Bitcoin Forum
August 18, 2018, 04:51:17 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.2  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 [471] 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 ... 1145 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool  (Read 4340023 times)
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2058
Merit: 1000


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
June 02, 2013, 01:49:55 PM
 #9401

Thanks for the response, you are absolutely right. I do pull the statistics via the JSON API every 10 minutes and analyse & plot it automatically every 6 hours. (I do not want to pull more frequently for practical reasons.)

At this point in time, based on stats from the last 2 months, what I see confirmed is the "magical fix" manual recalculation via PPS which is easy to spot and slush has been honest about it when I contacted him (he is very open and honest, and I do understand him not wanting to actively post here recently).

Can you explain this? PM me if you don't want to post publicly.

I do not think that based on my current amount of data I could back my assertion beyond a doubt, this is why I was very explicitly calling it a guess. I could collect data and perform "black box analysis" for any amount of time and still not reach 100% as it is theoretically impossible to reach 100% via passive black box analysis but the confidence level is growing with the amount of data collected.

Great! Have you been able to calculate 'c' yet? Having this will allow you to back calculate shares which will make figuring out the renormalisation easier.

Checking the code (aka white box analysis) could be much less effort taking and allow for a statement beyond doubt. And honestly, I have never even seen a precise description of what exactly is done on a renormalisation, only the fact is mentioned that a renormalisation is periodically performed. In contrast to this, Meni Rosenfeld is very explicit in how rescaling should work when using DGM (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=39497.0).

I thought there was one somewhere. Maybe not. I'll try to find it, if it exists.

Regarding changes to C: what I mean is that on rescaling/renormalization, when the score is changed, but C is not, then you very aggressively change the weight of all the work one has performed before renormalisation versus the weight of the new per share increment. However, if the score is divided by X, and C multiplied by log(X), then the value of previous scores relative to the value of the increment score for the new share is kept the same (maintaining the exponential semantics used by slush), and you will end up with the same exponential curve, just rescaled (zoomed out).

Since 'c' can't be changed without completely changing the 'hoppability' of the pool, you are in effect saying that given this restriction proper renormalisation or rescaling can't occur? Hmmm. Have to think about that.

You've obviously done a lot of work - you should post your results somewhere on the forum, as a work in progress. I'm keen to see what you have.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
1534611077
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534611077

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534611077
Reply with quote  #2

1534611077
Report to moderator
1534611077
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534611077

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534611077
Reply with quote  #2

1534611077
Report to moderator
1534611077
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1534611077

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1534611077
Reply with quote  #2

1534611077
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
iFA88
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 235
Merit: 100



View Profile WWW
June 02, 2013, 02:34:25 PM
 #9402

Compare this block info:
18339    2013-06-02 14:00:37    2:02:30    19604110    328    0.00000000    239277    25.12461000    95 confirmations left
18331    2013-06-02 04:22:48    2:08:01    19975253    314    0.00046448    239200    25.06660003    18 confirmations left

On 18339 i have stopped the mining on half time, and my previous shares value is 0 ?!
On 18331 i have mined the whole block, but with only one worker.

Thats fair?

Multicurrency webwallet: https://www.fusionwallet.io
TiborB
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 83
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 02, 2013, 02:38:14 PM
 #9403


Can you explain this? PM me if you don't want to post publicly.

(...)

Great! Have you been able to calculate 'c' yet? Having this will allow you to back calculate shares which will make figuring out the renormalisation easier.

(...)

I thought there was one somewhere. Maybe not. I'll try to find it, if it exists.

(...)

Since 'c' can't be changed without completely changing the 'hoppability' of the pool, you are in effect saying that given this restriction proper renormalisation or rescaling can't occur? Hmmm. Have to think about that.

You've obviously done a lot of work - you should post your results somewhere on the forum, as a work in progress. I'm keen to see what you have.

I will send you a PM. I tried to look for how exactly the rescaling works, but have not found detailed docs. I would really appreciate a link in case you have it handy.
Regarding reverse engineering the current value of C, I have read your blog post on the topic (http://organofcorti.blogspot.hu/2012/09/43-slushs-score-method-and-miner.html), kudos to you, I enjoyed the read.

My idea was changing C on each rescaling, then resetting it to the original value when a new round starts. This would indeed affect the hop point. Honestly, I have not dived deeply into the hopping aspect of changing C intra-round yet, my first point of interest was checking how variance is correlated with the time elapsed since the last renormalisation with and without changing C.

I would avoid going public prematurely, the community might be a bit harsh and I do not want to raise a flame war before I can properly back the points. I'll PM you, you are way more experienced with this type of statistical analysis than me so any idea/comment is welcome.

Cheers,
   T
stephengillon
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0



View Profile
June 02, 2013, 02:50:44 PM
 #9404

no registration on block 239281


Accepting donations for help: 1GxiMYdPd4snJyNhwamwhx1Q2PGhNkhAFQ
iFA88
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 235
Merit: 100



View Profile WWW
June 02, 2013, 02:52:16 PM
 #9405

no registration on block 239281
U have right.
http://blockchain.info/hu/block-index/388856/000000000000003767647fa60d826ae86265ae6969fd75ea3f956ca364fd091e

Multicurrency webwallet: https://www.fusionwallet.io
valladex
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 61
Merit: 10



View Profile
June 02, 2013, 08:19:16 PM
 #9406

18347    2013-06-02 19:34:47    0:47:47    7511826    318    0.00096651    239329    25.17718286

18346    2013-06-02 18:47:00    0:51:59    8189628    329    0.00052418    239319    25.04053933

NOT complaining, just wondering if anyone else is seeing a lesser reward on this round as it doesn't seem to be getting corrected?

desired_username
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 867
Merit: 1000


View Profile
June 02, 2013, 08:28:52 PM
 #9407

18347    2013-06-02 19:34:47    0:47:47    7511826    318    0.00096651    239329    25.17718286

18346    2013-06-02 18:47:00    0:51:59    8189628    329    0.00052418    239319    25.04053933

NOT complaining, just wondering if anyone else is seeing a lesser reward on this round as it doesn't seem to be getting corrected?



