If you don't trust the pool operator in the first place, why would you mine here ? The payouts have worked correctly for the last months, it's not like there were no plans at all to fix the current issues.
To be fair, one of the ideals I've tried to make Eligius meet from the start has been not needing to trust me (immediate payout in the block, third party auditing, etc), but there's a compromise that needs to be made for certain functionality (minimum payouts, anti-pool hopping, etc). I'm not too happy with the current one-sided MaxPPS myself, and I can understand why someone wouldn't want to use it until it's finished if they don't especially trust me. Hence why Europe remains as-is. 
Topic: [350 GH/s] "Eligius" (experimental) pool: almost feeless PPS, hoppers welcome - page 10. (Read 116938 times)
June 14, 2011, 09:42:43 AM
June 14, 2011, 09:36:23 AM
So, you also want the possibility of allowing everyone to "cheat" by hopping between pools, reducing the reward of all the "legit" miners on the pool ? No, thanks.
Right, but so far the current policy has reduced payouts on all but that one 9h33m block, and that 'long' block paid only the amount a normal block would under the old system. So until it's fixed, the 'legit' miners you speak of are actually making less than they would have otherwise. Why should anyone want to put up with that, just on the promise that things will be made right at some unspecified future date? No thanks yourself.If you don't trust the pool operator in the first place, why would you mine here ? The payouts have worked correctly for the last months, it's not like there were no plans at all to fix the current issues.
June 14, 2011, 09:34:32 AM
Today I had a dream where all my doubts and misunderstandings were vanished. Somebody in my mind has described Max PPS to me 
It's in its essence, very simple : you don't get paid as much as you should when you contribute on "lucky" blocks. You have to contribute to the "unlucky" blocks too to get all your rewards. Thus eliminating the motive for pool hoppers (that try only to contribute to "lucky" blocks).
It's also, in my opinion, better for the mood to see the reward going up more than expected on otherwise long blocks.
Now, of course, the math behind is not simple, but the principle is really clever and easily understandable.
June 14, 2011, 09:32:56 AM
So, you also want the possibility of allowing everyone to "cheat" by hopping between pools, reducing the reward of all the "legit" miners on the pool ? No, thanks.
Right, but so far the current policy has reduced payouts on all but that one 9h33m block, and that 'long' block paid only the amount a normal block would under the old system. So until it's fixed, the 'legit' miners you speak of are actually making less than they would have otherwise. Why should anyone want to put up with that, just on the promise that things will be made right at some unspecified future date? No thanks yourself. June 14, 2011, 09:29:49 AM
Can you let us know about Max PPS system implementation at EU server beforehand?...
Europe will probably remain as-is until the big upgrade. At which time, I plan to have all the servers unified working together on a single logical pool.I will switch to the another pool...
That's beneficial with proportional, but not so much with MaxPPS :pLuke: I'm interested as to why you chose to do the 'half implementation' now? I'm only running a small-ish miner at the moment, and it looks like I've lost maybe 0.75BTC total compared to what I would've expected on the last few blocks - nothing that's going to break the bank, obviously, but a few beers' worth that I would've liked to see! I can quite see that someone with more power pointed at your pool would be less than pleased about having to wait for the retroactive credit at an uncertain time in the future.
Well, 1) there were a lot of people complaining about the pool hoppers, 2) I figured about a month was plenty of time for people to object to MaxPPS and/or suggest other alternatives, and 3) I realized that while I cannot retroactively change the short blocks, I can retroactively make up underpayments on long blocks.In hindsight, I also observe another reason: 4) If it turns out to really be a problem, I can still undo the 40% implementation.
Yeah, exactly, the only way to regain those lost earnings is to continue slaving away indefinitely, you put it well.
Underpayments on the long blocks will be made up retroactively regardless of whether a miner has continued on the pool or not.I want the possibility of doing better than average, of getting lucky and having miners deliver higher rewards.
That's the variation of mining; one purpose of pools is to eliminate variation. Maybe it's possible to make variation tolerance configurable. I have enough to implement without trying to consider the implications of changes right now. If you want a change made, document it on the wiki and get support for it. June 14, 2011, 09:04:51 AM
I want the possibility of doing better than average, of getting lucky and having miners deliver higher rewards.
So, you also want the possibility of allowing everyone to "cheat" by hopping between pools, reducing the reward of all the "legit" miners on the pool ? No, thanks.
June 14, 2011, 07:57:19 AM
Luke: I'm interested as to why you chose to do the 'half implementation' now? I'm only running a small-ish miner at the moment, and it looks like I've lost maybe 0.75BTC total compared to what I would've expected on the last few blocks - nothing that's going to break the bank, obviously, but a few beers' worth that I would've liked to see! I can quite see that someone with more power pointed at your pool would be less than pleased about having to wait for the retroactive credit at an uncertain time in the future.
I don't want to sound too critical - I'm well aware you're putting in a lot of effort that benefits us all - but I do think an all or nothing implementation would've been fairer.
I don't want to sound too critical - I'm well aware you're putting in a lot of effort that benefits us all - but I do think an all or nothing implementation would've been fairer.
Yeah, exactly, the only way to regain those lost earnings is to continue slaving away indefinitely, you put it well.
Playing catch up.
Having no warning that earnings would get crippled yesterday was definitely a low blow.
Never being able to do better than average even if I stick it out makes this a humble pool to be in.
I want the possibility of doing better than average, of getting lucky and having miners deliver higher rewards.
June 14, 2011, 07:30:21 AM
You won't have lost anything, Luke already said that he's going to retro-actively apply the MaxPPS system once the full implementation comes in.
June 14, 2011, 07:18:00 AM
Luke: I'm interested as to why you chose to do the 'half implementation' now? I'm only running a small-ish miner at the moment, and it looks like I've lost maybe 0.75BTC total compared to what I would've expected on the last few blocks - nothing that's going to break the bank, obviously, but a few beers' worth that I would've liked to see! I can quite see that someone with more power pointed at your pool would be less than pleased about having to wait for the retroactive credit at an uncertain time in the future.
I don't want to sound too critical - I'm well aware you're putting in a lot of effort that benefits us all - but I do think an all or nothing implementation would've been fairer.
I don't want to sound too critical - I'm well aware you're putting in a lot of effort that benefits us all - but I do think an all or nothing implementation would've been fairer.
June 13, 2011, 09:29:59 PM
...
I clearly see where I'm sincerely confused and humbly withdrawal myself from this thread.
I clearly see where I'm sincerely confused and humbly withdrawal myself from this thread.
'Humbly' is not among the top 10 words I would have used to describe your post.
Let's keep it civil, everyone. No need for arguments.
June 13, 2011, 09:28:29 PM
Since the terminology used seems to be confusing people, perhaps I should rename them to "x" and "y" or something?
Actually, could you just post the algorithm and formulas somewhere?
June 13, 2011, 08:17:58 PM
nyargh says, "If you miss a round your earnings are lost."
Luke-Jr says, "False."
Seems the opposite of confirming your theory...
nyargh says, "If you stop mining forever you lose your earnings."
Luke-Jr says, "You are free to continue with the accumulated earnings whenever you want."
Oh, again, in opposition.
nyargh says, "supa is a fucking retard."
supa says, "Potentially accurate."
This is the only confirmation you've received so far. If this thread were a bitcoin.... you couldn't spend it.
I clearly see where I'm sincerely confused and humbly withdrawal myself from this thread.
Luke-Jr says, "False."
Seems the opposite of confirming your theory...
nyargh says, "If you stop mining forever you lose your earnings."
Luke-Jr says, "You are free to continue with the accumulated earnings whenever you want."
Oh, again, in opposition.
nyargh says, "supa is a fucking retard."
supa says, "Potentially accurate."
This is the only confirmation you've received so far. If this thread were a bitcoin.... you couldn't spend it.
I clearly see where I'm sincerely confused and humbly withdrawal myself from this thread.
June 13, 2011, 08:10:27 PM
What happens when you miss a round? Can your "value" limit ever catch up to your actual share balance or did the pool just permanently screw you out of your prior contributions that were above your value limit?
This does explain your confusion a bit. At no time are either "value" or "earnings" reset. They both continue to accumulate. If you miss a round, you just pick up where you left off whenever you want.Yes, but the penalty spans rounds, whereas you can assign a penalty for a single round by decaying early shares as the round progresses. People have outages and various other legitimate reasons for downtime that could cause their prior honest work on short rounds to be unfairly discounted.
The end result is that the potential downside to honest miners is much greater with your system than with one like Slush's. In his system the potential downside only extends until the end of the round.
June 13, 2011, 08:01:56 PM
What happens when you miss a round? Can your "value" limit ever catch up to your actual share balance or did the pool just permanently screw you out of your prior contributions that were above your value limit?
This does explain your confusion a bit. At no time are either "value" or "earnings" reset. They both continue to accumulate. If you miss a round, you just pick up where you left off whenever you want. June 13, 2011, 07:59:02 PM
I've read many of your posts and you are without a doubt a fucking retard. Let me try this again, should be very simple even for someone like you:
Citation needed.
What happens when you miss a round? Can your "value" limit ever catch up to your actual share balance or did the pool just permanently screw you out of your prior contributions that were above your value limit?
Luke-Jr is already setting you straight, lord and master of intellect. Guess your simple explanation for simpletons like me didn't quite pan out as accurate. Have fun getting a lesson in basic comprehension of the written word.
June 13, 2011, 07:58:15 PM
I'm crap at words, way better at math.
Any chance artefact2 (all hail master stats person) could post a graph of what the average (say 700 Mhps) miner got over the last two weeks, and then apply that to what we could have expected if the *full* implementation had been used for that time period? Including a couple of missed or late entering/early exiting rounds?
I think a simple graph showing long term outcome the same would may it a bit clearer. I'm happy to help if you want to send me data.
Any chance artefact2 (all hail master stats person) could post a graph of what the average (say 700 Mhps) miner got over the last two weeks, and then apply that to what we could have expected if the *full* implementation had been used for that time period? Including a couple of missed or late entering/early exiting rounds?
I think a simple graph showing long term outcome the same would may it a bit clearer. I'm happy to help if you want to send me data.
June 13, 2011, 07:50:50 PM
What happens when you miss a round? Can your "value" limit ever catch up to your actual share balance or did the pool just permanently screw you out of your prior contributions that were above your value limit?
This does explain your confusion a bit. At no time are either "value" or "earnings" reset. They both continue to accumulate. If you miss a round, you just pick up where you left off whenever you want.But they don't accumulate at the same rate, it depends on the length of the round right? Show up late to a long round or miss it entirely and it could take a long time to "even out" again.
June 13, 2011, 07:50:13 PM
Perhaps my mistake was using English words for technical details...
I'd say the questions are valid.
Why not just post the technical details/formulas?
As it stands now, the pool just has some vague language about how only 40% of the features are implemented and a pledge to get the other 60% online later to square up with miners.
What's in the 40%?
Is there a way for miners to square up eventually without mining indefinitely or waiting for a long string of long rounds to drain their 'banked' balance?
June 13, 2011, 07:47:08 PM
No, the only way to get 100% of your earnings is to mine for infinity.
I missed your point... what was the problem with this?Since the terminology used seems to be confusing people, perhaps I should rename them to "x" and "y" or something?
Quote
The basic idea is to add a "value" balance counter that goes up by a fixed amount with each share your miner submits. This balance goes up by 50 / difficulty for each accepted share your miner submits to the server.
This "value" balance is then used as an upper limit for payments.
What happens when you miss a round? Can your "value" limit ever catch up to your actual share balance or did the pool just permanently screw you out of your prior contributions that were above your value limit?This "value" balance is then used as an upper limit for payments.
June 13, 2011, 07:43:02 PM
Wow, nyargh is stupid and snarky. Hilarious combination.
Protip: The only way to get and keep 100% of your earnings is to solo mine. People that mine in pools accept a certain tradeoff. Luke-Jr's implementation is better than most, on average, if you actually did do the math.
I like people that pick only a few words of information and preach it ad nausea while declaring themselves the most clever. They're fun.
I've read many of your posts and you are without a doubt a fucking retard. Let me try this again, should be very simple even for someone like you:
Quote
The basic idea is to add a "value" balance counter that goes up by a fixed amount with each share your miner submits. This balance goes up by 50 / difficulty for each accepted share your miner submits to the server.
This "value" balance is then used as an upper limit for payments.
This "value" balance is then used as an upper limit for payments.
What happens when you miss a round? Can your "value" limit ever catch up to your actual share balance or did the pool just permanently screw you out of your prior contributions that were above your value limit?