|
I'll concede to your superior statistical skills.
Now, can you please explain how lowering the difficulty will change the fact that each hash submitted will have the exact same chance of containing a nonce that is below the target for the block?
That's what I am not following. We can stop using the gambling analogy since my statistical skills are subpar.
|
|
|
|
You are suggesting solving a share is equivalent to one hash, one coin flip if you will. Each share still typically requires thousands/millions of hashes to solve.
Yes. I believe solving a share is equivalent to one independent hash or nonce, if you will. Typically it will take thousands of hashes or millions to solve a share. Sometimes the first nonce submitted might be lower than the target and thus, a succesfully submitted share. Regardless, each hash is independent of the other hashes whether it is one or a trillion. Pool difficulty does not change that. |
|
|
|
If you couldn't trust averages, vegas would still be a barren desert. The casinos know statistically speaking their expected return is 1.01, or 1.05, or 1.10 or whatever on that particular game. Yes its mathematically possible that every patron that placed every bet would win and bankrupt the casino, but that doesn't happen. Small variations even out over time and they end up with virtually exactly what the statistics said they would.
But that's exactly what I am talking about. Let's do the gambling analogy. Martingale betting strategy succumbs to the same Gambler's fallacy that you are speaking of now. Let's say you have a coin, heads and tails, no tricks. The odds are 50/50 that it will land on either side. What are the odds that it will hit tails five times in a row? Not very high. Statistically, you know it is a 3.125% chance. Now you observe someone flipping a coin and the results are as follows: Tails Tails Tails Tails What are the odds that it will hit tails again? Still 50/50 Each coin flip is independent of all previous coinflips, just as each share submitted is independent of all previous shares. They all have the same odds of being submittied and/or solving a block. |
|
|
|
No, when the block changes you lose all progress on that block that didn't get included in a share. Thats where the waste comes in. You are half way through a share when the block is found, the "half" share that you have just gets thrown out. Say you cut the diff in half. Guess what? That half a share that got thrown out? Thats ONE share now, and it gets submitted, and you get credit for it.
But that's not the way it works. You don't build a share like you build a house. You don't pour the foundation in the first second, and then the next second start building the frame. By the 30th second you don't have an almost finished house that just needs some brick work and plumbing to be complete just at the same time that a big block comes down and destroys it and washes you back to square one. From the first second your GPU is computing thousands of hashes and trying to get one share to submit. Nothing is lost when the block changes... the time since last block is just reset. At that point you have exactly the same chance in the next second that you have in every other second with difficulty (coin) constant. If you cut the difficulty in half, then over the span of a few days, my hypothesis would be that people would see their amount of shares double, each share to be worth half, and for everyone's profits to be relatively unchanged. |
|
|
|
No. This "loss/waste of hashpower" happens both when we change coins AND when a block changes. In that said 5-10 minutes, we might burn through 4-5 blocks, or we might get 1 block, or none, or whatever, depending on the coin.
Okay, I think I see what you are saying but if you average a share every minute and you are on a 15s average block coin, and they mine this coin for 5 minutes then the difficulty doesn't matter. 5 minute duration 512 difficulty - 1 minute/avg - 5 shares 256 difficulty - 30 second/avg - 10 shares (worth half of the 512 difficulty shares in terms of payout value) Whether your average share time is greater than the average block time doesn't matter. They both start at zero and have a chance to hit with every second that ticks. Just because the clock ticked 59 times and you didn't get a share, it does not mean that the 60th time has any higher chance to hit than the 1st. Edit: This sounds a lot like the Gambler's Fallacy. |
|
|
|
Without seeing the secret sauce, the best way to tell if we switch coins is to just listen to your cards throttle down. I don't think it happens too often, maybe 5-10 minutes sometimes but I am just guessing... i know I have been in my office for hours and not heard it before as well.
So then wouldn't it mean that as long as your average share time was under 5-10 minutes then the difficulty would not affect anything? |
|
|
|
When we mine LTC or novacoin or something like that, this shit doesn't really matter at all. The problem is these coins that we find blocks for in minutes or less.
That's not addressing what I don't understand though. If we find a block in a minute, we don't necessarily move to another coin. IF MinerAvgShareTime > CoinMiningTime THEN Profit = Lost IF MinerAvgShareTime < CoinMiningTime THEN Profit = Gained Are there many instances where we are only mining a specific coin for a minute or two? I haven't paid close attention to the total duration of each specific coins, but I've been pleased with the overall results of this pool and my hashrate is less than 1MH/s |
|
|
|
|
I guess that's what I don't understand.
Instead of average block time, wouldn't it make more sense to use total time that xCoin is mined?
If we are only on a coin for 20 seconds and you only find a share every minute, then it makes sense that you won't expect to earn any shares. However, if the average block time is 1s (or 30s or 1m) but we mine the coin for an hour, shouldn't you still be expected to get 60 shares in that hour?
|
|
|
|
|
Pee on the rug in his living room.
|
|
|
|
But one thing someone said a few pages back that I did not understand that I would like to understand is someone said something like H20 dont care as he will make the same no matter what.. What does that mean exactly? Is not what H20 makes based on what we make and if we make more he makes more?
Regardless of difficulty, what pays all of the miners and the pool operator is the number of blocks found. Miners are paid out based of succesful shares of the found blocks. Whether Miner A gets 70% shares and Miner B gets 30% shares or any other combination, Pool Op still gets fees on all 100% shares. His profit is only affected by the total hashrate and the market depth that determines which coins are the most profitable. As I stated before, the thing more important than changing the difficulty (as I don't see how this affects the pool overall) is finding a way to divert hashrate to multiple coins to take advantage of coins with smaller, but profitable, market depth on their perspective market. |
|
|
|
What do you mean my sample size is too small? I didn't use a sample size, since I didn't use real data. I used static variables to show examples of variances between miner speed and coin difficulty. You don't need a sample for that, since all we care about is the relationship between the fast and slow miners, not actual earnings.
Sorry I've been on edge lately. Never intended to get personal and start calling people stupid... especially when they know more about the subject than I do  I'd have to the see the spreadsheet to see the error of my ways. I just don't personally believe that the difficulty matters in the long-run |
|
|
|
You obviously don't understand statistics at all, that is the whole point of an average - to predict future values based on past values. And the larger the sample size the better an average is at doing so.
You missed the last part where I criticized your sample size for being too small. Edit: Although, I do like this math. It's fun for me and my favorite baseball team. Based on yesterday's results (big enough sample size for most everyone that is arguing difficulty here, no?) My Rangers are going to average 1.78 runs every inning for the rest of the year. World Series here we come baby! |
|
|
|
You are just being very undude past few days. Go and have a chillpill.
Very true.  I've been on edge lately and for that I apologize. Maybe I will ask my wife for a blowie later to remedy this problem... |
|
|
|
I like how you just ignored all of the math in my post.
The picture is blocked on my work computer. Not really interested in it, though  https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_workIf you have a 100KH/s "rig" then you have 100,000 chances every second to submit a share. Difficulty isn't important. Average time is just a measurement of past success, and is not a good prediction of future success in this instance because the past is a small percentage of the total picture. And to borrow from Mr. Lottery's words, let's review what a target is as well... It's important to realize that block generation is not a long, set problem (like doing a million hashes), but more like a lottery. Each hash basically gives you a random number between 0 and the maximum value of a 256-bit number (which is huge). If your hash is below the target, then you win. If not, you increment the nonce (completely changing the hash) and try again. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/TargetI understand the math, but you guys are just overthinking it based on a few hours of data from the pool and projecting those miniscule "averages" as if they are solid fact. Get a few years of data and then maybe you can make a good projection. It's equivalent to projecting a MLB hitters run average based on his first game (less than 1% of the duration of the season). |
|
|
|
This is basic mathematics. Just because you want to use this flawed vision that "it doesn't matter because it's just the lottery" is irrelevant. It is what it is. You shouldn't use quotes to put words in people's mouths. I actually think from your post that you don't know what the word average means. No sense in going around in circles. Just join a lower difficulty pool since that is what will make you happy. |
|
|
|
Wow... we'ere all stupid and get a better rig... But if we need a better rig aren't you admitting we are correct?
Better rig = more profits Lower difficulty = same profits Unless your sample size is 8-12 hours like most of the complainers seem to mine before saying the difficulty is too high and they should be mining LTC. |
|
|
|
|
Just because it AVERAGES a certain time does not mean that it MUST TAKE that same time.
Example:
Calculations say that you should get a block once every 2 hours. You mine for 6 hours and hit 3 blocks. Every single block hits EXACTLY 120 minutes apart. This is typical behavior of mining, right? No? Well hell, how could that be?!
|
|
|
|
|
How old are you? How will repay the loan?
|
|
|
|
LOL.. That is why I dont talk about this subject.. Because I dont know anything about this subject.. LOL
Hell! I don't know anything about it either, but I can definitely say I know more than some of these people posing theories that don't make a lick of sense! |
|
|
|
Interesting. Could the account have been bought or hacked?
Maybe hacked... it looks like two users are using it at the same time. Strange. Edit: My guess is that two friends are using it to get their post count up so they get paid more for the signature... just a guess! I suppose so. It's just odd that one speaks English fluently and the other can barely speak it coherently. Friendship knows no borders I guess. Maybe they are siblings and this one is younger and hasn't learned their secondary language (English) yet... I dunno, this person has PM'd me asking for help with understanding sports bets lately. Seems like a geniunely good person, but without a plan to repay I am leery on loaning to them as they might be a child with no way to make the money back. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
