 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
As mitigation, renters that believe to be affected by this can ask extra hours to their rig owners.
Are you suggesting that rig owners should compensate renters for a problem caused by your system??? Are you suggesting this not to be the correct way? So a renter aka (Paying Customer) who paid you for hashrate, you failed to deliver should not be compensated? You do understand that this is your responsibility to your Customers as a rig leaser. I hope that you also understand that when betarigs is down your rigs are mining coins on your choosen pool. In this case betarigs failed to deliver and not the server owners, you are right that the server owner mined at his/her own pool during that time so time compensation is in place. |
|
|
|
|
The current profitability is really low on wafflepool, I only made 1,76 euro (US $2.41) per Mh/s per day the last few days after power costs.
I'm doing switching myself now with good results, last 24 hours gave me 4,41 euro (US $6.04) per Mh/s... that is two and a half times more then wafflepool!
Something is seriously wrong.
|
|
|
|
I think extending the rental period would be really useful for both renters as rig-owners. Maybe the rig owner could set (or confirm) a price for example at the latest 1hour before the lease ends, which makes the rig 'extendable'. This way the future renter can pay in advance and carry on directly after the other renter, without 10 minutes downtime, the payment is already confirmed by then.
Or just a simple 'extendable? yes/no' option under 'my rigs'. Just like you can put your rig into maintenance atm.
'extendable? yes/no' is a good idea >> customer can see an "extend" button with the Mh/s a day price and just click "confirm" and do the payment, after the payment is received the time stacks on top of the remaining current time. |
|
|
|
|
The current "Best rated rigs" is kinda unfair towards other miners as people vote more then once on the same rig and others get no votes at all as not all people leave feedback.
In the current situation people with 99 good rentals without feedback have no chance against people with 9 positive and 1 less positive feedback due a lack of score.
Best way is to remove the entire "Best rated rigs" section.
I also would like to see a few changes to the search filters..
Small < 1Mh/s
Medium < 3Mh/s
Big < 6Mh/s
Farms > 6Mh/s
|
|
|
|
|
It's probably related to the pool you set, betarigs just acts as a proxy.
Or where those rigs pointed at different pools?
|
|
|
|
Not you, the dumbass that you quoted. Magiconline
If he imported coins that where not included in the stats... those coins where temporary hidden from us. I did not say he was stealing or anything negative.. so don't reflect your own intelligence towards others if you don't understand them. |
|
|
|
today is looking better so far at least.
not quite sure what to make of the chunk of immature that appeared out of nowhere though.
from h2o's twitter: Middlecoin @middlecoinpool
importing some trades. stats are paused for a bit.
So he has a sekrit stash of coins? |
|
|
|
wafflepool and middlecoin are on par in the last 24hr...
+1, just as clevermining by the way. I've switched from middlecoin to wafflepool a week ago and payouts are merely the same. You don't need to switch if you want to get payed better, the only reason could be better support (wafflepool), better website (clevermining) or don't switch at all. I was just tired of no communication and all the issues. Clevermining is Ok as long you are in or close to the US, due the lack of European servers the amount ofaccepted blocks (pool hashrate) is 15% lower. Wafflepools concept is really nice but even on the EU server I get 20% less BTC compared to middlecoin, so i'm still mining @ amsterdam.middlecoin.com... even with a higher reject amount and server connection losses it makes more $ then the others. |
|
|
|
Since last few days my rejects has gone from around 2-3% to 10%+, wtf is going on?  I got the same problem with hi reject, up from 3 to 20%, I lowered my intensity from 20 to 18 and that solved the problem for me. I'm also connected to amsterdam: Hash Rate: 4.68 MH/s Shares Last Hour: 251 Reject: 2 Reject %: 0.80 Scan and expire on 1 and queue 5, works just fine  |
|
|
|
|
Coins dropped 1/3 in value the last day, selling em now really would hurt payouts.
I'm glad h20 sticks to them till the value is better, I always check the weekly average payout as that gives a better picture.
|
|
|
|
I've been on Middlepool since it first started, but since I couldn't get a stable connection the last few days, I thought I'd give Wafflepool a try, to see if I could use it as failover at least. I'm mining with 330 kh/s and 95 kh/s, but where on Middlecoin I'd expect 0.005-0.0075 BTC/day, it seems on Wafflepool I'm only getting 0.003-0.004 BTC/day so far. Any smalltime miners that have compared the two pools and can say whether they are comparable?
Payout for me is also 3 to 4 times lower :S I really like the transparency of wafflepool, vardiff should have a minimum of 64 tho. waffle is just missing the hashpower to be more profitable, if it goes up to middlecoin levels the profits will also increase. In the end it's all about the money |
|
|
|
Unfortunately you're right, different server mine different pools, asia server for example despite the highest payday for the week, averaged approx 0.01btc/mh today.
I suspect the server location to have different earnings. I hope i'm wrong.
We use one profit pool and that is middlecoin, now it's spit up like different pools. As said before it should be: BTC's earned on all servers >> divided by all shares submitted on all servers>> multiplied by user shares >> is payout |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the advice but that isn't the issue (I13 G2) I switched to the main server and 0 stales and rejects till now.
Most other people in Europe that mine at middlecoin experience the same issues on amsterdam en useast, must be server related.
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm the amsterdam server and the useast server have serious issues.
A lot of disconnects on Amsterdam and a lot of rejects and stales on useast.
|
|
|
|
yesterday total of BTC was better than 15.1., but i've earned aprox 35% less...idk maybe because of diff 1024
btw i have rig 2.2 MH/s
MC is not miming the most profitable coin, we should be mining DOGE... |
|
|
|
We have already noticed these differences. It seems you can't estimate your payout only by taking some dudes' payouts with the same hashrate. There are so many parameters that you don't know from the server: accepted shares, stale shares (and btw do you submit your stale shares?), discarded works, gpus used, PSU, drivers, OS, settings in config files, mod miners, network connections... I've been mining on 2 different servers (eu and east) these last days: I didn't notice huge differences (same coins mined at -almost- the same time on the 2 servers). I may be wrong but I don't think the differences depend on which server you are. The EU server gave me a lot less less then the US server (I'm in Europe) On the EU server I got between 0.004 and 0.006 for each 280X Since I'm on the US server each 280X does around 0.009 a day So I don't know what is going on... Since we all mine at MC with a static block size the payout should be something like this: BTC mined (minus his fee) divided by the total amount of accepted shares (all pools together) x accepted user shares = payout If it was like: all miners get the same per accepted block and they can mine at the server with the lowest ping it would prevent a lot of stales and rejects. People from China and Australia are now mining at the US servers... that can't be good. |
|
|
|
What is WU?
Work Utility aka your pool hashrate |
|
|
|
From https://www.litecoinpool.org/help : How does share difficulty influence my earnings?
Short answer: it doesn't.
Long answer: a higher/lower share difficulty does not mean you will be earning more/less, because your expected earnings are independent of the share difficulty: they only depend on your hash rate and on the network difficulty. A higher share difficulty can only increase the variance, but not in a significant way.
Thats why I lost 27% of my WU... I call that significant! because an hour is enough time to tell statistical significance? I track my WU, normally it's between 1950 and 2250, with the 1024 blocks I'm getting between 1100 and 1600 so yeah it shows. A lot of the problems started when that other profit pool started to use middlecoin around new year. http://www.middlecoin.com/reports/1M3jtksp1upR33SX1VzeCfH5x9fc6zKykR.htmlIt doubled middlecoins hashrate... Sounds like you got shit on, should probably go to another pool. My WU is fine at this difficulty I just got alot of "2003 Can't connect to Mysql" errors on cgminer, it seems that the useast server was giving the issues. Switched to the normal server and I only got that message once... (till now) hashrate is also around the 2.1K 25% less like the useast server. |
|
|
|
From https://www.litecoinpool.org/help : How does share difficulty influence my earnings?
Short answer: it doesn't.
Long answer: a higher/lower share difficulty does not mean you will be earning more/less, because your expected earnings are independent of the share difficulty: they only depend on your hash rate and on the network difficulty. A higher share difficulty can only increase the variance, but not in a significant way.
Thats why I lost 27% of my WU... I call that significant! because an hour is enough time to tell statistical significance? I track my WU, normally it's between 1950 and 2250, with the 1024 blocks I'm getting between 1100 and 1600 so yeah it shows. A lot of the problems started when that other profit pool started to use middlecoin around new year. http://www.middlecoin.com/reports/1M3jtksp1upR33SX1VzeCfH5x9fc6zKykR.htmlIt doubled middlecoins hashrate... |
|
|
|
From https://www.litecoinpool.org/help : How does share difficulty influence my earnings?
Short answer: it doesn't.
Long answer: a higher/lower share difficulty does not mean you will be earning more/less, because your expected earnings are independent of the share difficulty: they only depend on your hash rate and on the network difficulty. A higher share difficulty can only increase the variance, but not in a significant way.
Thats why I lost 27% of my WU... I call that significant! |
|
|
|
|
