Been trying NiceHash out recently, and overall it's great. However, non-payment for stale shares makes this site extremely hokey. Why? Because if someone pays to direct hashrate to an extremely low diff coin, you activity like this:
When this site pushes so much hashrate to a low-diff coin like this, reject rates go thru the roof, and the actual payout is abimismal. Meanwhile, the person paying for hashes gets up to 50% "bonus" hashrate because most shares are rejected.
I think a change is needed here if you don't want this site to get gamed badly and fail. Either average reject rate needs to be considered, and the person paying for mining power should pay based on that average reject rate (individual miners with higher reject rates should get less of course). Or, NiceHash should avoid piling all of the pool's hashing power on a job when the difficult is so low that we compete with ourselves for orphans.
When this site pushes so much hashrate to a low-diff coin like this, reject rates go thru the roof, and the actual payout is abimismal. Meanwhile, the person paying for hashes gets up to 50% "bonus" hashrate because most shares are rejected.
I think a change is needed here if you don't want this site to get gamed badly and fail. Either average reject rate needs to be considered, and the person paying for mining power should pay based on that average reject rate (individual miners with higher reject rates should get less of course). Or, NiceHash should avoid piling all of the pool's hashing power on a job when the difficult is so low that we compete with ourselves for orphans.
You're partly right about this. Please, take a look at FAQ (you probably already did) "How exactly does pay-per-valid-share and get-paid-per-valid share work?" - https://www.nicehash.com/index.jsp?p=faq#faqg2
We'll make sure it's a 100% fair game for sellers and buyers. Currently we've already resolved all the issues regarding general validation of the shares and this is already implemented. Provider is paid for all valid work it produces (even if some of this valid work is rejected by the buyers pool, because pool is not operating correctly).
What we're currently working on is better validation of stale shares. When a buy order is set to a pool that produces excessive stale shares on the provider side, provider is actually not being paid for those stale shares. However, even without intelligent stale shares detection we're not talking about 50% rejects but more like 5-10% worst-case scenarios. But this is the exact same reject rate that a provider would have to "swallow" if you would be mining on any other pool or multipool which is hitting high-profitability fast-switching low-diff coins. But since our service is about renting (valid) hash power, buyer should pay for all the valid work that he gets, even if these are stale shares (buyer is the one that chooses a pool that produces stale shares) - therefore we'll improve this.
Anyway - stale shares validation is currently being tested - will let you know when it's fully implemented.
). You'll also find some useful information on how to configure your miners, how to squeeze some more hashrate by using optimized kernels, etc.