too low profitability means that we need a new coins ? 
There are no new profitable altcoins right now. LTC is becoming more and more worth mining now. 
Topic: [ANN][AUTO-SWITCH] Profit-switch auto-exchange pool: CleverMining.com - page 199. (Read 554386 times)
March 06, 2014, 04:01:32 AM
March 06, 2014, 03:21:19 AM
too low profitability means that we need a new coins ?
March 06, 2014, 02:58:06 AM
Been mining for about 2 weeks now and am totally impressed. about a day ago though hash rate displayed seems to be way off from CGminer. as you can see, my reject percentage shouldn't account for a 400kh/s difference between the chart on the site and my WU. in the bottom graph showing -10, -20,-30, etc it's showing hashrate above 1.7. is there a bug in that chart or am i really only getting credit for 1.2? did something change in the last few days?
https://i.imgur.com/Wt6Tl3m.png
https://i.imgur.com/Wt6Tl3m.png
Looks like you have --no submit stale set to true. Turn that off. Your missing out on shares. As for your accepted 24h, you may have had disconnects/failovers throughout the day.
March 06, 2014, 02:55:37 AM
Sorry for speaking again about %s 
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
http://s24.postimg.org/n7tqqvrbp/reject_rate.png
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
http://s24.postimg.org/n7tqqvrbp/reject_rate.png
I've seen this from some other users. I can't see your username here to check what is your hashrate reported by the pool, but I guess it's all right.
cgminer/sgminer seems to have some problems with recognising some of pool responses. It's related to messages about “rejected untracked stratum shares”, which were not actually rejected. What you see in your GPU data is correct and probably the same numbers will be displayed on the website.
The top-line number in cgminer/sgminer gets confused by these untracked shares and these numbers are totally wrong. As you can see they don't match what it's displayed just couple of lines below.
Most of my reject % came from rejected untracked stratum shares but my payout is aligned with the pool's btc / day. Thanks for the info, now I know it is not actually rejected.
adjusting queue expiry and scantime have fixed reject % that came from rejected untracked stratum for some users. set your queue to 1, scantime to bigger number and expiry as 2*scantime.
March 06, 2014, 02:01:11 AM
Been mining for about 2 weeks now and am totally impressed. about a day ago though hash rate displayed seems to be way off from CGminer. as you can see, my reject percentage shouldn't account for a 400kh/s difference between the chart on the site and my WU. in the bottom graph showing -10, -20,-30, etc it's showing hashrate above 1.7. is there a bug in that chart or am i really only getting credit for 1.2? did something change in the last few days?
https://i.imgur.com/Wt6Tl3m.png
https://i.imgur.com/Wt6Tl3m.png
March 06, 2014, 01:51:06 AM
I think Clevermining is a great service, and I mine here over the others because Terk really seems to give a shit.
Another big QFT
Keep up the good fight Terk may the Hash be with you.
March 05, 2014, 10:32:53 PM
Sorry for speaking again about %s
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
http://s24.postimg.org/n7tqqvrbp/reject_rate.png
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
http://s24.postimg.org/n7tqqvrbp/reject_rate.png
I've seen this from some other users. I can't see your username here to check what is your hashrate reported by the pool, but I guess it's all right.
cgminer/sgminer seems to have some problems with recognising some of pool responses. It's related to messages about “rejected untracked stratum shares”, which were not actually rejected. What you see in your GPU data is correct and probably the same numbers will be displayed on the website.
The top-line number in cgminer/sgminer gets confused by these untracked shares and these numbers are totally wrong. As you can see they don't match what it's displayed just couple of lines below.
Most of my reject % came from rejected untracked stratum shares but my payout is aligned with the pool's btc / day. Thanks for the info, now I know it is not actually rejected.
March 05, 2014, 10:32:08 PM
Sorry for speaking again about %s
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
I've seen this from some other users. I can't see your username here to check what is your hashrate reported by the pool, but I guess it's all right.
cgminer/sgminer seems to have some problems with recognising some of pool responses. It's related to messages about “rejected untracked stratum shares”, which were not actually rejected. What you see in your GPU data is correct and probably the same numbers will be displayed on the website.
The top-line number in cgminer/sgminer gets confused by these untracked shares and these numbers are totally wrong. As you can see they don't match what it's displayed just couple of lines below.
The site shows now 3% rejections at 2.1MHs, which seems to be OK for a WU of 2280. Just need to get it higher somehow.
March 05, 2014, 10:15:32 PM
I still have 0.03108981 BTC on my account that has yet to be paid out...Its been 3 days since I mined CM. Terk?
BTC Address 14BoKmeYWwmBBWMWiuc7zeQw6puR7maK2R
BTC Address 14BoKmeYWwmBBWMWiuc7zeQw6puR7maK2R
Of which 0.00789555 is ready for payout and the rest is unexchanged or immature. Payouts are for 0.01 BTC (or 0.001 BTC on Sundays). I need to import some manual trades so there's a small backlog in unexchanged balances currently.
March 05, 2014, 10:05:32 PM
Sorry for speaking again about %s
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
I've seen this from some other users. I can't see your username here to check what is your hashrate reported by the pool, but I guess it's all right.
cgminer/sgminer seems to have some problems with recognising some of pool responses. It's related to messages about “rejected untracked stratum shares”, which were not actually rejected. What you see in your GPU data is correct and probably the same numbers will be displayed on the website.
The top-line number in cgminer/sgminer gets confused by these untracked shares and these numbers are totally wrong. As you can see they don't match what it's displayed just couple of lines below.
Terk is correct, I talked with Kalroth on IRC and this is what he told me. My numbers are correct on the site so I wouldn't worry. If my number we're not right on the site, it would say I have over 30% rejected, in reality I am about 0.1% rejected
March 05, 2014, 10:04:42 PM
Sorry for speaking again about %s
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
I've seen this from some other users. I can't see your username here to check what is your hashrate reported by the pool, but I guess it's all right.
cgminer/sgminer seems to have some problems with recognising some of pool responses. It's related to messages about “rejected untracked stratum shares”, which were not actually rejected. What you see in your GPU data is correct and probably the same numbers will be displayed on the website.
The top-line number in cgminer/sgminer gets confused by these untracked shares and these numbers are totally wrong. As you can see they don't match what it's displayed just couple of lines below.
Great answer. This is exactly correct. Trust your GPU numbers.
March 05, 2014, 10:02:31 PM
Sorry for speaking again about %s
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
I've seen this from some other users. I can't see your username here to check what is your hashrate reported by the pool, but I guess it's all right.
cgminer/sgminer seems to have some problems with recognising some of pool responses. It's related to messages about “rejected untracked stratum shares”, which were not actually rejected. What you see in your GPU data is correct and probably the same numbers will be displayed on the website.
The top-line number in cgminer/sgminer gets confused by these untracked shares and these numbers are totally wrong. As you can see they don't match what it's displayed just couple of lines below.
March 05, 2014, 09:57:52 PM
I still have 0.03108981 BTC on my account that has yet to be paid out...Its been 3 days since I mined CM. Terk?
BTC Address 14BoKmeYWwmBBWMWiuc7zeQw6puR7maK2R
BTC Address 14BoKmeYWwmBBWMWiuc7zeQw6puR7maK2R
Of which 0.00789555 is ready for payout and the rest is unexchanged or immature. Payouts are for 0.01 BTC (or 0.001 BTC on Sundays). I need to import some manual trades so there's a small backlog in unexchanged balances currently.
March 05, 2014, 09:54:22 PM
Sorry for speaking again about %s
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
In sgminer I discovered a slight difference in the amount of rejected shares. See the screenshot: at the top we have 117760/776208 = 15% rejection ratio.
While there are only 0.8 - 2.3% at the GPU overview. Can someone explain the numbers please?
Compared with the displayed hashrate at CM it looks as 15% are lost in space
March 05, 2014, 09:33:54 PM
I still have 0.03108981 BTC on my account that has yet to be paid out...Its been 3 days since I mined CM. Terk?
BTC Address 14BoKmeYWwmBBWMWiuc7zeQw6puR7maK2R
BTC Address 14BoKmeYWwmBBWMWiuc7zeQw6puR7maK2R
March 05, 2014, 08:51:51 PM
The fee is what the pool operator sets. I know that's not really what this discussion is, but that's the bottom line.
We all know this pool charges 2%, and 11,000 MH/s says the fee is fine.
Personally, I've left my miners run here for a period of time. At the end of it, I'm happy with the payout compared to letting my miners run on a different pool. This includes fees, rejects, connection drops, etc.
As fun as it is for me to obsess about my own hash rates on a minute by minute basis, or my reject rates or ping speeds to servers, the bottom line to me is how much btc is transferred to my wallet.
Yes, I've moved some hash power around to see what's going on elsewhere. I owe it to MYSELF to know. Again, the bottom line is how much btc is transferred to my wallet. And as of this point, my hash power is back here.
We all know this pool charges 2%, and 11,000 MH/s says the fee is fine.
Personally, I've left my miners run here for a period of time. At the end of it, I'm happy with the payout compared to letting my miners run on a different pool. This includes fees, rejects, connection drops, etc.
As fun as it is for me to obsess about my own hash rates on a minute by minute basis, or my reject rates or ping speeds to servers, the bottom line to me is how much btc is transferred to my wallet.
Yes, I've moved some hash power around to see what's going on elsewhere. I owe it to MYSELF to know. Again, the bottom line is how much btc is transferred to my wallet. And as of this point, my hash power is back here.
^this +
All these talks about %s are just meaningless - how can you know what exact amount of what coin mined by the pool? At what exchange (fees) and at what price were coins traded? All you see is something pool operator willing to show you and all you get is some btc. And it's not about clever - that's how it works for any pool. The difference is amount of "transparency" (keeping in mind that you can't be sure that what you see is actually true), communication with dev, stability of pool, nice graphs and so on - to summarize - it's about quality of service. And it's about profits. If you are happy with quality and profits here - mine here, if you have another place where you can be even happier - you are free to choose your way. If there is no place where you are happy - build your own.
March 05, 2014, 08:36:33 PM
We all know this pool charges 2%, and 11,000 MH/s says the fee is fine.
thank you.
@ neon001: that's data.
March 05, 2014, 08:35:14 PM
the fact you impose arbitrary standards on this pool also seems to have glossed by your attention.
I'm failing to see how it's arbitrary to say that the vast majority of pools charge 1% or less. It's quite objective, and in no part arbitrary.
argumentum ad populum. the vast majority of people on earth don't know what a bitcoin is. ergo, bitcoin is worthless?
It's quite objective, and in no part arbitrary.
because why? because you've declared it objective? where's your data? it's your fucking opinion that 2% is too high, you cheapskate.
Lets use an analogy then. You can go to any number of online financial brokerages (Etrade and the like) and pay $10 a trade. You can go to a financial advisor to do the same thing and provide you some advice while he's at it for $25 a trade. When you're trading $5000 worth of securities at a time, it seems like a pittance either way, but the latter is still a LOT more expensive, relatively speaking.
so by your standard, a 0% pool should be best? sometimes you get what you pay for.
pool operators should aim for sustainability, not a race to the bottom for pool fees.
March 05, 2014, 08:31:50 PM
The fee is what the pool operator sets. I know that's not really what this discussion is, but that's the bottom line.
We all know this pool charges 2%, and 11,000 MH/s says the fee is fine.
Personally, I've left my miners run here for a period of time. At the end of it, I'm happy with the payout compared to letting my miners run on a different pool. This includes fees, rejects, connection drops, etc.
As fun as it is for me to obsess about my own hash rates on a minute by minute basis, or my reject rates or ping speeds to servers, the bottom line to me is how much btc is transferred to my wallet.
Yes, I've moved some hash power around to see what's going on elsewhere. I owe it to MYSELF to know. Again, the bottom line is how much btc is transferred to my wallet. And as of this point, my hash power is back here.
We all know this pool charges 2%, and 11,000 MH/s says the fee is fine.
Personally, I've left my miners run here for a period of time. At the end of it, I'm happy with the payout compared to letting my miners run on a different pool. This includes fees, rejects, connection drops, etc.
As fun as it is for me to obsess about my own hash rates on a minute by minute basis, or my reject rates or ping speeds to servers, the bottom line to me is how much btc is transferred to my wallet.
Yes, I've moved some hash power around to see what's going on elsewhere. I owe it to MYSELF to know. Again, the bottom line is how much btc is transferred to my wallet. And as of this point, my hash power is back here.
March 05, 2014, 08:31:24 PM
the fact you impose arbitrary standards on this pool also seems to have glossed by your attention.
I'm failing to see how it's arbitrary to say that the vast majority of pools charge 1% or less. It's quite objective, and in no part arbitrary.
Lets use an analogy then. You can go to any number of online financial brokerages (Etrade and the like) and pay $10 a trade. You can go to a financial advisor to do the same thing and provide you some advice while he's at it for $25 a trade. When you're trading $5000 worth of securities at a time, it seems like a pittance either way, but the latter is still a LOT more expensive, relatively speaking.
Jump to: