Author

Topic: bitcoinwatch.com now has other at 68% (Read 1893 times)

member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
May 31, 2011, 07:51:41 PM
#8
BTCMine did a software upgrade and apparently the JSON interface they had is not being consumed by Bitcoin Watch (or the interface changed) ... not sure whether Bitcoin Watch needs to do something or BTCMine does, I suspect the former.  That accounts for a pie slice a little larger than BTC Guild.

A bit smaller than BTC Guild actually Smiley.

The point is still valid though, some pools have been attacked/had downtime lately, which removes them from the pie chart temporarily.  Reloading bitcoinwatch's pie chart right now shows Other roughly the size of BTC Guild / BTCMine.

Deepbit is and has been up for awhile at well over 1TH/s, but they were not represented on the pie chart and thus were lumped in with other.  The chart is NOT wildly inaccurate and in fact it is precisely accurate [as of the time sample they use to generate the chart anyway].  But, if they aren't consuming the JSON data or the JSON data is not available from a pool, then the processing power generated by pools not represented falls under "other".  What would you expect them to put there?  I see deepbit is back there now and "other" is precisely reduced accordingly.

Let's get real and let this thread die a timely death.
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007
May 31, 2011, 06:08:52 PM
#7
BTCMine did a software upgrade and apparently the JSON interface they had is not being consumed by Bitcoin Watch (or the interface changed) ... not sure whether Bitcoin Watch needs to do something or BTCMine does, I suspect the former.  That accounts for a pie slice a little larger than BTC Guild.

A bit smaller than BTC Guild actually Smiley.

The point is still valid though, some pools have been attacked/had downtime lately, which removes them from the pie chart temporarily.  Reloading bitcoinwatch's pie chart right now shows Other roughly the size of BTC Guild / BTCMine.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
May 27, 2011, 02:15:49 AM
#6
More likely, the site is wildly inaccurate about the aggregate hashing speed, as it always is after a difficulty change, and it just subtracts the published hashing speeds of the various known pools from the horribly inflated global estimate and concludes that "other" is doing a lot of work.

I bet it'll look normal again in a day or two.

It is based on JSON data from the pools and everything else is "other".  Pretty simple.
kjj
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1025
May 27, 2011, 12:27:25 AM
#5
More likely, the site is wildly inaccurate about the aggregate hashing speed, as it always is after a difficulty change, and it just subtracts the published hashing speeds of the various known pools from the horribly inflated global estimate and concludes that "other" is doing a lot of work.

I bet it'll look normal again in a day or two.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
May 27, 2011, 12:18:47 AM
#4
I want to know just who these Others are?HuhHuh?  Are they pushing the button every 108 minutes???   Are they going to attack us and take our bitcoins?

Small friendly pools and solo miners.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
May 27, 2011, 12:04:12 AM
#3
BTCMine did a software upgrade and apparently the JSON interface they had is not being consumed by Bitcoin Watch (or the interface changed) ... not sure whether Bitcoin Watch needs to do something or BTCMine does, I suspect the former.  That accounts for a pie slice a little larger than BTC Guild.
sr. member
Activity: 339
Merit: 250
dafq is goin on
May 26, 2011, 11:16:25 PM
#2
.... wink, yeahhhh, the fpga asic flood, stop mining look at total hash rate Wink  Roll Eyes
full member
Activity: 157
Merit: 100
May 26, 2011, 11:13:29 PM
#1
are they missing a mining pool, or have more people gone independent?
Jump to: