Topic: [CLOSED] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees+NMC, Stratum, VarDiff, Private Servers - page 155. (Read 903163 times)
January 09, 2014, 08:10:10 PM
There's always P2Pool nodes if you guys are looking for No Fee/Free pools... if you can stand the extreme variance.
January 09, 2014, 07:57:07 PM
Also back in 2011 there was no pool even close to DeepBit size that was free.
That's kind of my point.
From what I can piece together Ghash is NOT a free pool.
According to this, they are:
https://ghash.io/ghashio_press_release.pdf
Fee free pools worry me. If you're not knowingly paying for a service, you still end up paying for it - you just don't know what the terms are.
January 09, 2014, 07:51:17 PM
Also back in 2011 there was no pool even close to DeepBit size that was free.
That's kind of my point.
From what I can piece together Ghash is NOT a free pool.
January 09, 2014, 05:00:45 PM
Ghash.io owns the private part. Buying it on cex.io doesn't mean you own it unless you trade it for physical hardware. They get the best of both worlds, they own/control the hardware, while people pay more than it will ever mine on cex.io. But if they weren't selling it for amounts above what it can ever produce, they'd still own that hash rate and have it mining for themselves.
So am I wrong to assume that the hashrate of their own hardware has remained fairly the same, while the the share of the independent miners has increased?
They also charge a "maintenance fee" on the cloud mining that is far greater than the actual cost to maintain it.
That can be also said for BTCGuild too. Just stating the obvious
That pie chart has always been useless. BTC Guild is ~25% of network hash rate. 24-hour, hell, even 4-day charts are USELESS because they are heavily influenced by luck. http://blockorigin.pfoe.be is accurate for BTC Guild's share of the network over the last 2 weeks. Still influenced by luck, but SIGNIFICANTLY more accurate than blockchain.info.
The stats on that website are based on the past 10-12 days, which does not show the current position of the pools.
I don't think Ghash.io controls only 30.85% of the network, because people would not be freaking out if they did.
Unfortunately there is no way to predict the current total hash rate of the network as it is based on solved blocks, which in turn is skewed based on luck.
What do you think are the real current percentages of the top 2 pools?
BTC Guild is ~25%. GHash.io is in the upper 30s, possibly 40. BTC Guild's percent of publicly available hashrate (private farms decrease the network share of all public hashrate pools) has not changed in months.
Fair enough.
It is just that from a regular person point of view Ghash.io growth seems much bigger than any other pool and so people are freaking out.
I would also assume you have no plans to reduce fees, which is your own personal choice of course, so it will be interesting at least for me to see how this will play out.
January 09, 2014, 04:52:48 PM
Ghash.io owns the private part. Buying it on cex.io doesn't mean you own it unless you trade it for physical hardware. They get the best of both worlds, they own/control the hardware, while people pay more than it will ever mine on cex.io. But if they weren't selling it for amounts above what it can ever produce, they'd still own that hash rate and have it mining for themselves.
So am I wrong to assume that the hashrate of their own hardware has remained fairly the same, while the the share of the independent miners has increased?
They also charge a "maintenance fee" on the cloud mining that is far greater than the actual cost to maintain it.
That can be also said for BTCGuild too. Just stating the obvious
That pie chart has always been useless. BTC Guild is ~25% of network hash rate. 24-hour, hell, even 4-day charts are USELESS because they are heavily influenced by luck. http://blockorigin.pfoe.be is accurate for BTC Guild's share of the network over the last 2 weeks. Still influenced by luck, but SIGNIFICANTLY more accurate than blockchain.info.
The stats on that website are based on the past 10-12 days, which does not show the current position of the pools.
I don't think Ghash.io controls only 30.85% of the network, because people would not be freaking out if they did.
Unfortunately there is no way to predict the current total hash rate of the network as it is based on solved blocks, which in turn is skewed based on luck.
What do you think are the real current percentages of the top 2 pools?
BTC Guild is ~25% of the full network. GHash.io is in the upper 30s of the full network. BTC Guild's percent of publicly available hashrate (private farms decrease the network share of all public hashrate pools) has not changed in months.
January 09, 2014, 04:48:06 PM
Ghash.io owns the private part. Buying it on cex.io doesn't mean you own it unless you trade it for physical hardware. They get the best of both worlds, they own/control the hardware, while people pay more than it will ever mine on cex.io. But if they weren't selling it for amounts above what it can ever produce, they'd still own that hash rate and have it mining for themselves.
So am I wrong to assume that the hashrate of their own hardware has remained fairly the same, while the the share of the independent miners has increased?
They also charge a "maintenance fee" on the cloud mining that is far greater than the actual cost to maintain it.
That can be also said for BTCGuild too. Just stating the obvious
That pie chart has always been useless. BTC Guild is ~25% of network hash rate. 24-hour, hell, even 4-day charts are USELESS because they are heavily influenced by luck. http://blockorigin.pfoe.be is accurate for BTC Guild's share of the network over the last 2 weeks. Still influenced by luck, but SIGNIFICANTLY more accurate than blockchain.info.
The stats on that website are based on the past 10-12 days, which does not show the current position of the pools.
I don't think Ghash.io controls only 30.85% of the network, because people would not be freaking out if they did.
Unfortunately there is no way to predict the current total hash rate of the network as it is based on solved blocks, which in turn is skewed based on luck.
What do you think are the real current percentages of the top 2 pools?
January 09, 2014, 04:33:01 PM
If you discount GHash.io having the world's largest private mining farm, BTC Guild is nearly 1 PH/s ahead of their POOL. Basically the only network share BTC Guild has lost has been the share of the network taken by the PRIVATE side of GHash.io. ~20% of the entire network is privately controlled by GHash.io's private farm based on their post that stated 45% of their pool is their private farm, meaning instead of BTC Guild competing with other pools for roughly 85% of mining capacity (large private farms+solo miners were ~15% of the network before GHash.io), it is competing for roughly 65% of mining capacity. Essentially 35% of the network pie chart is off limits, and BTC Guild has a little over a third of the network hash rate that can be obtained.
BTC Guild has continued to grow roughly in line with the other pools, which, discounting private farms, would mean it has not lost it's share of the public network.
Isn't the private part owned by people, who trade it on cex.io?
The only difference being I own my miners and they own just the hashrate (cloud hashing)?
Ghash.io owns the private part. Buying it on cex.io doesn't mean you own it unless you trade it for physical hardware. They get the best of both worlds, they own/control the hardware, while people pay more than it will ever mine on cex.io. But if they weren't selling it for amounts above what it can ever produce, they'd still own that hash rate and have it mining for themselves.
They also charge a "maintenance fee" on the cloud mining that is far greater than the actual cost to maintain it.
My comment is based on the https://blockchain.info/pools?timespan=24hrs pie chart.
BTCGuild and Ghash.io used to be equal and now Ghash.io is more than double BTCGuild (40% vs 16%)
From where I am standing Ghash.io has significantly increased its share of the total network speed.
BTCGuild and Ghash.io used to be equal and now Ghash.io is more than double BTCGuild (40% vs 16%)
From where I am standing Ghash.io has significantly increased its share of the total network speed.
That pie chart has always been useless. BTC Guild is ~25% of network hash rate. 24-hour, hell, even 4-day charts are USELESS because they are heavily influenced by luck. http://blockorigin.pfoe.be is accurate for BTC Guild's share of the network over the last 2016 blocks. They're not right on Ghash.io currently because they haven't been able to catch up on all the scraping due to blockexplorer.com being stuck for almost 2 weeks. Still influenced by luck, but SIGNIFICANTLY more accurate than blockchain.info.
January 09, 2014, 04:29:51 PM
If you discount GHash.io having the world's largest private mining farm, BTC Guild is nearly 1 PH/s ahead of their POOL. Basically the only network share BTC Guild has lost has been the share of the network taken by the PRIVATE side of GHash.io. ~20% of the entire network is privately controlled by GHash.io's private farm based on their post that stated 45% of their pool is their private farm, meaning instead of BTC Guild competing with other pools for roughly 85% of mining capacity (large private farms+solo miners were ~15% of the network before GHash.io), it is competing for roughly 65% of mining capacity. Essentially 35% of the network pie chart is off limits, and BTC Guild has a little over a third of the network hash rate that can be obtained.
