Topic: How does one get six generations in one day? (Read 1377 times)

Oh OK. So he would claim all 300 for himself, but then distribute the funds to his pool buddies (possibly from other accounts under his control)? That makes sense then.

Six generations in one day represents the generating capacity of around twenty 5970 cards, so it's possible for a determined and wealthy individual to put together this much computing power.

As others have said though, it's likely to be from pooled mining.

pooled mining is used to concentrate computing power to single mining "coordination servants"
such service operator would claim the mined block under his account and this is what you probably found.
the most successful mining pool does around 30+ blocks per day
but you've probably found out about mining pools anyway

I'm new to Bitcoin and I've read as much as I can about how it works, so I get how generating works and so on. I was browsing the Bitcoin Explorer (tracing back a bitcoin purchase I made) and I found this transaction, which sent 300 bc to an account which appears to belong to the vendor I ultimately bought bitcoins from (my money came out of this pool of 300).

What I don't get is the sources for this transaction. It takes 50 bc out of 6 separate addresses (for a total of 300). Each of the six addresses received the 50 bc from a "Generation" (meaning they happened to compute a valid nonce for a block). All six of them were generated on February 13, at the following times (sorted): 07:02:16, 14:52:27, 14:54:55, 17:13:18, 17:55:01, 20:42:08, 23:25:31.

I assume it's most likely that the same person generated all of these, and then combined them into a single account with this transaction. What I don't get is how this person generated all six of them in one day, in one case 2.5 minutes apart. Is this likely to be someone running a major server? Given what I've read about the difficulty recently, it seems unlikely that anyone could have enough CPU power to find six in one day (given that there are 144 blocks per day, you would need to control 4% of the CPU power in the entire network).

Is there something wrong with my logic, or does someone actually have that much power?