|
If you're going to fork Bitcoin, at least try to fix the many flaws in it...
|
|
|
|
Not my tool, so no idea how to get at the data... but changing the wording on the page to something along the lines of "your reward will be placed in the payout queue once it crosses the threshold" could be a start, and maybe followed by "click here for an estimate of the payment progress". I'd recommend "This amount will be eligible for payout to you when it reaches approximately 0.33554432 BTC or after one week of inactivity. Eligible payouts are sent 50 BTC at a time when the pool finds a block, oldest balance first. |
|
|
|
Eligius is clearly listed as having a 0.2 TBC minimum transaction fee, as published elsewhere. Need some clarifications again after further reading. Does this mean that for a normal transaction of say 10 BTC but has no transaction fee since the client doesn't force it, eligius will relay it but will not include it for processing in a block? This is more or less correct. |
|
|
|
|
I called it. This is basically exactly what I've been theorizing happened. After MtGox got a lot of criticism for explaining before they knew the facts, it only makes sense that MyBitcoin (or anyone else exploited) would keep silent until they had a good idea what was going on.
|
|
|
|
The data seems to show a bad luck streak. During good luck times (see the beginning for example), "short memory" methods should pay out more than pure PPS even. Most of the methods pay out PPS when the pool is lucky, so I had to drop blocks from the simulation to get what I considered a useful comparison. |
|
|
|
people messing up thinking they were looking at 90 (ninety) in his notes but was actually a kohu (one hundred) 90 (ko ton) is neither ninety nor one hundred. It is one hundred sixty (160) in decimal. Ko ton hu (9) is one hundred seventy-one (171). "Kohu" is nonsense. |
|
|
|
The purpose of TBC (and the Tonal system in general) is to simplify numbers. It does require relearning for those who have been raised with decimal, of course, so it cannot be exclusive yet.  I do not get Tonal at all. Is it just hexadecimal? No, tonal uses different glyphs for digits (ie, it doesn't recycle letters), and comes complete with units of measure, time, etc. As I write this, it is 7 Kolumbian 16 at about .T. My keyboard's space key is .8 metertons long. |
|
|
|
Thanks for that link, the one I found earlier didn't have such a long list... although the first thing that came to mind when I saw that was "Bitcoin needs less confusing denominations!" The purpose of TBC (and the Tonal system in general) is to simplify numbers. It does require relearning for those who have been raised with decimal, of course, so it cannot be exclusive yet. |
|
|
|
"Free transaction relay policy" is in reference to the network which relays transactions without prejudice against low/no fee or non-standard transactions. Eligius is clearly listed as having a 0.2 TBC minimum transaction fee, as published elsewhere.
Ok, so this means the no-fee transactions will get relayed but in order to be processed in a block, there must be a 0.2 Tera Bitcoin transaction fee? That amount is huge so I must be misunderstanding what you mean by "TBC", could you clarify that? Thanks! 0.2 TBC is equivalent to 0.00004096 BTC |
|
|
|
"Free transaction relay policy" is in reference to the network which relays transactions without prejudice against low/no fee or non-standard transactions. Eligius is clearly listed as having a 0.2 TBC minimum transaction fee, as published elsewhere. |
|
|
|
how long does it take you to go through difficulty * 8 shares? that might definitely influence my vote On average, 8 blocks... |
|
|
|
BitcoinTalk forum stupidly disabled the ability to change votes when I added the new option for PPLLNS on the other poll, so we'll have to start over  Please: - vote your preference(s) for Eligius's next reward method (you can choose more than one!)
- only vote if you at least intend to use Eligius after the change (assume your vote is chosen)
- only vote if you understand the different reward methods, and shortcomings of each method
- assume PPLNS and PPLLNS apply to both weighed and unweighed shares
There is presently no planned date or ETA for this change: it may happen next week, next month, or never.Summaries: See also: Real-world example graphs for most payout methods |
|
|
|
Pay Per Last N Shares might encurage miners to continueously mine, but it will also drive away part time miners.
One of the reasons Eligius is popular is because it offers free PPS rewards. This is atractive for its low variance, but also to part time miners, and as a backup pool, and for pool hoppers to come to on long blocks as a fallback pool. Switching to PPLNS could drive away all of those users, and their hashing power. Part time miners is the reason why I won't go N < diff*2. That is 86% CDF... maybe not enough. I'm adding a new option: Pay Per Last Limit-N Shares. PPLLNS differs from PPLNS in that when the difficulty changes upward, N gradually increases as shares arrive, and older shares are not "reinstated" into the N. So if the difficulty goes from 100 to 200, the first share at the new difficulty will be at N=101, the next at N=102, until N reaches 200. This new option will be available for voting with N=diff*8. This gives 99.96% CDF (probability of finding a block). This means when you submit a share, it will be paid a 8 times less than PPS, 8 times more often on average. |
|
|
|
Please document any feature requests and required core (ie, not web-specific) features, including features we already have at: http://eligius.st/wiki/index.php/Internal_requirementsIf you wish to get involved with the software development side of the rewrite, contact me privately on IRC. |
|
|
|
The buffer never pays out, that's what I mean by it doesn't exist. 1. Don't confuse the reward system with the payout system. 2. As I said earlier, voting is specifically for the reward system, and one should assume the payout system will be written to fit it. As it is now, the buffer is part of the reward system and entirely unrelated to the payout system. It is allocated to miner balances on long rounds, and is paid out eventually. The fact that with the current mismatched reward/payout systems this creates a backlog is unrelated to the fact that it does exist and work, just creating a slight delay (IIRC it was always under 3 days even during our worst dry period). |
|
|
|
What needs to remembered is that the current setup is cranking along at 500Ghash with no buffer at all, ever. No, the current setup is SMPPS with a buffer currently at 514 BTC. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
