Bitcoin Forum
September 28, 2016, 01:44:42 AM *
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 ... 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 [1029] 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 ... 1104 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3855812 times)
bigbitmine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


Big Bit Mine


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 03:01:50 PM
 #20561

Also that extra 1PH hits my rewards.  I'm happy with 0.083 per block.

1475027082
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475027082

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475027082
Reply with quote  #2

1475027082
Report to moderator
1475027082
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475027082

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475027082
Reply with quote  #2

1475027082
Report to moderator
1475027082
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475027082

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475027082
Reply with quote  #2

1475027082
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile WWW
February 18, 2015, 03:16:54 PM
 #20562

And it's followed up by a 22 minute block.  Whoever this monster pool hopper is please sod off. And if my conspiracy theory is right please also sod off because it's not funny.
...

The average blocks per day for the last few months are as follows: -

4.6 in October - (est. average pool hash rate = 7.8PH)
5.1 in November (est. average pool hash rate = 8.6PH)
5.2 in December (est. average pool hash rate = 10.3PH)
4.0 in January (est. average pool hash rate < 10.3PH)
5.2 so far for February (est. average pool hash rate < 9.3PH)

Looking at January as the worst month in recent times, we see that it started the month at 11.6PH and remained above 10PH until the 15th Jan (finding 65 valid blocks in 14.5 days). For the remaining 16.5 days of the month, the pool never went over 10PH (and was on average closer to 9PH) and found 57 blocks.

I personally would therefore call it luck (both good and bad) rather than being a bug in the code.


I'd rather look at it on the face of it rather than compartmentalise this based on months .... aside from the difficulty mined in certain periods, there is nothing to make a month's period any special to the bitcoin network. So here goes ...

I was only able to get data for the period 2015-01-08 18:50:01 to 2015-02-18 13:15:21 (i.e the last block) and we have:

53 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was below 9 Ph/s
66 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 9 Ph/s BUT below 9.5 Ph/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 9.5  BUT less than 10 Ph/sPh/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 10 Ph/s

So there .... there may be some mileage in the conspiracy theory but we do not go without!

bigbitmine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


Big Bit Mine


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 03:21:59 PM
 #20563

And it's followed up by a 22 minute block.  Whoever this monster pool hopper is please sod off. And if my conspiracy theory is right please also sod off because it's not funny.
...

The average blocks per day for the last few months are as follows: -

4.6 in October - (est. average pool hash rate = 7.8PH)
5.1 in November (est. average pool hash rate = 8.6PH)
5.2 in December (est. average pool hash rate = 10.3PH)
4.0 in January (est. average pool hash rate < 10.3PH)
5.2 so far for February (est. average pool hash rate < 9.3PH)

Looking at January as the worst month in recent times, we see that it started the month at 11.6PH and remained above 10PH until the 15th Jan (finding 65 valid blocks in 14.5 days). For the remaining 16.5 days of the month, the pool never went over 10PH (and was on average closer to 9PH) and found 57 blocks.

I personally would therefore call it luck (both good and bad) rather than being a bug in the code.


I'd rather look at it on the face of it rather than compartmentalise this based on months .... aside from the difficulty mined in certain periods, there is nothing to make a month's period any special to the bitcoin network. So here goes ...

I was only able to get data for the period 2015-01-08 18:50:01 to 2015-02-18 13:15:21 (i.e the last block) and we have:

53 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was below 9 Ph/s
66 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 9 Ph/s BUT below 9.5 Ph/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 9.5  BUT less than 10 Ph/sPh/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 10 Ph/s


True, When it hits the 10PH mark the blocks stop for regular users and the clock keeps running.  However, behind the scenes a select VIP elite group are actually getting the same regular block times the rest of us were enjoying and splitting the rewards between them.  Once they've creamed enough they then drop the hash rate below 10PH which synchronizes the system and the extra long block ends and normal service resumes.

Yes, I am crazy and I am aware I have opened the floodgates.

MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 03:24:54 PM
 #20564

I'd rather look at it on the face of it rather than compartmentalise this based on months .... aside from the difficulty mined in certain periods, there is nothing to make a month's period any special to the bitcoin network. So here goes ...

I was only able to get data for the period 2015-01-08 18:50:01 to 2015-02-18 13:15:21 (i.e the last block) and we have:

53 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was below 9 Ph/s
66 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 9 Ph/s BUT below 9.5 Ph/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 9.5  BUT less than 10 Ph/sPh/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 10 Ph/s


True, When it hits the 10PH mark the blocks stop for regular users and the clock keeps running.  However, behind the scenes a select VIP elite group are actually getting the same regular block times the rest of us were enjoying and splitting the rewards between them.  Once they've creamed enough they then drop the hash rate below 10PH which synchronizes the system and the extra long block ends and normal service resumes.

Yes, I am crazy and I am aware I have opened the floodgates.
If you actually believe that drivel and think the pool op is actively screwing you, why don't you move elsewhere?
bigbitmine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


Big Bit Mine


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 04:31:49 PM
 #20565

I'd rather look at it on the face of it rather than compartmentalise this based on months .... aside from the difficulty mined in certain periods, there is nothing to make a month's period any special to the bitcoin network. So here goes ...

I was only able to get data for the period 2015-01-08 18:50:01 to 2015-02-18 13:15:21 (i.e the last block) and we have:

53 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was below 9 Ph/s
66 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 9 Ph/s BUT below 9.5 Ph/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 9.5  BUT less than 10 Ph/sPh/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 10 Ph/s


True, When it hits the 10PH mark the blocks stop for regular users and the clock keeps running.  However, behind the scenes a select VIP elite group are actually getting the same regular block times the rest of us were enjoying and splitting the rewards between them.  Once they've creamed enough they then drop the hash rate below 10PH which synchronizes the system and the extra long block ends and normal service resumes.

Yes, I am crazy and I am aware I have opened the floodgates.
If you actually believe that drivel and think the pool op is actively screwing you, why don't you move elsewhere?

Because I don't ACTUALLY believe that you bellend.

pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile WWW
February 18, 2015, 04:45:34 PM
 #20566

I'd rather look at it on the face of it rather than compartmentalise this based on months .... aside from the difficulty mined in certain periods, there is nothing to make a month's period any special to the bitcoin network. So here goes ...

I was only able to get data for the period 2015-01-08 18:50:01 to 2015-02-18 13:15:21 (i.e the last block) and we have:

53 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was below 9 Ph/s
66 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 9 Ph/s BUT below 9.5 Ph/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 9.5  BUT less than 10 Ph/sPh/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 10 Ph/s


True, When it hits the 10PH mark the blocks stop for regular users and the clock keeps running.  However, behind the scenes a select VIP elite group are actually getting the same regular block times the rest of us were enjoying and splitting the rewards between them.  Once they've creamed enough they then drop the hash rate below 10PH which synchronizes the system and the extra long block ends and normal service resumes.

Yes, I am crazy and I am aware I have opened the floodgates.
If you actually believe that drivel and think the pool op is actively screwing you, why don't you move elsewhere?

Because I don't ACTUALLY believe that you bellend.

But then again, you might be onto something ..... if you look at the numbers from your assertion, they tell us:

142 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was below 10 Ph/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 10 Ph/s

That is, during the period 8th Jan 2015 - 18th Feb 2015, the pool found ~86% of the blocks when the pool was hashing below 10 Ph/s and only 13% when the pool was hashing above 10 Ph/s.
Now, I am not usually a supersticious person, but that 13 in the above 10 Ph/s does put the conspiracy theories on the back burner ..... what do you think? And if it turns out that the 1-2 Ph/s roving hashpower that seems to affect our block solving capacity is made up of 13 rigs, that would be something!

bigbitmine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


Big Bit Mine


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 04:58:32 PM
 #20567

Well if anything it's keeping this thread alive.  Been dead since  people have been switching off.  Imagine what it's going to be like at the next block halving.  It'll be a ghost town.

HPmuirt
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 05:00:25 PM
 #20568

But then again, you might be onto something ..... if you look at the numbers from your assertion, they tell us:

142 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was below 10 Ph/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 10 Ph/s

Statistics and numbers can always be used or misused to prove or disprove a point, so here are some more numbers for you...

In December, 107 blocks were found above 10PH and only 55 found whilst below 10PH, which is a little different to the 142:23 ratio claimed in the posts above.

Cheers n beers

HP
bigbitmine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


Big Bit Mine


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 05:06:55 PM
 #20569

Wow there were some mega transactions in that last block.  Wish some of that was heading my way.  1000 BTC and the address has received 1,063,884.27764275 BTC.  That's amazing!  Give me that wallet.

pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile WWW
February 18, 2015, 05:09:09 PM
 #20570

But then again, you might be onto something ..... if you look at the numbers from your assertion, they tell us:

142 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was below 10 Ph/s
23 Blocks where the Pool Scoring Hash Rate was above 10 Ph/s

Statistics and numbers can always be used or misused to prove or disprove a point, so here are some more numbers for you...

In December, 107 blocks were found above 10PH and only 55 found whilst below 10PH, which is a little different to the 142:23 ratio claimed in the posts above.

Cheers n beers

HP

Now, I am not usually a supersticious person, but that 13 in the above 10 Ph/s does put the conspiracy theories on the back burner ..... what do you think? And if it turns out that the 1-2 Ph/s roving hashpower that seems to affect our block solving capacity is made up of 13 rigs, that would be something!

That you failed read the entire post in context and thus also failed to decipher the sacarsm in that is only testament to you being new here ...!

I was only able to get data for the period 2015-01-08 18:50:01 to 2015-02-18 13:15:21 (i.e the last block) and we have:

I could not get the December numbers, but that is neither here nor there as my numbers are NOT claims, but I can honestly say yours are just that ... because I could not get hold of them when I tried!

HPmuirt
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 06:14:53 PM
 #20571

That you failed read the entire post in context and thus also failed to decipher the sacarsm in that is only testament to you being new here ...!

I was only able to get data for the period 2015-01-08 18:50:01 to 2015-02-18 13:15:21 (i.e the last block) and we have:

I could not get the December numbers, but that is neither here nor there as my numbers are NOT claims, but I can honestly say yours are just that ... because I could not get hold of them when I tried!

I have numbers from October onwards from Slush, BTC Guild and Eligius, which I have copied from the pools and pasted into a spread sheet, so my numbers are not claims, just facts that you did not have to hand  Wink

Been mining on Slush for a couple of years, I just don't post much so rather than newbie I would say I am just quiet - and sick of conspiracy theories based on no hard evidence, so I broke silence to add some facts to the equation.

However I have no argument with anyone and since I did indeed fail to spot your sarcasm, I will slink back into the shadows and let the usual contributors continue the song and dance show.

Cheers n beers

HP

pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile WWW
February 18, 2015, 06:23:14 PM
 #20572

That you failed read the entire post in context and thus also failed to decipher the sacarsm in that is only testament to you being new here ...!

I was only able to get data for the period 2015-01-08 18:50:01 to 2015-02-18 13:15:21 (i.e the last block) and we have:

I could not get the December numbers, but that is neither here nor there as my numbers are NOT claims, but I can honestly say yours are just that ... because I could not get hold of them when I tried!

I have numbers from October onwards from Slush, BTC Guild and Eligius, which I have copied from the pools and pasted into a spread sheet, so my numbers are not claims, just facts that you did not have to hand  Wink

Been mining on Slush for a couple of years, I just don't post much so rather than newbie I would say I am just quiet - and sick of conspiracy theories based on no hard evidence, so I broke silence to add some facts to the equation.

However I have no argument with anyone and since I did indeed fail to spot your sarcasm, I will slink back into the shadows and let the usual contributors continue the song and dance show.

Cheers n beers

HP

Fair enough if you are the quiet one ... (there must be a reason why but thats for another day).
So, if you have the numbers from Slush dating back from October (I assume that is last year), then you'd know without any doubt that my numbers are NOT claims at all, rather facts. That, of course, is on the premise that you engaged your brain before posting to rubbish my numbers, which in this case you certainly did not (and may explain why you'd chosen to be quiet previously!).
Honestly, get off your perch!

bigbitmine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


Big Bit Mine


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 06:33:31 PM
 #20573

Happy Chinese New Year all you Chinese peeps.  Now turn off your farms and take some time off to party!  Don't worry, we've got it covered.

MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 06:34:20 PM
 #20574

If you really want to analyze it, please at least do so in a way that makes sense. Saying there were X number of blocks at >10PH/s vs Y blocks at <10PH/s in a given period is a relatively useless measurement.
Take the numbers from whatever period you want (say everything from the start of December onward), calculate the luck for each block solved, then group them along whatever cutoff you want. Then it's just a matter of looking at the data and pulling trends out that support your preconceived bias.
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile WWW
February 18, 2015, 06:37:38 PM
 #20575

If you really want to analyze it, please at least do so in a way that makes sense. Saying there were X number of blocks at >10PH/s vs Y blocks at <10PH/s in a given period is a relatively useless measurement.
Take the numbers from whatever period you want (say everything from the start of December onward), calculate the luck for each block solved, then group them along whatever cutoff you want. Then it's just a matter of looking at the data and pulling trends out that support your preconceived bias.
Your legendary status precedes you!
While you are still basking in it, pull your finger out and post your own numbers that, apparently, make sense (you patronising so and so!)

MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 06:54:23 PM
 #20576

If you really want to analyze it, please at least do so in a way that makes sense. Saying there were X number of blocks at >10PH/s vs Y blocks at <10PH/s in a given period is a relatively useless measurement.
Take the numbers from whatever period you want (say everything from the start of December onward), calculate the luck for each block solved, then group them along whatever cutoff you want. Then it's just a matter of looking at the data and pulling trends out that support your preconceived bias.
Your legendary status precedes you!
While you are still basking in it, pull your finger out and post your own numbers that, apparently, make sense (you patronising so and so!)
I don't really care enough to bother, I've never seen anything at Slush that suggests a problem. If, like our good friends bigbitmine and rpandassociates, you want assert that there is a fundamental problem with the pool that keeps it from scaling over 10PH/s it's on you to show that the problem isn't just an invention of your imagination.
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile WWW
February 18, 2015, 07:01:44 PM
 #20577

If you really want to analyze it, please at least do so in a way that makes sense. Saying there were X number of blocks at >10PH/s vs Y blocks at <10PH/s in a given period is a relatively useless measurement.
Take the numbers from whatever period you want (say everything from the start of December onward), calculate the luck for each block solved, then group them along whatever cutoff you want. Then it's just a matter of looking at the data and pulling trends out that support your preconceived bias.
Your legendary status precedes you!
While you are still basking in it, pull your finger out and post your own numbers that, apparently, make sense (you patronising so and so!)
I don't really care enough to bother, I've never seen anything at Slush that suggests a problem. If, like our good friends bigbitmine and rpandassociates, you want assert that there is a fundamental problem with the pool that keeps it from scaling over 10PH/s it's on you to show that the problem isn't just an invention of your imagination.

If you do not care enough to bother, then what use would it serve for me (or anyone) to prove your percieved lack of a fundamental problem or otherwise, as the case may be? Or is it the case that you really believe that your opinion matters?

KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 614


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 07:02:13 PM
 #20578

I don't really care enough to bother, I've never seen anything at Slush that suggests a problem. If, like our good friends bigbitmine and rpandassociates, you want assert that there is a fundamental problem with the pool that keeps it from scaling over 10PH/s it's on you to show that the problem isn't just an invention of your imagination.
+1
It's very simple on my opinion - people join when there is an increased luck, which should even out latter, so ...

BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


View Profile
February 18, 2015, 08:28:51 PM
 #20579

If you really want to analyze it, please at least do so in a way that makes sense. Saying there were X number of blocks at >10PH/s vs Y blocks at <10PH/s in a given period is a relatively useless measurement.
Take the numbers from whatever period you want (say everything from the start of December onward), calculate the luck for each block solved, then group them along whatever cutoff you want. Then it's just a matter of looking at the data and pulling trends out that support your preconceived bias.
Your legendary status precedes you!
While you are still basking in it, pull your finger out and post your own numbers that, apparently, make sense (you patronising so and so!)
I don't really care enough to bother, I've never seen anything at Slush that suggests a problem. If, like our good friends bigbitmine and rpandassociates, you want assert that there is a fundamental problem with the pool that keeps it from scaling over 10PH/s it's on you to show that the problem isn't just an invention of your imagination.

If you do not care enough to bother, then what use would it serve for me (or anyone) to prove your percieved lack of a fundamental problem or otherwise, as the case may be? Or is it the case that you really believe that your opinion matters?
It doesn't, but then I really don't expect it to. Neither does yours. However if I were to set about about to show that the pool was having issues scaling, I would try and do so in a way that actually shed some light on the issue. Feel free to do so however you want, but I will point out that the numbers you posted are useless just so they don't confuse anyone else.

PS - Did you know that this pool found zero blocks in the first half of 2014 when the pool hashrate was above 10TH/s? Seems pretty clearcut to me there's a scaling issue somewhere.
pekatete
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile WWW
February 18, 2015, 08:40:25 PM
 #20580

It doesn't, but then I really don't expect it to. Neither does yours. However if I were to set about about to show that the pool was having issues scaling, I would try and do so in a way that actually shed some light on the issue. Feel free to do so however you want, but I will point out that the numbers you posted are useless just so they don't confuse anyone else.

PS - Did you know that this pool found zero blocks in the first half of 2014 when the pool hashrate was above 10TH/s? Seems pretty clearcut to me there's a scaling issue somewhere.

You are not a legend for nothing .... you truly are pushing your point on the pretext that I (even bigtime) do believe there is an issue here (be that with / without scaling or something else sinister) ... seriously? You even have the time to context this in the first half of 2014 (be it the 10Th/s rate)?
So tell me then, what does it take to be a 4 star general on bitcointalk?

Pages: « 1 ... 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 [1029] 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 ... 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!