Neisklar
Member
Offline
Activity: 60
Merit: 10
|
|
December 14, 2013, 09:45:44 PM Last edit: December 14, 2013, 10:06:26 PM by Neisklar |
|
Could someone please prove my following maths wrong: hash_rate = (blocks_found/expected_blocks*difficulty * 2^24 / 30) I looked at the block window from block 456520 onwards (approx 2013-12-14 20:10:18 GMT) Lets look at a 5 minute window, which should get us 10 blocks. Depending if we start this window at 20:10:00 or 20:10:18 we get 10 or 11 blocks "solved" in that time, so lets take the middle and take a factor of 1.05 So we have: hash_rate = 1.05 * 6411.26760900 * 16777216 / 30 hash_rate =~ 3764712752 =~ 3,76 GH/s So we have approximatly a network hashrate of 3,67 GHashes per second. http://qrk.coinmine.pl/ showed at that time an approximate pool hashrate of 3,8 GH/s. So either my maths are totaly wrong, the pools hahsrate display is totaly wrong, or houston, we have a very big problem... pools hashrates are notorious for being wrong. So what du you think the real hashrate of that pool is? 3 GHash, 2,5 GHash? EDIT: Just looked at the generation TX of last 100 Blocks: From 86 of them the destination address was the same, which i assume is the pools address. This means, although this is only a very rough estimations: 86% of the networks hashing power lies by this pool, and here we are: housten, we have a very big problem... EDIT2: Looking at the stats prooves this: http://www.coinmine.pl/qrk/index.php?page=statistics&action=blocksBlock Overview Gen Est. Found Valid Orphan Avg Diff Shares Est. Shares Percentage Amount Rate Est. All Time 308,642 176345 175056 1289 1,101.2280 48194144 67308505 139.66% 25459277.001874 57.14% Last Hour 120 105 105 0 5,510.0801 144640 199012 137.59% 1680.0195 87.50%Last 24 Hours 2880 2577 2576 1 5,958.9464 3837562 4721686 123.04% 41220.21616 89.48% Last 7 Days 20160 17745 17743 2 4,733.0264 20994522 19637075 93.53% 283927.71958001 88.02% Last 4 Weeks 80640 65543 65520 23 2,493.8772 40849708 44652365 109.31% 1643143.30782 81.28% Last 12 Month 967680 176345 175056 1289 1,101.2280 48194144 67308505 139.66% 25459277.001874 18.22% EDIT3: And just to be clear: I personally have no reason to distrust the pool operator, but thats a thing that needs to be fixed ASAP or btc38 will never come, and maybe other trading platforms will suspend Quark, which would definatly be a pity.
|
BTC: 1LZQkJCojCiomDb1FdFXN5g1Gtc6n95acB - QRK: QRrcffSmb6jqw6RmZLtJ6skg71AXRG3S6y
|
|
|
gnode
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:06:42 PM |
|
Could someone please prove my following maths wrong: hash_rate = (blocks_found/expected_blocks*difficulty * 2^24 / 30) I looked at the block window from block 456520 onwards (approx 2013-12-14 20:10:18 GMT) Lets look at a 5 minute window, which should get us 10 blocks. Depending if we start this window at 20:10:00 or 20:10:18 we get 10 or 11 blocks "solved" in that time, so lets take the middle and take a factor of 1.05 So we have: hash_rate = 1.05 * 6411.26760900 * 16777216 / 30 hash_rate =~ 3764712752 =~ 3,76 GH/s So we have approximatly a network hashrate of 3,67 GHashes per second. http://qrk.coinmine.pl/ showed at that time an approximate pool hashrate of 3,8 GH/s. So either my maths are totaly wrong, the pools hahsrate display is totaly wrong, or houston, we have a very big problem... pools hashrates are notorious for being wrong. So what du you think the real hashrate of that pool is? 3 GHash, 2,5 GHash? EDIT: Just looked at the generation TX of last 100 Blocks: From 86 of them the destination address was the same, which i assume is the pools address. This means, although this is only a very rough estimations: 86% of the networks hashing power lies by this pool, and here we are: housten, we have a very big problem... EDIT2: Looking at the stats prooves this: http://www.coinmine.pl/qrk/index.php?page=statistics&action=blocksBlock Overview Gen Est. Found Valid Orphan Avg Diff Shares Est. Shares Percentage Amount Rate Est. All Time 308,642 176345 175056 1289 1,101.2280 48194144 67308505 139.66% 25459277.001874 57.14% Last Hour 120 105 105 0 5,510.0801 144640 199012 137.59% 1680.0195 87.50%Last 24 Hours 2880 2577 2576 1 5,958.9464 3837562 4721686 123.04% 41220.21616 89.48% Last 7 Days 20160 17745 17743 2 4,733.0264 20994522 19637075 93.53% 283927.71958001 88.02% Last 4 Weeks 80640 65543 65520 23 2,493.8772 40849708 44652365 109.31% 1643143.30782 81.28% Last 12 Month 967680 176345 175056 1289 1,101.2280 48194144 67308505 139.66% 25459277.001874 18.22% EDIT3: And just to be clear: i personally have no reason to distrust the pool operator, but thats a thing that needs to be fixed ASAP or bter38 will never come, and maybe otehr trading platforms will suspend Quark wich would definatly be a pity. talk to Feeleep he is a member here and runs the pools.
|
|
|
|
r3wt
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:09:33 PM |
|
I just doubled down on Quark. These prices are AMAZING!
Why there isn't a competent Quark exchange boggles the human mind.
If you are a developer, and have the free time to code PLEASE MESSAGE ME.
TRANSLATION: I'm desperately trying to escape my Quarkcoin investment, all it does is lose!
|
My negative trust rating is reflective of a personal vendetta by someone on default trust.
|
|
|
coinerer
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:10:07 PM |
|
Tom Cruise supports Quark!
Some scientists started to looking for pure Quarks in cosmic radiations. Is not simpler to buy Quarks at some of the exchanges?
|
|
|
|
Neisklar
Member
Offline
Activity: 60
Merit: 10
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:10:55 PM |
|
---snip--- EDIT: Just looked at the generation TX of last 100 Blocks: From 86 of them the destination address was the same, which i assume is the pools address. This means, although this is only a very rough estimations: 86% of the networks hashing power lies by this pool, and here we are: housten, we have a very big problem... EDIT2: Looking at the stats prooves this: http://www.coinmine.pl/qrk/index.php?page=statistics&action=blocksBlock Overview Gen Est. Found Valid Orphan Avg Diff Shares Est. Shares Percentage Amount Rate Est. All Time 308,642 176345 175056 1289 1,101.2280 48194144 67308505 139.66% 25459277.001874 57.14% Last Hour 120 105 105 0 5,510.0801 144640 199012 137.59% 1680.0195 87.50%Last 24 Hours 2880 2577 2576 1 5,958.9464 3837562 4721686 123.04% 41220.21616 89.48% Last 7 Days 20160 17745 17743 2 4,733.0264 20994522 19637075 93.53% 283927.71958001 88.02% Last 4 Weeks 80640 65543 65520 23 2,493.8772 40849708 44652365 109.31% 1643143.30782 81.28% Last 12 Month 967680 176345 175056 1289 1,101.2280 48194144 67308505 139.66% 25459277.001874 18.22% EDIT3: And just to be clear: i personally have no reason to distrust the pool operator, but thats a thing that needs to be fixed ASAP or bter38 will never come, and maybe otehr trading platforms will suspend Quark wich would definatly be a pity. talk to Feeleep he is a member here and runs the pools. Will do, and as said to my knowledge there is no reason to distrust him. Funny thing is now: all that talking about some few people hold what 60% or so of the coins is now obsolete, since Feeleep holds them currently ALL.
|
BTC: 1LZQkJCojCiomDb1FdFXN5g1Gtc6n95acB - QRK: QRrcffSmb6jqw6RmZLtJ6skg71AXRG3S6y
|
|
|
gnode
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:13:12 PM |
|
Except he pays out to each pool member. You can see that in the transaction history.
|
|
|
|
Netnox
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2044
Merit: 1008
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:16:49 PM |
|
Want to get rich? Make a Quark exchange that works properly! It's volume will make you rich.
|
|
|
|
FlipPro
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1015
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:17:11 PM |
|
Want to get rich? Make a Quark exchange that works properly! It's volume will make you rich.
+9000 Already working on one myself.
|
|
|
|
georgem
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1007
spreadcoin.info
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:20:50 PM |
|
Want to get rich? Make a Quark exchange that works properly! It's volume will make you rich.
+9000 Already working on one myself. me too ... that's what I like about the quark community, everyone is busy doing things.
|
|
|
|
Neisklar
Member
Offline
Activity: 60
Merit: 10
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:21:19 PM |
|
Except he pays out to each pool member. You can see that in the transaction history.
I think you didn't understand what i meant he holds them ALL: He has currently control of ALL Quarkcoins available, yours, mine, everyones, he could i think create arbitary transactions, generate coins at his will. (I'm not sure about the last part) He has a high reputation so of course he will not do that, but this is not healthy for a coin. It's a permanent 51% "attack".
|
BTC: 1LZQkJCojCiomDb1FdFXN5g1Gtc6n95acB - QRK: QRrcffSmb6jqw6RmZLtJ6skg71AXRG3S6y
|
|
|
gnode
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:34:18 PM |
|
Except he pays out to each pool member. You can see that in the transaction history.
I think you didn't understand what i meant he holds them ALL: He has currently control of ALL Quarkcoins available, yours, mine, everyones, he could i think create arbitary transactions, generate coins at his will. (I'm not sure about the last part) He has a high reputation so of course he will not do that, but this is not healthy for a coin. It's a permanent 51% "attack". What you say could only be true if he never paid out to the pool members. He has paid so he has very few coins.
|
|
|
|
matt4054
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:39:11 PM |
|
The >51% situation is the same for many alts (think of "rare" MM coins like DVC or IXC and BitParking, they also have >90%).
Of course it's suboptimal, but it doesn't make the coin worthless. It merely means that miners have decided to trust a single entity to pool their efforts. Nothing more, and, granted, nothing less: trusting a central entity is not the aim of crypto coins IMO, at least not the original Bitcoin.
Miners could, theoretically, at any time, move away from CoinMine.pl and solo mine and/or switch pools, if they no longer trust them, or if they are no longer pleased by their policy.
|
|
|
|
Neisklar
Member
Offline
Activity: 60
Merit: 10
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:45:55 PM |
|
Except he pays out to each pool member. You can see that in the transaction history.
I think you didn't understand what i meant he holds them ALL: He has currently control of ALL Quarkcoins available, yours, mine, everyones, he could i think create arbitary transactions, generate coins at his will. (I'm not sure about the last part) He has a high reputation so of course he will not do that, but this is not healthy for a coin. It's a permanent 51% "attack". What you say could only be true if he never paid out to the pool members. He has paid so he has very few coins. You still don't get it. Please google (Bitcoin) 51% attack. For Bitcoin this imho never happened, but it hink FTC was one of the coins who already had one
|
BTC: 1LZQkJCojCiomDb1FdFXN5g1Gtc6n95acB - QRK: QRrcffSmb6jqw6RmZLtJ6skg71AXRG3S6y
|
|
|
r3wt
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:46:28 PM |
|
Want to get rich? Make a Quark exchange that works properly! It's volume will make you rich.
+9000 Already working on one myself. me too ... that's what I like about the quark community, everyone is busy doing things. yeah, running their mouths about how Quarkcoin isn't a scam.
|
My negative trust rating is reflective of a personal vendetta by someone on default trust.
|
|
|
Neisklar
Member
Offline
Activity: 60
Merit: 10
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:48:57 PM |
|
The >51% situation is the same for many alts (think of "rare" MM coins like DVC or IXC and BitParking, they also have >90%).
Of course it's suboptimal, but it doesn't make the coin worthless. It merely means that miners have decided to trust a single entity to pool their efforts. Nothing more, and, granted, nothing less: trusting a central entity is not the aim of crypto coins IMO, at least not the original Bitcoin.
Miners could, theoretically, at any time, move away from CoinMine.pl and solo mine and/or switch pools, if they no longer trust them, or if they are no longer pleased by their policy.
Of course doesn't make this the coin worthless, but imho in the longer run, for a stable and widely accepted coin, this must be fixed.
|
BTC: 1LZQkJCojCiomDb1FdFXN5g1Gtc6n95acB - QRK: QRrcffSmb6jqw6RmZLtJ6skg71AXRG3S6y
|
|
|
matt4054
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
|
|
December 14, 2013, 10:57:49 PM |
|
Of course doesn't make this the coin worthless, but imho in the longer run, for a stable and widely accepted coin, this must be fixed.
True, especially for a coin whose motto says "super secure"
|
|
|
|
gnode
|
|
December 14, 2013, 11:23:36 PM |
|
Except he pays out to each pool member. You can see that in the transaction history.
I think you didn't understand what i meant he holds them ALL: He has currently control of ALL Quarkcoins available, yours, mine, everyones, he could i think create arbitary transactions, generate coins at his will. (I'm not sure about the last part) He has a high reputation so of course he will not do that, but this is not healthy for a coin. It's a permanent 51% "attack". What you say could only be true if he never paid out to the pool members. He has paid so he has very few coins. You still don't get it. Please google (Bitcoin) 51% attack. For Bitcoin this imho never happened, but it hink FTC was one of the coins who already had one No I don't think you understand the 51% attack. Feeleep doesn't control all the coins, once he pays them for example to me and I put them in my wallet he can't do anything with those coins.
|
|
|
|
x0rcist
|
|
December 14, 2013, 11:24:36 PM |
|
Actually i already got away from this sinking ship but i cant resist to say that the guys responding in this topic are as strong as the almighty quark coin.. trolololol
|
|
|
|
Neisklar
Member
Offline
Activity: 60
Merit: 10
|
|
December 14, 2013, 11:25:11 PM |
|
Except he pays out to each pool member. You can see that in the transaction history.
I think you didn't understand what i meant he holds them ALL: He has currently control of ALL Quarkcoins available, yours, mine, everyones, he could i think create arbitary transactions, generate coins at his will. (I'm not sure about the last part) He has a high reputation so of course he will not do that, but this is not healthy for a coin. It's a permanent 51% "attack". What you say could only be true if he never paid out to the pool members. He has paid so he has very few coins. You still don't get it. Please google (Bitcoin) 51% attack. For Bitcoin this imho never happened, but it hink FTC was one of the coins who already had one No I don't think you understand the 51% attack. Feeleep doesn't control all the coins, once he pays them for example to me and I put them in my wallet he can't do anything with those coins. He can block them from ever be spend for example:)
|
BTC: 1LZQkJCojCiomDb1FdFXN5g1Gtc6n95acB - QRK: QRrcffSmb6jqw6RmZLtJ6skg71AXRG3S6y
|
|
|
matt4054
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1035
|
|
December 14, 2013, 11:26:53 PM |
|
He can block them from ever be spend for example:)
Go for a win-win: team-up with him and double (triple, quadruple, n-uple...) spend at will It still requires clever engineering to actually profit from double spend attacks, even with 90% hashrate under control, you can't force every node on the network (thinking of the exchanges) to think and accept whatever you would like them to.
|
|
|
|
|