Bitcoin Forum
February 20, 2020, 04:06:17 PM
 Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
 News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 Home Help Search Login Register More
 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 52 53 54 55
 Author Topic: Old simplecoin thread  (Read 99482 times)
simplecoin
Sr. Member

Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250

 June 08, 2011, 06:06:41 PM

Sigh, my estimated earnings are still randomly decreasing and jumping about.
Is the score calculation still flawed?

I'll do my own calculations to determine how accurate it is.

Edit:
50(13535/441462)=1.533 BTC
My earnings are showing as 1.203 BTC

I am trying to iron-out the cheat-proof estimate. It's crazy logarithmic math. Payouts are also no longer 100% proportional. They are weighted towards miners who spend even time in the round. So, if you're not trying to pool-hop, you will be paid slightly more than those who are.

Even if your estimate is off: the final payout will be correct. The final payout calculations are too complex and strenuous to run often enough for estimates.

Could you explain the entire formula for calculating how we are paid? Then we can review it and fully understand how the reward system works.

Also, with the current method, doesn't that mean the lower-power contributers (below 500 MH/s) are unfairly being disadvantaged relative to the high-power hashers, so long as the high-power hashers are present (or accepting shares while the low-power hashers are too)?

No, hashrate has nothing to do with the scoring weight. It's weighted towards when you participate.

Think of it as proportional scoring but also proportional to the length of the round you participated in.

The actual proof and discussion is here if you want the technical details (http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=4787.0)

Donations: 1VjGJHPtLodwCFBDWsHJMdEhqRcRKdBQk
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1582214777
Hero Member

Offline

Posts: 1582214777

Ignore
 1582214777

1582214777
 Report to moderator
simplecoin
Sr. Member

Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250

 June 08, 2011, 06:27:12 PM

Well, looks like I'll lose just a tiny bit from this first round..... Since tx fees are mandated by the client, every cashout costs me .01 btc.

So, since I want to keep this pool free... Should I take the estimated tx fee out on cashout or should it make accounts go negative for the actual cost?

I run this for you, so I'm open to suggestions.

Donations: 1VjGJHPtLodwCFBDWsHJMdEhqRcRKdBQk
pete248
Newbie

Offline

Activity: 12
Merit: 0

 June 08, 2011, 06:40:44 PM

Sigh, my estimated earnings are still randomly decreasing and jumping about.
Is the score calculation still flawed?

I'll do my own calculations to determine how accurate it is.

Edit:
50(13535/441462)=1.533 BTC
My earnings are showing as 1.203 BTC

I am trying to iron-out the cheat-proof estimate. It's crazy logarithmic math. Payouts are also no longer 100% proportional. They are weighted towards miners who spend even time in the round. So, if you're not trying to pool-hop, you will be paid slightly more than those who are.

Even if your estimate is off: the final payout will be correct. The final payout calculations are too complex and strenuous to run often enough for estimates.

Could you explain the entire formula for calculating how we are paid? Then we can review it and fully understand how the reward system works.

Also, with the current method, doesn't that mean the lower-power contributers (below 500 MH/s) are unfairly being disadvantaged relative to the high-power hashers, so long as the high-power hashers are present (or accepting shares while the low-power hashers are too)?

No, hashrate has nothing to do with the scoring weight. It's weighted towards when you participate.

Think of it as proportional scoring but also proportional to the length of the round you participated in.

The actual proof and discussion is here if you want the technical details (http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=4787.0)

So if i understand correctly, a simple situation would be this:

If Person 2 joined the pool at when the weighting was 5.
And the number means how many shares have been submitted at that weighting (would decrease within a given time period).

Person 1                     Person 2       Share Weighting (Decreases with time until block is solved)
1                                                               10
1                                                                9
1                                                                8
1                                                                6
1                             3                                 5
1                             3                                 4
1                             3                                 3
1                             3                                 2
1                             3                                 1

Person 1 submitted 10 shares. Has a total weighting of 55.
Person 2 submitted 15 shares. Has a total weighting of 45.
This means that Person 1 minimises their losses (or even equals or gets more than) Person 2 as he started mining earlier in the pool, and so the weighting starts canceling out the fact that Person 2 has a higher share of the reward.
simplecoin
Sr. Member

Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250

 June 08, 2011, 06:54:05 PM

So if i understand correctly, a simple situation would be this:

If Person 2 joined the pool at when the weighting was 5.
And the number means how many shares have been submitted at that weighting (would decrease within a given time period).

Person 1                     Person 2       Share Weighting (Decreases with time until block is solved)
1                                                               10
1                                                                9
1                                                                8
1                                                                6
1                             3                                 5
1                             3                                 4
1                             3                                 3
1                             3                                 2
1                             3                                 1

Person 1 submitted 10 shares. Has a total weighting of 55.
Person 2 submitted 15 shares. Has a total weighting of 45.
This means that Person 1 minimises their losses (or even equals or gets more than) Person 2 as he started mining earlier in the pool, and so the weighting starts canceling out the fact that Person 2 has a higher share of the reward.

No, that's what the scoring is meant to prevent.
Share # Person a (Pool Hopper) Person b (loyal member) Share weight
1          1mh                          1mh                            1
100       1mh                          1mh                            1.1
10000    1mh                          1mh                            2
100000   0mh                         1mh                            4
1000000 0mh                          1mh                            10

Please note these numbers are purely made up, but they might help get the point across. Since you never know when a block will end and pool hopping exploits the start of a new block, it causes anyone trying to cheat to not get a disproportionate reward on short rounds.

The share weights are not 1-1, and reset with each block, creating a constant sliding scale. Your rewards should be the same or better than a proportional share if you are not trying to exploit pool hopping.

Donations: 1VjGJHPtLodwCFBDWsHJMdEhqRcRKdBQk
pete248
Newbie

Offline

Activity: 12
Merit: 0

 June 08, 2011, 07:19:43 PM

So if i understand correctly, a simple situation would be this:

If Person 2 joined the pool at when the weighting was 5.
And the number means how many shares have been submitted at that weighting (would decrease within a given time period).

Person 1                     Person 2       Share Weighting (Decreases with time until block is solved)
1                                                               10
1                                                                9
1                                                                8
1                                                                6
1                             3                                 5
1                             3                                 4
1                             3                                 3
1                             3                                 2
1                             3                                 1

Person 1 submitted 10 shares. Has a total weighting of 55.
Person 2 submitted 15 shares. Has a total weighting of 45.
This means that Person 1 minimises their losses (or even equals or gets more than) Person 2 as he started mining earlier in the pool, and so the weighting starts canceling out the fact that Person 2 has a higher share of the reward.

No, that's what the scoring is meant to prevent.
Share # Person a (Pool Hopper) Person b (loyal member) Share weight
1          1mh                          1mh                            1
100       1mh                          1mh                            1.1
10000    1mh                          1mh                            2
100000   0mh                         1mh                            4
1000000 0mh                          1mh                            10

Please note these numbers are purely made up, but they might help get the point across. Since you never know when a block will end and pool hopping exploits the start of a new block, it causes anyone trying to cheat to not get a disproportionate reward on short rounds.

The share weights are not 1-1, and reset with each block, creating a constant sliding scale. Your rewards should be the same or better than a proportional share if you are not trying to exploit pool hopping.

Oh right, i get it thanks for explaining!
Man From The Future
Sr. Member

Offline

Activity: 371
Merit: 250

 June 08, 2011, 07:39:19 PM

Open source, ok, where is the source of this "Miner Pool"?

Please don't claim that it is open source, if it is not.

edit:, oh it's changed since yesterday, now it reads "SimpleCoin" in the about. Still no source that I can find... People shouldn't be asking "how is your reward calculated", if it was all open source. They would already know.

