Squirrel Dearing
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:08:42 PM |
|
didnt they promise dividends for today?
Tomorrow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The forum strives to allow free discussion of any ideas. All policies are built around this principle. This doesn't mean you can post garbage, though: posts should actually contain ideas, and these ideas should be argued reasonably.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
KCBitcoin
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:09:04 PM |
|
We'll see if they get another 0.15 payment in 2 minutes
yes!another .15!
|
|
|
|
velacreations
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:10:09 PM |
|
Except it's a four pay period window, remember? I'm pretty sure I made that clear. If I actually include a 0 payout at 18:07 the four-period window estimate would be 1097.202923 Gh/s.
We'll see if they get another 0.15 payment in 2 minutes
they just got .15 for 19:07
|
|
|
|
Ytterbium
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:12:10 PM |
|
We'll see if they get another 0.15 payment in 2 minutes
yes!another .15! Ding. 4-payment sliding window estimate at this point is 1030.403476 Gh/s, btw. I'm quite sure the other 400(?) Gh/s is on another account. (In fact, it has to be, or it would have shown up on the labcoin team's hashrate)
|
|
|
|
KCBitcoin
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:14:17 PM |
|
We'll see if they get another 0.15 payment in 2 minutes
yes!another .15! Ding. 4-payment sliding window estimate at this point is 1030.403476 Gh/s, btw. I'm quite sure the other 400(?) Gh/s is on another account. (In fact, it has to be, or it would have shown up on the labcoin team's hashrate) also, since this is just a threshold number, 1-hour output could (must) be larger than 0.15
|
|
|
|
velacreations
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:20:42 PM |
|
4 payment window would be:
UTC Payment Gh/s estimate 9/23/2013 16:17 0.29072199 1214.078822 9/23/2013 17:07 0.15 1372.026411 9/23/2013 18:07 0 1097.202923 9/23/2013 19:07 0.15 ~850
|
|
|
|
VolanicEruptor
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:23:34 PM |
|
I tried estimating % rate of network for ASICMINER one day by adding up all blocks with less than 100 confirmations and calculating it as a percentage out of 100. It was something like 25%, extremely high.. but then the next day I looked it was like 5%... finding blocks varies so much that its impossible to calculate it with only a day of information. I don't see how some of you could possibly be calculating hash rate accurately based on payments over a few hours, is there something I'm missing? If the pool is lucky, then the payments will come faster, right?
|
|
|
|
GodfatherBond
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:26:21 PM |
|
So, how this move from btc-tc > bitfunder(?) will go actually? What shareholders needs to do? Any info available?
|
|
|
|
abuelau
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:26:37 PM |
|
I tried estimating % rate of network for ASICMINER one day by adding up all blocks with less than 100 confirmations and multiplying by 10. It was something like 25%, extremely high.. but then the next day I looked it was like 5%... finding blocks varies so much that its impossible to calculate it with only a day of information. I don't see how some of you could possibly be calculating hash rate accurately based on payments over a few hours, is there something I'm missing? If the pool is lucky, then the payments will come faster, right?
^^ this
|
|
|
|
velacreations
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:27:49 PM |
|
I tried estimating % rate of network for ASICMINER one day by adding up all blocks with less than 100 confirmations and multiplying by 10. It was something like 25%, extremely high.. but then the next day I looked it was like 5%... finding blocks varies so much that its impossible to calculate it with only a day of information. I don't see how some of you could possibly be calculating hash rate accurately based on payments over a few hours, is there something I'm missing? If the pool is lucky, then the payments will come faster, right?
The most accurate way right now is this:
|
|
|
|
Ytterbium
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:29:05 PM |
|
4 payment window would be:
UTC Payment Gh/s estimate 9/23/2013 16:17 0.29072199 1214.078822 9/23/2013 17:07 0.15 1372.026411 9/23/2013 18:07 0 1097.202923 9/23/2013 19:07 0.15 ~850
Wow. You really are bad at math. There was no payment at 18:07. The last four payments were 15:47, 16:17, 17:07, and 19:07 If there had been a 0 payment at 18:07, the four-payment sliding window would be 981.6594931 Gh/s Not "~850"
|
|
|
|
VolanicEruptor
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:29:19 PM |
|
Sorry, I made a mistake with my post.. you don't need to multiply by 10. The # of blocks with less than 100 confirmations would be your percent..
|
|
|
|
velacreations
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:35:46 PM |
|
There was no payment at 18:07
wait, so you ignore when they don't get a payment, but include obvious manual ones? Isn't that selectively including data when it fits your argument? regardless, it's obvious their hash rate is trending towards what BTCGuild says it is.
|
|
|
|
tucenaber
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:41:08 PM |
|
@Ytterbium Unless Labcoin are morons they use PPLNS wich means the payout varies with the number of found blocks. Do you understand that?
|
|
|
|
Ytterbium
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:41:31 PM |
|
I tried estimating % rate of network for ASICMINER one day by adding up all blocks with less than 100 confirmations and multiplying by 10. It was something like 25%, extremely high.. but then the next day I looked it was like 5%... finding blocks varies so much that its impossible to calculate it with only a day of information. I don't see how some of you could possibly be calculating hash rate accurately based on payments over a few hours, is there something I'm missing? If the pool is lucky, then the payments will come faster, right?
The most accurate way right now is this: ASICMiner found 8 blocks in the past 24 hours. BTCGuild found 68. The variance is far lower, and you get paid over a sliding window of the last 10 'shifts', which reduces the variance even more. They don't get paid based on how many blocks BTCGuild found in the past hour. Except for the very first set of shifts this difficulty period (Where they had 188% luck), all of their 10-shift periods have had luck of about +/- 20%. The variance on BTCGuild is not very high at all. It's not like ASICMiner or slush, that's why people use it. and why it's always close to 51%. I made it clear the payments could have come from someone other then labcoin pointing to their payout address. That just seems unlikely to me. We haven't seen any more inexplicable payments since 16:17 UTC, though. But they did say they would "merge" the other hashers when they were "stable", whatever that means.
|
|
|
|
Ytterbium
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:44:50 PM |
|
@Ytterbium Unless Labcoin are morons they use PPLNS wich means the payout varies with the number of found blocks. Do you understand that?
Which recent BTCGuild shifts do you think would have let them make 0.2907BTC in 30 minutes with one acccount at 750Gh/s
|
|
|
|
Pompobit
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:47:49 PM |
|
I don't know why you put so much effort to persuade us that labcoin is hashing and everything will go fine. If you are so sure, why don't you simply keep quiet and buy cheap shares?
|
|
|
|
velacreations
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:49:59 PM |
|
I don't know why you put so much effort to persuade us that labcoin is hashing and everything will go fine. If you are so sure, why don't you simply keep quiet and buy cheap shares?
cause he's trying to sell shares
|
|
|
|
kleeck
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:53:13 PM |
|
I don't know why you put so much effort to persuade us that labcoin is hashing and everything will go fine. If you are so sure, why don't you simply keep quiet and buy cheap shares?
His assertion was challenged. He is defending his claim, and doing a damn good job. Those that disagree have been shifted to the weaker position, for sure.
|
|
|
|
Rulother
Member
Offline
Activity: 68
Merit: 10
|
|
September 23, 2013, 07:54:59 PM |
|
I don't know why you put so much effort to persuade us that labcoin is hashing and everything will go fine. If you are so sure, why don't you simply keep quiet and buy cheap shares?
His assertion was challenged. He is defending his claim, and doing a damn good job. Those that disagree have been shifted to the weaker position, for sure.
|
A Member of the LCSH
|
|
|
|