Bitcoin Forum
August 21, 2019, 04:51:45 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 ... 67 »
1  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 22, 2016, 07:23:15 PM
Hello Pekatete

You haven't explain how "my argument falls in pieces". I have not write that he have redirected hashpower to do something else.

The best way for a pool manager to rip of  his users is to do a false increase of hashpower of the pool.
That appears like bad luck (or block withhold...) and if he not overdo, it's difficult to see that because of the variance.

I did not explain because I do not think he's got any reason to do that when he could easily "earn" more by mining altcoins using YOUR very same hash-power that every-one seems to be accussing him of lying about. Well, that was my explanation, you only had to read between the lines ...

Honestly, this is stretching it to unreasonable levels, bottom line is the most unlikely reasons for which slush would allegedly do be responsible for the third party bug attack were being fanned by a dishonest pool op for nefarious aims. I am sure you've noticed the deafening silence since his baseless accusations were emphatically empirically proven to be pie in the sky.
2  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 22, 2016, 06:41:40 PM
<snip>
4) No because Payment of the minor = Block value x minor hashrate / total hashrate, if you increase displayed hashrate more than real hasrate of pool, you stole your minor... They loose = Real hashpower of pool PH / ( declared hashpower of pool)
<snip>

This is where that argument falls to pieces. Why would slush want to do such a thing? He could have used the hash from the pool to mine NMC for himself without giving miners the option to earn the mined NMC and he would make more from that. This is the very same guy who lost BTC 2000 (was it more?) only a few years ago and nothing of the sort of accusation was thrown at him in the following period, until now.

At the end of the day, everyone SHOULD know what their hash rate is supposed to earn them over a reasonable period, say a week. If your rewards are less than that and feel you can get better somewhere else, move it. I personally, since the demise of ghash as we knew it, have not mined at a better place than slush (and yes, been to the slow cooking heist pool too!).
3  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 22, 2016, 03:07:09 PM
If you believe Slush's explanation, which I do, then it is seems inappropriate to refer to this situation a "block withholding attack".  A better term would be "block withholding bug".  

As to people who believe that Slush "owes" them something.  We all had access to the same information and had the opportunity to move our hash power months ago, once it was clear that something was wrong.  I stopped mining at the pool some months ago, once it was obvious that the bad "luck" was almost certainly not luck.

^^ Sanity at last!

why would he? simple to keep simpletons like you at his pool thinking that large 40+PH will net them more then a smaller pool.

Most clear headed miners can establish what their hashing power should earn via a multitude of sites on the net that'll estimate how much you should earn with whatever hashing speed. I've never come accross anyone before on any forum that makes the choice of miner rewards pool to mine at based on pool speed, you are the first (and clearly barmy!).

you are obviously a small minded individual who probably bought his account.

Says the guy who opened an account specifically to spew drivel, a very cultured dimwit indeed.
4  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 22, 2016, 01:16:00 PM
The question is not whether an attack may be good or bad for the pool manager (I have the same opinion as pekatete on that) but whether this with-hold attack has really taken place!

Phew, thats a relief! Somebody actually has an opinion congruent to mine on at least one aspect.

If slush had increased the power displayed his pool for exemple +10PH (no one can know if the indication is true), it dims the incomes of miners and pool keeps the difference.

I fundamentally dis-agree with this, both in terms of the motive for slush to "lie" about the hashing power of the pool, and in terms of dimming / reducing the incomes of miners. For example, if a pool displays its hash power as 30PH when it is actually 20PH
1. The pool will only be earning circa 20PH worth of rewards
2. The pool will report lower luck because it is only earning 20PH worth, which is less than what is computed for 30PH
3. The miners will only be paid what the pool has earned
4. Miners will STILL be earning proportionately to their real hash power and therefore will NOT loose anything.

Unless you are saying that slush's setup is by far very superior to any other pool / mining operation on the network to an extent that he needs to fake his hash power so that pool luck reported is within the generally published values (but on this accassion something went wrong), then your assertion is flawed. I can not fathom any other plausible reason why slush would want to inflate the pool hash power.
5  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 21, 2016, 09:24:00 PM
So just let me simplesizeit for you.. How much does slush pay you?!!

Don't be such a simpleton ... how much did YOU lose in the block with-holding attack?
6  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 21, 2016, 08:49:08 PM
Pekatete:
You do understand principles of leadership in an industry correct? Companies that are thought to be leaders should lead through innovation by providing offerings or solutions that are not yet provided by other companies. In this case pools. If slush really cared about being a trailbazer, he wouldn't maintain the status quo of "oh well we had a withholding attack", he would do something different and innovative that would make everyone happy and help change the landscape of the mining world. By him not doing anything, it makes it perfectly fine for any other pool to follow suit. Those are just my two cents.

I am sure that you'll be benefiting from the hard work that the slushpool team put into detecting the with-holding attack, which-ever pool you decide to mine at in the future. If that is not enough innovation for you, that should not form the basis of accussing slush of dishonesty as the two (things) are not related.

7  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 21, 2016, 07:57:00 PM
Omg man you have no proof of anything and yet still you shiil about them! How much BTC did slush paid you to shill here? Wtf is going on in your brain if he did not paid anything... Im sorry if i insult you, but we lost money hello money because we trusted him! And yet without proof you still make him honorable and you try to bring points up for him! I really dont understand you...

I do feel for you if you actually lost money (even if you only think or believe that you lost money, I still feel for you), however my point is simple, slush DID NOT steal it from you, that much everyone knows. Actually, I am not sure ANYONE has what you percieve to have been stolen from you as a block with-holding attack does not necessarily mean the attacker actually kept the block reward to themselves.

What is beyond any shred of doubt though is that slush is an honest (and if you want honorable) pool operator, and his pool was a VICTIM of the block with-holding attack. Now, if you want me to join you in badgering and castigating slushpool for being a victim, I kindly refuse. Unless by mistaken identity, it is abominable in any culture, law or natural justice to victimise a victim, and to see a quack, slow cooking heist pool operator attempting to aid the victimisation through plain dishonesty is diabolical (for lack of a better word).

To paraphrase a famous American politician:
1. That you lost money as a result of the block with-holding attack is a known unknown.
2. That slushpool was a victim of a block with-holding attack is a known known.
So there ... that's what's going on in my brain since you asked.
8  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 21, 2016, 05:27:05 PM
Do you even realize that none of us speaking are pool operators (other than ck)?  All I have been saying is, just because it was okay in the past for pools to have the mentality of "oh well, we had a block withholding attack, nothing we can do about it." ----Does not mean here in 2016--- with difficulty being so high, and virtually every home/hobby miner resorting to mining in a pool because of the centralization of hashrate, that it should still be accepted; nor the norm.

You would expect an OG pool such as slush to understand this more than anyone, and maybe, to have a reserve set aside from his fees, to say something to the effect of "hey guys, we just had a withholding attack, but I set apart an insurance policy wallet for just the occasion, you will not be paid out based on the average amount of blocks we find a day for the current month, oh and btw the ip address, machine, firmware in question is xxxxxx, that would go over with all of us wayyyyy better than what has happened. Maybe I grew up in an area of the world where we are taught to be much less trustworthy than some of you, and that is why it appears to us that you are blindly following.

I guess maybe I am hoping for too much, but for someone who claims to have an extensive past in the banking industry, something like this would exactly be in place.

Actually, I totally understand the argument for such attacks not being accepted as the norm, but that one happened to slush can not make the pool responsible for such an attack happening. You also need to know that this pool mining phenomenon is not even a decade old, so is still evolving, and in most aspects, slush is the leader in improvements to the protocol. I am confident that future block with-holding attacks, on any pool going forward, will be easier to detect on the back of the fantastic work the slushpool team put to identifying the attack on the pool.

That said, we as miners can not expect to have our cake and eat it at the same time, and that is with regard to expecting the pools to re-imburse us when they are the victim of, for example a with-holding attack, but then demand low to no fees for mining at the pool. Insurance policies have a cost and that would inevitably have to be met by the miners, which would mean an increase in fees.

Bottom line, we are where we are, and slush can not be blamed for being attacked. The pool is one of the most resillient on the network as was demonstrated during the recent DDoS attacks targeting pools / nodes voting for BIP101, but block with-holding attacks, as has been demonstrated, are not easily detectable ..... well, it had to come to pass for it to get on the radar.

Now, unless you believe slush should have a crystal ball to know what kind of threat / attack is next on the horizon, I'll take their word for what it truly is worth over some opinion that has been pumped up based on false information by a dishonest pool op fishing for miners.
9  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 21, 2016, 04:52:43 PM
d57heinz : unfortunately you cant talk logically to those of low IQ such as pekatete. just look at his lack of trust rating. If he wants to continue to mine on slush and throw away his money/profits to a lying thieving pool operator then let him.

Pekatete: how about you actually shutting up for once and reading posts and forming intelligent responses instead of mindless blind following of a pool owner that has led you all around by you johnsons as he steals from you by overcharging for pool fees and for allowing the withholding attack to happen and not revealing who did it and what miner/software they were using.

Amazing how this "miner" has been identified yet hasn't been reveled. Makes one think why he/she/them haven't been identified to the public. or why themselves haven't come on here and apologized. My thoughts is that the "attacker" and slush were working together or the attacker was slush himself. why not toss a miner on the pool and get paid for work he hasn't done. O that's right that's what hes doing right now with his outrageous pool fee, getting paid for doing nothing. for the fees he charges he should be on here posting constantly.

You got an axe to grind? You are being fed nonsense by quack pool ops and spout it straight out without giving it thought and you have the audacity to lay claim to anything like an IQ score? That on the back of your only "evidence" being slush has not revealed who the "attacker" was?
It has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the gibberish you've been fed by the quacks is just that and there's nothing to it at all. Now if you want to lay claim to being the person that "discovered" how low luck was and thus detecting there was an attack on the pool, what has that got to do with anything?

If you think slush is not trustworthy or that he charges exhorbitant fees, do not mine there. Feel free to pop over to the slow cooking heist pool .... but you have been warned, dishonesty, as has been clearly laid bare of the quack pool op fishing for miners, is an ingrained thing ... it is not learnt. It is just a matter of time before the big opportunity presents itself to THAT quack pool op and you'll only have yourself to blame .... mark my words.
10  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 21, 2016, 04:00:20 PM
but it was going down hill two months prior to my dec 5 th post  i just thought that it would correct.. i held my breath for two freaking months then i decided i needed to start bringing attention to this.. Thats why you dont see it for the whole picture.. There were so many days in those two months prior that we had 30 % block days of normal.. and then followed by several days of 70 %.. just because your weekly stats dont show the day to day.. it was much worse that it appears.  Hell without the attacker who knows we could have been at kano standing of 106 % for the year instead slush was pushing to go lower than 90 % for the year.. and weekly stats he was barely finding more than 70 %..  im not going thru your weekly block maker stats organ but your know what im talking about.  This started well before dec 5th  its just wasnt till then when im like this cant be all variance!

Anyway. it is what it is.. you all seem to trust slush.. Lets see if he comes out with the brand and firmware of miners.. If that info never comes he was lying about the real reason for the shit luck.  https://slushpool.com/news/2016/02/06/recent-low-luck-information/

best Regards
d57heinz


If your enduring argument is you do not trust slush, then go mine somewhere else that has a pool operator you trust, END OF STORY.

Conceptually (and sematically) in cryptocurrency pool mining terms, you could not be more wrong in not trusting the very person who by many accounts "invented" pool mining (and the stratum protocol that made it feasible) in the first place. That is quite aside from the fact that despite being the longest existing pool around, such an accusation has NEVER been laid against slush, let alone the lack of any concrete proof to back up your accusation being brought for scrutiny.

The stats and facts speak for themselves, and assertions otherwise - akin to applying a razor to a hair strand only to be emphatically empirically disproved (aptly demonstrated by the quack pool op fishing for miners) cannot alter them. YOU are wrong to accuse slush of dishonesty, and the quack pool op fanning your ignorance is the dishonest one (that in more ways than fishing for miners .... but you'll find out in time).
11  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 21, 2016, 12:36:24 PM
Bitcointalk is big forum filled with lots of smart guys, creators of the stratum protocol and i think if he point some transparent facts they will chime in, investigate, point some real facts and proof and than i will beleive. You know the saying "innocent untill proven guilty", sadly in this case he is "guilty until proven innocent".

Facts are plainly there for all to see, if you choose to open your eyes and see them for what they truly are. Problem is you do not want to see them for what they are.
1. There was a block with-holding attack which negatively affected pool luck
2. The said attack was detected, miner identified and, after thorough investigation, the attack was attributed to buggy software
3. The offending miner's buggy software was patched with the un-doubtable expertise of the slushpool team which positively affected pool luck

The rest is the usual tripe by lesser pool operators fishing for miners, I have to say, slush keeps growing and that is telling.
12  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 21, 2016, 11:40:17 AM
Again no facts my friend. Maybe now is ok with the block findings but in near future that can happen again and with no proof he and we should blame on bad luck right?
You did not say whether you'd believe the facts .... but as you know, good AND bad luck happen, and it would not be a stretch of the imagination to attribute bad luck to .... bad luck, would it now?
13  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 21, 2016, 11:31:08 AM
Eventhough we all lost money here and now we should blindly belive slush and you that this is fixed.

