[∞ YH] solo.ckpool.org 2% fee solo mining USA/DE 255 blocks solved!

[Mikestang]

"bestshare": 44363102898.412689

still so farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

c'mon, 1 block please

Dang, that would have solved a block earlier this year!  How much hash power are you running and what type of machine pulled that share?

[1714904544]

1714904544

[1714904544]

1714904544

[1714904544]

1714904544

[willi9974]

"bestshare": 44363102898.412689

still so farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

c'mon, 1 block please

Oh shit, how much THs and Time do you have run...?

[JaredKaragen]

See, with NH;  they are trying to solve a block with your transaction;  so a different hash all together.  Theres no way for a renter to withhold blocks like that...   you can see the live submissions/hashrate coming through the solo pool.  I don't see that being faked at all.... unless the hash renter feeds garbage data to the pool (I would assume the pool would invalidate bad work?)


My one recommendation to people going for rented hash:

Its smarter and more statistically probable if you rent as much hash as possible and run it at once.

More workers working on the same block == greater chance of solving _your_ block in a given amount of time.

If you just space out the hash in smaller amounts over time;  you have less hash to find that block in a given time and it is somewhat wasteful.



In the same sense that pointing two antminers at two different BTC payout addresses, will both have the same probability of finding a block;  whereas if they are both mining to the same address, they stand twice the chance as find a block as when they are working independent.

I hope people grasp this idea.....

The more hash you cram in that "10 min" gives you a higher actual probability of finding a block.

[yslyung]

"bestshare": 44363102898.412689

still so farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

c'mon, 1 block please

Dang, that would have solved a block earlier this year!  How much hash power are you running and what type of machine pulled that share?

few s7's, few ccd's, couple of s3's, bunch of dragons from my own. rented some hash, hit that # when hashrate was abt 500ths ish . . . then boosted a lil' more hashrate peak of 1.3x ph but it remained sadly.

was just refreshing solo page, looking at blockchain & wanting to see Relayed solo ckpool, wallet open & hoping for a popup.

everything was just the same, back to pooled mining for a bit. will be back soon.

shortlived sadly the part that hurts the most is that p2p hit a block below 1 ph but those guys deserved it after waiting for so long.

GL to all who are still solo'ing.

{"hashrate1m": "90.9T", "hashrate5m": "348T", "hashrate1hr": "653T", "hashrate1d": "63.6T", "hashrate7d": "15.4T", "lastupdate": 1448485488, "workers": 5, "shares": 3268518759, "bestshare": 44363102898.412689, "bestever": 44,363,102,898}

[-ck]

To some of the regular posters here, I'm curious about reaction to this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=441465.msg13062153#msg13062153

If you don't want to follow the link, apparently 6 * Difficulty shares have been pointed at Eligius from Nicehash and not one block solve yet. Relevant here I think because many of us use Nice/Westhash to gamble.

We've talked about the dangers of rented hash many times before. The person who sells you the hash makes money whether their hardware solves blocks or not and if they're a big player they stand to gain by holding back diff from rising. The person who rents the hash assumes all the risk. In the earlier days on this pool the odds seemed to suggest that all the PH sized rentals were suspicious in they never found blocks while the hundreds of TH sized rentals did. I gave people warnings about this at regular intervals. However lately the rate at which PH sized rentals are finding blocks is averaging out to 100% luck so I don't see a problem at the moment, and it could well have been bad luck earlier on. This could change at any time though and there is no way to confirm this. And before you ask if there's a way to check whether rental hash is withholding blocks - no there is no way.
The BEST thing that would be helpful is if the rental service (nicehash, MRR etc) was to report the total shares found by each rental and the number of blocks found by that rental to confirm that it is finding blocks. None of them do that as far as I'm aware.

[kano]

See, with NH;  they are trying to solve a block with your transaction;  so a different hash all together.  Theres no way for a renter to withhold blocks like that...   you can see the live submissions/hashrate coming through the solo pool.  I don't see that being faked at all.... unless the hash renter feeds garbage data to the pool (I would assume the pool would invalidate bad work?)
...

Incorrect.

Withholding is done by the miner - they simply don't return the particular share that is a block, they just return (some or) all other shares.
Even if they do this, the person renting out their hardware gets paid and so does the renting service.
You can't know in advance which work contains a block, you only know when you find a particular share that is better than network difficulty.

It has nothing to do with where you get your hashes from except the obvious that: if it was your own miner and you were solo mining you'd be throwing away your own block

[jxz]

See, with NH;  they are trying to solve a block with your transaction;  so a different hash all together.  Theres no way for a renter to withhold blocks like that...   you can see the live submissions/hashrate coming through the solo pool.  I don't see that being faked at all.... unless the hash renter feeds garbage data to the pool (I would assume the pool would invalidate bad work?)

This is 100% incorrect.  A miner can easily submit all found shares except shares that are greater than the network diff.

My one recommendation to people going for rented hash:

Its smarter and more statistically probable if you rent as much hash as possible and run it at once.

More workers working on the same block == greater chance of solving _your_ block in a given amount of time.

If you just space out the hash in smaller amounts over time;  you have less hash to find that block in a given time and it is somewhat wasteful.

In the same sense that pointing two antminers at two different BTC payout addresses, will both have the same probability of finding a block;  whereas if they are both mining to the same address, they stand twice the chance as find a block as when they are working independent.

I hope people grasp this idea.....

The more hash you cram in that "10 min" gives you a higher actual probability of finding a block.

This is also wrong.  See ck posts above.  The only time working faster matters is to beat a difficulty change.  There is the same probability in finding a valid block with 1000TH for 1 hour as there is with 100TH for 10 hours.

[deltalima]

Its smarter and more statistically probable if you rent as much hash as possible and run it at once.

More workers working on the same block == greater chance of solving _your_ block in a given amount of time.

If you just space out the hash in smaller amounts over time;  you have less hash to find that block in a given time and it is somewhat wasteful.

Wrong! A hash is a hash.

In the same sense that pointing two antminers at two different BTC payout addresses, will both have the same probability of finding a block;  whereas if they are both mining to the same address, they stand twice the chance as find a block as when they are working independent.

Wrong!

The more hash you cram in that "10 min" gives you a higher actual probability of finding a block.

Wrong! You are not trying to find a hash in that "10 min", you are trying to find a hash that exceeds the current difficulty, the difficulty is adjusted so that the average time to solve a block is 10 minutes.

1000 Gh/s for 1 hour gives exactly the same chance as 1 Gh/s for 1000 hours (assuming the difficulty stays the same for the duration).

[jxz]

See, with NH;  they are trying to solve a block with your transaction;  so a different hash all together.  Theres no way for a renter to withhold blocks like that...   you can see the live submissions/hashrate coming through the solo pool.  I don't see that being faked at all.... unless the hash renter feeds garbage data to the pool (I would assume the pool would invalidate bad work?)
...

Incorrect.

Withholding is done by the miner - they simply don't return the particular share that is a block, they just return (some or) all other shares.
Even if they do this, the person renting out their hardware gets paid and so does the renting service.
You can't know in advance which work contains a block, you only know when you find a particular share that is better than network difficulty.

It has nothing to do with where you get your hashes from except the obvious that: if it was your own miner and you were solo mining you'd be throwing away your own block

Theoretically - would it be possible for a pool to send a miner the most recently solved blocks template immediately before the block change notification?  In this situation the miner should send back the solved block, then the pool could then discard it and continue sending valid work.  This could be a proof to see if blocks truly are being withheld.

I realize in this scenario some hash time would be wasted on an old block.

[kano]

See, with NH;  they are trying to solve a block with your transaction;  so a different hash all together.  Theres no way for a renter to withhold blocks like that...   you can see the live submissions/hashrate coming through the solo pool.  I don't see that being faked at all.... unless the hash renter feeds garbage data to the pool (I would assume the pool would invalidate bad work?)
...

Incorrect.

Withholding is done by the miner - they simply don't return the particular share that is a block, they just return (some or) all other shares.
Even if they do this, the person renting out their hardware gets paid and so does the renting service.
You can't know in advance which work contains a block, you only know when you find a particular share that is better than network difficulty.

It has nothing to do with where you get your hashes from except the obvious that: if it was your own miner and you were solo mining you'd be throwing away your own block

Theoretically - would it be possible for a pool to send a miner the most recently solved blocks template immediately before the block change notification?  In this situation the miner should send back the solved block, then the pool could then discard it and continue sending valid work.  This could be a proof to see if blocks truly are being withheld.

I realize in this scenario some hash time would be wasted on an old block.

No for multiple reasons:

1) block change times on a pool are the #1 priority - slowing that down (by delaying work changes) is how you lose blocks and get orphans

2) the work base for each miner is different, so you can't send a miner the work base of the other miner that found the block
 If the work bases weren't different, then miners would be wasting time mining the same work and getting the same results

3) there's no guarantee that 2 miners will find the same block with the same work since their speed and mining code may increment the extranonce differently or to a different level (due to speed)

[Mikestang]

I hope people grasp this idea.....

I hope you can grasp the idea as it has been pointed out a few times already that you are wrong on just about everything you stated.  Your points are a great summary of the common misconceptions almost all people have about how solving a block works.

[-ck]

As an experiment I've set up a passthrough node in China that forwards to the solo pool. If there are any miners in China that wish to try it out, try mining to
stratum+tcp://cn.ckpool.org:80
And please report back how it performs for you.

I have now taken this down. It has not remotely proven to be popular or worth maintaining.

[jxz]

See, with NH;  they are trying to solve a block with your transaction;  so a different hash all together.  Theres no way for a renter to withhold blocks like that...   you can see the live submissions/hashrate coming through the solo pool.  I don't see that being faked at all.... unless the hash renter feeds garbage data to the pool (I would assume the pool would invalidate bad work?)
...

Incorrect.

Withholding is done by the miner - they simply don't return the particular share that is a block, they just return (some or) all other shares.
Even if they do this, the person renting out their hardware gets paid and so does the renting service.
You can't know in advance which work contains a block, you only know when you find a particular share that is better than network difficulty.

It has nothing to do with where you get your hashes from except the obvious that: if it was your own miner and you were solo mining you'd be throwing away your own block

Theoretically - would it be possible for a pool to send a miner the most recently solved blocks template immediately before the block change notification?  In this situation the miner should send back the solved block, then the pool could then discard it and continue sending valid work.  This could be a proof to see if blocks truly are being withheld.

I realize in this scenario some hash time would be wasted on an old block.

No for multiple reasons:

1) block change times on a pool are the #1 priority - slowing that down (by delaying work changes) is how you lose blocks and get orphans

2) the work base for each miner is different, so you can't send a miner the work base of the other miner that found the block
 If the work bases weren't different, then miners would be wasting time mining the same work and getting the same results

3) there's no guarantee that 2 miners will find the same block with the same work since their speed and mining code may increment the extranonce differently or to a different level (due to speed)

Thanks.

[-ck]

There will be a brief blip in mining as I restart the pool to bring online a new faster backup bitcoind in case of problems.

EDIT: Complete, sorry about any inconvenience.

[philipma1957]

We are due for one.

[willi9974]

Hello all,

we plan today a big rental for the solo pool.

if it possible you / other people will have the same plan, please be aware we buy on the same markets nicehash / mining rentals and make force up the price... so it is better to speak together over amount of rentals or plan your big rental for the next day, so we have a win win situation for all.

Best Regards
Willi

[AriesIV10]

I just found this talk.  I have 55th/s with a pool right now.  Is there a chance that it would be more profitable for me to mine solo rather than with a pool?  I currently make $3700 a month with an electric bill of $1000.  Does solo provide a better income?

[jonnybravo0311]

I just found this talk.  I have 55th/s with a pool right now.  Is there a chance that it would be more profitable for me to mine solo rather than with a pool?  I currently make $3700 a month with an electric bill of $1000.  Does solo provide a better income?

With this pool you either get all 25 coins or none at all.  You might go for 6 months without any income... Or you might find 2 blocks this month and get 50.

[os2sam]

I just found this talk.  I have 55th/s with a pool right now.  Is there a chance that it would be more profitable for me to mine solo rather than with a pool?  I currently make $3700 a month with an electric bill of $1000.  Does solo provide a better income?

Do you know how many blocks you solved during each difficulty?

[willi9974]

an the moment we burn the solo pool with 3 PetaHash for 3h

{"hashrate1m": "3.03P", "hashrate5m": "3.05P", "hashrate1hr": "1.29P", "hashrate1d": "106T", "hashrate7d": "55.6T", "lastupdate": 1448564870, "workers": 1416, "shares": 11107888549, "bestshare": 5064547718.3337736, "bestever": 203670815116}

cross the fingers