Bitcoin Forum
December 03, 2016, 02:33:39 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 [413] 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [CLOSED] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees+NMC, Stratum, VarDiff, Private Servers  (Read 828299 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
mrkubanftw
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 344



View Profile WWW
April 29, 2015, 04:24:41 PM
 #8241

Block payments are based off contribution average over 10 shifts, which is something like 18-20 hours depending on pool speed.  If you drop out for an hour, your share of blocks will be decreased by roughly 5% of your normal contribution (1 hour missing out of the 20 hour evaluation window) until the shift with an hour missing is no longer part of the last 10 shifts.

PPLNS basically distributes the effect of your mining activity.  Instead of getting paid nothing while your miner was offline, you get paid slightly less averaged out over the shifts.


Eleuthria,


                   Any chance you could add actual pool time to the website somewhere? Or just tell me the timezone? I had an outage last night and i really have no way of knowing when they went down other then when i stopped accumulating shares on a certain shift... which is time stamped in some crazy time like EU time.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480732419
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480732419

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480732419
Reply with quote  #2

1480732419
Report to moderator
jonnybravo0311
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 994


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
April 29, 2015, 04:30:43 PM
 #8242

Block payments are based off contribution average over 10 shifts, which is something like 18-20 hours depending on pool speed.  If you drop out for an hour, your share of blocks will be decreased by roughly 5% of your normal contribution (1 hour missing out of the 20 hour evaluation window) until the shift with an hour missing is no longer part of the last 10 shifts.

PPLNS basically distributes the effect of your mining activity.  Instead of getting paid nothing while your miner was offline, you get paid slightly less averaged out over the shifts.


Eleuthria,


                   Any chance you could add actual pool time to the website somewhere? Or just tell me the timezone? I had an outage last night and i really have no way of knowing when they went down other then when i stopped accumulating shares on a certain shift... which is time stamped in some crazy time like EU time.
Just go into your settings and change your timezone.  You'll see things displayed local to you.

Jonny's Pool - Mine with us and help us grow!  Support a pool that supports Bitcoin, not a hardware manufacturer's pockets!  No SPV cheats.  No empty blocks.
mrkubanftw
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 344



View Profile WWW
April 29, 2015, 06:15:58 PM
 #8243

Block payments are based off contribution average over 10 shifts, which is something like 18-20 hours depending on pool speed.  If you drop out for an hour, your share of blocks will be decreased by roughly 5% of your normal contribution (1 hour missing out of the 20 hour evaluation window) until the shift with an hour missing is no longer part of the last 10 shifts.

PPLNS basically distributes the effect of your mining activity.  Instead of getting paid nothing while your miner was offline, you get paid slightly less averaged out over the shifts.


Eleuthria,


                   Any chance you could add actual pool time to the website somewhere? Or just tell me the timezone? I had an outage last night and i really have no way of knowing when they went down other then when i stopped accumulating shares on a certain shift... which is time stamped in some crazy time like EU time.
Just go into your settings and change your timezone.  You'll see things displayed local to you.


wonderful thank you!
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
May 05, 2015, 02:12:03 AM
 #8244

@ eleuthria,
as miners, we don't relay make decision, regarding soft and hard forks, we leave a lot to you to manage and pay the 2% premium for the luxury.

I think you handheld the 7 - 8 fork disaster well. 


That said, I was wondering how things like Gavan's proposed fork would be dealt with?

Do you have a process, a political affiliation or look for miners feedback? How would you go about assessing which fork to support?

Thanks for your consideration.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
os2sam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Think for yourself


View Profile
May 05, 2015, 02:17:08 AM
 #8245

Do you have a process, a political affiliation or look for miners feedback? How would you go about assessing which fork to support?

What fork? Care to enlighten us?

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
guitarplinker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288



View Profile WWW
May 05, 2015, 03:08:45 AM
 #8246

Do you have a process, a political affiliation or look for miners feedback? How would you go about assessing which fork to support?

What fork? Care to enlighten us?
He's probably talking about the 20MB block fork. I've heard that it's planned to happen in March 2016, and has been proposed by the main Bitcoin dev Gavin.

Here's a link if you want to read some more on it:
https://gavinandresen.svbtle.com/why-increasing-the-max-block-size-is-urgent
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
May 05, 2015, 03:19:40 AM
 #8247

@ eleuthria,
as miners, we don't relay make decision, regarding soft and hard forks, we leave a lot to you to manage and pay the 2% premium for the luxury.

I think you handheld the 7 - 8 fork disaster well.  


That said, I was wondering how things like Gavan's proposed fork would be dealt with?

Do you have a process, a political affiliation or look for miners feedback? How would you go about assessing which fork to support?

Thanks for your consideration.

A common misunderstanding:  Miners actually have zero influence over hardforking.  If a hard fork is going to happen, it doesn't matter if 99% of miners decide not to follow it.  If all of the major Bitcoin businesses, payment processors, and exchanges move to Bitcoin (New) and the miners all stay on Bitcoin (Old), it doesn't matter, forks do NOT require mining consensus unless the fork requires one, such as the "Block Version 1" -> "Block Version 2" fork, where the network switched to enforcing version 2 blocks after 95% of the last 1000(?) blocks were V2.

Code:
                       Bitcoin Fork A (95% of miners, 5% of businesses)
                      /
Prefork Bitcoin -----
                      \
                       Bitcoin Fork B (5% of miners, 95% of businesses)

Guess which one is going to retain any value?  Especially post-fork when the miners realize they can't exchange their BTC for goods or cash because no exchanges will accept BTC-A coins.

I believe we absolutely need to remove the 1MB block limit.  I'm not opposed to the jump from 1MB to 20MB, as I think it will have very minimal impact what the new limit is for quite some time.  I'm not sure if this jump to 20MB also implements the original proposal for automatically increasing the limit annually.  I do have objections to that one as I think Gavin's original proposed annual increase was FAR too aggressive and optimistic regarding throughput and bandwidth quotas for huge portions of the world.

What I think probably won't matter much though.  With a March 2016 prospective date, I'm not so sure the pool will even still be around by the time it's time to choose a side, given how much noise is being made by regulatory bodies who have absolutely no clue what to do with Bitcoin but sure as hell want to regulate it anyways.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
May 05, 2015, 07:51:49 AM
 #8248

Code:
                       Bitcoin Fork A (95% of miners, 5% of businesses)
                      /
Prefork Bitcoin -----
                      \
                       Bitcoin Fork B (5% of miners, 95% of businesses)

Guess which one is going to retain any value?  Especially post-fork when the miners realize they can't exchange their BTC for goods or cash because no exchanges will accept BTC-A coins.
Well, if it really was 95% vs 5% then yes miners would decide it.
If blocks suddenly take 20x longer to confirm, quite a few businesses would need to switch to the main mining fork or be in a lot of trouble for (on average) at least 20 weeks.

The problem is that it wouldn't ever be 95% vs 5%
The big mining farms like KnC, Bitmain, Bitfury, (Ghash) ... that's probably 40%+ ... would of course switch.
Their interest in bitcoin is the exchange value of it and exchanging it, they would be very unlikely to take any notice of the reasons behind a fork unless they could see it negatively affecting their bottom line in the very short term ... i.e. they would switch with the businesses.

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
May 05, 2015, 04:50:07 PM
 #8249

Code:
                       Bitcoin Fork A (95% of miners, 5% of businesses)
                      /
Prefork Bitcoin -----
                      \
                       Bitcoin Fork B (5% of miners, 95% of businesses)

Guess which one is going to retain any value?  Especially post-fork when the miners realize they can't exchange their BTC for goods or cash because no exchanges will accept BTC-A coins.
Well, if it really was 95% vs 5% then yes miners would decide it.
If blocks suddenly take 20x longer to confirm, quite a few businesses would need to switch to the main mining fork or be in a lot of trouble for (on average) at least 20 weeks.

The problem is that it wouldn't ever be 95% vs 5%
The big mining farms like KnC, Bitmain, Bitfury, (Ghash) ... that's probably 40%+ ... would of course switch.
Their interest in bitcoin is the exchange value of it and exchanging it, they would be very unlikely to take any notice of the reasons behind a fork unless they could see it negatively affecting their bottom line in the very short term ... i.e. they would switch with the businesses.

Yes, I'm sure there would never be such a drastic split.  Was just using an extreme example.  The main point was that it doesn't matter what miners do (unless the hard fork is implemented in a way that requires a mining consensus to take effect).  It's  also extremely unlikely that miners wouldn't follow the money.  Miners will go wherever they get paid, and that is decided by the businesses and exchanges that accept Bitcoin.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
May 05, 2015, 04:52:50 PM
 #8250

@ eleuthria,
as miners, we don't relay make decision, regarding soft and hard forks, we leave a lot to you to manage and pay the 2% premium for the luxury.

I think you handheld the 7 - 8 fork disaster well.  


That said, I was wondering how things like Gavan's proposed fork would be dealt with?

Do you have a process, a political affiliation or look for miners feedback? How would you go about assessing which fork to support?

Thanks for your consideration.

A common misunderstanding:  Miners actually have zero influence over hardforking.  If a hard fork is going to happen, it doesn't matter if 99% of miners decide not to follow it.  If all of the major Bitcoin businesses, payment processors, and exchanges move to Bitcoin (New) and the miners all stay on Bitcoin (Old), it doesn't matter, forks do NOT require mining consensus unless the fork requires one, such as the "Block Version 1" -> "Block Version 2" fork, where the network switched to enforcing version 2 blocks after 95% of the last 1000(?) blocks were V2.

Code:
                       Bitcoin Fork A (95% of miners, 5% of businesses)
                      /
Prefork Bitcoin -----
                      \
                       Bitcoin Fork B (5% of miners, 95% of businesses)

Guess which one is going to retain any value?  Especially post-fork when the miners realize they can't exchange their BTC for goods or cash because no exchanges will accept BTC-A coins.

I believe we absolutely need to remove the 1MB block limit.  I'm not opposed to the jump from 1MB to 20MB, as I think it will have very minimal impact what the new limit is for quite some time.  I'm not sure if this jump to 20MB also implements the original proposal for automatically increasing the limit annually.  I do have objections to that one as I think Gavin's original proposed annual increase was FAR too aggressive and optimistic regarding throughput and bandwidth quotas for huge portions of the world.


Thank, eleuthria, yes the Bitcoin protocol is quite elegant, ultimately it should always be the nodes that make up the network of the economic majority that dictate the most viable fork to mine.

there will probably always be exceptions and strange presidents. As far as I know, Gavin's proposal is more simple and has been toned down a lot when it comes to the increasing mechanism you described.

I'm glad we wont be on the metaphorical 0.7 fork when 0.8 roles out.

thanks,  

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
May 05, 2015, 05:03:58 PM
 #8251

What I think probably won't matter much though.  With a March 2016 prospective date, I'm not so sure the pool will even still be around by the time it's time to choose a side, given how much noise is being made by regulatory bodies who have absolutely no clue what to do with Bitcoin but sure as hell want to regulate it anyways.

that's a heavy hitting statement, from someone in your position, is there any reading we can do to give us a better understanding of the situation.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
May 05, 2015, 05:15:56 PM
 #8252

What I think probably won't matter much though.  With a March 2016 prospective date, I'm not so sure the pool will even still be around by the time it's time to choose a side, given how much noise is being made by regulatory bodies who have absolutely no clue what to do with Bitcoin but sure as hell want to regulate it anyways.

that's a heavy hitting statement, from someone in your position, is there any reading we can do to give us a better understanding of the situation.

BitLicense is the start of over-regulation, not the end.  Other states will follow RAPIDLY after New York finalizes BitLicense, copying it almost verbatim most likely.  Given BitLicense is already trying to establish jurisdiction when you have a user located in New York, it would only be a matter of time before the pool would be forced into closure.  Legally, it's likely a defendable case, but the cost of defense would be high.  With the pool's income is shrinking every single month as the price gets lower and private farms/China continues to take a larger chunk of the network for itself, it's not a legal cost I would be willing to endure.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
May 05, 2015, 05:18:52 PM
 #8253

What I think probably won't matter much though.  With a March 2016 prospective date, I'm not so sure the pool will even still be around by the time it's time to choose a side, given how much noise is being made by regulatory bodies who have absolutely no clue what to do with Bitcoin but sure as hell want to regulate it anyways.

that's a heavy hitting statement, from someone in your position, is there any reading we can do to give us a better understanding of the situation.

BitLicense is the start of over-regulation, not the end.  Other states will follow RAPIDLY after New York finalizes BitLicense, copying it almost verbatim most likely.  Given BitLicense is already trying to establish jurisdiction when you have a user located in New York, it would only be a matter of time before the pool would be forced into closure.  Legally, it's likely a defendable case, but the cost of defense would be high.  With the pool's income is shrinking every single month as the price gets lower and private farms/China continues to take a larger chunk of the network for itself, it's not a legal cost I would be willing to endure.

oh you paint a sad picture  Smiley

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
mrkubanftw
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 344



View Profile WWW
May 06, 2015, 02:45:59 PM
 #8254

What I think probably won't matter much though.  With a March 2016 prospective date, I'm not so sure the pool will even still be around by the time it's time to choose a side, given how much noise is being made by regulatory bodies who have absolutely no clue what to do with Bitcoin but sure as hell want to regulate it anyways.

that's a heavy hitting statement, from someone in your position, is there any reading we can do to give us a better understanding of the situation.

BitLicense is the start of over-regulation, not the end.  Other states will follow RAPIDLY after New York finalizes BitLicense, copying it almost verbatim most likely.  Given BitLicense is already trying to establish jurisdiction when you have a user located in New York, it would only be a matter of time before the pool would be forced into closure.  Legally, it's likely a defendable case, but the cost of defense would be high.  With the pool's income is shrinking every single month as the price gets lower and private farms/China continues to take a larger chunk of the network for itself, it's not a legal cost I would be willing to endure.

What exactly is BitLicense? Never heard of it.

*Edit*

In reading it... its sounds like the footprint for market exchanges in New York alone. I'm not seeing anything regarding mining. If this does in fact lay the legal footprint for an american market exchange... i see quite the opposite of what you described. Where are you getting this from.

+10 For pool luck. We are getting shit on lately.
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
May 06, 2015, 05:01:09 PM
 #8255

In reading it... its sounds like the footprint for market exchanges in New York alone. I'm not seeing anything regarding mining. If this does in fact lay the legal footprint for an american market exchange... i see quite the opposite of what you described. Where are you getting this from.

That's the intention, not the letter of the law.  On a pool, your money is in the pool's wallet until you ask for it or your threshold is hit.  See the 2nd definition of what qualifies as a virtual currency business:  securing, storing, holding, or maintaining custody or control of Virtual Currency on behalf of others;

It is not possible to run a managed pool without a central wallet, with two exceptions:  Solo pools, and p2pool-style where there is a minimum difficulty that prevents a user from having a "dust" balance owed to them, and each share submitted requires a new work push (share-chain style) where any work submitted without the new coinbase reflecting the new distribution is considered stale/not paid.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
mrkubanftw
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 344



View Profile WWW
May 06, 2015, 06:37:46 PM
 #8256

In reading it... its sounds like the footprint for market exchanges in New York alone. I'm not seeing anything regarding mining. If this does in fact lay the legal footprint for an american market exchange... i see quite the opposite of what you described. Where are you getting this from.

That's the intention, not the letter of the law.  On a pool, your money is in the pool's wallet until you ask for it or your threshold is hit.  See the 2nd definition of what qualifies as a virtual currency business:  securing, storing, holding, or maintaining custody or control of Virtual Currency on behalf of others;

It is not possible to run a managed pool without a central wallet, with two exceptions:  Solo pools, and p2pool-style where there is a minimum difficulty that prevents a user from having a "dust" balance owed to them, and each share submitted requires a new work push (share-chain style) where any work submitted without the new coinbase reflecting the new distribution is considered stale/not paid.


Correct. But no one is having you hold bitcoin on their behalf. You are GENERATING bitcoin not storing it. Temporarily storing it before its distributed is totally different. I would even argue it doesn't qualify as a business as you don't stand to profit from this in neither bitcoin nor fiat. That alone meaning this isn't even applicable to you. All of this in light.. you are not in new york. So don't worry about it Wink  
crilleaz
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 237

★ Always strive for the best ★


View Profile WWW
May 08, 2015, 07:56:43 AM
 #8257

So this means BTCGuild will close?

LiskFaucets. The hub and rotator for Lisk faucets. Overview faucets | RotatorReferral generator
Vote for 'liskfaucets' as delegate so we can ensure higher faucet rewards!
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
May 08, 2015, 04:42:53 PM
 #8258

So this means BTCGuild will close?

Every pool will close eventually.  BTC Guild almost closed 6 months ago.  When the time does come to actually close the pool, there will be 30+ days of warning before a single mining node stops, and many months of time before it finally goes offline.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
mrkubanftw
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 344



View Profile WWW
May 08, 2015, 04:48:11 PM
 #8259

So this means BTCGuild will close?

Every pool will close eventually.  BTC Guild almost closed 6 months ago.  When the time does come to actually close the pool, there will be 30+ days of warning before a single mining node stops, and many months of time before it finally goes offline.


Why did it almost close 6 months ago?
lemmyK
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 223


View Profile
May 08, 2015, 05:12:21 PM
 #8260

I'm going on the  BTC guild. somebody recommends changing the pool?
today I interrupt again Huh
Pages: « 1 ... 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 [413] 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 »
  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!