are there any actual stats on chain reorgs, by depth?

[2112]

I dropped out of kindergarten, I couldnt handle being shamed and put in the corner when I asked questions I wasnt supposed to.

Take mountain climbing as a hobby. Your main adversary will be then impersonal gravity. But you'll learn to deal with reality and how to overcome obstacles. Or you'll get yourself killed.

Or you dont mind if people just categorize you as some type of troll? I would think a smart person would want his point of view appreciated and not just dismissed as troll blather.

I'm actually proud of getting called troll by now know fraudsters like DeathAndTaxes or shtylman. On you the question is still open: are you leaning more towards harmless crackpottery or towards willful fraud? We'll see.

I appreciated your post about the getchaintips RPC, that was useful. Maybe you can stick to making useful posts? Like math based analysis, which is what I tried to do. Did I make any math errors?

This is public forum. I make post useful to the global audience of the readers, even if they aren't useful to you or any particular poster of any thread.

Your math error is called: GIGO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garbage_in%2C_garbage_out .

The mistake you are making is common enough that there's lots of educational texts regarding the "correlation vs. causation" issue. When I was in school profs used to refer to an excellent joke paper written by some Scandinavian scientists about presence of storks and childbirth rates in Scandinavia. I'm not sure if it was ever translated to English.

Edit: More seriously: many law schools offer "personal development" classes on how to deal with adversity in a public courtroom. Apparently it is a common problem for even excellent students that were home schooled or went to religious schools.

[jl777]

I dropped out of kindergarten, I couldnt handle being shamed and put in the corner when I asked questions I wasnt supposed to.

Take mountain climbing as a hobby. Your main adversary will be then impersonal gravity. But you'll learn to deal with reality and how to overcome obstacles. Or you'll get yourself killed.

Or you dont mind if people just categorize you as some type of troll? I would think a smart person would want his point of view appreciated and not just dismissed as troll blather.

I'm actually proud of getting called troll by now know fraudsters like DeathAndTaxes or shtylman. On you the question is still open: are you leaning more towards harmless crackpottery or towards willful fraud? We'll see.

I appreciated your post about the getchaintips RPC, that was useful. Maybe you can stick to making useful posts? Like math based analysis, which is what I tried to do. Did I make any math errors?

This is public forum. I make post useful to the global audience of the readers, even if they aren't useful to you or any particular poster of any thread.

Your math error is called: GIGO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garbage_in%2C_garbage_out .

The mistake you are making is common enough that there's lots of educational texts regarding the "correlation vs. causation" issue. When I was in school profs used to refer to an excellent joke paper written by some Scandinavian scientists about presence of storks and childbirth rates in Scandinavia. I'm not sure if it was ever translated to English.

Thanks! This really helps me find the math error in my analysis. I was missing the storks.

so we just need to wait stork number of blocks and that will be the optimal for mountain climbing.

I guess you think satoshi was an idiot too, as he said something about 10 blocks. Or was he committing fraud or whatever this crockpottery is.

ad hominem attacks vs. historical results with some actual math

And what exactly is this fraud you imply I am conducting? That using a hard coded lookup table (generated from p2p network and validated) instead of a DB is more efficient. Is that my supposed fraud?

James

[2112]

Thanks! This really helps me find the math error in my analysis. I was missing the storks.

so we just need to wait stork number of blocks and that will be the optimal for mountain climbing.

I guess you think satoshi was an idiot too, as he said something about 10 blocks. Or was he committing fraud or whatever this crockpottery is.

ad hominem attacks vs. historical results with some actual math

And what exactly is this fraud you imply I am conducting? That using a hard coded lookup table (generated from p2p network and validated) instead of a DB is more efficient. Is that my supposed fraud?

James

I don't know. What I do know is that fraudster and gangsters (more generally common criminals) have exceptional sensitivity to being given "no respect" (cue Marlon Brando in The Godfather). Of course, correlation is not causation. But see how DeathAndTaxes reacted to the mention of money orders in 2012. I think that even he didn't know at that time what scam he's going to pull of years later.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=93655.msg1036760#msg1036760

Your reaction to the mention of high-school-level science curriculum is very similar.

Again, time will show.

[jl777]

Thanks! This really helps me find the math error in my analysis. I was missing the storks.

so we just need to wait stork number of blocks and that will be the optimal for mountain climbing.

I guess you think satoshi was an idiot too, as he said something about 10 blocks. Or was he committing fraud or whatever this crockpottery is.

ad hominem attacks vs. historical results with some actual math

And what exactly is this fraud you imply I am conducting? That using a hard coded lookup table (generated from p2p network and validated) instead of a DB is more efficient. Is that my supposed fraud?

James

I don't know. What I do know is that fraudster and gangsters (more generally common criminals) have exceptional sensitivity to being given "no respect" (cue Marlon Brando in The Godfather). Of course, correlation is not causation. But see how DeathAndTaxes reacted to the mention of money orders in 2012. I think that even he didn't know at that time what scam he's going to pull of years later.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=93655.msg1036760#msg1036760

Your reaction to the mention of high-school-level science curriculum is very similar.

Again, time will show.

Are you seriously saying that since A -> B, if C -> B then C -> A can be concluded?

Like: you wake up in the morning. criminals wake up in the morning. Therefore you are a criminal.
or: you breathe air. criminals breathe air. Therefore you are a criminal.

what is the name for this logic, I dont know about it and want to find out more. I know about transitive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitive_relation when A -> B and B -> C that A -> C, but the reverse, this is quite novel. I guess if people operated as strict field elements with specific properties of reverse transivitism(?), maybe there is some basis for this, but last I checked I wasnt a finite field element. Are you?

What is a bit frustrating is that you mix in some highly intelligent stuff with total nonsense, but I am just supposed to accept it all. otherwise I am like a fraudster or mobster? I dont ask for any respect that I dont deserve. If I make a logic error or math error, then point it out. make fun that I am a bad calculator, fine. But this nonsense attack by implication that is supported by absurd "logic", well maybe you are the one that needs to go to school? Maybe I need to be your teacher about some things.

If you cant find any flaws with the logic or math, then you could just say that or be silent about it.

James

P.S. I have done most of my learning by using google to find relevant pages, so there are likely gaps in my knowledge as compared to someone who spent many years learning all the vital things that are learned in schools.

[Syke]

Regardless, of the realtime calc speed, I currently delay creation of a bundle until 10 blocks after the last block of that bundle and wanted to know what is the probability that it will need to be regenerated base on real world stats

As far as my node data, there have been only 2 instances of a reorg over 10 blocks, both due to significant unique events. 1 instance of a normal 6-block reorg. 2 instances of a 3 block reorg. 8 instances of a 2 block reorg. And lots of 1 block reorgs. 4 or more block reorgs are *extremely* rare. The standard client considers anything under 6 blocks to be unconfirmed. That seems like a good number to use for your purposes too.

[jl777]

Regardless, of the realtime calc speed, I currently delay creation of a bundle until 10 blocks after the last block of that bundle and wanted to know what is the probability that it will need to be regenerated base on real world stats

As far as my node data, there have been only 2 instances of a reorg over 10 blocks, both due to significant unique events. 1 instance of a normal 6-block reorg. 2 instances of a 3 block reorg. 8 instances of a 2 block reorg. And lots of 1 block reorgs. 4 or more block reorgs are *extremely* rare. The standard client considers anything under 6 blocks to be unconfirmed. That seems like a good number to use for your purposes too.

thanks for the confirmation. One additional nicety would be if the setback limit divides evenly into 2000. I guess it could be 8, but that doesnt conveniently add up to 2000.

My plan is to have smaller bundles of 100 and 10, so at most there would be 19 mini-bundles of 100, 9 microbundles of 10 and 9 blocks for a total of 37 things to search through