BTC Guild has continued to grow roughly in line with the other pools, which, discounting private farms, would mean it has not lost it's share of the public network.
Isn't the private part owned by people, who trade it on cex.io?
The only difference being I own my miners and they own just the hashrate (cloud hashing)?
January 09, 2014, 04:27:32 PM
in my opinion the #1 reason for people using Ghash.io is the lack of fees, which made the pool so big.
I disagree. People tend to glom onto the larger/largest hashrate pool(s) with the assumption that they must be doing something right, regardless of fee's. I believe that has been proven out by Deepbit's past success.
That might be true, but still people do not ignore the fee element and would use it to decide where to mine.
Also back in 2011 there was no pool even close to DeepBit size that was free.
I used to mine in DeepBit and then if I remember correctly I switched to BTCMine, which was by invitation only.
My prediction is that if BTCGuild does not lower fees it will continue to lose position within the total network speed share.
Again, I disagree. Saying BTCGuild is loosing network share isn't a completely honest statement. BTCGuild is NOT loosing hashrate. I'm not even sure BTCGuild is loosing it's network percentage, but I haven't been keeping tabs on that so I don't really know. It's just smaller than GHash at the moment.
My comment is based on the https://blockchain.info/pools?timespan=24hrs pie chart.
BTCGuild and Ghash.io used to be equal and now Ghash.io is more than double BTCGuild (40% vs 16%)
From where I am standing Ghash.io has significantly increased its share of the total network speed.
January 09, 2014, 04:03:33 PM
Sorry if this was asked, but does anyone know any common resolution to high # of rejected shares? i switched from slush to btcguild and all 4 antminers are showing very high number (~25%) of rejected shares. I don think it is the hardware or internet, they were mining slush fine but i dont like that pool anymore.
I am pretty sure it's some setting i need to do figured if someone already knew, will save me some time.
Thanks
I am pretty sure it's some setting i need to do figured if someone already knew, will save me some time.
Thanks
I'm not familiar with antminers personally, but I do know there's a ton of users on the pool using them with nowhere near that reject percentage. What type of reject is it showing on the dashboard? Some pools don't report duplicate shares as rejects (they just don't report them at all), which is something I know early ASICs and a *ton* of FPGAs had lots of problems with.
January 09, 2014, 03:39:06 PM
Sorry if this was asked, but does anyone know any common resolution to high # of rejected shares? i switched from slush to btcguild and all 4 antminers are showing very high number (~25%) of rejected shares. I don think it is the hardware or internet, they were mining slush fine but i dont like that pool anymore.
I am pretty sure it's some setting i need to do figured if someone already knew, will save me some time.
Thanks
I am pretty sure it's some setting i need to do figured if someone already knew, will save me some time.
Thanks
Try another stratum. I hade alot of rejects on eu so i switched to us.
January 09, 2014, 03:25:40 PM
Sorry if this was asked, but does anyone know any common resolution to high # of rejected shares? i switched from slush to btcguild and all 4 antminers are showing very high number (~25%) of rejected shares. I don think it is the hardware or internet, they were mining slush fine but i dont like that pool anymore.
I am pretty sure it's some setting i need to do figured if someone already knew, will save me some time.
Thanks
I am pretty sure it's some setting i need to do figured if someone already knew, will save me some time.
Thanks
January 09, 2014, 02:14:47 PM
My prediction is that if BTCGuild does not lower fees it will continue to lose position within the total network speed share.
Again, I disagree. Saying BTCGuild is loosing network share isn't a completely honest statement. BTCGuild is NOT loosing hashrate. I'm not even sure BTCGuild is loosing it's network percentage, but I haven't been keeping tabs on that so I don't really know. It's just smaller than GHash at the moment.
If you discount GHash.io having the world's largest private mining farm, BTC Guild is nearly 1 PH/s ahead of their POOL. Basically the only network share BTC Guild has lost has been the share of the network taken by the PRIVATE side of GHash.io. ~20% of the entire network is privately controlled by GHash.io's private farm based on their post that stated 45% of their pool is their private farm, meaning instead of BTC Guild competing with other pools for roughly 85% of mining capacity (large private farms+solo miners were ~15% of the network before GHash.io), it is competing for roughly 65% of mining capacity. Essentially 35% of the network pie chart is off limits, and BTC Guild has a little over a third of the network hash rate that can be obtained.
BTC Guild has continued to grow roughly in line with the other pools, which, discounting private farms, would mean it has not lost it's share of the public network.
January 09, 2014, 11:43:04 AM
Well, Ghash.io is getting a little negative press today over their network share.
http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-miners-ditch-ghash-io-pool-51-attack/
http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-miners-ditch-ghash-io-pool-51-attack/
January 09, 2014, 11:20:29 AM
My prediction is that if BTCGuild does not lower fees it will continue to lose position within the total network speed share.
Again, I disagree. Saying BTCGuild is loosing network share isn't a completely honest statement. BTCGuild is NOT loosing hashrate. I'm not even sure BTCGuild is loosing it's network percentage, but I haven't been keeping tabs on that so I don't really know. It's just smaller than GHash at the moment.
Ugh, I saw a CYPER post because someone quoted it.
As an experiment, I pointed identical hashing power at 4 different pools for some weeks. The experiment is still ongoing. In spite of the fee, BTCGuild still beats all the others for revenue. I disagree that people will leave the guild over the fee. It is worth every penny to have such a stable pool and a plugged in operator who cares about it.
January 09, 2014, 11:05:25 AM
My prediction is that if BTCGuild does not lower fees it will continue to lose position within the total network speed share.
Again, I disagree. Saying BTCGuild is loosing network share isn't a completely honest statement. BTCGuild is NOT loosing hashrate. I'm not even sure BTCGuild is loosing it's network percentage, but I haven't been keeping tabs on that so I don't really know. It's just smaller than GHash at the moment.
January 09, 2014, 10:59:53 AM
in my opinion the #1 reason for people using Ghash.io is the lack of fees, which made the pool so big.
I disagree. People tend to glom onto the larger/largest hashrate pool(s) with the assumption that they must be doing something right, regardless of fee's. I believe that has been proven out by Deepbit's past success.
Ghash has the benefit of having their own large farm(s) of high end ASIC's. So they are large even if they have no other miners. And that is why they charge no fee's, not because of altruistic generosity, but because they create their own revenue and don't need the fees.
January 09, 2014, 09:50:52 AM
Eleuthria, might you considering lowering your pool fees temporarily to incentivise more people to get off ghash.io and onto your pool ?
Lowering fees temporarily just to lure new people is a bit sneaky.Fair point. Bad knee-jerk suggestion brought on by this ghash.io nearing 51% craziness.
I hope I don't get my posts deleted for making valid observations, but in my opinion the #1 reason for people using Ghash.io is the lack of fees, which made the pool so big.
My prediction is that if BTCGuild does not lower fees it will continue to lose position within the total network speed share.
At the end of the day people are greedy by nature and so would very much pay nothing, than anything. And in this case they also get even lower variance and steady payouts for paying nothing.
On top of that luck has been great too for the last couple of days.
January 09, 2014, 09:44:45 AM
Eleuthria, might you considering lowering your pool fees temporarily to incentivise more people to get off ghash.io and onto your pool ?
Lowering fees temporarily just to lure new people is a bit sneaky.Fair point. Bad knee-jerk suggestion brought on by this ghash.io nearing 51% craziness.
January 09, 2014, 09:39:01 AM
Eleuthria, might you considering lowering your pool fees temporarily to incentivise more people to get off ghash.io and onto your pool ?
Lowering fees temporarily just to lure new people is a bit sneaky.
How would you feel if a business changed something that enticed you to switch and then removed it?
He can either lower the fees permanently to stay competitive or leave them as it is.
Jump to: