It was the Bitcointalk forum that inspired us to create Bitcointalksearch.org - Bitcointalk is an excellent site that should be the default page for anybody dealing in cryptocurrency, since it is a virtual gold-mine of data. However, our experience and user feedback led us create our site; Bitcointalk's search is slow, and difficult to get the results you need, because you need to log in first to find anything useful - furthermore, there are rate limiters for their search functionality.
The aim of our project is to create a faster website that yields more results and faster without having to create an account and eliminate the need to log in - your personal data, therefore, will never be in jeopardy since we are not asking for any of your data and you don't need to provide them to use our site with all of its capabilities.
We created this website with the sole purpose of users being able to search quickly and efficiently in the field of cryptocurrency so they will have access to the latest and most accurate information and thereby assisting the crypto-community at large.
There were 3,031 blocks total. 1,037 (34.21%) were PoW 391 (12.90%) were PoB 1603 (52.89%) were PoS | ||
The average network hash rate was 2,949khash/s. The average hash rate at slimcoinpool was 888khash/s or ~30%. The average hash rate at block quarry was 394khash/s or ~13%. During the time primer- mined there, his average hash rate there was 241khash/s. The graph shows where he switched back to slimcoinpool. Note that in the graph, the network hash rate is as estimated by the slimcoinpool code (getnetworkghps), while pool hash rates are estimated at the pools according to shares. | ||
Variability may be too high to say anything meaningful about the pools' luck after 3 days. slimcoinpool laid claim to 332 (32%) of the blocks, block quarry laid claim to 93 (9%) of the blocks, leaving the vast majority of the blocks - 612 (59%) as being mined solo or at other pools. If going by the estimated hash rates, slimcoinpool's luck would be ~106%, while block quarry's would be ~67%. If going by the relative hash rates, block quarry's hash rate was ~44% of slimcoinpool's hash rate, block quarry's number of blocks was ~28% of slimconpool's number of blocks, giving a luck of ~63%. This can also be seen in the graph - despite having a claimed higher hash rate than slimcoinpool between 2014-06-25 12:00:00 UTC and approximately 2014-06-25 18:00:00 UTC, fewer blocks were found as indicated by the dots on the lines. |