KanoPool since 2014 🐈 - PPLNS and Solo 0.5% fee - Worldwide - 2435 blocks

[VRobb]

Holy crapola, batman, we're at a 2 Trillion share!!  Here's where you separate the serious from the frivolous!

Mine on, kano-ites, we're bound to crack this damnable hellBlock if I have to squat down and start prancing/clucking like a chicken!! 

[1713537865]

1713537865

[1713537865]

1713537865

[1713537865]

1713537865

[1713537865]

1713537865

[ZACHM]

of course it would have; not on luck itself, but stdev of blocks per day, almost certainly.
organofcorti should correct if i am wrong.

A smaller pool should typically have more variation in the number of blocks mined per day than a larger pool.

to me, this ^^ sounds right.

Yes, you will get more blocks per day, but you will still get 600%+ blocks.
Blocks per day is not the way to look at it, the way is average shares per block.

The only thing having more hashrate will do is make the bad blocks go by quicker, which makes it feel better, but the reality is that there is no difference. We would all be getting less per block also, so the amount of BTC per day would be lower, so the number of blocks per day is not relevant.

[citronick]

Dear goddess Juvia,

Please make us find 5 blocks in 10 minutes so everyone just stop complain about our luck.

Thank you,

Herb

KEEP CALM - AND MINE ON !

[clgrissom3]

We could sure use the citronick/Juvia lucky fire power these days

[binarygold]

Regarding the bad luck streak...

1) First I am soooo sorry.  Srsly, so sorry.
2) Seems, whilst I was composing some bad-luck poetry, to target another pool of course, I was called away by events beyond my control and my cat sat on my bunker-PC's keyboard and she died.
3) Why does this matter, well her carcass was pressing CTRL+V and pasting the badluck passage into a google search window with site:kano.is in beginning of the search string...
4) I think she, RIP kitty, really messed us up sending out this bad juju but targeting our beloved pool
5) I don't go in the bunker often, but as soon as I saw her [and the terrible prose on screen] today - I put an end to it.
6) Srsly, so sorry.

Things should improve from here, again, sorry - it won't happen again.

[firetreeactual]

RIP Kitty...bring us blocks...

[ZACHM]

Please tell me that we don't need to start sacrificing cats now, chickens I'm okay with, but cats, well I'm okay with that too but other people will get mad... 

I had chicken for lunch, hoping to appease the block gods, but to no avail yet...

[kano]

Well in case anyone was wondering about pool changes (and someone commented before)

Blocks have been found since all changes that have occurred.
i.e. the pool does find blocks with the current configuration.
I'm not using any of the current ckpool git segwit which doesn't work.

The bad luck itself (as I posted before) has quite clearly been since the last block in November.

Now for some statistics (since the middle of May) I mentioned I'd post sooner or later:

Code:

Name         CDF[Erl]
S9v1         0.994766  103.6 BDR   79 Blocks
strat 0.8.x  0.883100   15.0 BDR   11 Blocks
A6+?         0.881335   83.2 BDR   73 Blocks
proxy 1      0.776782    6.5 BDR    5 Blocks
A7v1         0.772224    6.5 BDR    5 Blocks
S7+S5+?(4.8) 0.627001  307.3 BDR  302 Blocks
ckpool                   5.7 BDR    6 Blocks
S?+? (4.7)   0.298274   16.5 BDR   19 Blocks
S9v2         0.223353   10.2 BDR   13 Blocks
A?+? (4.9)   0.040362  143.3 BDR  165 Blocks

strat 0.5/0.6            0.4 BDR    0 Blocks

Total 668.1 BDR  678 Blocks

'strat' is stratehm stratum proxy

The total stats since May is:
Block finders: 753.8 BDR  750 Blocks
Non-block Finders: 3.5 BDR

[VRobb]

C'mon Juvia, this is your shift.  Let's do this! 

[tbonetony]

As of writing this, we are at 660%.

If you feel burnt more with every 1% plus, here's a better way to cool yourself down a bit, psychologically, and also, mathematically, true:

The worse the current, the more probable the end.

In the past we've had two or three 700%+ blocks but there was pretty much the top of it. Could we break it again this time, probably. But what's more likely to happen next is a block would arrive before that.

Assuming this is true, we are only or even less than another 50%'ish away

[IntroVert]

As of writing this, we are at 660%.

If you feel burnt more with every 1% plus, here's a better way to cool yourself down a bit, psychologically, and also, mathematically, true:

The worse the current, the more probable the end.

In the past we've had two or three 700%+ blocks but there was pretty much the top of it. Could we break it again this time, probably. But what's more likely to happen next is a block would arrive before that.

Assuming this is true, we are only or even less than another 50%'ish away

Timewise, this is likely the longest block in the pool history given the difficulty. The ones that were 700%+ took less time due to lower difficulty. I am pretty sure the suffering will end soon, we are approaching (or are already at) legendary bad luck share numbers, the most ever.

[Dak1]

New miner here and my first post.  I added my first 13THs into the mix!

My friends tell me I am a lucky man, so I am hoping to bring a whole lot of it to the pool.

[tbonetony]

New miner here and my first post.  I added my first 13THs into the mix!

My friends tell me I am a lucky man, so I am hoping to bring a whole lot of it to the pool.

No doubt. More true if the tide turns around then you just dodged the last a few painful days 

[kano]

Since it can cause no expected effect, but the block hash calculation is indeed a non-random calculation ...
I'm changing the payout address with a ckpool restart in 5 minutes.
All miners should just see a reconnect.
If your miner can't handle a reconnect it should just failover and then back about 5 minutes later.
(Yeah this bad luck is REALLY getting at me also)

[PPOC]

Interesting. I mine here because it's transparent, openly managed, and for all appearances over an extended period of time, honest. I don't give a rusty duck about a fancy GUI; I want to see hard numbers and open structure, and that's out front here and not buried. I'm reasonably confident that bad luck is simply that.

I've been doing this for several years. I came here last year. I'm not going anywhere.

Mine on.

I agree, a fancy GUI isn't important to me either, Although a bit more condensed homepage would be nice.
I'm just passing on what some of my friends have said, which means others feel it to.

Everyone who has done website design etc. Knows that info on a site isn't what pulls everyone in, look layout and feel are a big part, Even if it's irrelevant to the purpose.

Bitminter's got a good website layout and they've lost most of their hash power over the last 2 months.

Bitminer had a 49 day round, 2.061T, we are up to 2.092T and its only been a few days. I think this block on going to be a record and we should be due for a nice rebound.

[PPOC]

of course it would have; not on luck itself, but stdev of blocks per day, almost certainly.
organofcorti should correct if i am wrong.

A smaller pool should typically have more variation in the number of blocks mined per day than a larger pool.

to me, this ^^ sounds right.

Yes, you will get more blocks per day, but you will still get 600%+ blocks.
Blocks per day is not the way to look at it, the way is average shares per block.

The only thing having more hashrate will do is make the bad blocks go by quicker, which makes it feel better, but the reality is that there is no difference. We would all be getting less per block also, so the amount of BTC per day would be lower, so the number of blocks per day is not relevant.

I remember seeing Antpoo going almost a full day with no blocks, I think it ended being a 1400% block

[torontobitcoinmanager]

I got my new 50 S9s with better power supplies
and will be hooking them up tomorrow
I can not currently deal with luck at all due to power bills and cost if investment.
I am also purchasing another 150 machines.
I wish this pool would be hashing at at least 5% of total power. This way luck becomes next to irrelevant.
But this pool is the best out of everything I tried so far.

[Biodom]

of course it would have; not on luck itself, but stdev of blocks per day, almost certainly.
organofcorti should correct if i am wrong.

A smaller pool should typically have more variation in the number of blocks mined per day than a larger pool.

to me, this ^^ sounds right.

Yes, you will get more blocks per day, but you will still get 600%+ blocks.
Blocks per day is not the way to look at it, the way is average shares per block.

The only thing having more hashrate will do is make the bad blocks go by quicker, which makes it feel better, but the reality is that there is no difference. We would all be getting less per block also, so the amount of BTC per day would be lower, so the number of blocks per day is not relevant.

I remember seeing Antpoo going almost a full day with no blocks, I think it ended being a 1400% block

Oh, no....
If 1400% is possible, then what, a week without blocks is possible?
I hope we stop at about now or within 700%

[firetreeactual]

I got my new 50 S9s with better power supplies
and will be hooking them up tomorrow
I can not currently deal with luck at all due to power bills and cost if investment.
I am also purchasing another 150 machines.
I wish this pool would be hashing at at least 5% of total power. This way luck becomes next to irrelevant.
But this pool is the best out of everything I tried so far.

Hey...bring 'em on, bunkie! We can use it. You're entirely welcome. 

[torontobitcoinmanager]

I got my new 50 S9s with better power supplies
and will be hooking them up tomorrow
I can not currently deal with luck at all due to power bills and cost if investment.
I am also purchasing another 150 machines.
I wish this pool would be hashing at at least 5% of total power. This way luck becomes next to irrelevant.
But this pool is the best out of everything I tried so far.

Hey...bring 'em on, bunkie! We can use it. You're entirely welcome. 

I will as soon as i see some stability