Big drop in hashrate

[gmaxwell]

The people who panic sold will be feeling really, really angry/stupid once this is over. They only have themselves to blame

Funny that after all these years people are still falling for Emin Gun Sirer's market manipulation-- even though his twitter is stuff full of obviously paid altcoin promotion.

Sometimes it makes me feel like people are just dying to do something stupid and only looking for an excuse...

Because mining is a noisy poisson processes it provides a never ending stream of excuses for those who hope to dare to be stupid.

[1713881493]

1713881493

[1713881493]

1713881493

[1713881493]

1713881493

[Herbert2020]

The people who panic sold will be feeling really, really angry/stupid once this is over. They only have themselves to blame

Funny that after all these years people are still falling for Emin Gun Sirer's market manipulation-- even though his twitter is stuff full of obviously paid altcoin promotion.

Sometimes it makes me feel like people are just dying to do something stupid and only looking for an excuse...

Because mining is a noisy poisson processes it provides a never ending stream of excuses for those who hope to dare to be stupid.

they are exactly looking for an excuse. since bitcoin has turned into an speculation tool for a big percentage of those that own it, there is a lot of interest in only trading it and being volatile helps with making money.
how to help increase the volatility? by drama like this. lack of knowledge and understanding of bitcoin (which also stems from seeing it as an investment) helps with that a lot!
i don't know if we can call it stupid although it is sad to see bitcoin community is like this!

[BADecker]

Probably some near AI used a Quantum Computer and cracked a Bitcoin-like encryption. Then a few folks found out about it, and the word quietly spread among acquaintances. It didn't actually break a Bitcoin encryption, but it broke one similar, showing that Bitcoin will be broken in the near future. Those in the know simply got scared and sold out while they could.

[pereira4]

Looks like hashrate is back up.

there is no evidence the hashrate ever fell

it cannot go "back up" if it did not even fall

What is the process like in order to manipulate every single hashrate chart out there without actually doing anything hashrate wise? seems a bit extreme to me.

The people who panic sold will be feeling really, really angry/stupid once this is over. They only have themselves to blame

Funny that after all these years people are still falling for Emin Gun Sirer's market manipulation-- even though his twitter is stuff full of obviously paid altcoin promotion.

Sometimes it makes me feel like people are just dying to do something stupid and only looking for an excuse...

Because mining is a noisy poisson processes it provides a never ending stream of excuses for those who hope to dare to be stupid.

What is the relationship between EGS and hashrate manipulation? any past precedents? I reckon reading about how this guy became yet another Gavincoin pumper.

[Wind_FURY]

The people who panic sold will be feeling really, really angry/stupid once this is over. They only have themselves to blame

Funny that after all these years people are still falling for Emin Gun Sirer's market manipulation-- even though his twitter is stuff full of obviously paid altcoin promotion.

I believe it's coordinated by a number of bad actors, not merely of Emin Gun Sirer's doing.

Plus the the trolls talk of the "drop", counter-trolls should talk of the "jump". Let's do our jobs, people.

Sometimes it makes me feel like people are just dying to do something stupid and only looking for an excuse...

Because plebs be plebs, we'll always at the mercy of the whalecumulators.

[Carlton Banks]

Looks like hashrate is back up.

there is no evidence the hashrate ever fell

it cannot go "back up" if it did not even fall

What is the process like in order to manipulate every single hashrate chart out there without actually doing anything hashrate wise? seems a bit extreme to me.

it's not the graphs that were manipulated, it's the interpretation of them



The hashrate graph are averaged predictions

They are not "the" hashrate, there is no graph of "the" hashrate.

To plot these hashrate graphs we see for Bitcoin, you look backwards in time, at x number of blocks and the time at which those x blocks were announced to the Bitcoin network.

The obvious point is, that if you choose a small number for x as your window in which to calculate the average, you get a very "accurate" (but very erratic) graph line. And so people who publish hashrate graphs usually use 3 windows; say, average over 1 day, over 3 days, and over 7 days, and put all three average lines on the same graph in different colors (I hope this sounds familiar....)


The manipulation worked like this: a long gap between 2 blocks happened on September 23rd, 1 hour and 16 minutes I believe (much longer than the 10 minute average gap). If you calculate the average hashrate over the 6 hours that contained that 1 hour-long block interval, you'll get that very erratic measurement that implies a big drop in hashrate. But if you calculated it over 12 or 24 hours, still including that very long block interval, it's barely a blip on the charts, because the long block doesn't distort the average as much when you use more data points to calculate the average.

Conversely, if you calculate the average using just 2 hours, you could say the hashrate had dropped 90% or more, and technically it's not wrong!! But if you choose a short window, your average is increasingly meaningless. Averages are all about giving disparate data points a context, there's almost no context if you're using only 2 data points!!

I mean, fuck it, if you use only 1 data point to calculate the average change, the size of the series change is 0!!! If the window you're using moves zero data points ahead, then you can calculate infinity % change in hashrate, regardless of how much it went up or down!! It's not mathematically incorrect, but it is dumb as fuck.

[wndsnb]

Looks like hashrate is back up.

there is no evidence the hashrate ever fell

it cannot go "back up" if it did not even fall

Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks to me like there were only 114 blocks mined on 9/23.

596163 to 596276

https://www.blockchain.com/btc/blocks/1569268006726

100EH/s at 11.8T diff should produce 170 blocks/day on average. If the nethash was actually at 100EH/s, the probability of getting <= 114 blocks is .00000319. Pretty unlikely.
90EH/s at 11.8T diff would average 153 blocks/day. Probability of <= 114 blocks is 0.000587, which is getting into the range of possibility, but still a once in a 5 year kind of event.

Calculated these numbers with this poisson distribution calculator : https://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1180573180

Probability of getting <= X number of blocks in a day at 100EH/sec:

X    |  probability
--------------------
110 | 5.736E-7
120 | 3.248E-5
130 | 8.260E-4
140 | 0.01017
150 | 0.06519
160 | 0.2349
170 | 0.5204
180 | 0.7910
190 | 0.9400
200 | 0.9889

Probability of getting <= X number of blocks in a day at 90EH/sec:
X    |  probability
--------------------
110 | 1.574E-4
120 | 0.0033
130 | 0.0320
140 | 0.1560
150 | 0.4250
160 | 0.7307
170 | 0.9196
180 | 0.9852
190 | 0.9983
200 | 0.9999


edit: corrected to <= 114 blocks

[Cityhunter123]

This is a temporary phenomenon, there is always a rise behind the fall

[Digitalbitcoin]

Looks like hashrate is back up.

there is no evidence the hashrate ever fell

it cannot go "back up" if it did not even fall

Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks to me like there were only 114 blocks mined on 9/23.

596163 to 596276

https://www.blockchain.com/btc/blocks/1569268006726

100EH/s at 11.8T diff should produce 170 blocks/day on average. If the nethash was actually at 100EH/s, the probability of getting 114 blocks is .00000319. Pretty unlikely.
90EH/s at 11.8T diff would average 153 blocks/day. Probability of 114 blocks is 0.000587, which is getting into the range of possibility, but still a once in a 5 year kind of event.

Calculated these numbers with this poisson distribution calculator : https://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1180573180

Probability of getting <= X number of blocks in a day at 100EH/sec:

X    |  probability
--------------------
110 | 5.736E-7
120 | 3.248E-5
130 | 8.260E-4
140 | 0.01017
150 | 0.06519
160 | 0.2349
170 | 0.5204
180 | 0.7910
190 | 0.9400
200 | 0.9889

Probability of getting <= X number of blocks in a day at 90EH/sec:
X    |  probability
--------------------
110 | 1.574E-4
120 | 0.0033
130 | 0.0320
140 | 0.1560
150 | 0.4250
160 | 0.7307
170 | 0.9196
180 | 0.9852
190 | 0.9983
200 | 0.9999

If we calculate profitability comparing to hash rate against the price of BTC, then it is trending in negative values.

So, many user especially miners supporting BTC are moving towards alternative coins to generate with their hash power. This is the main reason behind the falling of hash rate of BTC mining.

BTC is always a prime cryptocurrency among the market, based on the SHA-256 algorithm which is supported by ASIC mining.

Next wave hash rate will be gone higher as halving is coming by next year.

[liuqi]

People are gone out of mining industry itseems. Since seeing this chart I think we need to understand this in such way only.

There are many users on this forum were doing mining as their main and partial works but nowadays even the scam cloudmining also has been reduced. That symbolize the clear show that where the crypto mining field is staging.

[mohdk52]

I'm tired of these price swings...

[Carlton Banks]

Looks like hashrate is back up.

there is no evidence the hashrate ever fell

it cannot go "back up" if it did not even fall

Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks to me like there were only 114 blocks mined on 9/23.

596163 to 596276

you're disagreeing?

100EH/s at 11.8T diff should produce 170 blocks/day on average. If the nethash was actually at 100EH/s, the probability of getting <= 114 blocks is .00000319. Pretty unlikely.
90EH/s at 11.8T diff would average 153 blocks/day. Probability of <= 114 blocks is 0.000587, which is getting into the range of possibility, but still a once in a 5 year kind of event.

oh I see, you're not disagreeing, because you know that the rate of blocks getting discovered is probabilistic


meanwhile, difficulty adjusted yesterday. Did the the difficulty drop?

[wndsnb]

Looks like hashrate is back up.

there is no evidence the hashrate ever fell

it cannot go "back up" if it did not even fall

Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks to me like there were only 114 blocks mined on 9/23.

596163 to 596276

you're disagreeing?

100EH/s at 11.8T diff should produce 170 blocks/day on average. If the nethash was actually at 100EH/s, the probability of getting <= 114 blocks is .00000319. Pretty unlikely.
90EH/s at 11.8T diff would average 153 blocks/day. Probability of <= 114 blocks is 0.000587, which is getting into the range of possibility, but still a once in a 5 year kind of event.

oh I see, you're not disagreeing, because you know that the rate of blocks getting discovered is probabilistic

The "evidence" is circumstantial, and depends on if you think there is a greater chance that a good chunk of the nethash went down temporarily than a 0.059% chance of just having a really unlucky day for the network. I just wouldn't say there is no evidence.

meanwhile, difficulty adjusted yesterday. Did the the difficulty drop?

Not sure what that has to do with a single day drop in nethash. If we had >114 blocks on the 23rd the difficulty would have increased more yesterday.

[pereira4]

Looks like hashrate is back up.

there is no evidence the hashrate ever fell

it cannot go "back up" if it did not even fall

What is the process like in order to manipulate every single hashrate chart out there without actually doing anything hashrate wise? seems a bit extreme to me.

it's not the graphs that were manipulated, it's the interpretation of them



The hashrate graph are averaged predictions

They are not "the" hashrate, there is no graph of "the" hashrate.

To plot these hashrate graphs we see for Bitcoin, you look backwards in time, at x number of blocks and the time at which those x blocks were announced to the Bitcoin network.

The obvious point is, that if you choose a small number for x as your window in which to calculate the average, you get a very "accurate" (but very erratic) graph line. And so people who publish hashrate graphs usually use 3 windows; say, average over 1 day, over 3 days, and over 7 days, and put all three average lines on the same graph in different colors (I hope this sounds familiar....)


The manipulation worked like this: a long gap between 2 blocks happened on September 23rd, 1 hour and 16 minutes I believe (much longer than the 10 minute average gap). If you calculate the average hashrate over the 6 hours that contained that 1 hour-long block interval, you'll get that very erratic measurement that implies a big drop in hashrate. But if you calculated it over 12 or 24 hours, still including that very long block interval, it's barely a blip on the charts, because the long block doesn't distort the average as much when you use more data points to calculate the average.

Conversely, if you calculate the average using just 2 hours, you could say the hashrate had dropped 90% or more, and technically it's not wrong!! But if you choose a short window, your average is increasingly meaningless. Averages are all about giving disparate data points a context, there's almost no context if you're using only 2 data points!!

I mean, fuck it, if you use only 1 data point to calculate the average change, the size of the series change is 0!!! If the window you're using moves zero data points ahead, then you can calculate infinity % change in hashrate, regardless of how much it went up or down!! It's not mathematically incorrect, but it is dumb as fuck.

I know those charts do not read realtime hashrate changes and do averages. However, what are the chances that, with absolutely no negative change in hashrate, we deviated as much as 1+ hour-long block interval away from the average of 10 minutes? Wouldn't it be more likely that there was indeed a temporarily decrease in hashrate which then caused this big gap? Probabilities aside.

[Carlton Banks]

what are the chances that, with absolutely no negative change in hashrate, we deviated as much as 1+ hour-long block interval away from the average of 10 minutes? Wouldn't it be more likely that there was indeed a temporarily decrease in hashrate which then caused this big gap? Probabilities aside.

it's impossible to know! but let's put it another way: 45-60 minute block intervals happen fairly frequently (more than once when I've been demonstrating Bitcoin to a newbie, and as well when I've been paying for something in person!)

meanwhile, difficulty adjusted yesterday. Did the the difficulty drop?

Not sure what that has to do with a single day drop in nethash. If we had >114 blocks on the 23rd the difficulty would have increased more yesterday.

that's correct, the difficulty increased despite the alleged hashrate drop.

next question:

is any hashrate drop in any way meaningful if the difficulty increased at the next adjustment?

(I'm going to give you a clue, the answer begins with the letter "n", ends in "o", and is not "nintendo")

[wndsnb]

what are the chances that, with absolutely no negative change in hashrate, we deviated as much as 1+ hour-long block interval away from the average of 10 minutes? Wouldn't it be more likely that there was indeed a temporarily decrease in hashrate which then caused this big gap? Probabilities aside.

it's impossible to know! but let's put it another way: 45-60 minute block intervals happen fairly frequently (more than once when I've been demonstrating Bitcoin to a newbie, and as well when I've been paying for something in person!)

meanwhile, difficulty adjusted yesterday. Did the the difficulty drop?

Not sure what that has to do with a single day drop in nethash. If we had >114 blocks on the 23rd the difficulty would have increased more yesterday.

that's correct, the difficulty increased despite the alleged hashrate drop.

next question:

is any hashrate drop in any way meaningful if the difficulty increased at the next adjustment?

(I'm going to give you a clue, the answer begins with the letter "n")

Not sure what you are getting at. Are you saying you think the number of blocks on any given day has no impact on the difficulty? Or that you don't care how much the difficulty changes, just if it goes up or down?

[squatter]

Not sure what you are getting at. Are you saying you think the number of blocks on any given day has no impact on the difficulty?

The block interval follows a Poisson distribution. That's why on rare occasion, no blocks will be found at all for a couple hours. The distribution evens out over time, tending back towards the 10-minute target interval.

A single 24-hour period can follow the same dynamic, with the distribution being smoothed out over the 2016-block difficulty adjustment period. Focusing too much on the short term can lead to some pretty drastic miscalculations.

[13abyknight]

With all the news of Bitcoin mining farms turning unprofitable due to the much reduced block rewards, it does not come in as a big surprise that this drop could have been due to one or more associated farms shutting down operations.

For the greater good, lets hope it was more of a prolonged maintenance break rather than a complete shut down since this is a major decrease in the hash rate all things considered.

[Bitcoin Seller]

I get that the media need their attention-grabbing headlines, but are we still not past taking everything they report at face value yet?

Apparently, not. News outlets have been getting worse with every month that went by, but people keep donating traffic to them. They hold the golden formula to keep triggering overly sensitive perma bulls.

And then we have social media influencers who keep reporting about these articles, which only adds fuel to the fire. You can't escape from these attention grabbing articles anymore. I guess we just have to accept it and move on.

Experts are not sure whether it is worth linking these two phenomena directly since previously significant decreases in hash rate did not significantly affect the rate. It is possible that these are just interesting coincidences. It is also possible speculative behavior of a large player who suddenly threw a large number of coins onto the market. At the moment, no one gives the exact reason for the fall.

[Carlton Banks]

With all the news of Bitcoin mining farms turning unprofitable due to the much reduced block rewards, it does not come in as a big surprise that this drop could have been due to one or more associated farms shutting down operations.

For the greater good, lets hope it was more of a prolonged maintenance break rather than a complete shut down since this is a major decrease in the hash rate all things considered.

you have no clue what you're talking about


the difficulty just went up. There was no meaningful hashrate drop, it's not possible if the difficulty increased when the supposed crash happened.


can you read? the above information is in this thread, the one you're posting in.