[1050 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff]

[DrHaribo]

Engaging fast block cheat now.

(Noone tell Gavin Andresen, he got really mad last time)

[1714249302]

1714249302

[1714249302]

1714249302

[1714249302]

1714249302

[Turbor]

  let the turbo kick in...

[Eveofwar]

Engaging fast block cheat now.

(Noone tell Gavin Andresen, he got really mad last time)

* Eveofwar waits for incoming block chain fork...

[DrHaribo]

First block is in...

[Turbor]

About time 

[DeathAndTaxes]

First block is in...

Too easy. Why didn't you engage cheat mode a day ago? 

It looks like my miner was running the following code:

Code:

If (cheatmode == true) Then
    AutoFindBlock()
Else
    DoNothing()

[DrHaribo]

Too easy. Why didn't you engage cheat mode a day ago? 

It looks like my miner was running the following code:

Code:

If (cheatmode == true) Then
    AutoFindBlock()
Else
    DoNothing()

That's exactly what it was doing. And the reason not to always run with cheatmode, well... Can you imagine the complaints from other pools if they knew we are hacking instead of hashing?

[Turbor]

Does someone know who (what) Geronimo, youpie and JohnyKnoxville are. Why do they hop all together ? Is this one guy with more than one nick ? They have more than 70 gh/s...

[P4man]

They are pool hoppers. If they have no "hoppable" pool to hop to, they have been sending their hashes to us lately.

[P4man]

Engaging fast block cheat now.

Not that one, the other one please. You know the one that produces blocks with less than 50% CDF pretty please

BTW, if you ever feel like working on the site again, a suggestion for making the luck page more readable; this is how it should be done IMO:
http://pool-x.eu/blocksAuth

[Turbor]

They are pool hoppers. If they have no "hoppable" pool to hop to, they have been sending their hashes to us lately.

I know but somehow it seems like they are connected. Just wondering why they come to us almost at the same time.

[eleuthria]

They are pool hoppers. If they have no "hoppable" pool to hop to, they have been sending their hashes to us lately.

I know but somehow it seems like they are connected. Just wondering why they come to us almost at the same time.

Hopping is pretty much just plugging pool stats into a formula, with maybe a little personal bias thrown in based on either past experiences or reliability between the pool and a particular user.  So you would expect hoppers to travel in groups, even if they're not related.

[DeathAndTaxes]

They are pool hoppers. If they have no "hoppable" pool to hop to, they have been sending their hashes to us lately.

I know but somehow it seems like they are connected. Just wondering why they come to us almost at the same time.

Most hoppers are using the same database of pools, same algorithms, and same software.

When the code tells one hopper there is no pool which can be exploited and to fall back to the "fair value pool" the same situation is occurring for all hoppers at the same time.

There is some variation because hoppers might be using slightly different algorithms or have slightly different sets of pools but generally speaking when hoppers are falling back to us all the hoppers are falling back to all of their backups pools all across the network.  It means for that period of time that they are here, no victim pool presents >1.0 share value (efficiency).  As soon as the code identifies a pool to exploit they go there and keep jumping to the most exploitable pool until no pool is exploitable and then they come back here.

[Turbor]

  Makes sense, something new learnt.

[DrHaribo]

Not that one, the other one please. You know the one that produces blocks with less than 50% CDF pretty please

Oh you wanted the lucky blocks? Let's try that again.. 

BTW, if you ever feel like working on the site again, a suggestion for making the luck page more readable; this is how it should be done IMO:
http://pool-x.eu/blocksAuth

This looks nice. I will think about some changes for the future.

I've added a bot to the chat (IRC) that announces new blocks as they are generated:

Code:

12:31 -MintBot:#bitminter- Ding! Ding! BTC block no.155846 generated by Zalfrin
12:31 -MintBot:#bitminter- Ding! Ding! NMC block no.31569 generated by Zalfrin

[Turbor]

Our bad luck forced me to change the pool  . Since the electric costs are very high over here and my gains around (below) zero i had no other choice. It sucks because BitMinter has the best homepage and excellent stale rates compared to other pools.

I wish you the best luck for the next blocks.

[P4man]

Our bad luck forced me to change the pool  . Since the electric costs are very high over here and my gains around (below) zero i had no other choice. It sucks because BitMinter has the best homepage and excellent stale rates compared to other pools.

I know exactly how you feel, and I even pointed one of my machines to another pool for a while. But then I thought it through.. the bad luck already happened. Switching to a bigger pool now just solidifies that bad luck with no chance of reversing it,  as you'll miss out when the luck changes.  It would be smarter to switch to a larger pool after we had a lucky streak.

[conspirosphere.tk]

me too. I will be back when the pool speed will be >600 GHs

[DrHaribo]

If the variance in two pools is the same, then switching between them or staying in the same one makes no difference luck-wise. They both offer the same chances for future payouts. The exception is when you can know something about future payouts, as is the case with proportional pools.

I can understand some users switching to pools with higher hashrate (and therefore lower variance), or PPS pools. Variance is a pain in a small pool when it's having bad luck. It is also very difficult to grow a pool up to a decent size. People leave because there aren't enough people. It's a catch-22.

Copying Wikipedia A personal appeal from the operator of the BitMinter pool: If you like this pool then please keep mining here so it can grow.

In other news, a new beta release over in the miner thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=31163.msg640162#msg640162

[P4man]

If the variance in two pools is the same, then switching between them or staying in the same one makes no difference luck-wise. They both offer the same chances for future payouts. The exception is when you can know something about future payouts, as is the case with proportional pools.

A (theoretical) infinitely large pool has no variance and is almost completely predictable. If you switch to such a pool after a stroke of bad luck at a small pool like ours, you will never make up for the bad luck youve already had. If you stick with the unlucky smaller pool with higher variance, its only a matter of time before the bad luck averages out.