Author

Topic: [ANN] [ASIC-RESISTANT] UltraCoin (UTC) - Ultrafast 6 second transactions!! - page 366. (Read 946654 times)

sr. member
Activity: 298
Merit: 250
So here is the thing!! we have a mining farm of 40 rigs.

Where mining now on leetpools, nitro is closed to registration.
Where can i go? someone have a good pool

https://utc.pool.pm

Does this pool also have the orphan problem?
newbie
Activity: 1
Merit: 0
can somebody help me set ultracoin miner config? via team viewer. i need set only connect with pool. i have tried all configurations and miners, but they doesnt work. 3 cards r9 280x i will pay 0,01 btc. tm 947 172 288   00001234   sorry for my english))
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
In the case of a normal distribution you have to take into account the systematic error that amounts to 1/sqrt(n), n being the number of measures. Note that unless proven otherwise this is always a perfectly valid asumption. And this case definitely fits the conditions.

In your case this equals 1/sqrt(15) = 26%

So you measure gives 6/15 +/- 1/sqrt(15) = 40% +/- 26%
there you go, what you found is perfectly consistent with what jakiman found out.

If you want a better determination of this value you have to do like jakiman: averaging over a number of days to get so many data points that the systematic error itself becomes almost negligible. Then we can talk about other concepts and introduce hypothesis testing etc. Go do some probability & statistics class to find out.

i dont understand what calculations you do, in few days of mining is the same, i get 50% of amount, also my friends, you can calculate whatever you want if i get 50% of what i should, it is 50%

The predicted amount of UTC generated on a daily basis is an indicative (as in: unreliable) measure based on the ratio between your hashpower (most likely determined over the last 10 minutes by your share rate divided by the entire pool shares) in relation with the network hashpower (sum of all individual haspowers determined the same way).

You will not be surprised that this may wildly vary minute after minute. just sit in front of your screen and refresh this measure every now and then and you will realize how imprecise it can be.

Under the stable pools hypothesis (network always perfectly performs, no orphan blocks and no rigs coming in or out of the pools) the true measure would be that every client would faithfuly report their individual hashpower and that your hashpower would then be divided by the sum of all (including yours) hashpowers in the network. Then you would have a most probable average that you would have to compound by the sum of all standard deviations in finding shares, because given the nature of the problem it cannot be anything else than probabilistic.

This might seem like a simple idea, but I can assure you it is not. The devil is in the details.




sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
So here is the thing!! we have a mining farm of 40 rigs.

Where mining now on leetpools, nitro is closed to registration.
Where can i go? someone have a good pool

https://utc.pool.pm
full member
Activity: 120
Merit: 100
So here is the thing!! we have a mining farm of 40 rigs.

Where mining now on leetpools, nitro is closed to registration.
Where can i go? someone have a good pool

Leetpools, Greekpool, utc.pool.pm - there's plenty of them to choose from. The orphaned blocks problem affects all except Nitro, just accept it, move your rigs to the smaller pools and be a part of the solution.
sr. member
Activity: 298
Merit: 250
So here is the thing!! we have a mining farm of 40 rigs.

Where mining now on leetpools, nitro is closed to registration.
Where can i go? someone have a good pool
member
Activity: 96
Merit: 10
I still don't get the point why it is such a bad thing if a pool generates the majority.

Can someone please briefly describe to me? As long as everyone is getting their fair share, why is it a bad thing if everyone is at the same pool?

ONLY the ones mining at that 1 pool is getting a fair share.
Everyone mining at other pools are NOT getting a fair share.
When small pool finds a block, big pool snatches it away from them.

Also, when Nitro does get DDoS'ed and it goes down, someone reaps ALL the benefit during that time. (such as solo miners)

Can you please explain how the big pools affect smaller ones? Smaller miners tend to receive more "orphans" if so how come?

I'm a novice miner so probably it's very basic stuff but I do want to get the logic behind it.

Thank you!

Maybe I should just subscribe to the following theories:

-  "If you can't beat them, join them" - I might as well switch over to Nitro and turn the anonymity switch on like 85% of the miners over there do.

-  "Don't be a part of the solution, be a part of the problem" (turned around) - Maybe the issue hasn't grown large enough yet.

-  "Just a little fish in a big pond" - My little 520kh/s doesn't really affect the issue anyway.

-  "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - Warnings from senior members here on this site and from pool operators are falling on deaf ears.

How long do you think other pool operators are going to continue operating at a loss with 0% fees.  
I could go on, but I don't think it matters.  Obviously there are too many people that don't think that this is a problem.
hero member
Activity: 636
Merit: 500
In the case of a normal distribution you have to take into account the systematic error that amounts to 1/sqrt(n), n being the number of measures. Note that unless proven otherwise this is always a perfectly valid asumption. And this case definitely fits the conditions.

In your case this equals 1/sqrt(15) = 26%

So you measure gives 6/15 +/- 1/sqrt(15) = 40% +/- 26%
there you go, what you found is perfectly consistent with what jakiman found out.

If you want a better determination of this value you have to do like jakiman: averaging over a number of days to get so many data points that the systematic error itself becomes almost negligible. Then we can talk about other concepts and introduce hypothesis testing etc. Go do some probability & statistics class to find out.

i dont understand what calculations you do, in few days of mining is the same, i get 50% of amount, also my friends, you can calculate whatever you want if i get 50% of what i should, it is 50%
full member
Activity: 120
Merit: 100
THIS POOL HAS STILL LOW ORPHANS:



https://utc.pool.pm/index.php?page=statistics&action=blocks

1 in the last 24h, why does everybody complain and not move?

Last 24 Hours   148.21%   

means it took 48% more shares than it should to find a block..meaning Your earnings are 48% less than predicted....

Think your maths are a little skewed there.. If the shares were at 150% then that would be 33% less than predicted!
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
THIS POOL HAS STILL LOW ORPHANS:



https://utc.pool.pm/index.php?page=statistics&action=blocks

1 in the last 24h, why does everybody complain and not move?

Last 24 Hours   148.21%   

means it took 48% more shares than it should to find a block..meaning Your earnings are 48% less than predicted....
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
Another Idea to strengthen the network would be to add for example leetpool to the node list, if they open the
TCP port. (44100 I think)

That should work, or I am wrong?
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
http://utc.greekpool.eu

50% orphan, there is no good pool

That's incorrect.

Last 24 Hours   
169 valid
28 orphan (14%)

Last 7 Days
937 valid
140 orphan (13%)
what is incorrect
Transaction Summary
1153099    2014-03-13 15:00:14    Fee    Unconfirmed          112496    0.00600327
1153098    2014-03-13 15:00:14    Credit    Unconfirmed          112496    0.60032708
1152911    2014-03-13 14:46:09    Fee    Orphaned          112468    0.00769618
1152910    2014-03-13 14:46:09    Credit    Orphaned          112468    0.76961786
1152580    2014-03-13 14:37:08    Fee    Confirmed          112449    0.00875269
1152579    2014-03-13 14:37:08    Credit    Confirmed          112449    0.87526882
1152396    2014-03-13 14:24:10    Fee    Confirmed          112422    0.00811176
1152395    2014-03-13 14:24:10    Credit    Confirmed          112422    0.81117621
1152210    2014-03-13 14:18:09    Fee    Orphaned          112411    0.00792897
1152209    2014-03-13 14:18:09    Credit    Orphaned          112411    0.79289733
1152024    2014-03-13 14:03:12    Fee    Confirmed          112379    0.00740627
1152023    2014-03-13 14:03:12    Credit    Confirmed          112379    0.74062739
1151828    2014-03-13 13:53:08    Fee    Confirmed          112365    0.01115207
1151827    2014-03-13 13:53:08    Credit    Confirmed          112365    1.11520738
1151638    2014-03-13 13:47:12    Fee    Orphaned          112352    0.01113219
1151637    2014-03-13 13:47:12    Credit    Orphaned          112352    1.11321948
1151440    2014-03-13 13:45:08    Fee    Orphaned          112350    0.00677998
1151439    2014-03-13 13:45:08    Credit    Orphaned          112350    0.67799788
1151258    2014-03-13 13:29:07    Fee    Confirmed          112319    0.00795962
1151257    2014-03-13 13:29:07    Credit    Confirmed          112319    0.79596158
1151072    2014-03-13 13:22:09    Fee    Confirmed          112309    0.00264746
1151071    2014-03-13 13:22:09    Credit    Confirmed          112309    0.26474638
1150937    2014-03-13 13:19:25    Fee    Orphaned          112302    0.00481348
1150936    2014-03-13 13:19:25    Credit    Orphaned          112302    0.48134778
1150778    2014-03-13 13:19:08    Fee    Orphaned          112301    0.00202709
1150777    2014-03-13 13:19:08    Credit    Orphaned          112301    0.20270893
1150599    2014-03-13 13:16:07    Fee    Confirmed          112295    0.00559038
1150598    2014-03-13 13:16:07    Credit    Confirmed          112295    0.55903778
1150454    2014-03-13 13:13:25    Fee    Confirmed          112291    0.00136333
1150453    2014-03-13 13:13:25    Credit    Confirmed          112291    0.13633265
....

In the case of a normal distribution you have to take into account the systematic error that amounts to 1/sqrt(n), n being the number of measures. Note that unless proven otherwise this is always a perfectly valid asumption. And this case definitely fits the conditions.

In your case this equals 1/sqrt(15) = 26%

So you measure gives 6/15 +/- 1/sqrt(15) = 40% +/- 26%
there you go, what you found is perfectly consistent with what jakiman found out.

