Bitcoin Forum
June 20, 2024, 10:37:53 AM *
News: Voting for pizza day contest
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1]
1  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [1450 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff] on: July 21, 2014, 12:40:15 PM
100% CDF would mean "with this amount of work you are absolutely certain to find a block". But that is never true. Unlike a lottery where you would perhaps be able to buy all the tickets, you can't do that in bitcoin.

As time approaches infinity, CDF approaches 100%. But just like time never reaches infinity, CDF can never be 100%.

Makes sense. But what about the case in which I'm brute forcing a private key. And my machine is the only one working on the problem. At some point in time a million bajillion years from now I would expect to have been able to try all possible combinations. Now assuming there is only one matching private key, it would be possible to find that key on the very last sequence tried. What is the CDF? Would 50% CDF be half that time, in this case?

Thanks for your explanations. Very lucid.
2  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [1450 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff] on: July 20, 2014, 02:57:20 PM
How do you get luck 47.47% ?

Over 9 days even luck would give us 14.6 blocks. During these specific 9 days we ended up finding 12 (+1 stale) blocks. That's bad luck, but calling it 47% seems a bit extreme.


What would perfectly average mining look like? In a perfectly average world we would be finding 1.x something blocks per day and the CDF would always be 50%, right? And the only thing changing that number would be a change in our pool Thps or a change in the mining difficulty.

CDF is definitely not linear. Seems you can get really close to the limits of the scale but never quite reach them. We can mine the snot out of blocks, seemingly forever, before finding one and be somewhere in the 99.x% CDF. It's close but never quite 100%. A pool (not this one:) could mine for a month before finding a block and the CDF would still only be 99.x% only a little closer to 100%.

And what about the other end of the scale? If you find the next block on the very first hash you try, would this equate to exactly 0% CDF? Thanks
3  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Vanitygen CDF vs. Mining CDF on: June 24, 2014, 12:26:39 AM
...in vanitygen (just like in Bitcoin mining) you aren't looking for a specific unique solution but rather one of any number of the quadrillions of possible solution which match the prefix. 

Thanks. That was my mistake, forgetting there are way more than just a single solution when using vanitygen.
4  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Vanitygen CDF vs. Mining CDF on: June 23, 2014, 04:50:54 PM
If I run Vanitygen to look for a unique address and I hit 50% CDF during the calculations, does this mean I have tried 1/2 of the possible hash combinations for that unique address? So, at most I will spend an equal amount of time hashing the rest of the possible combinations before finding a solution, assuming the solution is the very last hash I try.

Am I also correct in my understanding that BTC mining CDF works a little different because the block we are all trying to solve changes every 10 minutes? So if I am solo mining and hit 50% CDF, I am not guaranteed to solve a block in another increment of time equal to the first 50%. In fact I may never solve a block in which case my CDF gets closer and closer to 100% but never quite reaches it.

In the first case CDF seems like a linear function and in the second case CDF seems very non-linear.

I tried searching for the answer without much luck.
5  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [1450 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff] on: June 21, 2014, 04:34:25 AM

in that 2 hour period whomever hits the block or blocks     it is his  or hers just as if  it was  solo mined.

yeah koi will get the most hits   he has 200 th     I have .4 th  but any one with dud gear/dud software will never get a block in that time period.
<snip>
     2 hours a day we all get a shot at a big hit.

 the other 22 hours we are at normal.

This would discourage  that suspect bad luck canon would it not.  Opinions?

I would not mine here. I have .6 th. That's like an extra 8.333% donation (not that donations are bad or anything). But with so little hash I'll never find a block. I'm here for the 'pool' aspect of the pool.

It's like adding the Perk, 'Feeling Lucky'
Donations required - 8.333%.

I'm not feeling that lucky. But perhaps if all the people that worked a two hour shift were to pool 'their' blocks...
6  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [1450 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff] on: June 21, 2014, 12:05:11 AM
And what about the rest of you foolios? Five blocks in five days? And Koi found most of them. Come on! He should be saying the same things about having to carry the weight of the rest of us right now.

This is not true.   Just because one person solved that particular block does not make the work submitted by others less valuable.   It had to be done in order for the person that solved the block to have been given that work

The pool does not seem to be unlucky or full of free riders (and yes, I believe free riders exist and were born from incompetence)    

Now Koi has found 2/3rds of the blocks with only 1/6th of the entire pool's hash rate. Everyone here except Koi is a free loader! Period!

I will never find a block. I may be the biggest slacker there is. Should I stay and keep mining? Should I suspect my hardware? Should I do the right thing and leave? Or, even better, quit mining all together and save the electricity/planet?

I have thought a lot about it before. Maybe the work I've submitted is valuable because it allowed someone else to receive work that did find a block. This would justify everyone's existence, even Multipool's. That's the reason for pooled mining. The results may not prove it in the short term. But in the long term they would.
7  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [1450 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff] on: June 20, 2014, 07:23:49 PM
<snip>Given how loudly he claimed his faith in probability, his departure is strange.
<snip>

No, not really:


<snip>
Hey, don't worry bro, because I've already made the decision to diversify our hashrate.  You'll see it dropping soon.  There's really no reason for me to bother trying to convince fucktards like you of anything.

From what he posted, I didn't expect diversify to mean Bitminer = 0%. That's like infinite diversity Smiley

I don't see multipool anywhere on the top 50 of Bitminter.

Based on a post he put on his web site I would say we will not see him back on BitMinter any time soon.

"Jun 20 3:29 AM I've made the decision to move us off bitminter due to its toxic community. I will be splitting our hash between several major pools in an attempt to smooth out our variance."

Or maybe he left because it IS such a toxic community. Mining is very nerve racking when so much money is at stake. And it brings out the worst in people. But you have to understand the statistics. There's always a chance someone has bad hardware/software, but there's a far greater chance that everything is normal and luck is just not on our side at the moment. People are acting more like irrational wild gamblers in Vegas than the technical, educated, hard working, (and friendly) people that i know you are.

And what about the rest of you foolios? Five blocks in five days? And Koi found most of them. Come on! He should be saying the same things about having to carry the weight of the rest of us right now.

I'll probably never find a block myself. That's why I joined a pool. I want to see the pool increase in size, not decrease. It's the decreasing pool size that will bring on more of the same periods of bad luck.
Pages: [1]
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!