 THE ONE STOP SOLUTION FOR THE CRYPTO WORLD▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄/  Facebook   /  Twitter   /  Reddit   /  Medium   /  Youtube   / ▄▄█████████▄▄   ▄█████████████████▄  █████▀▀  ███  ▀▀█████ ████     █████     ████████     ██████████▀    ████ ███████▄   ████   ████████  ████▄▄▄▄▄████  ████ ███████████████████████  █████▄▄       ▄▄█████   ▀█████████████████▀      ▀▀█████████▀▀ CRYPTASSIST▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀KNOWLEDGE IS POWER ▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄▄█▀                       ▀█▄▄▄▄▄ ▄█                           █▄ ▄▄▄▄█   ███▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀███   █▀▀█▀                                 ▀█▀▀▄▀                                     ▀▄▄▄▀▄▄▄▄                                 ▄▄▄▄▀▄▄█       ▀▀▄                           ▄▀▀       ██          █                         █          ██▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀█▒▀▄       ██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▀█▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██       ▄▀▒▒█▀▀▀▀▄▄  █              ▀              █  ▄▄▀▀▀▀█▒▒█      █ ▀▄                           ▄▀ █      █▒▒▀▄▀▄▄▄▄▀  █▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀█  ▀▄▄▄▄▀▄▀▒▒▒▒▀▄▄▄▄▄ █                             █ ▄▄▄▄▄▀▒▒▒ ▒▒▒▒▒▒▀▀▀▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████████▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ████████████████████████ █ ▌|━━   TELEGRAM   ━━|▐ █((   ANN Thread   ))   ((   White Paper   ))
simplecoin
Sr. Member

Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250

 June 08, 2011, 07:42:34 PM

Open source, ok, where is the source of this "Miner Pool"?

Please don't claim that it is open source, if it is not.

Funny you mention that, I'm uploading it to a public github now!

It was based off Xenland's Miner Pool which was also opensource. He and I have spoken about cross-licensing, and came to an agreement. I'm comfortable enough now with the source too that it is on it's way shortly!

Miner Pool is here : http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=10617.0

Donations: 1VjGJHPtLodwCFBDWsHJMdEhqRcRKdBQk
Man From The Future
Sr. Member

Offline

Activity: 371
Merit: 250

 June 08, 2011, 07:45:47 PM

AAh, I see why I couldn't find it, it read "Miner Pool", when it is called "Mining Pool"!

Nice! I look forward to looking at it and becoming confused

 THE ONE STOP SOLUTION FOR THE CRYPTO WORLD▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄/  Facebook   /  Twitter   /  Reddit   /  Medium   /  Youtube   / ▄▄█████████▄▄   ▄█████████████████▄  █████▀▀  ███  ▀▀█████ ████     █████     ████████     ██████████▀    ████ ███████▄   ████   ████████  ████▄▄▄▄▄████  ████ ███████████████████████  █████▄▄       ▄▄█████   ▀█████████████████▀      ▀▀█████████▀▀ CRYPTASSIST▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀KNOWLEDGE IS POWER ▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄▄█▀                       ▀█▄▄▄▄▄ ▄█                           █▄ ▄▄▄▄█   ███▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀███   █▀▀█▀                                 ▀█▀▀▄▀                                     ▀▄▄▄▀▄▄▄▄                                 ▄▄▄▄▀▄▄█       ▀▀▄                           ▄▀▀       ██          █                         █          ██▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀█▒▀▄       ██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▀█▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██       ▄▀▒▒█▀▀▀▀▄▄  █              ▀              █  ▄▄▀▀▀▀█▒▒█      █ ▀▄                           ▄▀ █      █▒▒▀▄▀▄▄▄▄▀  █▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀█  ▀▄▄▄▄▀▄▀▒▒▒▒▀▄▄▄▄▄ █                             █ ▄▄▄▄▄▀▒▒▒ ▒▒▒▒▒▒▀▀▀▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████████▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ████████████████████████ █ ▌|━━   TELEGRAM   ━━|▐ █((   ANN Thread   ))   ((   White Paper   ))
iCEBREAKER
Legendary

Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1070

Crypto is the separation of Power and State.

 June 08, 2011, 08:08:55 PM

So if i understand correctly, a simple situation would be this:

If Person 2 joined the pool at when the weighting was 5.
And the number means how many shares have been submitted at that weighting (would decrease within a given time period).

Person 1                     Person 2       Share Weighting (Decreases with time until block is solved)
1                                                               10
1                                                                9
1                                                                8
1                                                                6
1                             3                                 5
1                             3                                 4
1                             3                                 3
1                             3                                 2
1                             3                                 1

Person 1 submitted 10 shares. Has a total weighting of 55.
Person 2 submitted 15 shares. Has a total weighting of 45.
This means that Person 1 minimises their losses (or even equals or gets more than) Person 2 as he started mining earlier in the pool, and so the weighting starts canceling out the fact that Person 2 has a higher share of the reward.

No, that's what the scoring is meant to prevent.
Share # Person a (Pool Hopper) Person b (loyal member) Share weight
1          1mh                          1mh                            1
100       1mh                          1mh                            1.1
10000    1mh                          1mh                            2
100000   0mh                         1mh                            4
1000000 0mh                          1mh                            10

Please note these numbers are purely made up, but they might help get the point across. Since you never know when a block will end and pool hopping exploits the start of a new block, it causes anyone trying to cheat to not get a disproportionate reward on short rounds.

The share weights are not 1-1, and reset with each block, creating a constant sliding scale. Your rewards should be the same or better than a proportional share if you are not trying to exploit pool hopping.

Doesn't this just change the incentive for pool hoppers from exploiting the first half of the round, to exploiting the second one?

*joins for first 1/3 of round, hops pools, re-joins for last 1/3 of current difficulty*

 ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████Monero
 "The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy."  David Chaum 1996"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
 ▪Private▪Auditable▪100% Fungible▪Wild & Free▪Flexible Blocksize▪Intro▪Core GUI▪Github▪Android
sirky
Sr. Member

Offline

Activity: 407
Merit: 250

 June 08, 2011, 08:14:22 PM

So if i understand correctly, a simple situation would be this:

If Person 2 joined the pool at when the weighting was 5.
And the number means how many shares have been submitted at that weighting (would decrease within a given time period).

Person 1                     Person 2       Share Weighting (Decreases with time until block is solved)
1                                                               10
1                                                                9
1                                                                8
1                                                                6
1                             3                                 5
1                             3                                 4
1                             3                                 3
1                             3                                 2
1                             3                                 1

Person 1 submitted 10 shares. Has a total weighting of 55.
Person 2 submitted 15 shares. Has a total weighting of 45.
This means that Person 1 minimises their losses (or even equals or gets more than) Person 2 as he started mining earlier in the pool, and so the weighting starts canceling out the fact that Person 2 has a higher share of the reward.

No, that's what the scoring is meant to prevent.
Share # Person a (Pool Hopper) Person b (loyal member) Share weight
1          1mh                          1mh                            1
100       1mh                          1mh                            1.1
10000    1mh                          1mh                            2
100000   0mh                         1mh                            4
1000000 0mh                          1mh                            10

Please note these numbers are purely made up, but they might help get the point across. Since you never know when a block will end and pool hopping exploits the start of a new block, it causes anyone trying to cheat to not get a disproportionate reward on short rounds.

The share weights are not 1-1, and reset with each block, creating a constant sliding scale. Your rewards should be the same or better than a proportional share if you are not trying to exploit pool hopping.

Doesn't this just change the incentive for pool hoppers from exploiting the first half of the round, to exploiting the second one?

*joins for first 1/3 of round, hops pools, re-joins for last 1/3 of current difficulty*

Well... you never know when you are going to find a block though. So you can't know when to rejoin. It's just good to be there right before it is found.
simplecoin
Sr. Member

Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250

 June 08, 2011, 08:34:24 PM

First public source released! http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=13164.0

Donations: 1VjGJHPtLodwCFBDWsHJMdEhqRcRKdBQk
iCEBREAKER
Legendary

Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1070

Crypto is the separation of Power and State.

 June 08, 2011, 09:09:50 PM

Well... you never know when you are going to find a block though. So you can't know when to rejoin. It's just good to be there right before it is found.

That works, unless you can use the current difficulty to estimate when the least profitable middle-third of the current round will occur, and then skip out on it.

Disclaimer: I am terrible at probability and combinatorics.  It's all magic quantum woo to me.

 ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████Monero
 "The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy."  David Chaum 1996"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect."  Adam Back 2014
 ▪Private▪Auditable▪100% Fungible▪Wild & Free▪Flexible Blocksize▪Intro▪Core GUI▪Github▪Android
simplecoin
Sr. Member

Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250

 June 08, 2011, 09:14:56 PM

Well... you never know when you are going to find a block though. So you can't know when to rejoin. It's just good to be there right before it is found.

That works, unless you can use the current difficulty to estimate when the least profitable middle-third of the current round will occur, and then skip out on it.

Disclaimer: I am terrible at probability and combinatorics.  It's all magic quantum woo to me.

Maybe, if the round was just one block. Plus, it's always possible to solve a block in less than the estimate.

Donations: 1VjGJHPtLodwCFBDWsHJMdEhqRcRKdBQk
mouser98
Member

Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10

 June 08, 2011, 09:43:57 PM

assuming SC doesn't mind, i have made a page in facebook for us called Simplecoin US.  come and hang out.
bitblazing
Member

Offline

Activity: 108
Merit: 10

 June 08, 2011, 09:47:43 PM

When do payout occur?
mouser98
Member

Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10

 June 08, 2011, 09:55:42 PM

When do payout occur?

a few hours after a block is solved.
simplecoin
Sr. Member

Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250

 June 08, 2011, 09:58:58 PM

When do payout occur?

Specifically, once we find a block and it matures (120 confirmations)

Donations: 1VjGJHPtLodwCFBDWsHJMdEhqRcRKdBQk
damata_chip
Newbie

Offline

Activity: 1
Merit: 0

 June 08, 2011, 10:07:07 PM

My processing speed keeps pretty constant between 62,000-66,000 khash/s, but on my account page the hashrate is showing as between 40-50 MH/s. Is there a problem with the calculation or is there something else i'm not taking into account?
kiwiasian
Full Member

Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 100

 June 08, 2011, 10:13:35 PM

My processing speed keeps pretty constant between 62,000-66,000 khash/s, but on my account page the hashrate is showing as between 40-50 MH/s. Is there a problem with the calculation or is there something else i'm not taking into account?

The hash rate is estimated based on the number of valid shares you submit relative to others.

Tradehill referral link, save 10% | http://www.tradehill.com/?r=TH-R12328
www.payb.tc/kiwiasian | 1LHNW1JGMBo2e7rKiiFz7KJPKE57bqCdEC
simplecoin
Sr. Member

Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250

 June 08, 2011, 10:25:38 PM

My processing speed keeps pretty constant between 62,000-66,000 khash/s, but on my account page the hashrate is showing as between 40-50 MH/s. Is there a problem with the calculation or is there something else i'm not taking into account?

The hash rate is estimated based on the number of valid shares you submit relative to others.

No, not relative Just ((valid shares*4294967296)/600seconds)

Donations: 1VjGJHPtLodwCFBDWsHJMdEhqRcRKdBQk
 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 52 53 54 55
 « previous topic next topic »
Jump to:

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.