Bitcoin Forum
September 25, 2016, 12:17:10 AM *
News: Due to DDoS attacks, there may be periodic downtime.
 
   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 ... 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 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 ... 1103 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3852320 times)
dmwardjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672


The Few, The Proud, The BTC


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 06:05:21 PM
 #20941

There is an ongoing discussion to increase the block size limit.

To my understanding the decision to use lager block sizes has
to be made by the miners. So what is the oppinion of the miners
at shush's pool and of the pool operator ?

If this topic is discussed somethere else and I missed it please
direct me to that post.

A


If you wish to try to get that answer from Slush, it needs to be on FaceBook.

BTC ADDRESS: 1HBSBwbFDg2XQii8cNJGAhLyd2mFS4jbG9
1474762630
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1474762630

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1474762630
Reply with quote  #2

1474762630
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1474762630
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1474762630

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1474762630
Reply with quote  #2

1474762630
Report to moderator
1474762630
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1474762630

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1474762630
Reply with quote  #2

1474762630
Report to moderator
KNK
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 614


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 07:16:04 PM
 #20942

There is an ongoing discussion to increase the block size limit.

To my understanding the decision to use lager block sizes has
to be made by the miners. So what is the oppinion of the miners
at shush's pool and of the pool operator ?

As a miner and a full node owner - I would vote against that
Why?
Because it takes more space:
 Yes, the hard drive space gets cheaper, but this assumes you constantly upgrade your drive space = constant expenses
 It takes longer to scan the blockchain, JUST to confirm a transaction is valid and not double spend
 It needs more CPU power to confirm each and every transaction = more expenses

Also Satoshi stated (and it is stored in the bitcoin logic), that at some point the transaction fees will be more than the reward, but if there is no concurrency for the place in the block - there is no stimulus to add bigger fee, so larger block size will actually open another/different can of worms or simply put - hurt bitcoin more than help it

BTC tips: 1KNK1akhpethhtcyhKTF2d3PWTQDUWUzHE
chiguireitor
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 853


Coins, Games & Miners


View Profile WWW
June 10, 2015, 07:33:54 PM
 #20943

[...] To my understanding the decision to use lager block sizes has
to be made by the miners [...]

No, the decision must come from consensus on the Bitcoin Foundation and coders, probably derived from consensus with full node owners. Miners (pool miners, specifically) play little or no role regarding block size.

GenTarkin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 08:22:10 PM
 #20944

Summer is heating up all over the northern hemisphere, most pools are seeing a drop in hash rate, and thus the back-to-back negative diff adjustments we just saw recently.

Except that doesnt explain the 3% incoming increase =P
So, wishful thinking
...

Anything less than +/= 4.5% per retarget is indistinguishable from variance. That is, if difficulty moves up or down by less than ~ 4.5%, you can't prove that the underlying hashrate has changed significantly.



Yeah, check it now dude, steady increase the last 5 days or so from -% to almost 5% .... theres definitely a surge in hashrate. This really sucks.

GenTarkin's MOD Kncminer Titan custom firmware! v1.0.4! <--- CLICK HERE
Donations: bitcoin- 1Px71mWNQNKW19xuARqrmnbcem1dXqJ3At || litecoin- LYXrLis3ik6TRn8tdvzAyJ264DRvwYVeEw
kano
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1848


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
June 11, 2015, 12:23:11 AM
 #20945

[...] To my understanding the decision to use lager block sizes has
to be made by the miners [...]

No, the decision must come from consensus on the Bitcoin Foundation and coders, probably derived from consensus with full node owners. Miners (pool miners, specifically) play little or no role regarding block size.
No, the consensus is simply the people who mine and use the blockchain.
Yes a pool can ignore their miners, but a pool is still a miner Tongue
If pools/miners decide to not want the change, and there is a high enough % that decide this, then that will answer it.
If exchanges decide to go with the change then that may influence pools/miners who want to be able to use their mined BTC.
But the reverse is also true that the exchanges may decide that they don't want to risk very low transaction confirmation if most pools/miners go against it.

My only confusion in it is that ... I don't see an overnight sudden increase in transactions because of the change.
The change would simply mean that future growth wouldn't be stifled by hitting the limit as quickly.

Anyway - there's threads on the subject, to look at elsewhere ... ...

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
chiguireitor
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 853


Coins, Games & Miners


View Profile WWW
June 11, 2015, 02:39:10 AM
 #20946

[...] To my understanding the decision to use lager block sizes has
to be made by the miners [...]

No, the decision must come from consensus on the Bitcoin Foundation and coders, probably derived from consensus with full node owners. Miners (pool miners, specifically) play little or no role regarding block size.
No, the consensus is simply the people who mine and use the blockchain.
Yes a pool can ignore their miners, but a pool is still a miner Tongue
If pools/miners decide to not want the change, and there is a high enough % that decide this, then that will answer it.
If exchanges decide to go with the change then that may influence pools/miners who want to be able to use their mined BTC.
But the reverse is also true that the exchanges may decide that they don't want to risk very low transaction confirmation if most pools/miners go against it.

My only confusion in it is that ... I don't see an overnight sudden increase in transactions because of the change.
The change would simply mean that future growth wouldn't be stifled by hitting the limit as quickly.

Anyway - there's threads on the subject, to look at elsewhere ... ...

Ooh my... being quoted by THE Kano, i can delete that from my bucket list. Anyways, what you say is true, there's countless threads regarding this matter for us to dabble in it.

Anywas, payments on slush have been steady enough that we can disregard the drop in hashrate. A little variance adds spice to life.

ajas
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 57


View Profile
June 11, 2015, 09:41:01 PM
 #20947

[...] To my understanding the decision to use lager block sizes has
to be made by the miners [...]

No, the decision must come from consensus on the Bitcoin Foundation and coders, probably derived from consensus with full node owners. Miners (pool miners, specifically) play little or no role regarding block size.
No, the consensus is simply the people who mine and use the blockchain.
Yes a pool can ignore their miners, but a pool is still a miner Tongue

I think a pool should not ignore its miners. If a topic is really controversial the pool operator should state what
rules he intends to follow and miners could base their decision which pool to use also on that. If we take
it serious that bitcoin is a decentralised system people should be aware of their 'power'. (OK maybe the power
of small miners is limited).

I don't want to turn mining into a highly political affair. But I think everybody using and contributing to
bitcoin should make up his mind. Finally this kind of decisions can influence the future development of
bitcoin (centralisation/decentralisation). In the end it is best to find some consensus based on good
arguments.

Quote
If pools/miners decide to not want the change, and there is a high enough % that decide this, then that will answer it.
If exchanges decide to go with the change then that may influence pools/miners who want to be able to use their mined BTC.
But the reverse is also true that the exchanges may decide that they don't want to risk very low transaction confirmation if most pools/miners go against it.

My only confusion in it is that ... I don't see an overnight sudden increase in transactions because of the change.
The change would simply mean that future growth wouldn't be stifled by hitting the limit as quickly.

Anyway - there's threads on the subject, to look at elsewhere ... ...

If I look at the average blocksize we have a slow exponential groth over the last 3 years. If we extrapolate it, the 1Mb
limit will be hit in 2 years from now on and it will take about 8 years to reach 20Mb. So I personally do not see an urgent
need for a large change of the limit with may have unforeseeable effects.

But right -  there are threads on the subject, to look at elsewhere ...
GenTarkin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


View Profile
June 12, 2015, 07:27:53 PM
 #20948

WTF is wrong w/ the pool?! where are the blocks, its been almost 24hrs.....!!! grrrrrrr =(

GenTarkin's MOD Kncminer Titan custom firmware! v1.0.4! <--- CLICK HERE
Donations: bitcoin- 1Px71mWNQNKW19xuARqrmnbcem1dXqJ3At || litecoin- LYXrLis3ik6TRn8tdvzAyJ264DRvwYVeEw
paczcz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
June 12, 2015, 09:12:14 PM
 #20949

WTF is wrong w/ the pool?! where are the blocks, its been almost 24hrs.....!!! grrrrrrr =(


Piece off here too. This week we are about 140000 Million shares far away from 100% luck
man114
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 13, 2015, 01:08:02 AM
 #20950

Almost 24hrs again... Luck has been bad.
GenTarkin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


View Profile
June 13, 2015, 03:54:32 AM
 #20951

We better a huge burst of blocks soon ... my god! this is insane, now its been 26hrs!

GenTarkin's MOD Kncminer Titan custom firmware! v1.0.4! <--- CLICK HERE
Donations: bitcoin- 1Px71mWNQNKW19xuARqrmnbcem1dXqJ3At || litecoin- LYXrLis3ik6TRn8tdvzAyJ264DRvwYVeEw
needmoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
June 13, 2015, 07:26:34 AM
 #20952

30 hours Shocked

Cray-1
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 36



View Profile
June 13, 2015, 11:43:58 AM
 #20953

Finally, We got the Block!!
Nikethemutt
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 11


View Profile
June 13, 2015, 02:54:57 PM
 #20954

WTF is wrong w/ the pool?! where are the blocks, its been almost 24hrs.....!!! grrrrrrr =(


Piece off here too. This week we are about 140000 Million shares far away from 100% luck


This seems like more than bad luck.

3 blocks in 3 days and only 1 7-block in the past week.   

10 hour blocks are becoming the norm.

Has something changed?
man114
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 13, 2015, 04:22:30 PM
 #20955

I'm about 2 blocks from my set payout after that I'm taking a break too.
man114
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 14, 2015, 07:11:02 AM
 #20956

Low and behold I turned on another miner when I got home this afternoon since I was close to my payout then they hit 4 blocks before I checked again this evening.
chiguireitor
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 853


Coins, Games & Miners


View Profile WWW
June 14, 2015, 03:32:16 PM
 #20957

So, i was 89% to my payout threshold, boom came the blocks... now i have my payout and i'm already 95% to my next payout threshold. That's the beauty of slush's

Darthswan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 411


View Profile
June 15, 2015, 12:18:58 AM
 #20958

We have lost some serious power over the last couple of weeks.  Any legitimate ideas of what's going on? 
dmwardjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672


The Few, The Proud, The BTC


View Profile
June 15, 2015, 12:21:46 AM
 #20959

We have lost some serious power over the last couple of weeks.  Any legitimate ideas of what's going on?  

It seems quite odd to me when I look at the hash rate on Slush's Pool and BTCGuild, the hash rate has gone down considerably.  However, if you look at the overall network hash rate, it has gone up considerably.  Any thoughts?

Home miners continuing to leave while giant farms (especially in China) continue to come online.  Now that it's getting hot in the northern hemisphere (which is where most home miners are located), it's becoming even more of a loss to keep miners running due to the extra cooling needed if you have them in your home.  They also perform worse at higher ambient temperatures, so home miners are literally just losing some of their hashrate in the warmer weather.


EDIT:  Also the fact that there's not a single pool outside of China that even has 5% of the network anymore makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy that the pools continue to shrink because people can't stand variance.

However, I will say this though:  One miner who had 2.5 PH/s all by their lonesome left, one miner with 1.0 PH/s all by their lonesome has left and another miner with 1.5 PH/s all by their lonesome has left.  One could tell this very easily if they were paying attention to the "Hash Rate Distribution Chart" under Pool Statistics at the bottom of the page.

BTC ADDRESS: 1HBSBwbFDg2XQii8cNJGAhLyd2mFS4jbG9
man114
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 15, 2015, 04:32:02 AM
 #20960

Hit my payout and then quite a bit of the next due to the larger payout with the low hash rate. I ended up staying on as I had a migraine most of the day and didn't feel like reconfiguring pools. So of course there is another long block.

Has anyone noticed wild up and down hash rate fluctuations on these long blocks? I was watching and when they were hitting the blocks the hash rate was very steady on the two miners I was using on Slush's, with the long block it started going up and down in wild swings in short intervals. I noticed this the last few times they've had a long block. This doesn't impact rejected work, I think I only had 24 rejects in the last 12hrs, but I did notice that my best share stats are considerably lower than typical.
Pages: « 1 ... 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 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 ... 1103 »
  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!