Eligius pool is back under the new name Ocean

[cryptosize]

you may argue that they are doing this for the sake of BTC

There is no such sake, that's the thing. It's not a "I don't mine it, it doesn't get into the chain". If you don't mine a transaction, somebody else will. That's how censorship-resistance is ensured. Ocean ignoring a transaction produces the equivalent outcome of mining it and giving the transaction fee to someone else.

I still don't understand how a Bitcoin developer is incapable of grasping this simple concept.

There's a real tangible effect that ordinals/runes minters will face if part of the hashpower doesn't mine them in the blocks they find.
Effectively they become more expensive to be included in a block. Right now with OCEAN being a small part of the network this effect isn't very large. But it's also acting as a vote of sorts.

If more miners get behind OCEAN it's indicating that they care more about what they perceive as a better step for the health of bitcoin's network rather than some short term profits. Of course Ordinals/Runes give economic incentives for miners to act against the interests of users seeking to transact value on bitcoin's chain, which harms the overall utility of bitcoin as a tool to make electronic cash transactions (which is Satoshi's original intention), so I'd say Luke is right to call these types of transactions an attack on bitcoin.

Surely not everyone has to agree. And not everyone has to follow the same ideals... But Luke isn't forcing anybody to do anything here. It's a novel proposal to miners to opt out of mining abusive transactions completely voluntarily. The results so far show that while some miners hold ideals to support bitcoin against this so called attack, those holding the vast majority of the hash power either don't care enough or would rather go after short term profit.

That's like arguing that the Communist Party may have a small percentage right now (around 5%), but in the future more "moral" people could join it and demolish profit-seeking, "greedy" capitalists.

I mean, good luck with that... you're basically asking people to go against human nature.

[stompix]

Probably the pool's total hashrate will rise soon also because it currently sits at around 660 Ph/s but most of the time it's above 1k Ph/s. I guess some mining operations shut down every now and then due to electricity cost spikes or weather etc.

Yeah, it will rise and rise ...since..the launch and it still hasn't crossed 0.20% of the global hashrate!
Quite funny that you mention costs when all this is about leaving profits aside!

Or perhaps also have found it might be more profitable to mine under the TIDES payment scheme after a block is found because of the way it rewards luck.

Or maybe they have switched to another pool that doesn't bankrupt them!

If more miners get behind OCEAN it's indicating that they care more about what they perceive as a better step for the health of bitcoin's network rather than some short term profits

Which is not happening!

The results so far show that while some miners hold ideals to support bitcoin against this so called attack, those holding the vast majority of the hash power either don't care enough or would rather go after short term profit.

And finally, we have the revelation, mining is a business!
That's why Phil shut down his operations, that's why electricity prices have killed mine, that's why the guys with 2 cents per kwh will keep mining as long as they get 1 cent profit and they will shut down when they won't! Ideals don't pay for bills nor do they fill your stomach!
Seriously, listen to mikeywith, he has explained this perfectly, there are dreams and there is a reality, you can't force your way in a decentralized system by ignoring the law of economics and then blabbing about freedom and free markets.

He is actually the opposite of woke, he is a Catholic: https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin_uncensored/comments/492ztl/lukejr_the_only_religion_people_have_a_right_to/

Ordinals in the blocks are bad, catholic prayers are good, small transactions are good, casino transactions have no place in the chain, if nobody sees the patter of "wherever I don't like is bad and should be banned" in here needs another prescription!

That's like arguing that the Communist Party may have a small percentage right now (around 5%), but in the future more "moral" people could join it and demolish profit-seeking, "greedy" capitalists.

Those commies would first need capital to start mining, so I guess that's a bit of a conundrum for them! 
And I can't wait to grab one huge bag of popcorn and check the math of the guys who thing 10tb of storage is too expensive for a node but magically 3 million $4k/3KW beast are doable!

[BlackHatCoiner]

There's a real tangible effect that ordinals/runes minters will face if part of the hashpower doesn't mine them in the blocks they find.

The tangible effect will be in those miners' pockets. Ordinals will get their confirmation sooner or later, whether only 50%, 5%, or even 0.5% of the hashrate mines them.

Effectively they become more expensive to be included in a block.

Nope. They become less expensive. Let me give you an example. Group A ignores Ordinal transactions, where group B ignores no transaction. Let's assume each group owns 50% of the hashrate.

Assume we have the following mempool:

Code:

[... TXs paying less than 50 sat/vb ...]
Regular TX #1: 50 sat/vb
Regular TX #2: 75 sat/vb
Ordinal TX:    100 sat/vb
Regular TX #3: 100 sat/vb
Regular TX #4: 110 sat/vb
Regular TX #5: 120 sat/vb

For the sake of simplicity, assume that each block can have up to 4 transactions.

In the hypothetical network state, the group A would mine TX #5, #4, #3 and #2, even if #2 pays less than the Ordinal one. Therefore, it reduces the competition, because the transactions that pay less than the Ordinals have a higher chance to be mined than before. The mempool right after would be:

Code:

[... TXs paying less than 50 sat/vb ...]
Regular TX #1: 50 sat/vb
Ordinal TX:    100 sat/vb

You can see that the Ordinal now pays way more than the others, and there is still 50% chance that it will be ignored again by group A, so the Ordinal user can reduce their fee from 100 sat/vb to 51, knowing that group B would consider them with the highest priority.

If it isn't completely understandable, think of it this way: In the first mempool figure, if you were the person paying 75 sat/vb, you'd know that you have 50% chance to be picked as highest priority, whereas in the current state, you'd be completely confident that the chance would be 0%, and this would incentivize you to compete with the Ordinal user, and rise your fee rate (which would in consequence incentivize them to do so, as well).

If more miners get behind OCEAN it's indicating that they care more about what they perceive as a better step for the health of bitcoin's network rather than some short term profits

I'd argue that the health of the Bitcoin network relies on principles such as censorship-resistance being preserved at all times, no matter what. Being censorship resistant is not just game theory; it's a principle itself, just like ignoring Ordinals. I don't understand why you think that pro-censorship pools would be more ethical than anti-censorship pools.

[philipma1957]

With changes to the hashrate that are that steep I have to guess the biggest changes in hashrate are coming from large operations that make a point by mining in Ocean. Or perhaps also have found it might be more profitable to mine under the TIDES payment scheme after a block is found because of the way it rewards luck.

So you want to ignore the obvious facts that exist on the longest blockchain the world has ever known and assume some things that only exist in your imagination? how does that work? Ocean pool leaves a ton of money on the table, look at this block https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000002509da9476db6f578ae8d2bd81d83b992ea37b68db8d1

it has a terrible health score, the pool included some 50+ sat/vByte transactions and left some 140+ sat transactions, anyone who thinks they are somehow magically making more profit mining on Ocean is either clueless or plain stupid, you may argue that they are doing this for the sake of BTC because they think inscription are bad, but you can't just claim they are somehow making a good profit by not mining high paying transactions.

Large pools that found most of the halving blocks have mined more BTC in a single day than they would in weeks, you know how terrible Ocean's rewards would seem if they found a block around the halving when inscriptions were paying 35-40BTC/block? just imagine that you have a 100ph of the 1000ph Ocean has and on that day you received your 0.325BTC when you could have made 4BTC on that same day had your pool mined those transactions.! Ocean Pool was very lucky they didn't mine any of those blocks.

there is a lot of push for perfect kyc
translation censoring of transactions

if i were running a big mine say 1 or 2 eh and it was usa based i would put some gear in this pool just in case the usa forces full kyc and tx censorship.

I am thinking a lot of people mining there has usa mines and are prepping for new 🆕 restrictions for usa mining ⛏️.

[DaveF]

.....
And I can't wait to grab one huge bag of popcorn and check the math of the guys who thing 10tb of storage is too expensive for a node but magically 3 million $4k/3KW beast are doable!

Yes way too expensive: https://www.microcenter.com/product/616808/seagate-ironwolf-12tb-7200-rpm-sata-iii-6gb-s-35-internal-nas-cmr-hard-drive
Popcorn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPFxTous3ew

Makes you wonder what else they will not mine when they decide they don't like it.

And don't forget Block / Square / CashApp are involved with this pool. They like their KYC and data tracking and all of that.


Either way for now I'm out of this thread. It's just getting me aggravated.

-Dave

[alani123]

The results so far show that while some miners hold ideals to support bitcoin against this so called attack, those holding the vast majority of the hash power either don't care enough or would rather go after short term profit.

And finally, we have the revelation, mining is a business!
That's why Phil shut down his operations, that's why electricity prices have killed mine, that's why the guys with 2 cents per kwh will keep mining as long as they get 1 cent profit and they will shut down when they won't! Ideals don't pay for bills nor do they fill your stomach!
Seriously, listen to mikeywith, he has explained this perfectly, there are dreams and there is a reality, you can't force your way in a decentralized system by ignoring the law of economics and then blabbing about freedom and free markets.

Can I preface this by saying that I don't mean what I'm about to say in an offensive way? Maybe you can help me come to another revelation because I genuinely fail to understand the motivations behind talking to me like that.

I get that people don't like Luke and I get most of your points. But what I don't get is why so many people seem to be on the offensive whenever someone talks about Ocean pool in a non-negative light.
Do senior users of this forum have something to gain from ordinals/runes? I'd bet that not ever 1% of this forum operate mining hardware anymore as it's become too much of a hassle to run as an individual. So what's the deal with siding against those opposing ordinals/runes? I don't understand this.

If we think about bitcoin's long term future, it's probably better to preserve and focus on its value transacting capabilities. Action against ordinals/runes is a novel idea based on good principles. So are we just going to stand completely against it, especially if it happens in a voluntary manner? Or are we just hating on Ocean because of some code Luke released over 10 years ago?

I'm not under the impression that anyone here would have ulterior motives to support Ordinals or Runes but still, attacking those that just oppose them in such passion seems a bit much to me.

[stompix]

Can I preface this by saying that I don't mean what I'm about to say in an offensive way? Maybe you can help me come to another revelation because I genuinely fail to understand the motivations behind talking to me like that.

There is nothing special in the way I talk and this is how I always do when I need to say things over and over again and again.

I get that people don't like Luke and I get most of your points. But what I don't get is why so many people seem to be on the offensive whenever someone talks about Ocean pool in a non-negative light.

I can't speak for others but for me I will simply not agree with censorship when this not only hits against most principles but it will also hurt the entire ecosystem, and once we go into there there are so many things wrong that you will need magical power to fix
- we start censoring ordinals, then we censor dust transactions, then we censor maybe coinjoins, maybe also consolidation cause...they offer no value, when do we draw the line as it is mathematically impossible for 10 million people to use the chain daily
- fees at 30 satoshi cover only 1/3 of the reward, when the reward is gone everyone will need to pay that just to keep the same level of security, if people are not willing to pay...who will? If they are why do you want them to stop and why?
- Luke is asking us to save the chain and allow people with 1 tb nodes to keep running while the same we need as above 3 million 3kw miners to secure the chain, FML, yeah fuck my life, 60knodes running 10tb drives is impossible but 3 million gears as powerful as AC units running 24/7 is doable

So what's the deal with siding against those opposing ordinals/runes? I don't understand this. I don't understand this.

Oh, the ones who are not with us are against us, recalling 89 again.
I am free to call Luke  whatever as long as I provide arguments for it and I don't have to like ordinals at all, to be honest, I'm not even completely sure how those work nor am I going to waste my time on it! 

If we think about bitcoin's long term future, it's probably better to preserve and focus on its value transacting capabilities.

I am focusing on the fire future. 

Yes way too expensive: https://www.microcenter.com/product/616808/seagate-ironwolf-12tb-7200-rpm-sata-iii-6gb-s-35-internal-nas-cmr-hard-drive

Don't forget you also need faster internet... Or at least faster than in 2013, oh wait!

[alani123]

So, anyone here have any takes in this?


I get that many people here have been calculating potential profitability based on block templates but that's the minimum amount of data you can have to make such projections. It's a sample of 1 assuming perfect conditions.

Since the beginning Ocean founders made a big point on how shares are calculated in a more fair manner in Ocean pool. With all the added entropy of how other pools estimate shares, it's not too unlikely that the ultra big miners steal from everyone else. So even with the supposed most profitable block template, hash on other pools is still less profitable? Potentially true. At least Bob Burnett who runs a lot of hash in Ocean and other places claims so.

It'd be interesting to get more insight in this but it sounds very plausible to me. Especially looking at how scummy other pools have been in the past.

[DaveF]

So, anyone here have any takes in this?

Large image removed

I get that many people here have been calculating potential profitability based on block templates but that's the minimum amount of data you can have to make such projections. It's a sample of 1 assuming perfect conditions.

Since the beginning Ocean founders made a big point on how shares are calculated in a more fair manner in Ocean pool. With all the added entropy of how other pools estimate shares, it's not too unlikely that the ultra big miners steal from everyone else. So even with the supposed most profitable block template, hash on other pools is still less profitable? Potentially true. At least Bob Burnett who runs a lot of hash in Ocean and other places claims so.

It'd be interesting to get more insight in this but it sounds very plausible to me. Especially looking at how scummy other pools have been in the past.

Without showing the data it means nothing.

1) How long a time was your sample?
2) Does it include when Ocean was 1st starting and had low fees? It did say since their launch.
3) What other pools?

And so on.

Anybody can say anything on twitter.

-Dave

[stompix]

Anybody can say anything on twitter.

-Dave

So, you don't trust a verified account on Twitter? Damn!

Setting aside both the dislike of ocean and the fact that they didn't provide any data, it is still possible for them to be more profitable than another pool for a miner in a selected interval, we're talking about 0.1% to 0.15% of the hashrate , luck could play a huge role in it.
Going just through their data rally quickly, in the last 30 days they had 8 blocks, so they mined 0.18% of the blocks while having at max levels 0.16% of the hashrate. Now if we go one month before it drops to 5 blocks, so...

 

[philipma1957]

Anybody can say anything on twitter.

-Dave

So, you don't trust a verified account on Twitter? Damn!

Setting aside both the dislike of ocean and the fact that they didn't provide any data, it is still possible for them to be more profitable than another pool for a miner in a selected interval, we're talking about 0.1% to 0.15% of the hashrate , luck could play a huge role in it.
Going just through their data rally quickly, in the last 30 days they had 8 blocks, so they mined 0.18% of the blocks while having at max levels 0.16% of the hashrate. Now if we go one month before it drops to 5 blocks, so...

 

well they are tiny well under 1%.

so as you say doing 8 vs 7 a month means they have a good month.

but if i run 200kwatts a month at 5 cents it costs me almost 7400 for power.

and if they do 4 vs 7 I am into pocket for thousands.

[mikeywith]

So, anyone here have any takes in this?

I do, it's called variance, assuming whatever he says is correct "which could be" then it's just the result of the huge variance that small pools face, with 1EH worth of hashrate the pool is supposed to hit a block every 4 days, with a small variance in luck, they could hit 2 in a week which makes them lucky and earn a lot more than having mined to other pools, but also, they are subject to hitting only 1 block in a whole week which makes them subject to earning a lot less than miners with the same hashrate on other pools.

You can't cherry-pick a certain period of time and say this pool earns me more than that pool, I did mine for a very short period of time on Kano.is and I made more BTC there than I could have made on the other large pool I used, I made like a dozen more profit because I was just lucky, it's all but variance and luck which eventually evens out across all pools.

[blockdyor]

I've been testing the pool with some home miners over the past month to write a review for the website and wanted to share my initial thoughts:

• No Registration, No KYC: In an industry where KYC is becoming the norm, this is incredibly liberating. I started mining in just 5 minutes. I bookmarked my dashboard, and that's it—I have everything under control.
  
• Non-Custodial: Unlike FPPS pools, which act as custodians and hold miners' funds by approximating reward distributions, the TIDES rewards system lets you receive coins directly from the Coinbase, ensuring the full and exact pro rata portion of your hashrate contributions. Currently, the minimum payout is around 1 million sats. They also recently integrated Lightning for even lower payments.

I'm extremely happy with this project and believe it's crucial for the industry. It's definitely one of the most important ones I've encountered in the last years. You can really see the people behind it aren't newbies, but have a deep, OG Bitcoin understanding.

[DaveF]

Anybody can say anything on twitter.

-Dave

So, you don't trust a verified account on Twitter? Damn!

Setting aside both the dislike of ocean and the fact that they didn't provide any data, it is still possible for them to be more profitable than another pool for a miner in a selected interval, we're talking about 0.1% to 0.15% of the hashrate , luck could play a huge role in it.
Going just through their data rally quickly, in the last 30 days they had 8 blocks, so they mined 0.18% of the blocks while having at max levels 0.16% of the hashrate. Now if we go one month before it drops to 5 blocks, so...

 

well they are tiny well under 1%.

so as you say doing 8 vs 7 a month means they have a good month.

but if i run 200kwatts a month at 5 cents it costs me almost 7400 for power.

and if they do 4 vs 7 I am into pocket for thousands.

Agreed, that is why more and more people are supporting PPS+ pools vs. PPLNS or any other format of getting paid.
It's a job so to speak. You submit a share you get X amount of BTC

Much like working someplace, you show up, do your job and get paid. You don't care in the day to day week to week month to month if the company is making money or not. If they have a bad month you get paid. If they have a great month you get paid. And hopefully the company keeps making money so you keep getting paid.

If VIA or Braiins does not find a block for a week I really don't care. I got paid.

-Dave

[kano]

Well there's clearly a sofware/design/policy issue with this pool

Block 444208 - ocean - empty - on the network 7 seconds after the previous block ...

[kano]

...
If VIA or Braiins does not find a block for a week I really don't care. I got paid less.

-Dave

Corrected your line.

To this day I have yet to understand why most miners have zero understanding of the word 'variance'
I guess the correct word would be short-sighted.

Variance means UP and DOWN.
So you are not getting paid less on non-PPS, you are getting paid, varying above and below a higher amount, with an expected higher return.

Just like every business on the planet - some higher and some lower times/seasons.

And to state the obvious, that is exactly how bitcoin works - no matter how big or small the pool is - blocks are random with variance - an expected average time.

Since you compared it to something that is not even comparable, I'll use the same faulty comparison:
Or even as employees in any good company, your wage depends on how the company performs (and how you perform)

[alani123]

So Kano pool paying less is variance which we should accept because statistical possibilities can lead to bad luck, also definitely OCEAN paying more is also luck. But when ocean had a mishap it is 100% a design flaw.

Well there's clearly a sofware/design/policy issue with this pool

Block 444208 - ocean - empty - on the network 7 seconds after the previous block ...

I think at this point you should stop claiming expertise ok the topic. Being unable to control emotion leads to many falsehoods, and speaking of a pool you clearly hate obviously draws in a lot of those with what you say.

[ABCbits]

Anybody can say anything on twitter.

-Dave

So, you don't trust a verified account on Twitter? Damn!
--snip--

Almost anyone can get blue checkmark by paying Twitter/X premium, see https://help.x.com/en/managing-your-account/about-x-verified-accounts.

I've been testing the pool with some home miners over the past month to write a review for the website and wanted to share my initial thoughts:

• No Registration, No KYC: In an industry where KYC is becoming the norm, this is incredibly liberating. I started mining in just 5 minutes. I bookmarked my dashboard, and that's it—I have everything under control.
  
• Non-Custodial: Unlike FPPS pools, which act as custodians and hold miners' funds by approximating reward distributions, the TIDES rewards system lets you receive coins directly from the Coinbase, ensuring the full and exact pro rata portion of your hashrate contributions. Currently, the minimum payout is around 1 million sats. They also recently integrated Lightning for even lower payments.

I'm extremely happy with this project and believe it's crucial for the industry. It's definitely one of the most important ones I've encountered in the last years. You can really see the people behind it aren't newbies, but have a deep, OG Bitcoin understanding.

I'm curious, have you tried the LN payment? I've read the guide on https://ocean.xyz/docs/lightning, but it's somewhat complicated.

[kano]

So Kano pool paying less is variance which we should accept because statistical possibilities can lead to bad luck

Um, not sure where I even mentioned my pool.

I was talking to DaveF and pointing out that PPS pays less than non PPS.
If you want to agree with him and say your pool pays less than PPS - then feel free to do so.

, also definitely OCEAN paying more is also luck. But when ocean had a mishap it is 100% a design flaw.

Well there's clearly a sofware/design/policy issue with this pool

Block 444208 - ocean - empty - on the network 7 seconds after the previous block ...

I think at this point you should stop claiming expertise ok the topic. Being unable to control emotion leads to many falsehoods, and speaking of a pool you clearly hate obviously draws in a lot of those with what you say.

You seem to have lost the plot with you emotions.

Simple fact, your favourite pool generated a tiny empty block 444208 and it got onto the bitcoin network 7 seconds after the previous block.

You also seem to be saying that your software is faulty: "ocean had a mishap"

And I'll help you with English there if you like - that's called (as I already said) an issue.

[DaveF]

...
If VIA or Braiins does not find a block for a week I really don't care. I got paid less.

-Dave

Corrected your line.

To this day I have yet to understand why most miners have zero understanding of the word 'variance'
I guess the correct word would be short-sighted.

Variance means UP and DOWN.
So you are not getting paid less on non-PPS, you are getting paid, varying above and below a higher amount, with an expected higher return.

Just like every business on the planet - some higher and some lower times/seasons.

And to state the obvious, that is exactly how bitcoin works - no matter how big or small the pool is - blocks are random with variance - an expected average time.

Since you compared it to something that is not even comparable, I'll use the same faulty comparison:
Or even as employees in any good company, your wage depends on how the company performs (and how you perform)

The last PPLNS block your pool found was back in January. How much BTC are people mining there not going to make vs mining @ a PPS pool because the next block you find is happening after the 1/2ing although they make less per share they still got all their PPS shares until the 1/2ing paid at a higher rate. And some unknown time in the future when you may find a block they will get a higher % of 3.125+fees. 4 Years ago at the last 1/2ing how much BTC did people loose because they were mining at your pool for months with no block. Yes after that you had a good bit of luck which has now been followed by some really bad luck.

There is a thing as opportunity cost of money. A large PPLNS pool with less variance overcomes that, a smaller one like Ocean or yours does not.

As Phil said a bad month and he could be into pocket for thousands, 2 months and he is in for even more. Others are in the same boat.
Had they been using a PPS pool in that scenario there could be enough BTC coming in to buy another miner.
The flip side of that is that mining in a PPLNS pool might have generated more BTC.

The risk / reward varies for person to person.


Using the 'Or even as employees in any good company, your wage depends on how the company performs (and how you perform)' statement that you made:

in some jobs you don't care how the company does you are a drone stocking shelves or answering calls or whatever. No bonus, no stock options, just that paycheck at the end of the week. That is PPS. If the company implodes on Friday in a couple of days you are at the next job being a drone stocking shelves or whatever. Making more or less what you did before with no real loss.

If you are higher up you get bonuses or stock options or whatever that is PPLNS. But if the company implodes you don't get that bonus at the end of the year because the company is gone and your stock options are now worthless.

-Dave