Luck isn't a zero-sum game.  The entire network can be having bad or good luck simultaneously.  That's why any graphs which try to show the network hash rate have massive fluctuations from day to day.  People are NOT turning equipment on/off at random, it's simply the network getting lucky/unlucky as a whole.

EDIT:  I didn't mean to imply that splitting hash rate will not reduce the impact of luck.  Just that the concept of "luck has to go somewhere" is false.

It's because we had a bad week.  Long term average is still under 1%, which is the rule of thumb generally.  When you only have 70ish blocks during a week, each orphan is a big hit.  Looking at it on a larger picture (one visible on the pool stats page), 3 out of the last 200 blocks were orphans, all 3 of which were last week.

That's cute, thinking ASIC manufacturers used testnet in the past.

They were both removed from auto switching within a day of the market dying off.  But until there is some volume, it's going to be a while before they get unloaded.

Something in your numbers is wrong, you haven't factored in the last difficulty increase, or you have hash rate leaking out to a backup pool.  24h luck is only 20% under expectation, yet you're claiming to be almost 40% behind.

There are no manual payouts.  Automatic payouts are hourly if your thresholds are set to 0.01+.  The FULL balance is paid out when it triggers.  They're every 24 hours if the thresholds are 0.001-0.009.

Just to clarify something when it comes to difficulty.

The work you're doing is the same whether the pool has your difficulty at 1 or 1,000,000.


Difficulty 1 mining didn't return all of your results either, only about 1 in 2^32 hashes produced a difficulty 1 share (4.2 billion).  However, your share wasn't "exactly" difficulty 1 (normally).  About 50% of those diff1 shares would also qualify as diff2 shares.  About 50% of those (25% of all diff1) would also qualify as diff4 shares.  Repeat infinitely.


When the pools adjust your difficulty (or you do via a web interface), what is being agreed upon is how high of a difficulty your minimum is.  You're not credited at all for anything worse than that difficulty.  In return, you're credited for more work with each submission.  So if you're only submitting diff2048+ shares, each submission is counted as 2048 shares, because the odds of a diff1 share also qualifying as diff2048 is 1 in 2048.

In the short term, you may have done much more or less work than what it would take to submit 2048 difficulty 1 shares.  Just like pools have luck, each hash is luck based.  But over time, the distribution of your hash results will match what you've been credited.  The proof of this is the fact that the pool interface should show an estimate of your hash rate that is very close to your actual hash rate (unless you have your difficulty set too high, in which case it my deviate significantly from variance).

Not much being done on it.  I'm expecting to  begin the move July 11-13, hopefully have all the office, utilities, and internet ready by the 18th.

Coins only show up when a shift is completed, once per hour.  There's always *something* that will show up as long as you're set to automatic.  If you manually picked a coin, I'd recommend changing back to auto because you're going to end up making a LOT less otherwise.

I'm not sure you realize the core problem here.  It doesn't matter how enticing the pool is.  Unless I spend more money than the pool has made in its lifetime to build up a giant warehouse of ASICs, it will not matter.  Public miners are becoming a smaller and smaller share of the network, and that is NEVER going to reverse now that the ASIC genie is out of the bottle and miners have thrown their money at them for first/2nd generation products.  Those companies are using the money that miners threw at them to build up private farms of their next generation products for pennies on the dollar compared to what miners would have to pay for the same hash rate.  They'll happily sell them to you as well, because for every unit they sell you, they can build 4 more with the profit from the sale.

Wow, pay for orphans AND keep the fee the same.  That cuts the income *in half* for me, and considering every other pool that doesn't have a 15+ PH/s private farm attached to it is shrinking, it's not going to in any way make the pool get larger to make up for a roughly 50% cut in gross revenue.

I used to pay for orphans.  Then I stopped paying for orphans and dropped the fee by 1%.  It makes no sense to pay for orphans when nobody else does, all it does is make your effective fee the same but your stated fee higher.

You can calculate it yourself once each difficulty.  Shifts are currently 11b shares long (approximately).  So 10 shifts lasts for ~110b shares.   Divide that by network difficulty to get the neutral luck blocks per shift. 110b / 16.b = 6.55 blocks would be perfect neutral luck.




That proposed solution will never see the light of day.  The complexity of implementing is just too high and no pool operator with a brain is ever going to touch a PPS reward system again.

No plans on changing that/making it selectable currently.  It's at 11 items because it's showing you the currently open shifts and the current (not yet completed) shift progress.  The recent blocks uses 11 just so they're symmetrical since it would look odd if one was longer than the other (empty space on one side or the other).

The point of the dashboard is quick live stats, not historical data.

The round length was always targetting 1 block per shift minimum, with a 1hour shift length maximum.  This is no longer possible since the pool is under 10% of the network.  The options are longer shifts, which means more blocks per shift but they last a LOT longer, or keeping shifts the same, which means fewer blocks per shift.

The earnings for the user does not change in either situation.  More shifts with fewer blocks per shift or fewer shifts with more blocks per shift.  Pick your poison.  I have no plans to increase shift length beyond what it already is because they already last too long in my opinion.  It already takes about 16 hours for a share submitted to fully mature (stop getting paid).

Yes, 1024 for a dragon is the recommended setting, and should guarantee proper results while mining without any weird stats popping up.  I'm not familiar with the prospector 200, but if it's under 250 GH/s, then 128 is the recommended setting, yes.

However, as far as I'm aware, the only ASIC where the setting *can* cause a problem is the Dragon Miners.  Anything else is just a recommendation, it should have no material effects on other hardware.

Setting the diff to 1024 on both ends will guarantee the problem doesn't happen.  512 is unlikely to cause a problem, other than the one I mentioned where a burst of luck could bump you to 1024, at which point 50% of your submissions get tossed under 'Unknown' rejects.  You would still get full credit for your mining though (you'd be submitting twice as many shares since you're set to 512, and roughly half would meet the 1024, getting credited for 2x512, while the other half would be rejected for not meeting 1024).

I'm not sure if newer dragon miners have fixed it, but I know all the early ones were a hard setting.  If the pool changed the difficulty, the miner would ignore it.  Many early users were complaining about this because dragon miners on every pool were showing only a fraction of the speed they should.  This was because the pools were only crediting them for  diff 2-32 (depending on the pool default), but the miner was only sending 1024+.

I would highly recommend 1024 for Dragon Miners.  Otherwise if your miner gets a burst of shares due to luck, vardiff will put you at 1024 and roughly half of your submissions will get rejected for low difficulty.  While that shouldn't cause any issue with earnings, it will make your stats look completely terrible.

I really despise the fact that the idiots who designed dragon miners made difficulty a setting in the miner which completely ignores what the pool tells it to use.

The most likely cause is the miner was turned on and restarted once or twice before it was left alone.  The speed shown is an average.  The window starts with only 2 minutes of mining data, and then as more data is available (miner keeps running), it extends that average to a full hour.  If you turn on a miner and then tweak a setting and restart it, you'll have a gap in your shares which affect the speed estimate.

Additionally, if your workers didn't have their minimum difficulty set, the few minutes or so will be have some brief gaps due to constant difficulty adjustments until vardiff finds the proper level.  Some hardware is significantly worse at handling difficulty adjustments than others.

The pool has no way to know your actual speed, it can only make a best guess.  If your miner is turned on and left alone, it should reach an accurate estimate quickly.  But any time you turn a miner off, it will have an effect on the estimate (unless you hit 'Reset Stats' before turning the miner back on, which resets the flexible window used to estimate the speed as well).