time when my 207 Gh/s will only net me what your 1 Antminer gets you today |
|
|
|
|
If you get the bug, like i did, it starts with the on hand GPU's and goes up from there. But if you want to make any real progress you will have to be talking in at least Gh/s not Mh/s. I agree with the USB approach. Great way to get started. Welcome to the pool!
|
|
|
|
|
Hobby here to. Started with an ATI video card which lead to my first USB RedFury. Then 2…3….4..., I now have 15 running along with a few BFL units for a total of about 156 Gh/s. No different than most hobbies. Start small to see if you like and then the sky becomes the limit ( figuratively ). If you start getting stressed by results, and that is what motivates you to spend more money, then the fun starts to go away. Plug it in, turn it on, and then come back and see what happens! Personally for me I have learned A LOT about the terminal, UNIX, git, and so on. It's really been fun. Good Luck to ALL!
|
|
|
|
|
