Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 12:10:05 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 ... 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] 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 ... 1105 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3926698 times)
bspurloc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 569


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 06:47:08 AM
 #15521

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.
1480810205
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480810205

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480810205
Reply with quote  #2

1480810205
Report to moderator
1480810205
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480810205

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480810205
Reply with quote  #2

1480810205
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480810205
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480810205

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480810205
Reply with quote  #2

1480810205
Report to moderator
1480810205
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480810205

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480810205
Reply with quote  #2

1480810205
Report to moderator
binja9
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 07:30:41 AM
 #15522

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
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 08:06:55 AM
 #15523

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.

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

Activity: 615


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 09:06:04 AM
 #15524

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.

BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
binja9
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 10:05:34 AM
 #15525

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
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 10:14:40 AM
 #15526

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
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 10:45:13 AM
 #15527

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.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 11:01:17 AM
 #15528

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.

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

Activity: 221


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 11:05:19 AM
 #15529

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

1Eeyore17YeHrbJW5Q3pSdV8sXujkdrrFc
binja9
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 11:49:03 AM
 #15530

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
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 615


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 11:51:06 AM
 #15531

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.

BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 11:53:03 AM
 #15532

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.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
binja9
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 01:38:56 PM
 #15533

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  Huh??
WhiteWalker
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 02:02:55 PM
 #15534

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
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 54


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 02:28:17 PM
 #15535

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  Huh??

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
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 04:48:00 PM
 #15536

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
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 50


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 04:55:20 PM
 #15537

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

reach for the toilet
ccynthia
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 52


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 05:11:56 PM
 #15538

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
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 52


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 05:13:39 PM
 #15539

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
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 06:12:25 PM
 #15540

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.
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 ... 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!