If you want a better determination of this value you have to do like jakiman: averaging over a number of days to get so many data points that the systematic error itself becomes almost negligible. Then we can talk about other concepts and introduce hypothesis testing etc. Go do some probability & statistics class to find out.



member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
GambleX Exchange/Gambling
Hey guys!

Gamblex has decided to add Ultracoin to our exchange and our gambling site. It will be fully implemented, that means we will also sell shares that distribute a part of the UTC fee revenue to stakeholders.

Check out our thread and maybe Invest!

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5676745
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
THIS POOL HAS STILL LOW ORPHANS:



https://utc.pool.pm/index.php?page=statistics&action=blocks

1 in the last 24h, why does everybody complain and not move?
sr. member
Activity: 951
Merit: 252
Ultracoin to 157$ within 2 years.

Sounds good to me! ... After 2 years POS rewards, selling at $157 would give me $900,000.00.... HELLO THERE MR MOONMAN! Cool
hero member
Activity: 636
Merit: 500
http://utc.greekpool.eu

50% orphan, there is no good pool

That's incorrect.

Last 24 Hours   
169 valid
28 orphan (14%)

Last 7 Days
937 valid
140 orphan (13%)
what is incorrect
Transaction Summary
1153099    2014-03-13 15:00:14    Fee    Unconfirmed          112496    0.00600327
1153098    2014-03-13 15:00:14    Credit    Unconfirmed          112496    0.60032708
1152911    2014-03-13 14:46:09    Fee    Orphaned          112468    0.00769618
1152910    2014-03-13 14:46:09    Credit    Orphaned          112468    0.76961786
1152580    2014-03-13 14:37:08    Fee    Confirmed          112449    0.00875269
1152579    2014-03-13 14:37:08    Credit    Confirmed          112449    0.87526882
1152396    2014-03-13 14:24:10    Fee    Confirmed          112422    0.00811176
1152395    2014-03-13 14:24:10    Credit    Confirmed          112422    0.81117621
1152210    2014-03-13 14:18:09    Fee    Orphaned          112411    0.00792897
1152209    2014-03-13 14:18:09    Credit    Orphaned          112411    0.79289733
1152024    2014-03-13 14:03:12    Fee    Confirmed          112379    0.00740627
1152023    2014-03-13 14:03:12    Credit    Confirmed          112379    0.74062739
1151828    2014-03-13 13:53:08    Fee    Confirmed          112365    0.01115207
1151827    2014-03-13 13:53:08    Credit    Confirmed          112365    1.11520738
1151638    2014-03-13 13:47:12    Fee    Orphaned          112352    0.01113219
1151637    2014-03-13 13:47:12    Credit    Orphaned          112352    1.11321948
1151440    2014-03-13 13:45:08    Fee    Orphaned          112350    0.00677998
1151439    2014-03-13 13:45:08    Credit    Orphaned          112350    0.67799788
1151258    2014-03-13 13:29:07    Fee    Confirmed          112319    0.00795962
1151257    2014-03-13 13:29:07    Credit    Confirmed          112319    0.79596158
1151072    2014-03-13 13:22:09    Fee    Confirmed          112309    0.00264746
1151071    2014-03-13 13:22:09    Credit    Confirmed          112309    0.26474638
1150937    2014-03-13 13:19:25    Fee    Orphaned          112302    0.00481348
1150936    2014-03-13 13:19:25    Credit    Orphaned          112302    0.48134778
1150778    2014-03-13 13:19:08    Fee    Orphaned          112301    0.00202709
1150777    2014-03-13 13:19:08    Credit    Orphaned          112301    0.20270893
1150599    2014-03-13 13:16:07    Fee    Confirmed          112295    0.00559038
1150598    2014-03-13 13:16:07    Credit    Confirmed          112295    0.55903778
1150454    2014-03-13 13:13:25    Fee    Confirmed          112291    0.00136333
1150453    2014-03-13 13:13:25    Credit    Confirmed          112291    0.13633265
....
sr. member
Activity: 393
Merit: 250
Any change someone would prepare p2pool files (networks.py + maybe some separate module ?) so we could start building p2pool infrastructure ??

DDoS resistant, PPLNS and decentralized ?
legendary
Activity: 1638
Merit: 1011
jakiman is back!
http://utc.greekpool.eu

50% orphan, there is no good pool

That's incorrect.

Last 24 Hours   
169 valid
28 orphan (14%)

Last 7 Days
937 valid
140 orphan (13%)
hero member
Activity: 636
Merit: 500
legendary
Activity: 1638
Merit: 1011
jakiman is back!
Can you please explain how the big pools affect smaller ones? Smaller miners tend to receive more "orphans" if so how come?

I'm a novice miner so probably it's very basic stuff but I do want to get the logic behind it.

Thank you!

Basically, majority wins.

If 2 people both see a coin on the ground and both grab the coin at same time, person A with more friends confirming he got it first wins.
So even though person B did find it at nearly the same time (and possibly even a little faster) has to give it up and let person A take it.
Jump to: