nottm28


June 24, 2013, 08:39:07 PM 

1) Only if the 100TH/s miner was an existing miner somewhere else (i.e. moved his processing power from somewhere else to slush). If he was a 'new addition' then you share decreases. 2) I don't see that  other pools gaining hash power and slush's pool remaining the same = less blocks found (by chance).
Okay, lets do this step by step. I dont get why you think the hashrate of some other pool should influence how often we find blocks. Finding a block means calculating a hash of some data containing the past block header and new transactions since the last block, and the hash has to meet certain conditions, like starting with 19 million (difficulty) zeros. Do we agree? Step by step is good for me... I dont get why you think the hashrate of some other pool should influence how often we find blocks. Let's say slush's pool combined power is 10% of the total network hash rate. One block (by design) is found every 10 mins. So, on average slush's pool should find a block approx every 100 mins. (could be 10 mins for one block, 20 mins the next, 5 hours the next  but the average is 100 mins). Now, if the total network hash rate suddenly doubled and nothing was added via slush's pool  our combined percentage of the whole network would suddenly drop to 5%  so one block found every 20 mins (not 10). Do you see this?

donations not accepted




Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.




trasla


June 24, 2013, 08:45:16 PM 

One block (by design) is found every 10 mins. Do you see this?
There we go, thats the point. This "by design"  how do you think it works? It does via adjusting the difficulty. If an increase in hashrate lets the network find blocks more often, difficulty is increased to a value which leads to one block every ten minutes on average, with the current hasrate. If the hasrate drops, and the networks finds blocks too slowly, difficulty is lowered. So "every ten minutes by design" does not work instantly, but is periodically adjusted via the difficulty value.




nottm28


June 24, 2013, 08:47:52 PM 

One block (by design) is found every 10 mins. Do you see this?
There we go, thats the point. This "by design"  how do you think it works? It does via adjusting the difficulty. If an increase in hashrate lets the network find blocks more often, difficulty is increased to a value which leads to one block every ten minutes on average, with the current hasrate. If the hasrate drops, and the networks finds blocks too slowly, difficulty is lowered. So "every ten minutes by design" does not work instantly, but is periodically adjusted via the difficulty value. Ok trasla, no worries, I tried

donations not accepted



trasla


June 24, 2013, 08:49:16 PM 

You want to give up? If you dont agree, just explain to me how the network makes sure one block is found every ten minutes.




nottm28


June 24, 2013, 08:53:41 PM 

You want to give up? If you dont agree, just explain to me how the network makes sure one block is found every ten minutes.
Ok, difficulty is set to 'try' and maintain one block find every 10 mins. If suddenly the total network hash rate was doubled (due to a massive sudden addition of asics say). Then difficulty woud stay the same for a few days. Blocks would suddenly be found every 5 mins not 10 for a few days. Until the guys who develop the code say  hey 'we need to increase difficulty'  'blocks are being found too often'. In the mean time, your reward will have dropped. I'm trying to explain that hash rate is the driver  and difficulty is the compensator...

donations not accepted



Trongersoll


June 24, 2013, 08:56:44 PM 

One block (by design) is found every 10 mins. Do you see this?
There we go, thats the point. This "by design"  how do you think it works? It does via adjusting the difficulty. If an increase in hashrate lets the network find blocks more often, difficulty is increased to a value which leads to one block every ten minutes on average, with the current hasrate. If the hasrate drops, and the networks finds blocks too slowly, difficulty is lowered. So "every ten minutes by design" does not work instantly, but is periodically adjusted via the difficulty value. Ok trasla, no worries, I tried heh, this is like tag team. I think that the problem is that we are looking at long term and you are looking short term. Yes, until the difficulty increase the time to find a block would decrease. And you would continue to find them at a constant rate. But, when he difficulty does go up, it will more than compensate for the previous "gift". At least i think it will. there are those that speculate that the date the last Bitcoin is mined is slowly moving closer.

*insert appropriate begging line here* BTC: 1CS6AV7VnjcPLxaTFoUhTjXK4mQCTzfSxE Doge: DB22tiynvXKg7SyPpnH9jyfitKLTZb6ejc



nottm28


June 24, 2013, 08:59:09 PM 

One block (by design) is found every 10 mins. Do you see this?
There we go, thats the point. This "by design"  how do you think it works? It does via adjusting the difficulty. If an increase in hashrate lets the network find blocks more often, difficulty is increased to a value which leads to one block every ten minutes on average, with the current hasrate. If the hasrate drops, and the networks finds blocks too slowly, difficulty is lowered. So "every ten minutes by design" does not work instantly, but is periodically adjusted via the difficulty value. Ok trasla, no worries, I tried heh, this is like tag team. I think that the problem is that we are looking at long term and you are looking short term. Yes, until the difficulty increase the time to find a block would decrease. And you would continue to find them at a constant rate. But, when he difficulty does go up, it will more than compensate for the previous "gift". At least i think it will. there are those that speculate that the date the last Bitcoin is mined is slowly moving closer. I think the 'end date' is coming closer Trong. There's loads of debate about increasing the life span of btc  some complicated maths the likes of organofcorti and a few others understand... [EDIT] trasla  please pm me  we need to take this offline. I don't wanna bloat this thread any worse  sorry guys

