Bitcoin Forum
September 27, 2016, 05:12:38 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.0 (New!) [Torrent]. Make sure you verify it.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: What type of pool payouts do you prefer?
Bitcoins - 3151 (80.4%)
Bank transfer / USD - 407 (10.4%)
Gold/silver coins and bars - 359 (9.2%)
Total Voters: 3915

Pages: « 1 ... 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 [749] 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 ... 1104 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3855010 times)
The Avenger
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798



View Profile
February 15, 2014, 01:33:23 AM
 #14961

Edit: That's more like 8 minutes rather than 42 minutes.

Looking at the last 30 blocks on Slush, if you left after 8 minutes, you'd only have hit one block. Certainly not a way to maximise earnings by hopping, so I'm sure Slush won't mind the example  Smiley

With the hitchhiker, err, "Deep Thought coefficient of pool hoppi-ness", you'd have hit 8 blocks before jumping.

I think you may have inadvertantly proved science fiction trumps statistics Grin I jest!

I really appreciate the worked example, thanks organofcorti.

"I am not The Avenger"
1AthxGvreWbkmtTXed6EQfjXMXXdSG7dD6
1474996358
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1474996358

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1474996358
Reply with quote  #2

1474996358
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1474996358
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1474996358

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1474996358
Reply with quote  #2

1474996358
Report to moderator
gourmet
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 311


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 01:51:34 AM
 #14962

Got a clue why do i lose 5/6% hashing power, so strange.

Do you lose five sixths of a percent of your hashing power? (That's 0.008333... of your power?)
How have you determined this strange fraction?
misternanyte
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 79


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 01:58:05 AM
 #14963

I'm so sick of this. I leave slush and go to another pool, check on slush without pointing the miners back to slush, see that the block times are like 1 hour and less for the most part. Proceed to point the miners back to slush, and now we are back in the fucking 11's and 15 hours.

I'm so sick of this conspiracy bullshit.

And then 4 in a row, super quick. Damn this conspiracy  Wink

I'm just saying it kept happening to me over and over again. I'm tired of it. Thank god... it's back to normal.

Dude, it's always been 'normal', that's the point  Cool.

We roll with the punches.

Forget the witchcraft and nonsense, average is average.

We are all, pretty much average.

IF there was a magic formula, it'd have regularised and published in open source years ago. Everything else is ego and nonsense.

Onwards and upwards. Before it becomes too difficult to mine for anyone other then Th/s corporates....



Just seems like all these sites HATE ME PERSONALLY. It's like, I'm trying to sell stuff in an auction online, and these assholes who have JUST REGISTERED continue to block the transactions by clicking "buy" and never paying. So I gotta wait at least 4 days to repost the auction. It's happening over and over and over again. I'm tired of it. I was using paypal to send my BTC to USD money to because paypal is the easiest way to do it, and then guess what all of a sudden they shut it down. Then the attacks happen, and blah blah blah.

At least they didn't destroy us.
gourmet
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 311


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 02:55:50 AM
 #14964

I think I read somewhere a while back that it is possible for the difficulty level to actually go down. If so, I wonder if the recent issues with the exchanges, the price drop, and what seems to be an unlucky streak that is allegedly not exclusive to just this pool could cause a slow down or reversal of the difficult change? Any thoughts?

OoC has explained the mechanism (for the 15th time). :-)
I'll only add that IMHO it's not too likely in the near future for the difficulty to go down, as new ASICs are still produced and new people are entering into Bitcoin. The difficulty increase may slow down a little bit, but I don't believe it would reverse any time soon.
PostMixer
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 53


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 03:11:59 AM
 #14965

How quickly I forgot what a 9+ hr block feels like :-)

I won't ask for donations but I will ask for help. And I won't give donations but I will help if I can.
gourmet
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 311


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 03:28:38 AM
 #14966

I'm so sick of this. I leave slush and go to another pool, check on slush without pointing the miners back to slush, see that the block times are like 1 hour and less for the most part. Proceed to point the miners back to slush, and now we are back in the fucking 11's and 15 hours.

I'm so sick of this conspiracy bullshit.

And then 4 in a row, super quick. Damn this conspiracy  Wink

I'm just saying it kept happening to me over and over again. I'm tired of it. Thank god... it's back to normal.

You're sick of moving away and back again? :-)))
(Looks like the simpliest solution would be to stop doing so...)
gourmet
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 311


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 03:54:51 AM
 #14967

It's all in the blog post. You will have to figure out 'c' for yourself, since it changes over time. In the post I link to an R script that does it for you - you don't have to do it by hand. Look for "Navigator" in the post.

'c' changed from 300 to 200 about two years ago, but I don't know what it is now.

Edit: I think PostMixer is referring to this post on page 739.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg5053668#msg5053668

On the News page of the Slush site, dated 2013-09-25, Slush has posted:

While working on completely new and quite exciting rewarding system, we've changed some settings of the current one in order to improve stability (e.g. decrease variance) in miners' income. It has already been deployed.

The change is about altering shape of used scoring function. The function is now less steep than before which means that your submitted shares influence your score for a longer time period. Therefore your score is less sensitive to instant luck of your miners and leads to a lower variance in results.


I've interpreted it as increasing the c constant for myself at that time. Or might the altering shape of used scoring function mean something more substantial?
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1876


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
February 15, 2014, 05:13:47 AM
 #14968

It's all in the blog post. You will have to figure out 'c' for yourself, since it changes over time. In the post I link to an R script that does it for you - you don't have to do it by hand. Look for "Navigator" in the post.

'c' changed from 300 to 200 about two years ago, but I don't know what it is now.

Edit: I think PostMixer is referring to this post on page 739.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg5053668#msg5053668

On the News page of the Slush site, dated 2013-09-25, Slush has posted:

While working on completely new and quite exciting rewarding system, we've changed some settings of the current one in order to improve stability (e.g. decrease variance) in miners' income. It has already been deployed.

The change is about altering shape of used scoring function. The function is now less steep than before which means that your submitted shares influence your score for a longer time period. Therefore your score is less sensitive to instant luck of your miners and leads to a lower variance in results.


I've interpreted it as increasing the c constant for myself at that time. Or might the altering shape of used scoring function mean something more substantial?

Yes, I'd say it's just a change in 'c'. You reduce variance by increasing 'c', although this makes the pool more hoppable. He probably put it back up to 300. It might be even higher now, given the decrease in network proportion. My guess is that c is probably 400 right now.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
PostMixer
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 53


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 06:10:22 AM
 #14969

It's all in the blog post. You will have to figure out 'c' for yourself, since it changes over time. In the post I link to an R script that does it for you - you don't have to do it by hand. Look for "Navigator" in the post.

'c' changed from 300 to 200 about two years ago, but I don't know what it is now.

Edit: I think PostMixer is referring to this post on page 739.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg5053668#msg5053668

On the News page of the Slush site, dated 2013-09-25, Slush has posted:

While working on completely new and quite exciting rewarding system, we've changed some settings of the current one in order to improve stability (e.g. decrease variance) in miners' income. It has already been deployed.

The change is about altering shape of used scoring function. The function is now less steep than before which means that your submitted shares influence your score for a longer time period. Therefore your score is less sensitive to instant luck of your miners and leads to a lower variance in results.


I've interpreted it as increasing the c constant for myself at that time. Or might the altering shape of used scoring function mean something more substantial?

Yes, I'd say it's just a change in 'c'. You reduce variance by increasing 'c', although this makes the pool more hoppable. He probably put it back up to 300. It might be even higher now, given the decrease in network proportion. My guess is that c is probably 400 right now.

I'm thinking the variance is probably tied to the altering shape of the scoring function. Since it is now less steep than the shares submitted and therefor is less sensitive to instant luck. I would have to guess that c=Cya Later.

:-) You all have a good weekend!!!!!!!!

I won't ask for donations but I will ask for help. And I won't give donations but I will help if I can.
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 614


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 09:05:08 AM
 #14970

I dont think it will take 72 hours to get back to 30day luck. More like 1week.
72h was about our weekly luck to recover.

Unless my calculations are a bit off, I thought that with neutral luck, we should expect ~7 blocks daily - the CDF hits 50% at 3 and a bit hours IIRC.

You are right. I was sleepy and calculated the time with the current network speed, while it should be at the time of the difficulty change, so 20PH instead of 27PH and it's ~5.6 rounds per day or ~4h 20min per round with our current pool speed.

BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
as2davis
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 7


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 10:46:48 PM
 #14971

Why is the minimum payout so high.  My computer mines so slowly that it will take me months to reach the threshold.

My bitcoin address 19Ldz5YuTFjZuNchRdnvmKuZDLdXexC1Ae
Sir Alan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 221


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 11:00:14 PM
 #14972

Why is the minimum payout so high.  My computer mines so slowly that it will take me months to reach the threshold.
Slush has to add a small fee to every payment.  If the threshold was lower, this would become a substantial part of the pool's running expenses.  As Slush takes only a small cut for running the pool (2%) there has to be a limit, or some people would claim every tiny amount they earn, and the thing would be unsustainable.

Are you mining using only a CPU or GPU?  If so, you are probably not covering your running costs anyway unless you get free electricity.

1Eeyore17YeHrbJW5Q3pSdV8sXujkdrrFc
nottm28
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574



View Profile
February 15, 2014, 11:08:46 PM
 #14973

unless you get free electricity.

It's never free, the planet pays...

