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

[kano]

...
It's called LIBEL and DEFAMATION, a situation Slush clearly steered well away from no matter what the facts. Good move.
...

Lulz, no it's not, stop pretending to be a lawyer and go ask one.
The only "LIBEL and DEFAMATION" I see here is you suggesting that Genesis may have done it on purpose ...

It's their untested software that caused everyone on the pool to lose well over 10% of their BTC while Genesis was mining.

...
Slush's miners lost revenue (On a user to user basis it is a minor amount of BTC, but not nothing)
...

... well over 10% is minor ... right ... ... ...

[1506325916]

1506325916

[1506325916]

1506325916

[1506325916]

1506325916

[1506325916]

1506325916

[1506325916]

1506325916

[Erumara]

genesis-mining mined with hardware that wouldn't find blocks
250BTC or more was lost by all the miners due to this
genesis-mining should have returned the BTC the pool paid them, for mining with hardware that wouldn't find blocks, and that should have been distributed to the miners

slush hid this ... I wonder why

That would be you making that insinuation, not me.
And if it WAS Genesis and the mistake WAS in error, than this entire topic is still entirely pointless as it doesn't reflect on Slush in any way shape or form.
Also, where does 250BTC come from? I assume you have the facts to back up this number.

If C is true the whole argument is pointless, Slush is under no obligation to release user information to ANYONE without concrete proof that they INTEND TO cause harm to another pool.
I stand by that 100%, no DOX without PROOF, I would make it a very personal issue if I screwed myself and my fellow users out of BTC due to a setup error and had a pool operator publicly release ANY of my information.

... well over 10% is minor ... right ... ... ...

Where does this 10% come from? This is the third time I've seen 10% pop up and still the nothingth time anyone has backed it up with facts.

[kano]

... well over 10% is minor ... right ... ... ...

Where does this 10% come from? This is the third time I've seen 10% pop up and still the nothingth time anyone has backed it up with facts.

Oh well, try reading my posts again ... you may find it there ...

[Erumara]

I'm not about to put a bounty on this information, but if anyone HAD such evidence and refused to share it, that would make them a far shittier person than any pool operator scamming their members.

Thanks for the FUD

[kano]

...
Also, where does 250BTC come from? I assume you have the facts to back up this number.
...

Oh I missed this one
Heh, so you don't even know where that number comes from.
Wow, you really need to understand the statistics of pool mining before going off on a rant about "No Facts"

[bittalc1]

...
Also, where does 250BTC come from? I assume you have the facts to back up this number.
...

Oh I missed this one
Heh, so you don't even know where that number comes from.
Wow, you really need to understand the statistics of pool mining before going off on a rant about "No Facts"

Burn

[CarrollFilms]

Wow, in under 24 hours the pool jumped another 10 Ph/s. Where are all these miners coming from?!

My rewards just keep getting smaller and smaller!

I'm going to try out Kano.is and see how the luck is over there.

[Erumara]

...
Also, where does 250BTC come from? I assume you have the facts to back up this number.
...

Oh I missed this one
Heh, so you don't even know where that number comes from.
Wow, you really need to understand the statistics of pool mining before going off on a rant about "No Facts"

Quotes? References? Statistics? Nothing?
Truly said like someone who has nothing to back it up, been asking for the proof/data for a month now, still waiting..........

[organofcorti]

If someone takes the time to do the math on all that information they freely share, they might see where the problem lies. Like an almost exactly 10% less payout that expected over the life of the pool...

I don't see anything like that when I do the stats. How exactly are you calculating this?

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/02/detecting-unintentional-block.html
well there is the post that you bring it to attention.. but that was only after we got shafted from slush.. here is a look at slush stats when the shit hit the fan..  There is a whole sluice of issues slush had with the relay network then a ddos for allowing vote to 8 mb  then the block withholder.. All that happen back to back.>   

Per your guide..

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/01/january-17th-2016-mining-pool-statistics.html

i dont have time atm to dig any further.. all pools need to show like phil said. all blocks and then a gradual decrease to last 5 or 10.  Kano sets an example how simple is best... That lost btc can never be replaced unless the Genesis mining comes forth and wants to save their reputation.. Ive already tweeted to them >> but of course no reply.. Something not taught in school and apparently not by parents is how to own up to your mistakes.. Its turning this world into a pile of crap if you ask me.

Best Regards
d57heinz

BTW.. Kano i didnt know that it was genesis.. i have given you shit in past but that is before i realized the pattern of honesty and transparency from you that is so lacking in this industry.. this space needs more like you for sure.. THankful for that.   

Please don't lie. I'm well aware of what I wrote, and I've never written that there has been a 10% loss over the life of the pool.

[philipma1957]

If someone takes the time to do the math on all that information they freely share, they might see where the problem lies. Like an almost exactly 10% less payout that expected over the life of the pool...

I don't see anything like that when I do the stats. How exactly are you calculating this?

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/02/detecting-unintentional-block.html
well there is the post that you bring it to attention.. but that was only after we got shafted from slush.. here is a look at slush stats when the shit hit the fan..  There is a whole sluice of issues slush had with the relay network then a ddos for allowing vote to 8 mb  then the block withholder.. All that happen back to back.>  

Per your guide..

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/01/january-17th-2016-mining-pool-statistics.html

i dont have time atm to dig any further.. all pools need to show like phil said. all blocks and then a gradual decrease to last 5 or 10.  Kano sets an example how simple is best... That lost btc can never be replaced unless the Genesis mining comes forth and wants to save their reputation.. Ive already tweeted to them >> but of course no reply.. Something not taught in school and apparently not by parents is how to own up to your mistakes.. Its turning this world into a pile of crap if you ask me.

Best Regards
d57heinz

BTW.. Kano i didnt know that it was genesis.. i have given you shit in past but that is before i realized the pattern of honesty and transparency from you that is so lacking in this industry.. this space needs more like you for sure.. THankful for that.  

Please don't lie. I'm well aware of what I wrote, and I've never written that there has been a 10% loss over the life of the pool.

Do you have lifetime number?  Or any long term numbers for them.

[organofcorti]

If someone takes the time to do the math on all that information they freely share, they might see where the problem lies. Like an almost exactly 10% less payout that expected over the life of the pool...

I don't see anything like that when I do the stats. How exactly are you calculating this?

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/02/detecting-unintentional-block.html
well there is the post that you bring it to attention.. but that was only after we got shafted from slush.. here is a look at slush stats when the shit hit the fan..  There is a whole sluice of issues slush had with the relay network then a ddos for allowing vote to 8 mb  then the block withholder.. All that happen back to back.>  

Per your guide..

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/01/january-17th-2016-mining-pool-statistics.html

i dont have time atm to dig any further.. all pools need to show like phil said. all blocks and then a gradual decrease to last 5 or 10.  Kano sets an example how simple is best... That lost btc can never be replaced unless the Genesis mining comes forth and wants to save their reputation.. Ive already tweeted to them >> but of course no reply.. Something not taught in school and apparently not by parents is how to own up to your mistakes.. Its turning this world into a pile of crap if you ask me.

Best Regards
d57heinz

BTW.. Kano i didnt know that it was genesis.. i have given you shit in past but that is before i realized the pattern of honesty and transparency from you that is so lacking in this industry.. this space needs more like you for sure.. THankful for that.  

Please don't lie. I'm well aware of what I wrote, and I've never written that there has been a 10% loss over the life of the pool.

Do you have lifetime number?  Or any long term numbers for them.

98.2% of expected over the life of the pool.

Orphans were more common when the pool started, and tx fees (included in the calculation) were often zero at that time, so 1.8% down over the lifetime of the pool is acceptable. At ~62% the CDF is certainly not unusual.

Code:

Pool reported statistics since 2010

            Pool    No.Blocks orphans luck    CDF  %Profitability
 1:      DeepBit        31218     115 1.01  82.7%            101%
 2:  Discus Fish        28117     197    1  25.5%            100%
 3:        Slush        26680     319    1  61.6%           98.4%
 4:     GHash.IO        23371     314 1.04 100.0%           91.1%
 5:      AntPool        16261     178    1  27.5%            101%
 6:    BTC Guild        13595      86    -      -               -
 7:    50BTC.com        12060     218    -      -               -
 8:      Eligius        11403     235 1.03  99.6%             91%
 9:    EclipseMC         6561      30 0.72   0.0%           84.1%
10:    BitMinter         6483     306 1.02  97.5%            107%
11:       Ozcoin         4855      22 1.07 100.0%             98%
12:        MTRed         2205      17 0.99  31.4%           99.1%
13:       p2Pool         2198      41    -      -               -
14:      Polmine         2069      25  1.1 100.0%           88.4%
15:     Mineb.tc         1692      38 1.02  78.9%           94.4%
16:        Itzod         1379       6 1.01  69.3%            102%
17:      Kano.is          909       8 0.93   1.7%            108%
18:   Bitparking          633      19 1.15 100.0%           95.2%
19:         HHTT          632       1    -      -               -
20: Triplemining          508       0 1.04  84.3%           92.1%
21:        BTCMP          390      12 0.89   1.2%           85.6%
22:       BTCDig           34       1 1.01  54.9%           84.1%
23:       MMPool           33       0 0.95  40.7%           94.2%

[d57heinz]

If someone takes the time to do the math on all that information they freely share, they might see where the problem lies. Like an almost exactly 10% less payout that expected over the life of the pool...

I don't see anything like that when I do the stats. How exactly are you calculating this?

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/02/detecting-unintentional-block.html
well there is the post that you bring it to attention.. but that was only after we got shafted from slush.. here is a look at slush stats when the shit hit the fan..  There is a whole sluice of issues slush had with the relay network then a ddos for allowing vote to 8 mb  then the block withholder.. All that happen back to back.>  

Per your guide..

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/01/january-17th-2016-mining-pool-statistics.html

i dont have time atm to dig any further.. all pools need to show like phil said. all blocks and then a gradual decrease to last 5 or 10.  Kano sets an example how simple is best... That lost btc can never be replaced unless the Genesis mining comes forth and wants to save their reputation.. Ive already tweeted to them >> but of course no reply.. Something not taught in school and apparently not by parents is how to own up to your mistakes.. Its turning this world into a pile of crap if you ask me.

Best Regards
d57heinz

BTW.. Kano i didnt know that it was genesis.. i have given you shit in past but that is before i realized the pattern of honesty and transparency from you that is so lacking in this industry.. this space needs more like you for sure.. THankful for that.  

Please don't lie. I'm well aware of what I wrote, and I've never written that there has been a 10% loss over the life of the pool.

Do you have lifetime number?  Or any long term numbers for them.

98.2% of expected over the life of the pool.

Orphans were more common when the pool started, and tx fees (included in the calculation) were often zero at that time, so 1.8% down over the lifetime of the pool is acceptable. At ~62% the CDF is certainly not unusual.

Code:

Pool reported statistics since 2010

            Pool    No.Blocks orphans luck    CDF  %Profitability
 1:      DeepBit        31218     115 1.01  82.7%            101%
 2:  Discus Fish        28117     197    1  25.5%            100%
 3:        Slush        26680     319    1  61.6%           98.4%
 4:     GHash.IO        23371     314 1.04 100.0%           91.1%
 5:      AntPool        16261     178    1  27.5%            101%
 6:    BTC Guild        13595      86    -      -               -
 7:    50BTC.com        12060     218    -      -               -
 8:      Eligius        11403     235 1.03  99.6%             91%
 9:    EclipseMC         6561      30 0.72   0.0%           84.1%
10:    BitMinter         6483     306 1.02  97.5%            107%
11:       Ozcoin         4855      22 1.07 100.0%             98%
12:        MTRed         2205      17 0.99  31.4%           99.1%
13:       p2Pool         2198      41    -      -               -
14:      Polmine         2069      25  1.1 100.0%           88.4%
15:     Mineb.tc         1692      38 1.02  78.9%           94.4%
16:        Itzod         1379       6 1.01  69.3%            102%
17:      Kano.is          909       8 0.93   1.7%            108%
18:   Bitparking          633      19 1.15 100.0%           95.2%
19:         HHTT          632       1    -      -               -
20: Triplemining          508       0 1.04  84.3%           92.1%
21:        BTCMP          390      12 0.89   1.2%           85.6%
22:       BTCDig           34       1 1.01  54.9%           84.1%
23:       MMPool           33       0 0.95  40.7%           94.2%

Per your guide organ.. A pool has to allow a miner to go thru what should have been ten blocks to be able to detect a block with holder.. So yea 250 btc at least.   More info to come..

2. How can a pool detect block withholding efficiently?
All the suggestions I've read depend on waiting until a miner has returned a sufficient amount of work to have solved on average(yes but with bad luck it could have been double average or triple. who is to know for sure Ive got data to back up when this started) ten blocks but has actually solved none. This has a lower tail Poisson probability of exp(-10) ~ 0.000045399, so this would happen by chance only once in every 22026 user accounts.

Unfortunately this means losing 10 blocks worth of credit for the pool, and depending on how the pool treats the loss, it may mean a loss for honest miners too. However there are more efficient methods to detect unintentional block withholders (and since an intentional block withholder can simply have many different user accounts in parallel or sequence,  it may not be possible to detect an intentional block withholder at all).
http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/02/detecting-unintentional-block.html

Here is where slush finally detected it.. https://slushpool.com/news/2016/02/06/recent-low-luck-information/  

[organofcorti]

If someone takes the time to do the math on all that information they freely share, they might see where the problem lies. Like an almost exactly 10% less payout that expected over the life of the pool...

I don't see anything like that when I do the stats. How exactly are you calculating this?

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/02/detecting-unintentional-block.html
well there is the post that you bring it to attention.. but that was only after we got shafted from slush.. here is a look at slush stats when the shit hit the fan..  There is a whole sluice of issues slush had with the relay network then a ddos for allowing vote to 8 mb  then the block withholder.. All that happen back to back.>  

Per your guide..

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/01/january-17th-2016-mining-pool-statistics.html

i dont have time atm to dig any further.. all pools need to show like phil said. all blocks and then a gradual decrease to last 5 or 10.  Kano sets an example how simple is best... That lost btc can never be replaced unless the Genesis mining comes forth and wants to save their reputation.. Ive already tweeted to them >> but of course no reply.. Something not taught in school and apparently not by parents is how to own up to your mistakes.. Its turning this world into a pile of crap if you ask me.

Best Regards
d57heinz

BTW.. Kano i didnt know that it was genesis.. i have given you shit in past but that is before i realized the pattern of honesty and transparency from you that is so lacking in this industry.. this space needs more like you for sure.. THankful for that.  

Please don't lie. I'm well aware of what I wrote, and I've never written that there has been a 10% loss over the life of the pool.

Do you have lifetime number?  Or any long term numbers for them.

98.2% of expected over the life of the pool.

Orphans were more common when the pool started, and tx fees (included in the calculation) were often zero at that time, so 1.8% down over the lifetime of the pool is acceptable. At ~62% the CDF is certainly not unusual.

Code:

Pool reported statistics since 2010

            Pool    No.Blocks orphans luck    CDF  %Profitability
 1:      DeepBit        31218     115 1.01  82.7%            101%
 2:  Discus Fish        28117     197    1  25.5%            100%
 3:        Slush        26680     319    1  61.6%           98.4%
 4:     GHash.IO        23371     314 1.04 100.0%           91.1%
 5:      AntPool        16261     178    1  27.5%            101%
 6:    BTC Guild        13595      86    -      -               -
 7:    50BTC.com        12060     218    -      -               -
 8:      Eligius        11403     235 1.03  99.6%             91%
 9:    EclipseMC         6561      30 0.72   0.0%           84.1%
10:    BitMinter         6483     306 1.02  97.5%            107%
11:       Ozcoin         4855      22 1.07 100.0%             98%
12:        MTRed         2205      17 0.99  31.4%           99.1%
13:       p2Pool         2198      41    -      -               -
14:      Polmine         2069      25  1.1 100.0%           88.4%
15:     Mineb.tc         1692      38 1.02  78.9%           94.4%
16:        Itzod         1379       6 1.01  69.3%            102%
17:      Kano.is          909       8 0.93   1.7%            108%
18:   Bitparking          633      19 1.15 100.0%           95.2%
19:         HHTT          632       1    -      -               -
20: Triplemining          508       0 1.04  84.3%           92.1%
21:        BTCMP          390      12 0.89   1.2%           85.6%
22:       BTCDig           34       1 1.01  54.9%           84.1%
23:       MMPool           33       0 0.95  40.7%           94.2%

Per your guide organ.. A pool has to allow a miner to go thru what should have been ten blocks to be able to detect a block with holder.. So yea 250 btc at least.   More info to come..

2. How can a pool detect block withholding efficiently?
All the suggestions I've read depend on waiting until a miner has returned a sufficient amount of work to have solved on average(yes but with bad luck it could have been double average or triple. who is to know for sure Ive got data to back up when this started) ten blocks but has actually solved none. This has a lower tail Poisson probability of exp(-10) ~ 0.000045399, so this would happen by chance only once in every 22026 user accounts.

Unfortunately this means losing 10 blocks worth of credit for the pool, and depending on how the pool treats the loss, it may mean a loss for honest miners too. However there are more efficient methods to detect unintentional block withholders (and since an intentional block withholder can simply have many different user accounts in parallel or sequence,  it may not be possible to detect an intentional block withholder at all).
http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/02/detecting-unintentional-block.html

Here is where slush finally detected it.. https://slushpool.com/news/2016/02/06/recent-low-luck-information/  

And nowhere there did I say that there has been a ten percent loss over the life of the pool. Another forum member just made that up but now you're saying it's something I wrote? Nothing in the quotes backs up the claim.

Please just post a retraction.

[kano]

...
Also, where does 250BTC come from? I assume you have the facts to back up this number.
...

Oh I missed this one
Heh, so you don't even know where that number comes from.
Wow, you really need to understand the statistics of pool mining before going off on a rant about "No Facts"

Quotes? References? Statistics? Nothing?
Truly said like someone who has nothing to back it up, been asking for the proof/data for a month now, still waiting..........

Because you are ignorant of pool statistics, you may indeed be unable to follow the posts where I have already given that information ...
Learn a little about pools and statistics before you rant about things well above your knowledge level then come back and see how stupid some of your comments are.

Firstly, my link shows they were around 20% down on luck for AT LEAST the whole month of December.
I'll point out where I replied to you with that link, since you don't bother reading replies ... but then I guess you wont read this one either ...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg14908257#msg14908257
The CDF[Erlang] that I mention, ignore it, it's too complicated for you.

Secondly to detect a withhold without using organofcorti's 32bit check idea takes around 10 blocks ... wow guess what, 10 blocks ~= 250 BTC ... amazing hey? Though that's probably too much for you to understand that one either.
That's of course if slush was paying attention the whole time ... otherwise it would be more than 10 blocks ...

But I can give you some simple grade school maths also ...
20% down for 228 blocks = 44 blocks below expected ... hmm that's a lot ...
So lets pretend probabilities don't matter, since they're too complicated for you, and assume the pool actually had a ridiculously high 10% bad luck on 228 blocks and that leaves 10% withholding ... so hmm 22 blocks lost ... 550 BTC ... ouch ...

[Mudbankkeith]

and that is why, after 3 years on "slush" I moved to CK on the 2nd of January this year.
The problem MAY be over "but" so is my trust.

[d57heinz]

If someone takes the time to do the math on all that information they freely share, they might see where the problem lies. Like an almost exactly 10% less payout that expected over the life of the pool...

I don't see anything like that when I do the stats. How exactly are you calculating this?

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/02/detecting-unintentional-block.html
well there is the post that you bring it to attention.. but that was only after we got shafted from slush.. here is a look at slush stats when the shit hit the fan..  There is a whole sluice of issues slush had with the relay network then a ddos for allowing vote to 8 mb  then the block withholder.. All that happen back to back.>  

Per your guide..

http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/01/january-17th-2016-mining-pool-statistics.html

i dont have time atm to dig any further.. all pools need to show like phil said. all blocks and then a gradual decrease to last 5 or 10.  Kano sets an example how simple is best... That lost btc can never be replaced unless the Genesis mining comes forth and wants to save their reputation.. Ive already tweeted to them >> but of course no reply.. Something not taught in school and apparently not by parents is how to own up to your mistakes.. Its turning this world into a pile of crap if you ask me.

Best Regards
d57heinz

BTW.. Kano i didnt know that it was genesis.. i have given you shit in past but that is before i realized the pattern of honesty and transparency from you that is so lacking in this industry.. this space needs more like you for sure.. THankful for that.  

Please don't lie. I'm well aware of what I wrote, and I've never written that there has been a 10% loss over the life of the pool.

Do you have lifetime number?  Or any long term numbers for them.

98.2% of expected over the life of the pool.

Orphans were more common when the pool started, and tx fees (included in the calculation) were often zero at that time, so 1.8% down over the lifetime of the pool is acceptable. At ~62% the CDF is certainly not unusual.

Code:

Pool reported statistics since 2010

            Pool    No.Blocks orphans luck    CDF  %Profitability
 1:      DeepBit        31218     115 1.01  82.7%            101%
 2:  Discus Fish        28117     197    1  25.5%            100%
 3:        Slush        26680     319    1  61.6%           98.4%
 4:     GHash.IO        23371     314 1.04 100.0%           91.1%
 5:      AntPool        16261     178    1  27.5%            101%
 6:    BTC Guild        13595      86    -      -               -
 7:    50BTC.com        12060     218    -      -               -
 8:      Eligius        11403     235 1.03  99.6%             91%
 9:    EclipseMC         6561      30 0.72   0.0%           84.1%
10:    BitMinter         6483     306 1.02  97.5%            107%
11:       Ozcoin         4855      22 1.07 100.0%             98%
12:        MTRed         2205      17 0.99  31.4%           99.1%
13:       p2Pool         2198      41    -      -               -
14:      Polmine         2069      25  1.1 100.0%           88.4%
15:     Mineb.tc         1692      38 1.02  78.9%           94.4%
16:        Itzod         1379       6 1.01  69.3%            102%
17:      Kano.is          909       8 0.93   1.7%            108%
18:   Bitparking          633      19 1.15 100.0%           95.2%
19:         HHTT          632       1    -      -               -
20: Triplemining          508       0 1.04  84.3%           92.1%
21:        BTCMP          390      12 0.89   1.2%           85.6%
22:       BTCDig           34       1 1.01  54.9%           84.1%
23:       MMPool           33       0 0.95  40.7%           94.2%

Per your guide organ.. A pool has to allow a miner to go thru what should have been ten blocks to be able to detect a block with holder.. So yea 250 btc at least.   More info to come..

2. How can a pool detect block withholding efficiently?
All the suggestions I've read depend on waiting until a miner has returned a sufficient amount of work to have solved on average(yes but with bad luck it could have been double average or triple. who is to know for sure Ive got data to back up when this started) ten blocks but has actually solved none. This has a lower tail Poisson probability of exp(-10) ~ 0.000045399, so this would happen by chance only once in every 22026 user accounts.

Unfortunately this means losing 10 blocks worth of credit for the pool, and depending on how the pool treats the loss, it may mean a loss for honest miners too. However there are more efficient methods to detect unintentional block withholders (and since an intentional block withholder can simply have many different user accounts in parallel or sequence,  it may not be possible to detect an intentional block withholder at all).
http://organofcorti.blogspot.com/2016/02/detecting-unintentional-block.html

Here is where slush finally detected it.. https://slushpool.com/news/2016/02/06/recent-low-luck-information/  

And nowhere there did I say that there has been a ten percent loss over the life of the pool. Another forum member just made that up but now you're saying it's something I wrote? Nothing in the quotes backs up the claim.

Please just post a retraction.

Ok i agree that you never said that....  i think the confusion there was year stats of pool and lifetime. not sure when that got mixed up.. thank you for clearing that up..  Knowing the exact amount of damage done is next to impossible atm because that would require being able to predict the next block.

All pools should post the lifetime stats to their website.. If they dont know how to do that then they shouldnt be running a pool or have something to hide!

as far as the genesis mining.. I havent been able to tie them to slush with any post or info online.>  What i have found on GM and its business is rather sad indeed. typical of this space unfortunately.>> If they were the ones that did this to slush i wouldnt expect any kind of compensation whatsoever..

Honestly its not about who did it or any of all that.. Stats at this point dont really matter as slush said he has fixed the problem..  The problems this pool has/had is its lack of awareness/transparency that the owner gave to the miners that support(ed) him.  No responses from him on fb or here when a good number of us where noticing the drastic drop in pool performance when that 10 ph miner jumped on and off back in sept or oct( i dont have time to dig back at my posts) of 2015 thru to jan 2016..  If he had just addressed our concerns back then i think it would have went a  long way in keeping his userbase.. He sided with the miner(corporate interest vs the community) and allowed them to profit.  If i wrote mining code for my own pool and put 10 ph to it not knowing it would find blocks i sure as hell wouldnt go to the community and expect them to compensate me if after 3 months it still hasnt produced.. Now on that line of thinking i dont know how the person slush was in contact with can feel good about what he did to slush and the miners on his pool..   I dont want to beat a dead horse any longer.  enough has been said and i think people are waking up to the fact that Kano actually is trying to make this a community feeling at least as long as we can .. But sadly big industry will push out all the creativity that started in this space and we will be left with the same old same old because its ran by the same ignorant people that put this world in the shit hole it is..

Anyway enough about that ..

Have a great day everyone.
Best Regards
d57heinz

[philipma1957]

And we get a good answer, thank you

philipma1957
Do you have lifetime number?  Or any long term numbers for them.

organofcorti
98.2% of expected over the life of the pool.

Orphans were more common when the pool started, and tx fees (included in the calculation) were often zero at that time, so 1.8% down over the lifetime of the pool is acceptable. At ~62% the CDF is certainly not unusual.

Code:

Pool reported statistics since 2010

            Pool    No.Blocks orphans luck    CDF  %Profitability
 1:      DeepBit        31218     115 1.01  82.7%            101%
 2:  Discus Fish        28117     197    1  25.5%            100%
 3:        Slush        26680     319    1  61.6%           98.4%
 4:     GHash.IO        23371     314 1.04 100.0%           91.1%
 5:      AntPool        16261     178    1  27.5%            101%
 6:    BTC Guild        13595      86    -      -               -
 7:    50BTC.com        12060     218    -      -               -
 8:      Eligius        11403     235 1.03  99.6%             91%
 9:    EclipseMC         6561      30 0.72   0.0%           84.1%
10:    BitMinter         6483     306 1.02  97.5%            107%
11:       Ozcoin         4855      22 1.07 100.0%             98%
12:        MTRed         2205      17 0.99  31.4%           99.1%
13:       p2Pool         2198      41    -      -               -
14:      Polmine         2069      25  1.1 100.0%           88.4%
15:     Mineb.tc         1692      38 1.02  78.9%           94.4%
16:        Itzod         1379       6 1.01  69.3%            102%
17:      Kano.is          909       8 0.93   1.7%            108%
18:   Bitparking          633      19 1.15 100.0%           95.2%
19:         HHTT          632       1    -      -               -
20: Triplemining          508       0 1.04  84.3%           92.1%
21:        BTCMP          390      12 0.89   1.2%           85.6%
22:       BTCDig           34       1 1.01  54.9%           84.1%
23:       MMPool           33       0 0.95  40.7%           94.2%

[CarrollFilms]

Tried Kano.is for a day with 3 miners, only found 1 block in 24 hours. No idea what would cause that.

I'll keep an S5 on there just to see if the pool luck changes at all, other than that it's back to Slush.

[Erumara]

Big thanks to Organofcorti for that information.

I am forced to point out, especially after Kano's basically personal attack on me (pretty solid evidence I'm on the right track), that you have still NOT provided the PROOF that Slush is responsible, or in any way to blame or to be held accountable for what amounts to an attack against his pool.

MAYBE Genesis controlled the hashpower we're talking about.
MAYBE this was an attack, MAYBE this was an accident.

Evidence submitted and accepted at large:

There was block withholding incident at Slushpool, no-one has argued this point.
There was a loss of income as a result of this block withholding, no-one has argued this point.

You are throwing out hypothetical numbers relating to what Slush and it's users lost as a result of this attack. Ever since, people claiming to be your users (Kano) have been using these hypothetical numbers to spread FUD and misinformation regarding Slush's culpability in these attacks.

Does that make you proud Kano? Now you're in here, promoting FUD and blaming the primary victim (Slush) for the loss of his own income!

I ask again, for the dozenth time, where is the proof Slush is to blame? Where is the logic in attacking a pool operator for the actions of an unknown individual? Why exactly, despite DOZENS of shill posts in this thread and elsewhere encouraging people to use Kano, should anyone choose Kano over Slush?

Lower fees.

It is accepted (based on the information provided) that no pool can detect or prevent a block withholding attack better than another.

A pool is a pool is a pool. Kano's ckpool continues to lose face as a result of the actions of both users and now admins in this thread. If I saw Slush promoting shills and posting in your (self-moderated, way to increase transparency!) pool thread, I would move my hashpower elsewhere as I refuse to support what amounts to shill tactics and FUD to the benefit of YOUR BUSINESS.

So where should you point your miners? As I've said before, IT MAKES NO F**KING DIFFERENCE and personally it's none of my concern.
When people come to these forums seeking information and advice, they should be met with that FACT, not rumor and testimony about how "Slush is really suspicious and didn't answer users asking for privileged information regarding other users"

See if you can guess where my hashpower is NOT going.

[Erumara]

Tried Kano.is for a day with 3 miners, only found 1 block in 24 hours. No idea what would cause that.

I'll keep an S5 on there just to see if the pool luck changes at all, other than that it's back to Slush.

Your original post seemed to get lost in the mayhem, thought I would try and help you out.

Slush will find more blocks per day (assuming 100% luck) but you will get a proportionally smaller share of each block.
Kano will find fewer blocks per day (assuming 100% luck) but you will get a proportionally larger share per block.
Small pools (Johnnybravo and the like) will find blocks on the timescale of weeks, you will get a proportionally larger share of these blocks.

On a long enough timeframe your earnings will be equal on any pool, with Kano's 1.1% lower fees you will make 1.1% more than Slush.
The choice is yours, ignore anyone telling you that one pool is better than another based on anything BUT fees, they don't know what they're talking about.

Cheers,

Erumara