ckpool.org CLOSED

[igorfosp]

What is network diff? I want to learn that to feel comfortable and be capable to do the math by myself. Now I can see that the hash is 6.12P. What is the relationship with the hp and the network diff? Why u say that if we have more hp in your pool would decrease this time.

EDIT:
If I have started yesterday with 54 TH, so only after those 80 days that I will be in my max performance?

[1713950048]

1713950048

[1713950048]

1713950048

[1713950048]

1713950048

[-ck]

What is network diff? I want to learn that to feel comfortable and be capable to do the math by myself. Now I can see that the hash is 6.12P. What is the relationship with the hp and the network diff? Why u say that if we have more hp in your pool would decrease this time.

EDIT:
If I have started yesterday with 54 TH, so only after those 80 days that I will be in my max performance?

Network difficulty is the current difficulty share required to solve a bitcoin block.

bitcoin-cli getmininginfo
{
  "blocks": 502754,
  "currentblockweight": 9280,
  "currentblocktx": 5,
  "difficulty": 1931136454487.716,
  "errors": "",
  "networkhashps": 1.384324312220417e+19,
  "pooledtx": 33864,
  "chain": "main"
}

Note the difficulty value is 1.9 trillion. This means it takes on average 1.9 trillion shares to find a block. When the pool's stats show "herp" equal to 5x that value, it will have plateaued. As hashrate rises on the pool, we find 9.6 trillion shares faster. Most of your performance will happen in a lot less than those 80 days, more like about 20 to see the bulk of the effect, but yes, the maximum you can earn currently will be if you mine here continuously for 80 days. It's the only way to guarantee fairness for people that have been consistently mining here. We're hoping for more hashrate on the pool to keep bringing that value down.

[philipma1957]

Nice  here I am.   0.00854429

Code:

 "height": 502677,
 "reward": 17.06318344,
 "fee": 0.0,
 "payouts": {
  "1EcH7pHYTHLo3cbdXfkf6e6Zh5JzCPGumc": 11.03057436,
  "176sh81PQupUsFyX6hNL2PTYydSuL7Wu73": 1.3395927,
  "16sx9rJR7sDaKEB4xjHnh8Cw2Ci2mwh747": 0.83390967,
  "1FVK2VLqWUpFSqptLmg5DZM9NcKWDA6QQF": 0.74080404,
  "1Fd7in5wQ5QUmbAc6zFMAcfS7M2yR6d1SA": 0.70894275,
  "1GeniexG7MnLr9WH48jG1cPLqgGbqUsaFM": 0.55874182,
  "1B5nA9AyLxtRmA16S4YCXR5D1r9Z9j1wBg": 0.16883478,
  "1EEggteW9M1nUtbXnv9Am9RjSnEXNVPXfF": 0.12838563,
  "3HWbABbZj1pNWGE8njHNQqDfGC4c5ZMDnA": 0.12118281,
  "18Yv7cyUXJhdtN3J3tpYNcsoG4Qbz4z62e": 0.09364871,
  "17fLF6ZYXFDqpistGUyLnKuPcGhrQ7Xuqm": 0.07585182,
  "16r2NjZuLmye6v34L9ySqDVzRk4aScmAU2": 0.0731584,
  "1FTwbE7DagdmaCbuCFW3yb9FHZsUgdRoSa": 0.07138554,
  "1EjTdmm8768CPvt8kXQRrZoby2ivXjyPpb": 0.06053692,
  "198fMgE5q92r3HUWCrWiobBWQAq9d8FHAx": 0.05947852,
  "1AnJHGLmBBhwxTmn8avcZ9FANUpq84Aczq": 0.0582624,
  "17zyuMZzuD4cd4WCP24WcnnMcBkYiRc3es": 0.05220357,
  "12rMUe15NqZsLDUaJb5VWwgshR3Gvqr3ha": 0.04853001,
  "3Lp6dqavhqjGR8NLKhXYm8Q5d5351Wb2Xg": 0.03653698,
  "18NivBmhxubygKacXSgomS3mBPq4WxHbZj": 0.03372781,
  "1EnFgD1z8Qhz5jLT2Dsqbf1w2pGkt5XZmD": 0.03120408,
  "1NpJZ84TYRgjD9jFcevd5HtTWXnuceV9h7": 0.02982374,
  "1Dsf35RmLdGRa9iwUuuZVH1YUuawsGQktv": 0.02755165,
  "13thF1oor6CAwyzyxXPNnRvu3nhhYeqZdc": 0.02359003,
  "1AhnyWPGwkWjrxtz6khAQNhuvppRW7eV8h": 0.02345831,
  "1J2Ce25U6kDfKtz5iKm3jHePzGVT529g8w": 0.0208441,
  "1Lu4coZqQxgaSrXsB3Y1ZctDjKgRNVugd8": 0.01998833,
  "17g9Frex53fVUzX45Dw28Caw4pFYVmHAbn": 0.0178456,
  "1N9UWvnF42EWc2Q2nXvmgHRfLc2dH52Ype": 0.01780734,
  "12PbPgw7e5SANspLJYezBxsi4ociS1PBiK": 0.01672755,
  "144xhJYYvPsW8a31ZJ244YjBEEJc3h2dsk": 0.01613886,
  "1HihVDkPJsJyQr5isVx6FXCdvHo1o7Ru1X": 0.01562979,
  "1Cko1QNx7mC4dS5R2mcm12zYpDCQJt5rmm": 0.01549329,
  "1AUrEziNG7cH5fytYFBGQsnYivtYh2zqT8": 0.01530291,
  "1LFepM1Jv84nWo9hTeG5SbasXM7kHVnAaZ": 0.01396627,
  "1NyN2Y6vH75gr6zQenad3DG1QgZdJ2Uztg": 0.01366313,
  "19BgtBNx4UGxNTZqQKCfRXUUrdNruDnuTQ": 0.0132491,
  "144RnTangRbu89UdfEMimNXzZkJ2JoDCYA": 0.01320924,
  "12v4oypi7qUpkfkMWAeHHtxv9jZyBy32S7": 0.01314671,
  "112BRCKfaigKrRCgK3rF9WB6Lcbd2GFXmq": 0.0130303,
  "1KeR1jwghL5oHTSiDEfRZpfsKkh8CUopLr": 0.01292327,
  "195bMEnezoPAjxYGr4cMQqsQmeghD8XvFJ": 0.01269116,
  "1LqGC9oQggKngF7dn7cV9mzZsz65JYcgEN": 0.01262189,
  "17gWFbqYyQHFziHJ4rhkSBUsR2EWZJz1yd": 0.01241608,
  "1Q3j9nyM353ikitd2qj5AYy7EnKywQkMHD": 0.01170298,
  "1Leon1Z1X7fn54Rki2ubMUvdkCJJtipUQY": 0.01154635,
  "1BdcszfZn7ufNAND1KiGyvExG5eED2Acdj": 0.01121788,
  "1CEQ91zArq5pbReQ2J27VEuyZRHo2KSQU8": 0.01118326,
  "1BHYzdSHRd8kNSrQeSQytS2yQs1wynXEyj": 0.01100116,
  "18Tc7P4L5D6LyEhNVcJgCcgzCC58iFXeG2": 0.00983816,
  "18yQTCLBzwmDCnNBCcvw2fRkRRvTGp81xK": 0.0088024,



 "1JdC6Xg3ajT3rge3FgPNSYYFpmf53Vbtje": 0.00854429,  


"1NW6YzvP6SiXbx884KAyqAANDdksYZAPPg": 0.00813216,

MOD EDIT: Put in code tags.

[swanny88]

Nice  here I am.   0.00854429

MOD EDIT: Trimmed quote.

Just curious.  What is you Hash rate?

[philipma1957]

Nice  here I am.   0.00854429

MOD EDIT: Trimmed quote.

Just curious.  What is you Hash rate?

it was 500th for 3 or four days in a row.

[Rodderman]

Yo Phil why leave just curios you still mining here? if not why?

[philipma1957]

Yo Phil why leave just curios you still mining here? if not why?

I used to rent large rentals from nicehash when the pool started and btc was only 2-4k  a coin.

I wanted to support _ck     when he began this pool.

So when btc got to 15k  I simply could not afford the big rentals.

I don't have a lot of sha-256 gear

about 45th  and I am using them at buysolar's solar array.  my fee is 50-50 coin split  he is doing rather well with that deal.  But when btc was 2k  I was better off.

I will come back here down the road  with big rentals and the like.

But  with the 45th I have   I go with lower variance then this pool.  Since ½ the coins go to buysolar  and since s-9's break a lot  my 45th  is due to 2 dead boards  I would be

52-56th mining here with high variance is not easy for me. 

[LoneRangir]

please be aware that bech32 addresses (starting with bc) which have started appearing in some wallets are not currently supported by this pool

Why is this?  Just not popular enough to add support?  The 'standard' has been around for a while now.  I've found a few places reject this format, even though electrum has offered the format for some time now.

[-ck]

please be aware that bech32 addresses (starting with bc) which have started appearing in some wallets are not currently supported by this pool

Why is this?  Just not popular enough to add support?  The 'standard' has been around for a while now.  I've found a few places reject this format, even though electrum has offered the format for some time now.

No code in the pool to support it? I'm also not sure on whether you can generate directly to a bech32 address since it's meant to be segwit to segwit only.

[LoneRangir]

please be aware that bech32 addresses (starting with bc) which have started appearing in some wallets are not currently supported by this pool

Why is this?  Just not popular enough to add support?  The 'standard' has been around for a while now.  I've found a few places reject this format, even though electrum has offered the format for some time now.

No code in the pool to support it? I'm also not sure on whether you can generate directly to a bech32 address since it's meant to be segwit to segwit only.

So we've not successfully mined a block to a native SewWit address?  I'm a bit fascinated by the (lack of) SegWit adoption.   

[-ck]

please be aware that bech32 addresses (starting with bc) which have started appearing in some wallets are not currently supported by this pool

Why is this?  Just not popular enough to add support?  The 'standard' has been around for a while now.  I've found a few places reject this format, even though electrum has offered the format for some time now.

No code in the pool to support it? I'm also not sure on whether you can generate directly to a bech32 address since it's meant to be segwit to segwit only.

So we've not successfully mined a block to a native SewWit address?  I'm a bit fascinated by the (lack of) SegWit adoption.   

Segwit address yes we have, plenty. Bech32 is a unique segwit to segwit only address format. Virtually all segwit in use today is using the 3x address format though.

[LoneRangir]

please be aware that bech32 addresses (starting with bc) which have started appearing in some wallets are not currently supported by this pool

Why is this?  Just not popular enough to add support?  The 'standard' has been around for a while now.  I've found a few places reject this format, even though electrum has offered the format for some time now.

No code in the pool to support it? I'm also not sure on whether you can generate directly to a bech32 address since it's meant to be segwit to segwit only.

So we've not successfully mined a block to a native SewWit address?  I'm a bit fascinated by the (lack of) SegWit adoption.  

Segwit address yes we have, plenty. Bech32 is a unique segwit to segwit only address format. Virtually all segwit in use today is using the 3x address format though.

So you cannot spend a bech32 to a 'standard' address?  If so, I was not aware.  Maybe that's not what you said....

I get that '3' addresses are segwit-compatible-multi-sig addresses.  

Anyways.. would you not be spending to a bech32 adddress upon a block found/payout?  Is the finding address not a '1' or a '3' address?

Honestly...   I'm not trying to be a troll.  I just would like to know the reason for the slow rollout of such 'upgrades'.  Is it technical?  Political?   Trying to understand the landscape...

[-ck]

So you cannot spend a bech32 to a 'standard' address?  If so, I was not aware.  Maybe that's not what you said....

I get that '3' addresses are segwit-compatible-multi-sig addresses.  

Anyways.. would you not be spending to a bech32 adddress upon a block found/payout?  Is the finding address not a '1' or a '3' address?

Yes a bech32 is neither a 1 nor a 3 address; it's a new format that starts with bc. You can spend from any address to any other address. The bech32 addresses are not nested P2SH addresses, they are native segwit addresses and thus 10% smaller than 3x segwit addresses. Each wallet that has a bech32 address will have the private key to a corresponding 1x address or 3x address but I don't have code in ckpool to read a bech32 address and then decode it to the underlying address, and we can't actually assume that wallets will know to look for the 1x and 3x counterparts of their bech32 addresses should you send coin to them instead of the actual bech32 address. Sending directly to bech32 is something I have not investigated so I don't even know if you can generate directly to them.  This pool does all payments through generation transactions which by nature are not segwit transactions.

[LoneRangir]

So you cannot spend a bech32 to a 'standard' address?  If so, I was not aware.  Maybe that's not what you said....

I get that '3' addresses are segwit-compatible-multi-sig addresses.  

Anyways.. would you not be spending to a bech32 adddress upon a block found/payout?  Is the finding address not a '1' or a '3' address?

Yes a bech32 is neither a 1 nor a 3 address; it's a new format that starts with bc. You can spend from any address to any other address. The bech32 addresses are not nested P2SH addresses, they are native segwit addresses and thus 10% smaller than 3x segwit addresses. Each wallet that has a bech32 address will have the private key to a corresponding 1x address or 3x address but I don't have code in ckpool to read a bech32 address and then decode it to the underlying address, and we can't actually assume that wallets will know to look for the 1x and 3x counterparts of their bech32 addresses should you send coin to them instead of the actual bech32 address. Sending directly to bech32 is something I have not investigated so I don't even know if you can generate directly to them.  This pool does all payments through generation transactions which by nature are not segwit transactions.

You've been much helpful. Thanks.

[Sith_Ari]

Hey Everyone,

This is probably the wrong place to make my first post but here it goes. I'm new to this, idk why but a few days ago out of nowhere I've decided to get into mining. Right now I'm just doing browser mining which is taking FOREVER (20 h/s) I know it's inefficient but my computer is running all the time anyways. Now to get to my question, I already have the CGminer software on my computer and its directed towards CKPool and it's all setup and ready for a device, only issue is idk which one to go with. My budget is around $500 (I'm not cheap, I'm broke) and I was leaning towards going with x4 overclocked Gekkoscience 2 pac (estimated 60 GH/S) with a Anker USB hub and an Arctic Freeze fan. What are your opinions on that setup and how well would it do on CKPool or what are your recommendations on a rig/setup for my kind of budget that will run well with CKPool and get a decent payout? I know it's nothing robust but it would be easy to break down and take with me when I travel... when I actually have money.

Also I'm not running into this with the blind ambition of getting rich.

Oh, one other thing. I'm in the U.S., Eastern Timezone, What would be the best port to direct my software to?

Thanks for any input!!!

Mods: My apologies if this is the wrong place to post this, please move to appropriate sub forum. Reason I posted here is because my setup will be dedicated to CKPool.

[NUKE4321]

I think this might be a more userful list. It should show the top 50 contributors to the pool over the last 7 days.

Code:

Place -> User -> Hashrate GH/s -> %
1 1EcH7pHYTHLo3cbdXfkf6e6Zh5JzCPGumc 4030000.0  ->  89.36%
2 1GeniexG7MnLr9WH48jG1cPLqgGbqUsaFM 134000.0  ->  2.97%
3 3HWbABbZj1pNWGE8njHNQqDfGC4c5ZMDnA 74700.0  ->  1.66%
4 1FVK2VLqWUpFSqptLmg5DZM9NcKWDA6QQF 66700.0  ->  1.48%
5 1Dsf35RmLdGRa9iwUuuZVH1YUuawsGQktv 24500.0  ->  0.54%
6 3Lp6dqavhqjGR8NLKhXYm8Q5d5351Wb2Xg 19800.0  ->  0.44%
7 17fLF6ZYXFDqpistGUyLnKuPcGhrQ7Xuqm 14800.0  ->  0.33%
8 1Q3j9nyM353ikitd2qj5AYy7EnKywQkMHD 14600.0  ->  0.32%
9 17zyuMZzuD4cd4WCP24WcnnMcBkYiRc3es 13600.0  ->  0.30%
10 12rMUe15NqZsLDUaJb5VWwgshR3Gvqr3ha 12000.0  ->  0.27%
11 16iuKEfX5VVsZP55o8eyikMRhPbHHVSmYS 7200.0  ->  0.16%
12 1FTwbE7DagdmaCbuCFW3yb9FHZsUgdRoSa 6670.0  ->  0.15%
13 17gWFbqYyQHFziHJ4rhkSBUsR2EWZJz1yd 6290.0  ->  0.14%
14 1BHYzdSHRd8kNSrQeSQytS2yQs1wynXEyj 6110.0  ->  0.14%
15 3B7W3JVQVTdWexNXAJRnAv2uukPGMe3XsV 5800.0  ->  0.13%
16 1LFepM1Jv84nWo9hTeG5SbasXM7kHVnAaZ 4570.0  ->  0.10%
17 1AhnyWPGwkWjrxtz6khAQNhuvppRW7eV8h 3700.0  ->  0.08%
18 1Cko1QNx7mC4dS5R2mcm12zYpDCQJt5rmm 3470.0  ->  0.08%
19 18Tc7P4L5D6LyEhNVcJgCcgzCC58iFXeG2 2970.0  ->  0.07%
20 17g9Frex53fVUzX45Dw28Caw4pFYVmHAbn 2870.0  ->  0.06%
21 1KMzjrA4LEpBwN3oqXkKfE2yewf9bFzPSy 2800.0  ->  0.06%
22 1H2R6s1RknrszdZQ5j1AXbS16Kc1YzgxG5 2670.0  ->  0.06%
23 1NpJZ84TYRgjD9jFcevd5HtTWXnuceV9h7 2030.0  ->  0.05%
24 1EyYkx1L5ncJdi5jdLgYjnzDf9b8gcxCmW 1980.0  ->  0.04%
25 1KeR1jwghL5oHTSiDEfRZpfsKkh8CUopLr 1800.0  ->  0.04%
26 1Lu4coZqQxgaSrXsB3Y1ZctDjKgRNVugd8 1770.0  ->  0.04%
27 16r2NjZuLmye6v34L9ySqDVzRk4aScmAU2 1740.0  ->  0.04%
28 198fMgE5q92r3HUWCrWiobBWQAq9d8FHAx 1480.0  ->  0.03%
29 12v4oypi7qUpkfkMWAeHHtxv9jZyBy32S7 1310.0  ->  0.03%
30 15gDHc8UEER5hh1Vvm19iE9iGqvxzQGpHb 1230.0  ->  0.03%
31 1GzyZmmNyo2P16RUAh5TnKBFLFs4FbgfiC 1210.0  ->  0.03%
32 1EebvdLuomZmtHA24RDBhV7YDMpJVL9SRh 1010.0  ->  0.02%
33 144xhJYYvPsW8a31ZJ244YjBEEJc3h2dsk 971.0  ->  0.02%
34 1Q3Zt4aJg3GC2kBQKTyh8K9RGkNnaFMLJf 897.0  ->  0.02%
35 1DZ2wfFTc1bUhVUC9fSBKitTYZWibr3M7H 860.0  ->  0.02%
36 1BsmsGXpoBZeYFNJnEGvEepKxwe1qQfY9V 829.0  ->  0.02%
37 1MVFBkkRXyRhQeQTVsVoNP7t8KCiTpdjZ5 804.0  ->  0.02%
38 1PQSwTHPp7FadAKdxtuooiVAvo9Q6tWonw 789.0  ->  0.02%
39 1PQpXWxANK2uJCcwro3MFQTyrSMFZ2Fkfa 713.0  ->  0.02%
40 17PrHnctDELLPLcSP7xLqrU2FSNpEpw9gu 707.0  ->  0.02%
41 1FGYWHoK6DoezFsqKFKcoQBqTQHFKbX9BT 652.0  ->  0.01%
42 1NCmczeEcL3rrNcRpcXZFYLDuGTNcMe3JD 605.0  ->  0.01%
43 13knTbSfXtjxyRz3MSvkeshuFcMFbYvW7N 558.0  ->  0.01%
44 156LHoAYzsv9Mn9h1WoydRu1Bv1tmuheMd 528.0  ->  0.01%
45 1BitbeececVVArCqaANj9SWnTJM5GorQDB 465.0  ->  0.01%
46 3LtAacrfqNdegPvV1JTcVj8UsaTXHBD3rH 461.0  ->  0.01%
47 15aknGQMitT85bA5Zckr3Jpzm23y4Phyd4 450.0  ->  0.01%
48 1MEo4aCnSbKA5FaBSVCEPQQYpxRr9MZ4be 444.0  ->  0.01%
49 17rmwiTYff18SRnXsoPW78DaHKPJZudcq1 415.0  ->  0.01%
50 36NUS5Z3xJGJDVTEGq5mKV2bfsG3aSLfce 370.0  ->  0.01%

MOD EDIT: Please use code tags for long lists

How can we access this list?  Are there any other hidden stats we can access?

[ComputerGenie]

How can we access this list?  Are there any other hidden stats we can access?

They used http://ckpool.org/pool/pool.work and did some manual math

[igorfosp]

What is network diff? I want to learn that to feel comfortable and be capable to do the math by myself. Now I can see that the hash is 6.12P. What is the relationship with the hp and the network diff? Why u say that if we have more hp in your pool would decrease this time.

EDIT:
If I have started yesterday with 54 TH, so only after those 80 days that I will be in my max performance?

Network difficulty is the current difficulty share required to solve a bitcoin block.

bitcoin-cli getmininginfo
{
  "blocks": 502754,
  "currentblockweight": 9280,
  "currentblocktx": 5,
  "difficulty": 1931136454487.716,
  "errors": "",
  "networkhashps": 1.384324312220417e+19,
  "pooledtx": 33864,
  "chain": "main"
}

Note the difficulty value is 1.9 trillion. This means it takes on average 1.9 trillion shares to find a block. When the pool's stats show "herp" equal to 5x that value, it will have plateaued. As hashrate rises on the pool, we find 9.6 trillion shares faster. Most of your performance will happen in a lot less than those 80 days, more like about 20 to see the bulk of the effect, but yes, the maximum you can earn currently will be if you mine here continuously for 80 days. It's the only way to guarantee fairness for people that have been consistently mining here. We're hoping for more hashrate on the pool to keep bringing that value down.

CK, Can you please take my hand and help me more to understand? I feel that I am asking you to draw LOL. I was tracking my progress in your pool, and I ve started mining 01-04 at 8:13 pm and at, 01-05 8:13 pm my derp was 0.00481861. With the same hashpower at Nicehash I made .0089 and .00931 at BTC.com.  Can you please explain to me (I really mean it because I am not understanding  ) when your pool is more profitable with 0% fee?

I need to understand better your system before I move back again man

[puntpasskick]

How can we access this list?  Are there any other hidden stats we can access?

They used http://ckpool.org/pool/pool.work and did some manual math

I did write a little script to help automate the math work a little. If Ck doesn't mind the extra hits on his web server, I can run the script once a week and post the results. 

[ComputerGenie]

...my derp was 0.00481861. With the same hashpower at Nicehash I made .0089 and .00931 at BTC.com.  ...

You're comparing apples to oranges. You're looking at what you will get from the current block (out of the next 5) and comparing it to what you got in total somewhere else. Granted, you'll not get a total of 5x the amount of the next block, but you have to remember that the next block is just a fraction of what you will get in total.