[4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool

[organofcorti]

Man slush is never gonna come back...

(at least i wouldn't if i were him)

Well the other day there were 30 blocks discovered.
30 blocks at 2% = 15 BTC
15 BTC roughly = $1700

$1700 dollars a day would make me sort it out!

Mathematically incorrect seeing 1 block =  ~25 BTC

30 * 0.02 * 25 = 15

(not including tx fees)

[nottm28]

Man slush is never gonna come back...

(at least i wouldn't if i were him)

Well the other day there were 30 blocks discovered.
30 blocks at 2% = 15 BTC
15 BTC roughly = $1700

$1700 dollars a day would make me sort it out!

Mathematically incorrect seeing 1 block =  ~25 BTC

30 * 0.02 * 25 = 15

(not including tx fees)

Oh yeah - my bad   (EDIT - And I read your docs too!)

[digital]

Man slush is never gonna come back...

(at least i wouldn't if i were him)

Well the other day there were 30 blocks discovered.
30 blocks at 2% = 15 BTC
15 BTC roughly = $1700

$1700 dollars a day would make me sort it out!

There's nothing to sort out.  All these complaints about rewards are either a result of variance on slow miners, or bad luck with the designed score reset.  There are no real problems.  Everything is working the way it's designed.

Which is why nothing is getting sorted out.

When there is a real problem, slush will make an appearance.

[sunriselad]

I agree.

I used the term "sort it out" above meaning when there are problems which there clearly aren't atm.

[digital]

I agree.

I used the term "sort it out" above meaning when there are problems which there clearly aren't atm.

I c.  Well, then my tirade was not directed at you, but I will definitely leave it out there... lol

[nybbler905]

I have problems with this block. It is impossible that I have this reward from these shares:

17925    2013-05-08 14:13:44    1:27:14    11634278    157    0.00000004    235160    25.21733124    confirmed

No, it's not impossible. You have a low hashrate on a very long round.

less then 2 hours is NOT a very long round and with 157 shares in that less than 2 hours it should be higher given the .21733124 transaction fees added to the 25 for the block.
I have a similar issue regarding a few blocks, since the DDoS ' recovery ' I have managed to get a GPU ( getting out of CPU mining ) and of a total 39 confirmed my side i get the following

17944    2013-05-09 14:14:32  0:03:20     441950        1   0.00006387     235323      25.25160000
17943    2013-05-09 14:11:12  0:55:57    7613553    1   0.00000000     235322      25.50196136 
17942    2013-05-09 13:15:15  1:11:07    9707432    6   0.00000683     235318      25.20460524 
17941    2013-05-09 12:04:08  1:57:03   15909482    10  0.00001692     235302      28.55436691  <3+Fee
17940    2013-05-09 10:07:05  3:03:04   24728547    10  0.00000000     235285    25.35920001 
17939    2013-05-09 07:04:01  0:42:39    5733080    1   0.00000433     235273    25.34090002 
17938    2013-05-09 06:21:22  1:14:17    9911155        3   0.00000095     235269    25.53907807 
17937    2013-05-09 05:07:05  2:06:58   16830593       5   0.00002536     235262    25.75715645 

32 out of 39 isn't bad and it still isn't acurate as the difference isn't being reported my side as stale/NMC or Other.
I reformatted and pointed out the block with 3+ BTC fee in this group.
Still haven't heard from Slush if the ' missing ' shares are NMC or not and there is no NMC earnings listed for me at https://mining.bitcoin.cz/stats/nmc/ in spite of the getwork I did during the DDoS attack ( stratum couldn't connect, getwork could at times and would try to connect at least )
With my paranoia regarding network security, I would have reloaded the scripts for calculating shares, etc just in case the one that managed admin access dropped a few logic bombs... skimmers, etc.  things that would not get noticed until alot of people were missing their ' 1/4 cent per transaction ' ( or equivalent, if ya don't get the quarter cent ref, watch the superman movie with Richard Prior and see how fast it adds up ) with all the weird variances, ' missing ' shares there is room to suspect we have the system still funding the attacker with out our permission/knowledge.

Sorry in advance Slush, there is work to do to see if I am wrong ( and I hope for the pools sake I am )

[sunriselad]

 

[nottm28]

less then 2 hours is NOT a very long round and with 157 shares in that less than 2 hours it should be higher given the .21733124 transaction fees added to the 25 for the block.
I have a similar issue regarding a few blocks, since the DDoS ' recovery ' I have managed to get a GPU ( getting out of CPU mining ) ...

Now is probably a good time to 'get out of CPU mining' - but the figures you are quoting look like CPU figures not GPU - you should be seeing better shares/round than what you are posting... what GPU did you get?

[not.you]

Man slush is never gonna come back...

(at least i wouldn't if i were him)

Well the other day there were 30 blocks discovered.
30 blocks at 2% = 15 BTC
15 BTC roughly = $1700

$1700 dollars a day would make me sort it out!

There's nothing to sort out.  All these complaints about rewards are either a result of variance on slow miners, or bad luck with the designed score reset.  There are no real problems.  Everything is working the way it's designed.

Which is why nothing is getting sorted out.

When there is a real problem, slush will make an appearance.

So did Slush ask you to speak for him?  Just curious.

I would like something more official, like an actual comment from Slush about block 17925.  I have been following this thread for many dozens of pages and I have seen Slush come on here and say a block was miscalculated and see it adjusted.  I don't think "working as designed" describes a block where many people got about 1/10,000 of the estimated reward while others got 10-15 times more than the estimated reward.  That sounds like a problem.

Full time mining removes the probability factor over time so that it does not resemble playing the lottery.  Block 17925 looks exactly like playing the lottery.  It appears to be an anomaly based on what I have seen over time but nevertheless it indicates a problem.  If Slush says that problem doesn't exist or he doesn't want to address it that is one thing (and allows me to make an informed decision about where I want to mine) but if random interwebs guy says it (i.e. you) that means jack.

Finally I would point out to those with the browner of noses that this is a partnership.  No miners, no pool; no Slush no pool.  We all profit together or we all have no pool together.  It is in Slush's interests to keep his miners happy because that keeps the pool making profit for all.  This is not about us all simply benefitting from Slush's generosity.  I paid money to build my miners and I contribute actual computing power (such as it is) to the work of finding blocks.  Blocks don't just arrive in the mail and then get divided up by some benevolent pool owner.

Having said that I want to see a more or less reliable profit over time, which is the entire point of mining in a pool.  If I want to play the lottery I'll take up solo mining.

[rsbriggs]

I'll echo that sentiment!  Looks like 17925 didn't get sorted out, but things have otherwise settled down.  

So, I'm back FWIW  And I should bring like another 800 Mh/s on line, if I manage to get this STUPID video card to run right when I get home from work tonight.

[OlgaA524]

Man slush is never gonna come back...

(at least i wouldn't if i were him)

Well the other day there were 30 blocks discovered.
30 blocks at 2% = 15 BTC
15 BTC roughly = $1700

$1700 dollars a day would make me sort it out!

There's nothing to sort out.  All these complaints about rewards are either a result of variance on slow miners, or bad luck with the designed score reset.  There are no real problems.  Everything is working the way it's designed.

Which is why nothing is getting sorted out.

When there is a real problem, slush will make an appearance.

So did Slush ask you to speak for him?  Just curious.

I would like something more official, like an actual comment from Slush about block 17925.  I have been following this thread for many dozens of pages and I have seen Slush come on here and say a block was miscalculated and see it adjusted.  I don't think "working as designed" describes a block where many people got about 1/10,000 of the estimated reward while others got 10-15 times more than the estimated reward.  That sounds like a problem.

Full time mining removes the probability factor over time so that it does not resemble playing the lottery.  Block 17925 looks exactly like playing the lottery.  It appears to be an anomaly based on what I have seen over time but nevertheless it indicates a problem.  If Slush says that problem doesn't exist or he doesn't want to address it that is one thing (and allows me to make an informed decision about where I want to mine) but if random interwebs guy says it (i.e. you) that means jack.

Finally I would point out to those with the browner of noses that this is a partnership.  No miners, no pool; no Slush no pool.  We all profit together or we all have no pool together.  It is in Slush's interests to keep his miners happy because that keeps the pool making profit for all.  This is not about us all simply benefitting from Slush's generosity.  I paid money to build my miners and I contribute actual computing power (such as it is) to the work of finding blocks.  Blocks don't just arrive in the mail and then get divided up by some benevolent pool owner.

Having said that I want to see a more or less reliable profit over time, which is the entire point of mining in a pool.  If I want to play the lottery I'll take up solo mining.

@not.you: +1 you voiced it out perfectly! totally my feelings. Cheers!

[digital]

A whole bunch of stuff...

Oh boy...

Nope, I'm not speaking for slush.

And that block in question was processed exactly how the system was designed.  It was said in a previous post that the score was reset right before the block was found which caused a higher variance in the scores through the pool.  So yeah, it was unlucky for alot of people, and lucky for a lot of people.  There are a lot of people that aren't happy about it, but that's the way it works.

Bitcoin in general is a high risk venture, kind of like playing the lottery.  And it's been said before that Slush's score method causes increased variance.  So by design, things like that are going to happen.  The point is that it balances out in the long run.  If you had a clear understanding of all the factors involved, you would care a whole lot less about that one block.  And for what it's worth, my reward was a lot smaller than normal too, but it happens.  I've had plenty of blocks that were higher than normal, but you don't see people complaining about that.

And it's great that you want an official response, you expect more from your pool operator right?  It's a symbiotic relationship, one can't exist without the other.  So if all these complaints don't get addressed everyone will leave and slush will be left in the dust right? Wrong.  All these complaints are coming from .1% of the miners on the pool who are new to the system, new to the pool, or expect a full service mining pool.

Slush takes care of his miners like no other pool operator out there.    Bottom line is the problem has been addressed plenty of times.  If slush is going to respond, he's going to respond when he's ready.  Continually posting about it does nothing but clutter the board and make it harder to isolate legitimate problems.

Sorry for the book, I'm gonna take a break from the bs now...

[h2002al]

I have problems with this block. It is impossible that I have this reward from these shares:

17925    2013-05-08 14:13:44    1:27:14    11634278    157    0.00000004    235160    25.21733124    confirmed

No, it's not impossible. You have a low hashrate on a very long round.

This is not an argument. I can tell again the same thing (mine) and we can continue al the month in this way. Others in forum write the contrary. Why I don't believe them? Can you ARGUMENT me the results?

[KNK]

17925 is near the end of the list and will soon slip out ... will you all still keep talking about it?

And no, i am not from those who benefit from it and i also got 10k less than expected, but please go to irc and make #round_17925 channel if you still want to scratch your tongue or fingers

[tiktoc]

I have problems with this block. It is impossible that I have this reward from these shares:

17925    2013-05-08 14:13:44    1:27:14    11634278    157    0.00000004    235160    25.21733124    confirmed

No, it's not impossible. You have a low hashrate on a very long round.

This is not an argument. I can tell again the same thing (mine) and we can continue al the month in this way. Others in forum write the contrary. Why I don't believe them? Can you ARGUMENT me the results?

Do you have a log of the round for when the round started and when the shares were found? If so you can work it out  using the formula in this post
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg50002#msg50002

and organofcorti is right the main reason for the low payout is the long round and the weighting share system. The sharp increase in difficulty makes cpu/single slow GPU mining basically finished.

[OlgaA524]

I have problems with this block. It is impossible that I have this reward from these shares:

17925    2013-05-08 14:13:44    1:27:14    11634278    157    0.00000004    235160    25.21733124    confirmed

No, it's not impossible. You have a low hashrate on a very long round.

This is not an argument. I can tell again the same thing (mine) and we can continue al the month in this way. Others in forum write the contrary. Why I don't believe them? Can you ARGUMENT me the results?

Do you have a log of the round for when the round started and when the shares were found? If so you can work it out  using the formula in this post
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg50002#msg50002

and organofcorti is right the main reason for the low payout is the long round and the weighting share system. The sharp increase in difficulty makes cpu/single slow GPU mining basically finished.

with slow miners PPS (Pay Per Share) pools probably the best

[h2002al]

I have problems with this block. It is impossible that I have this reward from these shares:

17925    2013-05-08 14:13:44    1:27:14    11634278    157    0.00000004    235160    25.21733124    confirmed

No, it's not impossible. You have a low hashrate on a very long round.

This is not an argument. I can tell again the same thing (mine) and we can continue al the month in this way. Others in forum write the contrary. Why I don't believe them? Can you ARGUMENT me the results?

Do you have a log of the round for when the round started and when the shares were found? If so you can work it out  using the formula in this post
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.msg50002#msg50002

and organofcorti is right the main reason for the low payout is the long round and the weighting share system. The sharp increase in difficulty makes cpu/single slow GPU mining basically finished.

I'm not able to do this but your answer is a good answer. At least to "close my mouth". I can't tell nothing more if I'm not able to verify what you have written. But if anyone in forum can do this please go ahead. If needed my help in giving various data please tell me what you need.

[Lucko]

I have problems with this block. It is impossible that I have this reward from these shares:

17925    2013-05-08 14:13:44    1:27:14    11634278    157    0.00000004    235160    25.21733124    confirmed

No, it's not impossible. You have a low hashrate on a very long round.

Look at the round. It is the one.

[FAN]

Slush pool steals award from miners

[Lucko]

There's nothing to sort out.  All these complaints about rewards are either a result of variance on slow miners, or bad luck with the designed score reset.  There are no real problems.  Everything is working the way it's designed.

Which is why nothing is getting sorted out.

When there is a real problem, slush will make an appearance.

If that would be the only glitch I saw last days OK. But this is not a case. I'm seeing missing shares(log from cgminer), jumping from stratum to stratum2, stratum3, api, backup pool(log and shares on backup pool)... And I don't see it fixed. Because of some random errors I got less on about 7 to 9 blocks now. Others have problem connecting... I think that Slush took a holiday without internet or something happened to him and pool is degrading without maintenance. So yes it is a problem... Slush didn't make a appearance over a week. This is not normal for him.

EDIT: and even if you are right that this is how it should work, why did Slush fixed this in a past?