It looks like bitclockers is using a payment scheme based on hashing rate not number of shares. I'm disabling it for now. And I got its efficiency statistics written.
it's proportional scheme, # shares = hash rate |
|
|
|
|
it is just for me - btcguild, as Germany servers gone, US are too far
|
|
|
|
|
some pools produce more rejected shares and I preffer not to use them and sometimes if pool is DDOS-ed it'd be wise to turn it off for a while
|
|
|
|
|
requesting easy way to remove some pools
|
|
|
|
I will be interested to see how SMPPS pans out in the long run for eligius; how far off it is from paying off 100% of the shares over a long period of time. I'm curious because there might be enough room for an SMPPS+fees pool that acts like a PPS pool with zero risk to the pool-op.
Under SMPPS+fees the pool would still pay 50/difficulty BTC per share. However, it would include Generation Fees (collected by the pool for processing included transactions) in the pot. If collected generation fees end up being greater than the loss due to cheaters then the pool should accumulate a surplus pot in the long run. A large enough surplus would allow it to act like a PPS pool. The pool-op takes on no extra risk, and only gives up the cost of those fees.
This could also be done by including the normal pool fees, the fees normally taken out of the 50BTC reward by the pool-op as his share for operating the pool. This would accumulate a surplus faster, but at the risk of the pool-op not earning a profit or recouping their costs if the cheater percentage is too high.
By the way, Luke-Jr, are the stats on Eligius's surplus displayed anywhere?
why you think "cheaters" will ever join your pool if you use cheat proof scoring method, and your surplus will be leached from miners with network issues RSMPPS was something I considered when I was coming up with SMPPS. The key problem with it is, that cheaters (that is, people who only submit useless valid shares) can avoid taking any of the damage from their cheating. Solve that, and we have a winner  Can you elaborate on the submitting useless valid shares? Does SMPPS solve this? Only the one share that gets the pool a block is actually useful. Cheaters can reduce pool luck by refusing to submit those. With PPS, the liability is held entirely by the pool operator. With proportional, MPPS, and SMPPS, the liability is distributed among everyone in the pool. With RSMPPS, that liability is distributed among everyone except the cheater. it is not possible to recognize a winning share |
|
|
|
|
how do I put 10-15 seconds delay before pulling API data from all pools when LP is triggered?
|
|
|
|
why default pool is not deepbit PPS but eligius  |
|
|
|
|
something is wrong with LP, I got rejected shares over 30 seconds after LP message shows up
|
|
|
|
|
can we get a button that shifts between primary and backup pools manually
when running on backup pool, backup miner should not be stopped until some shares were accepted on primary pool, same way as poclbm handles backup pools
|
|
|
|
|
what if your dog chews that CD/DVD
|
|
|
|
with 0% fee you get 0% support when things go wrong, that's why 50% of miners prefer 3% fee |
|
|
|
|
I'm selling 18hrSeXxVPMHUVv6XC63zKWRf76nyVmohD for 2 BTC, it is on mybitcoin account
|
|
|
|
everyone has a hidden "scam now" price, you just need to bid high enough  |
|
|
|
GOX me baby |
|
|
|
|
you, damn trolls, if you knew it was a scam DON'T use that account, sent a note to delete your account and create another.
if b7 staff deletes some refferals without proof, because some troll said they should, they become scammers themselves
|
|
|
|
They simply need to open an account in one of the Euro participating countries.
For example in Greece - it's only about 300 km south of Sofia.
Then the problem should be solved. They really should know that (high fee) is a complete no-go within the EU!
I don't think opening an account in a bankrupt country is a good idea in this very moment... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
