 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
The way I see it, I am buying cheap bitcoins from my electric company.
Glad to see I'm not the only one mining for that same reason.  |
|
|
|
This is bad very bad  14 hours .......so rough  LOL - you will end up driving yourself crazy watching blocks solve - you would probably be better off watching paint dry  I know I check 1-2 times a day should be looking 1-2 times a week lol  Just remember - we had a 24+h block not that long ago... |
|
|
|
why does the pool register my hash rate at abotu 20% less than what it is?
Because the pool reports in sampling intervals, based on when you submit work, and how long it's been since you submitted. Your hash rate at the pool will look most like your hash rate on your console immediately after submitting work. The longer the time since you submitted, the longer the time your worker shows "dead air", and so from the pool side, shows no activity. |
|
|
|
I think a slow ramp up in reward for those joining in the middle of a block would deter hoppers and reward the loyal, kind of reverse of what we have now.
Wait, do people not know how this pool scoring works? Shares contributed at the very start of the window come easily, they have a low computational cost, and therefore, a lower score. Shares later cost more to calculate, and so have a higher score. Each hash is scored, the sum of all the hash scores added up, the block reward divided up (minus the pool fee) between all scores, and you get the proprtion of (your score / pool score) for a given block. The only way someone jumping in at the end of the block gets the same reward as someone that started at the beginning is if that person has VASTLY more compute power available - and in that case, if they'd been in at the start of the block, they have gotten way more than the original full-time person anyway, because they calculate more hashes per second. |
|
|
|
Hi guys anybody else had an issue on block 304275 had half reward but i did not stop mining before end of block or something else # Block trouvé le Durée Total de shares Your shares Votre récompense en BTC Block # Block value Validité 22198 2014-06-04 23:48:01 2:23:53 5266747598 394640 0.00090130 304275 25.04120144 95 confirmations restantes 22197 2014-06-04 21:24:08 2:22:42 5188155636 398788 0.00185923 304260 25.12039371 80 confirmations restantes opened ticket just in case but just for information am i alone with trouble on this block ? I see the problem...your screen is in French. |
|
|
|
Oh look 10% done and already an hour into the block.
You do realize that 10% has absolutely nothing to do with the "completeness" of a block, right? That's 10% into the CDF for the time it SHOULD take to find a block. We might find a block at 11%. We might find one at 99.989%. That's why the pool has a "Luck" statistic. |
|
|
|
...looking back over my previous 20 or so blocks, its kinda evened out...
And that's your answer. All of this is statistical variance, you should never be looking at less than a dozen or so blocks mined in the same manner before deciding that there's a "problem" in your rates or contribution levels or payouts. |
|
|
|
Is anyone else seeing some strange data in the estimated reward and their current scores? I have a current score of around 6000 with over 8700 shares and my estimated reward is about 2% of what I normally see for the same number of shares. My hashrate appears normal.
Any ideas or explanations? With a very modest hashrate (about 7.5 GH/s split evenly between Slush and BTCguild) I see large variations in Slush. This seems to be due in no small part to over-aggressiveness on the part of Vardiff: it appears to go in cycles over about 20-30 minutes, dropping from difficulty 4 to 1, then up to 2, then up to 3 or 4, then back down to 1, resulting in big swings in the estimated reward. BTCguild, meanwhile, remains steady on the minimum of 2. Sod's Law decrees that Slush will often solve a block just when the estimated reward is at its low point, resulting in variance of over 50% even on reasonably long rounds when one would expect some consistency. It seems to me that Vardiff is too sensitive to sort-term changes; while this may be a useful attribute in the first few minutes after establishing a connection, it becomes a liability once the worker has settled down. Maybe vardiff needs to tone itself down after N shares or X minutes of runtime? |
|
|
|
Your profile page breaks down stats per worker.
Right, on the My Account page. That's what I was asking about originally. But, that only shows an average for the worker across the whole of the current round. I'd like to see a 20 minute, or even 1 hour, average. So that I can see any effect of tuning in my workers without having to wait more than a full round. I believe that Slush implied on the Facebook page that functionality like this is coming "Soon (TM)". |
|
|
|
current round
Thanks. I thought that might be the case. Makes it hard to see variation in any changes I make in the config of my miner, since rounds sometimes last most of a day, but understandable. Is there any break-down of what work is being contributed by workers elsewhere in the interface? Your profile page breaks down stats per worker. |
|
|
|
Where can I find the Slush Pool forum?
Good thing I only logged in here today to get to my Bitcointalk watchlist :-) |
|
|
|
28 Eur so around 38 $ , they're weren't that easy to find here and I can't order from ebay because import tax here is calculated in math formula that would be harder to crack than any crypto formula  I'll second that price range, got mine for $28 each on EBay with no shipping, have seen them pop up as low was $24 on Amazon. |
|
|
|
why did your pps rate drop from .00000016 to .00000015?
If the PPS rate dropped, then the Litecoin network difficulty became higher. Simply as that. The PPS rate is calculated dynamically on this value. And it dropped again today. Damn all these miners finding all these coins. :-) Is these somewhere on the site/app that the luck values are actually displayed? I keep seeing that they're in the API values, but I don't see them anywhere else. |
|
|
|
AM I reading the stats correctly that we've found 15 blocks in the last two days?!!
I expect the Slush haters will show up shortly claiming that it's a conspiracy, that Slush is holding onto blocks and waiting for small populations in order to get more money for himself. Or something. |
|
|
|
Your on Slush because you like drama. If you want sit back and watch the sausage factory go on one of the big PPLNS pools. At the end of the month you could be up or down depending on which pool happened to have better luck that month. You can spend hours analyzing why it works that way if you want something to occupy your time but in the end there's no way to beat the odds.
 |
|
|
|
I have a question
does the monthly luck ever have a chance of going 113%
seems to me the monthly should be pretty close to 100%.
Correct - statistically, Luck should converge on 100% at 30 days. In reality, well, there's a reason it's called "Luck" and not "Standard Deviation" or "Block solve/find rate" or something equally untrue. Like they say: Lies, Damn lies, and Statistics |
|
|
|
any comment about slush pool??? is it a good pool?
Wouldn't know, everyone on this slush pool forum mines elsewhere.  I mine on Slush it has been very stable, it is just people cannot handle the score system. Because when bad luck hits you do not get any reward but when you hit a very good luck then you earn lots. So, Slush is on PPLNS?? No, Slush is score based. Shares contributed later in a given block are scored higher than shares contributed in the early portions; this is meant to discourage miners who join for the first, lesser difficulty portion of a block, then jump out to somewhere else when the CDF crosses whatever threshhold they've determined is "too hard too long" for them (See also: Raulo's attack, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3165.msg44357#msg44357 ). The block is then scored as a whole, and rewards are based on the portion of the score of the block that you accumulated. |
|
|
|
Just lost 1.3 btc...miners for sale. anyone interested? News: ♦♦ A bug in OpenSSL, used by Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoin Core, could allow your bitcoins to be stolen. Immediately updating Bitcoin Core to 0.9.1 is required in some cases, especially if you're using 0.9.0. Download. More info. ♦ The same bug also affected the forum. Changing your forum password is recommended. See also: The top of every page in the forum |
|
|
|
A mining rig is a tool used to achieve some other purpose which is to mine BTC.
I believe the term everyone is looking for is "sunk cost". In economics and business decision-making, a sunk cost is a retrospective (past) cost that has already been incurred and cannot be recovered.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_costs - especially, the section that describes decision-making based on costs. In traditional microeconomic theory, only prospective (future) costs are relevant to an investment decision. Traditional economics proposes that economic actors should not let sunk costs influence their decisions. Doing so would not be rationally assessing a decision exclusively on its own merits.
...
Sunk costs should not affect the rational decision-maker's best choice. However, until a decision-maker irreversibly commits resources, the prospective cost is an avoidable future cost and is properly included in any decision-making processes.
The cost of your mining hardware is a sunk cost. In a rational economic decision, that cost is immaterial, it's already been lost and can't be recovered in any way, which is especially true in the world of mining hardware that becomes "obsolete" so fast. |
|
|
|
oh and to humble you even more. Previous poster mis quoted. Our pool in 1.3 PetaHash/sec
Oops - missed a 1E-3 shift in the conversion. So that's 1 ten-millionth of a percent. |
|
|
|
|
