Wonder who this solominer is? 88.6.216.9

[P4man]

Had another look at the stats of our mystery miner, and rather than just counting blocks per day, I had a look at the average time in between blocks (gets rid of variance when finding blocks just before or after midnight). The result is interesting:

(click to enlarge)


What you see above is a 24hr average of time inbetween blocks every day.

Aside from 2 obvious spikes, possibly caused by some downtime?, its surprisingly stable around 1 block per hour.
Of course you could say thats a logical consequence of having 16.6% of the network hashing power, and that its coincidence, but it looks like he may be throttling himself to an average of 1 block per hour.

It will be interesting to see what happens after the upcoming difficulty change, if he maintains 1 block per hour or if the time between blocks increases and he just maintains his hashrate.

[DeepBit]

Nice find :)

[DeepBit]

Had another look at the stats of our mystery miner, and rather than just counting blocks per day, I had a look at the average time in between blocks (gets rid of variance when finding blocks just before or after midnight). The result is interesting:

Are there only her blocks or all 1tx blocks ?

[P4man]

Are there only her blocks or all 1tx blocks ?

All. But almost certainly, all 1TX blocks over that period belong to the mystery miner, they all have the same "bits"  for 10 or more blocks, not a single exception. BTW, that actually applies to all 1TX blocks since the beginning of the year. If other pools or miners produce 1TX blocks on rare occasions, I havent seen it this year.

[DeepBit]

Are there only her blocks or all 1tx blocks ?

All. But almost certainly, all 1TX blocks over that period belong to the mystery miner, they all have the same "bits"  for 10 or more blocks, not a single exception. BTW, that actually applies to all 1TX blocks since the beginning of the year. If other pools or miners produce 1TX blocks on rare occasions, I havent seen it this year.

I did certainly generated 1tx blocks this month. Please use something like this - http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/blocklist.php to filter out my blocks, may be your graph will be cleaner. (or not)

[P4man]

I did certainly generated 1tx blocks this month. Please use something like this - http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/blocklist.php to filter out my blocks, may be your graph will be cleaner. (or not)

 Okay, I goofed up. *blush*. I was looking at "bits", which is just difficulty, not exactly proof its the same guy heh.
Any chance you can provide me with a csv or something to subtract your (1tx) blocks ?
If you cant give me a csv, can you give me a ballpark estimate of how many 1tx blocks you mine per day or week?

BTW, I did the same exercise on some data preceding the recent 1TH boost. Its not quite as clear cut, but it does seem to follow a similar pattern:



There seems to be no relationship with difficulty, just a bottom at around 3Hr, like there is one now at 1hr.

[DeepBit]

Any chance you can provide me with a csv or something to subtract your (1tx) blocks ?
If you cant give me a csv, can you give me a ballpark estimate of how many 1tx blocks you mine per day or week?

I don't have such stats available, but hashes of ALL my blocks are published on my site.
You can use the link mentioned above to find out my blocks since 11.03.2012, that won't require you to download my stats.

Just find your block numbers in this table and remove them if they are marked as Deepbit's

[P4man]

Just find your block numbers in this table and remove them if they are marked as Deepbit's

Yeah I knew what you were getting at, I was just trying to be lazy.

Anyway, your data seems to span a relatively short period of time. I found 5 1TX by deepbit blocks in it that I eliminated, it doesnt change the chart in any significant way:

[DeepBit]

Anyway, your data seems to span a relatively short period of time. I found 5 1TX by deepbit blocks in it that I eliminated, it doesnt change the chart in any significant way:

Well, if someone would like to get more precision, they can fetch the block data from deepbit.net, it's available for all the blocks ever found by deepbit.

[jjiimm_64]

If i am not mistaken, the spike is just before the last difficulty change...  maybe to keep the diff from jumping?

[molecular]

Any chance you can provide me with a csv or something to subtract your (1tx) blocks ?
If you cant give me a csv, can you give me a ballpark estimate of how many 1tx blocks you mine per day or week?

I don't have such stats available, but hashes of ALL my blocks are published on my site.
You can use the link mentioned above to find out my blocks since 11.03.2012, that won't require you to download my stats.

Just find your block numbers in this table and remove them if they are marked as Deepbit's

why not just exclude blocks that were found within 15 seconds, this should eliminate most of deepbits 1-tx-blocks, no?

[molecular]

some simple stats: "1-tx-blocks per day"

[pieppiep]

All. But almost certainly, all 1TX blocks over that period belong to the mystery miner, they all have the same "bits"  for 10 or more blocks, not a single exception. BTW, that actually applies to all 1TX blocks since the beginning of the year. If other pools or miners produce 1TX blocks on rare occasions, I havent seen it this year.

What do you mean with the same "bits" ?
If you mean the bits part described in the block header (see protocol specification in the bitcoin wiki) it is just the difficulty that is the same for 2016 blocks on a row.

[P4man]

What do you mean with the same "bits" ?
If you mean the bits part described in the block header (see protocol specification in the bitcoin wiki) it is just the difficulty that is the same for 2016 blocks on a row.

Yeah, just read 2 posts below the one you are quoting .

[pieppiep]

What do you mean with the same "bits" ?
If you mean the bits part described in the block header (see protocol specification in the bitcoin wiki) it is just the difficulty that is the same for 2016 blocks on a row.

Yeah, just read 2 posts below the one you are quoting .

Sorry, didn't get enough sleep with the daytime change here in the netherlands

[ram1]

All. But almost certainly, all 1TX blocks over that period belong to the mystery miner, they all have the same "bits"  for 10 or more blocks, not a single exception. BTW, that actually applies to all 1TX blocks since the beginning of the year. If other pools or miners produce 1TX blocks on rare occasions, I havent seen it this year.

What do you mean with the same "bits" ?
If you mean the bits part described in the block header (see protocol specification in the bitcoin wiki) it is just the difficulty that is the same for 2016 blocks on a row.

Earlier I pointed out a method for identifying the MM blocks.  They have a consistent and unique coinbase format.

[zvs]

Eligius has been spitting out a lot more 1 transaction blocks than the "mystery miner" lately.   I noticed they have some astounding luck ratio for the last 36 hrs or so, too..

sadly, i've moved off from eclipsemc for the time being,  such luck curves  lie on the far edge of  'reasonable' probability

[pieppiep]

Does anyone know if the mystery miner has spent a single bitcoin he mined?

[molecular]

Eligius has been spitting out a lot more 1 transaction blocks than the "mystery miner" lately.   I noticed they have some astounding luck ratio for the last 36 hrs or so, too..

those 2 things are directly connected:

"luck" manifests itself in finding a quick block. If you make a quick block, it can easily contain only 1 transaction, because the tx buffers have just been flushed.

"spitting out more 1-tx-blocks" and "having luck" are related in the sense that the latter is on of the possible causes for the former.

[molecular]

Does anyone know if the mystery miner has spent a single bitcoin he mined?

I should probably update this, but I made "coin age" a while back:


^{(more info here: https://bitcoin.org.uk/forums/topic/41-old-coins-do-not-move-much)}

See that peak 2011/9? Assumption: this is the mysteryminers money.  Answer: He didn't spend it before late Summer 2011.

the assumption could well be false, though, especially taken into consideration the fact that this graph considers all transactions, not just generating transactions, maybe I should filter those only.