Topic: [ANN][AUTO-SWITCH] Profit-switch auto-exchange pool: CleverMining.com - page 27. (Read 554359 times)

I im now using Clevermining. Great service!

I have my first gpu instance running und showing up on your website. Now I want to add more machines. Is it possible to run them all under the same BTC wallet (username/worker)?

Wouldn´t be great to manage a lot of BTC wallets. I will run a lot of smaller machines (about 200-300 kh/s) instead of a few big ones.

You have not reached the minimum for daily payouts (0.01 BTC) but you have enough for a weekly payout (minimum 0.001), so you should get it by Monday.

I still didn`t get my payment 13QErq5utG3urKMfrQC1znUTic7pGFu2W1

honestly, if clever mining reduced as much as you like, the hashrate of the coin would drop by 15-20%, becoming even easier a target for anyone with ~12GH of scrypt. At least with clever mining involved, you need about 14-15GH to overwhelm the coin and cripple it via forking or a range of other attack styles.

IMO, new coins need to either be fast out of the gates to get a safe amount of hashrate, or be based on a new type of algo. It would not take much for a malicious miner farm or pool to bounce around various altcoins destroying them with 51% attacks for a few hours. Only reason it doesnt happen is that most altcoins simply are not worth the attack, which serves only to devalue them at the cost of time not spent mining BTC/LTC/DRK/etc (the leading coin for each algo)

@klondike_bar: Upset was mostly caused by not responding for months, but that is ok now and Terk is not mining 50%-70% anymore. It is 30% now. 0%-10% would still be better though.

holy crap, you are THICK. Your issue isnt with Terk, its with your shitty altcoin that is seconds away from being crushed by any half-decent scrypt-mining farm or pool.

Clevermining:
- redirects user hashrate to what is profitable.
- puts newly-mined coins into exchanges so that people can buy them (or not buy them, if the coin isnt worth anything)
- is not 51% attacking anything

NLG:
- has around 1% of the total scrypt hashpower. This makes it insanely weak and suscpetible
- has atrocious blocktimes, an issue that hasnt been resolved for months
- is incapable of handling an influx of hashrate, and does not adjust its blocktimes properly in accordance


You should be happy that clevermining is playing nice, when Terk could ACTUALLY rape and destroy your coin overnight very easily. Building a new coin based on an algorithm that's already in place and dominated by LTC is a terrible idea in the first place, and if Terk doesnt destoy it someone else will - either for profit or just for fun.

having the added hashrate of clevermining is supposed to be a good thing, you just dont see that

Thank you for your thorough answers, Terk. Appreciated.

But I did this.

This was before your developers contacted me:



And this was after I make adjustments to ease on NLG:



And it has been like this for the last four months.

CM hasn't been mining NLG for the last four days and your block gaps remained at the same level - so there's nothing we can do to further ease in the issue which has potential to cause the most inconvenience to users and merchants. Because this is the most important issue.

Mining 50% is not an issue if there are 10 or maybe even 20 different scrypt pools/farms which have 15 GH/s or more and are able to takeover 50% NLG at any time. It's inevitable to be vulnerable to domination if you have only 1.2% of Litecoin network hashrate. Everyone who holds 15 GH/s or more is currently a threat to NLG, regardless if they mine 50% NLG or 0% NLG. Stopping mining doesn't change a thing.

If anything, having another 15 GH/s from CM for a total of 30 GH/s network only increases NLG security because it would now require someone else to have 30 GH/s to try to hurt NLG.

CM was in a position to control 50% of blockchain of over 100 different coins in our history (basically every scrypt coin except Litecoin, yes, including also Dogecoin at some point in time) and we were actually mining over 50% of dozens of coins. We never attacked any single coin and never did anything to intentionally hurt any coin. Also, there wasn't even single another coin community which reacted anyhow similar to NLG, with open hatred. The biggest non-LTC scrypt community which is Dogecoin was merely concerned about us having 51%, but they understood my explanation and accepted it with understanding. Please compare your reaction to this and look how many upvotes this statement got: http://www.reddit.com/r/dogecoin/comments/2dw3tl/clevermining_statement_about_approaching_51_of/ - there were some negative comments of course, but most upvoted commens are filled with understanding, acceptance and even writing thanks for reassuring them with our position. There were not a single ridiculous comment about "raping" a coin of "fucking" a coin. Perhaps you should grow up to the level of DOGE shibes? ;-P


Coming back to NLG:

If NLG will choose to continue being a very tiny scrypt coin, 85x smaller than LTC, then you need to accept that there will always be dozen pools or mining farms capable to overtake your network. You need to either learn to live with this or change.

If you want to live with this, then being friendly with a pool like CleverMining is a good way to do this, because our added 15 GH/s can make you secure against anyone who would like to mess with your coin but doesn't have at least 30 GH/s. You can be sure that CM won't attack NLG, just as we didn't attack DOGE or any other among over 100 coins which we had technical possibility to attack. We have no interest in this kind of activity.

If you want to change this, then I recommend implementing AuxPoW and start being merge-mined, because coins which changed their algorithms to non-scrypt usually didn't end well (like Feathercoin which changed to Neoscrypt in October and then this happened: https://i.imgur.com/jq4pGOY.png) - miners already invested too much in scrypt ASICs to hold on to coins which decide to go the GPU route.


I already broke my promise to ignore you so please don't make me do this again. I'm really tired of this thread and I imagine CM users who will read this will have to be tired as well. If you want to comment, move to your thread or to PM. Goodnight.

While I'd love for your pool to cease existing completely, I know that's not going to happen.

If you're going to "operate in a way to minimize inconveniences for coins", then do that.  You haven't done that with NLG, and your posts thus far today read like you won't anytime soon.  Prove me wrong.  Work with the NLG devs and community if you're going to keep mining NLG.  Don't say you are, and then rape the coin for another 5 months, only to perpetuate this cycle over and over.

If you want to cooperate, cooperate with our community and devs going forward.

If you can do that and prove that this is truly your intention, then I won't ever post in your thread again.  You have my word on that.

-Fuse

This is what every coin-switching pool is about. You earn 1 BTC here, 2 BTC there, 3 BTC there, and all these pieces make the total amount. You start skipping profitable coins, you end up mining only Litecoin. I'm sorry but this is how all coin-switching pools work. As I wrote multiple times, CM operates in a way to minimize inconveniences for coins. But you want me to stop running a pool at all and this is not going happen. End of story.

Figuring out what you could possibly make on NLG in a given day for the last 5 months isn't hard to do.

Lets make it extremely easy for you:

50% of the average 550 blocks in a day is 275 blocks.  That's your take of NLG blocks in a day.  275 x 1000(the number of coins in a block) = 275000NLG per day.  275000NLG x 0.000005BTC(a higher average for the price for the last few months) = 1.375BTC.

Price was, for the most part, lower than 500 for a long time.  Some days you mined 70%, some days 30%.  Mostly, you fell in at around 45-55%.  So my estimation of 1-2BTC a day is pretty spot on to what you were making with NLG mining.  Take out your operating costs and fees, if any.  You're seriously telling me that 1-2BTC a day, spread among your hundreds, if not thousands of users, is worth all this negative reaction for?  The NLG community hates your pool.  After the last 5 months of your pools effect on us, they seriously consider you a cancer on our chain.  Is it really worth it?

Are you seriously going to tell me that your premiere profit-switching multipool is so reliant on 1-2BTC a day, to the point that you can't ease up on NLG?

-Fuse

This is the part that relates to CM and its profits so I respond to it as it might interest our users. I'm ignoring all the rest as I wrote I will.


You seem to lack the ability to understand written word. I wrote that we lost only tiny amount by mining on a wrong chain, because coin-health checks jumped in and shortly stopped mining NLG when problems were detected. I did not disclose what average daily profits mining NLG creates for CM.

I promise you that if the amount would be totally insignificant for the pool, I would stop mining NLG, because maintaining coin daemons for 100 different non-profitable coins takes time and is not worth the effort if it doesn't generate enough profits. Altcoins market is very leveled-out these days and we are mining any coin which has even as low as 103% LTC profitability, because these 3% matters these days. It's not like we earn 200% by mining and selling NLG and your users need to spend 200% value to purchase NLG from us instead of mining it. The difference is much lower, more like 3-5%, and users who purchase NLG from us on exchanges don't overpay any significant value.

I reduced our NLG earnings from 103.2% to 103% (I get these numbers from nowhere - they are not real numbers and are just an example) to lower your max block times  from 120-580 minutes range to 20-60 minutes range. This is what I can do. But we cannot abandon any profitable coin and we need to mine NLG to keep our users happy and profitable.

EOT here.

I will continue to address you in public.  You want to hide in PM, and I'd rather let the people who want answers see what you have to say.


The change is that at some point someone decides to buy a miner and use said miner to produce coins rather than buying them.  This is most likely someone who will end up using these coins on a day to day basis, as that is what the coin was created for.  When you're taking 50% of the coins out of the mining equation on any given day, you're taking coins out of miners hands.



I'm not a dev.  I'm just a community member.  I, along with many others, made numerous suggestions to the devs of the coin.  It's true that it's not your fault that it took that long to make any changes, but it was your fault that we continued to struggle with your pool's influence on the coin during that time.  Don't sit back and claim innocence.  Your pool, your responsibility.



You're absolutely right.  It's all about perception.  You go absent for long periods of time.  You let your pool rape our coin.  You finally come back here to answer questions.  When asked about the last 5 months, you sit back and tell us we should kiss your feet.  Right now, my only perception of you is you're a greedy narcissist.  I'm sure there are plenty of other people thinking the same thing in the NLG community.

So perception... yeah, let's talk about it.  If you come back to mining NLG, you're sending a clear message to the NLG community that even though the profit made from mining 50% of the NLG a day was a "tiny amount", as pointed out in your first post today, you're going to continue to mine it.  The only message that you're sending with that, that can't be perceived any other way, is "Fuck NLG".

Just leave NLG alone.  Just lets us enjoy not having the cancer that has been your pool run our blockchain into the ground.



You're a trip.  "If you find a solution to MPs, let me know so I can adjust my pool to beat it".  LOL... what CM can do for me.  CM can kiss my ass.  That's what it can do for me.  I still don't understand how you can possibly think you're helping anyone in the NLG community.  You are seriously delusional.



No, cooperation would have been you not raping the shit out of our blockchain for 5 months.  It would have been you not ignoring NLG all that time.  10%, 20%... anything besides the 50-90% you took everyday.  If NLG is a "tiny amount" of the profit you make in a day, then it wouldn't be significant decrease in your miner's profits in any given day if you stopped.  At most, you made a 1-2BTC a day mining NLG into the ground.  Spread amoung how many users?  You're seriously telling me that if that's a tiny portion of what you make in a day, you can adjust your mining to 10-20% and still not meet your profit goals by just mining a more profitable coin?

Again, perception... it really just looks like you either don't care about cooperating with anyone, or you're really bad at math.



I see you poked your head into the NLG thread, where people would LOVE to hear you talk about how much we should thank you for all your "cooperation".  I'll see you over there from now on.

-Fuse

These coins don't disappear. If the coins are sold on markets, then it means that someone else bought them. So the coins still go to users who will actually use the coins. Nothing changes here.


If you came to that conclusion at the time you now claim you did, then well, you were not successful in implementing it. I recommended DIGI to another NLG developer in a PM sent on Sep 14th and I recommended it to you personally in a PM sent on Sep 16th. One week later you announced switching to DGW3. Then you finally implemented DIGI with the beginning of Feb, four months later. You can't blame me for you being unable to implement good solutions for four months.


Actually exactly 5 months ago I recommended you the solution which you failed to implement then and finally implemented only 4 days ago.


I repeat: There is no difference wether we actually mine 50% or don't mine but control hashpower which is able to dominate your mining network. It's just the fact that somewhere there exists a hashpower which could take over your network - this is the problem. There are dozen of entities with this amount of hashpower, CM being only one of them, and you can't do anything about it. Wether we mine 50% blocks or 0% changes only perception, but doesn't solve the problem. Mining 50% blocks makes only the problem more visible to you. Not mining makes it less visible to you - and that's the only change. Us stopping mining won't change the problem - there still will be dozen of different entities each controlling enough hashpower to dominate your network at any time.

If you find a solution to this - and somehow prevent the other dozen entities to be able to control your network, then I'm ready to discuss what more CM can do for you. Until this happens, I refuse to decrease my users profit only to change your perception of the problem, but don't solve any real problem. Your coin is as much vulnerable with someone mining 50% or not mining but being able to mine. Think of it like 10 people accidentally holding copies of keys to your home. You are vulnerable, because if they decided to, they can go in and out whenever they please (as: attack the coin). 9 of these people are holding their keys in their pockets (are not mining) and you don't see them. 1 of these people have his copy in plain sight (is mining) and it annoys you. You really should be worried that 10 copies of the key exist, not that you can see 1 of them. The thing is that you can't take these keys back and these people cannot give them back even if they wanted. There are dozen of entities with high enough hashpower to dominate your network and they won't disappear. Me hiding my key in a pocket won't solve your problem. And I won't throw my key away (where key being controlling enough amount of hashrate) as it would require shutting the pool down.

So again: I'm helping any way I can while running our pool at the same time. I reduced your max block time 20-fold. I recommended you the best readjustment algorithm four months before you finally decided to use it. But I won't stop mining NLG at all only for you to feel better, because it wouldn't solve any real problem.

Your idea of "cooperation with coin-switch pool" is the pool to stop mining at all. This is not cooperation and this is not going to happen. This is not coexistence. You would like us to stop existing at all. I can agree to solutions which decrease inconvenience to your users a lot (decreasing maximum block times from 580 minutes to 30 minutes) and don't decrease profitability of my users in a significant way, but I won't implement solutions which really don't improve NLG in any way (other than make you feel better) but decrease our users profitability.


I'm finishing discussing with you (and any other member of NLG community) in this thread because it's not the place for it - it's a support and announcement thread for communication between me and pool users. If your goal is to troll, then you can continue posting in this thread, but then I will simply ignore you and you will never hear from me again, let alone have a chance to ask me for something or try to convince me to something. If you really want to discuss something and try to convince me to something, then you already got my attention and show me that I should treat you seriously by stopping cluttering this thread and switching to PM.

Your problem is not with someone mining 50% coins, but with someone being able to mine 50% coins. The difference between these two is only in perception but don't solve any real problems. Please read my next post for explanation. I hold ourselves from mining 80% of your coins to leave some space for other miners and pools, but please don't ask me to back down to 5%.


No, it was not. It was because I readjusted our algorithms especially for NLG and it started around Oct 20th. Every new 1 GH/s which your dedicated miners added to the network since then, I could match with 3 GH/s more from my side. Instead I matched it with 1 GH/s new from my side to keep the balance (truth be told, it all happened automatically and was managed by algorithms - I didn't look into NLG since October when I readjusted our algorithms).

Again, thank you so much for your help with taking 50% of our blocks.  It was very generous of you.



How close minded are you to think that you were solving our problem?  You didn't solve anything.  You created the original problem, then "fixed" it with another problem.  Did we need to continually ask you to work with us?  Should we have outlined exactly what we needed?  I'm sorry we didn't simplify it enough for you.



No, not 51% attack.  Owning 50%+ of the network, as in centralization of mining.  You should know a lot about that with those silly Clever Hashlets.  Tell me, Terk.  How many blockchains do you control?  I seriously wonder how many there are, and how many you just don't give two shits about.  Hell, I doubt you give a shit about any of them as long as you keep getting paid.  That's why you can walk away from your pool and go silent.  That's why you can pretend that you're going to "work with coins" and then continue to rape the shit of their blockchains.



Again, thank you so much for working so hard to cooperate with our coin.  You're right... I'm completely wrong for being upset about half of the coins mined daily going to be sold on markets, and not going to users who will actually use the coins.  It's not like we don't around 80 merchants that accept it, and users who use the coin on a daily basis.  No, you're right... it's better that those 50% of the coins went to turning profit for you instead of going to their wallets.  Thanks for showing me the light... I've been wrong about you all along.



Then stay off of NLG.  There are literally hundreds of other coins.  At this point your return to NLG is just in spite.  And I'm not the only one who wants you off our chain.  We made a decision in response to your pool.  The community wanted you gone.  Your pool was a cancer that we lived with for 5 painful months.  If you want to help us out, as you like to think you are doing, then don't help us out.  Just go find another coin.  One that has no community, and no purpose.  Leave ours alone.



I already came to the conclusion of DIGI before we knew who you were on the chain.  Your suggestion, at the time, was just another in a long line of suggestions.  Here we go again with the "I only tried to help you" mantra that you have been trying to sell me.  If you were trying to help, where were you in the 5 months of discussing how to mitigate your pool's influence on the coin?  Where were you when people started asking why you had no input on what was going on?

You weren't helping anyone.  You're not a friendly pool op.  The fact that you continue to think that you were helping this whole time is honestly mind-boggling.  If you had any shred of decency and compassion for doing the right thing, you would have done the right thing.  You didn't though.

I'll say this again- you didn't help us.  You caused a problem with our coin, pretended to help "fix" the problem you created, and in turn caused another one.  You didn't help.



Go find another coin to rape for 5 months.  Go "cooperate" with someone else.  If you leave us alone, after 5 months of putting up with your "cooperation", then there is nothing more to discuss.

-Fuse

I find it not reasonable mining 40%-85% NLG most of the time, Terk. It is just not done. http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/historical_mining_stats.html

Do you know why it was just 50% or lower CM got, only some periods last months? It was because very dedicated people behind NLG had to buy a lot of hashingpower to compete to keep it at 50% or lower for CM.

Some of your miners like raping "shitcoins" they said, but I think most here want a good compromise and support good crypto in general as well.
And NLG is. https://timeline.guldencoin.com/ (scroll and zoom)

I think it is about 5-10% hashrate of the total network of NLG is reasonable for you to mine or look for another coin, because it was more than enough for 5 months. Best leave NLG.

It was the concern for the other developer who contacted me first with the issue. I addressed this issue and helped to solve this problem.

I have your PM and I answered it immediately. I just checked it. Your concern was also "When CleverMining hops on NLG, we see difficulty swings and periods of no blocks found". I addressed this issue and solved this problem for your community.



I promised to drop our hashrate to solve inflated block times problem and I did exactly that. Our NLG mining share in September was 85% mined blocks, then 65% in October, then 55% in Nov, 51% in Dec, and 53% in Jan. These numbers are coming from your own mining stats at http://nlgstats.iblogger.org/historical_mining_stats.html. You see, I did what I promised, I decreased our NLG hashrate and I kept that promise and never increased it back again.



As you write about "50% ... common concern in the crypto community regardless of the coin" I assume you are taking about 51% attack.

Then you probably lack understanding of 50% issue/attack. It really doesn't matter if someone mines 50% blocks or even mines 80% blocks or doesn't mine at all. The coin has the same problem even if someone doesn't mine it at all, but has enough hashpower to mine 51% blocks. Anyone who has enough hashpower can jump into your coin at any time and execute a 51% attack. It doesn't matter if they were mining 51% blocks before the attack or if they didn't mine your coin at all. And with 14 GH/s network hashrate there are at least dozen entities (mining farms and pools) which have enough hashpower to take 51% of your network. An entity which mines 51% but doesn't attack is better than entity that doesn't mine but plan to attack. Your problem isn't with CM. Your problem is with having a coin which uses the same mining algorithm (scrypt) as another coin which has 85x higher network hashrate (Litecoin). I can't help you with that (some coins solved this by switching algorithms to non-scrypt, but that made them even more niche coins, other solved this by implementing AuxPoW and becoming merge-mined coins, other decided that they didn't care that much and accepted the fact of being little brother to LTC). What I can do is to promise that you will never face a 51% attack from CleverMining. This is much more than you get from the other dozen entities which control over 14 GH/s of scrypt mining power. You don't even need to believe me to believe that we won't attack - as we don't hoard NLG, we don't have coins to double-spend and 51% attack is useful only for double spending.

Another issue which you might have is that we sell blocks which we mine. But this is simply a market mechanism and this is our business model. What you would like us to do is to cease operations and close the pool. This is not going to happen. I can cooperate to don't inflate your block gaps to several hours - which would cause inconvenience for users and merchants and would kill the coin in the long term - but I won't let my users down and I don't close the pool. Coin-switching pools are reality and you need to learn to live with that. I've done as much as I could to limit inconvenience caused by CM to your users and I expected only a little bit of friendliness in return (and I got it from other NLG developers).


If I were, then I would probably like to show you my "power" - after you started offending me and shitting in my thread - by removing all limits which are limiting amount of hashpower sent to NLG. This wouldn't inflate your block times to 560 minutes as before because of your improved algorithm, but it would inflate them to 120~180 minutes which is high enough to cause painful inconveniences to users and merchants. I won't do this. I am friendly and I won't hurt intentionally entire community because of one of their members.



This only shows how hostile you are, while I have been cooperative and friendly.

Also, by the way of your "whole changeover", I would like to remind you, that I was recommending you DigiShield algorithm when you were brainstorming what to use instead of KGW back in September. I told your developers that coins with DigiShield readjustment behave the best with coin-switching pools and that it will be better for NLG to adapt it. I did this because I wanted to help. I really prefer thriving coins than coins with problems. You went with DGW3 despite my advice and you saw only little improvement (which would be zero improvement if I didn't decrease our hashrate). Now you finally switched to Digi readjustment, which is something I recommended from the start for the good of your coin. This is another example of me being helpful, caring and cooperative. You try to paint me as a villain but the truth is I really did everything I could to help your coin. Perhaps you didn't use my advice on readjustment algorithm out of suspicion that I try to sell you something which was good only for me, but I was recommending something which was good for the coin (and in effect, also good for me, because CleverMining can profit only from healthy coins). I wish you could learn to recognize a friendly pool operator and learn to work together peacefully, because coin-switching pools won't disappear - instead of sending only hate my way despite my efforts to cooperate and help.

This is EOT from my side. You wrote your thing, I wrote mine. There's nothing to add. If you still think there's anything to discuss, please PM me to don't pollute this thread - which is about CleverMining, not about Guldencoin. Please respect this.

amen

Then you obviously don't follow your own thread or the threads of the coins you mine.  Here in your thread, we've asked why you continued to consistently mine 50% of the coins everyday, after saying that you would reduce mining power and ease the burden on the coin.  In the NLG thread, we've talked about how we were going to make changes to the coin to prevent your pool's influence for the last 5 months.  I hope that helps you understand what I'm talking about, because I'm crystal clear about what it is.



I contacted you as well.  I have the PM's if you need a refresher.  Our block gaps were caused by our broken algo, and as a direct result of your pool's influence in that algo.  So you "helped" by reducing the problems you caused.  The block times weren't the concern though.  It was the fact that directly after telling us you would reduce mining power, and dropping down to 20% of the block mining in a given day, you went up to 90% of the blocks in a day, and then back down to around 50% for the last few months.  You're telling me that mining a majority of the blocks in a day and insta-selling them is a compromise?



Oh thank you, oh supreme CM pool op for graciously helping us get rid of 50% of our coins everyday.  It's so kind of you.  You say though that you cooperate within reason.  So is asking that you not take 50% of the blocks in a given day, a common concern in the crypto community regardless of the coin, a unreasonable request?  Help me wrap my head around that, because no, I don't understand that.

Oh and the other pools that could mine the low difficulty blocks... yeah, they could have been any pool.  They could have even been dedicated pools and miners who actually want to see NLG succeed.



You're delusional if you think your pool was gentle and caring towards our coin.  And the entire community was happy and boasting that you weren't on the chain anymore.  You've been a thorn in our side for 5 months.  Your pool is the primary reason we changed algorithms, and that should tell you something.  Truth of the matter is that you continued to mine NLG on a side fork.  Your failure to identify the issue, or even plan for it, was a nice little bonus to the whole changeover.  I won't apologize for my enthusiasm with that.



Again... delusional.  Yes we still have higher block times, but that wasn't the primary concern here.  Your 50%+ insta-sell everyday was.  We'll get back to better block times with future updates and tweaks.  I'll tell you now that we will continue to mitigate your pool's effect on our coin.  So you can threaten CM mining on the coin with your big bad pool, but the community isn't having it anymore.

Go ahead and mine NLG... we'll be watching the results and planning future updates accordingly.



Sure... I'll apologize.

I'm sorry you're a power hungry, greedy multi-pool op who doesn't give a shit about anything besides his bottom line.

-Fuse