Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 08:50:44 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [NEW POOL & MINER] - BitcoinPool.com - Jump In! ~NO FEES~ :)  (Read 96083 times)
bombo999
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 107


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 11:07:28 AM
 #721



TBH, if someone thinks that the measures you take may affect their payout badly, they will just leave. I personally find deepbit's system right now great

Sounds like an opinion to me ... I thought you said these were not allowed?
1481403044
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481403044

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481403044
Reply with quote  #2

1481403044
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481403044
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481403044

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481403044
Reply with quote  #2

1481403044
Report to moderator
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
April 01, 2011, 11:31:42 AM
 #722

You have your own pool. Go run it instead of trying to run ours.

You probably don't understand - I cannot test pool hoping on my own pool, because it is mostly resistant against this type of attack. But as you don't believe that this attack is possible, you should be fine that I'll contribute my 2-3ghash to your pool, right? I want to be absolutely clear; I'm asking because I don't want to be accused later that I'm attackng your pool.

You have two possibilities:
a) Be fine with my test, because you are sure that pool switching attack is nonsense
b) Ban me (I'll use my public credentials, no hiding), but disclose that you're affraid of switching users

And I'm doing all this because YOU don't believe Raulo's math and YOU are asking for real-world proof. (And it will brings me few bitcoins as a bonus.)

FairUser
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 261


View Profile WWW
April 01, 2011, 11:31:57 AM
 #723

*
**
*** PLEASE RESTART YOUR MINERS IF YOU HAVE NOT DONE SO ALREADY!
**
*

Because of the attack, your miner may have crashed, and lots of users are requesting getwork but are not submitting any shares.
Drazar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 10


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 11:49:05 AM
 #724

just restarted my miner and working away again, and just wanted to say something on my opinion of people jumping off the mining pool for another. i will admit i stop mining with you from time to time, to turn my pc off, i don't own a dedicated mining rig, what i use is my everyday gaming rig that i just so happen to mine on. This sits right next to my bed and has several fans running on it meaning there are nights that i can't sleep due to the constant noise and so it all goes off. While i realise you want to make sure people are mining for the whole length of time, and i have discussed with you before my very strange and ongoing efficiency problems, i joined this pool as the payout was based on what work i'd done in the pool, whether i'd had to turn my rig off or had it running the entire time instead of one like slush' where my down time would have me penalised. So while i'd like to see people staying with you're pool the entire time and i agree with you're points on the mathematical 'proofs' being mentioned in here, i'd rather not be punished for having my pc off one night and not getting any coins from a block because of it
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
April 01, 2011, 12:08:21 PM
 #725

instead of one like slush' where my down time would have me penalised.

Excuse me, but this is not correct. You're also 'penalized' (well, I don't think it is penalty, but call it for now) when you're connecting in share-based pool in middle of the round; your round reward will be always significantly lower in those rounds. Did you realized that after connecting in the middle of score-based pool, your round reward is going up (to expected value as for all-time mining) very fast?

FairUser
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 261


View Profile WWW
April 01, 2011, 12:35:16 PM
 #726

just restarted my miner and working away again, and just wanted to say something on my opinion of people jumping off the mining pool for another. i will admit i stop mining with you from time to time, to turn my pc off, i don't own a dedicated mining rig, what i use is my everyday gaming rig that i just so happen to mine on. This sits right next to my bed and has several fans running on it meaning there are nights that i can't sleep due to the constant noise and so it all goes off. While i realise you want to make sure people are mining for the whole length of time, and i have discussed with you before my very strange and ongoing efficiency problems, i joined this pool as the payout was based on what work i'd done in the pool, whether i'd had to turn my rig off or had it running the entire time instead of one like slush' where my down time would have me penalised. So while i'd like to see people staying with you're pool the entire time and i agree with you're points on the mathematical 'proofs' being mentioned in here, i'd rather not be punished for having my pc off one night and not getting any coins from a block because of it

I agree.  People should be able to come and go as they please, and not be punished for leaving (because they want to sleep, watch a movie, play a game, or whatever people do with their systems.)  This is the reason why I've been against implementing anything that punishes people for leaving the pool.

We started this pool to show efficiency of miners and the effects it has on the pool itself.  Because everybody seems to have an opinion about how things should be run, and because we've made several required bug fixes to the pool software, we've gotten distracted from the fact that we started this to show efficiency and how it effects finding blocks.

In light of remembering why we started this pool, we will be making some changes in the up coming days, and the inefficient miners are going to feel the effects of it.  If you haven't increased your askrate on your miner, or are not using poclbm-mod, and your efficiency remains low (< 50% or whatever % we choose), you'll be finding yourself going to another pool.

Here is how you determine what your askrate should be.  Use the average speed of your card when doing this math.

(2^32) / (your card speed)

For example.  1 of my GPUs does about 171,000,000 hashes per second.
(2^32) / ( 171000000 ) = 25.116767812865497076023391812865 seconds.
Round that number, and you get 25 seconds.  My askrate would then be 25 seconds. 

I do understand that some of the other miner programs were not built to be efficient, and may not let you set your askrate above 10 (poclbm) or 60 (jgarzik's CPU miner) seconds.  This is why you should use poclbm-mod if possible.  It will work through the entire getwork, then request another, which results in a higher level of efficiency.  Before we make this change that will effect inefficient miners, we'll be releasing a very slighty modified version of jgarzik's miner for the CPU miners.  The only change will be we remove the 60 second maximum askrate and increase it.  What would be ideal would be if jgarzik's CPU miner knew when it was finished working through the entire getwork THEN requests another one, but neither Geebus or myself are going to recode/redesign the behavior of another miner since we already did this to poclbm, and we just don't have the time right now to make major changes to another miner.  Hence why we'll be making a very slight change and then leaving it up to the user to figure out what their askrate should be.

However, there is no need to even have an askrate if your miner can:
 1) Work through the entire getwork before asking for another ( check all 2^32 hashes )
 2) Detect when the block changed and receive a new getwork ( long polling )

Poclbm-mod meets both those conditions, and our server supports long polling.  If jgarzik's miner could meet the first condition, then it would be the ideal CPU miner.
Again, with an efficient miner AND long polling there would be no more need for an askrate in the miner.

Drazar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 10


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 01:06:29 PM
 #727



Excuse me, but this is not correct. You're also 'penalized' (well, I don't think it is penalty, but call it for now) when you're connecting in share-based pool in middle of the round; your round reward will be always significantly lower in those rounds. Did you realized that after connecting in the middle of score-based pool, your round reward is going up (to expected value as for all-time mining) very fast?
[/quote]

I agree slush, it's not a penalty, if i connect in the middle of the round i've not mined for the first x% of the shares, and so i don't recieve any payment for that, i am happy with that and would expect it, i used you'rs as an example as it's the only other pool i really looked into much and the shares there devalue over time, so the shares i mined the day before, if you solve a block while i'm offline, will not be worth as much as if i'd done the same amount of work in the block but had been on when it'd finished as you devalue the shares over time. Im not saying one pool is better than the other, i'm just saying in my position and by my own opinon, i'm happier working this pool than i would be yours. That said i have a low efficency even with the polcbm-mod so will have to look into getting that improved else i won't be in this pool much longer anyway.

But now, to work!
xenon481
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406



View Profile
April 01, 2011, 01:17:39 PM
 #728

the shares there devalue over time, so the shares i mined the day before, if you solve a block while i'm offline, will not be worth as much as if i'd done the same amount of work in the block but had been on when it'd finished as you devalue the shares over time.

But the end of a round is indeterminate, so, if you leave 9 times, the on average: 3 times will be at the beginning (worth not much), 3 will be in the middle (worth a little), 3 will be at the end (worth a lot. Enough to make up for the other times where you were devalued).

It averages out over time.

Tips Appreciated: 171TQ2wJg7bxj2q68VNibU75YZB22b7ZDr
bobR
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 01:56:58 PM
 #729

Any chance of windows 64bit binaries of your modified miner
grndzero
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 02:04:46 PM
 #730

Any chance of windows 64bit binaries of your modified miner

I had no problem running the binary on 7 x64. I don't think a x64 binary would gain anything more.

Ubuntu Desktop x64 -  HD5850 Reference - 400Mh/s w/ cgminer  @ 975C/325M/1.175V - 11.6/2.1 SDK
Donate if you find this helpful: 1NimouHg2acbXNfMt5waJ7ohKs2TtYHePy
bobR
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 02:15:43 PM
 #731

Any chance of windows 64bit binaries of your modified miner

I had no problem running the binary on 7 x64. I don't think a x64 binary would gain anything more.

When I run it on 7 x64  the commamd windo just sets there showing nothing

Edit []
IT was the sample-bat file -- start /low -- removed that and it works
jgarzik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 02:22:00 PM
 #732

Quote from: geebus
Prove it.

Show it being done. Not theories on paper. Give me a reasonably sized data set proving it, in comparison to daily payouts when not pool hopping, with a comparable set of control data.

And then slush offered to prove it...

geebus, fairuser - any response to my cheating offer? As you don't believe that pool hoping can damage pool users, there should not be a problem with that...

But then...

You have your own pool. Go run it instead of trying to run ours.

So...  you demand evidence of a particular cheating method.  Then, when someone offers to satisfy your demands, you tell him to go away?

Um, ok.


Jeff Garzik, bitcoin core dev team and BitPay engineer; opinions are my own, not my employer.
Donations / tip jar: 1BrufViLKnSWtuWGkryPsKsxonV2NQ7Tcj
Drazar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 10


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 02:44:59 PM
 #733

the shares there devalue over time, so the shares i mined the day before, if you solve a block while i'm offline, will not be worth as much as if i'd done the same amount of work in the block but had been on when it'd finished as you devalue the shares over time.

But the end of a round is indeterminate, so, if you leave 9 times, the on average: 3 times will be at the beginning (worth not much), 3 will be in the middle (worth a little), 3 will be at the end (worth a lot. Enough to make up for the other times where you were devalued).

It averages out over time.

but each time i leave over 9 times with bitcoinpool all 9 times i will get the same amount no matter the average of when i leave, the only thing that will change it is how many shares i have entered vs the total number, and the only way to stop that is to not leave.
Where you need to then factor into such an evaluation what time periods in a round you would call beginning, middle, and end and shares entered vs total shares vs payout comparisons which i really don't want to get into as i'm not good at that kind of thing, all i can quite happily say is with this pool my X shares into a round with a total of Y shares always gives me X payment using the same equation no matter when the shares are entered.

If anyone wants to work out the maths to back me up or disprove me feel free to do so
audaibnjad
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 03:31:24 PM
 #734

Hi FairUser & geebus. First, thanks for pushing forward work on mining, and not only proposing but also implementing new methods. This is great.

Given all the work you've done, I feel a bit bad making requests, but here it is anyway:

Because of the attack, your miner may have crashed, and lots of users are requesting getwork but are not submitting any shares.

I woke up this morning to find a log-full of "long poll" messages requesting new blocks, but no work getting done. Could the miner be fixed to not crash when the server crashes? I'm not sure how much work this is...
Maybe if the miner actually exited when this happened (instead of just stopping work), it'd be a bit easier to run it in a batch-script loop.

One thing I may do in the meantime is write a script to kill & restart the miner every hour.


Thanks again for the hard work!

Sharecoin: SYQh1Bh6drRocFT6YJWgeM43ZeTHyiY1a4
xenon481
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406



View Profile
April 01, 2011, 05:11:21 PM
 #735

If anyone wants to work out the maths to back me up or disprove me feel free to do so

The maths is called "Average".

Tips Appreciated: 171TQ2wJg7bxj2q68VNibU75YZB22b7ZDr
bobR
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 05:25:49 PM
 #736

If anyone wants to work out the maths to back me up or disprove me feel free to do so

The maths is called "Average".

Math is math
show me the money
all this POSSIBLE cheating is you worry warts just wining
If you can get a few coins extra do it
if not STFU  enough already
bobR
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 06:13:24 PM
 #737

I switched to YOUR miner
It's throwing invalids - stale  wtf

my efficiency is up ...  pay is the same ..  SO???
this is the great hoha here for efficiency

I'm not seeing  it

edit[]
Another 2 invalids

edit again
more invalids
bullox
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 08:01:27 PM
 #738

I'm not the forum-posting type but i registered just to say this:

You people are all worrying too much.  Randomness is randomness.  It's a lottery if we solve the block or not.

I personally am not a dedicated miner but i have a script to enable my miner whenever my screensaver pops.  I feel good about contributing the 60Mhash when my computer is idle.  I like this pool because it does not penalize people like me, who would otherwise be using that miner as solo.  What youre doing is great, and Im sorry you are getting so much flak for it, especially in the form of DDOS which is just plain uncalled for.  Share those logs with other pool operators and im sure they'll be more than happy to block those ip's as well, assuming they are decent human beings.
thursday0451
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4



View Profile
April 01, 2011, 09:20:40 PM
 #739

Anybody know what SFRANZ3's rig is? It's pulling 2.2 Ghash!

"As you come closer ... you don't get something smooth, but irregularities at a smaller scale."
FRanz33
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
April 01, 2011, 10:08:02 PM
 #740

Anybody know what SFRANZ3's rig is? It's pulling 2.2 Ghash!

rigs... 2 boxes two with dual 5870s 1 box with dual 6970s and two more boxes with 5770s got some more on the way if the market is right ...another reason why I love this pool I can jus hook em all up to one account. Makes things alot easier and if my hash rate doesn't look right I know one of em has problems its peaked up to 2.6 and I haven't really tried to overclock much core on all is 900
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 »
  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!