Eligius pool is back under the new name Ocean

[alani123]

I think the implication here would be that big pools are employing some sort of thievery to steal from their miners in a shady manner.
Perhaps falsely attributing more shares to their miners or just their opaque share system algorithmically favouring some sort of miner more than another.

Several parties mining at OCEAN have claimed they earn more at OCEAN. A miner in a pool wouldn't stand to gain anything from more people mining on it. Except maybe faster blocks, but ocean is doing pretty well in terms of total hashrste now.

Well if anyone wanted to prove the opposite it would be pretty easy to run a test though.
Go to mining rig rentals and rent two small but identical rigs for a week or so. One goes on OCEAN and the other on a pool by the Chinese cartel like Binance or antpool.

[kano]

It is VERY easy to calculate your expected reward on any PPS/FPPS pool if you simply look at your accepted shares on your miner.
I very much doubt any of the big pools would get away with claiming PPS or FPPS and not paying it, since it is so damn simple to check.

So making such claims about them without any sort of proof does seem rather sketchy, and since it is SO easy to check if they are doing something, it would be advisable to check such comments before making them.

Running a rental from fuckhash is probably the worst way to test a pool, since you have no access to the miners at all, and no access to statistics, just a randomly allocated hash rate that may well be nothing like they say it is and nothing like you paid for.
We run a 'solo' fun run in my pool using fuckhash, and looking at the expected result vs the actual result, it's quite obvious they like rounding things down.

ALL pools work off share difficulty - hash rate is simply a calculation from that.
Alas when fuckhash only show you hash rate, it's really hard to tell what's actually going on and how much you lost vs what you should have got.

I do hope your pool also supplies valid statistics and isn't hiding behind unreliable calculations.

Aside: miners also do the same thing to show hash rate, it's also a calculations based on nonce difficulty found by the chips over time. (and it's also not a count of hashes)

[mikeywith]

Well if anyone wanted to prove the opposite it would be pretty easy to run a test though.

You made the claim, you need to prove it. Show us how any large reputable mining pool pays less than they promise. As Kano said, PPS payent is straightforward; you know beforehand how much you are getting paid based on your hashrate, Claiming that your pool pays more is jus bizarre; if anything, it pays less due to the fact that it censors transactions.

[alani123]

Seems like this summer someone started dropping a lot of hashrate on OCEAN. The pool went from 3 EH/s to 12 EH/s...

It's been interesting to observe this because once again the hashrate seems to be coming from a certain few addresses. For instance:
https://ocean.xyz/stats/3Dkn56s9MVsN7tc6dm8rD4s5rqRyRDHBWC

This address was using some minor hashrate on the pool since may and since then effectively doubled the pool's hashrate by bringing its own.
Similar story for the pool's current top 3 addresses in terms of hashrate.
https://ocean.xyz/dashboard

Could it be that big miners are not fond of this type of transparency that some are avoiding this pool? May be.

As per https://miningpoolstats.stream/bitcoin OCEAN remain at #14 to 15 among all pools

[EstherBtc]

Seems to be that Eligius is back under the new name ocean.
I wonder why Luke Dashjr. did not open up a thread about this.
 
source:
www.ocean.xyz

Ocean utilizes DATUM, allowing miners to construct their own block template and decides which transactions to include.
It has also experienced significant growth since it's launch.

[jahloverastaone]

If the economic incentive to mine in this pool is that bad,

Because it's not, that's just a lie. Our miners have observed 10-15% more earnings than on the competing pools.

lol - did someone hack your account?

That statement is clearly false.

No, you are a liar.

you have lost the narrative and no way in hell people fall for your knotscoin scheme with your shill army of twitter sockpuppets liarrrrrrrrrrr lol

[jimbocuzzi]

Why are the blocks so few and far between.

[DaveF]

Why are the blocks so few and far between.

Lack of people mining there causing low hasrate.
The main operator of the pool is lukejr who has been pushing his own view of BTC which has caused some people to leave.
To the extent that the developers pulled his DNS seed.
https://blockspace.media/insight/bitcoin-core-removes-luke-dashjrs-dns-seed-following-policy-violation/

You can read about in a few threads here.
-Dave

[jimbocuzzi]

I was really starting to worry there for a moment when i last looked it was 70 hours since a block but since then we hit 5

[jimbocuzzi]

You know guys i just keep posting here to keep it moved to the top isn't there any one else to say anything? What about the new ocean?

[o_solo_miner]

You know guys i just keep posting here to keep it moved to the top isn't there any one else to say anything? What about the new ocean?

maybe: it dryed out?

[jimbocuzzi]

It didn't dry vout it's going strong.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

Luke jr's Ocean has taken a back seat to discussions over his disasterous bip110 crusade and Knots (which Ocean runs on). No one really cares about Ocean with that hot mess on the fire....

[gmaxwell]

The Ocean website is absolutely emphatic that ocean is entirely non-custodial-- reiterating it on page after page.

How is it possible that they're non-custodial while supporting lightning payments?  I don't see any way to initiate a lightning payment with a coinbase output.

How are they non-custodial in the presence of a minimum payout level? -- they don't appear to do the most obvious (if fairly undesirable thing) of increasing share difficulty like p2pool did such that you'll either submit a payable amount or nothing at all (at the expense of your variance).  The other obvious alternatives are to be custodial for sub-threshold-per-block payments (but their website appears to thoroughly deny any custodial element), or to make the sharepool accumulate a 'debt' that will underpay current miners to pay (and larger miners are overpaid during periods when the debt is subthreshold).  Perhaps because they don't (appear to) disclose enough information that outsiders can tell this hoping advantage is only available to insiders (but I think it could be inferred, e.g. if the work has many outputs near the threshold, and you're a large miner that

Also what's the ecosystem feel on how they handle fees?  The way they advertise tides appears that the fee income of high fee generating miners (e.g. ones mining "spam"!) subsidizes the morality policing of other miners that don't bother trying to maximize fee income.  It also seems to have the effect of spreading it over time-- so e.g. if your templates fees are atypically high for this block due to a few unusual transactions, economically you're better off switching to solo mining until those transactions are gone.

An alternative way to pool fees in this framework would instead be splitting fees according to sum(miners_share_fees)*sum(miners_share_work) / sum(everyone_share_fees)*sum(everyone_share_work) for the last N*difficulty worth of work, as that would award fees to parties actually doing the most work to obtain them, consistent with the incentives described in the whitepaper.