[2.5+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool

[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

[d57heinz]

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%

the fallacy in this logic is that we all started mining on this pool from beginning.. For me i started back in july of 2015.. @organofcorti can you please give me the stats of mining on slush pool from jluly of 2015 to january of 2016 please and thank you..

Best Regards
d57heinz

[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.

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

Thanks for making sense of things. I was completely thrown off by the whole debate.

I am more than likely going to end up sticking with Slush because of the fancy desktop UI and mobile app.

I've almost mined an entire Bitcoin on Slush at this point. I see no point in leaving the pool; especially for being with it for as long as I have been with it.

[Erumara]

the fallacy in this logic is that we all started mining on this pool from beginning.. For me i started back in july of 2015.. @organofcorti can you please give me the stats of mining on slush pool from jluly of 2015 to january of 2016 please and thank you..

Best Regards
d57heinz

In this perfect example, this user has fallen victim to The Gambler's Fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy and believes that past performance of a pool has some impact on future performance of a pool. This is false. The odds of Kano's luck remaining >100% are identical to the odds of Kano's luck being <100% in the future, the only factor that changes is time.

User announces: "This pool has >100% lifetime luck! Point your miners here"
Translation:        "I happened to pick this pool as a result of various factors and choices, and just so happened to stumble upon good luck!"

User announces: "This pool has <100% lifetime luck! Point your miners elsewhere!"
Translation:        "I mine on a different pool and personally want your hashpower there so we can find more blocks!"

Not trying to pick on anyone I'm just trying to educate while I continue to learn myself.

[kano]

...
In this perfect example, this user has fallen victim to The Gambler's Fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy and believes that past performance of a pool has some impact on future performance of a pool. This is false. The odds of Kano's luck remaining >100% are identical to the odds of Kano's luck being <100% in the future, the only factor that changes is time.
...
Not trying to pick on anyone I'm just trying to educate while I continue to learn myself.

Try learning before you educate people with misinformation

Wouldn't the world be bright with sparkly rainbows if random luck was the only factor in mining

[Erumara]

Did you have some worthwhile information to add, or are you simply back to take another shot at me?
Can't help but notice the whole "Slush is untrustworthy" tangent seems to have finally disappeared and instead you seem determined to make this about me, despite the fact I have only offered information from outside sources coupled with my own opinions.

Are you insinuating there is some controllable factor for a pool or miner to squeeze out >100% lifetime luck? I really hope not as this is *by my understanding* the whole reasoning behind the difficulty system (to ensure the odds of a block being found by entity A are the same as entity B, all other factors being equal).

No human generated system can be absolutely random, as pointed out earlier in the thread, bandwidth/latency, relative location of nodes, etc. all have an impact.
However, from the point of view of the network, those factors vary from miner to miner, pool to pool, and can change constantly.
I'm pretty confident Organofcorti would agree any gain from having a better connection (and claiming the 1/10,000 blocks [Just a number for illustrative purposes, don't get all worked up] that end up being submitted *just* faster than another) would be impossible to prove either way due to variance.

Pretty sure I had it right thanks, anyone who has actual information PLEASE correct me as you even quoted me on:

I'm just trying to educate while I continue to learn myself.

[organofcorti]

Did you have some worthwhile information to add, or are you simply back to take another shot at me?
Can't help but notice the whole "Slush is untrustworthy" tangent seems to have finally disappeared and instead you seem determined to make this about me, despite the fact I have only offered information from outside sources coupled with my own opinions.

Are you insinuating there is some controllable factor for a pool or miner to squeeze out >100% lifetime luck? I really hope not as this is *by my understanding* the whole reasoning behind the difficulty system (to ensure the odds of a block being found by entity A are the same as entity B, all other factors being equal).

No human generated system can be absolutely random, as pointed out earlier in the thread, bandwidth/latency, relative location of nodes, etc. all have an impact.
However, from the point of view of the network, those factors vary from miner to miner, pool to pool, and can change constantly.
I'm pretty confident Organofcorti would agree any gain from having a better connection (and claiming the 1/10,000 blocks [Just a number for illustrative purposes, don't get all worked up] that end up being submitted *just* faster than another) would be impossible to prove either way due to variance.

Pretty sure I had it right thanks, anyone who has actual information PLEASE correct me as you even quoted me on:

I'm just trying to educate while I continue to learn myself.

I'm guessing what Kano means is that if the luck statistic is unusually high (poor luck, say at ten blocks a CDF of greater than 0.99999 or a thousand blocks at a CDF of 0.999) then it may be that something untoward is happening -- in this case a block withholding attack event.

If we could know that the result is simple "bad luck", then you what you've written is correct. This is not always the case so for any pool recent extremely poor luck statistics could predict future "bad luck" if:

1. There is a reason for the poor luck statistic
2. This reason has not been addressed by the pool operator.

In the case of GHash.IO for example, I informed them of their abnormally poor luck scores a long time before they actually did anything about it. In their case, there was an actual attack in which the same hashes could be resubmitted and counted as valid and unique as long as upper and lower case letters were considered different. This went on for quite a while before it was eventually fixed, and turned out it was a known bug that had been addressed in other pools much earlier and AFAIK before exploited.


 

[philipma1957]

Did you have some worthwhile information to add, or are you simply back to take another shot at me?
Can't help but notice the whole "Slush is untrustworthy" tangent seems to have finally disappeared and instead you seem determined to make this about me, despite the fact I have only offered information from outside sources coupled with my own opinions.

Are you insinuating there is some controllable factor for a pool or miner to squeeze out >100% lifetime luck? I really hope not as this is *by my understanding* the whole reasoning behind the difficulty system (to ensure the odds of a block being found by entity A are the same as entity B, all other factors being equal).

No human generated system can be absolutely random, as pointed out earlier in the thread, bandwidth/latency, relative location of nodes, etc. all have an impact.
However, from the point of view of the network, those factors vary from miner to miner, pool to pool, and can change constantly.
I'm pretty confident Organofcorti would agree any gain from having a better connection (and claiming the 1/10,000 blocks [Just a number for illustrative purposes, don't get all worked up] that end up being submitted *just* faster than another) would be impossible to prove either way due to variance.

Pretty sure I had it right thanks, anyone who has actual information PLEASE correct me as you even quoted me on:

I'm just trying to educate while I continue to learn myself.

   I don't know what kano is saying, but here is the truth about bitcoin mining luck.

The only part that is even for all pools is the 256 algorithm   or in other words the difficulty level.  Thats is even Steven across the board for all pools.

All the rest is not even. 
What happened to your pool when the pool suffered from the withholding issue is a perfect example of  something that crushed your luck.

BTW btc guild got hammered  with a withholding issue that crushed their luck for a long time.

Tell you what  why not make this list

Block Statistics

Description   Time   MeanTx%   Diff%   Mean%   CDF[Erl]   Luck%
Last 5 Blocks   1.1days   100.8%   102.84%   102.84%   0.5840   97.24%
Last 10 Blocks   2.7days   101.1%   114.19%   114.19%   0.7032   87.57%
Last 25 Blocks   5.8days   101.5%   94.05%   94.05%   0.4066   106.32%
Last 50 Blocks   12.0days   101.5%   91.08%   90.90%   0.2686   110.02%
Last 100 Blocks   27.9days   101.5%   109.76%   110.40%   0.8507   90.58%
Last 250 Blocks   8.5wks   101.3%   94.05%   93.61%   0.1559   106.83%
Last 500 Blocks   18.9wks   101.2%   92.90%   91.92%   0.0327   108.79%
All - Last 929 Blocks   87.3wks   100.9%   93.70%   94.26%   0.0381   106.09%


take it back since you are older

put in

Last  750
Last 1000
Last 1500
Last 2000
Last 3000
Last  4000
Last  5000

We know you are at 98% lifetime  which is good.


But     the stats above would show if you really had a slump  of 10% for months

[tomcat2]

11 blocks in the last 12 hours.

[xman77]

To Kano: Why are you coming here and complaining about this pool!? Go to your pool, which BTW sucks! You charge 0.9% fee for what? Ugly graphics like from 90's, no miners monitoring and settings, poor pool information and low luck! If you like McDonald you don't come to Burger King and complain that their burgers suck. Just eat McDonald and shut up!

[Erumara]

Thanks again to Organofcorti and Philipma1957, you are gentlemen among trolls 

This discussion is so entertaining, counting T-minus 2 weeks until it starts up again with the same old FUD.

[kano]

To Kano: Why are you coming here and complaining about this pool!? Go to your pool, which BTW sucks! You charge 0.9% fee for what? Ugly graphics like from 90's, no miners monitoring and settings, poor pool information and low luck! If you like McDonald you don't come to Burger King and complain that their burgers suck. Just eat McDonald and shut up!

What low luck?

[Newcoins2020]

To Kano: Why are you coming here and complaining about this pool!? Go to your pool, which BTW sucks! You charge 0.9% fee for what? Ugly graphics like from 90's, no miners monitoring and settings, poor pool information and low luck! If you like McDonald you don't come to Burger King and complain that their burgers suck. Just eat McDonald and shut up!

There is a nice ignore button which you should use.
I've been with slush for 3 years now in good and in bad I will stay loyal to them. Although sometimes it's really tempting to use f2pool.

[jonnybravo0311]

Although sometimes it's really tempting to use f2pool.

Please don't.  There are far better options out there from which you can choose.  Here, kano, my pool, bcmonster, bitminter... just don't go to f2pool or antpool or any of the big, bad-for-bitcoin pools.

[nlwnola]

So in the grand scheme of things I am new to this.  I just wonder why it seems like slush pool will have long lags with no blocks.  I was wondering if the merged mining with namecoin may be a cause maybe by using up processing capability that could be focused on finding the next block.

[cassini]

processing capability that could be focused on finding the next block

Well, this is not how mining works.

In simple terms, the miners "focus" on finding Bitcoin blocks only, whereas the mining pool does all the background administration including merged-mining operations.
In other words, the miner's ASIC chips don't even know if their mining pool does merged mining or not. All the hashing power goes into finding a Bitcoin block. You will notice the merged mining feature, however, as soon as a few NMCs show up in your account. This is a free numerical side effect if the pool supports merged mining.
That said, merged mining actually does have a microscopic effect on the Bitcoin orphans rate. We are talking about 1 in 100000 blocks or so, depending on lots of factors.

For the technically minded: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Merged_mining_specification

[GigaBit]

To Kano: Why are you coming here and complaining about this pool!? Go to your pool, which BTW sucks! You charge 0.9% fee for what? Ugly graphics like from 90's, no miners monitoring and settings, poor pool information and low luck! If you like McDonald you don't come to Burger King and complain that their burgers suck. Just eat McDonald and shut up!

What low luck?

Let miners cash out when they want to now, Kano?  Not yet?  Then STFU until you do, you're rhetoric yields nothing.
You're all talk Kano, so easy to condemn, so hard to create, eh?
Stop trying to poach miners, makes you look a desperate loser to be honest.

Actions speak louder than words. 
Maybe when you have similar features as Slush, like letting miners cash out when they want and block version voting, then you can try poaching here.
Until then, you're ants at a picnic, you don't belong here.  I like ya but you're coming out like a total scumbag and I put poachers out of business.
Miners are here because Slush actually progresses, I don't see why I should bless you with my presence and hashrate when you just sit around waiting for an easy paycheck.

This is all time you could use to set up new features but no, poaching more important.