[0Th]Ozcoin Pooled Mining |DGM 1%|Stratum+VarDiff port 80|NEW CN mining|

[Graet]

With the help of spendbitcoins.com I have just paid Ozcoin's company "Annual Review Fee" in Bitcoins
$230AUD for those interested.

I think thats really cool - hope others agree
Cheers
Graet

[DutchBrat]

With the help of spendbitcoins.com I have just paid Ozcoin's company "Annual Review Fee" in Bitcoins
$230AUD for those interested.

I think thats really cool - hope others agree
Cheers
Graet

Bitcoin: Makes paying taxes more FUN !!!

[kano]

With the help of spendbitcoins.com I have just paid Ozcoin's company "Annual Review Fee" in Bitcoins
$230AUD for those interested.

I think thats really cool - hope others agree
Cheers
Graet

Yes indeed spendbitcoins.com is great (Graet) for Aus people
You can even do a bpay to your credit card ...

[Graet]

just noticed this in the wallet - been out a bit today
2012-10-04 01:33   184   generate   154.68299211
and the bot   
-ozbot/#ozcoin-vip- BLOCK: 201731 | 298650 shares | 0h 26m 29s | Amount: 154.68299211 | Found by slaveindebt | 9.78% of difficulty
confirmed
http://blockchain.info/tx/51bb40d9e2eb3121a43017e3ab5fcdead31b57411690ea6976d45aff84dfae4b

Good thing for our miners Ozcoin is one of the few pools that pay out txn fees

[Mobius]

just noticed this in the wallet - been out a bit today
2012-10-04 01:33   184   generate   154.68299211
and the bot   
-ozbot/#ozcoin-vip- BLOCK: 201731 | 298650 shares | 0h 26m 29s | Amount: 154.68299211 | Found by slaveindebt | 9.78% of difficulty
confirmed
http://blockchain.info/tx/51bb40d9e2eb3121a43017e3ab5fcdead31b57411690ea6976d45aff84dfae4b

Good thing for our miners Ozcoin is one of the few pools that pay out txn fees

Very nice indeed  

[os2sam]

just noticed this in the wallet - been out a bit today
2012-10-04 01:33   184   generate   154.68299211
and the bot   
-ozbot/#ozcoin-vip- BLOCK: 201731 | 298650 shares | 0h 26m 29s | Amount: 154.68299211 | Found by slaveindebt | 9.78% of difficulty
confirmed
http://blockchain.info/tx/51bb40d9e2eb3121a43017e3ab5fcdead31b57411690ea6976d45aff84dfae4b

Good thing for our miners Ozcoin is one of the few pools that pay out txn fees

How in the world do transaction fees get that high?

[Graet]

just noticed this in the wallet - been out a bit today
2012-10-04 01:33   184   generate   154.68299211
and the bot   
-ozbot/#ozcoin-vip- BLOCK: 201731 | 298650 shares | 0h 26m 29s | Amount: 154.68299211 | Found by slaveindebt | 9.78% of difficulty
confirmed
http://blockchain.info/tx/51bb40d9e2eb3121a43017e3ab5fcdead31b57411690ea6976d45aff84dfae4b

Good thing for our miners Ozcoin is one of the few pools that pay out txn fees

How in the world do transaction fees get that high?

someone/thing screwed up
http://blockchain.info/tx/f776cac4a61ed03a54fdf272d0e38f9a68824420aa5d2b8f1b7abf25543a0751
http://blockchain.info/tx/c16b8666e9f0ed85532a158bd9659b0cb62cdd462a920300285cf21b9898b8f2
http://blockchain.info/tx/f821e1d32c5da639295926b977a4003f3920b05c1b81b0002aa79e560f1c5724

to clarify
those 3 txn, one is for 3.xx btc with a 9.xx btc fee, a 21.xx btc txn with a 21.xx fee and another txn with a 64BTC fee

[DutchBrat]

 

[crazyates]

201731   2012-10-04 01:30:58   154.68299211   slaveindebt   298,650   47.89907436   0.00016039   0.42%   Completed

Question: If the block was 154 BTC, why did the pool only pay out 47?

[Graet]

201731   2012-10-04 01:30:58   154.68299211   slaveindebt   298,650   47.89907436   0.00016039   0.42%   Completed

Question: If the block was 154 BTC, why did the pool only pay out 47?

I think that table works off pool_B not pool_B +txn fees - need to look into that
currently pool fee is taken before txn fees are added in as well - this will change come reward halving.

[DutchBrat]

201731   2012-10-04 01:30:58   154.68299211   slaveindebt   298,650   47.89907436   0.00016039   0.42%   Completed

Question: If the block was 154 BTC, why did the pool only pay out 47?

I think that table works off pool_B not pool_B +txn fees - need to look into that
currently pool fee is taken before txn fees are added in as well - this will change come reward halving.

So there will be another payment coming to however is entitled to it ? Or am I misreading it ?

[Graet]

201731   2012-10-04 01:30:58   154.68299211   slaveindebt   298,650   47.89907436   0.00016039   0.42%   Completed

Question: If the block was 154 BTC, why did the pool only pay out 47?

I think that table works off pool_B not pool_B +txn fees - need to look into that
currently pool fee is taken before txn fees are added in as well - this will change come reward halving.

So there will be another payment coming to however is entitled to it ? Or am I misreading it ?

misreading I think


I was already waiting for one of the staff to appear to check that everything went as it should, I believe it has. If we find any discrepancies there will be an extra payment.
If not, no

[Graet]

Ok
Talked to roomservice - I felt a copy/paste would be better than me trying to re-explain it

<roomservice> the problem is that people don't understand how tx fee payout on dgm work
<roomservice> quote meni:
<roomservice> The correct way is much simpler, it's to use the block reward of the share itself. That is, the share is a hash of a block header you hand out for the getwork, which has a merkle root of a transaction list with a given total transaction fee, which together with generation is the total block reward. That's the value of B which should be used for this share.
<roomservice> link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=39497.msg573349#msg573349
<roomservice> did you get it?
<roomservice> let me explain in easy words
<Graet> ahh yes
<roomservice> if you submit a share right now
<Graet> we caculate the actual share reward at the time
<roomservice> you will be credited for block reward + tx fee if a block is found now
<Graet> but total block reward may be different
<roomservice> what pool finds is another story yes
<Graet> ahh
<roomservice> it could be possible that the pool didn't find this 150btc block
<roomservice> and would have credited tx fees nevertheless
<Graet> yep
<roomservice> we even credit tx fees right now
<roomservice> even if we don't find the next block
<Graet> yes
<roomservice> so in this case you were really lucky
<Graet> can I quote this conversation?
<Graet> heh yeah
<roomservice> sure
<roomservice> people who submitted shares a few minutes before we found this block should see a really nice increase of score
<roomservice> but it won't be a REALLY big difference - i guess most people don't even realize it

So we calculate the value of the share +txn fee at the time it is submitted not after the block is found.  Which looks to be fine if there is not much variation in txn fees. On this occasion with an extremely high (unusual ) reward I feel this has not worked out the way it was intended.

It is late, will PM meni and sleep on it I think
best wishes
Graet

[Mutters]

Karma.   

atta-boy Mutters.

*bows*

[os2sam]

Ok
Talked to roomservice - I felt a copy/paste would be better than me trying to re-explain it

I read the exchange and it sounds like the pool calculates share value and tx fee portion to credit to my account before a block which that share is applied to is even found.  That makes no sense.  So if you could re-explain it in more laymen terms I'd appreciate it.
Sam

[Graet]

Ok
Talked to roomservice - I felt a copy/paste would be better than me trying to re-explain it

I read the exchange and it sounds like the pool calculates share value and tx fee portion to credit to my account before a block which that share is applied to is even found.  That makes no sense.  So if you could re-explain it in more laymen terms I'd appreciate it.
Sam

Sorry for the slow reply, was a bit sick yesterday and crashed out once I got kids to bed, then slept for 13hours.

I will try to explain (excuse me if I state some obvious stuff we all should know)
transactions get included in blocks, some have a txn fee  
each longpoll (someone finding a block on the network) some transactions are included into the block that triggered the longpoll,
so the memorypool of txns changes, longpoll signifies  a change of data to be hashed by miners.
The way DGM works is each share is scored at the time it was submitted (like "if a block was found now")
So at different times the value of the submitted share changes depending on the value of the txn fees we are currently hashing into a block.
Over time this should even out - unless ppl keep wasting BTC like they did in block 201731 - I can not stress enough how unusual the txn fees in this block were.

This means if Ozcoin had not found the block with unusually high txn fees we still would have paid a portion of the shares at that rate "as if we were finding the block now" to our miners.

Including TXN fees in blocks was 1st discussed in the DGM thread here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=39497.msg573288#msg573288
Ozcoin has always strived to have the correct implementation of DGM.
Being the only DGM pool paying out TXN fees you are still ahead of the other DGM pools which ever way txn fee is calculated
If there wasn't a mistake by someone that had put those fees in that block or if another pool had found the block we wouldn't even be having this discussion

Hope that helps clarify
Graet

EDIT: we are planning to make an extra payout for that round, strictly following DGM we would not. BUT as this is a very unusual situation I propose to make another payout to miners of approximately 1/2 of the bonus txns and put the other 1/2 aside for a rainy day (bad luck streak).

[DutchBrat]

I think the confusion lies in the fact that OzCoin shows the found block was worth 157 BTC while the pool only paid out 47 BTC, so the questions is then where did the 110 BTC go ?

As you describe DGM; a share that is being submitted at time T is scored compared to the other shares based on the value of the transaction that is submitted to the network at time T, even if the pool does not find the block that transaction is included in. If someone includes a transaction fee of 100.000 BTC, each share submitted at that time would have an abnormally high score value whether or not OzCoin finds the block.

Seeing as this score is only to determine how much of the total generated BTC a share is worth to a miner compared to other shares submitted by miners, the question remains if the transaction fee received by OzCoin is 10.000 BTC then 10.000 BTC + blockreward should be divided amongst all all the shares submitted within the scoring period.

As I started out saying, now it looks like OzCoin received 157 BTC and only paid out 47 BTC. Regardless of any reward system, the payout on each share should have been roughly 3 times at high as it usually is (with DGM less so than with PPS, but higher over a longer period of submitted shares).

This is how I see it at least

[Graet]

I think the confusion lies in the fact that OzCoin shows the found block was worth 157 BTC while the pool only paid out 47 BTC, so the questions is then where did the 110 BTC go ?

As you describe DGM; a share that is being submitted at time T is scored compared to the other shares based on the value of the transaction that is submitted to the network at time T, even if the pool does not find the block that transaction is included in. If someone includes a transaction fee of 100.000 BTC, each share submitted at that time would have an abnormally high score value whether or not OzCoin finds the block.

Seeing as this score is only to determine how much of the total generated BTC a share is worth to a miner compared to other shares submitted by miners, the question remains if the transaction fee received by OzCoin is 10.000 BTC then 10.000 BTC + blockreward should be divided amongst all all the shares submitted within the scoring period.

As I started out saying, now it looks like OzCoin received 157 BTC and only paid out 47 BTC. Regardless of any reward system, the payout on each share should have been roughly 3 times at high as it usually is (with DGM less so than with PPS, but higher over a longer period of submitted shares).

This is how I see it at least

The way I understand DGM is that the pool operator takes some of the variance from miners (depending on pool variables), thus on long rounds we pay >49BTC and on short rounds 49BTC< (allowing for 2% fee)
There is no "buffer" like some systems, if the pool runs out of Bitcoins they come from my pocket, if the pool is lucky I benefit.
The pool software does not look at the txn fee when a block is found - per DGM scoring this is already factored in.

On this occasion the pool has had a windfall, as I said in EDIT: in previous post, I am looking at making an extra payout to miners in that round to share the windfall - even though the DGM worked as it should. As a sign of goodwill - not because something is wrong with the pool software.

To wait until block reward is known would involve rewriting software and making it something that is not DGM in my understanding.
Again I would like to point out that this is an extremely unusual situation and if any other pool had found this block your score would reflect the txns fees from that time - and the pool would be paying out extra - not benefiting.

[Meni Rosenfeld]

I think the confusion lies in the fact that OzCoin shows the found block was worth 157 BTC while the pool only paid out 47 BTC, so the questions is then where did the 110 BTC go ?

As you describe DGM; a share that is being submitted at time T is scored compared to the other shares based on the value of the transaction that is submitted to the network at time T, even if the pool does not find the block that transaction is included in. If someone includes a transaction fee of 100.000 BTC, each share submitted at that time would have an abnormally high score value whether or not OzCoin finds the block.

Seeing as this score is only to determine how much of the total generated BTC a share is worth to a miner compared to other shares submitted by miners, the question remains if the transaction fee received by OzCoin is 10.000 BTC then 10.000 BTC + blockreward should be divided amongst all all the shares submitted within the scoring period.

As I started out saying, now it looks like OzCoin received 157 BTC and only paid out 47 BTC. Regardless of any reward system, the payout on each share should have been roughly 3 times at high as it usually is (with DGM less so than with PPS, but higher over a longer period of submitted shares).

This is how I see it at least

The mistaken assumption is that the pool always pays out exactly 100% of the block reward.

Basically, PPLNS absorbs no variance (all block reward is paid), PPS absorbs all reward (payment is completely independent of block rewards), and DGM absorbs some variance - in lucky times less than the block reward is given, in unlucky times more than the block reward is given. On average it evens out.

To further complicate things, this description is correct only if the block reward is fixed (and "luck" only relates to how many blocks are found). But if the block reward is variable (e.g. due to transaction fees), true PPLNS also doesn't always pay out exactly the block reward. That's the only way to be completely hopping-proof and to make sure expected payout is always equal to expected contribution. The differences will usually be minor though.

To wait until block reward is known would involve rewriting software and making it something that is not DGM in my understanding.

More concretely, it would enable pool-hopping when tx fees become significant. Hoppers will mine at your pool when the fees are low (knowing that the low fees will not be factored into their score) and as more time passes without a block and fees increase, hop to solo or a pool that does handle fees correctly (where they are credited for the high fees).

[DutchBrat]

Thanks guys, learned something on a sunday morning !