Thanks again to Organofcorti and Philipma1957, you are gentlemen among trolls 

This discussion is so entertaining, counting T-minus 2 weeks until it starts up again with the same old FUD.

Did you have some worthwhile information to add, or are you simply back to take another shot at me?
Can't help but notice the whole "Slush is untrustworthy" tangent seems to have finally disappeared and instead you seem determined to make this about me, despite the fact I have only offered information from outside sources coupled with my own opinions.

Are you insinuating there is some controllable factor for a pool or miner to squeeze out >100% lifetime luck? I really hope not as this is *by my understanding* the whole reasoning behind the difficulty system (to ensure the odds of a block being found by entity A are the same as entity B, all other factors being equal).

No human generated system can be absolutely random, as pointed out earlier in the thread, bandwidth/latency, relative location of nodes, etc. all have an impact.
However, from the point of view of the network, those factors vary from miner to miner, pool to pool, and can change constantly.
I'm pretty confident Organofcorti would agree any gain from having a better connection (and claiming the 1/10,000 blocks [Just a number for illustrative purposes, don't get all worked up] that end up being submitted *just* faster than another) would be impossible to prove either way due to variance.

Pretty sure I had it right thanks, anyone who has actual information PLEASE correct me as you even quoted me on:

In this perfect example, this user has fallen victim to The Gambler's Fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy and believes that past performance of a pool has some impact on future performance of a pool. This is false. The odds of Kano's luck remaining >100% are identical to the odds of Kano's luck being <100% in the future, the only factor that changes is time.

User announces: "This pool has >100% lifetime luck! Point your miners here"
Translation:        "I happened to pick this pool as a result of various factors and choices, and just so happened to stumble upon good luck!"

User announces: "This pool has <100% lifetime luck! Point your miners elsewhere!"
Translation:        "I mine on a different pool and personally want your hashpower there so we can find more blocks!"

Not trying to pick on anyone I'm just trying to educate while I continue to learn myself.

Your original post seemed to get lost in the mayhem, thought I would try and help you out.

Slush will find more blocks per day (assuming 100% luck) but you will get a proportionally smaller share of each block.
Kano will find fewer blocks per day (assuming 100% luck) but you will get a proportionally larger share per block.
Small pools (Johnnybravo and the like) will find blocks on the timescale of weeks, you will get a proportionally larger share of these blocks.

On a long enough timeframe your earnings will be equal on any pool, with Kano's 1.1% lower fees you will make 1.1% more than Slush.
The choice is yours, ignore anyone telling you that one pool is better than another based on anything BUT fees, they don't know what they're talking about.

Cheers,

Erumara

Big thanks to Organofcorti for that information.

I am forced to point out, especially after Kano's basically personal attack on me (pretty solid evidence I'm on the right track), that you have still NOT provided the PROOF that Slush is responsible, or in any way to blame or to be held accountable for what amounts to an attack against his pool.

MAYBE Genesis controlled the hashpower we're talking about.
MAYBE this was an attack, MAYBE this was an accident.

Evidence submitted and accepted at large:

There was block withholding incident at Slushpool, no-one has argued this point.
There was a loss of income as a result of this block withholding, no-one has argued this point.

You are throwing out hypothetical numbers relating to what Slush and it's users lost as a result of this attack. Ever since, people claiming to be your users (Kano) have been using these hypothetical numbers to spread FUD and misinformation regarding Slush's culpability in these attacks.

Does that make you proud Kano? Now you're in here, promoting FUD and blaming the primary victim (Slush) for the loss of his own income!

I ask again, for the dozenth time, where is the proof Slush is to blame? Where is the logic in attacking a pool operator for the actions of an unknown individual? Why exactly, despite DOZENS of shill posts in this thread and elsewhere encouraging people to use Kano, should anyone choose Kano over Slush?

Lower fees.

It is accepted (based on the information provided) that no pool can detect or prevent a block withholding attack better than another.

A pool is a pool is a pool. Kano's ckpool continues to lose face as a result of the actions of both users and now admins in this thread. If I saw Slush promoting shills and posting in your (self-moderated, way to increase transparency!) pool thread, I would move my hashpower elsewhere as I refuse to support what amounts to shill tactics and FUD to the benefit of YOUR BUSINESS.

So where should you point your miners? As I've said before, IT MAKES NO F**KING DIFFERENCE and personally it's none of my concern.
When people come to these forums seeking information and advice, they should be met with that FACT, not rumor and testimony about how "Slush is really suspicious and didn't answer users asking for privileged information regarding other users"

See if you can guess where my hashpower is NOT going.

Sound advice, been looking forward to next-gen tech and I find myself in the same boat. Time to diversify and finish up my GPU rig before I go buying more than 1 or 2 s9's

Quotes? References? Statistics? Nothing?
Truly said like someone who has nothing to back it up, been asking for the proof/data for a month now, still waiting..........

Thanks for the FUD

That would be you making that insinuation, not me.
And if it WAS Genesis and the mistake WAS in error, than this entire topic is still entirely pointless as it doesn't reflect on Slush in any way shape or form.
Also, where does 250BTC come from? I assume you have the facts to back up this number.




Where does this 10% come from? This is the third time I've seen 10% pop up and still the nothingth time anyone has backed it up with facts.

Wow, wall of text!

I appreciate you linking those organofcorti articles, I believe I had a look at those back when I was doing my research. Makes a lot more sense 5 months later!

So what I understand is this:

Earlier this year, Slushpool experienced a period of exceptionally bad luck. This was later found to be a product of block withholding. Intentional? Accidental? Did Slush for some reason collude with the miner (alleged to be Genesis Mining)? These questions sadly remain unanswered.

I am not against people throwing in their opinions, but I refuse to watch a thread fill up with FUD and misinformation simply because people (who largely were entirely unaffected by this incident) seem to take a personal issue with Slush not releasing information that may or may not exist. So let's make some scenarios.

A: Slush colluded with the miner and personally covered up any tracks that could lead to the miner for the purpose of
B: The miner intentionally withheld blocks as a form of attack against Slushpool and it's users while making themselves difficult to track.
C: The miner's software was improperly set-up, and this somehow resulted in valid blocks not being submitted.

If A is true, then we need a mob. A big one. Torches, pitchforks, biblethumping. The whole nine yards. As a user I will be front of the pack. The evidence submitted so far to prove A is true is included below:

[evidence]
[/evidence]


If B is true, and Slush holds irrefutable evidence this was the case, as well as this person's information, it should be released to the public to prevent further withholding attacks. Anyone who understands mining knows this is futile because their identity can be easily obfusticated and thusly there is NO POINT releasing this information outside of exactly what he did provide, which was informing people that it happened and making improvements to minimize future vulnerability.

[Most likely scenario]
If B is true and Slush does NOT hold irrefutable evidence, I stand by them 100% for not releasing information that amounts to FUD.
[/Most likely scenario]


If C is true the whole argument is pointless, Slush is under no obligation to release user information to ANYONE without concrete proof that they INTEND TO cause harm to another pool.
I stand by that 100%, no DOX without PROOF, I would make it a very personal issue if I screwed myself and my fellow users out of BTC due to a setup error and had a pool operator publicly release ANY of my information.

You say you've directly accused Genesis of being the bad actor, and doing so purposefully, without any evidence?
There's a way to describe that.

It's called LIBEL and DEFAMATION, a situation Slush clearly steered well away from no matter what the facts. Good move.


Regards,

Erumara

I'm just trying to make sure I understand exactly what you are trying to say, so despite the fact that Genesis Mining (I'll take your word for it, yet again still waiting for the evidence) was ACTUALLY providing hashpower and expending electricity, and that hashpower was not producing blocks either due to a bad actor intentionally withholding blocks or ?improper setup? of their software.

In this scenario:

Genesis lost revenue (Not as much as they should have)
Slush lost revenue (Can't take 2% of blocks that aren't found)
Slush's miners lost revenue (On a user to user basis it is a minor amount of BTC, but not nothing)

Where exactly is this BTC that should be redistributed? Lacking irrefutable evidence that the entity in question was withholding on purpose, I would never expect a pool operator to go reassigning funds.
Intentional or accidental the only thing you can POSSIBLY divine from this is that pool mining still has room for improvement, and improvements have been made.

End Of Story.

As a pool operator you should fully realize that FUD and rumors are the most powerful tools in the community, I have yet to see any evidence come from anybody painting Slush as a bad actor. I've lost track of how many times I have left an open invitation for these facts to be set forth and I am constantly met with more FUD, and more conspiracy theories.

Frankly between users claiming to use Kano and you yourself perpetrating what, by all appearances, is a smear campaign against your competitor, you have only cemented my decision NOT to use Kano. While I would not hold a pool accountable to it's users actions, your presence here with no more verifiable information than the rest of them has shaken the respect I had for what I thought was a stand-up operation.

Little odd to see you in here spreading FUD, thought a little better of you frankly. Slush *to my knowledge* was perfectly up front when the block-withholding was confirmed. Insinuating he somehow "owes" the miners due to a bad actor withholding blocks is a bit of a strange way of looking at it.
Utmost of respect to the work you do, but I have left the arena WIDE open for someone to provide the evidence behind these accusations and there is yet to be someone willing or able to provide it.




