[4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool

[kabopar]

Oh, I see. No, the amount of blocks a block maker solves is related to the block maker's hashrate and the network difficulty, nothing else. In the long term of course difficulty will rise, and what you expect will happen. But in the short term it just means a larger number of blocks solved per day overall. Does that make sense? I know it's a bit anti-intuitive.

If there is a significant rise by hashrate of some pool, wouldn't that have also some short-term impact on the relative number of blocks that this pool solves?  The difficulty drives the complexity of finding a solution, and if there was only a single miner, this would dictate the rate of blocks solved by that miner.  If there are 2 miners, there is some competition between them, as each block can be solved only once, so some of the work expended by one of the miners would be lost if the other miner solves that particular block.  Intuitively it is expected that the instantaneous relative hash rate would have some impact on the rate of individual solutions - why is that incorrect?

Cheers

[1593697111]

1593697111

[1593697111]

1593697111

[1593697111]

1593697111

[1593697111]

1593697111

[organofcorti]

If there is a significant rise by hashrate of some pool, wouldn't that have also some short-term impact on the relative number of blocks that this pool solves?  The difficulty drives the complexity of finding a solution, and if there was only a single miner, this would dictate the rate of blocks solved by that miner.  If there are 2 miners, there is some competition between them, as each block can be solved only once, so some of the work expended by one of the miners would be lost if the other miner solves that particular block.  Intuitively it is expected that the instantaneous relative hash rate would have some impact on the rate of individual solutions - why is that incorrect?

Cheers

Because there is no competition to find a block in the way you think. Every (diff 1) share has the same chance of finding a block. An increase in hashrate by some pool just means that that pool - and the network - makes more blocks.

[kabopar]

Because there is no competition to find a block in the way you think. Every (diff 1) share has the same chance of finding a block. An increase in hashrate by some pool just means that that pool - and the network - makes more blocks.

Thanks for the explanation.

[organofcorti]

Thanks for the explanation.

Np. I think this was a good conversation to have in the thread, won't be the last time this sort of question is asked.

[pekatete]

I think its about time we re-visited the thresh-hold that seems to drain all the luck out of slush. up to now, we've had it at 10 Ph/s, but seeing we've been hovering at or around 9.9 Ph/s for the last 17 hours or so  may be a case to in point.
It may seem like splitting hairs (and if you believe so please feel free to abstain from pointing out the obvious), but I think it is critical we nail down the exact thresh-hold if we are going to have any chance of proving (or otherwise) the conspiracy theory.

[leowonderful]

I can't wait till the bitcoin network reaches 1 billion Petahashes, then small rigs will die

[bitcoinbelieve]

I really care less what other ppl opinions about this issue but personally there is some correlation between 10 PH and long block.

[aurel57]

I really care less what other ppl opinions about this issue but personally there is some correlation between 10 PH and long block.

after 20+ hours and am starting to listen. 

[rpandassociates]

Said it a zillon times, I was probably the first person to point out this 10PH barrier issue people thought i was crazy or creating conspiracies

And yes totally agree makes no logical sense what so ever seriously makes no sense.

But I feel our best block times come in the 8-9PH range 

Once we get into the 9-10PH they block times start to increase
At 10PH game over
as you can see right now 20+hrs @ 10PH I bailed out at 10hrs just cannot mine 24hrs with no income not with my electric rates
I have also come to the conclusion that if a block crosses 9hrs its going to run 24hrs or more.

Once again just a observation

another thing I observe is when the difficulty changes seems to be some correlation to long block times, as if it takes the pool time to adjust.

[pekatete]

another thing I observe is when the difficulty changes seems to be some correlation to long block times, as if it takes the pool time to adjust.

There, ma friend, you have a point! My observation about that particular conspiracy is congruent with the spirit of what you say , my minor divergence emanating from the little detail of "long block times", as the reverse can also be true, indeed it happened not long ago. Remember when we had those 10 blocks in a day? That was on the 11th Feb 2015 and that lucky run began a mere 10 hours after the increase in network difficulty from 41272873894 to 44455415962.

So it seems pool luck can be influenced by how fast the algorithm dishing out (and co-ordinating) the work adjusts to a new network difficulty (if ever there is anything of the sort!)

PS. And if there is such a thing in existence as optimisation of the algorithm dishing out and co-ordinating work, then please do tell since I'd very much like to implement it in my very own proxy for solo mining ...!!

[bigbitmine]

Well, time for a beer and a scotch egg. Had a productive day servicing miners in main farm whilst the miners at home appear to have spent the day chewing the same block again. Oh well 

[pekatete]

Is it just me not seeing properly or is the network generally slow today .... ?

[aurel57]

I just pulled my miners ....I guess I now remember why I left a year ago.. 

[bigbitmine]

Time to start renting my small rig out again.  Will wait for the end of this block so it's not a waste of time.  Watch the 10 blocks a day start again.

[aurel57]

Time to start renting my small rig out again.  Will wait for the end of this block so it's not a waste of time.  Watch the 10 blocks a day start again.

I was waiting also before pulling my miners, but that was 10+ hours ago. Should have just left then and would have been better off.

[pekatete]

I must be missing something ..... so I decided to dust off my early NanoFury acquisition, that I had put away for months on end now, fired up bfgminer and pointed it to slush in the hope we can breach that annoying 10 Ph/s thresh-hold .... every little helps!



Hope that helps ..... Now back to the number crunching ....

[manic miner]

 
Well ive got a Ice Fury sitting in a jar on the mantle. Maybe I could blow off the dust and plug that beast in if you think it might help.
 

[bigbitmine]

I've got an Antminer U1.  Plugged it in but nothing happened.  Thank god.  Couldn't be arsed setting it up to be honest.

[bigbitmine]

Wow, the amount of offline rigs a Betarigs is amazing.  There's hardly anything running any more.  Definitely more offline than online.

[SargeR33]

28hr block so far. That is great.

If someone has the time, they should go through the list of IP's which found blocks during >10PH on the blockchain and then compare then to IP's found when the pool was operating under 9ph. Look at the performance difference between Slush and Eligius for the tiny difference in power. Less that 1% more power against the network but 80% more blocks.