Have any of us said "the chance of X happening is so remote that we don't need to worry about it?" I have, and far too many times I've had to follow up by saying "ain't never seen that before".
Well, perhaps your analysis of the probability of X occurring was faulty? That said, I've always thought million-to-one chances happen nine time out of ten. I rarely rely on my analysis of a probability of anything. I used to rely on others analysis a little more often but have been taught by the School of Hard Knocks not to do that when the consequences are too high. Graet will need to determine what his comfort level with the consequences are. |
|
|
|
Personally I'd prefer a smaller a which would make the cap unnecessary.
The maximum value of a share is still effectively unbounded, even for smaller a, so a single share can still bankrupt the pool. This seems to me to be a different type of risk from that which a PPS operator takes, for example - where the rate at which the pool can lose money is clearly bounded. Yes, but it's a " so you're telling me there's a chance" can. With a=0.4 and wd=1, the chance that a share will cause a loss of more than a reward of a single block is about 1 in a quintillion, I think they can handle it. There may be some wisdom in the KISS method by putting a reasonable cap on max reward as opposed to taking a "1 in a quintillion" chance of something astronomically bad happening. Have any of us said "the chance of X happening is so remote that we don't need to worry about it?" I have, and far too many times I've had to follow up by saying "ain't never seen that before". Sam |
|
|
|
Any way to make it selectable by the user? .5 .6 .7 or .8 with appropriate fees? Could get interesting...
ooc was interested in that too, it *may* be possible yes I'd like to make this interesting, but don't want to go broke doing it  I don't think any of us wants you to go broke. So is this new payout method for only those who are using higher difficulty targets? |
|
|
|
If it doesn't increase it numbers of connections try:
bitcoin-qt.exe -maxconnections=x , while x is the number of connections you would like to have at max.
This option only limits your connections to your "x" value. Is there a reason to limit the number of connections? If so what is a good number to limit it to? Sam |
|
|
|
He stated earlier that he's using Gentoo (woohoo!).
AFAIK, there are no native cuda kernels for cgminer.
I thought there were *nix versions of those utilities. Didn't CGMiner used to have CUDA support?? Not that it matters this late in the game. |
|
|
|
Meaning I am using CUDA?
Well, since your mining you would have to be using CUDA, correct? GPU Caps should be able to tell you for sure, and maby GPU Shark. |
|
|
|
Sorry to change the subject a little, but I am looking for some advice.
I am using Gentoo Linux, and I have nvidia-cuda libraries installed.
I see my Geforce 8800GT (yes I know it's as much use as a fart in a spacesuit) has 100 odd cuda cores.
How do I know if cgminer is seeing / using them?
I have O/Cd the card and I am getting around 26Mh/s.
Peace.
Your performance, or lack thereof, is in the correct ball park https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison#Nvidia |
|
|
|
* ckolivas keeps wishing people would stop using the windows version knowing he may as well wish the sky weren't blue. And I have wished for years they were banned from connecting to the internet... Windoze certainly is NOT my OS of choice. But that is where the world is and I am forced to use and know it. Sorry you have to share the pain. |
|
|
|
could it be a stratum issue?
Well it is 12/12/12. Maybe the end of the world is at hand |
|
|
|
|
I got my very first crash on 2.9.7 this morning. Win7 32 bit.
I just updated to 2.10. My crashes have been few and far between. So I'm not even sure it's a CGMiner problem or not. I'll keep an eye on it and see if I have any reproducible problems.
Thanks for your effort,
Sam
|
|
|
|
Now Yes and No are tied with 17 votes. It was just 17 Yes to 15 No this morning. Originally it started out with Yes as the clear leader. Looks fishy.
Yes, it looks very fishy that 34 people actually thought voting on this poll would have a bearing on anything |
|
|
|
wow just like that the luck switches to the other side 5 blocks in last 2 shifts.
wonder how much BTC he made in those 5 blocks after losing 200... Dunno for sure, but maybe 3%??? |
|
|
|
wow just like that the luck switches to the other side 5 blocks in last 2 shifts.
That's what I get for taking the opportunity of bad luck to shut my mining down to do some maintenance. |
|
|
|
No kidding. Even with PPLNS running, the majority of the pool is on PPS. That single block cost me over 200 BTC  . Really sorry to hear that. You know the old adage "No good deed goes unpunished". |
|
|
|
Double checked everything on Stratum, and it really was just terrible luck. We had quite a few shares that were >= diff 2097152 [highest power of 2 that is lower than current target], but none of them were able to meet network difficulty. Really curious if that was a record though. ~36 million shares, which is slighlty above network difficulty x10.
While PPLNS, Prop, DGM, etc, will have more variance than PPS...last night was an extremely rare situation. I can't recall a BTC Guild block taking ~11x network difficulty, at least not in the last 6+ months.
A record that I would want to make a habit out of setting/breaking. |
|
|
|
|
Uh, where's the PPS stats now?
|
|
|
|
I think luke-jr must have stopped looking in that thread. No, I just continued ignoring known trolls such as yourself. The question is also irrelevant. Is that an example of going the extra mile? I think that comment was a bit unnecessary. |
|
|
|
Deepbit already caused the 51% concern and nobody really cared.
AND, more importantly, nothing bad happened as a consequence of reaching 51%. |
|
|
|
Why is everything that questions ASICS automatically designated as silly or troll?
I'm referring to the poll, whose result really means nothing, as silly. Aren't you tired of these senseless polls? The topic of discussion is borderline silly too but I don't really have a problem with that since some have an idea to vent. But it is a case of beating a dead horse. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
