Topic: [CLOSED] BTCMine - ZERO fee mining pool (LP, SSL, JSON API, P2SH) - page 25. (Read 171605 times)

In the next 1-2 hour frontend webserver will be disabled for 10-15 minutes due software update.
Mining pool server will not affect from this downtime, so nothing to worry about.

The only pool that redistributes fees is LukeJr's. The fee are still meaningless for now. They are anywhere between 0 and 0.05 BTC per block on average. Fees are expected to overcome block reward at the earliest 6-7 years from now, when block will reward 6.25 BTC each.

All fee keeps for pool now. And yes, this stated before, many times.
Not so quick, perhaps several months or even years...

not sure if it was stated before. What happens to the transaction fees, that are mined in addition to the 50BTC?
Please correct me if I understood the whole thing wrong. When value of BTC and difficulty rises, then those fees are the incentive for mining, no? So in a few weeks this might matter.

Send me your account name and detailed configuration string through form on the site, I will check all.

Actually one for each gpu core (i.e. for each launched miner), if you do not use crossfire/sli.

I seem to be getting Error 80070006: The handle is invalid. using Ufasoft Miner.

I have the correct format coming from the site, but I get that every time.


The miner is working just fine for deepbit though. Any thoughts?

Pretty sure it is per rig.

i was reading the FAQS it says
does that mean you need a new miner for each mining rig or for each GPU?

dbitcoin,

Thank you very much for the statistics page update.  I am very glad to see the difficulty level there; that is a great piece of information to have when looking at the stats

Yes, just luck.  Block 125089 (round 276) took 11:35:05 to find.  That is what massive jumps in difficulty do.

Why are most of last block so big? just a luck?

293    125335    05/20/2011 12:28:14    04:22:53    615672 42
292    125299    05/20/2011 12:10:13    00:18:01    43059 78
291    125295    05/20/2011 11:10:04    01:00:08    143035 82
290    125289    05/20/2011 06:36:18    04:33:46    640326 88
289    125250    05/20/2011 05:15:14    01:21:03    184828 confirmed
288    125228    05/20/2011 04:27:29    00:47:45    106135 confirmed
287    125222    05/20/2011 00:18:13    04:09:15    538027 confirmed
286    125183    05/19/2011 23:38:33    00:39:40    81912 confirmed
285    125174    05/19/2011 21:33:18    02:05:14    260590 confirmed
284    125155    05/19/2011 20:37:41    00:55:36    113959 confirmed
283    125151    05/19/2011 20:10:34    00:27:07    56480   confirmed
282    125147    05/19/2011 19:09:36    01:00:57    122096 confirmed
281    125135    05/19/2011 18:33:55    00:35:40    68190  confirmed
280    125128    05/19/2011 18:33:07    00:00:47    1412      confirmed
279    125127    05/19/2011 14:53:42    03:39:24    435700 confirmed
278    125100    05/19/2011 14:07:03    00:46:38    86011  confirmed
277    125095    05/19/2011 12:57:52    01:09:11    33578  confirmed
276    125089    05/19/2011 01:22:47    11:35:05    1574416 confirmed

I apologize for my part.  I have said more than enough on the subject.

I agree, that graph would be very usefull

cut if off already!

When I'm talking about the reported hashing power and siphoning off bitcoins I'm simply referring to a possibly way in which a mine could cheat, I'm not talking about anything specific to btcmine or any other mine.    I took that fact for granted which could be where the miscommunication is stemming from.

There aren't too many ways for a mine to cheat.  It could just not pay people, but they'd know they weren't paid and make it public.  It could not report a block being found, but the client that solved the block would know that it was solved.   One way that it almost certainly could get away with is putting in phantom miners to inflate the reported hashing power and then pocketing their shares.  The blocks would be solved a little too slowly on average but the variance is likely large enough to account for that.

The reason that I think that it sounds like an accusation is that you used the word "siphoning" when referring to bitcoins from the pool.  BTCMine and no other pool that I have tried siphons anything.  Use deepbit for an example.  Set the window to five minutes and you will see your hash rate drop way below what your miner reports and other times be way above what the miner reports.  It is just a matter of when the miner submits finished shares and the sampling window.  There will always be a slight average of less than your miner reports because of the work that is dropped from either a stale share submitted or dropping current work when long polling suggests getting new work.  As far as payouts, pretty much all pools payout to the bit cent, but the remainder is left in your pool account and not "siphoned".  It isn't like the banks where they use special rounding at the cent level [round to even ... 2.025 will round to 2.02 and 2.035 will round to 2.04].

As far as stating with certainty, sure I can.  I use Phoenix 1.47 (haven't gone to 1.48 yet) and I can simply look at the number of shares on the miner page of BTCMine for that miner and then run the client and after several hours [or days], check the number of shares reported by the client as accepted and compare to the value from the BTCMine miner page minus the value I started at.  With deepbit.net it is even easier, because you can simply hit reset counters and then both the miner and the pool start counting at 0 (personally, I like seeing the life long submissions for a given miner).  With Phoenix, I have never seen a missing share.  Using the windows gui miner, I have noticed drift, which is why I started using Phoenix.  So, yes, you can tell with certainty.

Of course it isn't an accusation.  I'd hardly be using the pool if I thought it was stealing.  I am of the opinion that openness is the best way to go, regardless of underlying honesty.  This is not an uncommon opinion. 

Your second paragraph.  I don't know what you're trying to say.   You can't state any of that as fact, you don't have a clue what happens after your shares get sent to the mine and you obviously can't monitor all the other miners using it.   I agree that that's almost certainly the case, I just don't see why you're writing it.

what about donating for a btc per day graph like slush one?

What?  That sure sounds like an accusation.  Putting that sentence after an accusation doesn't change the fact that is is one.  Putting that aside for a second ....

The pool is not siphoning off any bitcoins from anybody and they are not over reporting processing power [clearly, it is window averaged (5-30 min?)] as completely real-time is not realistic.