Topic: [DEAD] DeepBit.net PPS+Prop,instant payouts, we pay for INVALID BLOCKS too - page 88. (Read 1601405 times)

Sorry didn't see the info any where but I'm still learning. By the way I have about 7gh/s on your pool and I see we had a group of short 2-6min rounds. I don't see any shares for my miners? Bad blocks or something?

This question is asked EACH time after the difficulty adjustment :)

Hey is anyone else not seeing pool luck on the statistics page?

This is true, but afaik all the devs agree that the way multisig is currently implemented is not a good way. That's why we have BIP 16 (and 17), if multisig was fine just like this then there would be no reason for BIP 16. This is not just Gavin, all the devs agree that P2SH is the way to go.

True, but again, the option of using plain multisigs has basically been shelved by the entire dev team, so P2SH is what we're aiming for. And there is no better implementation in the horizon.

I'm aware of this. That's exactly why I would like to see it enabled as soon as possible so the client developers, not just for the official client, can start working on actual use scenarios and GUI features for multisig. There are a lot of other issues to work on regarding Bitcoin protocol as well, for example the scaling issue. It's difficult to completely move on until this is settled.

Thanks for making this clear, I appreciate it. By the way I do agree with the way you've handled this whole issue, by deciding that your pool is not the first one to support P2SH. That was smart because your vote has so much weight that it can easily pull others simply by being a large percentage. That's not very democratic.

Also, it seems that P2SH support has increased. It's now at 38% even without Deepbit, which is very impressive in my opinion. Taking Deepbit out of the calculation, it amounts to 55% relative support. With Deepbit the total support would be 70% which is good enough to be totally safe and I'm quite confident that everyone else will upgrade when forced to. Even the miners who don't care for Bitcoin care for their money and mining on a dead end chain would not be smart.

... and just now - ALL 11 blocks from 169599 to 169609 say DeepBit on blockchain.info
(last block found was 169610 by someone else just a minute ago)

Why would I think what?
The only thing I am thinking is that sounds like some sort of bad luck record.
26 blocks with an average of 200% shares (50% luck)
It is indeed rare.

Why would you think so? Deepbit's been at 50% for a short time before. It's also been at ~200% before, any problems with that?
It won't happen often, obviously, but it can and will.

You didn't look close enough.
Based on the current hash rate (3950GH/s) for the day of 3-Mar the pool luck was approximately 50% (26 blocks)
I think that has to be some sort of long term bad record of all time for any pool?

To be clear, Im not implying its not random. Im just curious how rare it is.

LOL, talk about a streak of bad luck 
I just saw your last 10 blocks averaged a hair under 4M shares per block.

Anyone want to calculate the odds on that?

Current support for multisigs is not "rudimentary", it's fully functional. I know how it works and there are existing multisig TXes in the blockchain. The problem is that "official client" doesn't supports creating ANY multisigs - both plain and P2SH.
P2SH is NOT the same as "multisig support", its just a method that will make many different things easier to use, including multisigs.

I mentioned blockchain.info just as EXAMPLE of working multisigs. You don't need to use this online wallet if your client supports either plain multisigs or P2SH/BIP16.

The benefits of multisigs will not be available right after enabling P2SH just because there are no clients supporting it for normal users. It's just one step towards really deploying it.

P.S.: "next month" is 03.2012

Your question was already answered on the previous page.
Last two days were very unlucky, just in last 24 hours we had one ~11M shares block and 5 * ~5M shares blocks.
Bad luck happens sometimes, it's expected and shouldn't affect overall monthly rewards.

I'm having the exact same issue. Right around 1.35ghash/sec and I was at about -20% of the expected BTC payout. I've seen variance on the pool before, but the most I've ever seen on deepbit was +/- .07 btc/24h. Not sure what's up...

I'm trying to figure out if my cards are defective or if something else is wrong on my end.

I have 1.38GH/s and not including variance I should have around 0.93bitcoins/24h.

On deepbit the last 24h has had 31min on average for solved block and I have had 0.71bitcoins/24h.

According my calculations I have 76% vs 100% for no variance for 1.38GH/s.

Is the above normal or is something wrong with my PC?

Baaaaaaaaaa, I find your, Baaaaaaaaa, remarks, Baaaaaaaaaaa, insulting. Baaaaaaaaaaaaa.

I don't know what you're talking about, there is of course a rudimentary multisig support already in the protocol but P2SH will actually make it usable. Currently any multisig transactions are considered non-standard, the benefits of multisig are not really available until P2SH is enabled. What Blockchain.info can do has nothing to do with this and even mentioning it leads me to believe that your understanding of why P2SH is needed might be flawed. Blockchain.info is a 3rd party service, that allows for a different set of features compared to a client that you run on your own.

Again I'm slightly confused as to what you're talking about. P2SH concerns multisignature transactions explicitly so I don't understand why you're separating them. I hope you add support this month, not next month. It's unlikely that support for P2SH is going to increase significantly from where it is now, no matter what anyone says or does. Simply because so many miners are complete sheep. It's your move and I don't know what you're waiting for.

At least consider adding support this month so it has a chance of passing the check April 1st and perhaps be enabled April 15th. Waiting longer doesn't help, what it does is it denies us Bitcoin users of a great feature. The fact that Blockchain.info supports multisig escrow transactions has nothing to do with this and doesn't help at all, that was ridiculous...

Yes, but if you can create a good enough sanity check then you may simply pay from this second server :)

Creating such sanity checks is not easy, BTW.

Or, a second server in another location could approve payments with the second key, after doing sanity checking on transactions beforehand.

1. We already have multisignature support in the protocol and in reality. For example, you can create multisignature transactions with blockchain.info's online wallet.
Current "official" client doesn't supports sending multisignature TXes from the GUI.

2. I think that you are talking about P2SH, not multisignatures. Yes, I'm working on it and it's possible that I'll deploy it in next month. I still think that BIP16 is a dirty hack and don't WANT to support it. But it may be necessary to implement because of Gavin.

3. No, the P2SH will not make Linode-like incidents impossible. Not even close.
Yes, it's possible to set up a combination of countermeasures that can make payments more safe, but P2SH won't be that important.
If the system is ready to make automatic payments then anyone with root access can repeat same actions to steal money unless the pool operator manually approves each transaction with his second key.