[40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool

[bspurloc]

Or you could all just go look at organofcorti's excellent weekly blog post, which lists the luck for most of the major pools.

at least we got 2nd place in orphaned blocks.

[binja9]

Unfortunately there is no relation between the pool size and the luck in the direction you want. It's the opposite ...
When the luck increases - more people are joining, but then it should go down to compensate it and it look like the higher hashrate is causing the bad luck, but it is not. If no new miners join the pool a 12h block will actually take 13h

Why 'unfortunately'? Because if it was true, then a solo miner with CPU, would have much more luck and much bigger reward, then no one would need to join a pool at all.

I'm also afraid to tell you that 'luck' does not exist - you can calculate probability but not luck (unless someone could post the calculation for the likelihood of luck existing)...

One certainty is that as the pool grows then so does the traffic into servers and it doesn't matter how much hashing goes on, it has to get to a server and 800-825TH seems to be the current 'lucky' number range.

[organofcorti]

I'm also afraid to tell you that 'luck' does not exist - you can calculate probability but not luck (unless someone could post the calculation for the likelihood of luck existing)...

'Luck' exists, silly! If you earned more than expected, you've had good 'luck'. If you earned less than expected, you had bad 'luck'.

One certainty is that as the pool grows then so does the traffic into servers and it doesn't matter how much hashing goes on, it has to get to a server and 800-825TH seems to be the current 'lucky' number range.

No, the traffic problem is what vardiff solves.

[KNK]

One certainty is that as the pool grows then so does the traffic into servers and it doesn't matter how much hashing goes on, it has to get to a server and 800-825TH seems to be the current 'lucky' number range.

No, the traffic problem is what vardiff solves.

True, but binja9 is also right - vardiff solves the problem for a single miner and his hashrate, but more miners means more traffic.
If a single miner points more of his equipment at Slush, the pool will change his vardiff and the traffic and server load will remain the same.
If 1000 miners point 1Gh at the pool they will increase the traffic and the server load for just 1Th increase.

Still the pool hashrate is not related to the load it takes to serve it.

I am sure in such cases Slush just starts an additional stratum back-end (or adds a CPU to the virtual server instance) to take the load. With getwork the load was many times more than with stratum, so we are far from the limit. I also have a reason to believe that most of the processing is done in the startum back end servers, so adding another one scales almost linearly.

[binja9]

I'm also afraid to tell you that 'luck' does not exist - you can calculate probability but not luck (unless someone could post the calculation for the likelihood of luck existing)...

'Luck' exists, silly! If you earned more than expected, you've had good 'luck'. If you earned less than expected, you had bad 'luck'.

One certainty is that as the pool grows then so does the traffic into servers and it doesn't matter how much hashing goes on, it has to get to a server and 800-825TH seems to be the current 'lucky' number range.

No, the traffic problem is what vardiff solves.

Of course luck doesn't exist it is a convenient word to cover bad judgement, calculations or events we choose not to understand or have control of.

If you expect to earn  X and you earn Y then a force has acted upon X to move its value to Y - an event, not luck.
Either way your expectation/calculation was wrong.

[binja9]

One certainty is that as the pool grows then so does the traffic into servers and it doesn't matter how much hashing goes on, it has to get to a server and 800-825TH seems to be the current 'lucky' number range.

No, the traffic problem is what vardiff solves.

True, but binja9 is also right - vardiff solves the problem for a single miner and his hashrate, but more miners means more traffic.
If a single miner points more of his equipment at Slush, the pool will change his vardiff and the traffic and server load will remain the same.
If 1000 miners point 1Gh at the pool they will increase the traffic and the server load for just 1Th increase.

Still the pool hashrate is not related to the load it takes to serve it.

I am sure in such cases Slush just starts an additional stratum back-end (or adds a CPU to the virtual server instance) to take the load. With getwork the load was many times more than with stratum, so we are far from the limit. I also have a reason to believe that most of the processing is done in the startum back end servers, so adding another one scales almost linearly.

Thanks for that clarity - well put

[organofcorti]

I'm also afraid to tell you that 'luck' does not exist - you can calculate probability but not luck (unless someone could post the calculation for the likelihood of luck existing)...

'Luck' exists, silly! If you earned more than expected, you've had good 'luck'. If you earned less than expected, you had bad 'luck'.

Of course luck doesn't exist it is a convenient word to cover bad judgement, calculations or events we choose not to understand or have control of.

If you expect to earn  X and you earn Y then a force has acted upon X to move its value to Y - an event, not luck.
Either way your expectation/calculation was wrong.

That calls for an "Argh".  You seem to have some math knowledge, but then you confound "expectation" in a mathematical sense, with "expectation" in some other sense.

Your expected income per difficulty 1 share is (Bitcoin reward per block) / (network difficulty). If you earn more than this per share, you've had good luck. Less than this is bad luck.

[organofcorti]

One certainty is that as the pool grows then so does the traffic into servers and it doesn't matter how much hashing goes on, it has to get to a server and 800-825TH seems to be the current 'lucky' number range.

No, the traffic problem is what vardiff solves.

True, but binja9 is also right - vardiff solves the problem for a single miner and his hashrate, but more miners means more traffic.
If a single miner points more of his equipment at Slush, the pool will change his vardiff and the traffic and server load will remain the same.
If 1000 miners point 1Gh at the pool they will increase the traffic and the server load for just 1Th increase.

Still the pool hashrate is not related to the load it takes to serve it.

I am sure in such cases Slush just starts an additional stratum back-end (or adds a CPU to the virtual server instance) to take the load. With getwork the load was many times more than with stratum, so we are far from the limit. I also have a reason to believe that most of the processing is done in the startum back end servers, so adding another one scales almost linearly.

If the load got too high, then Slush could simply increase the minimum variable difficulty. I don't think that will be a problem though - the pool isn't attracting as many new miners as other pools.

[Sir Alan]

I'm also afraid to tell you that 'luck' does not exist

"We must believe in luck. For how else can we explain the success of those we don't like?" - Jean Cocteau

[binja9]

I'm also afraid to tell you that 'luck' does not exist - you can calculate probability but not luck (unless someone could post the calculation for the likelihood of luck existing)...

'Luck' exists, silly! If you earned more than expected, you've had good 'luck'. If you earned less than expected, you had bad 'luck'.

Of course luck doesn't exist it is a convenient word to cover bad judgement, calculations or events we choose not to understand or have control of.

If you expect to earn  X and you earn Y then a force has acted upon X to move its value to Y - an event, not luck.
Either way your expectation/calculation was wrong.

That calls for an "Argh".  You seem to have some math knowledge, but then you confound "expectation" in a mathematical sense, with "expectation" in some other sense.

Your expected income per difficulty 1 share is (Bitcoin reward per block) / (network difficulty). If you earn more than this per share, you've had good luck. Less than this is bad luck.

No confusion - Expectation has to be based on some form of calculation applied to factors that you know or think you know.

As per my previous statement - luck is a convenient word to cover bad judgement, bad calculations or events we choose not to understand or have control of. Which is Bitcoin luck do you think.

[KNK]

One certainty is that as the pool grows then so does the traffic into servers and it doesn't matter how much hashing goes on, it has to get to a server and 800-825TH seems to be the current 'lucky' number range.

No, the traffic problem is what vardiff solves.

True, but binja9 is also right - vardiff solves the problem for a single miner and his hashrate, but more miners means more traffic.
If a single miner points more of his equipment at Slush, the pool will change his vardiff and the traffic and server load will remain the same.
If 1000 miners point 1Gh at the pool they will increase the traffic and the server load for just 1Th increase.

Still the pool hashrate is not related to the load it takes to serve it.

I am sure in such cases Slush just starts an additional stratum back-end (or adds a CPU to the virtual server instance) to take the load. With getwork the load was many times more than with stratum, so we are far from the limit. I also have a reason to believe that most of the processing is done in the startum back end servers, so adding another one scales almost linearly.

If the load got too high, then Slush could simply increase the minimum variable difficulty. I don't think that will be a problem though - the pool isn't attracting as many new miners as other pools.

VarDiff with Slush aims at 15-20 shares per minute. Setting a higher minimum diff will increase the variance for the slower miners and may force them to move away.
If the load is high because of very slow miners not worth the additional server - Yes higher min diff is the solution, but if the load is high because of increased number of 'average speed' miners it is not a solution.

I am sure Slush is smart enough to figure it out when and what to do, when he has much more insight on the load than us - that's why i don't buy the conclusion of pool hashrate being a limiting factor.

[organofcorti]

am sure Slush is smart enough to figure it out when and what to do, when he has much more insight on the load than us - that's why i don't buy the conclusion of pool hashrate being a limiting factor.

I absolutely agree. Pool hashrate doesn't correlate with "luck", er shares/difficulty.

[binja9]

am sure Slush is smart enough to figure it out when and what to do, when he has much more insight on the load than us - that's why i don't buy the conclusion of pool hashrate being a limiting factor.

I absolutely agree. Pool hashrate doesn't correlate with "luck", er shares/difficulty.

I wouldn't look now but the somebody has just shot a whole herd of miners - 700TH  ??

[WhiteWalker]

Does anyone know of an iPhone app, or twitter feed, or something... that would send an alert each time a block is found by Slush's pool?

[anthem]

am sure Slush is smart enough to figure it out when and what to do, when he has much more insight on the load than us - that's why i don't buy the conclusion of pool hashrate being a limiting factor.

I absolutely agree. Pool hashrate doesn't correlate with "luck", er shares/difficulty.

I wouldn't look now but the somebody has just shot a whole herd of miners - 700TH  ??

I am showing 813 right now. .  a drop from 850, but it seems to be going back and forth between 740 to close to 900. .   Every time it gets near 900, we get an run of long running rounds that seems to thin the crowd down. .  And I don't believe/think there is any correlation between the two - just that that has happened the last month or so.

[dburdett84]

Well this is a good bye, I have jumped ship completely all my miners have been transitioned to BTC Guild.  I do not know why I clung on to Slush for so long, it was nothing but a waste of my time and hardware for the last year.  At the new pool my gear has earned more in the last 48 hours then it has on Slush's pull in the last week I was here.   I don't see it getting bad there either, The longest block so far has only been about 2 hours.

I am not sure why so many of you die hard Slush fan's can not see the writing on the wall, it is clear as day.  Your pool leader does not care about you anymore, I was stuck here since I started mining in 2011 but have finally realized what a joke he is.

[ipoomyself]

Slushes pool is shit there is someone on the inside stealing my work blocks just like mt gox and their stats are all fucked up as well.  Daily graph doesn't update after almost a week wot a lot of shit.  

Changed to BTC guild and the interface is more in depth i like it hopefully it will work better than slush costing me money scammers

[ccynthia]

Slushes pool is shit there is someone on the inside stealing my work blocks just like mt gox and their stats are all fucked up as well.  Daily graph doesn't update after almost a week wot a lot of shit.  

Changed to BTC guild and the interface is more in depth i like it hopefully it will work better than slush costing me money scammers

Bye bye, so long, cya, don't let the door hit ya in the butt on your way out.

You obviously are a real noob and haven't been on BTC long at all. I've been on BTC as well as Slush since I started and if you haven't seen any 3+ hour blocks over and over on BTC you haven't been there long. A 3+ hour block on BTC is like a 12 hour on Sluch. True BTC is paying better right now but has only been so like you said in the past week. And true they offer better graphics and info but overall over 30 days Slush has paid better.

Didn't like your dumb act talk anyhow and I think you are same jerk on WOW talking same way irritating everyone and getting put on ignore by 1000's of players.

So just go and be gone already.

[ccynthia]

Well this is a good bye, I have jumped ship completely all my miners have been transitioned to BTC Guild.  I do not know why I clung on to Slush for so long, it was nothing but a waste of my time and hardware for the last year.  At the new pool my gear has earned more in the last 48 hours then it has on Slush's pull in the last week I was here.   I don't see it getting bad there either, The longest block so far has only been about 2 hours.

I am not sure why so many of you die hard Slush fan's can not see the writing on the wall, it is clear as day.  Your pool leader does not care about you anymore, I was stuck here since I started mining in 2011 but have finally realized what a joke he is.

Bye bye.

[cardgenius]

Slushes pool is shit there is someone on the inside stealing my work blocks just like mt gox and their stats are all fucked up as well.  Daily graph doesn't update after almost a week wot a lot of shit.  

Changed to BTC guild and the interface is more in depth i like it hopefully it will work better than slush costing me money scammers

Bye bye, so long, cya, don't let the door hit ya in the butt on your way out.

You obviously are a real noob and haven't been on BTC long at all. I've been on BTC as well as Slush since I started and if you haven't seen any 3+ hour blocks over and over on BTC you haven't been there long. A 3+ hour block on BTC is like a 12 hour on Sluch. True BTC is paying better right now but has only been so like you said in the past week. And true they offer better graphics and info but overall over 30 days Slush has paid better.

Didn't like your dumb act talk anyhow and I think you are same jerk on WOW talking same way irritating everyone and getting put on ignore by 1000's of players.

So just go and be gone already.

LOL... Who would have thought, a Slush Mining Pool fanboy. It's ok, take a tissue for your tears.