Don't believe me, see the pool luck yourself .... does it look like it's been fixed like slush said?

He said that he will give the findings so everyone can investigate. Do you really beleive that that was witholding attack?! What is the possibility that he took all that blocks and now is blaming that on witholding?

If slush said he'll give the findings, then he will if he has not already done so, that I have no doubt, however, the probability that slush "took all those blocks" is a figment of your imagination. And yes, if he says it was a with-holding attack, I have every reason to believe it was such, but more importantly, I have NO reason at all to think it was not (emphasis on the latter).

Can you point some real truth and not just shilling here please!!

If I point you to the truth, would you believe it if you read it with your own eyes?
14  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 21, 2016, 10:52:34 AM
Do i really need to go back thru my post history to find how many months ago i started barking about this..  ITS BEEN Far too long ago now.. Esp the size of the miner in question.  Should have been more obvious to someone that is a great pool op or so caring of the miners like you say!  guess ill check my first fb post and on here about this exact problem.  Only to come to find out after 4 months i was right.. Seriously man defending slush makes you look the fool..

ANd again .. .slush says this was a bad firmware in miners.. NOt a pool proxy.. so lets come with the info on the miners already..ill walk away once that info is out


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg13158361#msg13158361
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg13166550#msg13166550  this shows you i once supported slush.. but his handling of this issue is horrible in my eyes!   i think what pissed me off the most was his dead silence and total disregard for the issue... just kept telling me its luck move along.. F$%% that.. good thing i didnt!  Or i should say good for you Pekatete since you still mine here!!

Best regards
d57heinz

Whether you spotted the issue that long ago is neither here nor there, fact is (and as far as I am concerned) it has now been resolved. For what it is worth, I'll add that I will take slush's word over yours any day wihout batting an eyelid, and that is not a reflection on you.

By the way, I am NOT defending slush, just pointing out the facts as I see them, if anything, just to stem your tirade of twaddle (though clearly it is not working on that last one!).
15  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 20, 2016, 08:20:34 PM
Like I said, if you believe there is nothing hidden, then keep mining here. Fact of the matter is BTC was stolen here no matter which way you slice it. BTC was withheld from its miners. Any payouts never happened. The same exact thing happened to cryptsy, and they went under, slush did not, why? Because of their brilliant PR campaigns with favorable articles strategically published immediately after the withholdings came bubbling up in this forum. Also their paid google advertisements have them pop up first for the casual miner when they search for bitcoin mining pool and the like. There is your ignorance.
Your conspiracy theories are just that. As far as I am concerned, everything at slushpool is above board. The block with-holding attack can not be blamed on slush whatever crede you proffess to as the attack can happen to any pool, more so to a successfull one like slush.

All that needed to be said about the attack by the team at slushpool, to my reckoning, has been said. And true to their word, pool luck since has been above average, even skirting above the levels before the attack. The remnants of the conversation are mainly geared towards getting the gullible to switch to lesser pools, but nothing more of substance.
16  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 20, 2016, 07:41:09 PM
You guys that defend slush and his pool are baffling. If ANY other pool had attacks on them where hundreds or thousands of btc were withheld, stolen, hidden, whatever the case may be; that site would be a ghost town in no time with no one mining on it. The fact that there was a hijacking of this pool, and you all still mine here is insanity. He used to brag about having higher than bank level security, and you really believe someone could have programmed their single solitary miner to withhold blocks from a pool with this level of security?

To me this is a smaller scale cryptsy event that just happened, where miners were NOT PAID their BTC, yet you people seem to still happily mine here. Carry on with your pools, I know I will certainly never attempt to earn any BTC here ever again and make sure no family member nor friend does so either.  

You profess your ignorance at will. To be able to launch a block with-holding attack worthy of the tag requires more than the single solitary miner that you believe was responsible. And why wouldn't anyone want to mine at a pool with pool luck of, as we speak, 216%, 117% and 110% for the day, week and month respectively?
17  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 20, 2016, 02:04:18 PM
I can and did!!!  He needs to at the very least come with the hardware if this is even a credible story.. Still no comment.. like i said if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.> Only a fool would continue to mine here. Just my two bits anyway.. If he is lying about this what will come in the future that he will hide..  

Slush you need to come out with the type of miner and firmware to make this story remotely credible. Until then i have my thoughts as to what really happened.. Just contiue to stick your head in the sand.. It appears your miners are more naive than i first thought.. Ehh to each their own i guess.

best Regards
d57heinz

Nonsense! The only thing that quacks like a duck in all this, and thus is a duck is yourself. If a fool is described as one that mines at a pool with above average luck (198%, 117% and 110% for 1 day, 7 days and 30 days respectively), then whoever does not mine there, or advises not to mine there, must be an accomplished idiot.

In all this, bear in mind that some pools piggy-back on others to improve their luck and lure miners to their pools, and some operators have gone on record to detail their methods of sabotaging other pools that piggyback onto them thus you can not rule out the very real possibility that some pool operator targets another with a block withholding attack, simply to suppress that pool's luck and lure miners to their pools.

I actually believe slush gave a cover story for the block with-holding attack and the real culprit is another pool. Saying that, I have every confidence in slush's ability to handle this better than any other pool operator on planet bitcoin. Pool mining is about trusting the pool operator and slush being the pioneer pool (and stratum protocol architect) can not put his reputation out to hang over a 4 month block with-holding attack by misleading miners. If anything, slush holds the miner's best interests to the forefront in everything that he does, and questioning that should raise more questions about intentions.
18  Bitcoin / Pools / Re: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool on: February 18, 2016, 07:30:20 PM
Maybe you noticed the pool website now redirects to https://slushpool.com. The URL is legit, we've been lucky enough to obtain this nice domain and we just moved there from more complicated "mining.bitcoin.cz". Back in 2010 I did not realize how big the mining industry will became, so I choose just a subdomain of my Czech bitcoin blog :-).

This is just about the website, no change in miner settings is needed as we keep all mining URLs to work normally.

Nice one captain, and the UI keeps getting better! Looking forward to the proof stats coming up, and great job nipping that block with-holding bug ... better late than never I say. Oh! before I forget, the pool luck across all stats looks brilliant too .... keep up the good work.
19  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Stock S3+ voltage on: January 23, 2016, 06:47:37 PM
You are a liar because you crystallised your argument based on your search for an under-volt efficiency, not on whether the voltage setting can improve the efficiency of the rig depending on which frequency you are running, and that is where you went wrong. That you adamantly peddle that as fact in direct contradiction with even the datasheet, makes you an even bigger liar.

But we digress, OP's issue, like he stated, is about how they are powering the problem rig. If you want to split hairs as to which diodes you looked at and what the readings of your multimeter were when you were looking to undervolt, then I'll leave you to it.

The OP raised voltage setting, all adseb and I pointed out was that is does not actually change the core voltage. If the S3 was not well past it's sell by date I would persist in the discussion, however as it's now academic I will call it a Day on the S3 Voltage setting discussion.

If anyone else want's to chip in with their experiences of software voltage setting on an S3 then please do so. I for one have had my fill of being called a liar in every other paragraph...


Rich

If you do not want to be called a liar, do not lie, simple.
The datasheet is quite clear on the recomended voltage setting for different frequencies, so persisting with your lies that the voltage setting has no use, while saying in the next breath that you do not know what the chip actually does with the settings from cgminer, simply cements your assertions as pure lies (and which liar wouldn't have their fill if they were found out?).

The voltage setting, like I stated, will not resurect an inadequately powered S3, so the OP has to ensure they are powering their rig adequately before even being concerned about the voltage setting. Matching the frequency they are running at with the recomended voltage setting (or a touch higer) will definitely reduce HW and / or improve hash speed.

EDIT:
Here's one example, properly powered with a Dell N750P-S0 server PSU with 4 custom made 16AWG 6 pin PCI-e cables, that's been running for a couple of weeks with the voltage setting matched to that recomended for the frequency in the datasheet.



I usually let these run for months on end without restarting save for when the PSU's fans die (common with these PSU's running in a shed in the garden) and the PSU shuts down.
20  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Stock S3+ voltage on: January 23, 2016, 06:22:09 PM
You are a liar because you crystallised your argument based on your search for an under-volt efficiency, not on whether the voltage setting can improve the efficiency of the rig depending on which frequency you are running, and that is where you went wrong. That you adamantly peddle that as fact in direct contradiction with even the datasheet, makes you an even bigger liar.

But we digress, OP's issue, like he stated, is about how they are powering the problem rig. If you want to split hairs as to which diodes you looked at and what the readings of your multimeter were when you were looking to undervolt, then I'll leave you to it.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 ... 67 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!