PPS was more important when computational power was small and rounds lasted for ever (couple of hours or even days), now it is useless because as you said it cost much larger fee.
Oh and I would gladly return to Slush's pool but for now it is not fully compatible with newer versions of Diablo Miner. Deepbit gives me almost 15% more Mhps (including much less stales on Deepbit). Older versions of Diablo are some 10% slower on both pools
Topic: Deepbit nearly at 50%! Change Pool now! (Read 4340 times)
I don't really get why people mine at Deepbit. There are many pools that are big enough to not have any significant variance in solving blocks that do not have any fees. The 50% issue is a problem but that's just one of the reasons to not mine at Deepbit, the other one is the fees.
A lot of people love the pps (pay per share) system. And it seems that nobody can do the math and see that the pool gets more or less 10% from the miners. I guess those are the same miners that are happy when the newest mining gets them another 0.1% - switching pool would bring an order of magnitude more... It seems a lot of bitcoin miners like to pay the highest fees. One wonders how that fits in the bitcoin world.
I don't get it..why it's bad if deepbit have more that 50% of market share?
See http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=8653.0
I don't really get why people mine at Deepbit. There are many pools that are big enough to not have any significant variance in solving blocks that do not have any fees. The 50% issue is a problem but that's just one of the reasons to not mine at Deepbit, the other one is the fees.
I'd switch if there was a good alternative offering the same as deepbit.
Currently I see no need to change
Currently I see no need to change
There are plenty of alternatives offering a much better deal than deepbit. Deepbit charges the highest fees of almost any pool out there.
The Fees of the large pools was one of the resons why we made the TENOBIS MINE a 0 Fee Pool http://mine.tenobis.com
So there are many alternative pools out there
I'd switch if there was a good alternative offering the same as deepbit.
Currently I see no need to change
Currently I see no need to change
There are plenty of alternatives offering a much better deal than deepbit. Deepbit charges the highest fees of almost any pool out there.
A I missing something? According to the charts Slush is almost as big as Deepbit.
Seems as long as their is direct competition it's not the end of the world.
Seems as long as their is direct competition it's not the end of the world.
I realy agree that there should be more pools that balance the total hashrate between more then just a few big pools out, if you like to join the TENOBIS MINE feel free to do so! http://mine.tenobis.com
i dont see it as a real problem, if deepbit decided to abuse the power of having more than 50% then everyone would leave them, giving them less than 50% 
or u can just keep the system balanced and join another independent pool, like mine
or u can just keep the system balanced and join another independent pool, like mine
Can't find it elsewhere. Is it so, that only block-generating bitcoin "clients" are verifying transactions?
What is the point of leaving the non-generating clients open then?
What is the point of leaving the non-generating clients open then?
A block is simply a register of transactions. Finding a block is simply verifying those transactions. This means that only the miners who find a block are verifying transactions since the previous block was found.
These days people don't typically mine through the client (except some CPU miners). The only reason I can see to leave the client open is to allow it to catch up to the blockchain, and automatically download every new block without a delay.
Thank you for clarification. Then I see the whole point with deepbit.net.
Can't find it elsewhere. Is it so, that only block-generating bitcoin "clients" are verifying transactions?
What is the point of leaving the non-generating clients open then?
What is the point of leaving the non-generating clients open then?
A block is simply a register of transactions. Finding a block is simply verifying those transactions. This means that only the miners who find a block are verifying transactions since the previous block was found.
These days people don't typically mine through the client (except some CPU miners). The only reason I can see to leave the client open is to allow it to catch up to the blockchain, and automatically download every new block without a delay.
I'd switch if there was a good alternative offering the same as deepbit.
Currently I see no need to change
Currently I see no need to change
Can't find it elsewhere. Is it so, that only block-generating bitcoin "clients" are verifying transactions?
What is the point of leaving the non-generating clients open then?
Burden of proof is on you, not me, for making a statement like that. You went from pointing out a possibility to concluding it was highly likely "soon."
I provided the evidence and numbers for my position.
There have been A LOT of these threads. ENOUGH ALREADY.
Have you considered that maybe there really is something to our concerns? This is the first I've commented on this particular subject, but if others are saying the same thing (and we reached this conclusion independently) does that not give credence to the idea?
That's my advice to you, as a pool op, take it or leave it. I'm not bumping this thread any more. Peace.
If you're not interested in discussing this point, that's fine by me. Others will surely be curious, and I'll be happy to explain my conclusions to them. If my conclusions are inaccurate, I would appreciate their inaccuracies being pointed out to me so I can stop misleading people. But until evidence is shown that convinces me that they are not accurate, I will continue to share them widely.
Oh, and I'm not a pool op.
What is the concrete scenario of deepbit (or some Other pool) to do something bad?
The pool attracts people because one get something in reasonable time. Its really disheartening to newcomers
to wait for more than a day (eg, the other pool I am mining on, shows 01day(s) 15hours current round!).
When I see that, I want to redirect my miners somewhere else, even without reading about how pool-hopping
is bad.
What is the alternative? Solo-mining with waiting for 50BTC for 2 months? Some other wonderful new pool,
which is not stable enough?
What is the real compelling incentive to switch? And where to switch to?
The pool attracts people because one get something in reasonable time. Its really disheartening to newcomers
to wait for more than a day (eg, the other pool I am mining on, shows 01day(s) 15hours current round!).
When I see that, I want to redirect my miners somewhere else, even without reading about how pool-hopping
is bad.
What is the alternative? Solo-mining with waiting for 50BTC for 2 months? Some other wonderful new pool,
which is not stable enough?
What is the real compelling incentive to switch? And where to switch to?
I replied to exactly one line of your post. Re-read it. Calling what I replied to a "fact" is ignorant, or you're just trolling. You skipped a lot of logic between your statistics and your conclusion.
Pool diversification is great. Accomplish it with merit, not by attacking pools with a bigger chunk than yourself.
Pool diversification is great. Accomplish it with merit, not by attacking pools with a bigger chunk than yourself.
You replied saying that my conclusion was erroneous, without saying why. Objecting to the conclusion without objecting to the steps to get there shows a lack of understanding or willful ignorance. Perhaps I missed a step in my explanation. If this is the case, tell me where the step was missed and I can attempt to explain it or admit my error. Otherwise your objection is utterly meaningless without reason and evidence; unless you think that Bitcoin will continue to be seen as valuable when people can spend your coins for you without your consent?
Also; when did I 'attack' any other pool? I didn't say anything bad about deepbit other than the somewhat obvious dangers that occur with a pool that large. I'd say the same thing regardless of what pool it was, because being that large is dangerous to the network as a whole. If pointing out the reality of a situation paints a particular group in a bad light, you can't hold the artist responsible. I just call it as I see it.
Burden of proof is on you, not me, for making a statement like that. You went from pointing out a possibility to concluding it was highly likely "soon."
Regardless, posting in the umpteenth thread about deepbit being dangerous is not doing you any favors. I don't have a personal problem with you, props to everyone who starts a pool. I'm telling you - as a guy with a decent amount of mining power - this shit is beyond old. Reading past all the nonsense going on here is exhausting now. There have been A LOT of these threads. ENOUGH ALREADY. If you are determined to restate and re-argue this point YET AGAIN, there's no way I'm signing up on your pool.
That's my advice to you, as a pool op, take it or leave it. I'm not bumping this thread any more. Peace.
I replied to exactly one line of your post. Re-read it. Calling what I replied to a "fact" is ignorant, or you're just trolling. You skipped a lot of logic between your statistics and your conclusion.
Pool diversification is great. Accomplish it with merit, not by attacking pools with a bigger chunk than yourself.
Pool diversification is great. Accomplish it with merit, not by attacking pools with a bigger chunk than yourself.
You replied saying that my conclusion was erroneous, without saying why. Objecting to the conclusion without objecting to the steps to get there shows a lack of understanding or willful ignorance. Perhaps I missed a step in my explanation. If this is the case, tell me where the step was missed and I can attempt to explain it or admit my error. Otherwise your objection is utterly meaningless without reason and evidence; unless you think that Bitcoin will continue to be seen as valuable when people can spend your coins for you without your consent?
Also; when did I 'attack' any other pool? I didn't say anything bad about deepbit other than the somewhat obvious dangers that occur with a pool that large. I'd say the same thing regardless of what pool it was, because being that large is dangerous to the network as a whole. If pointing out the reality of a situation paints a particular group in a bad light, you can't hold the artist responsible. I just call it as I see it.
I will never join any pool whose owner attacks another pool for being too successful.
I don't object to the success of any pool on that fact alone; quite the contrary, I believe successful entrepreneurs deserve the success they have achieved. That said, a lack of diversification in mining pools weakens the entire network, and all you're doing is sticking your head in the sand and saying 'it could never happen'.
I provided the statistics of how it *could* happen. Its your choice if you decide not to take action based upon the facts, but don't deny that the facts exist purely because you don't like the direction they point to.
I replied to exactly one line of your post. Re-read it. Calling what I replied to a "fact" is ignorant, or you're just trolling. You skipped a lot of logic between your statistics and your conclusion.
Pool diversification is great. Accomplish it with merit, not by attacking pools with a bigger chunk than yourself.
That's amazing, a pool owner gets 1.5% of all bitcoins minted...and people still keep signing up...
Depends on the pool. deepbit takes 3%, other take none. It ranges anywhere from nothing to 3%. I think its amazing that people stay at deepbit when they have the highest fees. I guess its the instant payout option. Only thing i can figure.
I will never join any pool whose owner attacks another pool for being too successful.
I don't object to the success of any pool on that fact alone; quite the contrary, I believe successful entrepreneurs deserve the success they have achieved. That said, a lack of diversification in mining pools weakens the entire network, and all you're doing is sticking your head in the sand and saying 'it could never happen'.
I provided the statistics of how it *could* happen. Its your choice if you decide not to take action based upon the facts, but don't deny that the facts exist purely because you don't like the direction they point to.
Jump to: