When I go to ABCPool.co I get:
Access denied for user 'www-data'@'localhost' (using password: NO)
Topic: [1423GH] ABCPool PPS - Proxy Pool For High & Steady Mining Rewards - page 32. (Read 151781 times)
January 26, 2012, 07:40:44 PM
January 26, 2012, 05:46:17 PM
So you effectively made ~9% off your miners by going to Goat ?
4% fee + 5% bonus.
Not exactly. The experiment with gigaminer was small (about a million shares), but a complete disaster. We ended up paying our miners for about 200,000 valid shares which have been rejected upstream. 4% fee + 5% bonus.
ABC miners are always credited for every valid share they submit as long as it’s not a duplicate. Even if an 'upstream pool' later turns out to reject the share, the original miner is still credited.
That's another way that we create a predictable experience for our miners, which cost us quite a bit in this instance.
I don't know for sure that I understand what needs additional explanation, but I'll try!
Quote
As far as I see it, it is your choice of where you sent the hashing that caused this problem.
It sure is.Quote
So of course you should pay for the problems you cause - it would make no sense why people who mine at your pool should pay for that.
I completely agree, that's why we set it up that way. We absorb that risk, so our miners know that their shares are always counted. Luckily this problem has only happened once on this scale.Quote
Had you processed the shares yourself, the stales would not have been anything like that
Yes, they would probably be a lot lower.Quote
No pool should be having 20% stales, ever! ... all but foolish members would leave such a pool.
We intend to prevent shares from being routed through the project #2 pool in the future. We've now seen that it does not work when pools forward shares to each other in a circle. Who would have thought? 
Of course sending shares in a loop wouldn't work ... however, the getwork must come from somewhere ...
There must be some pool that replies to the getwork request and that is the pool that will accept/reject the shares.
So I'd not expect that the circle was the actual direct cause of the problem - that would mean that no getworks would be answered.
Somewhere in the "loop" there must have been getwork replies or no work would have happened on the loop at all.
The problem would be: not sending the share replies to the getwork source.
So I'd again guess that the issue there was (and has now been corrected) no proper correlation of where the getwork came from with where the share reply should go ...
January 26, 2012, 05:14:50 PM
So you effectively made ~9% off your miners by going to Goat ?
4% fee + 5% bonus.
Not exactly. The experiment with gigaminer was small (about a million shares), but a complete disaster. We ended up paying our miners for about 200,000 valid shares which have been rejected upstream. 4% fee + 5% bonus.
ABC miners are always credited for every valid share they submit as long as it’s not a duplicate. Even if an 'upstream pool' later turns out to reject the share, the original miner is still credited.
That's another way that we create a predictable experience for our miners, which cost us quite a bit in this instance.
I don't know for sure that I understand what needs additional explanation, but I'll try!
Quote
As far as I see it, it is your choice of where you sent the hashing that caused this problem.
It sure is.Quote
So of course you should pay for the problems you cause - it would make no sense why people who mine at your pool should pay for that.
I completely agree, that's why we set it up that way. We absorb that risk, so our miners know that their shares are always counted. Luckily this problem has only happened once on this scale.Quote
Had you processed the shares yourself, the stales would not have been anything like that
Yes, they would probably be a lot lower.Quote
No pool should be having 20% stales, ever! ... all but foolish members would leave such a pool.
We intend to prevent shares from being routed through the project #2 pool in the future. We've now seen that it does not work when pools forward shares to each other in a circle. Who would have thought? January 26, 2012, 04:13:53 PM
Could you please be more specific about what pools you are mining on and how you choose which pools you are mining. Are you using bithopper, or some other custom software?
It would seem that while you have "come clean" about what you are doing with shares you have not explained the how.
Are you pool hopping proportional pools with other miner's hashes?
It would seem that while you have "come clean" about what you are doing with shares you have not explained the how.
Are you pool hopping proportional pools with other miner's hashes?
Hey Gigavps, that's PRECISELY what worries me about projects such as Goat's.
"We'll give you 1xx%!" looks good on paper but that money HAS to come from somewhere and Goat wasn't Santa Claus last time I checked.
The official explanation is that the hash power is being rented, which of course cuts the further debate as everything else is considered a "trade secret".
I wouldn't touch such a scheme with a ten feet pole.
Mint, any comment?
Good point jake."We'll give you 1xx%!" looks good on paper but that money HAS to come from somewhere and Goat wasn't Santa Claus last time I checked.
The official explanation is that the hash power is being rented, which of course cuts the further debate as everything else is considered a "trade secret".
I wouldn't touch such a scheme with a ten feet pole.
Mint, any comment?
At some point we'll have to play the trade secret card too. There's a lot of smart people in the Bitcoin community, some of whom may already be thinking about launching a similar service.
What I can say is that we're using a variety of sources. We mix those both to spread the block-finding risk as much as possible, and to ensure a stable experience for our miners. The most important thing for us, and indeed the whole idea behind launching ABCPool originally, is to provide miners the most predictable mining experience possible: known rewards, low stales, low latency, high uptime. It turns out there are lots of pools out there that are barely functioning, so balancing stability and risk is quite a challenge.
As for the software/hardware, see http://www.abcpool.co/about.php. I cannot stress enough how heavily we customized Pushpool, to the point it's almost unrecognizable. Many hours went into that. You also mentioned Bithopper. ABCPool does not use Bithopper, or any custom mining software for that matter (besides pushpool and simplecoin of course).
January 26, 2012, 04:09:08 PM
So you effectively made ~9% off your miners by going to Goat ?
4% fee + 5% bonus.
Not exactly. The experiment with gigaminer was small (about a million shares), but a complete disaster. We ended up paying our miners for about 200,000 valid shares which have been rejected upstream. 4% fee + 5% bonus.
ABC miners are always credited for every valid share they submit as long as it’s not a duplicate. Even if an 'upstream pool' later turns out to reject the share, the original miner is still credited.
That's another way that we create a predictable experience for our miners, which cost us quite a bit in this instance.
As far as I see it, it is your choice of where you sent the hashing that caused this problem.
So of course you should pay for the problems you cause - it would make no sense why people who mine at your pool should pay for that.
Had you processed the shares yourself, the stales would not have been anything like that
No pool should be having 20% stales, ever! ... all but foolish members would leave such a pool.
January 26, 2012, 03:36:11 PM
Hey Gigavps, that's PRECISELY what worries me about projects such as Goat's.
"We'll give you 1xx%!" looks good on paper but that money HAS to come from somewhere and Goat wasn't Santa Claus last time I checked.
The official explanation is that the hash power is being rented, which of course cuts the further debate as everything else is considered a "trade secret".
I wouldn't touch such a scheme with a ten feet pole.
Mint, any comment?
"We'll give you 1xx%!" looks good on paper but that money HAS to come from somewhere and Goat wasn't Santa Claus last time I checked.
The official explanation is that the hash power is being rented, which of course cuts the further debate as everything else is considered a "trade secret".
I wouldn't touch such a scheme with a ten feet pole.
Mint, any comment?
January 26, 2012, 02:34:45 PM
MintCondition,
Could you please be more specific about what pools you are mining on and how you choose which pools you are mining. Are you using bithopper, or some other custom software?
It would seem that while you have "come clean" about what you are doing with shares you have not explained the how.
Are you pool hopping proportional pools with other miner's hashes?
Thanks,
gigavps
Could you please be more specific about what pools you are mining on and how you choose which pools you are mining. Are you using bithopper, or some other custom software?
It would seem that while you have "come clean" about what you are doing with shares you have not explained the how.
Are you pool hopping proportional pools with other miner's hashes?
Thanks,
gigavps
January 26, 2012, 01:49:35 PM
So you effectively made ~9% off your miners by going to Goat ?
4% fee + 5% bonus.
Not exactly. The experiment with gigaminer was small (about a million shares), but a complete disaster. We ended up paying our miners for about 200,000 valid shares which have been rejected upstream. 4% fee + 5% bonus.
ABC miners are always credited for every valid share they submit as long as it’s not a duplicate. Even if an 'upstream pool' later turns out to reject the share, the original miner is still credited.
That's another way that we create a predictable experience for our miners, which cost us quite a bit in this instance.
January 26, 2012, 01:45:23 PM
But if we could somehow decrease that enormous risk, the required buffer could also be a lot smaller. That’s why we now do what most miners do. They consider solo mining too risky, and aggregate their mining power with the mining power of others by joining a pool. Or in our case, joining several pools.
What pools, specifically? I hope all miners here understand that it is very important to know what blocks they are contributing to solve to. Nowadays, pools are necessary evil, but "pool proxy" is rather dangerous thing.
January 26, 2012, 01:36:12 PM
And on a completely unrelated note... I see that my invalids have shot up to almost 5% since yesterday.. Any idea what is up with that?
Sigg
Sigg
They are implementing load balancing to their servers and it isn't 100% yet.
January 26, 2012, 01:32:15 PM
So you effectively made ~9% off your miners by going to Goat ?
4% fee + 5% bonus.
4% fee + 5% bonus.
January 26, 2012, 01:28:43 PM
Hi everyone,
Thanks for your patience. While we took care of rolling out the DDOS countermeasures, a lively discussion has been going on in the ABC thread. We think the time has come to explain a few things about how ABCPool works behind the scenes.
Well-respected forum member Meni Rosenfeld ran the numbers on running a PPS pool, and while ABCPool was still young he shared those with us in a PM conversation:
Anyway they do not mine blocks or have rounds so they can't post this...
We may list block history and top hashers in the future. There are no rounds however because we pay per share, not per round. See also https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.685134
Some of ABCPool hashpower went to Goat’s project, around a million shares.
Happy hashing everyone!
MC & Chlorine
Thanks for your patience. While we took care of rolling out the DDOS countermeasures, a lively discussion has been going on in the ABC thread. We think the time has come to explain a few things about how ABCPool works behind the scenes.
Well-respected forum member Meni Rosenfeld ran the numbers on running a PPS pool, and while ABCPool was still young he shared those with us in a PM conversation:
infos like round stats, block history, top hashers would be nice to have?
lmfao So what I do know and can prove is that ABC was sending me hashing power and they were getting paid 105% for this.
Some of ABCPool hashpower went to Goat’s project, around a million shares.
I did not DDOS them, I do not even know why you would think that was related.
The DDOS is indeed a completely separate incident, involving thousands of hosts. Goat had nothing to do with it. Now that the countermeasures are in place, we will supply a post-mortem on the DDOS shortly.Happy hashing everyone!
MC & Chlorine
January 26, 2012, 12:18:08 PM
And on a completely unrelated note... I see that my invalids have shot up to almost 5% since yesterday.. Any idea what is up with that?
Sigg
Sigg
They are implementing load balancing to their servers and it isn't 100% yet.
January 26, 2012, 09:57:54 AM
And on a completely unrelated note... I see that my invalids have shot up to almost 5% since yesterday.. Any idea what is up with that?
Sigg
Sigg
January 26, 2012, 09:54:40 AM
Well, they are technically mining blocks and I don't recall them ever saying they were mining blocks on their own bitcoind.
Frankly, I'm not sure I see anything wrong with this - it's not like they have a monopoly as a pool and people are free to mine where they choose. I dunno, I have to give it some more thought... but what are the actual objections to this?
"Pool hoppers is the devil and pool operators that run not-hop-proof pools isn't stupid!" lol, I don't know how I feel about it either, but you know members on this forum like pitchforks and torches more than reason and sense. We all like transparency, though, and if ABCPool was charging a fee "for pool costs" and making a separate undisclosed sum by using actually mining on a 105% payout pool, I'd rather be in the 105% pool. Realistically the 105% pool doesn't want <500MH hashers, though, so the option to merge my power with someone else and get paid the same is nice (other than the 4% fee would then really be a 9% fee in disguise). Frankly, I'm not sure I see anything wrong with this - it's not like they have a monopoly as a pool and people are free to mine where they choose. I dunno, I have to give it some more thought... but what are the actual objections to this?
January 26, 2012, 08:48:33 AM
Well, they are technically mining blocks and I don't recall them ever saying they were mining blocks on their own bitcoind.
Frankly, I'm not sure I see anything wrong with this - it's not like they have a monopoly as a pool and people are free to mine where they choose. I dunno, I have to give it some more thought... but what are the actual objections to this?
Frankly, I'm not sure I see anything wrong with this - it's not like they have a monopoly as a pool and people are free to mine where they choose. I dunno, I have to give it some more thought... but what are the actual objections to this?
January 26, 2012, 06:30:50 AM
A while back a friend, that I introduced to bitcoin, asked How do I know that my hashing power
isn't being used to help the Iranians develop a nuclear device or some other evil deed...
I just laughed of course and gave him a short explanation how it works.... well, in light
of the recent event(s) I can't say anymore that it's not possible....
EDIT: just noticed it's my 251st post and I am now Sr.Member.. should have put up some wise words...
It's still not possible, unless it's helping "the Iranians" by earning/finding them something that you can earn/find be solving sha256 hashes (if that's the right kind of hash, but my point is that the miner on your friend's cpu will only do what it is programmed to do). The GPU is only doing that, so while the hashing power can be redirected, it's purpose can't be changed into something that requires completely different math/work.isn't being used to help the Iranians develop a nuclear device or some other evil deed...
I just laughed of course and gave him a short explanation how it works.... well, in light
of the recent event(s) I can't say anymore that it's not possible....
EDIT: just noticed it's my 251st post and I am now Sr.Member.. should have put up some wise words...
maybe for hacking passwords then....
January 26, 2012, 06:11:05 AM
I agree that it does seem shady for a pool to send it's power off somewhere else without telling it's miners. If gigavps can verify the information I would be interested in seeing it.
As Goat stated, GPUMAX had nothing to do with this deal and wouldn't condone such an operation.
As Goat stated, GPUMAX had nothing to do with this deal and wouldn't condone such an operation.
I would like Giga's thoughts on this and then would like to give ABC a chance to come out and let us know what is going on. If they do not want to clear this up I guess we can post everything we know. Would making public gigaminer's Singular phone account be too much? lol yeah we know who you are:)
I only brought this issue up in the thread to make sure they knew that their hashing power was being redirected, I just wanted to make sure it was not stolen. That is why I have not paid ABC their coins yet, just wanted that confirmation I got via PM recently.
Anyway until this gets sorted, or you post a BTC address in the thread I am going to hold onto the coins...
I did think that it was GPUMAX at first just because damn, 400G but after checking we know it is not GPUMAX.
The information provided looks legitimate. It shows a request for work coming from an amazon ec2 IP address for the worker "gigaminer". It also shows a response with a valid solution to a block.
I am admittedly not an expert in these matters and have been asked to keep the information private. I will let the owners of the information provide it.
January 26, 2012, 05:30:47 AM
A while back a friend, that I introduced to bitcoin, asked How do I know that my hashing power
isn't being used to help the Iranians develop a nuclear device or some other evil deed...
I just laughed of course and gave him a short explanation how it works.... well, in light
of the recent event(s) I can't say anymore that it's not possible....
EDIT: just noticed it's my 251st post and I am now Sr.Member.. should have put up some wise words...
It's still not possible, unless it's helping "the Iranians" by earning/finding them something that you can earn/find be solving sha256 hashes (if that's the right kind of hash, but my point is that the miner on your friend's cpu will only do what it is programmed to do). The GPU is only doing that, so while the hashing power can be redirected, it's purpose can't be changed into something that requires completely different math/work. isn't being used to help the Iranians develop a nuclear device or some other evil deed...
I just laughed of course and gave him a short explanation how it works.... well, in light
of the recent event(s) I can't say anymore that it's not possible....
EDIT: just noticed it's my 251st post and I am now Sr.Member.. should have put up some wise words...
January 26, 2012, 02:04:47 AM
A while back a friend, that I introduced to bitcoin, asked How do I know that my hashing power
isn't being used to help the Iranians develop a nuclear device or some other evil deed...
I just laughed of course and gave him a short explanation how it works.... well, in light
of the recent event(s) I can't say anymore that it's not possible....
EDIT: just noticed it's my 251st post and I am now Sr.Member.. should have put up some wise words...
isn't being used to help the Iranians develop a nuclear device or some other evil deed...
I just laughed of course and gave him a short explanation how it works.... well, in light
of the recent event(s) I can't say anymore that it's not possible....
EDIT: just noticed it's my 251st post and I am now Sr.Member.. should have put up some wise words...
Jump to: