Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 09:28:49 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 [176] 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 »
  Print  
Author Topic: bitHopper: Python Pool Hopper Proxy  (Read 333064 times)
MaGNeT
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


Founder of Orlycoin | O RLY? YA RLY!


View Profile WWW
August 13, 2011, 11:35:58 AM
 #3501

Er...interesting....

https://www.rfcpool.com/account

Quote
rfcpool has been shut down because the owner is a fucking idiot - that
should sum it up in brief.


If you were a miner, your money is all accounted for, and you will be paid as
soon as the most recent block matures. If you did not have a wallet address
in your account then email chris@rfcpool.com and after slinging your abuse
at me, tell me the username/email on account/wallet combination and you will
get paid.

So what happened? Well in short, running a pool and dealing with
people's money is a metric fucktonne harder than I ever imagined it would
be, and a series of fuckups relating to handling all said money has left me
about 150BTC out of pocket, so I'm pulling the plug before the situation
gets any worse.

Good luck to all other pool ops.

Hmmm...

role=disable

 Sad
1481318929
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481318929

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481318929
Reply with quote  #2

1481318929
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481318929
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481318929

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481318929
Reply with quote  #2

1481318929
Report to moderator
pbj sammich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 272


Fighting Liquid with Liquid


View Profile
August 13, 2011, 12:07:40 PM
 #3502

Just saw that RFC pool notice this morning as well.

You can't even get to your account page, and I was hopping them last nite

I know I had BTC there but how much is a guess

oh well, not a huge loss
deepceleron
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470



View Profile WWW
August 13, 2011, 12:37:19 PM
 #3503

This made me think:

Good news everyone! 43% is dead!

We no longer have to hop at 0.43*difficulty!
...

Of course in any given round, after total shares=diff, your shares are worth less than one. But over time the shorter rounds make up for it. Even with only 3 Prop and backup, your efficiency will always be about 1.83, unless you hop off *too soon*. With ten other pools you get about 250% over PPS - sound familiar?

tl;dr BOLD CLAIM: As long as you always hop to the pool with the lowest shares - regardless of hashspeed - you don't need to hop to backup at 0.43.


I tried several schedulers now and I thought about the following (new "--HopLowestSharecount" scheduler):

- mine the 3 pools with lowest sharecount at any moment (where 3 can be changed to a custom value with "--hop_ x_pools=3" parameter)
- forget about the 0.43 threshold
- It won't need back-up pools, it will always hop between the 3 pools with lowest sharecount and with 18 pools, that should work without problems

It's a bit like the OldDefaultScheduler and SliceScheduler, without the threshold.


That is bold to make bold claims, and be incorrect at them. A share submitted after 43.3% of difficulty has elapsed in a proportional pool has a lower expected return than if that share was submitted to a 0 fee PPS or even-paying pool, or if a switch was made to solo mining. By mining from the start until 100% of difficulty shares, you reduce your expected return from 28% to 22%. Considering the lag in statistics and delays switching into and out of a proportional pool, you should be triggering an earlier exit than that to maximize your expected earnings. By mining more pools, you have a higher chance of one of the pools being in the sweet spot, and can also choose the highest reward pool at a particular time, but that doesn't change the ultimate temporal valuation of a submitted share.

Indeed, you also shouldn't be 'slicing', shares should be submitted to the highest instantaneous reward pool only. I would have to scroll back 100 pages to see who came up with this stinker... The fallacy of reducing variation is why people are paying 7% for PPS (and 20% for credit cards), they can't see or comprehend the long-term.

MaGNeT
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


Founder of Orlycoin | O RLY? YA RLY!


View Profile WWW
August 13, 2011, 01:08:41 PM
 #3504

This made me think:

Good news everyone! 43% is dead!

We no longer have to hop at 0.43*difficulty!
...

Of course in any given round, after total shares=diff, your shares are worth less than one. But over time the shorter rounds make up for it. Even with only 3 Prop and backup, your efficiency will always be about 1.83, unless you hop off *too soon*. With ten other pools you get about 250% over PPS - sound familiar?

tl;dr BOLD CLAIM: As long as you always hop to the pool with the lowest shares - regardless of hashspeed - you don't need to hop to backup at 0.43.


I tried several schedulers now and I thought about the following (new "--HopLowestSharecount" scheduler):

- mine the 3 pools with lowest sharecount at any moment (where 3 can be changed to a custom value with "--hop_ x_pools=3" parameter)
- forget about the 0.43 threshold
- It won't need back-up pools, it will always hop between the 3 pools with lowest sharecount and with 18 pools, that should work without problems

It's a bit like the OldDefaultScheduler and SliceScheduler, without the threshold.


That is bold to make bold claims, and be incorrect at them. A share submitted after 43.3% of difficulty has elapsed in a proportional pool has a lower expected return than if that share was submitted to a 0 fee PPS or even-paying pool, or if a switch was made to solo mining. By mining from the start until 100% of difficulty shares, you reduce your expected return from 28% to 22%. Considering the lag in statistics and delays switching into and out of a proportional pool, you should be triggering an earlier exit than that to maximize your expected earnings. By mining more pools, you have a higher chance of one of the pools being in the sweet spot, and can also choose the highest reward pool at a particular time, but that doesn't change the ultimate temporal valuation of a submitted share.

Indeed, you also shouldn't be 'slicing', shares should be submitted to the highest instantaneous reward pool only. I would have to scroll back 100 pages to see who came up with this stinker... The fallacy of reducing variation is why people are paying 7% for PPS (and 20% for credit cards), they can't see or comprehend the long-term.

I like the discussion Smiley

Do we have graphs for both to compare? Smiley
Rino
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 38


View Profile
August 13, 2011, 01:47:04 PM
 #3505

stats page(and other pages) are broken in last version for me
Endeavour79
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 169



View Profile WWW
August 13, 2011, 01:48:48 PM
 #3506

stats page(and other pages) are broken in last version for me

use --auth username,password

NSW, Australia - Rigs, Mining, Pools - Local help needed? Send me a message!
r2edu
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 68


View Profile
August 13, 2011, 01:49:47 PM
 #3507

I tested version 0.1.7.1-6, stats page don´t work (blank page), went back to 0.1.6.2-16*

*Having some problems with bcpool, It keeps reseting to 0% after some time, but when I look into the webpage the round still counting
*Same problems with db and bclc as I mention in previous posts (shares keep counting and counting, never find a new round)

Edit:@Endeavour79: which user or pass?
Endeavour79
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 169



View Profile WWW
August 13, 2011, 01:52:05 PM
 #3508

I tested version 0.1.7.1-6, stats page don´t work (blank page), went back to 0.1.6.2-16*

*Having some problems with bcpool, It keeps reseting to 0% after some time, but when I look into the webpage the round still counting
*Same problems with db and bclc as I mention in previous posts (shares keep counting and counting, never find a new round)

stats page - see one post before..

bcp is faking json stats..

NSW, Australia - Rigs, Mining, Pools - Local help needed? Send me a message!
Rino
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 38


View Profile
August 13, 2011, 01:58:59 PM
 #3509

I tested version 0.1.7.1-6, stats page don´t work (blank page), went back to 0.1.6.2-16*

*Having some problems with bcpool, It keeps reseting to 0% after some time, but when I look into the webpage the round still counting
*Same problems with db and bclc as I mention in previous posts (shares keep counting and counting, never find a new round)

Edit:@Endeavour79: which user or pass?
set with
bithopper.py --auth user,pass
login to stats with those.

Is non-slicing scheduler still available ? it isnt listed in readme anymore
Endeavour79
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 169



View Profile WWW
August 13, 2011, 02:01:59 PM
 #3510


Is non-slicing scheduler still available ? it isnt listed in readme anymore

use
--scheduler=OldDefaultScheduler

NSW, Australia - Rigs, Mining, Pools - Local help needed? Send me a message!
r2edu
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 68


View Profile
August 13, 2011, 02:28:17 PM
 #3511

I tested version 0.1.7.1-6, stats page don´t work (blank page), went back to 0.1.6.2-16*

*Having some problems with bcpool, It keeps reseting to 0% after some time, but when I look into the webpage the round still counting
*Same problems with db and bclc as I mention in previous posts (shares keep counting and counting, never find a new round)

Edit:@Endeavour79: which user or pass?
set with
bithopper.py --auth user,pass
login to stats with those.

Is non-slicing scheduler still available ? it isnt listed in readme anymore

Sorry but i don´t get it... i don´t have any user or pass related to bh, only for the workers and i have 3 differents

About bcpool, I think they´re starting to fake their stats when a block gets X size (>diff or diff*1.X-2), so "we" hop there and help it finish. I think this because i hop there in previous short rounds (~2-3hs) and got no problems and get payed very well Smiley
floeti
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 30



View Profile
August 13, 2011, 02:37:25 PM
 #3512

Quote
Indeed, you also shouldn't be 'slicing', shares should be submitted to the highest instantaneous reward pool only.

In my opinion, slicing has two advantages:
  • You distribute your risk a bit more across pools, especially the small ones, that have long round times and are more likely to disappear all of a sudden
  • You compensate a bit for unreliable hopping-methods (LP-based and so on)

Quote
Sorry but i don´t get it... i don´t have any user or pass related to bh, only for the workers and i have 3 differents
You have to define your own user and password and give that in command line. It protects the stats-website.

@c00w
Wouldn't it be better to just show the stats-page (insted of nothin), if no --auth was given?

ewibit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1749


View Profile
August 13, 2011, 02:59:55 PM
 #3513

are the stats from bclc correct?
it shows on HP:
Friday 12 Aug 23:48:02 CEST
round    17 hours, 6 minutes
7 249 657 shares
and in bh
27700 1,47%
*confused*
Endeavour79
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 169



View Profile WWW
August 13, 2011, 03:15:40 PM
 #3514


@c00w
Wouldn't it be better to just show the stats-page (insted of nothin), if no --auth was given?

No, if you don't have a login you most likely are not allowed to see and should not see anything. Noone has to see your stats beside you. And you should know your login credentials.
Smiley

NSW, Australia - Rigs, Mining, Pools - Local help needed? Send me a message!
muyoso
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84



View Profile
August 13, 2011, 04:01:15 PM
 #3515

If bitcoinpool is faking stats then they are also faking my estimated reward as well. 

I drink it up!
dadittox
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 22


View Profile
August 13, 2011, 04:07:11 PM
 #3516

We need to be able to mark the pool as faker and then bh to vote as fake on p2plp. Because in disabled state it just won't vote at all.
muyoso
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84



View Profile
August 13, 2011, 04:29:56 PM
 #3517

So wait, are you guys saying that bitcoinpool didn't just solve like 5 blocks today?  Because its showing up on my unconfirmed rewards . . . .

I drink it up!
Rino
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 38


View Profile
August 13, 2011, 04:43:22 PM
 #3518

So wait, are you guys saying that bitcoinpool didn't just solve like 5 blocks today?  Because its showing up on my unconfirmed rewards . . . .
it did but it reset json round shares counter several times during current block, it should be ~15% right now according to time*speed
Sukrim
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


View Profile
August 13, 2011, 05:02:32 PM
 #3519


@c00w
Wouldn't it be better to just show the stats-page (insted of nothin), if no --auth was given?

No, if you don't have a login you most likely are not allowed to see and should not see anything. Noone has to see your stats beside you. And you should know your login credentials.
Smiley
If you don't require a login via a commandline switch, most likely you're on a LAN or on localhost and don't care about credentials, as you are the only one having access.

https://bitfinex.com <-- leveraged trading of BTCUSD, LTCUSD and LTCBTC (long and short) - 10% discount on fees for the first 30 days with this refcode: x5K9YtL3Zb
Mail me at Bitmessage: BM-BbiHiVv5qh858ULsyRDtpRrG9WjXN3xf
joulesbeef
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


moOo


View Profile
August 13, 2011, 05:10:55 PM
 #3520

Quote
The fallacy of reducing variation is why people are paying 7% for PPS (and 20% for credit cards), they can't see or comprehend the long-term.

the problem is you left human behavior out of the equation. How many here lost coin when bitminers union reset? how many are missing coin on rfc? a few of the small pools have also changed payouts mid block. How many pools have we dropped in a month? and then their is crossing difficulty lines which non of yall put into the equations.

it's not just variation, it is how many eggs i want in a weak basket.


Quote
Wouldn't it be better to just show the stats-page (insted of nothin), if no --auth was given?

Not but a note to reconfigure bithopper would be nice.. every single person who hops and will come here and ask what happened to the stats page.

90% of them wont understand that they make up their own user name and pass either.. when you tell them to use --auth user,pass

or has been my exp so far

mooo for rent
Pages: « 1 ... 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 [176] 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 »
  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!