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

[pekatete]

Seeing I have not yet been able to confirm that the roving 1-2Ph/s is generated from 13 rigs, I took another delve into the stats. Rather than analyse the data without considering the two factors that I have been led to believe are important, i.e hash power and difficulty (I discarded luck as un-important), here's what I have based on difficulty.

Diff: 44455415962 (total: 42 blocks)
16 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
20 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
7 - Above 10 Ph/s

 ----------------------

Diff: 41272873894 (total: 61 blocks)
58 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
2 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
1 - Above 10 Ph/s

 ----------------------

Diff: 43971662056 (total: 48 blocks)
46 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
0 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
2 - Above 10 Ph/s

 ----------------------

Diff: 40640955016 (total: 69 blocks)
0 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
1 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
68 - Above 10 Ph/s

 ----------------------

Diff: 39457671307 (total: 73 blocks)
4 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
5 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
64 - Above 10 Ph/s

 ----------------------

Diff: 40007470271 (total: 69 blocks)
17 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
16 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
36 - Above 10 Ph/s

 ----------------------

Diff: 40300030327 (total: 68 blocks)
63 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
4 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
1 - Above 10 Ph/s

 ----------------------

Diff: 39603666252 (total: 77 blocks)
76 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
1 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
0 - Above 10 Ph/s

 ----------------------

Diff: 35985640265 (total: 18 blocks)
18 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
0 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
0 - Above 10 Ph/s

Finally a dicotomous comparison of the data from November 2014 to today total: 526 blocks.

298 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
228 - Above 9.5 Ph/s

EDIT: looks like we had our time with the 10 Ph/s threshhold when the difficulty was 40640955016 and 39457671307. Since then, our luck has depleted at that rate ..... there must be a pattern to it, but seeing I only have a sample size of 526 (not enough to be relied on ... I think minimum should be 2000), I'll have to concentrate on establishing whether that roving hash-rate is from 13 rigs!

[1475113074]

1475113074

[1475113074]

1475113074

[1475113074]

1475113074

[MrTeal]

Seeing I have not yet been able to confirm that the roving 1-2Ph/s is generated from 13 rigs, I took another delve into the stats. Rather than analyse the data without considering the two factors that I have been led to believe are important, i.e hash power and difficulty (I discarded luck as un-important), here's what I have based on difficulty.

Ok, but how much time was spent at each hash rate tier within those difficulty levels?

Diff: 44455415962 (total: 42 blocks)
1. 16 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
2. 20 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
4. 7 - Above 10 Ph/s

If 50% of the hashes are submitted while the pool is over 10PH/s but only 1/6 of the blocks are found in that period, something might be wrong. If the pool only spent 1/6th of the time at that level, then the numbers your seeing are what you'd expect.

[pekatete]

Seeing I have not yet been able to confirm that the roving 1-2Ph/s is generated from 13 rigs, I took another delve into the stats. Rather than analyse the data without considering the two factors that I have been led to believe are important, i.e hash power and difficulty (I discarded luck as un-important), here's what I have based on difficulty.

Ok, but how much time was spent at each hash rate tier within those difficulty levels?

Diff: 44455415962 (total: 42 blocks)
1. 16 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
2. 20 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
4. 7 - Above 10 Ph/s

If 50% of the hashes are submitted while the pool is over 10PH/s but only 1/6 of the blocks are found in that period, something might be wrong. If the pool only spent 1/6th of the time at that level, then the numbers your seeing are what you'd expect.

At this point, I do not care what you think or know, even whether you might have a point. You've adequately demonstrated to me (thus far today), that your opinion is worth disregarding in its entirity.
If you can confirm either way whether the roving hash-rate is from 13 rigs, that would be your time spent well.

[MrTeal]

At this point, I do not care what you think or know, even whether you might have a point. You've adequately demonstrated to me (thus far today), that your opinion is worth disregarding in its entirity.
If you can confirm either way whether the roving hash-rate is from 13 rigs, that would be your time spent well.

Fair enough. Please feel free to add me to your ignore list if it will help with your disregarding.

[pekatete]

Fair enough. Please feel free to add me to your ignore list if it will help with your disregarding.

Don't be silly, I do what I want on my end .... (see, there you go again!)

[organofcorti]

At this point, I do not care what you think or know, even whether you might have a point. You've adequately demonstrated to me (thus far today), that your opinion is worth disregarding in its entirity.
If you can confirm either way whether the roving hash-rate is from 13 rigs, that would be your time spent well.

Fair enough. Please feel free to add me to your ignore list if it will help with your disregarding.

Hey Mr. Teal, can I ask you a favour?

When you quote pekatete I get to see what he has written even though he one of a very few I have on ignore.

So would you mind not quoting him? I get sufficient stupid in my day already.

[bigbitmine]

Damm this is getting bitchy.  It's obvious the illuminati has infiltrated the pool.  There, case solved.

[kkurtmann]

Damm this is getting bitchy.  It's obvious the illuminati has infiltrated the pool.  There, case solved.

This might be the most plausible conspiracy theory that I have seen here in years.

[MrTeal]

Hey Mr. Teal, can I ask you a favour?

When you quote pekatete I get to see what he has written even though he one of a very few I have on ignore.

So would you mind not quoting him? I get sufficient stupid in my day already.

I think I can probably manage that.

[pekatete]

At this point, I do not care what you think or know, even whether you might have a point. You've adequately demonstrated to me (thus far today), that your opinion is worth disregarding in its entirity.
If you can confirm either way whether the roving hash-rate is from 13 rigs, that would be your time spent well.

Fair enough. Please feel free to add me to your ignore list if it will help with your disregarding.

Hey Mr. Teal, can I ask you a favour?

When you quote pekatete I get to see what he has written even though he one of a very few I have on ignore.

So would you mind not quoting him? I get sufficient stupid in my day already.

You are so full of yourself and clearly full of self importance. And yeah, the ignore button is a good option for the feeble minded, like yourself, and those that believe its only their opinion that matters. But that you get enough stupidity in your day already should sum you up nicely (and I know you are reading this ..... you just can't resist!).

Anyway, to keep on with my number crunching, I thought I'd continue my comparison but this time for only the blocks found when the pool hashing rate was above 9 Ph/s as with the 13 rigs' roving 1-2 Ph/s there was a more realistic chance of crossing that 10 Ph/s thresh-hold that seems to suck the blocks from the pool, and here goes:

November 2014 - today above 9 Ph/s: 354 blocks)
155 blocks - Less than 9.8 Ph/s
199 blocks - Above 9.8 Ph/s

[bigbitmine]

It might seem off the current topic but my Trezor advert has disappeared from my dashboard.  Has the offer finished?

[pekatete]

Anyway, to keep on with my number crunching, I thought I'd continue my comparison but this time for only the blocks found when the pool hashing rate was above 9 Ph/s as with the 13 rigs' roving 1-2 Ph/s there was a more realistic chance of crossing that 10 Ph/s thresh-hold that seems to suck the blocks from the pool, and here goes:

November 2014 - today above 9 Ph/s: 354 blocks)
155 blocks - Less than 9.8 Ph/s
199 blocks - Above 9.8 Ph/s

Just noticed something else, 132 of the 199 blocks found (~66%) when the pool was hashing above 9.8 Ph/s (aka blocks with a difficulty of 40640955016 and 39457671307) were found between 17th Dec 2014 and 12th Jan 2015 (thats ~ a 3 week window).

[kkurtmann]

It might seem off the current topic but my Trezor advert has disappeared from my dashboard.  Has the offer finished?

I don't see the Trezor advertisement on the beta site, but it is still on the regular site in my browser.

[jackbox]

It might seem off the current topic but my Trezor advert has disappeared from my dashboard.  Has the offer finished?

I don't see the Trezor advertisement on the beta site, but it is still on the regular site in my browser.

If you qualify you can just go to the Trezor site and use your API key as a discount code. Usable one time only.

[bigbitmine]

Another long one. All this fighting has angered our masters and they have activated again already. Calm must be restored.

[aurel57]

Seeing I have not yet been able to confirm that the roving 1-2Ph/s is generated from 13 rigs, I took another delve into the stats. Rather than analyse the data without considering the two factors that I have been led to believe are important, i.e hash power and difficulty (I discarded luck as un-important), here's what I have based on difficulty.

Ok, but how much time was spent at each hash rate tier within those difficulty levels?

Diff: 44455415962 (total: 42 blocks)
1. 16 - Less than 9.5 Ph/s
2. 20 - Between 9.5 Ph/s AND 10 Ph/s
4. 7 - Above 10 Ph/s

If 50% of the hashes are submitted while the pool is over 10PH/s but only 1/6 of the blocks are found in that period, something might be wrong. If the pool only spent 1/6th of the time at that level, then the numbers your seeing are what you'd expect.

At this point, I do not care what you think or know, even whether you might have a point. You've adequately demonstrated to me (thus far today), that your opinion is worth disregarding in its entirity.
If you can confirm either way whether the roving hash-rate is from 13 rigs, that would be your time spent well.

What MrTeal stated was the first thing that came to my mind as well. Your data is flawed to show anything without it.

[bitcoinbelieve]

Another long one. All this fighting has angered our masters and they have activated again already. Calm must be restored.

what are you talking about?

[aurel57]

Another long one. All this fighting has angered our masters and they have activated again already. Calm must be restored.

what are you talking about?

screen capture windows

[bigbitmine]

Another long one. All this fighting has angered our masters and they have activated again already. Calm must be restored.

what are you talking about?

screen capture windows

There is a smoking gun hiding in plain site. The plans appear to have been in motion since the new site was launched. In their announcement: http://satoshilabs.com/news/2014-11-17-slush-pool-beta-released-while-others-shut-down-we-move-forward/  they state "enhanced payouts". As far as I can see the rewards and payouts haven't changed at all as I use both the old and new sites. We're still over 10PH and still grinding the same block again. Those barking it's just luck are clearly part of it.

Now excuse me, I have some foil hats to make.

[bigbitmine]

Using my conspiracy calculator I calculate this block will end at approx 14 hours 45 minutes.