Come on lady luck!

donations not accepted
anthem
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 54


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 12:11:50 AM
 #14974

maybe there should be a discussion over the transferree paying the 0.0001 transfer fee (take it out of the transfer amount) - then let the transferee select whatever amount they want to transfer as long as its over the transfer fee.
CheeseSammich
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 13


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 12:25:38 AM
 #14975

Why is the minimum payout so high.  My computer mines so slowly that it will take me months to reach the threshold.

.01 BTC is high ?!
Trongersoll
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448


Retired Software Engineer


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 12:32:08 AM
 #14976

maybe there should be a discussion over the transferree paying the 0.0001 transfer fee (take it out of the transfer amount) - then let the transferee select whatever amount they want to transfer as long as its over the transfer fee.

Ok, This discussion is kind of silly. Lowering the minimum payout would kind of be futile. You would end up with lots of little transactions in your wallet that you couldn't spend because it would cost you too much in Tx fees to put them back together. I mean, really, we are talking about withdrawing less than US$6. Do you really need to transfer that amount? Let it accumulate in your account until it is big enough. If you are mining so little... well that has been argued adnauseum.

*insert appropriate begging line here* 
BTC: 1CS6AV7VnjcPLxaTFoUhTjXK4mQCTzfSxE
Doge: DB22tiynvXKg7SyPpnH9jyfitKLTZb6ejc
dlowings
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 227


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 04:24:19 AM
 #14977

maybe there should be a discussion over the transferree paying the 0.0001 transfer fee (take it out of the transfer amount) - then let the transferee select whatever amount they want to transfer as long as its over the transfer fee.

Ok, This discussion is kind of silly. Lowering the minimum payout would kind of be futile. You would end up with lots of little transactions in your wallet that you couldn't spend because it would cost you too much in Tx fees to put them back together. I mean, really, we are talking about withdrawing less than US$6. Do you really need to transfer that amount? Let it accumulate in you account until it is big enough. If you are mining so little... well that has been argued adnauseum.

I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but I feel this answer was silly... Regardless of wether it's 6 dollars or less "IT''S MONEY" , not only that but it's money that has to get absorbed back into the general ledger and that is above the advertised 2% . That alone is something I would not want any part of if I were slush because it gives the appearance of impropriety . There are several fair solutions, but I'll just leave it at that. My point is, to dismiss any amount of money shows a total disrespect for money itself.

BTC donations welcome:- 1BrersvQubEKt4m2hBXDNvU1B4RiYe6J4i   -   Feel free to visit wiki.chainminer.com for free hardware listings, and mining info. -  IRC on freenode #wiki.chainminer.com
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1876


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
February 16, 2014, 04:41:08 AM
 #14978

maybe there should be a discussion over the transferree paying the 0.0001 transfer fee (take it out of the transfer amount) - then let the transferee select whatever amount they want to transfer as long as its over the transfer fee.

Ok, This discussion is kind of silly. Lowering the minimum payout would kind of be futile. You would end up with lots of little transactions in your wallet that you couldn't spend because it would cost you too much in Tx fees to put them back together. I mean, really, we are talking about withdrawing less than US$6. Do you really need to transfer that amount? Let it accumulate in you account until it is big enough. If you are mining so little... well that has been argued adnauseum.

I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but I feel this answer was silly... Regardless of wether it's 6 dollars or less "IT''S MONEY" , not only that but it's money that has to get absorbed back into the general ledger and that is above the advertised 2% . That alone is something I would not want any part of if I were slush because it gives the appearance of impropriety . There are several fair solutions, but I'll just leave it at that. My point is, to dismiss any amount of money shows a total disrespect for money itself.

Really, Trongersoll has a point. In the long run, some time down the track, it might end up costing you $6 to spend that $6 - then what's the point? I think it's better to wait and see if there'll be some change to the client to reduce tx fees as the exchange rate increases by orders of magnitude. If all the money you earn is like that, you wouldn't be able to spend it.

For a one off though, it's not too bad. Eligius will pay your account out fully if you haven't submitted shares for some number of days or weeks. I've had 0.009 locked into DeepBit for years, wouldn't mind seeing it again.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
J_Dubbs
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 07:27:32 AM
 #14979

Just wanted to say... I put half my gear on ghash.io and left around half on Slush. Over a short amount of time Slush mining had higher revenues. I didn't keep detailed records, but over 48 hours it was an easy decision to move everything back to Slush.

"a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush"
Learn something new?: 1hzpjSkWaxm7XaEMi5P2fL6hhxuj8gxyX
Sir Alan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 221


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 10:38:11 AM
 #14980

...over 48 hours it was an easy decision to move everything back to Slush.
Uh-oh.  That's put the mockers on us.

1Eeyore17YeHrbJW5Q3pSdV8sXujkdrrFc
Pages: « 1 ... 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 [749] 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 ... 1104 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!