[300 PH][BTC PPS 100%][EN/CN/RU] Sigmapool.com

[kano]

I never said the statistics you gave were wrong I said you used them deceptively.

Which I didn't and I clearly proved that by doing a very simple bit of math that you wouldn't do, and as usual in this discussion, you're just ignoring it.
0.1% or even 1% chance of failure - both require a large amount of BTC

Your argument is saying I'm deceiving people by using 0.1%, but who cares, if we switch it to a be a "Phil" pool where 1% chance of failure is OK, it still requires 2878 BTC instead of 4317.375 BTC

Yeah you're pretending that's not the case ... dood you're wrong, OK, just live with it, and stop giving people REALLY bad advice.

try another way.

practical is what matters.

No it doesn't, as I keep telling you, but you keep making up specific 'examples' trying to argue you are right and the statistics are wrong.
Again stop giving people REALLY bad advice.

your use of meni's numbers does not apply  for the miner.

False. It does apply for the miner - very simple and obvious:
If the pool doesn't have the necessary backing/balance, you can work out what the expectation is of the pool going broke and the miners not being paid - very simple and even given in the examples I gave in the Pool thread.
More information ignored by you again.

Yes you keep pretending that doesn't matter, every time you ignore the amount required.
Lets say he only has 1200 BTC (which he doesn't even have that) and again 1% fee:
δ ~= exp((-2 x f x R) / B)
~= exp((-2 x 0.01 x 1200) / 12.5) = 0.1466 or a 15% chance of going broke.

Now lets use Phil's magic 140 BTC number
δ ~= exp((-2 x 0.01 x 140) / 12.5) = 0.7993 or an 80% chance of going broke.
That means there's an 80% chance of miners not being paid at some point, if they use Phil's magic 140 BTC number
Again stop giving people REALLY bad advice.

You're hooked on the altcoin scams, as your sig clearly says, where people get in, make a profit then do a runner and the ones left at the end lose money.
Pyramid schemes, Pump and Dump, pick a scam you think is OK and go for it.
Your "they can mine until it runs out" is the same.

Me, I don't like any of that shit, I don't want to be involved in any of that shit, I simply give stats and advice that says stay away from that shit.

Phil, your wrong.
Live with it, and stop giving people REALLY BAD advice.

...
At 240 ph  he needs a practical reserve of more then 140 coins as I explained.
...

... and I've no idea why an idiot mod would give merit to that post that gives people REALLY BAD advice ...

[1714137249]

1714137249

[1714137249]

1714137249

[1714137249]

1714137249

[kano]

I think, statistics matters here and even at 1% OP may go a long way and get away with it, but he'll have been lucky. Probably even more so if pool doesn't get bigger quickly (again, statistics but wider chance for variance with more participants?).

Bitcoin aside, is it possible somehow merge mining could offset some of that risk? I never really wondered until now if a new pool might actually gear to optimise that.

Ignoring the fact that it is off topic, altcoins in general are worthless (otherwise why would you get them for free ... )

If the pool is merge mining some tiny altcoin and keeping it, they need to be making a % of the pool's expected income to thus increase the % fee for the calculation.
i.e. if the fee is 1% and they make another 0.01% by keeping merged mined coins and not giving them to the miners, then they could say the pool fee is 1.01% in all the calculations (which is basically a waste of time)

[kano]

So you've given up and are ignoring the statistics now ... (since it doesn't match what you want)

Pulling the number '34 days' out of your ass is pointless.

I'll link it yet again https://bitcoil.co.il/pool_analysis.pdf

... and it has nothing to do with pool size.

pool size matters as a practical matter.

...

Well yeah size matters if you are talking about pissy little PPLNS pools that take 2 months to find a block.
But in that case you are already losing BTC BADLY due to diff changes making your shares worth less across the time frame of the N in PPLNS.

If you want to talk about such pools (PPLNS or PPS), then go find a sandpit to sit in, and get the other kids around, to sit and listen.

But what is going on here, so far, is a pool saying how great they are, and no fees, paying PPS, and Phil backing them up saying (incorrectly) how little BTC they need so everyone will be happy and make PPS similar to a 1% fee PPLNS pool but with no PPLNS variance at all.

Wow sounds great, lets get lotsa people here mining and making great rewards ... ... ... hmm so that means it does matter if they grow to even a 1EH pool ...

So either people will see that they don't have the BTC if the pool grows and wont be able to pay a down turn in luck, or people will see Phil posting about how this is all OK, they don't need a lot of BTC to be able to afford to run the pool so everyone should join in ... ... ...

This thread is about this pool and I'm trying to say that there's a problem with the PPS payout, and I see you saying: no my statistics are wrong or deceiving people ... ... meaning yeah it's OK go for it

[philipma1957]

I never said to mine here I simply said you using a reserve  number of 4300 is wrong
you then went all out to win your arguement

So you've given up and are ignoring the statistics now ... (since it doesn't match what you want)

Pulling the number '34 days' out of your ass is pointless.

I'll link it yet again https://bitcoil.co.il/pool_analysis.pdf

... and it has nothing to do with pool size.

I completely proof this part is wrong by showing  multiple linear mathematical example of why it was wrong

linear math proves you to be wrong in the application of the formula

It also proves  that the formula has better accuracy on day one of a ½ ing vs day 600 or 700 and you think I am out to defend pool op.

I am not all I did was want to show that he did not need a reserve that high.

Just because you lost the argument does not mean any one should mine here.

Peace out I am done here.

To all that think I want you to ignore kano and mine here:

I don't and  I don't mine here.

My reasons for not mining here  are practical and don't involve difficult to understand math.

1) bitmain has admitted to mining with 10 percent of the world's hash

so we are at about 43,390 PH/s worldwide
bitmain by there own admission is 4,339 ph

this pool is at about 240 PH

So if bitmain points 60 ph  to do a with holding attack  it could cost the pool  around 75 btc a month

https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/difficulty  just put in 60000 th and up pops 74.67 coins a month

now if bitmain can write  3 speed s9 software (they can)
they can write 4 speed s9 software   with
low
medium
high
with hold
they can rotate  the 60ph around their 4,339 ph  with proxy and vpn
this pool would not be sure  if they were being with held or not.

what is the cost to this pool  about 74.67 coins a month

lets see what does bitmain lose the tx fees  which are around 1 %  or .75btc

if they pointed it to solo antpool and used it to pay off  cloud contracts  they could suffer variance
if they pointed it to antpool and used it to pay of cloud contracts they could suffer variance.

their profit margin on a cloud contract  is well over 4 %

so they pay .75 btc in tx fees collect well over 3 btc  in cloud mining fees

and cost this pool  75 btc.   this reason may never be done ,but it can be done

and while as Kano says I don't know stats I do know that the above is an issue that stops me from mining here.

This issue  causes me to feel the pool op will fold up shop.
This issue  is far more real world then kano's use of meni's formula for reserve needed.

I don't think it can be stopped if bitmain did this to a pool. Other then banning all bitmain gear from mining on the pool

[kano]

I never said to mine here I simply said you using a reserve  number of 4300 is wrong
you then went all out to win your arguement

It's not an argument ... ... ...

The problem is the garbage you keep spouting ...

Firstly, the parts out of the first mod merited 2 point post of yours:

My guess is you that with 230 ph you may go broke.

you would earn 296 btc a month  with that much hash

that is 24 blocks a month.

 so 3 x  85% months

is  3x24 = 72 x .85 = 61.2 blocks  meaning  10 or 11 blocks short   which is 137.5 btc

a lot depends on  two things  will you get attacked by a bad player?
if you do get attacked you will be tapped out.

This is garbage.
It's where I guess you get your first 140 BTC number from ... ... ...
and then throw in the comment about withholding being the point ... ... ...

So you said simply put  and showed that number  I ask again did you use a 1 in 1000 factor?

Did you use a 1 in 100 factor?

as I see it

 1 n 1000
 1 n 100
 1 n 50

all give big difference in the reserve needed.

More completely incorrect garbage - they don't give a big difference.

if I mine at op's pool and get 100% pps  with a larger chance of bankruptcy  it may be worth it to me.

so if you are using 1 in 1000 to get your reserve number

you have attempted to deceive all the mathematically challenged miners reading this.

so what is the answer how did you get that 6.9078 number?

I can tell you if you used 1000 and I don't mind 100 then he needs 1/10 the reserve

False. More completely incorrect garbage. It's not magically suddenly 1/10 ... as I said you don't understand.

now  using 1 in 100  he needs a reserve of much less  then what you put in correct?

False. Read my reply quoted below.

But what the hey, I'll do a quick table of all 4 numbers:
1/1000 4317.375 BTC
1/500 3884 BTC
1/200 3311 BTC
1/100 2878 BTC

Yeah I don't see anything as tiny as 140 BTC ANYWHERE in that
I do see a bit more than 20 times that if the pool is going down the path of a high 1% chance of going bankrupt ...

Don't you hate non-linear maths?

Lets continue with (all) the parts out of the next mod merited 2 point post of yours:

...

Problem is math Kano gave was deceptive. And he implied I did not understand it.

At 240 ph  he needs a practical reserve of more then 140 coins as I explained.

...


I would argue I would mine with this pool if he had enough coins to make the safety factor 199/200


...


I resent Kano tossing out the number he did and then acting that he is smart and I don’t understand the math. And that I am not entitled to have an opinion on the thread.

Here is my opinion.

I think a reserve of enough coins to make the risk  of going broke 1/200 would make the pool worth playing.

...


I also think I would like to see Kano calculate

For 1/1000
For 1/500
For 1/200
For 1/100.

And say phil you are right I used the 1/1000 figure and did not explain it.

But Kano has never admitted being wrong for anything I ever called him on.

Also I should  shut the fuck up as this post will piss more people off.

Kano crossed posted and stayed true to form.


...

And here you are proving what I said ... you don't understand that 199/200 you said would be OK is 1/200 chance of failing is ... from further up
1/200 3311 BTC

1/200, 1/1000 both give very large BTC numbers.

You said that they only needed 140 BTC

I never said to mine here I simply said you using a reserve  number of 4300 is wrong
you then went all out to win your arguement

No, it's not an argument, it's me explaining with various data, that you keep posting rubbish based on what is probably misunderstanding.

...
it is late I am tired.

 I can show that miners only need for him to have  a reserve to pay 34 days in a row.

via btc pays me 97  op pays me 100 each day in mining

34 days in a row = 3298 from via btc

34 days in a row = 3400 from op


op folds   runs skips  etc  I loose on 35th day



so  via btc would have paid me 3395
op would have paid me            3400     so if he had enough coin to pay for 34 days  I am better off with op.

since pool should make   24 blocks in a month   it would need to do 11 blcoks  and the reserve of 140 would  be enough

making 11 blocks vs expected 24 is more then 100 to one.

my point was he may need a much smaller reserve if he is legit for a miner to profit. and that asking for him to have a 4300 coin is too much

But honestly  everyone that runs a high paying pps  seems to go broke

why is that?

they are simply hoping to have an early hot streak  and if they don't they bail.


I doubt he has 2 blocks in reserve no less 13  or 350

So you've given up and are ignoring the statistics now ... (since it doesn't match what you want)

Pulling the number '34 days' out of your ass is pointless.

I'll link it yet again https://bitcoil.co.il/pool_analysis.pdf

... and it has nothing to do with pool size.

I completely proof this part is wrong by showing  multiple linear mathematical example of why it was wrong

linear math proves you to be wrong in the application of the formula

No, it proves how to run a scam so that 240 PH of NEW people wont notice it for a month ...
The pool itself is probably already 240PH of their own hardware.

It also proves  that the formula has better accuracy on day one of a ½ ing vs day 600 or 700 and you think I am out to defend pool op.

No, the formula has nothing to do with halvings.
When the next halving occurs, then indeed the 12.5 BTC becomes 6.25 BTC
But lets give a simple (mathematical) example of that effect ...

1% fee pool
Phil's dodgy 0.5% chance of failure pool (that's the number he said was ok 199/200 ...)
12.5 BTC reward
Reserve = B x (ln (1/δ)) / (2 x f) = 12.5 x ln(1/0.005) / (2 x 0.01) = 12.5 x 5.2983 / (2 x 0.01) = 3311 BTC

So if we hit the halving, the B value halves, so you simply halve the answer = 1656 BTC

So does it really make thatr much difference?
Well it's half the BTC, but still a lot of BTC ... ... ... ...

I am not all I did was want to show that he did not need a reserve that high.

Just because you lost the argument does not mean any one should mine here.

The only loser in this is someone who spouts so much incorrect information and then says they won an argument.
Again, it's not an argument, I'm pointing out where you've gone wrong in MANY places throughout this discussion.

My reasons for not mining here  are practical and don't involve difficult to understand math.

1) bitmain has admitted to mining with 10 percent of the world's hash

so we are at about 43,390 PH/s worldwide
bitmain by there own admission is 4,339 ph

this pool is at about 240 PH

So if bitmain points 60 ph  to do a with holding attack  it could cost the pool  around 75 btc a month

https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/difficulty  just put in 60000 th and up pops 74.67 coins a month

now if bitmain can write  3 speed s9 software (they can)
they can write 4 speed s9 software   with
low
medium
high
with hold
they can rotate  the 60ph around their 4,339 ph  with proxy and vpn
this pool would not be sure  if they were being with held or not.

what is the cost to this pool  about 74.67 coins a month

lets see what does bitmain lose the tx fees  which are around 1 %  or .75btc

if they pointed it to solo antpool and used it to pay off  cloud contracts  they could suffer variance
if they pointed it to antpool and used it to pay of cloud contracts they could suffer variance.

their profit margin on a cloud contract  is well over 4 %

so they pay .75 btc in tx fees collect well over 3 btc  in cloud mining fees

and cost this pool  75 btc.   this reason may never be done ,but it can be done

and while as Kano says I don't know stats I do know that the above is an issue that stops me from mining here.

This issue  causes me to feel the pool op will fold up shop.
This issue  is far more real world then kano's use of meni's formula for reserve needed.

I don't think it can be stopped if bitmain did this to a pool. Other then banning all bitmain gear from mining on the pool

Seriously?

You're gonna go down a conspiracy theory path for a reason to not mine at a pool who looks like they own 240 PH ?

What about a 10PH pool you like to send mining to ... that's OK?
They don't even check any of the statistics to determine what's going on, so that would be a simple case of just point withholding miners there ... ... ... ...
But that's OK? Or are they just too small it really doesn't matter at all?

...

That is the point of the math I've been providing from the start before you began spouting rubbish.
To give actual grounds to not risk mining here.

Not some random 'gut feeling' or random 'conspiracy theory' you seem to enjoy using.

...

If you want to turn this into an argument, then first correct ALL that garbage you've posted so far.

Edit: Phil, you haven't been around bitcoin for very long, go find and read the threads for the 2 best known pools that have paid PPS and gone broke and the end game for the two of them. Not very nice (BitAffNet and MtRed)

[philipma1957]

I have some more garbage to post here.

This pool makes about 5 blocks in six days  25 blocks in 30 days.  Lets say a 50 to one shot occurs  and the pdf for the next 25 blocks is about 0.98

the luck would be about 66%

the shares would be about 150%

I took all this info from here: https://www.kano.is/index.php?k=pblocks

Last 25 Blocks   14.9wks   150.17%   101.19%   0.9876   66.59%   66.78%

funny how karma is that the above pool has a nice example of why a 140 coin reserve for sigma pool.com would work.

so if  karma pool suffers the same bad luck as kano.is did for 25 blocks  will 140 coin reserver work as I said.

well  150% shares bumps the time out to 45 days not 34 days.

So I was wrong as it is better then 34 days.

the pool needs to pay out about 450 coins for the 45 days  

I will leave the fees out since we work against the 25 blocks earned

I will then add tx fees back

so 12.5 x 25 = 312.5 coins + 140 reserve = 452.5  so owner of pool would have 2.5 coins as a reserve and if you add in tx fees he has  3.125  add and get net 5.625  so pool owner would be able to pay for at least 45 days.

now the miner that kano said is at risk due to a lack of 4300+ reserve  lets see were he stands

45 x 97 (viaBTC pps)    4365
45 x 100 (sigmapool pps) 4500

you are now ahead 135 in earnings

after 45 days if the owner had a reserve of 140 coins

since you the miner risk 1 day of mining earnings  the next day you could lose 97

so  135/97   is your payout   on a 1/50 chance of going broke.

assuming the owner has the 140 coin reserve.

so if the owner sent a real escrow 140 coins  mining here is smart not stupid

the problem is the owner almost certainly does not have a 140 coin reserve
he certainly won't put it in escrow and risk it.
and if he did most likely the pool grows to 500 ph  which makes these calculations no good.

Once again I have shown that 140 coin reserve works for a miner.
with 240 ph and the certainty the owner pays it.

you risk a 97 dollar loss if you earn 97 daily at viabtc if you switch here.

once again  that while a reserve of 4317 coins would be the answer to the formula as applied by kano it is simply not applicable.  to my facts above

I simply ask you in a true game  were you put up 97 dollars for a 135 profit   and I have to hit a 50 to 1 shot for you to lose  you should do it.

The problem does not lie in the reserve need for the owner to stay afloat.
The problem lies in the willingness for the op to really lose 140 coins in 45 days.  Ie a true 140 coin reserve.

Back to the formula.

B=12.5
1n .1000 =6.9079
2  = a constant
0.01 = true fees  based on about .126 in tx fee

so 12.5 x 6.9079/ (2x0.01) = 86.348/0.02 comes to 4317.4  kanos number  a true number  not false just applied wrongly in this case.

kano said I did not understand the math and was not entitled to an opinion in this thread.

well I had forgotten how to get 1n.1000  to become 6.9079   and asked him to figure it out in the other examples.

he insulted me but he did do it thinking it proved me wrong about him misapplying the reserve.

well I had an error right here

I decided to show you were wrong to apply the formula

and here is why you ignored that B is linear
you ignore or don't understand that if tx fees are .125  now and stay at .125

the op fee  2x  as .125/12.5 = .01
and .125/6.125 = .02

so the 4300/4 = 1075 at the ½ ing

and 4300 was only true on day one of the ½

put another way so that you will give  up and simply agree that the number 4317 is wrong

if the ½ were in 2 days  the 1075 number would be correct.
and today the formula shows  4300

so zero blocks means  op pays 20 coins at 10 coins a block  and we are at 1075    so reserve is 1095 if ½ is in 2 days.

I normally don't push here but you said pool size does not matter.

I have shown  1ph  a small reserve lasts for more then 100 years even if he never hits a block

I have shown that at 240 ph   he only need sto have a 140 coins  for me to have a solid shot at a profit.

bet 97  to gain 135 and a 50 to 1 shot is needed to beat you.   that is a good move.

but we both know he  simply is not going to stay here and drop 140 coins he will bail.

which is why I won't mine at him.

I also have shown that meni's formula needs to be applied on day 1 of a ½ ing to be most accurate you applied it on day  600  948  it is due in 466 days

so at best

july 9 2016 to feb 13 2016 is 948  

feb 13 to say may 25 2020 is 467 days

this means B is not really 12.5 for practical purposes

I agree with you he will go broke

you erroneously used 4317 as the proper reserve

Peace kano
 
if the ½ ing was in 2 days   we would go

[kano]

I have some more garbage to post here.

Yep it sure is again.

This pool makes about 5 blocks in six days  25 blocks in 30 days.  Lets say a 50 to one shot occurs  and the pdf for the next 25 blocks is about 0.98

the luck would be about 66%

the shares would be about 150%

I took all this info from here :https://www.kano.is/index.php?k=pblocks


Last 25 Blocks   14.9wks   150.17%   101.19%   0.9876   66.59%   66.78%

funny how karma is that the above pool has a nice example of why a 140 coin reserve for sigma pool.com would work.

so if  karma pool suffers the same bad luck as kano.is did for 25 blocks  will 140 coin reserver work as I said.

well  150% shares bumps the time out to 45 days not 34 days.

So I was wrong as it is better then 34 days.

the pool needs to pay out about 450 coins for the 45 days 

You are using specific examples that the pool must be limited to and adhere to, before your example can work.
That's the point I've already made that you are assuming certain things, that you can in no way assume to be correct.
... and everything after the above quote, is doing exactly that, assuming that the pool size must be exactly what you want it to be.

Oddly enough the pool size is probably 0PH and the rest of the pool (240PH) is their own hardware, so that even says they can have no BTC in their wallet and be fine since they are currently effectively solo mining.

You don't know what their public hash rate will be (nor do I) so there's no point using specific examples to say, yeah it's OK.
You also keep choosing small pool sizes to say that you can ignore the calculation.
As I already stated, that's pointless, since it doesn't cover what's necessary, any pool size.
If the pool advertises hard about zero fee PPS they may well be able to get a lot of idiots to join who don't understand the statistics ... just like you ... and then the public pool size will no longer be some tiny value that works for your specific example.

I've already suggested you read Meni's analysis and posted the link to it - but you (obviously) haven't and wont.
Thus you keep trying to make the argument that your specific case of a specific sized pool, with a specific level of luck wont fail.
Which is, to be blunt, pointless.
I'll not bother including any more of the above post cos it's a waste of time.

... and here I am repeating myself, pointing out why your calculations don't matter, coz you, for some unknown reason, seem to want to keep repeating them over and over.

Oh and most countries consider 4 years to be ... 1461 days.

[philipma1957]

too bad you don't understand me

you could read this parable

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant

and we can leave it at that.

At least we agree he will go broke  so we are better off then the blind men

@ Meni Rosenfeld

https://bitcoil.co.il/pool_analysis.pdf

I would love to discuss

Appendix C
Safety nets for PPS pools

Since I fail to agree with using  B  in the formula  and disregarding ½  ing effect

To leave out  the 50% drop in B  means  formula is most accurate day 1 of ½ ing

least accurate day before new ½ ing why did you leave it out  or not mention it .

As If I do the calculation  and ignore it I over estimate reserve the closer I get to  the  next ½ ing

[kano]

@ Meni Rosenfeld

https://bitcoil.co.il/pool_analysis.pdf


I would love to discuss

Appendix C
Safety nets for PPS pools


Since I fail to agree with using  B  in the formula  and disregarding ½  ing effect

To leave out  the 50% drop in B  means  formula is most accurate day 1 of ½ ing

least accurate day before new ½ ing

Yet the halving will simply halve the calculated value as is obvious for anyone with basic math skills
... and I have already said that.

why did you leave it out  or not mention it .

As If I do the calculation  and ignore it I over estimate reserve the closer I get to  the  next ½ ing

I didn't leave it out, I mentioned it.
So cleary you haven't read what I've written so you are wasting my time also
OK - I give up.
I'm arguing with an idiot and thus lowering myself to your level.
I'll stop here.

...

It also proves  that the formula has better accuracy on day one of a ½ ing vs day 600 or 700 and you think I am out to defend pool op.

No, the formula has nothing to do with halvings.
When the next halving occurs, then indeed the 12.5 BTC becomes 6.25 BTC
But lets give a simple (mathematical) example of that effect ...

1% fee pool
Phil's dodgy 0.5% chance of failure pool (that's the number he said was ok 199/200 ...)
12.5 BTC reward
Reserve = B x (ln (1/δ)) / (2 x f) = 12.5 x ln(1/0.005) / (2 x 0.01) = 12.5 x 5.2983 / (2 x 0.01) = 3311 BTC

So if we hit the halving, the B value halves, so you simply halve the answer = 1656 BTC

So does it really make thatr much difference?
Well it's half the BTC, but still a lot of BTC ... ... ... ...

...

Edit: Phil, you haven't been around bitcoin for very long, go find and read the threads for the 2 best known pools that have paid PPS and gone broke and the end game for the two of them. Not very nice (BitAffNet and MtRed)

[BSGMiner]

Dear Kano,

We’ve been waiting for your reply...

Ha! That's gotta be the most amusing opening salvo to Kano that I've seen.

Looks like they tried to have their talking points in order first.

Everybody's got a plan until they get punched in the mouth.

[kano]

Oh, wait, I missed out something else here at the start

Phil's early on claim was I was being deceptive.
I've just included a little of that post so it's easy to see:

So you said simply put  and showed that number  I ask again did you use a 1 in 1000 factor?

...

so if you are using 1 in 1000 to get your reserve number

you have attempted to deceive all the mathematically challenged miners reading this.

so what is the answer how did you get that 6.9078 number?

Well, Phil's claim of me being deceptive is also false.
Why? Coz, before he falsely accused me, I said:

...
The 1% means you have a low chance (0.1%) of going broke if you already have a 4317.375 BTC balance and continue to top it up whenever it gets below that.
...

(I added highlight to point it out)

[philipma1957]

I am opening a different thread.  Since Kano says I am an idiot and don't have the right to post in this thread.

using meni's formula correctly  and solving meni's formula correctly are not the same thing.

Kano's solving  of the formula and getting 4317.375 is a correct number

Kano saying this pool needs that reserve  to have a low chance 0.1%  of going bankrupt is deceptive.

In fact  he has even deceived his own self and simply refuses to see or agree to what I am saying.

So

1) I don't mine here and won't mine here.
2) I don't believe Kano intentionally acted to deceive anyone.
3) I think he is simply applying the formula blindly.
4) I think he believed I accused him of intentional deception
5) I do not think kano  post the solution to the formula to deceive people on purpose

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5109937.msg49738589#msg49738589

I have new thread

My intentions is to show that the formula called be solved correctly

and used incorrectly.

Not to show kano was trying to fool people into not mining with this pool.

[notabeliever]

I tried this pool for 12 hours and if it is going to attract miners needs to increase their PPS more in line with their competition.  With 20th I did not make what I can in 12 hours  with other pools.
edit.........give me a couple days to make a comparison

[Artemis3]

I tried this pool for 12 hours and if it is going to attract miners needs to increase their PPS more in line with their competition.  With 20th I did not make what I can in 12 hours  with other pools.

Yes, but it would be more interesting and for the benefit of others, if you would tell us the actual numbers. And which pools do you refer to as well.

[Steamtyme]

With 20th I did not make what I can in 12 hours  with other pools.

I would say 12 hours is to small a sample though, depending on the miner it could have been 1/2 hour of startup connections and miner configuration. Also hard numbers as mentioned do help.

For curiosity sake I paroused their site, I  couldn't find an expected earnings calculator anywhere. It's been a long time since I mined PPS, but that was always available when I did.

I didn't sign up for an account to look deeper; was there any explanation of how much approximately per TH/24 hours?

[Gervunt93]

... I didn't sign up for an account to look deeper; was there any explanation of how much approximately per TH/24 hours?

It's on the main page, 0.00004148 BTC / TH/s currently. The calculator is at the dashboard section, you will probably have to create an account.

Just to add - I've been mining at the op since September 2018, and despite having a bad luck spree with blocks, they managed to make the payouts every day. So I do believe they have a reserve (no idea how big it is).
Furthermore, they proved to be the most profitable.
A friend of mine, Homeminer @youtube (not a product placement) has ASICs set up at different pools and he has a spreadsheet updated with every difficulty change (though it is in russian - there won't be difficulties with understanding it).

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12lZZfG_raBWe2NssfZDSo-sBBc8-3Qfr/view

[Artemis3]

It's on the main page, 0.00004148 BTC / TH/s currently. The calculator is at the dashboard section, you will probably have to create an account.

Just to add - I've been mining at the op since September 2018, and despite having a bad luck spree with blocks, they managed to make the payouts every day. So I do believe they have a reserve (no idea how big it is).
Furthermore, they proved to be the most profitable.
A friend of mine, Homeminer @youtube (not a product placement) has ASICs set up at different pools and he has a spreadsheet updated with every difficulty change (though it is in russian - there won't be difficulties with understanding it).

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12lZZfG_raBWe2NssfZDSo-sBBc8-3Qfr/view

Here is my "Google translation" in bbcode (because google docs are overrated):

Pool name

Pool power

Btc payout thresholds

Support rus

application

AsicBoost

payment systems

Special features

1 TH * 24 hours in BTC

Fee

Fact of accrual

network commission

1

EXpool

3 PH

not

not

not

Yes

PPS

Manual registration. Manual payout. Own firmware.

0,00004179

0%

0,00004179

pays for pool

2

Sigmapool

207 PH

0,001

rus

development

Yes

PPS

pool commission 0%. Detailed statistics that some even scares. There is a FREE firmware for overclocking antminer s9. PROMO CODES (bonus to income + 0.5%)

0,00004148

0,5%

0,00004168

there is

3

Dpool

1,65 EH

0,001

English

*Yes

Yes

FPPS PPLNS

* The application is not available in the Russian Appstore. * Asic added to Pool in a few seconds / Hashrate 1 in 1 matches what the asic shows

0,00004084

1,5%

0,00004084

pays for pool

4

Antpool

3,63 EH

0,001

rus \ engl

Yes

Yes

PPS+ PPLNS SOLO

charges you 2% plus about, but first takes 4%. The usual Chinese pool. Sometimes it cuts the hashrate. And oochen for a long time connects the asic to the personal account. 4% plus, and 2 take away)))

0,00004231

4%

0,00004045

pays for pool

5

BTC.com

6,6 EH

0,001

English

Yes

Yes

FPPS

Plain Chinese with NMC Commission and Coin

0,00004148

2%

0,00004029

pays for pool

6

F2pool

4731 PH

0,005

English

Yes

Yes

PPS+

Pay the network commission. Sometimes the cereit is cut .. Poole Chinese.

0,00004129

2,5%

0,00004025

pays for pool

TOP 6 Pools

for mining Bitcoin "2019"
FEBRUARY

WITH REGISTRATION ON SIGMAPOOL

PROMOCODE: HOMEMINER gives + 0.5% to income

[MoparMiningLLC]

I tossed 5 S9's on here for nothing else than the 5% bonus.

below is my first week - not counting the first day as it was a partial though.

Date   Avg. hashrate 24h   Earnings   Profitability   
20-02-2019   68.57 TH/s   0.00284472 BTC   0.00004148 BTC/TH/s   + 0.00001422 BTC/TH/s bonus
19-02-2019   69.44 TH/s   0.00288081 BTC   0.00004148 BTC/TH/s   + 0.00001440 BTC/TH/s bonus
18-02-2019   70.17 TH/s   0.00291108 BTC   0.00004148 BTC/TH/s   + 0.00001456 BTC/TH/s bonus
17-02-2019   69.23 TH/s   0.00287175 BTC   0.00004148 BTC/TH/s   + 0.00001436 BTC/TH/s bonus
16-02-2019   69.50 TH/s   0.00288297 BTC   0.00004148 BTC/TH/s   + 0.00001441 BTC/TH/s bonus
15-02-2019   69.31 TH/s   0.00287513 BTC   0.00004148 BTC/TH/s   + 0.00001438 BTC/TH/s bonus
14-02-2019   69.67 TH/s   0.00289013 BTC   0.00004148 BTC/TH/s   + 0.00001445 BTC/TH/s bonus
13-02-2019   16.59 TH/s   0.00068804 BTC   0.00004148 BTC/TH/s   + 0.00000344 BTC/TH/s bonus

first payment was 0.01104313 - and now sitting with 0.01151077 and accruing waiting for it to hit the time they do payout - which should be in the next hour or so.

I can say this - the amount they send and what I receive are not the same

First payment sent was: 0.011043134438 - I received .011026, a difference of .00001713 BTC (.109%)
Second payment sent was: 0.012101170225 - I received .012088 a difference of .00001317 BTC (.155%)
(I am not carrying it out to 12 decimal places as sigma appears to do)

It appears to be some sort of fee on the payment - no other pool I use is being charged this fee - what the other pools send is what I get.

For reference, my last payment from kano.is:
Payment sent was 0.01050444 - I received 0.01050444

I can see that the amount on the blockchain transaction matches what I got from Sigma but does not match what they record as sent.

for the first payment:

on Sigma dashboard - 107d4e58acbacb4faccac3218bd5916608273110e01a09a41cfe007f7b0f6502 0.011043134438

on block chain - 1LD6V8VNXfCTNzRyV6bj2vBhNg6VLTA2Ps 0.01102686 BTC

for the second payment:

on Sigma dashboard - 19ced6b02b7418241bcb6bf20e8a0a70dd7a72a2243f26962b48830d868f1bfa  0.012101170225

on block chain - 1LD6V8VNXfCTNzRyV6bj2vBhNg6VLTA2Ps 0.01208892 BTC

payments do not match between sigma dashboard and actual payment on blockchain

and with the kano.is transaction:

on kano website -
Block   Block UTC   Miner Reward   N Diff   N Range   Pool N Avg   Your %   Your N Diff   Your N Avg   Your BTC
561503   2019-Feb-04 12:50   12.41932163   29.086T   429hr 52m 30s   80.72PHs   0.08%   24.601G   68.28THs   0.01050444

on block chain - 1LD6V8VNXfCTNzRyV6bj2vBhNg6VLTA2Ps 0.01050444 BTC

payment matches between kano.is and blockchain

[rifleman74]

Slowly but surely, they're bleeding you dry.

Just say no to this scam pool.

[MoparMiningLLC]

Slowly but surely, they're bleeding you dry.

Just say no to this scam pool.

Maybe so but a few cents are missing but overall it is doing better than any other pool I am currently in and I now have it set to pay daily.

• No fees mining

maybe you could see my posts above and elaborate on how there are no fees? The amount reported in my payments screen are not equal to what was actually received by me nor equal to what was actually sent on the block chain - which, by the way, your transaction links are broken - they point to "blockchair" not "blockchain."