Laurentia Pool - BAD risk for miners

[kano]

We are insured, plan to use funds from fee generation as proof of reserves in case of any errors in or out of our control to safety net our users work in lieu of insurance in the future.

At a pool fee of 0.3% it will take you 333 blocks to just cover the cost of a single lost block, with no income to pay for servers or anything else.

I did this on KanoPool due to the problems of -ck's poorly coded and tested code, and that was just before what lead up to him kicking me out of the ckpool and cgminer git. He wasn't happy about it
My pool already has a few (current) blocks worth of pool fees that I've not paid to my wallet, to cover anything that might go drastically wrong.
But I have also removed specific problems from the ckpool code I use that are still there in the public git.
Aside: there is more code in the ckpool git by me than by -ck.

FIBRE is non essential for LP or solo ckpool, it's loss will be missed by the network but ck pools are unaffected. So beyond that our server is extremely well connected and block switching is extremely fast for both the pool -ck hosts and LP which he co-operates specifically the server side.

You can't just make a statement that is clearly wrong, without some proof of why you think the logical need of distributing your blocks quickly and getting blocks from the majority of pools quickly isn't necessary.
That makes no sense at all for anyone who has even the slightest understanding of how bitcoin works.

No matter what you say, it takes some number of milliseconds to process a block find.
But then that block needs to get to all the other pools, to stop them trying to find a competing block with the one you found, and move on to finding the next height block built off your block.
On top of that, there is the requirement to see the blocks of other pools as quickly as possible, so you aren't working on stale work, like what happened on the solo pool in the extreme when they recently lost a block.

Without the fibre network, your block will only get to other pools by relay from your bitcoind to those you are connected to.
Thus it will be a number of (slow) steps from wherever your bitcoind is to the pools in china ...

Of course like you state any pool which submits a "winning" share from two miners at the same will have conflict. Our whitepaper outlines well our take on networking, and reasoning for our single node setup. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue as larger pools are starting to either adopt something similar or develop more on stratum like V2 which is mostly to support better the inefficiencies of satellite/proxy nodes within the same pool.

It's no conflict, it's simply expected to happen no matter how many nodes you have, one or 1000.
Having only one node doesn't stop it from happening.
Each hash is random - it's not going to make any difference if two miners are talking to the same node or two different nodes.
If you think for some reason two miners pointing to the same node cannot find 2 blocks at the same time, then you don't understand bitcoin mining.

You mention "V2" but this is simply just slush trying to market themselves, since they are falling in size compared to the other larger pools.
V2 is GBT relabeled, that died out for many good reasons

Also we don't expect higher orphan chance, we expect less than competitors.

Your block distribution is worse than most pools, by your own design.
So you WILL expect more orphans.

Our UI now although very basic displays best share so I'm not sure how we're not transparent as you claim when other pools provide less insight in these metrics, but still have the need to attack our service. Our goal as well is to use our fee to build out the UI to our users needs which could include more metrics requested by consensus.

... interesting how your opinion of having a UI has changed ... to quote YOU in the past:

...
Don't get me started on how shitty slushpool is. This "beta" shit is the same UI with features they should have built in years ago.

If anything we, including -ck are very open and transparent. Likely this is well known by anyone who has engaged with us before.

... and yet on the multiple occasions that his pools have lost blocks, no one knew except the miner who found the block, that then prompted him to explain why.
That's not transparent - that's hiding important information.

Everything you state in this thread is extremely assumptive

I've run a reliable pool for 6 years, and had to deal with the problem known as -ck for many of those years.
There's no assumptions in anything I've said.
I'll make it quite clear that I am an expert in bitcoin, networks, software development and server management.

As for the technical aspects you'd have to consult -ck but I know that relationship is tarnished, so good luck getting answers. I'll just say there is a reason we chose new high end equipment to host our server on, to not just benefit us as operators but to benefit our users and future optimizations and efficiencies without restraint.  

If your definition of "high end" is that tiny server -ck uses for the solo pool, then you clearly have no idea what is required to run a pool.
Remember, he ran a pool on a piece of junk for years that only by luck didn't lose more blocks than it did (or did it and no one knew?)

As a lot of the people on my pool know, I use two types of servers just for the nodes, one equivalent of your so called "high end" and one with half the ram - duplicated in the major areas on two different providers.
The main server is MUCH more powerful.

Basically you are saying you are cutting corners, spending only $120 a month on a server to support millions of dollars of mining hardware,
instead of setting up a proper pool with distributed nodes to get the blocks out to the rest of the network.
One lost block due to poor network distribution is (currently) about $50,000 yet you're only willing to spend $120 a month to deal with network distribution

"Laruentia Pool - BAD risk for miners"
Using software developed by someone who has so far lost 4 blocks due to buggy code and negligence.
... and has a white paper full of design flaws.

[minefarmbuy]

We can go back an forth forever. There's nothing in your criticisms that is note worthy as every pool has it's features and benefits. You're biased as are we, we can just admit it. Also our code isn't public so please stop assuming you know anything about anything regarding LP. It's a protected mining environment and although -ck would like to make it public we've asked him not to at this point. Which you can flame as non transparent as well but other ops don't have public code either.

0.3% fee covers the cost of operating the pool and more at our minimum cadence, to drive more development specifically to the pool. I've already addressed block loss due to operational error. The fee also scales for us as operators like any other pool, so the more hashrate the sooner we can have reserves and leave fiat based insurance and the more we an do for our users. This is grass roots startup with no VC funding rounds, no grants, and is the product of considerable thought and analysis, and we specifically reached out to -ck because of his skill and bitcoin centric motivations. Also his care for performance, professionalism, and the synergy for us works 110%. We're also showing how operators needlessly rent seek miners with high fees, though we're not greedy but still want our payday. As well we're very transparent in our fee as large pool already have back door deals with farms for considerably low fees. As every hash has the same probability it doesn't make sense to tax one user over another. We don't have a login requirement just pw, and no op wallet to manage for users. So overhead is even less. So who is putting reward and personal data at more risk? I wouldn't trust you hold a door a for someone let alone hold coin.

It's fine if you think you operate a pool "better", I would believe all operators would make the same case. You just seem to be fixated on LP for reasons already mentioned prior. Again, I'm flattered for the attention you give us, as it's just more exposure. Where any sane person easily sees that there's been considerable thought into our design and we're more than proud to work along side -ck. It's also ok if you disagree with anything and everything, we can't please everyone.

If you want to take my distain for pools with a considerable fee that in my opinion doesn't really innovate for it's pool base but funds projects and also excepts grant monies for projects, it fits the narrative you'd like to tell, though completely out of context. And as once a long time Slush Pool user I'm allowed as a consumer to have an opinion on their service. I also don't have a flaming thread attempting to discredit all their work, nor have I cared to flame your work excessively like you do. It also shows that anyone can pick anything apart if they choose to. We don't have a great relationship with Slush Pool but still these are people we happily engage with and always look to have productive, provoking discourse and they take my critiques seriously in our private and public conversations.

Even after all your blatant attempts to incite us to come down to your "karen'ing" of the mining section here, just tells me you're more focused on what others are doing than your own work. Likely scrambling for a FIBRE fix thinking your some sort of god while we already made their loss a non event for us, like many other points in our design.

If you'd like to continue to compare LP to a free and feely open community pool that's ok as well but still has nothing to do with LP besides any arbitrary association you stretch to make. And again, you're still using this thread to promote YOUR work, YOUR preferences, and lack of relationship skills under the guise of some sjw assumptive, conjecture that you then reflect onto us.

You could be so much more productive than continue to write replies that will be tl;dr'd once people realize the immense time sink this is to no result. Which you seem to have in ample supply, showing it's doesn't take much to run a pool now does it. 

We cut zero corners with our services, which are provided at a high level or would not occur. We have limited risk considerably in multiple ways for our users. Our whitepaper isn't perfect but considering the competition is well ahead of the curve and we're not going anywhere.

"So get used to it".

#mineon

[kano]

...
You could be so much more productive than continue to write replies that will be tl;dr'd once people realize the immense time sink this is to no result. Which you seem to have in ample supply, showing it's doesn't take much to run a pool now does it.  
...

And here we have it.
The basis of why you've made so many mistakes in your white paper and either made a lot of it up or were lead astray by someone else.

You believe it doesn't take much effort ... and your white paper states you are doing exactly that ... to run a reliable good pool.

Time sink for me? Not much.
Running a pool? Yes I do it 24/7/365.25 for almost 6 years now.

[minefarmbuy]

No, I’m saying you simply reap the rewards from the effort you put in. Obviously you don’t care about your pool to focus your efforts there.

My wife never touches her desktop yet it’s been on 24/7/365 for years as well.

We can go back an forth forever. There's nothing in your criticisms that is note worthy.

[kano]

No, I’m saying you simply reap the rewards from the effort you put in. Obviously you don’t care about your pool to focus your efforts there.

My wife never touches her desktop yet it’s been on 24/7/365 for years as well.

We can go back an forth forever. There's nothing in your criticisms that is note worthy.

Again saying how you think it takes no effort to run a pool.

The people who do mine on my pool do know how much effort I put into it.

The last person, who we both well know was putting no effort into a pool, was -ck who didn't give a shit about the solo pool, ignored it, and lost someone around $50,000
Then he decided that although he has thousands of BTC, he wouldn't cover the losses his negligence caused.
The same person you are saying:

...
This is grass roots startup with no VC funding rounds, no grants, and is the product of considerable thought and analysis, and we specifically reached out to -ck because of his skill and bitcoin centric motivations. Also his care for performance, professionalism, and the synergy for us works 110%.
...
Where any sane person easily sees that there's been considerable thought into our design and we're more than proud to work along side -ck.
...

Again and quite obvious:
"Laruentia Pool - BAD risk for miners"
Using software developed by someone who has so far lost 4 blocks due to buggy code and negligence.
... and has a white paper full of design flaws.

[minefarmbuy]

I don’t think it’s easy at all, considering the effort we’ve put into our project. You’re just on a personal vendetta that has nothing to do with LP and the time you waste here could be spent being much more productive on your own work. Specifically your user base, is the point I’m attempting to communicate. Which that and everyother point you mischaracterize to suit the narrative you’re after. Or just simply avoid.
We’ll keep building and you’ll keep complaining, constantly presenting yourself as a desperate, sad, forum troll short on fluoxetine and vitamin D.

If people don’t already know, spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt to intentionally disadvantage competition is a widely known tactic, used typically in desperation and obviously with malice of intent. And why my first comment here was that this entire thread is defamation and the actual narrative here is just a really sad attempt to pump yourself and shit all over someone who is actually respected by bitcoiners.

You just enjoy your night there thinking of more ways to be unproductive.

We’ll catch up again in a few weeks and let everyone here enjoy some popcorn again ok?

#mineon

[kano]

...
If people don’t already know, spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt
...

Using a common tactic to hide the truth.
... there's nothing I've stated about your pool design or -ck that isn't fact.

The opening post here is about why you should use different software.
Alas you're ignorance of Bitcoin and server management will be leading people astray and probably losing money unnecessarily.

I'm not sure what rubbish -ck has been telling you to make you pay him, but his priority is not Bitcoin at all.
You can find all about his priority here on his reddit account:
https://www.reddit.com/user/ittaku

... and lastly ...
The 'k' in ckpool stands for 'kano'

Funnily enough many people also know all this.

--

Now you seem to think that there's something special about how you are planning to run a pool that will make people flock to it.
Yet you have been posting about it here for months and your pool shows nothing for it.
Don't forget the obvious, there's currently well over 100EH of miners out there ... so yaw so called 'great design' that 'works' should have easily got that exceptionally tiny % of that 100EH that you 'need' by now ...

Running the best pool for Bitcoin (which I do) does not guarantee hash rate.

Most Bitcoin miners are ignorant of how bitcoin works - like you.
Most pools have large miner bases either due to requiring them to mine on their pool or by deception in their marketing.
Alas I'm not happy to do that.

Your white paper clearly says you are happy to do that - though it's not working for you either yet ...
Just post after post trying to bump your own thread ... against the rules of the forum

[minefarmbuy]

I just find it "odd" we work with a rival and you proceed with a full attack. Then we expected it.

You also know: That we don't work on the technicals for the pool. That -ck refuses to interact with you. So it's opportunistic "5N" for you to fud the shit out of the thread. Or ours, but I won't allow your bullshit. Likely you'll play your righteous card from a soap box and quote this line pushing your deflective, deceptive narrative towards us.

I believe our mission is 110% explained in detail in our whitepaper. And I'm being frugal with that number. Our server is highly optimized, and ready for mining
https://laurentiapool.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/laurentiapool_whitepaper.pdf 

We do client services, and seek dev on UI by user review, interested devs can dm me for contract or split of fee agreement (please read on). -ck works the server. We collaborate well, and are proactive in management. If you have interest in mining with Laurentia Pool it's entirely up to you and we can be easily contacted for any matter unless you're a complete douche. What we're driving to achieve is to highly compete to out perform F/PPS score and increase revenue directly to the user. All while reducing as much trust as possible for all parties in our methods. All we require is a 2016 block commitment. Using what we believe are the best tools and code to do that to date and pouring our fee into exactly what matters; our server, ui, and development. Our minimum operation cadence, or hashrate, is a projected 5 blockfinds per diffadj, with a score system that will still payout after exit, yet incentivizing continued participation.

If you have millions of dollars in infra, it's likely you'd appreciate and value a full coinbase derived payment directly to your own control. If you have a usb stick you can still mine here, likely we would not be counting you as a dedicated user since your payout would be deferred greatly, still we'd suggest you solo mine. Yet all potential users are allowed to mine right away, knowing fully the risks involved regarding probability and conflicts with fw, hosts, or rentals. Essentially our pool is gauged to those who actually own equipment in possession due to our pw strength. Every hash is scored and accounted and does payout till fall off.

And yes, 70Ph is a feat in this environment for a self funded start up. Debatable to be under expectation but is still a celebrated feat, and we look forward to continued commitments. https://laurentiapool.org/commitment

We're proud of the work we've accomplished, as we know full well none of this easy. We can fund the server without use, as it costs less for us than to manage it than active and also to not have already had preset expectations directly with a user before entrance.
We can easily manage 100 active mining users daily with our recourses. Our fee scales so it incentivizes us to grow and develop, incentivizes participation from any active miner dedicated to the bitcoin network, and obviously and greatly our own.

I really don't care what you say or how much stalk -ck with your weird manic depressive compulsive disorder.

And just to make clear our post was originally locked because we knew you'd be the first to flame, and voila  . . here we are. We also are able to bump once every 24 hours, per forum rules. I'd think a "legend" here would know that. Still we adjusted our method to support the the fluidity of the forum to just major announcements/updates as they occur. Which are reformatted and unfortunately to our unliking so we revise to default, and without complaint.

Again, our only karen is you, as our feedback has been great. Which brings me back to the first line of this reply.

#mineon

[kano]

Blah blah blah repeat the same stuff I've already pointed out the problems with - that you clearly do not understand.

...
I really don't care what you say or how much stalk -ck with your weird manic depressive compulsive disorder.
...

Lulz - you sure you're not a -ck sock puppet?

He thinks that anyone who reads all of the pool section of this forum is a stalker of him?

I made one post in the past year on one of his threads and that is called being a stalker?

Not sure why anyone thinks that one post in the past year on his pool page is called stalking ...
That's called paranoia. Read up all about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia

My one line post that means I'm a stalker
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=763510.msg54139427#msg54139427

But that was his 'stalker' comment you copied:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=763510.msg54140865#msg54140865

The guy spends most of his time working on animated child porn.
Check his reddit page.
He's the one who sounds like a stalker ...

[mikeywith]

and yet on the multiple occasions that his pools have lost blocks, no one knew except the miner who found the block, that then prompted him to

How can anyone tell if your pool or any other mining pool for that matter actually lost a block and the miner didn't notice it? what if due to a packet loss caused by a server faliture or a connection problem from the pool side caused a loss of a block and went unnoticed, or even worse what if the pool lost a block due to the exact reasons CK pool lost some blocks?

I am not attacking your pool or anything else, I know CK could have prevented the last block if he had the right resources, I am not making excuses for him, actually running a solo pool is the best test since almost EVERYONE looks at their miner's status, but when mining on a pool especially if it's a PPS and in the grand scheme of things almost NOBODY watches their status simply because finding a block won't make them earn an extra penny, so really, how can someone (doesn't have to be you) claim that their pool never lost a block? based on what?

You also know: That we don't work on the technicals for the pool. That -ck refuses to interact with you.

I am probably the one who likes Kano the least here, but the concerns he has should be answered, if -ck refuses to answer them, then it's your duty as the pool owner to answer these questions and deny Kano's accusations, if the software your pool uses is the same one that lost a few blocks due to what Kano claims to be "lack of testing" then why would miners trust your pool? if -ck has has already fixed those issues (assuming there are issues aside from the inadequate server resources he had) then him or you should state that, if -ck now runs a different version from the one on github then that should be also stated, if Kano is making stuff up because of the personal issues between him and -ck then -ck should at least deny the allegations either by posting here personally or through you as the pool owner/manager.

Feel free to ignore my oppinion since i am not one of your clients, I have zero issues with -ck in fact I do like him, but when it comes to being honest when giving unbiased oppinion, Kano's terrible attitude doesn't get in the way of my judgment.

[MoparMiningLLC]

... but when mining on a pool especially if it's a PPS and in the grand scheme of things NOBODY watches their status simply because finding a block won't make them earn an extra penny...

I wouldn't say "NOBODY watches their status" - I track every block I find on any algo and or pool - now on PPS that can be tedious to go thru the blocks but it is not impossible. I keep screenshots as well.

Not debating or arguing any other point of your statement but you can't say NOBODY tracks it because I know I am not the only one.

here is just the past few months - some images are of one block - some images have details on quite a few blocks. I store the block number - hash - and diff of each block in a spreadsheet as well.

[minefarmbuy]

Any client or potential is able to contact -ck. I have already recommend making a genuine inquiry on our thread or our other contact methods. Even invited Kano to do so. There’s no reason I'm needed as a proxy or mediator for discourse especially by what should be amongst peers.

I will not ask ck or mandate he, or anyone engage with someone like Kano regardless of any history.

[kano]

Firstly, this is off topic.
Post it in my pool thread, which is only what you are posting about.

Secondly, again, mr gambler shows his complete lack of understanding of statistics.
You do this over and over again and pretend you know what you are talking about and each time I point out why you don't.

I will again point out what you are showing and clearly unable to read:

So you picked the worst PAPPS% line in the whole table
1) Last 50 Blocks   87.9wks   117.94%   103.35%   0.8937   84.79%   86.84%

This is 50 blocks. Not 100, not 1000, simply 50 blocks.
What does the CDF[Erl] say about the probability - 0.8937 i.e. it's inside even the 90th percentile.
Approx one in ten chance of that happening ... damn that's ... one in ten wow - why is this an issue?

Someone posted slush's luck stats in my discord channel this morning before I kicked him ... hmm let me go get them ...


OhMyFuckingGod - they had 83.69% luck over their last 50 blocks - we better go call the police ... that's worse than kano.is luck ...

Yes I do get sick of this rubbish from phil who clearly has no understanding of statistics and keeps making posts like these


... I don't suppose you know how bad the statistics are on the CKPools? No he hides that information.
LA pool will have none also - he'll be hiding that as well.
The ckpool single block difficulty ratio/luck calculation is also WRONG

--
Edit:

and he's now deleted all the accusations he made

The luck isn't terrible - it's expected approx 1 in 10 runs of 50 blocks - so every 500 blocks on every pool you'd expect to get a run of 50 blocks with that luck.

[philipma1957]

i have deleted all my posts. kano is right i am stupid.

[DaveF]

PPS is more and more what people want.

If it's good for the miner / pool operator has to be determined on an individual basis.

Personally, I have about $7.50 in dust left on Kano's pool since 2016. Due to PPLNS and the lack of luck, it's just a write off to me at the moment, never going to get paid and unless I put some crap miner on there when they happen to get lucky and find a block I'm never going to get paid. In terms of crypto mining losses it's a small one.

For smaller pools like Kano and Laurentia, PPS is looking to be the only way to gain more users. A small user might mine there knowing they will get paid what they mine (minus the fee) if they grow into a larger miner they might stay.
But, very few larger miners are going to move to or start with a small PPLNS pool.

Same with Laurentia I am not going to mine here, I just changed out some equipment and barely have 1PH.

It's all older, outdated, inefficient gear. But since I have fixed power costs it works for me.
Since I have fixed expenses PPS works best for me.

Having had many discussions with other people what I am doing seems to be a recurring theme.

-Dave

[philipma1957]

oh kano is right i will stay off this thread. i opened another. here in the pool section.

[kano]

...
Personally, I have about $7.50 in dust left on Kano's pool since 2016.
...

If it's above dust 10,000 sat, I'll probably get around to sending it out sooner or later.
I've been very busy with coding on the KanoPool.
As everyone knows we have a full 100% proof of payment page (uses the blockchain information to prove the payments)
with a CSV download

I've also been doing dust payouts to any miner who gets a payout
i.e. Block reward + owed dust, so most of the current miners have zero dust left
(there were only a few owed extra in the last block)

The KDB code has had sizeable additions done over the last months (and still uses way less CPU than ckpool), and soon there'll also be the option for Solo mining on KanoPool.
For a limited few medium long term miners (of my choice) they'll also be able to mine 50% PPS until the PPS funds run out

PPS is normally NOT an option for small pools, since to run it long term, the backing is a large amount of BTC.
Using Meni's calculation from my post here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104664.msg48795003#msg48795003
Current reward 6.25 BTC for a 0.1% chance of the pool going bankrupt, with a 3% fee, the backing required is:
719.5625 BTC or about $6.8 million

(my PPS I'll have is simply to have a buffer that when it runs out, they'll simply have to switch their miners elsewhere or to PPLNS - but no losses since I'll payout the trailing end of mining of course and can switch off PPS mining with a command)

[mikeywith]

I wouldn't say "NOBODY watches their status" - I track every block I find on any algo and or pool

Ok perhaps that was poor wordings on my side, changed that nobody to almost nobody, you are right, but this doesn't invalidate the point that the motive to watch blocks found on a PPS pool or a very large PPLNS is slim to nothing when compared to mining solo, maybe even "almost nobody" is far from accurate but i am sure you get the point.

Still waiting for Kano to answer my question and show us all on what bases can a mining pool claim they never lost a block when nobody has access to their database, not saying it can't be done, i am simply asking a question and willing to be educated on the subject.

[DaveF]

If it's above dust 10,000 sat, I'll probably get around to sending it out sooner or later.

Of course it's above 10K sat. How else do you get to $7.50  

PPS is normally NOT an option for small pools, since to run it long term, the backing is a large amount of BTC.
Using Meni's calculation from my post here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104664.msg48795003#msg48795003
Current reward 6.25 BTC for a 0.1% chance of the pool going bankrupt, with a 3% fee, the backing required is:
719.5625 BTC or about $6.8 million

(my PPS I'll have is simply to have a buffer that when it runs out, they'll simply have to switch their miners elsewhere or to PPLNS - but no losses since I'll payout the trailing end of mining of course and can switch off PPS mining with a command)

Which as a miner kind of puts you into a loop. Do you mine on a small PPLNS pool that might never find a block so you never get paid before they close? (bitminter). Or do you take a loss and pay the 3% or 4% fee and mine on a PPS pool?

If you are creating a pool, how do you encourage people to join if they might not get paid more then once a month or possibly every other month or once a quarter? Same loop as above just from the other side.

Which brings us back to the original thought of this thread. "Laurentia Pool - BAD risk for miners". It's might be, it might not be. For me, even if they had the best coders in the world and the best pool infrastructure in the world etc. It would be because if they don't find blocks or have them orphaned then I'm loosing money. Same with your pool Kano.

On the flip side, if I needed to squeeze every last $ out of my miners and could wait for payment, then PPS @ 4% would be a bad risk. And I should be mining someplace else.

Blanket statements are bad

If it's just about the coding and the back end and connectivity, then without a full review of their code and a complete network and peer map then it's just a guess.

-Dave

[MoparMiningLLC]

Ok perhaps that was poor wordings on my side, changed that nobody to almost nobody, you are right, but this doesn't invalidate the point that the motive to watch blocks found on a PPS pool or a very large PPLNS is slim to nothing when compared to mining solo, maybe even "almost nobody" is far from accurate but i am sure you get the point...

agreed.