[ANN][AUTO-SWITCH] Profit-switch auto-exchange pool: CleverMining.com

[Terk]

Terk, why are some miners not being reported on the All Active Users page??  Such as this one:

http://www.clevermining.com/users/1BT9cPLGRep7nXnvo9JoXn6H7sSd5Em2WE

They were asking for privacy so their username was hidden from user lists. This is the only modification that was made for them.

And in this clevermining payout transactions, a payment of 25.01196375 BTC (approx $14,000.00 USD) to an address that does not even appear under individual miner stats:

It is a 37.68105879 BTC transaction occurring March 27, 2014 1:32am, but the web site reports it as only 12.66769504 BTC.

https://blockchain.info/tx/cc8030c2a38cbb0c2d038c4197eedf993cc0f698f7f543b41beeaceaed9407cc

http://www.clevermining.com/users/1HAQpP7D1eTbMhu5WvkQxZmRWNHF2AEYMt

This is a change address, so this is the money returned to the pool's wallet. From the numbers which you quoted:
37.68105879 BTC transaction minus 12.66769504 BTC payout = 25.01336375 BTC change.

And it's exactly these 25.01196375 BTC which you found.

This is how Bitcoin works. You can only spend whole outputs of previous transactions, you cannot spend some part of it. If you want to spend less, your wallet just uses a change address where change from the transaction is returned to your wallet.

Most likely you will see this 1HAQpP7D1eTbMhu5WvkQxZmRWNHF2AEYMt address sending payouts to users tomorrow or a day after.


I can show you how it was in the past:

March 26, 2014 1:32am payout:
https://blockchain.info/tx/7e2edeaf3457f170467fd5ba2b10b8527e83b98d812be20f779677f2395945dc
22.11547462 BTC sent to users as reported by CleverMining website
27.01426284 BTC moved as reported by blockchain.info
This includes 4.89878822 BTC sent to 17nAyN7CUDhTT5LZT5C6VKhZUvi3LxN935
which is not an user at CM: http://clevermining.com/users/17nAyN7CUDhTT5LZT5C6VKhZUvi3LxN935
because it's a change from this transaction: 27.01426284 - 22.11547462 = 4.89878822

One day later, March 27 payout:
https://blockchain.info/tx/88643eca70ebc081549be4eed55061d88ad3abc739511a52308b97768ad97435?show_adv=true
Blockchain.info has also an “advanced mode” which is enabled in the above link.
Please check what addresses this payment was sent from. In advanced mode you also see amounts coming from each addresses.



As you can see, the mysterious non-user 17nAyN7CUDhTT5LZT5C6VKhZUvi3LxN935 who got Bitcoins from March 26 payout contributed to sending March 27 payout and it sent exactly 4.89878822 BTC.

This is because 17nAyN7CUDhTT5LZT5C6VKhZUvi3LxN935 is one of CleverMining's wallet addresses and it received a change from one of previous transactions. This change was sitting in our wallet all the time and was used to send next day's payout.

This is Bitcoin change addresses work.

You can think of Bitcoin inputs/outputs as physical bills, with the only difference being that you can cut Bitcoin “bills” into pieces and make them infinitely divisible. But when you want to spend only some part of a bill, you need to cut it and do something with the part which you are not sending. If you received 1 BTC from someone and you want to send 0.8 BTC somewhere, you need to cut that 1 BTC bill into 0.8 BTC bill and 0.2 BTC bill. You send 0.8 BTC bill somewhere and put the 0.2 BTC bill back in your pocket. Blockchain shows this as 1 BTC sent to two addresses getting 0.8 BTC and 0.2 BTC respectively. The 0.2 BTC  is a change from this transaction and it's back in your wallet.

And other transaction amounts reported on the web page to not match amounts reported within the block chain transactions themselves:

Transaction f9fda2157370ea2ffc8f43c257d3e23c9a069a149af3952b1a55dd1519489ccb was listed on the web site as 34.00931928 BTC, but actually transferred out 35.11097067 BTC from the pool.  https://blockchain.info/tx/f9fda2157370ea2ffc8f43c257d3e23c9a069a149af3952b1a55dd1519489ccb

Transaction 88643eca70ebc081549be4eed55061d88ad3abc739511a52308b97768ad97435 was listed on the web site as 35.87959086 BTC, but actually transferred out 36.49590222 BTC from the pool. https://blockchain.info/tx/88643eca70ebc081549be4eed55061d88ad3abc739511a52308b97768ad97435

And more...

Blockchain.info doesn't know which addresses are change addresses. It only sees X Bitcoins moved. Most transactions actually have Y Bitcoins sent somewhere + Z Bitcoins returned to the wallet as change. Y + Z = X. Blochchain.info shows you X Bitcoins moved as it cannot know which of the output addresses belong to the same wallet as input addresses.

Why are there so many discrepancies in these transactions?  

Why does the front end accounting not match up with the back end accounting?  

Should we be concerned about the accounting methods being used?  

How can we know if we are properly being credited for what we are due?

What other things are being concealed from us miners?  

What else do we have to worry about?

There are no discrepancies and accounting matches perfectly what's shown on the public Blockchain.

Your questions are because you apparently don't understand how Bitcoin works. That's fine, because most of Bitcoin users don't understand.

I believe other users can point you (and others) to some ELI5 explanation on how Bitcoin change works. I couldn't find any link quickly. My explanation using the bills analogy was above, but I bet there are better ones somewhere.

[1714676695]

1714676695

[1714676695]

1714676695

[r00tdude]

Terk, why are some miners not being reported on the All Active Users page??  Such as this one:

http://www.clevermining.com/users/1BT9cPLGRep7nXnvo9JoXn6H7sSd5Em2WE

They were asking for privacy so their username was hidden from user lists. This is the only modification that was made for them.

And in this clevermining payout transactions, a payment of 25.01196375 BTC (approx $14,000.00 USD) to an address that does not even appear under individual miner stats:

It is a 37.68105879 BTC transaction occurring March 27, 2014 1:32am, but the web site reports it as only 12.66769504 BTC.

https://blockchain.info/tx/cc8030c2a38cbb0c2d038c4197eedf993cc0f698f7f543b41beeaceaed9407cc

http://www.clevermining.com/users/1HAQpP7D1eTbMhu5WvkQxZmRWNHF2AEYMt

This is a change address, so this is the money returned to the pool's wallet. From the numbers which you quoted:
37.68105879 BTC transaction minus 12.66769504 BTC payout = 25.01336375 BTC change.

And it's exactly these 25.01196375 BTC which you found.

This is how Bitcoin works. You can only spend whole outputs of previous transactions, you cannot spend some part of it. If you want to spend less, your wallet just uses a change address where change from the transaction is returned to your wallet.

Most likely you will see this 1HAQpP7D1eTbMhu5WvkQxZmRWNHF2AEYMt address sending payouts to users tomorrow or a day after.


I can show you how it was in the past:

March 26, 2014 1:32am payout:
https://blockchain.info/tx/7e2edeaf3457f170467fd5ba2b10b8527e83b98d812be20f779677f2395945dc
22.11547462 BTC sent to users as reported by CleverMining website
27.01426284 BTC moved as reported by blockchain.info
This includes 4.89878822 BTC sent to 17nAyN7CUDhTT5LZT5C6VKhZUvi3LxN935
which is not an user at CM: http://clevermining.com/users/17nAyN7CUDhTT5LZT5C6VKhZUvi3LxN935
because it's a change from this transaction: 27.01426284 - 22.11547462 = 4.89878822

One day later, March 27 payout:
https://blockchain.info/tx/88643eca70ebc081549be4eed55061d88ad3abc739511a52308b97768ad97435?show_adv=true
Blockchain.info has also an “advanced mode” which is enabled in the above link.
Please check what addresses this payment was sent from. In advanced mode you also see amounts coming from each addresses.



As you can see, the mysterious non-user 17nAyN7CUDhTT5LZT5C6VKhZUvi3LxN935 who got Bitcoins from March 26 payout contributed to sending March 27 payout and it sent exactly 4.89878822 BTC.

This is because 17nAyN7CUDhTT5LZT5C6VKhZUvi3LxN935 is one of CleverMining's wallet addresses and it received a change from one of previous transactions. This change was sitting in our wallet all the time and was used to send next day's payout.

This is Bitcoin change addresses work.

You can think of Bitcoin inputs/outputs as physical bills, with the only difference being that you can cut Bitcoin “bills” into pieces and make them infinitely divisible. But when you want to spend only some part of a bill, you need to cut it and do something with the part which you are not sending. If you received 1 BTC from someone and you want to send 0.8 BTC somewhere, you need to cut that 1 BTC bill into 0.8 BTC bill and 0.2 BTC bill. You send 0.8 BTC bill somewhere and put the 0.2 BTC bill back in your pocket. Blockchain shows this as 1 BTC sent to two addresses getting 0.8 BTC and 0.2 BTC respectively. The 0.2 BTC  is a change from this transaction and it's back in your wallet.

And other transaction amounts reported on the web page to not match amounts reported within the block chain transactions themselves:

Transaction f9fda2157370ea2ffc8f43c257d3e23c9a069a149af3952b1a55dd1519489ccb was listed on the web site as 34.00931928 BTC, but actually transferred out 35.11097067 BTC from the pool.  https://blockchain.info/tx/f9fda2157370ea2ffc8f43c257d3e23c9a069a149af3952b1a55dd1519489ccb

Transaction 88643eca70ebc081549be4eed55061d88ad3abc739511a52308b97768ad97435 was listed on the web site as 35.87959086 BTC, but actually transferred out 36.49590222 BTC from the pool. https://blockchain.info/tx/88643eca70ebc081549be4eed55061d88ad3abc739511a52308b97768ad97435

And more...

Blockchain.info doesn't know which addresses are change addresses. It only sees X Bitcoins moved. Most transactions actually have Y Bitcoins sent somewhere + Z Bitcoins returned to the wallet as change. Y + Z = X. Blochchain.info shows you X Bitcoins moved as it cannot know which of the output addresses belong to the same wallet as input addresses.

Why are there so many discrepancies in these transactions?  

Why does the front end accounting not match up with the back end accounting?  

Should we be concerned about the accounting methods being used?  

How can we know if we are properly being credited for what we are due?

What other things are being concealed from us miners?  

What else do we have to worry about?

There are no discrepancies and accounting matches perfectly what's shown on the public Blockchain.

Your questions are because you apparently don't understand how Bitcoin works. That's fine, because most of Bitcoin users don't understand.

I believe other users can point you (and others) to some ELI5 explanation on how Bitcoin change works. I couldn't find any link quickly. My explanation using the bills analogy was above, but I bet there are better ones somewhere.

Nice work explaining this Terk... I don't think I've read a more clear explanation anywhere else...

[gtraah]

Why does is Say Cloudfare has blocked access to the android mining stats app, twitter him and ask for json access or ask him to remove DDOS protection


The above message is what masically says when I try to accesss the clevermining stats app , it used to work 5 days ago now last few days it doesnt work... ANyone know why?

I dont have twitter to message him

[MinorError]

Looking at the stats from Poolpicker

http://poolpicker.eu/

It appears profitability for Clever and their colleagues have gone down by half from the end of Feb to the end of March. Can we expect the same decrease by the end of April from where we're at now?

So around the end of February profits were pretty steady at .01/Mhash, now they're steady at around .005/Mhash....so by the end of April are we looking at .0025?

Not picking on Terk here, all the pools have had the same decrease, but just curios.

[mvma]

http://www.clevermining.com/users/1BT9cPLGRep7nXnvo9JoXn6H7sSd5Em2WE


10,130.4 MH/s 24-hour Average 

 

What kind of hardware is being used?

-  10 130 MH / s are more than 10,000 R9 290x GPUs, consuming over 320W x 10000 = 32 000 KW / day!

How is it possible exist a miner so big!?

[lagster]

http://www.clevermining.com/users/1BT9cPLGRep7nXnvo9JoXn6H7sSd5Em2WE


10,130.4 MH/s 24-hour Average 

 

What kind of hardware is being used?

-  10 130 MH / s are more than 10,000 R9 290x GPUs, consuming over 320W x 10000 = 32 000 KW / day!

How is it possible exist a miner so big!?

one clever janitor of large hadron collider. check sfire @bitcointalk.org

[toxic0n]

Looking at the stats from Poolpicker

http://poolpicker.eu/

It appears profitability for Clever and their colleagues have gone down by half from the end of Feb to the end of March. Can we expect the same decrease by the end of April from where we're at now?

So around the end of February profits were pretty steady at .01/Mhash, now they're steady at around .005/Mhash....so by the end of April are we looking at .0025?

Not picking on Terk here, all the pools have had the same decrease, but just curios.

I'm not sure. By some rough math, around 0.003 BTC/Mhash/day is when a lot of people will stop breaking even on electricity costs when running GPUs and electricity higher than 0.15c/kWH. I think we will see a lot of hash power drop around the barrier which should stabilize it for a bit. I'm just guessing though.

[riazg]

I stopped mining at this address since the 14th of March. The account still has un-exchanged that is holding up my payout.

http://www.clevermining.com/users/1A5WnmPbYZkEBzDhaiia6Z8Ze9FFNtm1hT

Please investigate.

Thanks!

Are you seriously asking the pool operator to investigate just over USD$1 of bitcoin that is held up in your account?  Simply wait until the weekend when the system automatically pays out amounts under 0.01 BTC and let him tend to more important matters.  If it does not arrive over the weekend, then contact Terk.

The unexchanged in your account is worth less that USD$0.02 -- between one and two cents!

Its not holding out his payout either, he just didnt even bother reading main page nor faq nor anything.

Guys, why so harsh! 2 points:

1. Stopped using that account since March 14th... are coins really taking that long to exchange?
2. It's almost 2 weeks now, 1 weekend has already passed.

I just thought I'd bring it up in case others are having issues with coins being stuck in unexchanged for 2 weeks. I didn't say it was a pressing matter I am sure Turk has other things that are more pressing.

Peace!

[riazg]

I stopped mining at this address since the 14th of March. The account still has un-exchanged that is holding up my payout.

http://www.clevermining.com/users/1A5WnmPbYZkEBzDhaiia6Z8Ze9FFNtm1hT

Please investigate.

Thanks!

Are you seriously asking the pool operator to investigate just over USD$1 of bitcoin that is held up in your account?  Simply wait until the weekend when the system automatically pays out amounts under 0.01 BTC and let him tend to more important matters.  If it does not arrive over the weekend, then contact Terk.

The unexchanged in your account is worth less that USD$0.02 -- between one and two cents!

Its not holding out his payout either, he just didnt even bother reading main page nor faq nor anything.

Looks like you guys answer to somebody and have no clue what he was asking about.
The point of the question was that when he STOPED mining for over a week there were still coins "Unexchanged".
sitting there for way too long beyond normal, reasonable time, (actually they are still sitting there).

The amount doesn't matter, every cent should be accounted for and released to the owner/miner.

I don't believe that it would take a week or two to auto-exchange whatever most profitable coins were mined at the time as the auto-exchange system takes care of it at whatever the price is at the moment.

When you stop mining and the balance reaches over 0.001 BTC, eventually it should be paid out and account balance would be ZEROED.

I have tested that claim and noticed the same outcome. Once you stop mining, the account stops exchanging and there is always something left over. - Most likely a system bug, giving the benefit of a doubt to SysOps honesty and integrity.

Exactly! you hit the nail on the head! Thanks!

[MinorError]

Looking at the stats from Poolpicker

http://poolpicker.eu/

It appears profitability for Clever and their colleagues have gone down by half from the end of Feb to the end of March. Can we expect the same decrease by the end of April from where we're at now?

So around the end of February profits were pretty steady at .01/Mhash, now they're steady at around .005/Mhash....so by the end of April are we looking at .0025?

Not picking on Terk here, all the pools have had the same decrease, but just curios.

I'm not sure. By some rough math, around 0.003 BTC/Mhash/day is when a lot of people will stop breaking even on electricity costs when running GPUs and electricity higher than 0.15c/kWH. I think we will see a lot of hash power drop around the barrier which should stabilize it for a bit. I'm just guessing though.

Guessing is all we can really do at this point...yea I figured anything under .003 isn't worth it...and that's assuming that bitcoin prices stay above USD 550 ish.....which isn't looking to good. It's dropped down below $520 at some points today.

But yea, I totally would like to hear what Terk or some people more knowledgeable than myself think about the sustainability of profits in the pool.

[12gaFacelift]

24 later and still "Unexchanged" have not moved, is that the way you make your money on the back of the people mining there? anyway fuck you there is better place where they pay the full "balance"

[ghur]

Looking at the stats from Poolpicker

http://poolpicker.eu/

It appears profitability for Clever and their colleagues have gone down by half from the end of Feb to the end of March. Can we expect the same decrease by the end of April from where we're at now?

So around the end of February profits were pretty steady at .01/Mhash, now they're steady at around .005/Mhash....so by the end of April are we looking at .0025?

Not picking on Terk here, all the pools have had the same decrease, but just curios.

I'm not sure. By some rough math, around 0.003 BTC/Mhash/day is when a lot of people will stop breaking even on electricity costs when running GPUs and electricity higher than 0.15c/kWH. I think we will see a lot of hash power drop around the barrier which should stabilize it for a bit. I'm just guessing though.

I don't expect the hashrate to drop. While GPU miners might drop out, there's a very large amount of gridseed units hitting the market.
These have a much lower power requirement and will happily keep on crunching through the lower profitability.

Even without ROI, these units will be kept running by someone as long as they're more profitable than the power they consume.

[tyj8tim]

Massive drop is pool speed!! Where's everyone going?

[Xenocyde]

That 10 gh whale just lost 6 gh and prolly some little whales lost gh.

[toxic0n]

Looking at the stats from Poolpicker

http://poolpicker.eu/

It appears profitability for Clever and their colleagues have gone down by half from the end of Feb to the end of March. Can we expect the same decrease by the end of April from where we're at now?

So around the end of February profits were pretty steady at .01/Mhash, now they're steady at around .005/Mhash....so by the end of April are we looking at .0025?

Not picking on Terk here, all the pools have had the same decrease, but just curios.

I'm not sure. By some rough math, around 0.003 BTC/Mhash/day is when a lot of people will stop breaking even on electricity costs when running GPUs and electricity higher than 0.15c/kWH. I think we will see a lot of hash power drop around the barrier which should stabilize it for a bit. I'm just guessing though.

I don't expect the hashrate to drop. While GPU miners might drop out, there's a very large amount of gridseed units hitting the market.
These have a much lower power requirement and will happily keep on crunching through the lower profitability.

Even without ROI, these units will be kept running by someone as long as they're more profitable than the power they consume.

That is true, for me the Gridseeds will remain profitable all the way until 0.0001 BTC/MHs/day. Maybe that will be the new lower limit. I still think there is a large amount of GPU miners, especially in Europe that will stop mining very soon and the Gridseeds coming in won't replace all that hash rate quickly.

[mmichaels1970]

I've noticed a huge increase in duplicate/rejected shares over the last couple of hours.  I was mining happily before that so I don't think it's a miner setup issue.  Anybody else seeing high rejects?  I'm getting 60+%

[MinorError]

Looking at the stats from Poolpicker

http://poolpicker.eu/

It appears profitability for Clever and their colleagues have gone down by half from the end of Feb to the end of March. Can we expect the same decrease by the end of April from where we're at now?

So around the end of February profits were pretty steady at .01/Mhash, now they're steady at around .005/Mhash....so by the end of April are we looking at .0025?

Not picking on Terk here, all the pools have had the same decrease, but just curios.

I'm not sure. By some rough math, around 0.003 BTC/Mhash/day is when a lot of people will stop breaking even on electricity costs when running GPUs and electricity higher than 0.15c/kWH. I think we will see a lot of hash power drop around the barrier which should stabilize it for a bit. I'm just guessing though.

I don't expect the hashrate to drop. While GPU miners might drop out, there's a very large amount of gridseed units hitting the market.
These have a much lower power requirement and will happily keep on crunching through the lower profitability.

Even without ROI, these units will be kept running by someone as long as they're more profitable than the power they consume.

That is true, for me the Gridseeds will remain profitable all the way until 0.0001 BTC/MHs/day. Maybe that will be the new lower limit. I still think there is a large amount of GPU miners, especially in Europe that will stop mining very soon and the Gridseeds coming in won't replace all that hash rate quickly.

Just out of curiosity...are you guys still mining GPU? I literally just put together my first righ a month or so ago, so I was really late to the party. The catch is, I have free electricity....so I was contemplating throwing another GPU in and getting about 500khash extra for around $400, but was wondering if that is worth the investment...I mean free electric is great, but not if the KnC Titan or whatever the hell it is comes out drives the difficulty so high that any GPU is screwed.

[Terk]

I stopped mining at this address since the 14th of March. The account still has un-exchanged that is holding up my payout.

http://www.clevermining.com/users/1A5WnmPbYZkEBzDhaiia6Z8Ze9FFNtm1hT

Please investigate.

Thanks!

Are you seriously asking the pool operator to investigate just over USD$1 of bitcoin that is held up in your account?  Simply wait until the weekend when the system automatically pays out amounts under 0.01 BTC and let him tend to more important matters.  If it does not arrive over the weekend, then contact Terk.

The unexchanged in your account is worth less that USD$0.02 -- between one and two cents!

Its not holding out his payout either, he just didnt even bother reading main page nor faq nor anything.

Guys, why so harsh! 2 points:

1. Stopped using that account since March 14th... are coins really taking that long to exchange?
2. It's almost 2 weeks now, 1 weekend has already passed.

I just thought I'd bring it up in case others are having issues with coins being stuck in unexchanged for 2 weeks. I didn't say it was a pressing matter I am sure Turk has other things that are more pressing.

Peace!

Coins usually are exchanged automatically within hours or couple days (depending on the coin). We have some unexchanged balances from past days though as can be seen here: http://www.clevermining.com/profits/30-days

This is something requiring my manual investigation but I didn't have time for that having my hands full with other more urgent issues with the pool. These are really near-dust amounts so I didn't give much priority to it.

All of these balances are for some small/niche coins which we are no longer mining. I will be checking this manually when I find time.
If the coins are there (because they can be remains of some nasty/long forks which these smaller coins used to have and some of these balances might be actually orphaned), they will be exchanged and credited to users as always, even if it's only $0.02, but when it's only $0.02 then I don't give too much priority to checking it and this is why it is waiting so long to be resolved.

[ghur]

Just out of curiosity...are you guys still mining GPU? I literally just put together my first righ a month or so ago, so I was really late to the party. The catch is, I have free electricity....so I was contemplating throwing another GPU in and getting about 500khash extra for around $400, but was wondering if that is worth the investment...I mean free electric is great, but not if the KnC Titan or whatever the hell it is comes out drives the difficulty so high that any GPU is screwed.

First of all, 500 khash for $400 is a terrible rate, you're buying the wrong GPU in that case.
The KnC is advertised to be done Q2 or Q3, so expect Q3, which will be quite a while.

But basically, don't listen to advice about this from a stranger on the forums who probably has financial gain in giving bad advice.
Instead just run the numbers. Look at current profits per mhash and project how long it takes to get ROI.
Then run the numbers again with a worst case scenario by projecting the downwards profit trend from the past few weeks into the next few months.

Personally, even at free electricity, the ROI is probably too long to bet on what currently seems a consistent downwards trend of profitability.
But don't take my advice, run the numbers yourself, estimate possible profit and then only buy when those numbers look good to you.

[Terk]

I've noticed a huge increase in duplicate/rejected shares over the last couple of hours.  I was mining happily before that so I don't think it's a miner setup issue.  Anybody else seeing high rejects?  I'm getting 60+%

I'm afraid this is a bug which I introduced earlier today when changing something in the pool software. I deployed a change helping with some disconnection issues thick some small percent of miners had, but it turns out the change had also a negative side effect.

I'm working on solving this right now and I expect to deploy a fix within an hour.