Bitcoin Forum
August 19, 2018, 05:54:30 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.2  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 [241] 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 ... 1145 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool  (Read 4340033 times)
disclaimer201
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 22, 2012, 03:54:37 PM
 #4801

Slush

just want to voice my opinion here, I mined my very first Bitcoin on your pool (and sold it for 0.85 cents! ) and mined probably in total 200 coins with you.

I personally think DGM sucks and will become less popular as the difficulty continues to go up.
Yes it's pool hop proof and "fair" but only really fair to a person if they want to dedicate themselves to mining with that pool and that pool only 24/7

I like your modified proportional score system - a lot of people do and I think you should stay with it , and if you really have to change, change it to a pure PPS like BTCGuild is doing.


thank you for listening Smiley

+1

There are many reasons miners can't be connected 24/7 to one pool. If I lose out everytime I have to do some maintenance or upgrade my miners that's no good. It's good to be loyal, in certain limits. If there really is even a 2% loss due to pool hoppers or invalid blocks/stales, pps with 4% fee may have an advantage due to predicatable income, payout times/0 variance/0% pool hopping loss.
1534701270
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534701270

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534701270
Reply with quote  #2

1534701270
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1534701270
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534701270

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534701270
Reply with quote  #2

1534701270
Report to moderator
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1019



View Profile WWW
January 22, 2012, 04:13:53 PM
 #4802

cablepair, disclaimer201, I think that DGM is pretty flexible method and it's more about selected parameters how it will work for particular users. Actually there's no reason to think that DGM will make much difference in rewards for average (non-hopping) pool user. Don't forget that current score method is also very "unfriendly" for miners who are disconnecting frequently, but both methods averages out after some time.

I still didn't run my own simulations of DGM on some real data, so I cannot tell for sure if I'll switch to DGM or not, but so far it looks like much advanced method than current score system.  Don't be affraid that I'll make any big change overnight. I prefer evolution more than revolution...

kkurtmann
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 475
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
January 22, 2012, 07:58:36 PM
 #4803

i like Slush's current method

https://www.buytrezor.com?a=55c37b866c11   well sir, I like it!
digital
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 22, 2012, 11:08:53 PM
 #4804

Is something up with the btc payouts?  I just noticed the my confirmed reward is over my send threshold. 

I thought it might have just been a delay, but it looks like it's been that way for at least two blocks, maybe three now.

If I help you out: 17QatvSdciyv2zsdAbphDEUzST1S6x46c3
References (bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=): 50051.20  50051.100  53668.0  53788.0  53571.0  53571.0  52212.0  50729.0  114804.0  115468  78106  69061  58572  54747
rjk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250


1ngldh


View Profile
January 22, 2012, 11:22:39 PM
 #4805

Is something up with the btc payouts?  I just noticed the my confirmed reward is over my send threshold. 

I thought it might have just been a delay, but it looks like it's been that way for at least two blocks, maybe three now.

Same here.

Mining Rig Extraordinaire - the Trenton BPX6806 18-slot PCIe backplane [PICS] Dead project is dead, all hail the coming of the mighty ASIC!
cablepair
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854
Merit: 1000


These days, i am Crazy.


View Profile WWW
January 22, 2012, 11:39:51 PM
 #4806

I prefer evolution more than revolution...

That is one of the single most intelligent sentences I have ever seen on this forum. Smiley
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1019



View Profile WWW
January 22, 2012, 11:50:02 PM
 #4807

Is something up with the btc payouts?

I did some maintenance and stopped payouts for moment. Now it's working again, expect your payment in 15 minutes...

digital
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 22, 2012, 11:56:52 PM
 #4808

Thanks Slush!

If I help you out: 17QatvSdciyv2zsdAbphDEUzST1S6x46c3
References (bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=): 50051.20  50051.100  53668.0  53788.0  53571.0  53571.0  52212.0  50729.0  114804.0  115468  78106  69061  58572  54747
majamalu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
January 23, 2012, 06:09:18 AM
 #4809

Hi Slush! I am having a problem with rejected shares. With some of my cards rejected shares reach 15%. I tried all possible changes in the settings, without success. Then I tried disabling LP. I waited for an hour before restarting the rigs but didn't notice a significant improvement.

I'm using:
2 rigs with 3 6970 each one
Phoenix 1.7
aoclbf 1.75

¿Am I doing something wrong?

Thanks in advance for your help.

http://elbitcoin.org - Bitcoin en español
http://mercadobitcoin.com - MercadoBitcoin
digital
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 23, 2012, 07:10:09 PM
 #4810

Wow, a one second block with only 25 shares.  Those shares are worth 2btc (roughly) a piece!  

Too bad i didn't get one...   Undecided

If I help you out: 17QatvSdciyv2zsdAbphDEUzST1S6x46c3
References (bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=): 50051.20  50051.100  53668.0  53788.0  53571.0  53571.0  52212.0  50729.0  114804.0  115468  78106  69061  58572  54747
shad
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 148
Merit: 100


View Profile
January 23, 2012, 07:24:57 PM
 #4811

0shares on that one but
http://blockchain.info/block/00000000000003eae180415821018e35b5d00d501ed1b6ec6dc65f566d05ecbc?site=slush
no sign of our block 163552

15dUzJEUkxgjrtcvDSdsEDkXu7E7RCbNN3
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1019



View Profile WWW
January 23, 2012, 07:25:18 PM
 #4812

Wow, a one second block with only 25 shares.  Those shares are worth 2btc (roughly) a piece!  

Too bad i didn't get one...   Undecided

Don't worry, this short block is invalid :-). Actually those two blocks were found in less than one second and blockchains on backends wasn't in sync yet.

BinoX
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 100



View Profile
January 23, 2012, 07:59:46 PM
 #4813

Hi Slush! I am having a problem with rejected shares. With some of my cards rejected shares reach 15%. I tried all possible changes in the settings, without success. Then I tried disabling LP. I waited for an hour before restarting the rigs but didn't notice a significant improvement.

I'm using:
2 rigs with 3 6970 each one
Phoenix 1.7
aoclbf 1.75

¿Am I doing something wrong?

Thanks in advance for your help.

You sure your cards aren't clocked a bit too high and occasionally give invalid results? When I took my 5830s up to 980MHz my invalid share rate went up, so I clocked them down to 950MHz and get basically the same amount of accepted shares and rarely any invalids.

It's also possible that it's just one card that's not working properly (6 same spec cards = 16.66666% of your hashing power per card)
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1019



View Profile WWW
January 23, 2012, 08:17:05 PM
 #4814

Binox, thanks for the response to majamalu, I sent him PM and forgot to mention it here.

majamalu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
January 23, 2012, 09:07:40 PM
 #4815

Hi Slush! I am having a problem with rejected shares. With some of my cards rejected shares reach 15%. I tried all possible changes in the settings, without success. Then I tried disabling LP. I waited for an hour before restarting the rigs but didn't notice a significant improvement.

I'm using:
2 rigs with 3 6970 each one
Phoenix 1.7
aoclbf 1.75

¿Am I doing something wrong?

Thanks in advance for your help.

You sure your cards aren't clocked a bit too high and occasionally give invalid results? When I took my 5830s up to 980MHz my invalid share rate went up, so I clocked them down to 950MHz and get basically the same amount of accepted shares and rarely any invalids.

It's also possible that it's just one card that's not working properly (6 same spec cards = 16.66666% of your hashing power per card)

Thank you very much. Slush already contacted me. Let me tell you anyway that most of my cards are not overclocked, and now they are all approaching 7% rejected shares.

http://elbitcoin.org - Bitcoin en español
http://mercadobitcoin.com - MercadoBitcoin
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2058
Merit: 1000


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
January 25, 2012, 01:30:17 PM
 #4816

Slush

just want to voice my opinion here, I mined my very first Bitcoin on your pool (and sold it for 0.85 cents! ) and mined probably in total 200 coins with you.

I personally think DGM sucks and will become less popular as the difficulty continues to go up.
Yes it's pool hop proof and "fair" but only really fair to a person if they want to dedicate themselves to mining with that pool and that pool only 24/7

I like your modified proportional score system - a lot of people do and I think you should stay with it , and if you really have to change, change it to a pure PPS like BTCGuild is doing.


thank you for listening Smiley

+1

There are many reasons miners can't be connected 24/7 to one pool. If I lose out everytime I have to do some maintenance or upgrade my miners that's no good. It's good to be loyal, in certain limits. If there really is even a 2% loss due to pool hoppers or invalid blocks/stales, pps with 4% fee may have an advantage due to predicatable income, payout times/0 variance/0% pool hopping loss.


-1

You realise that there is no significant loss of earnings for intermittent miners on PPLNS or DGM? They are provably fair, and in this context fair doesn't mean just hopper proof, it means that each share's expected reward is the same. You're confusing variance with mean reward, and DGM can be adjusted to reduce variance.

Going with pure PPS is fine, except that in order to eliminate variance you get a significant decrease in payout because of a fee, which needs to be at least 7% for the pool to remain viable through bad luck periods.

So your choice is: learn to live with variance on DGM, or earn less on pure PPS with no variance. If you've mined on slush at a low hashrate, you've already experienced more variance than you'll get under DGM.

I hope this helps clear up this "score systems penalise part time miners". I ran some simulations on intermittent mining at slush, and didn't see any significant difference in payout from intermittent mining at a proportional pool.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
Meni Rosenfeld
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
January 25, 2012, 02:46:57 PM
 #4817

Eclipse I think is different?
Eclipse uses c=0.01, o=0.99, f = -0.0101...

Slush

just want to voice my opinion here, I mined my very first Bitcoin on your pool (and sold it for 0.85 cents! ) and mined probably in total 200 coins with you.

I personally think DGM sucks and will become less popular as the difficulty continues to go up.
Yes it's pool hop proof and "fair" but only really fair to a person if they want to dedicate themselves to mining with that pool and that pool only 24/7

I like your modified proportional score system - a lot of people do and I think you should stay with it , and if you really have to change, change it to a pure PPS like BTCGuild is doing.

thank you for listening Smiley
Did you take the time to understand how DGM works and then judged it based on its merits, or did you just arbitrarily decide that it penalizes intermittent miners? It does no such thing. Mining with multiple pools will not reduce your rewards (and could be a good way to reduce your variance), and if you're disconnected you will only lose the worth of the work you could have done during that time. For every share you submit you get on average (Block Reward / Difficulty), that's all there is to it.

For a long time slush's method has been falsely accused of penalizing intermittent miners, so in a way it's kind of refreshing to hear you acquit it of this crime. But it looks like you've just found a new scapegoat in DGM.

slush's method is high variance, less hoppable than proportional, but still significantly hoppable.
Geometric method is similar to slush's method, also high variance, but completely hopping-proof.
DGM is also hopping-proof, but much lower variance.

In fact with DGM you can have the variance as low as you want, much lower than in proportional for example - it's all in the parameters. The easy way to reduce the variance is by increasing maturity time, which I think slush can pull off because it's a big pool, so even the increased maturity time will be pretty short.

PPLNS, when properly implemented, is also hopping-proof and almost as low-variance as DGM. It can be used if DGM is too complicated. In particular, I think shift-PPLNS could work better with slush's parallel architecture than DGM.

PPS is definitely a possibility, and I think PPS proxy pools are the way of the future. But until the substrate for it is developed, slush would have to take great risks, which he may not want to do without significantly raising the fees, reducing the long-term gains of miners.

1EofoZNBhWQ3kxfKnvWkhtMns4AivZArhr   |   Who am I?   |   bitcoin-otc WoT
Bitcoil - Exchange bitcoins for ILS (thread)   |   Israel Bitcoin community homepage (thread)
Analysis of Bitcoin Pooled Mining Reward Systems (thread, summary)  |   PureMining - Infinite-term, deterministic mining bond
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1019



View Profile WWW
January 26, 2012, 01:27:38 PM
 #4818

I found that a lot of people started p2sh war on this forum and for some unknown reason they're "fighting" about my pool because of this.

I want to tell that I'm *supporting* p2sh and Gavin's initiative, as I stated here and here.

The only reason that I'm not in the blockchain.info/p2sh stats is that patching of pool's bitcoind takes some time, but I'm working on it with Gavin and other supporters intensively.

So all you with signatures and forum threads "boycott slush", please stop spreading FUD.

BinoX
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 100



View Profile
January 26, 2012, 05:22:03 PM
 #4819

To be honest, as long as my payments come in at about the same rate it doesn't really bother me too much what happens

You've been a trustworthy pool operator, so I feel I can trust that whatever decision you make in this matter

I've gotten my hands on a 5970, so hopefully I'll be throwing another 600+MHash into the mix as well Smiley
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1019



View Profile WWW
January 26, 2012, 05:24:04 PM
 #4820

BinoX, you're right that this is change which should not affect miners at all. I'm just writing it for people who are interested in recent fights about bitcoin protocol improvements.

Pages: « 1 ... 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 [241] 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 ... 1145 »
  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!