2024 Diff thread happy New Years.

[joker_josue]

Where can you see how many blocks each pool mines daily?
And also the hash power of each pool?

[philipma1957]

Where can you see how many blocks each pool mines daily?
And also the hash power of each pool?

the hash power is not really available. it is only an estimate made on blocks made daily.

so if you look at foundry and they make 48 blocks in a day  for days on end the estimate is 48/144 = 33% of the worlds hashrate.

IF THE  world  makes 2016 blocks in exactly 14 days at a difficulty of 72th see below  you can calculate the estimated hashrate

https://newhedge.io/terminal/bitcoin/difficulty-estimator

Latest Block:   825001  (23 minutes ago)

Current Pace:   89.5444%  (458 / 511.48 expected, 53.48 behind)

Previous Difficulty:   72006146478567.1

                           
Current Difficulty:   73197634206448.34                           
Next Difficulty:   between 65611530447772 and 69940710246342
Next Difficulty Change:   between -10.3639% and -4.4495%
Previous Retarget:   last Friday at 7:36 PM  (+1.6547%)
Next Retarget (earliest):   January 20, 2024 at 11:24 AM  (in 11d 2h 33m 17s)
Next Retarget (latest):   January 21, 2024 at 10:50 AM  (in 12d 1h 59m 11s)
Projected Epoch Length:   between 14d 15h 48m 4s and 15d 15h 13m 57s

blocks are here


https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/blocks

[joker_josue]

blocks are here


https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/blocks

Excellent tip! I'm thinking of doing an analysis with this data. Thanks.

Then I share it here.

[philipma1957]

blocks are here


https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/blocks

Excellent tip! I'm thinking of doing an analysis with this data. Thanks.

Then I share it here.

here is another chart

[mikeywith]

see below.  so if you want to argue that foundry is testing my raise the fee concept this evidence certainly is in favor of what I said.
 But not conclusive at all.   much like old paternity test. If one guy is type a+ and the other guy is type B-

But foundry found 38 blocks in the last 24 hours, which corresponds to 27% of blocks found, not much lower from their 7-days average of 27.8%, I am not saying they are not doing what you are suggesting because we don't know if the last 7-day representation is even accurate, but don't you think that if they were going to do something like that -- it would be better while BTC price is down? right now BTC sits at roughly 47k which is a very interesting number to most miners and many of them would sell at this price to stack cash for the rainy days, what you suggest would be better down when the price falls, not while going up IMO.

[joker_josue]

But foundry found 38 blocks in the last 24 hours, which corresponds to 27% of blocks found, not much lower from their 7-days average of 27.8%, I am not saying they are not doing what you are suggesting because we don't know if the last 7-day representation is even accurate, but don't you think that if they were going to do something like that -- it would be better while BTC price is down? right now BTC sits at roughly 47k which is a very interesting number to most miners and many of them would sell at this price to stack cash for the rainy days, what you suggest would be better down when the price falls, not while going up IMO.

In reality, the fact that the price of Bitcoin is rising is the best time to do so. Since the value in fiat is high, turning off machines does not significantly affect the operation, as the money earned from mining continues to support costs and make a profit.

[philipma1957]

see below.  so if you want to argue that foundry is testing my raise the fee concept this evidence certainly is in favor of what I said.
 But not conclusive at all.   much like old paternity test. If one guy is type a+ and the other guy is type B-

But foundry found 38 blocks in the last 24 hours, which corresponds to 27% of blocks found, not much lower from their 7-days average of 27.8%, I am not saying they are not doing what you are suggesting because we don't know if the last 7-day representation is even accurate, but don't you think that if they were going to do something like that -- it would be better while BTC price is down? right now BTC sits at roughly 47k which is a very interesting number to most miners and many of them would sell at this price to stack cash for the rainy days, what you suggest would be better down when the price falls, not while going up IMO.

The evidence shows that the last year has had really high fees and we all know this year is the 1/2 ing dial this in for 2023 was okay.

[mikeywith]

In reality, the fact that the price of Bitcoin is rising is the best time to do so. Since the value in fiat is high, turning off machines does not significantly affect the operation, as the money earned from mining continues to support costs and make a profit.

Well, yes, that's a valid point. However, my argument is, if the profit is high, I'd rather harvest it now. The percentage increase in net profit outweighs the block fee. I'm not saying my point makes more sense than yours, but you need to keep in mind that if Foundry turns off gears to achieve anything (be it higher transaction fees or lower difficulty), they would only benefit from 25% of the goal they set, whereas anything they lose is 100% theirs.

If the above is not clear, let's put it into actual figures. If Foundry underclocks all of its gears by 10%, the effect on difficulty would be a drop of 2.5%, and the transaction fees would only go up by 2.5% (since there would be 2.5% fewer blocks for roughly 2 weeks).

Out of this 2.5% increase, Foundry gets only 22.5%. So if the total fees are 2016 BTC per epoch, they now become 2,066.4. That's an extra 50.4 BTC, of which Foundry would get 11.34 BTC. But they have lost 10% of their cut out of those 14,616 BTC. So instead of making 3,654 (if they kept their 25% share), they would make 3,288. That's a loss of 365.4 BTC in a single epoch.

In the next epoch after that 2.5% difficulty drop, they would make 2.5% more profit. So instead of 3,654, they would make 3,745.35 BTC or 91.35 BTC.

So they are up 91.35 + 11.4 = 102.75 BTC, down 365.4 BTC, net = a loss of 262 BTC.

Obviously, operating at a 10% underclock means more efficiency, and thus their power bill would be lower than just 10%, so maybe we can reduce the loss by 10-20% or even 30%. They are still in a net loss.

Again, another reason I say it would make sense to do that in a bear market where gear efficiency matters most. When net profit is close to zero, gear efficiency matters the most. When net profit is high, you are better off overclocking than underclocking. It's just how I would act if I were them. It's how I conduct my mining business as a small-sized miner.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

The ordinal game is literally gonna get bigger - plans in progress to archive vintage Nintendo console games in them.
I started a thread here in the technical area about it.

TL;DR
    Bitcoin developers have unveiled a project that will allow them preserve Nintendo games with Ordinals.
    SNES emulator on the Bitcoin blockchain.

fun fun... At least it beats the hell out of the inane pics being sold to idjits.

[joker_josue]

~~

But, apparently, they don't "turn off" the machines for the full 14 days. The feeling we have is that there is a shutdown of machines in the first few days, after the cycle change, until the network becomes clogged and fees rise. In other words, for 4 or 5 days, they have fewer machines to mine. And then regression with all its strength. And the closer to the renewal of the difficulty, the more power they place.

Therefore, during the last cycle, it was noted that in almost the entire period the predicted variation was 0%, but in the final stretch it rose 1%. Right after the difficulty adjustment, everything slowed down, with -10% expected in the next adjustment. It remains to be seen, the sequence of this cycle, to see if it will really go down.

Latest Block:   825070  (30 minutes ago)
Current Pace:   91.8181%  (527 / 573.96 expected, 46.96 behind)
Previous Difficulty:   72006146478567.1                             
Current Difficulty:   73197634206448.34                           
Next Difficulty:   between 67270021584854 and 70379123537470
Next Difficulty Change:   between -8.0981% and -3.8505%
Previous Retarget:   last Saturday at 12:36 AM  (+1.6547%)
Next Retarget (earliest):   January 20, 2024 at 2:12 PM  (in 10d 13h 56m 50s)
Next Retarget (latest):   January 21, 2024 at 6:32 AM  (in 11d 6h 16m 50s)
Projected Epoch Length:   between 14d 13h 36m 27s and 15d 5h 56m 27s

[mikeywith]

started a thread here in the technical area about it. [/url]

You are going to get some fun comments there  , some folks treat Ordinals as an attack on BTC and they don't take kindly any discussion related to them.

But, apparently, they don't "turn off" the machines for the full 14 days.

The math still holds true. If it's 7 days, you just divide everything I mentioned above by 2, and so on. However, I understand the theory behind all this. We've discussed it here, probably since 2019 or so. It's a valid theory. I just don't think the math checks out for a single pool. It makes sense if 3-4 of the largest pools do it, as everything they do to the blockchain would be almost 100% beneficial to them. As it stands right now, the way I see it is that mining pools would be better off spamming the blockchain with high-fee transactions than turning off gears.

[stompix]

But, apparently, they don't "turn off" the machines for the full 14 days. The feeling we have is that there is a shutdown of machines in the first few days, after the cycle change, until the network becomes clogged and fees rise.

Apparently and feelings...
You can go here and check the blocks mined by every pool:
https://explorer.btc.com/btc/insights-pools
the shut down thing then pump more get fees sound good in theory but you have on huge problem!

Mining coins is not like oil pumping, so you close  valve you get half, you might shut down 30% of your machine and actually in the next hour mined more than previously, because..luck! So rather than blaming on one pool or others, how about we see what went wrong in that 10% drop which is mainly because of the 12 minutes between block average on the 7!
Well, what happen is that block 824718 proved to be an asshole, as it was mined 2 hours and 2 minutes after the previous, dropping the numbers of blocks to 125 for the day. Does this 2 hours interval sound like something Foundry would be able to do while throttling their gear?  

Yeah, sound nice like a theory but..it's still a theory!

Obviously, operating at a 10% underclock means more efficiency, and thus their power bill would be lower than just 10%, so maybe we can reduce the loss by 10-20% or even 30%. They are still in a net loss.

But, with gear shut down doesn't that mean that the epoch will be longer? So you will get the same reward for the 2016 blocks but it will not be in 14 days it will be in 14 days and 8 hours or god knows how much, as everyone will be running their remaining gear longer for the same $, increasing the their electricity spent/bitcoin?

started a thread here in the technical area about it. [/url]

You are going to get some fun comments there  , some folks treat Ordinals as an attack on BTC and they don't take kindly any discussion related to them.

I'm grabbing my fudge popcorn.  

[joker_josue]

The math still holds true. If it's 7 days, you just divide everything I mentioned above by 2, and so on. However, I understand the theory behind all this. We've discussed it here, probably since 2019 or so. It's a valid theory. I just don't think the math checks out for a single pool. It makes sense if 3-4 of the largest pools do it, as everything they do to the blockchain would be almost 100% beneficial to them. As it stands right now, the way I see it is that mining pools would be better off spamming the blockchain with high-fee transactions than turning off gears.

It should be noted that the two largest pools will have +50% hash power. So it really isn't difficult to have concerted actions between them.

Apparently and feelings...
You can go here and check the blocks mined by every pool:
https://explorer.btc.com/btc/insights-pools
the shut down thing then pump more get fees sound good in theory but you have on huge problem!

~~

Yeah, sound nice like a theory but..it's still a theory!

I will come back with an analysis on this soon. We will see what can be understood from it. 

Otherwise, I totally agree, it's just a theory.

[philipma1957]

~~

But, apparently, they don't "turn off" the machines for the full 14 days. The feeling we have is that there is a shutdown of machines in the first few days, after the cycle change, until the network becomes clogged and fees rise. In other words, for 4 or 5 days, they have fewer machines to mine. And then regression with all its strength. And the closer to the renewal of the difficulty, the more power they place.

Therefore, during the last cycle, it was noted that in almost the entire period the predicted variation was 0%, but in the final stretch it rose 1%. Right after the difficulty adjustment, everything slowed down, with -10% expected in the next adjustment. It remains to be seen, the sequence of this cycle, to see if it will really go down.

Latest Block:   825070  (30 minutes ago)
Current Pace:   91.8181%  (527 / 573.96 expected, 46.96 behind)
Previous Difficulty:   72006146478567.1                             
Current Difficulty:   73197634206448.34                           
Next Difficulty:   between 67270021584854 and 70379123537470
Next Difficulty Change:   between -8.0981% and -3.8505%
Previous Retarget:   last Saturday at 12:36 AM  (+1.6547%)
Next Retarget (earliest):   January 20, 2024 at 2:12 PM  (in 10d 13h 56m 50s)
Next Retarget (latest):   January 21, 2024 at 6:32 AM  (in 11d 6h 16m 50s)
Projected Epoch Length:   between 14d 13h 36m 27s and 15d 5h 56m 27s

the pattern has been - for 400-500 blocks =  the underclock
slowly rising back to 0 than plus = the overclock


most of 2023 has this pattern

and so far most of 2024 has this pattern.


when the ½ ing comes the penalty for a 500 block under clock drops from 6.25 reward to 3.125 reward

it becomes a 50% discount and as fuzzy mentions instead of ordinals video games 🎮 will be used and on and on and on.

people need to learn and use ln

[joker_josue]

it becomes a 50% discount and as fuzzy mentions instead of ordinals video games 🎮 will be used and on and on and on.

people need to learn and use ln

Unfortunately I still can't see LN as a solution/alternative.
The alternative cannot be more complex than the main model. It has to be at least the same, or even simpler.

For me, these are the things that need to be on a second or third layer, not money transactions. But this is my view, which is irrelevant.

[philipma1957]

it becomes a 50% discount and as fuzzy mentions instead of ordinals video games 🎮 will be used and on and on and on.

people need to learn and use ln

Unfortunately I still can't see LN as a solution/alternative.
The alternative cannot be more complex than the main model. It has to be at least the same, or even simpler.

For me, these are the things that need to be on a second or third layer, not money transactions. But this is my view, which is irrelevant.

well it would be complex to stop ordinals .

even if you say no tx bigger then 5000bits an ordinal guy could do 100 5000 bit inputs number 01 to 100 and boom 500,000 bits used.

[joker_josue]

20EH/s WANTED
Last time seen, they were mining blocks at rates greater than 250 sat/vB.
If anyone finds them, please contact Foundry. 


https://mempool.space/mining/pool/foundryusa

[philipma1957]

and we are now 26 blocks off pace.

pattern happens a lot.

-1 to -10 %. early and then we move up and on to + 1- 3% as a finish,

[joker_josue]

-1 to -10 %. early and then we move up and on to + 1- 3% as a finish,

I really find this strange...it can't be natural behavior.
There must be concrete reasons for this to happen.

How many cycles have we seen this type of event? 4 or 5 cycles? More?

[philipma1957]

-1 to -10 %. early and then we move up and on to + 1- 3% as a finish,

I really find this strange...it can't be natural behavior.
There must be concrete reasons for this to happen.

How many cycles have we seen this type of event? 4 or 5 cycles? More?

so far 27 cycles from jan 2023 to now.

I would think at least nine cycles in the last 27 match the pattern.

look at the concept I describe . if you make it work and it pays more and it will as rewards decrease you simply do not need to do it every jump.


 the patterns happened a lot in2023 and the first month of  2024.

as rewards drop with 2024 ½ ing it is easier to do.

and getting closer to 0 blocks behind. from 50 behind now to 20 behind

https://newhedge.io/terminal/bitcoin/difficulty-estimator

Latest Block:   825465  (a minute ago)

Current Pace:   97.8070%  (922 / 942.67 expected, 20.67 behind)

Previous Difficulty:   72006146478567.1                            
Current Difficulty:   73197634206448.34                            
Next Difficulty:   between 71632154136678 and 72086154231421
Next Difficulty Change:   between -2.1387% and -1.5185%
Previous Retarget:   January 5, 2024 at 7:36 PM  (+1.6547%)
Next Retarget (earliest):   January 20, 2024 at 12:55 AM  (in 7d 16h 12m 11s)
Next Retarget (latest):   January 20, 2024 at 3:08 AM  (in 7d 18h 25m 17s)
Projected Epoch Length:   between 14d 5h 18m 54s and 14d 7h 32m 1s

but this round of down then up did not give them as many fees as other rounds of this game. most fees were under 0.75 btc a block



so if the next four years happen with 2 of 3 jumps doing what i say pools will make solid coin.



back to 0%

Latest Block:   825572  (11 minutes ago)

Current Pace:   99.9679%  (1029 / 1029.33 expected, 0.33 behind)

Previous Difficulty:   72006146478567.1                             
Current Difficulty:   73197634206448.34                           
Next Difficulty:   between 73208068106894 and 73211358075134
Next Difficulty Change:   between +0.0143% and +0.0187%
Previous Retarget:   January 5, 2024 at 7:36 PM  (+1.6547%)
Next Retarget (earliest):   January 19, 2024 at 7:41 PM  (in 6d 20h 31m 37s)
Next Retarget (latest):   January 19, 2024 at 7:42 PM  (in 6d 20h 33m 10s)
Projected Epoch Length:   between 14d 0h 4m 55s and 14d 0h 6m 28s