[NEW POOL & MINER] - BitcoinPool.com - Jump In! ~NO FEES~ :)

[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.

I demanded evidence, not for someone to dick around on my pool doing the exact thing that I'm trying to prevent.
He has his own pool, and there are other pools out there that he can gather evidence from.

Likewise, I would give two shits if it was someone else offering, but I don't like slush and I think he's a pretentious asshole.
Thats my personal opinion, and I reserve the right to be apprehensive toward him whenever I choose.
For that matter, I reserve the right to be apprehensive toward anyone attempting to join my pool with the intention of not helping to solve blocks for the entire pool.

[1714255804]

1714255804

[1714255804]

1714255804

[1714255804]

1714255804

[slush]

For that matter, I reserve the right to be apprehensive toward anyone attempting to join my pool with the intention of not helping to solve blocks for the entire pool.

Please be clear. Do you reject my 3ghash rig from your pool? How can I mine for you and don't help to solve blocks? I also don't understand how it is different if the hopper will be somebody else than me.

[goatpig]

For that matter, I reserve the right to be apprehensive toward anyone attempting to join my pool with the intention of not helping to solve blocks for the entire pool.

Don't you think he's helping by offering to expose a weakness in your system, that if exploited, could slow the block solving? You're supposed to thank someone that proves you wrong, not unleash on him.

[Ian Maxwell]

geebus, I like your pool a lot but you have an attitude problem. I have repeatedly considered leaving it, not because of the payouts (which are of course the best available), but because I don't like being associated with it.

Stop letting technical discussions about potential cheating methods turn into protracted "Whose pool is better" wars, because it's really off-putting. If you know your pool is safe, let your results speak for themselves.

(Though you should really make sure you actually know that, first. If I knew my own server were safe from an attack, I would invite you to try it out, not tell you to leave me alone. Since you don't trust the math and you don't want to do the experiment, what method are you using to decide whether you are vulnerable?)

[geebus]

For that matter, I reserve the right to be apprehensive toward anyone attempting to join my pool with the intention of not helping to solve blocks for the entire pool.

Don't you think he's helping by offering to expose a weakness in your system, that if exploited, could slow the block solving? You're supposed to thank someone that proves you wrong, not unleash on him.

Lets look at the two possible ways this works out...

1) He's right, and he's stolen money from every hard working participant in this pool without ever having the intention of leaving his "3 ghash/s" in the pool to solve blocks. Thus, only negatively effecting our userbase.

2) He's wrong, and stolen money from every hard working participant in this pool without ever having the intention of leaving his "3 ghash/s" in the pool to solve blocks. Thus, only negatively effecting our userbase.

So no, I'm not going to thank him.

geebus, I like your pool a lot but you have an attitude problem. I have repeatedly considered leaving it, not because of the payouts (which are of course the best available), but because I don't like being associated with it.

Stop letting technical discussions about potential cheating methods turn into protracted "Whose pool is better" wars, because it's really off-putting. If you know your pool is safe, let your results speak for themselves.

(Though you should really make sure you actually know that, first. If I knew my own server were safe from an attack, I would invite you to try it out, not tell you to leave me alone. Since you don't trust the math and you don't want to do the experiment, what method are you using to decide whether you are vulnerable?)

My attitude isn't directed toward you. It's directed toward the other pool operators and their chronies who sit in IRC all day long having FairUser and I be the butt of their jokes. Then they come here and tell us we're wrong, not doing things right, or make offers like the one above that only negatively effect the users in this pool.

Everything we have done, we have done without help, doing our own research, looking at our own data, and finding our own conclusive answers.

Every change we have made to this pool has been for the sake of someone requesting a feature, and us working on it immediately, while still working full time jobs, to make sure our users were happy.

So you don't like my attitude? Fine, leave.

[[Tycho]]

2) He's wrong, and stolen money from every hard working participant in this pool without ever having the intention of leaving his "3 ghash/s" in the pool to solve blocks. Thus, only negatively effecting our userbase.

Sorry, i don't get it. How he can "stole" their money if he is wrong and there is no vulnerability ?

[geebus]

2) He's wrong, and stolen money from every hard working participant in this pool without ever having the intention of leaving his "3 ghash/s" in the pool to solve blocks. Thus, only negatively effecting our userbase.

Sorry, i don't get it. How he can "stole" their money if he is wrong and there is no vulnerability ?

Bringing in a single user account with 1/5 the speed of our pool, and leaving rounds before their end (i.e. never staying to solve a block himself) with the sole intention of trying to take BTC without ever positively contributing toward the pool.

Perhaps it's not "stealing" per se, but it sure shit isn't helping to get BTC for everyone else.

[Ian Maxwell]

If slush is wrong, all that connecting will do is increase the hash rate and decrease the average time to payout, leaving the expected value of a share unchanged while reducing the variance. In other words, exactly what would happen if anyone else did the same thing.

If you are saying that a person can deliberately unbalance and harm your pool with only 3 GHash/s, how on earth is that not a vulnerability?

Re. our earlier exchange: if I had already decided to leave because of your attitude, I would have done so, not written here about it. And if I decide to do so, I'll do it, not demand that you offer me a better deal. My purpose was to inform you that your attitude is toxic and is not going to attract users to your pool.

[[Tycho]]

2) He's wrong, and stolen money from every hard working participant in this pool without ever having the intention of leaving his "3 ghash/s" in the pool to solve blocks. Thus, only negatively effecting our userbase.

Sorry, i don't get it. How he can "stole" their money if he is wrong and there is no vulnerability ?

Bringing in a single user account with 1/5 the speed of our pool, and leaving rounds before their end (i.e. never staying to solve a block himself)

No one can know when the round will end, so if he will leave at 43% of CFD, he will still be mining at the time when many blocks are found because many blocks are found in less than half of difficulty.

Perhaps it's not "stealing" per se, but it sure shit isn't helping to get BTC for everyone else.

If he will be 20% of your pool speed then even when leaving, he will almost honestly add 8.6% to your pool's solving power.

[geebus]

Fine. We'll put the whole thing to rest.

Slush can try to exploit the pool all he wants, as long as he uses our miner to do it.

[bullox]

Can everyone kindly shut the hell up?   Everyone involved in the past 4-5 pages of posts is publicly making a goddamn fool of themselves.

[CryptikEnigma]

We has a server outage again tonight, but for a totally different reason.  We were attacked with a SYN flood.  The offending IPs has been blocked.  Yes, I said IP's.  This time is was a DDoS.  Looks like someone doesn't like us much.   I know it's April 1st and all, but this is not funny.

Please restart your miners.

Wow, someone was butthurt enough to DDoS bitcoinpool 

[Ian Maxwell]

Can everyone kindly shut the hell up?   Everyone involved in the past 4-5 pages of posts is publicly making a goddamn fool of themselves.

I'm pretty sure you just posted on the last page, buddy.

[FRanz33]

Fine. We'll put the whole thing to rest.

Slush can try to exploit the pool all he wants, as long as he uses our miner to do it.

register as slush so we know how to find u. And also tell us the other pool ur apart of and when u hop so we can watch this. If u can prove u make more bitcoins than me outside of the extra hash power and negate the luck of the other pool then we have an exploit. This should be fun. Hope none of my miners crash lol

[geebus]

Fine. We'll put the whole thing to rest.

Slush can try to exploit the pool all he wants, as long as he uses our miner to do it.

register as slush so we know how to find u. And also tell us the other pool ur apart of and when u hop so we can watch this. If u can prove u make more bitcoins than me outside of the extra hash power and negate the luck of the luck of the other pool then we have an exploit. This should be fun. Hope none of my miners crash lol

He needs to post his hash rate, estimated daily earnings, estimated time to solve a block solo, and repeat the process enough times to prove it is consistent as opposed to coincidental. Likewise, repost new data each time the difficulty changes.

If he is consistently making a larger than estimated payout, each time, every time, then it's a valid claim. Otherwise, it's purely coincidental.

[FairUser]

So for the sake of reposting something that is IMPORTANT for you to read, here it is again.

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.

[h00ters]

I dont understand why xenon481 and slush continue to troll this thread. FUCK OFF! GOTO YOUR OWN GAWD DAMIT THREAD.

This pool was started so WE DONT HAVE TO DEAL WITH FUCK FACES LIKE YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111

That is all.

[Anonymous]

[thursday0451]

Thanks for the response Franz, I was trying to do the math and figure out how you were pulling two gigs, multiple rigs makes a lot more sense (forgot it was all tied into one user in the pool here).

I do have to say I've read through the entire thread (took about an hour and a half) and I generally come out on the side of geebus and fairuser. I haven't read through whatever thread the initial disagreement arose in, but so far I am impressed with geebs and fair. They didn't like how things were going in slush's pool, so they manned up and made their own pool. I'm sure they've been busy as shit, and it can't help to have a bunch of people antagonizing them constantly. Seriously, as of Xenon's last posted, I'm tempted to say he's just trolling.

Also it's totally fair to want to see something demonstrated in practice before you believe it. Theoretical outcomes are often way different than real world scenarios in every science I've ever worked with (computers or economics).

Lastly, if possible, simmer down, everybody go smoke a joint or medidate or something.

[FairUser]

Due to the fact that this thread has now been completely taken off topic, our server has been attacked multiple times, and someone has tried to hack into our personal e-mail accounts, I'm locking the thread.

If user's of our pool would like to contact us, please send either Geebus or myself a private message.

We didn't come here to stir up shit.  We came here to explain how miner's were not mining efficiently, and we started a pool to show why this is important.  Due to amount of flaming and mis-information that has occurred here, many people are simply confused and don't understand why this is important.  Efficiency is important in regards to many things in our lives, from cars to computers, efficiency matters.  Some people understand this, some don't.  Those who don't have for some reason take personal offense to our claims and started flaming our thread.

Expect a new forum on our site sometime in the next week. Things will be much more regulated on our forums.

To all the loyal users, Geebus and I would like to apologize that you've had to read through all this shit from the trolls who think efficiency doesn't matter. 
This stops now.  Thread is locked.