Please send me the links to this "transparency", all I can see on Kano's site is the same as has always been there, the most basic of information you could possibly provide. At least I can count on you to reliably show up and spread nonsense regularly, brightens my day to see you back in here, with the same lack of any useful knowledge or information.




So I take it you're simply too busy to "do the math"? Or are you simply too "elite" to share your results with the peasants?
Are you really insinuating Slush is taking 10% off the top? This statement could hardly make less sense. You're talking about the theft of ~18BTC/day without a trace, that's a massive accusation to be coming from a Jr. Member who didn't bother including anything to back up such a damaging claim.

I have done the math, every one of my payouts has been on time and 100% accounted for, block for block. Still waiting for someone to show evidence to the contrary.

Hate-bait successful!

Please refer to Pros #1: Reference https://slushpool.com/stats/hashrate_proof/

Please also refer to Cons #2:


More hate, based on no facts, with no references and no evidence. I still fail to understand it.

What pool anyone chooses is precisely none of your concern, anyone with EVIDENCE insisting that Slushpool is not entirely legit is still HIGHLY ENCOURAGED to come forth with it.

I'm not about to put a bounty on this information, but if anyone HAD such evidence and refused to share it, that would make them a far shittier person than any pool operator scamming their members.

Pros:

1. Transparency that goes far above and beyond any other pool that I am aware of.
2. Really nicely done GUI, tools, and statistics.
3. Democratic hashpower voting for user-submitted proposals. (Never heard of another pool doing this)
4. Years of experience and uptime coupled with a continually evolving system.
5. Backed by large amount of hashpower including some mines over 1PH.
6. Can use Google 2FA for wallet address changes (As well as perm-locking an address to an account) really nice security features.

Cons:

1. Slightly higher PPS fees.
2. Seems to attract a lot of hate, haven't figured that one out yet.


Feel free to look back over the debate spanning basically the entire life of this post, but better question:

Do you have any compelling reason why not to use this pool?

+2.2 = Erumara

Definitely past due, quote me please! Verify if someone has time 


-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Erumara @ Bitcointalk.org 05/16/2016
Staking address because it's about time
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
13W9FxUiCGpenhStxygzsWDbpTAnnwaQqr
IMvV3nZStbvQqZR057aQvCU9Y6BDPuLL9MBQat4sKJmOLfAMb+nlR4V5VSdrt2JOixJkewgzDOP3rE6RbNmo9G4=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Gonna guess 6.31TH @ 1380W, hopefully in the 5BTC price range!





I think you're absolutely correct on both opinions. Why would they do one or the other?

Still on the hunt for the remaining startup capital (got a few interested parties but only my business partner so far) We've already found a suitable industrial space that is looking promising. I will be updating in the next few months because come hell or high water that is precisely what I'm hoping to do

To say that Bitmain's miners are subpar is fair, you can't for a second deny the fact that building things cheap and en masse is China in a nutshell. You've failed to consider the fact that in terms of price/reliability/efficiency they are fantastic (not perfect). You're arguing that "Spondoolie makes far superior miners" yet here they are, out of business, almost certainly due to refusing to "cut corners" as you put it.

Guess what, when your competition comes out with a cheaper, mass produced product and drives you out of business; THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF CAPITALISM! Just look at the f**king Iphone! A cheap, poorly made imitation product mass produced by nearly slave labor that holds a huge chunk of the market FOR THOSE PRECISE REASONS!

I have two family members who scoff anytime Bitcoin is mentioned because "China owns 70% of Bitcoin".

THIS FACT MAKES PERFECT SENSE!

China has 1bn people and some of the most restrictive currency controls. Of course they're adopting Bitcoin. They have one of if not the best mass-production capability for consumer products especially electronics. Of course they're mass-manufacturing miners.
Don't hate China for doing what they do best, don't even hate the USA or EU for NOT being the manufacturers, your livable wages and quality of life are the price you pay for your country not being able to compete with them. Whether that's good or bad is a pointless debate.

In any case I'm agreeing with notlist3d, you have made accusations regarding s7's causing house fires which is absolute nonsense. I have (through months of research preparing for my mining rig) come across ZERO incidents regarding a miner fire. I have found a couple incidents regarding electrical fires where miners happened to be the devices pulling the power when the electrical failed, most likely due to poor design or cutting corners. If you have a REAL incident regarding a MINER and NOT THE ELECTRICAL SERVICE causing a fire I would love to review that information. Not that it makes much of a difference because I built a fire-resistant enclosure for my mine because it made all the sense to do so.


tl;dr talks_cheep continues to be a hater with nothing to back it up

Gonna go for -0.5 this time