Also, in 4 or 5 days ( I think) difficulty is most likely going to drop again significantly:  so seeing miners leave in droves makes me happy  |
|
|
|
Isn't there some possibility that there's a bug in the miner server code that could be causing it to "miss" solutions to the block? It's just VERY unlikely that we could be consistently hitting either 90+% or 20-% CDF, which I'd imagine should settle somewhere around 50%. Quite frankly, my mining is turning into a complete waste of time sitting in this pool that's solving no blocks (and when it does, I get a paltry little table-scrap share for how long I've sat mining it)...
Bluntly, it's getting just really fucking frustrating seeing that nobody's acknowledged the possibility, investigated, nor explained the absurdly low block-finds in this pool...
I feel you pain, and shared your concern. But then I did the math. If I average all the CDFs so far, I get 49.15%. If anything, so far this pool has on average been "lucky". Just not lately . I admit having been tempted to move at least one machine to a larger pool to get some consistency, but then I know for sure, after I did that, the next blocks on bitminter will have like 15 CDF and Ill bang my head against the wall. Also, joining a larger pool does give you consistency, but lets not kid ourselves, the daily or even weekly payout from one or two machines is still ridiculously low. Its only somewhat tangible if you look at it over many months, and in that sense, the current dry spell is insignificant. So Im keeping the faith, the next 5 blocks will be found within a week, I can feel it  . |
|
|
|
Are you taking into account the changes in the total pool hash rate?
I've had a steady hashrate over the last 10 shifts, but since the total hashrate has gone up, the shifts go by faster and I have fewer shares per shift as a result..
Good point. Seems like the single card results I was looking at, indeed the pools hash rate was substantially lower. I was looking mostly at the "your score" column, but clearly my score goes down as hashrate goes up, hence no doubling . I guess Ill have to add a third card Cant wait for our luck to turn though. Seems like we are headed to another 90+% CDF |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin, because money should be free *.
* Free as in freedom.
|
|
|
|
It is even worse than you think. All commercial SHA coprocessors are built for streaming, which doesn't work for bitcoin.
Care to elaborate? What is streaming in this context? |
|
|
|
Interesting points, but I think still having a machine running solo specifically for the variance is a good thing because if I hit I suddenly can afford to buy some new hardware that I would not otherwise have. And if you read before I am a gambler ;-) I used to play online poker for a living now I am doing actual working and looking for a new way “out”.
As an update what I thought was a 5870 turned out to be a dead card so now I have my 6450 mining on this computer @ 28.5 Mhash/s on a pool. It is the best working machine I have atm so I am thinking of putting this solo and switching all the others to a pool. Right now I am paying $0.08 per KWh and according to my power management software I am using 5.40 KWh per day….. I also have a Quadro 3xxx that is PCIe that may be dead. Worth using if it is not?
Its not profitable if you count all 225W of the machine (ie, if you otherwise turn the machine off). Power cost per 24h: 0.43 USD Revenue per day: 0.09 USD ... less power costs: -0.35 USD See for yourself here: http://bitcoinx.com/profit/index.phpDont bother with the quadro either. There are only a few cards out there where its even possible to be profitable, that is basically 5770s, 58x0, 59x0, 68x0 and 69x0 cards. Even with those cards its tough to make a profit, with anything else, forget it. |
|
|
|
|
Anyone with an IQ bigger than his shoe size would assume in the context of this discussion "miners" means people mining for the revenue of mining. Not people speculating who also happen to run a mining rig. You butterfly causing a hurricane argument is neither original, meaningful or relevant, but Ill grant you it perfectly fits your "argument". What are you, 12 ?
|
|
|
|
Bitcoins are worth thousands of dollars. We'll see how long it takes for people to realize this If you realize it already, you can buy all my bitcoins for just hundreds of dollars |
|
|
|
Doesnt matter. Its first come first served,no matter how long its been around.
Depends on the country. In some countries you common law rights, in others you dont. Ive no idea about France. |
|
|
|
 Mining peaked around August 1, 2011.The mining graph has roughly the shape of the Bitcoin/USD price graph, but trails it by about two months. One interpretation of this is that miners hang on an average of two months after they start losing money, then quit. A proper economic analysis of this needs to take into account both the initial cost, buying the video cards, and the running cost (electricity). Back in June, miners thought that the price was going to keep on going up, so it was seen as worth it for a very large number of new miners to come in, and they did, paying the initial cost. The price went far down, and it is now no longer worth it for new miners to enter (unless they're not paying for their electricity), but even in July it was worth it for existing miners to keep mining. In August, however, the price kept on falling, and fell below the threshold so that the least efficient of even the existing miners were forced to shut down, which is why it's only then that the number of miners started to go down. It's not a 2 month lag, it's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis - like a thermostat only increasing or decreasing the power to the heating when the temperature falls substantially below the target. The price threshold for miners to stay mining is about 1/3 of the threshold for there to be new miners, so there is a 3x range within which the price can change without changing the number of miners, but if the price falls outside the range it drags the number of miners up and down with it (technically, it's the expectation of future high prices that brings new miners in, and that's what happened in June, but it's a good simplification in the long term). I mostly agree, except there is a delay. Bringing new rigs online takes time. First the miner has to be convinced its worth it, and the price increase isnt a fluke, so he may watch prices for a while before deciding to buy. Then he has to order, build, configure. It takes time. Though probably not as much as reducing hashrate; first there is the same effect, miners will look at prices for a while before being convinced its not a short term dip and decide to pull the plugs and/or sell their equipment. Look at the for sale section, there is gazillion cards for sale there now. I bet many still have their rigs running as marginal profits may still beat marginal costs for most people, so why not use them while they wait for their cards to be sold. To be fair, I suspect most cards bought on this forum will end up mining again, but on other fora I see truckloads of AMD cards being offered to gamers from miners who threw the towel. In the long run, particularly if bitcoin price remains less volatile, this effect will fade. Miners are learning, some the hard way, the economics behind mining. If there is a new big bubble you might get a similar effect from newcomers though. |
|
|
|
|
Syke, there is no point arguing. Some people just cant seem to distinguish between miners and speculators. Or rather between mining for profit and speculating. Let them believe in the positive feedback loop and wonder how come prices arent spiraling out of control in either direction.
|
|
|
|
You can see they produced more proofs of work in shift 64 than in shift 63.
In shift 63 (and the ones before) both machines were offline for some time, so thats not surprising. If I look further back, to 56, 51 etc, I got ~2200-2400 proofs, with just one machine (technically 1.1 machines if you count the nvidia rig). With 2 now Im getting no more than ~2700-2900. Perhaps more telling, "my score", so compared to the rest of the pool, has not really changed, despite having twice the hashrate and the pools hashrate not having changed all that much. Anyway, you're probably right, but just to be sure, Ive put both machines on the same worker now Nothing is ever deleted from the database. Workers are just marked as deleted if you "delete" them on the website.
good |
|
|
|
Nothing wrong there, the work is just spread out over more than one shift.
Here's the work from those 2 workers by shift:
shift | worker | proofs
--------+------------+------
current | bitminterp4| 191
65 | diablocore2| 431
65 | bitminterp4| 1525
64 | diablocore2| 1455
64 | bitminterp4| 1518
63 | bitminterp4| 1196
63 | diablocore2| 1191
And here is the work by block:
block | worker | proofs
-------+------------+------
current | diablocore2| 3077
current | bitminterp4| 4430
If I got the UTC conversion right, shift 64 is the first full shift where i had both machines mining nonstop. Seems kinda surprising Im barely getting more proofs than I got previously with just one machine. But I have been creating and deleting workers a fair bit, you sure that doesnt delete my "proofs"? |
|
|
|
Fishy or not, stock photos don't provide a whole lot of proof of ownership.
Dude, he's selling on ebay. When is the last time you bought something there from someone with 100% feeback, paying with paypal yet demanded "proof of ownership"? |
|
|
|
Its never gonna happen. Ill be shocked if you raise 10BTC. TBH, I hope it doesnt happen. So many people are actually in need, I can hardly think of a less worthy cause than donating so a teenager (I assume) living with his parents can buy a sportscar he doesnt need. If you feel like donating to give someone a car, have a look at this: http://getglennmobile.com/Now that makes more sense to me. If you want to make the press and do it for a good cause, set up a bitcoin fund for someone like Glenn, someone who really is in need at who at least tries something anything to raise money. |
|
|
|
I believe there is a bug in the stats. When you click statistics -> shift, the number of proofs appears to based on just one worker. Yesterday I brought a second machine online, and the stats there have not really budged:  Note that for at least for the duration of the last shift, those 2 machines where running, both equal machines. I created two new workers at that time, to compare bitminter to diablo, and in the my account page, I do see all shares, and it corresponds to what my miner apps report:  |
|
|
|
Last update, the Core2 machine has to be taken offline:  To be clear, you have to look at the proofs of work. The MH/s is a short term average (not sure, 5 minutes or so) and fluctuates wildly. Seems like these apps are really close, but bitminter does have an edge on my 5850s. I believe bitminter has a bigger edge on 69x0's, but I cant test that. Anyone else feel free. |
|
|
|
There are more laptops than there are desktops. There are FAR more corporate style desktops than there are gaming rigs. I would be surprised if 1/10th of the PCs out there would be remotely suitable for mining. Scratch that, more like 1/100, as it seems even among gamers, only 5% has DX11 capable hardware: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