donations not accepted



trasla


June 24, 2013, 09:04:52 PM 

I think that the problem is that we are looking at long term and you are looking short term. Yes, until the difficulty increase the time to find a block would decrease. And you would continue to find them at a constant rate. But, when he difficulty does go up, it will more than compensate for the previous "gift". At least i think it will. there are those that speculate that the date the last Bitcoin is mined is slowly moving closer.
I completely agree  but thats exactly what i said before. If someone else adds hashrate, my reward stays the same _until difficulty adjusts_. nottm28: Okay, we are getting near. Lets say we have two pools, each with half the hasrate (say, 10 GH/s each). Both find a block every 20 minutes, totalling for one block every 10 minutes. Now one pool adds 20 GH/s. Network hashrate is doubled, blocks are found every 5 minutes. One pool has 30 GH/s, tripled hashrate, finds 3 blocks in 20 minutes. The other pool stays at 10 GH/s, finds one block every 20 minutes. In total, 4 blocks in 20 minutes > one block in 5. One pool gets same number of blocks with same hasrate, so same income as before for all its miners. The other pool gets three times the blocks, but every miner in it now has only one third of the relative hashing power, so he gets one third of his usual rewar per block > same income as before. I agree with you, only "in the meantime, your reward will have dropped" i cant see. EDIT: Well, yes, might be good not to spam the thread, of course you can reply via pm.




nottm28


June 24, 2013, 09:25:12 PM 

I think that the problem is that we are looking at long term and you are looking short term. Yes, until the difficulty increase the time to find a block would decrease. And you would continue to find them at a constant rate. But, when he difficulty does go up, it will more than compensate for the previous "gift". At least i think it will. there are those that speculate that the date the last Bitcoin is mined is slowly moving closer.
I completely agree  but thats exactly what i said before. If someone else adds hashrate, my reward stays the same _until difficulty adjusts_. nottm28: Okay, we are getting near. Lets say we have two pools, each with half the hasrate (say, 10 GH/s each). Both find a block every 20 minutes, totalling for one block every 10 minutes. Now one pool adds 20 GH/s. Network hashrate is doubled, blocks are found every 5 minutes. One pool has 30 GH/s, tripled hashrate, finds 3 blocks in 20 minutes. The other pool stays at 10 GH/s, finds one block every 20 minutes. In total, 4 blocks in 20 minutes > one block in 5. One pool gets same number of blocks with same hasrate, so same income as before for all its miners. The other pool gets three times the blocks, but every miner in it now has only one third of the relative hashing power, so he gets one third of his usual rewar per block > same income as before. I agree with you, only "in the meantime, your reward will have dropped" i cant see. EDIT: Well, yes, might be good not to spam the thread, of course you can reply via pm. Before: Pool A, 10 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 25 coins earned Pool B, 10 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 25 coins earned Me in pool A, 1 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 2.5 coins earned After: (difficulty not increased) Pool A, 10 GH/s, 30 mins per block, 25 coins earned Pool B, 30 GH/s, 10 mins per block, 25 coins earned Me in pool A, 1 GH/s, 30 mins per block, 2.5 coins earned In your scenario, my own earnings jump down from 2.5 coins per 20 mins to 2.5 coins per 30 mins...

donations not accepted



gourmet


June 24, 2013, 09:35:35 PM 

Why should my reward go down? The frequency in which i find blocks with a given difficulty does not depend on the network hashrate in any way.
If that 'someone' suddenly plugged in their 100 TH/s miner into slush's pool, you would see a smaller share of the pot  result  reward goes down. If they plugged it into another pool then slush's pool would find blocks less frequently (more competition)  result  reward goes down. 1) Reward per block found by the pool goes down, but number of blocks found goes up > reward stays the same. 2) No, how many blocks slush' pool finds does not decrease when some other pool gets more hashing power, see the post i just wrote before yours. If there was some mechanism to make our pool find less blocks if some other finds more, we would never need a difficulty adjustment. There is nothing like "more competition". You are rolling dice in a casino. You get a dollar on every 5 or 6. If a thousand other people start doing it too, you still earn the same money. Only when the casino decides to only pay out on 6 and no more on 5 (difficulty adjust), you suddenly earn less. Thank you for your effort, Trasla.. It's been only a week since I've been trying to explain the same thing...




Trongersoll


June 24, 2013, 09:38:06 PM 

WWooHoo!!!! I've finally mined my first full bitcoin to completion. only took me, um... 2 months? well the next one should come quicker. (I hope) *kicks computer* "Hash faster!!"

*insert appropriate begging line here* BTC: 1CS6AV7VnjcPLxaTFoUhTjXK4mQCTzfSxE Doge: DB22tiynvXKg7SyPpnH9jyfitKLTZb6ejc



gourmet


June 24, 2013, 09:58:00 PM 

I think that the problem is that we are looking at long term and you are looking short term. Yes, until the difficulty increase the time to find a block would decrease. And you would continue to find them at a constant rate. But, when he difficulty does go up, it will more than compensate for the previous "gift". At least i think it will. there are those that speculate that the date the last Bitcoin is mined is slowly moving closer.
I completely agree  but thats exactly what i said before. If someone else adds hashrate, my reward stays the same _until difficulty adjusts_. nottm28: Okay, we are getting near. Lets say we have two pools, each with half the hasrate (say, 10 GH/s each). Both find a block every 20 minutes, totalling for one block every 10 minutes. Now one pool adds 20 GH/s. Network hashrate is doubled, blocks are found every 5 minutes. One pool has 30 GH/s, tripled hashrate, finds 3 blocks in 20 minutes. The other pool stays at 10 GH/s, finds one block every 20 minutes. In total, 4 blocks in 20 minutes > one block in 5. One pool gets same number of blocks with same hasrate, so same income as before for all its miners. The other pool gets three times the blocks, but every miner in it now has only one third of the relative hashing power, so he gets one third of his usual rewar per block > same income as before. (emphasis by gourmet)I agree with you, only "in the meantime, your reward will have dropped" i cant see. EDIT: Well, yes, might be good not to spam the thread, of course you can reply via pm. Before: Pool A, 10 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 25 coins earned Pool B, 10 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 25 coins earned Me in pool A, 1 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 2.5 coins earned After: (difficulty not increased) Pool A, 10 GH/s, 30 mins per block, 25 coins earned Pool B, 30 GH/s, 10 mins per block, 25 coins earned Me in pool A, 1 GH/s, 30 mins per block, 2.5 coins earned In your scenario, my own earnings jump down from 2.5 coins per 20 mins to 2.5 coins per 30 mins... Why you have changed trasla's numbers???The calculation should look like this: Before: Pool A, 10 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 25 coins earned Pool B, 10 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 25 coins earned Me in pool A, 1 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 2.5 coins earned After: (difficulty not increased) Pool A, 10 GH/s, 30 mins per block, 25 coins earned (your nonsense change) Pool A, 10 GH/s, still 20 mins per block, 25 coins earned (real) Pool B, 30 GH/s, 10 mins per block, 25 coins earned (your nonsense change) Pool B, 30 GH/s, 20 mins per 3 blocks, 75 coins earned (real) Me in pool A, 1 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 2.5 coins earned as before




nottm28


June 24, 2013, 10:10:04 PM 

Actually they were my numbers but there you go... we were just discussing things  now offline...

donations not accepted



gourmet


June 24, 2013, 10:34:53 PM 

Pools hashrate does not matter, really. The higher it is, the smoother your earnings will be, but its either bigger parts of fewer blocks or smaller parts of more blocks, average the same, as long as the difficulty stays the same.
The only one who should care is Slush, as he gets his %% from the pool blocks... ;)




5120015186126


June 24, 2013, 10:38:46 PM 

I think that the problem is that we are looking at long term and you are looking short term. Yes, until the difficulty increase the time to find a block would decrease. And you would continue to find them at a constant rate. But, when he difficulty does go up, it will more than compensate for the previous "gift". At least i think it will. there are those that speculate that the date the last Bitcoin is mined is slowly moving closer.
If you mean the last bitcoin mined by design, that won't happen until sometime in 2041  but there are things that could shut down the network before then, and somebody will be the last to find a block.




