Deepbit Approaching 50% Once Again

[um0rion]

Im going to agree with the idea that Tycho should close registration. Keep deepbit at 40% of the total, or thereabouts. It wont stop the pool's expansion, since existing people can still expand, but it'll slow the influx of new people. There's a lot of good Tycho does with deepbit, and the mining community in general, but I really dont want to see 1 pool have the majority of the power. Ideally you'd have 3 or 4 pools with about the same share, or 1 with slightly larger. 1 pool with 50% or more is just bad news..

[1713969544]

1713969544

[1713969544]

1713969544

[1713969544]

1713969544

[1713969544]

1713969544

[Hawkix]

Better than blocking new registration is to INCREASE THE FEE according to the pool relative rate.

Something like:

40% - 3% fee.
45% - 5% fee.
48% - 8% fee

etc.

It could kind of auto-regulate into slightly above 40%.

Good for Tycho, good for all of us.

[Mess]

Kinda offtopic:

You should try out gbyte.dk if you live close to Denmark. We're a small group of danish people mining together.

[BitCheddar]

I didn't say anything the first time I saw your avatar, only in conjunction with your post. This negates your response.

Whatever you say.   Not really worried about your opinion of me or my avatar.

Anywho, just look at the graph that's been posted a number of times, bitcoinpool is relatively small. Large pool alternatives -- Slush, btcguild btcmine. All larger than bitcoinpool. I've used slush and am not a fan, I've used btcguild and it's basically a smaller deepbit with idle notification (but no PPS) and a lower (or 0) fee. I can't speak to btcmine, but I've heard good things about it.

The point though isn't just that there are alternatives to deepbit that are just as good as it (which there are), the point is that if you are concerned that your magical money fountain is going to dry up, then mining on deepbit makes as little sense as staying on a pool that requires your miners to restart every night. Maybe less sense.

Yes, there are alternatives.  I do not disagree with you on this.  As far as making less Bitcoin on deepbit, I apologize for not simply taking your word for it...I am of the school of "prove it".  I will stay there a while and see how it goes.  If that makes me an idiot in your book, I don't really care.  If end up agreeing with you after some times passes, you can say you were right and I will go somewhere else.  

MY entire point was I just don't see the risk of one pool owning 50% of the mining share.  The security threats exist regardless.  I want a pool that is reliable and gives me good results.  So far, this is the only one I have tried that does that.  No, I haven't tried them all.

[tehcodez]

I didn't say anything the first time I saw your avatar, only in conjunction with your post. This negates your response.

Whatever you say.   Not really worried about your opinion of me or my avatar.

Anywho, just look at the graph that's been posted a number of times, bitcoinpool is relatively small. Large pool alternatives -- Slush, btcguild btcmine. All larger than bitcoinpool. I've used slush and am not a fan, I've used btcguild and it's basically a smaller deepbit with idle notification (but no PPS) and a lower (or 0) fee. I can't speak to btcmine, but I've heard good things about it.

The point though isn't just that there are alternatives to deepbit that are just as good as it (which there are), the point is that if you are concerned that your magical money fountain is going to dry up, then mining on deepbit makes as little sense as staying on a pool that requires your miners to restart every night. Maybe less sense.

Yes, there are alternatives.  I do not disagree with you on this.  As far as making less Bitcoin on deepbit, I apologize for not simply taking your word for it...I am of the school of "prove it".  I will stay there a while and see how it goes.  If that makes me an idiot in your book, I don't really care.  If end up agreeing with you after some times passes, you can say you were right and I will go somewhere else.  

MY entire point was I just don't see the risk of one pool owning 50% of the mining share.  The security threats exist regardless.  I want a pool that is reliable and gives me good results.  So far, this is the only one I have tried that does that.  No, I haven't tried them all.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power

[bcpokey]

I didn't say anything the first time I saw your avatar, only in conjunction with your post. This negates your response.

Whatever you say.   Not really worried about your opinion of me or my avatar.

Anywho, just look at the graph that's been posted a number of times, bitcoinpool is relatively small. Large pool alternatives -- Slush, btcguild btcmine. All larger than bitcoinpool. I've used slush and am not a fan, I've used btcguild and it's basically a smaller deepbit with idle notification (but no PPS) and a lower (or 0) fee. I can't speak to btcmine, but I've heard good things about it.

The point though isn't just that there are alternatives to deepbit that are just as good as it (which there are), the point is that if you are concerned that your magical money fountain is going to dry up, then mining on deepbit makes as little sense as staying on a pool that requires your miners to restart every night. Maybe less sense.

Yes, there are alternatives.  I do not disagree with you on this.  As far as making less Bitcoin on deepbit, I apologize for not simply taking your word for it...I am of the school of "prove it".  I will stay there a while and see how it goes.  If that makes me an idiot in your book, I don't really care.  If end up agreeing with you after some times passes, you can say you were right and I will go somewhere else.  

MY entire point was I just don't see the risk of one pool owning 50% of the mining share.  The security threats exist regardless.  I want a pool that is reliable and gives me good results.  So far, this is the only one I have tried that does that.  No, I haven't tried them all.

I'm not entirely sure what security threat you're referring to, perhaps this is where our disjunction arises.

There is a very specific security threat when a single entity controls 50% of the networks hashing power. That is the point of this thread and why people are crying foul of people using deepbit. This security concern does not exist otherwise, and it's a major one concerning control of the block chain which bitcoin exists upon. If you are unaware of this, that is why I mentioned that you seem to be lacking knowledge of it. If you were aware of it and simply do not care, well, nothing I can do about that. We've tried to warn people.

[kiwiasian]

The size of "Other" shrunk pretty significantly. 3 days ago it was some 35%.

[Hawkix]

Better than blocking new registration is to INCREASE THE FEE according to the pool relative rate.

Something like:

40% - 3% fee.
45% - 5% fee.
48% - 8% fee

etc.

It could kind of auto-regulate into slightly above 40%.

Good for Tycho, good for all of us.

it wont solve the problem it will just give the incentive to run a pool whit lower free and get a awesome income

Sorry, I do not get it. Please, explain. Who will run a pool with lower fee?

[KnuttyD]

The size of "Other" shrunk pretty significantly. 3 days ago it was some 35%.

That was because Deepbit was DDOS'd down for a while; people went solo.
Also, huge influx of new miners that probably didn't know about pooled mining.

[Serge]

if deepbit tries to do anything shady, its hashing power will get close to zero real fast, and that will be the end for it.


people telling deepbit to limit new registrations, would you cut yourself short in place of deepbit?

[KnuttyD]

Better than blocking new registration is to INCREASE THE FEE according to the pool relative rate.

Something like:

40% - 3% fee.
45% - 5% fee.
48% - 8% fee

etc.

It could kind of auto-regulate into slightly above 40%.

Good for Tycho, good for all of us.

it wont solve the problem it will just give the incentive to run a pool whit lower free and get a awesome income

Sorry, I do not get it. Please, explain. Who will run a pool with lower fee?

Well, Bitcoins.lc has NO fee. So there is a good option.

[leepfrog]

if deepbit tries to do anything shady, its hashing power will get close to zero real fast, and that will be the end for it.

This is not the problem: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=12120.msg170365#msg170365

When the damage is done - it is done. BTC will rapidly lose value and I doubt they'll ever recover again. Because that would break one of the major advantages: security

[Grinder]

There is a very specific security threat when a single entity controls 50% of the networks hashing power.

50% isn't actually a hard limit. It is possible to do the same attack with 40% or even less, it will just succeed less often.

[tehcodez]

There is a very specific security threat when a single entity controls 50% of the networks hashing power.

50% isn't actually a hard limit. It is possible to do the same attack with 40% or even less, it will just succeed less often.

Ok, so the risk is still there, and needs to be addressed. No firm limit, check. Either group action or voluntary responsibility will work. Ok.

So who's it gonna be? the miners? tycho? Or the (some) miners setting up tycho for the chain?

All it takes is pop-a-box. Or corruption...

But we don't have any of that lolololololol

[Hawkix]

Well, Bitcoins.lc has NO fee. So there is a good option.

But, when about 10% of people move from deepbit to another 0% fee pool, then it will fix current situation, won't it?

[NghtRppr]

All this panic is amusing to me. I'd rather see what attacks can be accomplished and how the community can recover from a successful attack. That way, when people ask "what happens if..." we can say "it did happen and we survived it". Of course, some people are a little over-invested and don't find it amusing at all.

[bcpokey]

There is a very specific security threat when a single entity controls 50% of the networks hashing power.

50% isn't actually a hard limit. It is possible to do the same attack with 40% or even less, it will just succeed less often.

There are more problems than simply forking the block chain and double spending. 50% is a hard limit for being given control of parts of the block transactions. Leading to a whole can of worms in the grand scheme of bitcoin. The idea is that the less opportunity there is for malicious and potentially devastating problems with the block chain the more trust there can be in the idea of bitcoin as a viable tool.

Approaching 40-50+% lends itself to being far more vulnerable to all kinds of faith shattering events.

Well, Bitcoins.lc has NO fee. So there is a good option.

But, when about 10% of people move from deepbit to another 0% fee pool, then it will fix current situation, won't it?

The more the better, but if 10% of Tycho's users moved out that would definitely grant a large margin of error. The problem is, what is 10% currently? He has about 2.2THash of power, so that's 220GHash. If you assume each user as having 850MHash of power (which is more than most actually have) that's about 250 people.

There aren't even half of 250 replies in this thread. It's a bigger feat to accomplish than you might think.

[kiwiasian]

All this panic is amusing to me. I'd rather see what attacks can be accomplished and how the community can recover from a successful attack. That way, when people ask "what happens if..." we can say "it did happen and we survived it". Of course, some people are a little over-invested and don't find it amusing at all.

This!!

Honestly, people need to stop freaking out.

[Hawkix]

But, when about 10% of people move from deepbit to another 0% fee pool, then it will fix current situation, won't it?

The more the better, but if 10% of Tycho's users moved out that would definitely grant a large margin of error. The problem is, what is 10% currently? He has about 2.2THash of power, so that's 220GHash. If you assume each user as having 850MHash of power (which is more than most actually have) that's about 250 people.

There aren't even half of 250 replies in this thread. It's a bigger feat to accomplish than you might think.

They will notice (umm, some of them), when the increased fee will be announced. Check my original post.

[Maged]

if deepbit tries to do anything shady, its hashing power will get close to zero real fast, and that will be the end for it.

That would not happen at all. The fact that few deepbit users have even seen this thread is proof of that.

I never thought I'd have to say this, but we'll need to start a bounty to DDoS deepbit if Tycho doesn't do SOMETHING soon.