It's alright for me.

I had a bit less than usual on 18343   2013-06-02 16:33:13   0:00:23   50946   150   0.07358613

otherwise good times Smiley

minerapia
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 100


View Profile
June 02, 2013, 09:18:48 PM
 #9408

Compare this block info:
18339    2013-06-02 14:00:37    2:02:30    19604110    328    0.00000000    239277    25.12461000    95 confirmations left
18331    2013-06-02 04:22:48    2:08:01    19975253    314    0.00046448    239200    25.06660003    18 confirmations left

On 18339 i have stopped the mining on half time, and my previous shares value is 0 ?!
On 18331 i have mined the whole block, but with only one worker.

Thats fair?
Yes, its fair. You completly stopped looking for the block solution, youre shares would be worthless anyway if someone else would not have finished the job you left halfway.





donations -> btc: 1M6yf45NskQxWXknkMTzQ8o6wShQcSY4EC
                   ltc: LeTpCd6cQL26Q1vjc9kJrTjjFMrPhrpv6j
Trongersoll
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 02, 2013, 09:38:00 PM
 #9409

Compare this block info:
18339    2013-06-02 14:00:37    2:02:30    19604110    328    0.00000000    239277    25.12461000    95 confirmations left
18331    2013-06-02 04:22:48    2:08:01    19975253    314    0.00046448    239200    25.06660003    18 confirmations left

On 18339 i have stopped the mining on half time, and my previous shares value is 0 ?!
On 18331 i have mined the whole block, but with only one worker.

Thats fair?
Yes, its fair. You completly stopped looking for the block solution, youre shares would be worthless anyway if someone else would not have finished the job you left halfway.






The purpose, and a feature of this pool to to discourage people from casually coming and going in the middle of a block. If you feel this is unfair, you are in the wrong pool.
stephengillon
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0



View Profile
June 02, 2013, 11:33:35 PM
 #9410

still no registration for 239281

our block but nothing on stats

http://blockchain.info/block-index/388856

Accepting donations for help: 1GxiMYdPd4snJyNhwamwhx1Q2PGhNkhAFQ
nottm28
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 02, 2013, 11:36:48 PM
 #9411

still no registration for 239281

our block but nothing on stats

http://blockchain.info/block-index/388856

Slush has been pretty good at refunding these - usually he attaches the value to another block.

donations not accepted
el_rlee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1550
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 03, 2013, 12:24:43 AM
 #9412

payout for 18339 is too high for me (~20% too high)
matauc12
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500


View Profile
June 03, 2013, 12:37:46 AM
 #9413

still no registration for 239281

our block but nothing on stats

http://blockchain.info/block-index/388856
it has seemingly been attached to block 239282 as my reward is exactly double on that block.
stephengillon
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0



View Profile
June 03, 2013, 03:30:41 AM
 #9414

Not me i got screwed lol

Accepting donations for help: 1GxiMYdPd4snJyNhwamwhx1Q2PGhNkhAFQ
Uliss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 297
Merit: 250



View Profile
June 03, 2013, 03:42:17 AM
 #9415

Change the title of the topic to 11.3Th/s
Turok
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 03, 2013, 08:11:29 AM
 #9416

my rigs can't connect to api2.bitcoin.cz:8332, anyone else having the same issue?
biz
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 38
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 03, 2013, 08:17:02 AM
 #9417

my rigs can't connect to api2.bitcoin.cz:8332, anyone else having the same issue?

If you have Stratum compatible software (miner) use: stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333


BTC: 1P4BnRN5REdNhQXQWs6ySbPVMdbTKd4dkN
Turok
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 03, 2013, 08:19:40 AM
 #9418

my rigs can't connect to api2.bitcoin.cz:8332, anyone else having the same issue?

If you have Stratum compatible software (miner) use: stratum.bitcoin.cz:3333



thanks! that works
valladex
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 61
Merit: 10



View Profile
June 03, 2013, 08:53:50 AM
 #9419

still no registration for 239281

our block but nothing on stats

http://blockchain.info/block-index/388856
it has seemingly been attached to block 239282 as my reward is exactly double on that block.



not here, i got a smaller than usual reward and it shows only 25 Btc reward, not double.
iFA88
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 235
Merit: 100



View Profile WWW
June 03, 2013, 08:55:27 AM
 #9420

Compare this block info:
18339    2013-06-02 14:00:37    2:02:30    19604110    328    0.00000000    239277    25.12461000    95 confirmations left
18331    2013-06-02 04:22:48    2:08:01    19975253    314    0.00046448    239200    25.06660003    18 confirmations left

On 18339 i have stopped the mining on half time, and my previous shares value is 0 ?!
On 18331 i have mined the whole block, but with only one worker.

Thats fair?
Yes, its fair. You completly stopped looking for the block solution, youre shares would be worthless anyway if someone else would not have finished the job you left halfway.
Only for interesting!
When i join only on 1:00:00 to the block and work until the block is founded, example 2:00:00 then i become better reward as i the whole block worked has? (Sorry for grammar)

Multicurrency webwallet: https://www.fusionwallet.io
Pages: « 1 ... 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 [471] 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 ... 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!