Eligius: 0% Fee BTC, 105% PPS NMC, No registration, CPPSRB

[flounderella]

Question on the min payout these days: is it 0.04194304 BTC as per the home page or is it really 0.01048576 BTC as per the options page.

Tx

[1715543056]

1715543056

[1715543056]

1715543056

[1715543056]

1715543056

[1715543056]

1715543056

[1715543056]

1715543056

[1715543056]

1715543056

[OleOle]

Question on the min payout these days: is it 0.04194304 BTC as per the home page or is it really 0.01048576 BTC as per the options page.

Tx

If you're a new user it really is 0.04194304 BTC so if you're in a hurry it's far better to mine on another site to get paid much faster.

Plus, any residual fractions of a coin that you have mined on Eligius get paid out usually at the end of the month so you won't lose anything. I know loads of people who have started mining on Eligius who got really annoyed about the 0.04 BTC initial payout threshold that they abandon mining here and now happily mine elsewhere.

Worse still, they then end up ridiculing the Eligius pool and miners merely because they wanted paid promptly for their work

I get a little fed up explaining it sometimes.

 

[flounderella]

Question on the min payout these days: is it 0.04194304 BTC as per the home page or is it really 0.01048576 BTC as per the options page.

Tx

If you're a new user it really is 0.04194304 BTC so if you're in a hurry it's far better to mine on another site to get paid much faster.

Plus, any residual fractions of a coin that you have mined on Eligius get paid out usually at the end of the month so you won't lose anything. I know loads of people who have started mining on Eligius who got really annoyed about the 0.04 BTC initial payout threshold that they abandon mining here and now happily mine elsewhere.

Worse still, they then end up ridiculing the Eligius pool and miners merely because they wanted paid promptly for their work

I get a little fed up explaining it sometimes.

 

Oddly enough I'm able to change it from user options. So now it says:

Note: Your minimum payout was customized to 0.01048576 BTC under 'My Eligius'.

This doesn't correspond to what you said. Just confusing I guess. Anyways, doesn't really matter too much. I've always been paid by the pool

[mdude77]

Question on the min payout these days: is it 0.04194304 BTC as per the home page or is it really 0.01048576 BTC as per the options page.

Tx

If you're a new user it really is 0.04194304 BTC so if you're in a hurry it's far better to mine on another site to get paid much faster.

Plus, any residual fractions of a coin that you have mined on Eligius get paid out usually at the end of the month so you won't lose anything. I know loads of people who have started mining on Eligius who got really annoyed about the 0.04 BTC initial payout threshold that they abandon mining here and now happily mine elsewhere.

Worse still, they then end up ridiculing the Eligius pool and miners merely because they wanted paid promptly for their work

I get a little fed up explaining it sometimes.

 

Oddly enough I'm able to change it from user options. So now it says:

Note: Your minimum payout was customized to 0.01048576 BTC under 'My Eligius'.

This doesn't correspond to what you said. Just confusing I guess.

I think the minimum was recently decreased and the help wasn't updated to reflect it.

M

[roy7]

The 0.04194304  is just the default. You can lower it further to the minimum.

[flounderella]

The 0.04194304  is just the default. You can lower it further to the minimum.

Makes sense. Thanks

[anth0ny]

I know loads of people who have started mining on Eligius who got really annoyed about the 0.04 BTC initial payout threshold that they abandon mining here and now happily mine elsewhere.

I hear the miners over at CoinEX where there's no minimum are especially happy.

[ujka]

Out of curiosity, I calculated average luck on Eligius last 24 hours to be 323%!
I extracted that from 'blocks' stats page. Is there some graph picturing this? Or API to use for importing data?

[joeofall]

You get paid out once your mining contribution reaches the minimum amount, which is about 0.04BTC. You will be entered into the queue after reaching threshold and will get paid for all work done including work done between entering the queue and being paid.

i look at the queue, there is a list of payout, and there is a date saying 11 mth then reach payout

[mdude77]

Out of curiosity, I calculated average luck on Eligius last 24 hours to be 323%!
I extracted that from 'blocks' stats page. Is there some graph picturing this? Or API to use for importing data?

Something seems wrong with that number.

Here's the info on the API:

http://eligius.st/~gateway/pool-apis

I'm in the process of integrating the luck API in my MPoolMonitor app.

M

[ujka]

Out of curiosity, I calculated average luck on Eligius last 24 hours to be 323%!
I extracted that from 'blocks' stats page. Is there some graph picturing this? Or API to use for importing data?

Something seems wrong with that number.

Here's the info on the API:
http://eligius.st/~gateway/pool-apis

I'm in the process of integrating the luck API in my MPoolMonitor app.

M

Thanks.
I didn't count in current block, very unlucky one, and there were two very lucky blocks: 2114,00% and 1240,20%.
From 2014-mar-16 13:46:29
To    2014-mar-17 13:19:57
28 blocks found
00:50:29 average time

[redvette]

IHi,

Looks like I am loosing hash rate with low difficulty shares.
Is it possible to set the workers minimum difficulty?

thanks,

[MrTeal]

Out of curiosity, I calculated average luck on Eligius last 24 hours to be 323%!
I extracted that from 'blocks' stats page. Is there some graph picturing this? Or API to use for importing data?

Something seems wrong with that number.

Here's the info on the API:
http://eligius.st/~gateway/pool-apis

I'm in the process of integrating the luck API in my MPoolMonitor app.

M

Thanks.
I didn't count in current block, very unlucky one, and there were two very lucky blocks: 2114,00% and 1240,20%.
From 2014-mar-16 13:46:29
To    2014-mar-17 13:19:57
28 blocks found
00:50:29 average time

That 50:29 is better than average, but nowhere near 300%. Are you sure you're not just averaging the luck % numbers? You can't do that.

[mdude77]

Out of curiosity, I calculated average luck on Eligius last 24 hours to be 323%!
I extracted that from 'blocks' stats page. Is there some graph picturing this? Or API to use for importing data?

Something seems wrong with that number.

Here's the info on the API:
http://eligius.st/~gateway/pool-apis

I'm in the process of integrating the luck API in my MPoolMonitor app.

M

Thanks.
I didn't count in current block, very unlucky one, and there were two very lucky blocks: 2114,00% and 1240,20%.
From 2014-mar-16 13:46:29
To    2014-mar-17 13:19:57
28 blocks found
00:50:29 average time

That 50:29 is better than average, but nowhere near 300%. Are you sure you're not just averaging the luck % numbers? You can't do that.

Is that because each luck % is "weighted", so 200% has more weight that 101% does?

M

[baddw]

Out of curiosity, I calculated average luck on Eligius last 24 hours to be 323%!
I extracted that from 'blocks' stats page. Is there some graph picturing this? Or API to use for importing data?

Something seems wrong with that number.

Here's the info on the API:
http://eligius.st/~gateway/pool-apis

I'm in the process of integrating the luck API in my MPoolMonitor app.

M

Thanks.
I didn't count in current block, very unlucky one, and there were two very lucky blocks: 2114,00% and 1240,20%.
From 2014-mar-16 13:46:29
To    2014-mar-17 13:19:57
28 blocks found
00:50:29 average time

That 50:29 is better than average, but nowhere near 300%. Are you sure you're not just averaging the luck % numbers? You can't do that.

Is that because each luck % is "weighted", so 200% has more weight that 101% does?

M

In a way, yes, it's weighted, but just due to the way that numbers work when you take the average of a percentage like this, and the way the luck percentage is calculated.  Take a look at an example.  

Let's say that the average block find time should be 1 hour, just to make the numbers easier.

BLOCK 1: 1.0 hour (100% luck)
BLOCK 2: 0.5 hour (200% luck)
BLOCK 3: 1.5 hour (66% luck)

Now, if you add 100% + 200% + 66%, you get 366%.  Divide by 3 blocks and you get 122%.  But if you look at the whole series of blocks, there were 3 blocks found in 3 hours, which is 100% luck.

If you want to find luck for a large number of blocks, it's really easy.  You don't have to look at the timestamps or luck for each block in between; just the timestamps for the first block and the last block, and the number of blocks in between.

Of course, this assumes that the expected 100% luck remains constant; i.e., that the network hashrate and the pool hashrate both remain constant (relative to each other; if they both increase by 10%, the expected luck should remain the same).  Which of course, is not the case, but for short periods (like 24 hours or less) it is probably a safe approximation.

[BuildTheFuture]

So I looked at my NMC deposit address, and the last deposit I got from Eligius was on 2014-03-08. Is this the same as everyone else?

[mdude77]

Is that because each luck % is "weighted", so 200% has more weight that 101% does?

M

In a way, yes, it's weighted, but just due to the way that numbers work when you take the average of a percentage like this, and the way the luck percentage is calculated.  Take a look at an example.  

Let's say that the average block find time should be 1 hour, just to make the numbers easier.

BLOCK 1: 1.0 hour (100% luck)
BLOCK 2: 0.5 hour (200% luck)
BLOCK 3: 1.5 hour (66% luck)

Now, if you add 100% + 200% + 66%, you get 366%.  Divide by 3 blocks and you get 122%.  But if you look at the whole series of blocks, there were 3 blocks found in 3 hours, which is 100% luck.

If you want to find luck for a large number of blocks, it's really easy.  You don't have to look at the timestamps or luck for each block in between; just the timestamps for the first block and the last block, and the number of blocks in between.

Of course, this assumes that the expected 100% luck remains constant; i.e., that the network hashrate and the pool hashrate both remain constant (relative to each other; if they both increase by 10%, the expected luck should remain the same).  Which of course, is not the case, but for short periods (like 24 hours or less) it is probably a safe approximation.

I follow example #1, but I don't follow the part about "just the timestamps for the first block and the last block, and the number of blocks in between".  Can you give an example for that?

M

[roy7]

It would be better to remove the Luck % column completely and show a CDF % column instead.

[mdude77]

Is that because each luck % is "weighted", so 200% has more weight that 101% does?

M

In a way, yes, it's weighted, but just due to the way that numbers work when you take the average of a percentage like this, and the way the luck percentage is calculated.  Take a look at an example.  

Let's say that the average block find time should be 1 hour, just to make the numbers easier.

BLOCK 1: 1.0 hour (100% luck)
BLOCK 2: 0.5 hour (200% luck)
BLOCK 3: 1.5 hour (66% luck)

Now, if you add 100% + 200% + 66%, you get 366%.  Divide by 3 blocks and you get 122%.  But if you look at the whole series of blocks, there were 3 blocks found in 3 hours, which is 100% luck.

If you want to find luck for a large number of blocks, it's really easy.  You don't have to look at the timestamps or luck for each block in between; just the timestamps for the first block and the last block, and the number of blocks in between.

Of course, this assumes that the expected 100% luck remains constant; i.e., that the network hashrate and the pool hashrate both remain constant (relative to each other; if they both increase by 10%, the expected luck should remain the same).  Which of course, is not the case, but for short periods (like 24 hours or less) it is probably a safe approximation.

I follow example #1, but I don't follow the part about "just the timestamps for the first block and the last block, and the number of blocks in between".  Can you give an example for that?

M

I think I get it.  With your example above, 3 blocks, 3 hours apart, therefore 1 block an hour (which is the target), so 100%.

M

[baddw]

Is that because each luck % is "weighted", so 200% has more weight that 101% does?

M

In a way, yes, it's weighted, but just due to the way that numbers work when you take the average of a percentage like this, and the way the luck percentage is calculated.  Take a look at an example.  

Let's say that the average block find time should be 1 hour, just to make the numbers easier.

BLOCK 1: 1.0 hour (100% luck)
BLOCK 2: 0.5 hour (200% luck)
BLOCK 3: 1.5 hour (66% luck)

Now, if you add 100% + 200% + 66%, you get 366%.  Divide by 3 blocks and you get 122%.  But if you look at the whole series of blocks, there were 3 blocks found in 3 hours, which is 100% luck.

If you want to find luck for a large number of blocks, it's really easy.  You don't have to look at the timestamps or luck for each block in between; just the timestamps for the first block and the last block, and the number of blocks in between.

Of course, this assumes that the expected 100% luck remains constant; i.e., that the network hashrate and the pool hashrate both remain constant (relative to each other; if they both increase by 10%, the expected luck should remain the same).  Which of course, is not the case, but for short periods (like 24 hours or less) it is probably a safe approximation.

I follow example #1, but I don't follow the part about "just the timestamps for the first block and the last block, and the number of blocks in between".  Can you give an example for that?

M

I think I get it.  With your example above, 3 blocks, 3 hours apart, therefore 1 block an hour (which is the target), so 100%.

M

Exactly. 

And the target of 1 hour comes from something like "Bitcoin blocks are mined 6 per hour on average; our hashrate is 1/6 of the total network hashrate; therefore we expect 1 block every hour".  Of course blocks are mined somewhat more than 6 per hour, depending on how long since the last difficulty adjustment, and how much network hashrate has been added in the interim; and the overall network hashrate and pool hashrate will both vary as well.  So the 1 hour is a moving target, constantly changing.  But again, it should stay "fairly" constant over a short time period.

If I could boil it down, I would probably choose to show something like an EMA(24h) for Luck at the top of the main Eligius site, instead of a current block luck %.