Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 06:14:39 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: What type of pool payouts do you prefer?
Bitcoins - 3160 (80.5%)
Bank transfer / USD - 407 (10.4%)
Gold/silver coins and bars - 359 (9.1%)
Total Voters: 3924

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 ... 1105 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3929670 times)
PostMixer
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 53


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 06:10:22 AM
 #14961

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.
1481177679
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481177679

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481177679
Reply with quote  #2

1481177679
Report to moderator
1481177679
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481177679

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481177679
Reply with quote  #2

1481177679
Report to moderator
1481177679
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481177679

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481177679
Reply with quote  #2

1481177679
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 615


View Profile
February 15, 2014, 09:05:08 AM
 #14962

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
 #14963

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
 #14964

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
 #14965

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
 #14966

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
 #14967

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
 #14968

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
 #14969

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: 1960


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
February 16, 2014, 04:41:08 AM
 #14970

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
 #14971

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
 #14972

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

1Eeyore17YeHrbJW5Q3pSdV8sXujkdrrFc
eoakland
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434


★☆★Bitin.io★☆★


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 11:39:48 AM
 #14973

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.

tough to really get pool stats in 48hrs.  Slush got hot--it had to.  seems like it has cooled, and it's back to it's regular sluggish self.  I just got tired of the consistent inconsistencies in daily earnings. 

gwk4
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 03:23:03 PM
 #14974

I am not an expert in stats, but I have had training and experience.  The consistent "bad luck" that we have experienced over the last 10000 blocks is starting to look remarkably systematic, and not a question of chance alone.  There might be an underlying factor such as speed of connections within the pool, distance from the pool members to the server where the blocks are recorded, etc. This might be subtle and appear irrelevant but is significant enough in the financial markets to have the servers for the rapid trading systems be in NY and NJ where both reale state and energy are more expensive.  You can be sure that the TH corps utilize every such advantage.
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 615


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 03:53:49 PM
 #14975

I am not an expert in stats, but I have had training and experience.  The consistent "bad luck" that we have experienced over the last 10000 blocks is starting to look remarkably systematic, and not a question of chance alone.  There might be an underlying factor such as speed of connections within the pool, distance from the pool members to the server where the blocks are recorded, etc. This might be subtle and appear irrelevant but is significant enough in the financial markets to have the servers for the rapid trading systems be in NY and NJ where both reale state and energy are more expensive.  You can be sure that the TH corps utilize every such advantage.
I am not an expert in trolling, but to register just to post nonsense as your first post looks as trolling to me.

Bad connections may result in more orphan blocks, but when the pool finds a block it submits it to the network and ends the round ... it does not store it at some remote location - it stores the miner score in remote database from where it is displayed on the website, but that operation is not time critical.

The distance from the pool members will increase the stale shares for the user, but again will not affect the pool success and abilty to find a block.

BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
gwk4
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 04:11:19 PM
 #14976

KNK,
I am not attempting to troll, far from it.  I have been with Slush consistently since Oct and run 200 GH/sec, quite satisfied to be here.  However, and to have an 86% luck for the pool over the chain growth of over 7000 blocks warrants consideration.  It is not just random noise related to small sample issues.  I have been reading erudite posts from OoC as well as others' with more or less rational explanations and denials of the trends.  Not being an IT professional I am merely suggesting that there might be a systematic advantage in the newly rising data centers' close proximity of the miners to one another that would give them an advantage, fewer stale shares being one.  I do believe that there might be room on this forum for intelligent discussion rather than either just cheerleading or flaming.
wdalessi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 04:51:51 PM
 #14977

Hello All.

Looks like Difficulty and Variance are catching up with me on Slush's pool. When I started mining here difficulty was a small, small fraction of what it is today. I am now looking at another 11 hour Block. Block #286208 , and it is staring at me, and laughing in my face. Not nice really. It appears to me over time as Difficulty has risen and variance has followed the extreme blocks are getting longer and longer.  I remember when people freaked out over a 10 to 12 hour block. Now they defend it with honor. I am afraid when difficulty triples from where it is today. This will probably take a few days so not to be to concerned, the extreme blocks could easily extend for 24 hours or more.

I am curious. What is the shortest block time, and the longest block time anyone has ever seen here, and what the difficulty was at the time. I am not posting what I remember, but I remember some very fast, and very, very slow blocks, and am curious what others remember.
dburdett84
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 05:05:34 PM
 #14978

I am hoping there is something wrong with the server at this point, I have never complained and been mining solely with this pool for years.  But from the last block to this block my estimated payout has been reduced 1/100th of the normal I get.  If this is true and not just a display error I will be walking away for good.   I have bit my tongue and stayed quite during all the other luck issue we have had, but staying at the same Hash rate to get 1/100th of the normal payout is just not going to happen.

Anyone else having this issue?
robix
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 360


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 05:07:12 PM
 #14979

Same here.
dburdett84
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43


View Profile
February 16, 2014, 05:07:41 PM
 #14980

unless you get free electricity.

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

Come on lady luck!

I run off of pure SOLAR(no damage to the enviroment) and even generate enough that the power company pays me for what I kick back into their system.
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 ... 1105 »
  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!