trasla


June 24, 2013, 10:45:14 PM 

Pool A, 10 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 25 coins earned Pool B, 10 GH/s, 20 mins per block, 25 coins earned
After: (difficulty not increased)
Pool A, 10 GH/s, 30 mins per block, 25 coins earned Pool B, 30 GH/s, 10 mins per block, 25 coins earned
First, your "after" scenario would have 4 blocks per 30 minutes, thats one block in 7.5 minutes instead of one in 5. But thats not the point. Different approach (all before difficulty adjusts): We have only one pool. 10 GH/s, and it finds a block every ten minutes. If we double the hashing power, thats 20 GH/s, and it will find double the number of blocks in the same time, thats 2 blocks per ten minutes. If we let it have 100 GH/s, it will find ten times the blocks, thats 10 blocks per ten minutes. Agreed? Now imagine we split this 100 GH/s pool into two. If we let both have the same hashing power, thats 50 GH/s each, and each will find half of the total number of blocks, thats 5 per ten minutes for each pool. If we split 4060, the pool with 40 GH/s will find 40% of blocks, thats 4 per ten minutes, and the other finds 60%, thats 6 blocks per ten minutes. Agreed? If we do split it 1090, we will have one pool with 10 GH/s, finding 10% of total blocks, thats 1 in 10 minutes. And one pool with 90 GH/s, finding 90% of blocks, thats 9 every ten minutes. Agreed? If so, compare beginning and end. First: We have one pool with 10 GH/s, and it finds a block every ten minutes. End: We still have one pool with 10 GH/s, and it still finds a block every ten minutes, although we suddenly have a second pool with 9 times the hashing power. Conclusion: With the difficulty unchanged, the pool with 10 GH/s will find a block every ten minutes, no matter whether other pools exist or how fast they hash. Only when difficulty is adjusted, the total network will again only find one block each ten minutes. If we have one pool with 100 GH/s, it will now need 100 minutes instead of 10 to find its ten blocks, totalling one block per ten minutes. If we instead have a pool with 10 GH/s and one with 90 GH/s, one will need 100 minutes for one block, the other needs 100 minutes for 9 blocks, total 10 blocks / 100 minutes. After difficulty increase, the earnings of our 10 GH/s pool drop to 1/10. Before the increase, earnings stay stable. I can think of no more ways to explain this right now. If you still dont believe, just explain this to me:
How is my pool supposed to even know about other pools hashrates? Even if it would, why should my pool work slow on purpose, and find less blocks, just because some other pool did find more?There is no function in the bitcoin client doing something like: "Fuck, ASICMINER found a block _again_, thats definitely too many right now, lets just not report the next valid hash, to keep blocks/minutes stable!"




gourmet


June 24, 2013, 10:58:19 PM 

Actually they were my numbers but there you go... we were just discussing things  now offline...
They were not. You have changed the A Pool "after" from 1 block in 20 min to 1 block in 30 min You have changed the B Pool "after" from 3 blocks in 20 min to 1 block in 10 min Trasla's post starts with Lets say we have two pools and continues with his numbers that you have eventually changed. They're definitely not yours. So do not be lying here.




nottm28


June 24, 2013, 11:01:33 PM 

Actually they were my numbers but there you go... we were just discussing things  now offline...
They were not. You have changed the A Pool "after" from 1 block in 20 min to 1 block in 30 min You have changed the B Pool "after" from 3 blocks in 20 min to 1 block in 10 min Trasla's post starts with Lets say we have two pools and continues with his numbers that you have eventually changed. They're definitely not yours. So do not be lying here. Okays, I will not be doing the lying. You win I give up.

donations not accepted



gourmet


June 24, 2013, 11:15:15 PM 

Different approach (all before difficulty adjusts):
We have only one pool. 10 GH/s, and it finds a block every ten minutes. If we double the hashing power, thats 20 GH/s, and it will find double the number of blocks in the same time, thats 2 blocks per ten minutes. If we let it have 100 GH/s, it will find ten times the blocks, thats 10 blocks per ten minutes. Agreed?
Now imagine we split this 100 GH/s pool into two. If we let both have the same hashing power, thats 50 GH/s each, and each will find half of the total number of blocks, thats 5 per ten minutes for each pool. If we split 4060, the pool with 40 GH/s will find 40% of blocks, thats 4 per ten minutes, and the other finds 60%, thats 6 blocks per ten minutes. Agreed?
If we do split it 1090, we will have one pool with 10 GH/s, finding 10% of total blocks, thats 1 in 10 minutes. And one pool with 90 GH/s, finding 90% of blocks, thats 9 every ten minutes. Agreed?
If so, compare beginning and end. First: We have one pool with 10 GH/s, and it finds a block every ten minutes. End: We still have one pool with 10 GH/s, and it still finds a block every ten minutes, although we suddenly have a second pool with 9 times the hashing power.
Conclusion: With the difficulty unchanged, the pool with 10 GH/s will find a block every ten minutes, no matter whether other pools exist or how fast they hash.
Only when difficulty is adjusted, the total network will again only find one block each ten minutes. If we have one pool with 100 GH/s, it will now need 100 minutes instead of 10 to find its ten blocks, totalling one block per ten minutes. If we instead have a pool with 10 GH/s and one with 90 GH/s, one will need 100 minutes for one block, the other needs 100 minutes for 9 blocks, total 10 blocks / 100 minutes. After difficulty increase, the earnings of our 10 GH/s pool drop to 1/10. Before the increase, earnings stay stable.
This post should be remembered. And carved in stone for next generations.




gourmet


June 25, 2013, 12:16:37 AM 

For those who're telling their reward goes down immediately as network power increases, it should do so. :))) (And we who're trying hard to explain should get the difference. )




