padrino
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1000
https://www.bitworks.io
|
 |
February 08, 2012, 07:32:12 PM |
|
I love how Pool Ops get persuaded to change things by some members at the risk the members that made the pool grow.
McDonald's still makes burgers and fries (what made them,) not only pseudo bbq rib sandwiches, coffee or salads... So, make a PPLNS or DGM pool along side Prop configured via the worker and see where the hash power gravitates to. That way you don't lose members and you give members options...win/win and you can test your theory in production
In marketing, you should study the "new coke" mistake... Pool ops should run the pool as a business and they would be less likely to change things without understanding ALL the costs to the business.
It's funny you say that, I'm by no means unique but I am one of the users that asked to re-evaluate and I'm in the top 25 for all time shares submitted, I've supported Jine since the beginning. I don't think you are saying anything that isn't understand, one of the first methods to determine how the community feels is market research, so here we are (referring to "new coke"). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even in the event that an attacker gains more than 50% of the network's
computational power, only transactions sent by the attacker could be
reversed or double-spent. The network would not be destroyed.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
martychubbs
|
|
February 08, 2012, 08:12:00 PM
Last edit: February 08, 2012, 09:28:04 PM by martychubbs |
|
I love how Pool Ops get persuaded to change things by some members at the risk the members that made the pool grow.
McDonald's still makes burgers and fries (what made them,) not only pseudo bbq rib sandwiches, coffee or salads... So, make a PPLNS or DGM pool along side Prop configured via the worker and see where the hash power gravitates to. That way you don't lose members and you give members options...win/win and you can test your theory in production
In marketing, you should study the "new coke" mistake... Pool ops should run the pool as a business and they would be less likely to change things without understanding ALL the costs to the business.
It's funny you say that, I'm by no means unique but I am one of the users that asked to re-evaluate and I'm in the top 25 for all time shares submitted, I've supported Jine since the beginning. I don't think you are saying anything that isn't understand, one of the first methods to determine how the community feels is market research, so here we are (referring to "new coke"). "I'm in the top 25 for all time shares submitted" So what? are you contracted to mine here? There are another top 24 that have a say just like every other member of the pool... Instead of changing the pool, go somewhere else and make less btc...who cares? Why have you mined here since the beginning and now want a change, just wake up? If you can't figure out how to change your miner to try a different pool, I can help you? You choose to mine here for a reason ~100% return, the pool owes you nothing but the btc to compensate you. IMHO, jerkoff pool ops or contract proxies who pay the 115% to miners do do what ever they want with the hash power are trying to mine here...with the delayed stats, they are losing money... I watched 400 GH hop at the wrong time and now they are gone...fail. Why do you thing bitclockers has such a high spike in the beginning, cause it is easy pickings or hard to do? You can't hop here as easy as at bitclockers... Dude, stop freaking out. Ask hoppers what their efficiency is here? it is not 125%, the stats are way too unstable... Dude, don't freak out! I averaged 99% and i am happy...BTG pays 93%....go mine there and suck up the loss or come crying back... "I don't think you are saying anything that isn't understand" double negative...so you understand what I am saying...Thanks "one of the first methods to determine how the community feels is market research, so here we are (referring to "new coke")." And I am providing insight to step 2, test marketing - alternative pool with Jine using the new payout scheme... referring to "new coke"? what are you referring to? New Coke was back in the 80's in the US and was a big disaster. See, they did not do enough market research and launched a new flavor for coke while they stopped producing the original recipe...sales dropped. It is an analogy. |
|
|
|
Starlightbreaker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1006
|
|
February 08, 2012, 08:51:13 PM |
|
You can't hop here as easy as at bitclockers...
nah, it's as easy. nothing's too hard. |
|
|
|
|
P4man
|
|
February 08, 2012, 11:32:56 PM |
|
Anyone voting for proportional either is hopping or doesnt understand hopping. Those 115% PPS proxy pools by Clipse and Goat are hopping you and bitclockers. I charted bitclockers stats, did the math and calculated the effect: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61985.msg737310#msg737310I havent done this for your pool yet, but I expect the results to be similar. THe short version; anyone not hopping there but mining 24/7 is losing out on 20% revenue compared to the hoppers. To think its "a wash" because they increase hashrate is silly. Each block only gives you 50BTC, if hoppers can increase their portion of that by 20%, who do you think loses ? |
|
|
|
padrino
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1000
https://www.bitworks.io
|
|
February 09, 2012, 01:38:13 AM |
|
referring to "new coke"? what are you referring to? New Coke was back in the 80's in the US and was a big disaster. See, they did not do enough market research and launched a new flavor for coke while they stopped producing the original recipe...sales dropped. It is an analogy.
Let me be clear then, you used the analogy of new coke specifically referring to a lack of market research.. My point was this very thread is just that so my point was that you are not saying anything that isn't understood yet you tried to make that point in the very thread surveying the pool's userbase (form of market research). |
|
|
|
|
Clipse
|
|
February 09, 2012, 03:28:42 AM |
|
Well since you find it appropriate to slander me with heresay, I will do the same. P4man is actively persuing underage boys in Pattaya, I found it on google. It must be true because I think it is. Get of your high horse, your fat ass is hurting its back. |
...In the land of the stale, the man with one share is king... >> ClipseWe pay miners at 130% PPS | Signup here : Bonus PPS Pool (Please read OP to understand the current process)
|
|
|
|
ancow
|
|
February 09, 2012, 11:18:17 PM |
|
@Jine: What N would you choose for PPLNS? Also, could you please enable changing one's vote for this poll? Shame. P2pool is looking better by the day.
p2pool uses PPLNS... |
BTC: 1GAHTMdBN4Yw3PU66sAmUBKSXy2qaq2SF4
|
|
|
DiabloD3
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
|
|
February 10, 2012, 12:01:44 AM |
|
Well since you find it appropriate to slander me with heresay, I will do the same. P4man is actively persuing underage boys in Pattaya, I found it on google. It must be true because I think it is. Get of your high horse, your fat ass is hurting its back. Angry neighborhood bastard mod here. Cut that out. |
|
|
|
nased0
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 79
Merit: 0
|
|
February 10, 2012, 12:28:54 AM |
|
I mine when computer in my bedroom is turned on. I'm not interested in mining at a pool that forces me to mine 24/7. Therefore I'm not enthusiastic over PPLNS. Maybe DGM would be better, but it's obscure and offers small rewards at the beginning. Yes, poolhoppers are parasitic, and they wouldn't visit a pool without the base of honest miners. But they massively contribute to finding blocks also , and finding many blocks attracts honest miners. There is a rule in business: "IF IT WORKS, DON'T MESS WITH IT". |
|
|
|
|
deepceleron
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1025
|
|
February 10, 2012, 02:11:18 AM
Last edit: February 10, 2012, 02:47:05 AM by deepceleron |
|
I mine when computer in my bedroom is turned on. I'm not interested in mining at a pool that forces me to mine 24/7.
This is a misconception. PPLNS does not require full-time mining, nor does it punish part-time miners (nor unfairly reward part-time pool hoppers). If you submit a share now, it will pay you a reward of (50/N) BTC for any block that is found during the next N shares on the pool. You can keep on mining or you can quit, it doesn't affect what that submitted work will earn you. If your hashrate's expected reward for 24 hours of mining is 2BTC, your expected reward for 12 hours of mining would be 1BTC, regardless of when or how you part-time mine. PPLNS does have a lottery-like aspect similar to solo mining, but it is significantly more favorable because you are part of the pool's high hashrate, and your work continues to count even after you quit. If solo mining with an expected 2BTC/day hashrate, you might earn 0 BTC in a month of mining, or you might find three lucky blocks worth 150BTC. If you mine on a PPLNS pool for an hour, you might get 0 reward if the pool is unlucky, or you might share several block finds, and earn significantly more than expected for your work. Proportional has the same situation, miners suffer lower earnings if the pool is unlucky. However even the modest part-time miner will quickly see they are getting their expected earnings over time with PPLNS. Proportional also has the "OMFG, when are we going to solve this ridiculous long block? I'm gonna quit" factor. PPLNS is much more optimistic, you start submitting work and wait for the block finds to roll in, you aren't overly invested in unlucky blocks, and nobody is punished for starting mining in the middle of a round. |
|
|
|
|
|
P4man
|
|
February 10, 2012, 12:03:23 PM |
|
Precisely. I think some people misunderstand "hopping". Mining at random intervals, or only during day or whatever, is not hopping and "hop proof" payout schemes do not penalize this behavior. Quite on the contrary, even if you mine at random times, you would be gaining substantially more with PPLNS or DGM compared to proportional.
|
|
|
|
jjhall
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 10
Merit: 0
|
|
February 10, 2012, 03:33:16 PM |
|
Jine,
Do you have the statistics available (and the time of course) to generate some comparisons of payout methods using real historical data from the pool? Per user would be great (I'd like to see if I would have made more or less with my miners since joining the pool) but a lot of work I'm sure. Even some "this is a typical full-time miner of X mh/s, this is a typical part-time non-hopper user, and this is a typical hopper" over the last 365 days would be very helpful. If you could also show what payouts would have been without the hoppers in the pool for everyone else that would be even better. My suspicion is without factoring out the hoppers being in the pool, merely adjusting their payouts to the tested method along with everyone else, the amount of payout I'd have received would be roughly the same. If you can in fact "remove" them from the pool for the statistics, I'd be curious to see if they really do hit regular users for up to 20% as is being claimed, or if the reduction in found blocks due to loss of hash power will offset some or all of that loss.
At the end of the day, I don't care if I make (obviously exaggerated) 20% of 50 BTC found or 10% of 100 BTC found in the same period of time, the payout to me is the same, 10 BTC, for the same amount of work I contributed. I don't care about hoppers unless they're reducing that number either by taking an unfair portion, or if they're causing undue delay or downtime on the pool. It sounds like that is happening, but as they say, "the proof is in the pudding."
Thanks Jim!
Jeremy
|
|
|
|
|
|
P4man
|
|
February 10, 2012, 05:43:49 PM
Last edit: February 12, 2012, 10:38:23 AM by P4man |
|
Even some "this is a typical full-time miner of X mh/s, this is a typical part-time non-hopper user, and this is a typical hopper" over the last 365 days would be very helpful. If you could also show what payouts would have been without the hoppers in the pool for everyone else that would be even better. I already made a spreadsheet to calculate that for bitclockers, so I pasted data for this pool in to it and tried to make it work with the not so easy time formatting of the site.. I might have made a mistake somewhere, but it looks correct and the result (if correct) is quite sobering. Assuming hoppers jumped at 40% CDF, this is the result for the last 98 blocks: expected BTC /share 0,0000366269
Hopper BTC/share 0,0000632149
Nonstop BTC/share 0,0000300854 Expected is what youd get on a hop proof pool, or PPS. Hopper is what the hoppers took. Nonstop is what you got on this pool if you mined 24/7 and didnt hop. You can check my spreadsheet and play with the number by grabbing the spreadsheet here: http://www.mediafire.com/?qbqrcu4iyycacrx |
|
|
|
malavita
Member
Offline
Activity: 90
Merit: 10
|
|
February 10, 2012, 08:43:55 PM |
|
Jine,
Do you have the statistics available (and the time of course) to generate some comparisons of payout methods using real historical data from the pool? Per user would be great (I'd like to see if I would have made more or less with my miners since joining the pool) but a lot of work I'm sure. Even some "this is a typical full-time miner of X mh/s, this is a typical part-time non-hopper user, and this is a typical hopper" over the last 365 days would be very helpful. If you could also show what payouts would have been without the hoppers in the pool for everyone else that would be even better. My suspicion is without factoring out the hoppers being in the pool, merely adjusting their payouts to the tested method along with everyone else, the amount of payout I'd have received would be roughly the same. If you can in fact "remove" them from the pool for the statistics, I'd be curious to see if they really do hit regular users for up to 20% as is being claimed, or if the reduction in found blocks due to loss of hash power will offset some or all of that loss.
At the end of the day, I don't care if I make (obviously exaggerated) 20% of 50 BTC found or 10% of 100 BTC found in the same period of time, the payout to me is the same, 10 BTC, for the same amount of work I contributed. I don't care about hoppers unless they're reducing that number either by taking an unfair portion, or if they're causing undue delay or downtime on the pool. It sounds like that is happening, but as they say, "the proof is in the pudding."
Thanks Jim!
Jeremy
I already made a spreadsheet to calculate that for bitclockers, so I pasted data for this pool in to it and tried to make it work with the not so easy time formatting of the site.. I might have made a mistake somewhere, but it looks correct and the result (if correct) is quite sobering. I solved for BTC/minute since hoppers dont mine as long as non stop miners. For 100 shares / minute mining speed, and assuming hoppers jumped at 40% CDF, this is the result for the last 98 blocks: expected BTC /min 0,00366269
Hopper BTC/min 0,00632149
Nonstop BTC/min 0,00300854 Expected is what youd get on a hop proof pool, or PPS. Hopper is what the hoppers took. Nonstop is what you got on this pool if you mined 24/7 and didnt hop. You can check my spreadsheet and play with the number by grabbing the spreadsheet here: http://www.mediafire.com/?qbqrcu4iyycacrxNice comparison - thanks!! |
Somebody's gotta finance this revolution - you can help by donating supplies, ammo, field hospital beds or simply BTCs here: 1QBNASECM8z2LLojkqZH3s2F8Ur7nhafNc
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
February 10, 2012, 08:57:13 PM
Last edit: February 10, 2012, 09:37:39 PM by DeathAndTaxes |
|
Many of us have discussed this at length, including you and I, in the past on IRC. The biggest reason to switch was in order to discourage pool hoppers from leaving the pool. After much discussion it was (I thought) decided that pool hopping doesn't actually hurt the pool or the workers in it. Yes they reduce the payout for all of the shares since there are more of them, but they contribute to more frequent blocks so it all comes out in a wash. It has been quite a while since I've participated in any discussions, so if the overall consensus has changed, then I digress. That was never the consensus. It isn't a wash. There is a mathematical advantage to hopping. Hoppers earn > full PPS value Since mining is zero sum that means everyone else earns < full PPS value. Hopping a prop pool and robbing the suckers may be unethical but at least it is smart. Mining a prop pool and NOT hopping is basically say I prefer to have 20% of my revenue stolen from me everyday. I could have 100% but I would rather have 80% instead. Game theory. There are three options you must choose one a) Earn 1.2x per day but it requires a little more work and you must live with the fact you are stealing from others b) Earn 1.0x per day. c) Earn 0.8x per day. Which options seems the best? Which options seems the worst? In the long run, assuming any fees/charged by the pool are reasonable, it all works out the same for people who have workers that sit and stay in the pool, and payout calculation method really doesn't matter. If the pool is hop-proof that is correct however proportional pools aren't hop-proof. |
|
|
|
|
malavita
Member
Offline
Activity: 90
Merit: 10
|
|
February 10, 2012, 09:32:00 PM |
|
Been mining 24/7 for months >> never hopped >> tired of being called a sucker >> casted my vote >> switching to a PPLNS pool >> I'll check back with the site next month.
Best!
|
Somebody's gotta finance this revolution - you can help by donating supplies, ammo, field hospital beds or simply BTCs here: 1QBNASECM8z2LLojkqZH3s2F8Ur7nhafNc
|
|
|
padrino
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1000
https://www.bitworks.io
|
|
February 11, 2012, 04:10:24 AM |
|
Been mining 24/7 for months >> never hopped >> tired of being called a sucker >> casted my vote >> switching to a PPLNS pool >> I'll check back with the site next month.
Best!
Well said.. |
|
|
|
|
jkminkov
|
|
February 12, 2012, 12:46:15 PM |
|
Mining at random intervals, or only during day or whatever, is not hopping and "hop proof" payout schemes do not penalize this behavior. Quite on the contrary, even if you mine at random times, you would be gaining substantially more with PPLNS or DGM compared to proportional.
if you are right, that kind of "hopping" rips off regular miners...but wait... hop proof schemes protect regular miners...unless they are screwing them to pay that "substantially more" to someone else...unless you are clueless |
.:31211457:. 100 dollars in one place talking - Dudes, hooray, Bitcoin against us just one, but we are growing in numbers!
|
|
|
|
P4man
|
|
February 12, 2012, 12:52:56 PM |
|
Mining at random intervals, or only during day or whatever, is not hopping and "hop proof" payout schemes do not penalize this behavior. Quite on the contrary, even if you mine at random times, you would be gaining substantially more with PPLNS or DGM compared to proportional.
if you are right, that kind of "hopping" rips off regular miners...but wait... hop proof schemes protect regular miners...unless they are screwing them to pay that "substantially more" to someone else...unless you are clueless  In a proportional pool, hoppers will get, say 120% PPS and non hoppers 80% PPS (assuming equal average hash rate between hoppers and non hoppers) In a hop-proof pool, everyone will get 100% PPS, there is no difference between hoppers and non hoppers. Duh. |
|
|
|
|
martychubbs
|
|
February 12, 2012, 01:49:06 PM |
|
Quite on the contrary, even if you mine at random times, you would be gaining substantially more with PPLNS...
Not true, AFAIK, PPLNS will penalize occasional miners. DGM, PPS or SMPPS are better choices for hoping / occasional mining. PPLNS is preferred for full time mining on one pool...good to maintain pool loyalty but not very flexible. |
|
|
|
|
Poll
