Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool - page 69. (Read 4382653 times)
February 23, 2016, 04:53:59 PM
24 h with 4 block don't match with 139%
February 23, 2016, 04:46:35 PM
One month, not "so many". Your hyperbole makes it harder for people to take you seriously. Just post what you can prove is true, it'll be enough.
MONTHS!! read thru the damn posts and go back .. i didnt peg you as being lazy
must be that poor impulse control ehhh
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13230382
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13232270
There's no significant bad luck in the months before December. I can show you how to calculate it for yourself if necessary. Again, best stick with things you can prove, not just what seems true to you.
Ok if you know so much about the luck, can you please elaborate the 139% luck day that is now on slush with 54PH?
February 23, 2016, 04:36:11 PM
One month, not "so many". Your hyperbole makes it harder for people to take you seriously. Just post what you can prove is true, it'll be enough.
MONTHS!! read thru the damn posts and go back .. i didnt peg you as being lazy
must be that poor impulse control ehhh
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13230382
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13232270
There's no significant bad luck in the months before December. I can show you how to calculate it for yourself if necessary. Again, best stick with things you can prove, not just what seems true to you.
February 23, 2016, 04:27:34 PM
55 ph for 10 hours and no block , something fishy again
February 23, 2016, 09:41:25 AM
https://slushpool.com/stats/
to me it still appears there is something going on.. look at it hit blocks each time the 10 peta drops off hmmmm.. spv mining and the 10 peta is throwing invalid block headers at slush to fuck his pool up.. Maybe idk.. But its just too much!
should hit one soon if the patter holds and the hash plummets again.. Lets see. Maybe maybe not..
next question is.. Is the 10 peta coming from nicehash to disguise the miner now.. LOOK at the price.. 0063 at 10 peta pointed at slush it would seem since slush is up and down the same 10 peta.> Hmm purely speculation obviously!. check out nicehash orders..
#1032866 0.0063 9999.00 1292 3358.0778
https://www.nicehash.com/index.jsp?p=orders
why would someone be paying double the rate to point to slush?? hmm All i know is im getting pd big bucks on nice atm.. Still had some miners set at 0043 and they rented out.!!
to me it still appears there is something going on.. look at it hit blocks each time the 10 peta drops off hmmmm.. spv mining and the 10 peta is throwing invalid block headers at slush to fuck his pool up.. Maybe idk.. But its just too much!
should hit one soon if the patter holds and the hash plummets again.. Lets see. Maybe maybe not..
next question is.. Is the 10 peta coming from nicehash to disguise the miner now.. LOOK at the price.. 0063 at 10 peta pointed at slush it would seem since slush is up and down the same 10 peta.> Hmm purely speculation obviously!. check out nicehash orders..
#1032866 0.0063 9999.00 1292 3358.0778
https://www.nicehash.com/index.jsp?p=orders
why would someone be paying double the rate to point to slush?? hmm All i know is im getting pd big bucks on nice atm.. Still had some miners set at 0043 and they rented out.!!
February 23, 2016, 09:11:37 AM
One month, not "so many". Your hyperbole makes it harder for people to take you seriously. Just post what you can prove is true, it'll be enough.
MONTHS!! read thru the damn posts and go back .. i didnt peg you as being lazy
must be that poor impulse control ehhh
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13230382
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13232270
February 23, 2016, 09:08:10 AM
One month, not "so many". Your hyperbole makes it harder for people to take you seriously. Just post what you can prove is true, it'll be enough.
February 23, 2016, 08:44:46 AM
Where's our buddy slush in all this back and forth.. again with his head in the sand.. hope that it will blow over.. Maybe we forget all this.. Dont worry I dont forget and ill make sure to direct people to more honest and supportive pools from here on out. I Cant believe for someone raking in what slush does per month on fees he cant be bothered with us.. Must mean he has just a few large miners to deal with and Fuck the rest of us!!!!!!.. Don't see him defending anything at all.> I'm sure he doesn't want to point a finger at the miners because we will bust him out on his lie.. Well pekatete i dont know why you defend unless you are slush himself or paid by him.. I find it funny how you chime in just in the right times.. LMAO.... Anyway if you care to read from here on.. You can see this was discussed in length by many people and its funny your the only one that defends slush back then aswell.. Makes it obvious you have some ties to him.! Slush pool may have at one time been the best But so was AOL at the dawn of the internet age..
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13072339
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.21460
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13238801
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13244988
Best Regards
d57heinz
ALL i know from my own life experience is that when someone tells the truth they are Very defending of said truths.> In this case i dont see that at all. All slush has to do is come out with the brand and firmware of the miners he said caused this issue for so many months now.. If he doesn't do that then he was lying and it was his fuckup causing the lost earnings which should be compensated.. HOw about this.. i don't want compensation IF SLUSH comes forth with the iNFO on these miners.. This info is far more valuable to the community than the lost btc! If this was only a bug and nothing nefarious then i don't see why this info hasn't been released. Pekatete why would you not want this info as well??? ??
Edit >> im sure someone mining solo would love to know they are paying power for nothing as their machines will NEVER hit a block.. AND SLUSH KNOWS WHICH MACHINES THEY ARE!!!
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13072339
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1976.21460
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13238801
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13244988
Best Regards
d57heinz
ALL i know from my own life experience is that when someone tells the truth they are Very defending of said truths.> In this case i dont see that at all. All slush has to do is come out with the brand and firmware of the miners he said caused this issue for so many months now.. If he doesn't do that then he was lying and it was his fuckup causing the lost earnings which should be compensated.. HOw about this.. i don't want compensation IF SLUSH comes forth with the iNFO on these miners.. This info is far more valuable to the community than the lost btc! If this was only a bug and nothing nefarious then i don't see why this info hasn't been released. Pekatete why would you not want this info as well??? ??
Edit >> im sure someone mining solo would love to know they are paying power for nothing as their machines will NEVER hit a block.. AND SLUSH KNOWS WHICH MACHINES THEY ARE!!!
February 23, 2016, 01:27:42 AM
Stop Bitching and keep mining....if u don't like it move to another pool
February 22, 2016, 02:50:24 PM
Hello Pekatete
You haven't explain how "my argument falls in pieces". I have not write that he have redirected hashpower to do something else.
The best way for a pool manager to rip of his users is to do a false increase of hashpower of the pool.
That appears like bad luck (or block withhold...) and if he not overdo, it's difficult to see that because of the variance.
You haven't explain how "my argument falls in pieces". I have not write that he have redirected hashpower to do something else.
The best way for a pool manager to rip of his users is to do a false increase of hashpower of the pool.
That appears like bad luck (or block withhold...) and if he not overdo, it's difficult to see that because of the variance.
I did not explain because I do not think he's got any reason to do that when he could easily "earn" more by mining altcoins using YOUR very same hash-power that every-one seems to be accussing him of lying about. Well, that was my explanation, you only had to read between the lines ...
Honestly, this is stretching it to unreasonable levels, bottom line is the most unlikely reasons for which slush would allegedly
I either I do not allow myself to accuse slush. I set out the facts and assumptions described. But nothing can be Prove, anyway.
I agree with you that it has aquired a reputation he would be completely stupid to spoil now. Especially since it seems to me that it was he who founded the company that makes "trezor" in parallel, it would destroy everything he has built. We know who he is. In Reflective, it can not be that.
The possibility of an external attack or big mistake is a likely option.
We will see later what happens.
Thank you
(Sorry for my very bad english)
February 22, 2016, 02:23:15 PM
Hello Pekatete
You haven't explain how "my argument falls in pieces". I have not write that he have redirected hashpower to do something else.
The best way for a pool manager to rip of his users is to do a false increase of hashpower of the pool.
That appears like bad luck (or block withhold...) and if he not overdo, it's difficult to see that because of the variance.
You haven't explain how "my argument falls in pieces". I have not write that he have redirected hashpower to do something else.
The best way for a pool manager to rip of his users is to do a false increase of hashpower of the pool.
That appears like bad luck (or block withhold...) and if he not overdo, it's difficult to see that because of the variance.
I did not explain because I do not think he's got any reason to do that when he could easily "earn" more by mining altcoins using YOUR very same hash-power that every-one seems to be accussing him of lying about. Well, that was my explanation, you only had to read between the lines ...
Honestly, this is stretching it to unreasonable levels, bottom line is the most unlikely reasons for which slush would allegedly
February 22, 2016, 02:16:22 PM
You guys that defend slush and his pool are baffling. If ANY other pool had attacks on them where hundreds or thousands of btc were withheld, stolen, hidden, whatever the case may be; that site would be a ghost town in no time with no one mining on it. The fact that there was a hijacking of this pool, and you all still mine here is insanity. He used to brag about having higher than bank level security, and you really believe someone could have programmed their single solitary miner to withhold blocks from a pool with this level of security?
Despite all the back and forth, this is the post that sums it up the best. I'll never understand why a lot of people mine where they do. Why anyone would continue to mine at slush baffles me. The fanboi flag waving is mildly entertaining, but besides that I see nothing positive here. When it looks like crap, smells like crap, and feels like crap I have a good feeling what it is...Hello,
I am one of those people (at least for part of my hashrate).
This is actually a good question because Ghash.io fell very low for less than that!
However, nobody can prove that slush lie. For justice you are inocent if it is not proven that you are not guilty. I apply this rule too.
External attack to kill his pool is an possible option also. that can be to suport him!
Everyone does what he wants
For now pool works well!
February 22, 2016, 02:07:26 PM
4) No because Payment of the minor = Block value x minor hashrate / total hashrate, if you increase displayed hashrate more than real hasrate of pool, you stole your minor... They loose = Real hashpower of pool PH / ( declared hashpower of pool)
This is where that argument falls to pieces. Why would slush want to do such a thing? He could have used the hash from the pool to mine NMC for himself without giving miners the option to earn the mined NMC and he would make more from that. This is the very same guy who lost BTC 2000 (was it more?) only a few years ago and nothing of the sort of accusation was thrown at him in the following period, until now.
At the end of the day, everyone SHOULD know what their hash rate is supposed to earn them over a reasonable period, say a week. If your rewards are less than that and feel you can get better somewhere else, move it. I personally, since the demise of ghash as we knew it, have not mined at a better place than slush (and yes, been to the slow cooking heist pool too!).
Hello Pekatete
You haven't explain how "my argument falls in pieces". I have not write that he have redirected hashpower to do something else.
The best way for a pool manager to rip of his users is to do a false increase of hashpower of the pool.
That appears like bad luck (or block withhold...) and if he not overdo, it's difficult to see that because of the variance.
February 22, 2016, 01:41:40 PM
4) No because Payment of the minor = Block value x minor hashrate / total hashrate, if you increase displayed hashrate more than real hasrate of pool, you stole your minor... They loose = Real hashpower of pool PH / ( declared hashpower of pool)
This is where that argument falls to pieces. Why would slush want to do such a thing? He could have used the hash from the pool to mine NMC for himself without giving miners the option to earn the mined NMC and he would make more from that. This is the very same guy who lost BTC 2000 (was it more?) only a few years ago and nothing of the sort of accusation was thrown at him in the following period, until now.
At the end of the day, everyone SHOULD know what their hash rate is supposed to earn them over a reasonable period, say a week. If your rewards are less than that and feel you can get better somewhere else, move it. I personally, since the demise of ghash as we knew it, have not mined at a better place than slush (and yes, been to the slow cooking heist pool too!).
February 22, 2016, 01:36:03 PM
You guys that defend slush and his pool are baffling. If ANY other pool had attacks on them where hundreds or thousands of btc were withheld, stolen, hidden, whatever the case may be; that site would be a ghost town in no time with no one mining on it. The fact that there was a hijacking of this pool, and you all still mine here is insanity. He used to brag about having higher than bank level security, and you really believe someone could have programmed their single solitary miner to withhold blocks from a pool with this level of security?
Despite all the back and forth, this is the post that sums it up the best. I'll never understand why a lot of people mine where they do. Why anyone would continue to mine at slush baffles me. The fanboi flag waving is mildly entertaining, but besides that I see nothing positive here. When it looks like crap, smells like crap, and feels like crap I have a good feeling what it is... February 22, 2016, 01:09:13 PM
If you believe Slush's explanation, which I do, then it is seems inappropriate to refer to this situation a "block withholding attack". A better term would be "block withholding bug".
As to people who believe that Slush "owes" them something. We all had access to the same information and had the opportunity to move our hash power months ago, once it was clear that something was wrong. I stopped mining at the pool some months ago, once it was obvious that the bad "luck" was almost certainly not luck.
As to people who believe that Slush "owes" them something. We all had access to the same information and had the opportunity to move our hash power months ago, once it was clear that something was wrong. I stopped mining at the pool some months ago, once it was obvious that the bad "luck" was almost certainly not luck.
Thank you, You have right, i will use "bug" instead of "attack", sorry
I did exactly as you
The question is not whether an attack may be good or bad for the pool manager (I have the same opinion as pekatete on that) but whether this with-hold attack has really taken place!
Phew, thats a relief! Somebody actually has an opinion congruent to mine on at least one aspect.
Thank you,
On this point you are right, it's not debatable
If slush had increased the power displayed his pool for exemple +10PH (no one can know if the indication is true), it dims the incomes of miners and pool keeps the difference.
I fundamentally dis-agree with this, both in terms of the motive for slush to "lie" about the hashing power of the pool, and in terms of dimming / reducing the incomes of miners. For example, if a pool displays its hash power as 30PH when it is actually 20PH
1. The pool will only be earning circa 20PH worth of rewards
2. The pool will report lower luck because it is only earning 20PH worth, which is less than what is computed for 30PH
3. The miners will only be paid what the pool has earned
4. Miners will STILL be earning proportionately to their real hash power and therefore will NOT loose anything.
Unless you are saying that slush's setup is by far very superior to any other pool / mining operation on the network to an extent that he needs to fake his hash power so that pool luck reported is within the generally published values (but on this accassion something went wrong), then your assertion is flawed. I can not fathom any other plausible reason why slush would want to inflate the pool hash power.
1) Yes, but exactly same if there is a withholding bug , impossible to see any difference
2) Yes, but exactly same if there is a withholding bug , impossible to see any difference
3) Yes, but exactly same if there is a withholding bug , impossible to see any difference
4) No because Payment of the minor = Block value x minor hashrate / total hashrate, if you increase displayed hashrate more than real hasrate of pool, you stole your minor... They loose = Real hashpower of pool PH / ( declared hashpower of pool)
It is totally impossible to see difference between a withholding bug and a false increase of total hashrate.
Personally, I have no opinion, I do not accuse slush, I see the facts, that's all.
I have pointed some of my miner since two weeks and at the moment I am quite happy
Anyway when we got caught in the teeth several hashrate increases of over 10%, this problem appears very small now ...
February 22, 2016, 10:07:09 AM
If you believe Slush's explanation, which I do, then it is seems inappropriate to refer to this situation a "block withholding attack". A better term would be "block withholding bug".
As to people who believe that Slush "owes" them something. We all had access to the same information and had the opportunity to move our hash power months ago, once it was clear that something was wrong. I stopped mining at the pool some months ago, once it was obvious that the bad "luck" was almost certainly not luck.
As to people who believe that Slush "owes" them something. We all had access to the same information and had the opportunity to move our hash power months ago, once it was clear that something was wrong. I stopped mining at the pool some months ago, once it was obvious that the bad "luck" was almost certainly not luck.
^^ Sanity at last!
why would he? simple to keep simpletons like you at his pool thinking that large 40+PH will net them more then a smaller pool.
Most clear headed miners can establish what their hashing power should earn via a multitude of sites on the net that'll estimate how much you should earn with whatever hashing speed. I've never come accross anyone before on any forum that makes the choice of
you are obviously a small minded individual who probably bought his account.
Says the guy who opened an account specifically to spew drivel, a very cultured dimwit indeed.
February 22, 2016, 10:04:24 AM
If you believe Slush's explanation, which I do, then it is seems inappropriate to refer to this situation a "block withholding attack". A better term would be "block withholding bug".
As to people who believe that Slush "owes" them something. We all had access to the same information and had the opportunity to move our hash power months ago, once it was clear that something was wrong. I stopped mining at the pool some months ago, once it was obvious that the bad "luck" was almost certainly not luck.
As to people who believe that Slush "owes" them something. We all had access to the same information and had the opportunity to move our hash power months ago, once it was clear that something was wrong. I stopped mining at the pool some months ago, once it was obvious that the bad "luck" was almost certainly not luck.
February 22, 2016, 09:44:42 AM
I can not fathom any other plausible reason why slush would want to inflate the pool hash power.
why would he? simple to keep simpletons like you at his pool thinking that large 40+PH will net them more then a smaller pool. you are obviously a small minded individual who probably bought his account. or have nothing better to do then spam message board with your mindless vomit you call words.
Its ok you can tell us how much slush pays you to spill your mindless dribble on these boards. I think if you facerolled across the keyboard it would be a more intelligent response then what you have been talking about slush being a trust worthy guy.
With the diff on the rise and the split happening soon any theft regardless of it was intentional or not should not be tolerated in any form these days. It might not seem like a lot of money in btc. but convert that to USD and it is now petty theft or grand theft depending on the size of the mining farm.
Try telling the feds that all you did was skim a few pennies from thousands of people and thousands of transactions and see where you end up. JAIL. Why should the digital world be any different, the thief should have been announced and banned from mining. His info should have been then given to other pool owners to be banned from their pools. if the guy is crafty enough to write his own mining software he knows how to code in a withholding attack so the "accidental" attack doesn't fly.
February 22, 2016, 08:16:00 AM
The question is not whether an attack may be good or bad for the pool manager (I have the same opinion as pekatete on that) but whether this with-hold attack has really taken place!
Phew, thats a relief! Somebody actually has an opinion congruent to mine on at least one aspect.
If slush had increased the power displayed his pool for exemple +10PH (no one can know if the indication is true), it dims the incomes of miners and pool keeps the difference.
I fundamentally dis-agree with this, both in terms of the motive for slush to "lie" about the hashing power of the pool, and in terms of dimming / reducing the incomes of miners. For example, if a pool displays its hash power as 30PH when it is actually 20PH
1. The pool will only be earning circa 20PH worth of rewards
2. The pool will report lower luck because it is only earning 20PH worth, which is less than what is computed for 30PH
3. The miners will only be paid what the pool has earned
4. Miners will STILL be earning proportionately to their real hash power and therefore will NOT loose anything.
Unless you are saying that slush's setup is by far very superior to any other pool / mining operation on the network to an extent that he needs to fake his hash power so that pool luck reported is within the generally published values (but on this accassion something went wrong), then your assertion is flawed. I can not fathom any other plausible reason why slush would want to inflate the pool hash power.
Jump to: