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

[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?

[1475094614]

1475094614

[1475094614]

1475094614

[1475094614]

1475094614

[sbtctalk]

But to slush's credit, he was the one who designed the stratum protocol.

[Erumara]

lulz the pool luck was well beyond bad in December ... for over 220 blocks ... way obvious that something was wrong back then
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77000.msg13482822#msg13482822

As for 'owing' ... well the company that caused it is known, but he hid that detail and no one here I bet even knew it before I posted that.

But ... he let them off scot-free to keep the other miner's BTC and hid their name ... or he didn't let them off scot-free and kept the BTC that was returned.
Which one? No idea. Doesn't matter which, both are inappropriate ...

I'm just trying to make sure I understand exactly what you are trying to say, so despite the fact that Genesis Mining (I'll take your word for it, yet again still waiting for the evidence) was ACTUALLY providing hashpower and expending electricity, and that hashpower was not producing blocks either due to a bad actor intentionally withholding blocks or ?improper setup? of their software.

In this scenario:

Genesis lost revenue (Not as much as they should have)
Slush lost revenue (Can't take 2% of blocks that aren't found)
Slush's miners lost revenue (On a user to user basis it is a minor amount of BTC, but not nothing)

Where exactly is this BTC that should be redistributed? Lacking irrefutable evidence that the entity in question was withholding on purpose, I would never expect a pool operator to go reassigning funds.
Intentional or accidental the only thing you can POSSIBLY divine from this is that pool mining still has room for improvement, and improvements have been made.

End Of Story.

As a pool operator you should fully realize that FUD and rumors are the most powerful tools in the community, I have yet to see any evidence come from anybody painting Slush as a bad actor. I've lost track of how many times I have left an open invitation for these facts to be set forth and I am constantly met with more FUD, and more conspiracy theories.

Frankly between users claiming to use Kano and you yourself perpetrating what, by all appearances, is a smear campaign against your competitor, you have only cemented my decision NOT to use Kano. While I would not hold a pool accountable to it's users actions, your presence here with no more verifiable information than the rest of them has shaken the respect I had for what I thought was a stand-up operation.

[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.   

[d57heinz]

But to slush's credit, he was the one who designed the stratum protocol.

Yes we have things to be thankful for that slush did for the community. This is about owning up to the mistake and moving on. But we cant expect that of him.. he has to want to do that.. The fact that he would rather protect one interest rather then the community says a lot to me.. I would have taken it much easier had he just been honest(which i knew in my gut from day one he wasnt being) then things would have smoothed over much faster.> Instead you got the latter.  He wishes this would die and regrets sticking up for genesis. Must have had some kind of back door deal in order for slush to take such grief that he wouldnt just quickly let the community know who it was..   Should make one question what is going on for sure.  Slush isnt a community man anymore  so if you are looking for that feel then kano is def the place to be...

EDIT  ALSO one must question why genesis with 10 ph didnt just mine on its own solo.. Im sure they knew it didnt find blocks.. More unanswered questions.


Best Regards
d57heinz

[jonnybravo0311]

EDIT  ALSO one must question why genesis with 10 ph didnt just mine on its own solo.. Im sure they knew it didnt find blocks.. More unanswered questions.


Best Regards
d57heinz

Pretty sure you answered your own question there...

[d57heinz]

EDIT  ALSO one must question why genesis with 10 ph didnt just mine on its own solo.. Im sure they knew it didnt find blocks.. More unanswered questions.


Best Regards
d57heinz

Pretty sure you answered your own question there...

Thanks  fixed lol.. 

[Erumara]

Wow, wall of text!

I appreciate you linking those organofcorti articles, I believe I had a look at those back when I was doing my research. Makes a lot more sense 5 months later!

So what I understand is this:

Earlier this year, Slushpool experienced a period of exceptionally bad luck. This was later found to be a product of block withholding. Intentional? Accidental? Did Slush for some reason collude with the miner (alleged to be Genesis Mining)? These questions sadly remain unanswered.

I am not against people throwing in their opinions, but I refuse to watch a thread fill up with FUD and misinformation simply because people (who largely were entirely unaffected by this incident) seem to take a personal issue with Slush not releasing information that may or may not exist. So let's make some scenarios.

A: Slush colluded with the miner and personally covered up any tracks that could lead to the miner for the purpose of
B: The miner intentionally withheld blocks as a form of attack against Slushpool and it's users while making themselves difficult to track.
C: The miner's software was improperly set-up, and this somehow resulted in valid blocks not being submitted.

If A is true, then we need a mob. A big one. Torches, pitchforks, biblethumping. The whole nine yards. As a user I will be front of the pack. The evidence submitted so far to prove A is true is included below:

[evidence]
[/evidence]


If B is true, and Slush holds irrefutable evidence this was the case, as well as this person's information, it should be released to the public to prevent further withholding attacks. Anyone who understands mining knows this is futile because their identity can be easily obfusticated and thusly there is NO POINT releasing this information outside of exactly what he did provide, which was informing people that it happened and making improvements to minimize future vulnerability.

[Most likely scenario]
If B is true and Slush does NOT hold irrefutable evidence, I stand by them 100% for not releasing information that amounts to FUD.
[/Most likely scenario]


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.

You say you've directly accused Genesis of being the bad actor, and doing so purposefully, without any evidence?
There's a way to describe that.

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


Regards,

Erumara

[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 ... ... ...

[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/