Your/others mining reward might not be but I’m referring to the pool who receives the literal coinbase tx. I understand that the rollback was considered futile after the initial calls/ statement but doesn’t make less relevant now that they are looking to pool hr, all imo of course.

I’d pump our projected payout cadence of LP but will refrain, if PPS is desired I might look at Nova a little closer.

I don’t recall specifying a time frame. Again you don’t pose any queries just assume.

For everyone else 1% is a median based on the data I have specifically from analysis of front end which is what I manage. From my own equipment and others, who have compatible factory fw, asicboost, and operate within advertised spec. From 1hr and longer.

But whatever narrative you’d like push here is gospel. I do like bullshit but mostly over beer and good food, not about the service I provide.

Funny thing is if anyone thinks Kano has their best interests at heart here they’re mistaken. This all about ck, kano’s ego, the failing of Kano pool, and some weird, chaotic, flailing attempt to kill our project here because of all of the above.

No pool side variance is about +/-1% for well operating equipment. Everything overtime reports extremely accurate. Guess again fren.

Fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

I’d imagine lower hr would as well. Then reward will have less variance on our server with a locked in hr per diffadj specifically with well operating  equipment.

Ive seen poor fw in action and imagine you have as well. It was easy to determine within five to ten minutes of mining seeing equipment struggle to produce shares and  extreme variance at 50+Th/s than a r606 at 900 gh/s.

But you know what’s best for everyone, so I imagine we’ll hear more about your greatness soon so we don’t forget.

The Kano pump thread continues.

The appropriate scenario is to ask why we prefer to retain coinbase payout, not assume ignorance in retaining it.

I stated a little while back that the linked thread isn't where we'd like the record of inquiry for our service and people can and could post here. I can't say I'll monitor what is said there but if there's something I do see and can address I may.

-ck and I have had discussions on fw a few times. We've been lucky enough for users to have tested a few generations of asics, custom fws, hosted units, and rentals on the pool.

I wouldn't mine a pool from a company that continues to signal for network rollbacks when they get hacked. Also providing direct liquidity to an exchange likely contributes to a poorer market rate.

I could make assumptions on the hr drops pool and user side but would only be speculation.

An excerpt from the "other" thread that has derailed into who knows what.



LP is able to monitor poor acting fw as their share quality would be horrendous and hr is often intermittent at best. Herp would be terrible and luck as displayed would be low overtime. Easy to weed out in conjunction with their reward would be extremely low at best making it worthless for the miner to use fw like this maliciously on our pool or if not malicious the miner would be able recover by flashing stock or quality fw to continue mining if compatible. Worst case if the miner is unresponsive to adjustment we'd simply block them and with a low reward would leave the rest of the pool relatively unaffected hashing through an entire diff adj.

Part of our pw protected server is to ensure miners are aware of incompatibilities prior to entrance, can test their equipment or in this case software. With a limited user base we can easily monitor this front and backend in collaboration in -ck.

Our pool incentivizes ownership and operation user side like other quality pools do or should.

Laurentia Pool operates based on the potential of it's commitment base. The goal is an organized and static mining landscape, for direct revenue generation at blockfind.

Current Hash Commitments Total: 72.5 PH

*Please note figures below are accurate to the day/time of posting and or edits*

Hashrate Goal: 550 PH ~2.5 day blockfind cadence.

Minimum for pool open: 130 PH; 61 PH needed, ~10 day blockfind cadence.

• 6.7 PH per user is needed to reach minimum cadence, on a sliding scale.*

*Meaning larger than minimum commitments will reduce, and smaller than will increase this average. And is still pendant on user specific preference on their cadence tolerance.

Max number of users/payouts: 18.

User space available: 9

Please reach out via DM, telegram, email, or https://laurentiapool.org/commitment to reserve user space.

We invite any miner interested in user space to reach out, as current commitments range from 31PH to 200th.

#mineon

---

Updated 1/27/2022

---

If considerable change occurs we'll update with a potential bump.

Did you want to lock the thread now? Otherwise I'd recommend to return to shitting on our pool service.

The risk I refer to is in relation to achieving successful enterprise, which you touch on just operation loss from a payout perspective a little further in your post.

Without getting into a debate on PPS scoring and why it's a net negative for miners and bitcoin's ecosystem, and assuming you want to operate a successful pool you'll want to look at securing hashrate either owned or contracted long term to mine a/your pps pool to guarantee revenue. Otherwise you're going to struggle to reach the level of investment to sustain operation at a loss for pps scoring before your able to garner a healthy market share in hashrate organically.

Of course bonds coupled with bankruptcy insurance protects the investors well, if that's just the focus here there's no real discussion besides how quickly you might expect to burn through funding, which anyone can excel at.

Also the speculation on the pooled environment is wrong imo, as pps pools will die off as op risk increases as more players exit mining, consolidating hashrate to these larger pools. Considering the abundance of pps pools currently, will be majority to die off. Essentially lean, well operated pools will survive, likely those that offer higher margins to their user base so they're able to thrive, compete, grow before another halving, as well the pools well funded with a hashrate base that is locked in.

But what do I know, I don't have a crystal ball, am biased, and already went through all these pooled scenarios in detail and is exhausting for me to rehash at for the moment, pun intended.

Still I'd be interested to see what others think, find, critique. but regardless of funding scenario if pps is the goal then you want to get a foundation of hashrate contracted to plug into your P&L model as a pool op to present to potential investors.

As something we evaluated ourselves the risk/reward didn't line up along with a number of other factors we wanted to achieve. Leaving out the bulk of the latter. .. 

You're going to want 3-5 years of operational cost to effectively protect the venture and investors. 300 BTC was maybe 6% of what we calculated for a small op pps pool (maybe 300 BTC is just an example given for context but none the less helps gives relevance/perspective). All of which comes as a sacrifice to the users of the pool as with smaller pool hashrate your going to have a higher op fee with pps to absorb the risk/loss and will need to adjust accordingly. And so won't attract miners long term.

Bonds are an interesting idea but in this scenario any investment strategy would be very high risk to the investors. Then you need to consider who might be interested in investing in a pool, which the bulk of the investment from our analysis (and even irl) comes from the players you're looking to diversify from. Those who are invested in multiple pools already. So to say three to four pool future is more likely double that amount. Which already is basically the pooled mining environment we currently have.

I tried to elaborate more but it just keeps turning more and more into an LP shill, so this is all that's left from my edits. 

He goes by Oliver I believe for us english speakers and is pretty active day to day. Not sure that says much about his physical freedoms though.

China is flooding and US is having a heat wave. Portland is hot af for us as well.

Interesting strategy. I never considered the ramifications of over/under clocking at scale at the network side.

Great notes for LP organizational strategy.

Any thoughts on the huge spike yesterday?

171.73 EH at 640727

Yea, but it's also odd to be concerned on ROI with gear with a kwh rate that high.

The irony is everything is a claim until we start mining. When people ask me for recommendations on pools, I recommend ones that are actively mining. People who want to mine on Laurentia Pool obviously reach out and express their interest. I also don’t need to sweep under any comment I make. Context is important but still we’re motivated to deliver, will thrive on competition, and we assume skepticism as we would be as well.

Even the million/billion dollar companies use the same hardware we do, just more of it. A single server is more than enough for 100 users who most are using their own proxies to point to LP.

I think we’ve worked an incredible plan to drive revenue to every user, while focusing on a consistent mining environment in a pooled scenario, that pays from coinbase. With hashrate in pool that is fixed every difficulty adjustment and highly incentivizing continued participation.

Also our push is to compete with PPS, and show it’s inherent net loss, which I would think a non PPS op would appreciate. Still there’s nothing wrong with preference, or mining at a lower margin for more consistency if desired. Still I’m not in here attacking PPS pools or their users. Just offering a choice we see as better. If anything simply providing more options in market. Everything we’re pushing for is deliberate and proactive. Still no one has to agree or see our side, and the expectation will always be to let our work speak for it’s self.

Which at this point still only brings us back to first sentence of this reply till we hit 340PH (or more) to open, allowing us to use actuals in data, and monitor a single server of 100 users (not thousands) and check and adjust like any business would to stay on mission to provide excellence in service.

If anyone wants details on technicals I’ll parrot this again and again: speak with ck directly, make a genuine inquiry on our thread, or in email. As this thread only exists is because the intent is to flame and fud, not to have an open dialogue, while manipulating the situation of our division labor. And lastly that we require some essence of civility in our thread.

If anyone really sees or think we’re being deceptive it’s because literally no one is making the effort to follow the advice the service organizer of our pool is giving to get the answers they’re seeking. If it can’t be seen why there’s no benefit for us to provide anything of substance here, or for me proxy technical information that can easily derived from our dev. Then I’m sorry, this just isn’t the thread we desire to have become the collection of inquiry for our work.

#mineon

Yea, can be reasonable in volume but you're still looking at $18-21/th on their M31s series. Still compared to zero and now bitmains reported theft of 10k units really is the only player in market for quality new gen manufacturer direct.

Which is sad as the 19 series as been reported to have better build quality than 17's and looks to better made than anything they've produced since the s9. Besides their fw