Topic: KanoPool kano.is lowest 0.9% fee 🐈 since 2014 - Worldwide - 2432 blocks - page 1653. (Read 5352367 times)

Thanks!

Yes a six for Sunday not bad.

Holy Crap...  I'm really starting to think about trying CK-Solo.
4 blocks in under 4 weeks.  Would have quadrupled my payouts with those results.
Well, glad to see all the green blocks racking up.

... and he's currently the low CDF leader, but that's his 2nd valid competition block
List updated: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8895607

WOOTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!

Block by cryptichermit with 190THs, his 4th on kano!  He's kind of in the middle of the high and low CDF for the contest...

EDIT:  This would be the 6th block of the day with about 20 minutes to spare...

Try this:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789369.msg13566071;topicseen#msg13566071

Thank-you Kano for the information.

Oh and I added flybit to the valid competition block list as usual here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8895607

Awseome getting a block with an ongoing red line of 4.7THs - but ended up right in the middle of the valid competition block list

OK, I've gone through the logs with this.

But firstly, the 2 most relevant points:

1) A higher diff with fewer shares - is the same as a lower diff with more shares.
The ONLY difference is variance, and at the miner level that variance is minor at worst/best.

2) You can't set your diff below what the pool decides it should be.
As it says on the Management page:
"* A value of 0, less than the pool minimum,
or less than the pool calculated value for you,
will use the pool calculated value"
However, to add to that explanation, Yes you can set it on the web site, but the pool wont change it below the pool calculated value.

So, to explain how it works as it is actually working correctly, here's the details (for worker2)

Now, I see you doing a diff change in the web 3 times:
Once to change worker3, once to change worker2, then finally to set them both back to 0 a couple of hours later.

I went through worker2's share log in detail and at the time you changed it, you put it below the pool calculated value, so yep it didn't change.

The pool value was 4622.0, you changed it to 3613, so it had no effect.
The pool aims for 18SPM (18 shares per minute)

Here's the numbers for the hour of "2016-Mar-6 12:00-12:59 UTC" which was after you set them during 11:00-11:59 and before you set them back to 0 during 13:00-13:59 - yeah I can work out the exact times but it doesn't matter

At diff 4622.0, worker2 submitted 901 shares - which happens to be 15 SPM.
All the shares were 4622.0 diff, so 901 shares at 4622.0 diff for 1 hour = 901 * 4622.0 * 2^32 / 3600 = 4.97TH/s

Now for 5THs (slight rounding) to get 18 SPM - that would come up with a diff of 5 * 10^12 * 60 / 18 * 2^32 = 3880 Diff
4622/3880 = 120% so 4662 is within the range to not adjust the difficulty.

CapnBDL, hopefully that Block was good payment, still ramping up so it will only get better, but no longer Dust territory.  =)

Good work flybit

well f2pool is under DDOS attack right now so I am not sure if that is going to take them out of the game for a bit or if they are set up to deflect that type of thing.  If it takes them out then that is 280 PH we won't have to compete with for awhile 

Rockin' blocks!

aaaaand flybit makes the acclaim board.

My bad on posting this on the wrong thread, I thought this was kinda a "Kano club"  thread.  I posted it here because I actually like the people here and get more support and responses.  I make sure I keep my future posts related to his pool.  Thanks for the heads up. 

does not belong here on this thread,  but it is really bad.  offline  mining is so fucked up I can not being to say why it is bad.

But GAW mining really pushed it and ended up busting out.  Having the feds after them.  This is a really bad idea.

Ok so has anyone heard of the proposed bitcoin lightning network?  You can read about it here

http://www.coindesk.com/could-the-bitcoin-lightning-network-solve-blockchain-scalability/


To me this is just one companies way to circumvent the blockchain by taking transactions and doing them privately, charging their own fees and then in the end dumping 1 transaction to be validated on on the blockchain. 

Sorry I have to throw the BS flag up on this one.  I understand the capacity issues, but I do not think this is the answer.  I spent a lot of money to be a miner and so to see this kind of outside manipulation makes me kinda mad. 

Any thoughts? 

well put blockchainmines

So for people who don't know me, I do YouTube videos to try and help people get into bitcoin and and haven't posted one for awhile.  However, after this week and seeing how congested the bitcoin network was I thought I would talk about the relevance about mining with a pool that shares its transaction fees.  I actually had an order to bitmain not go through because my payment was never processed by a block, so 2 days later I get a payment failed and my funds returned.  I had another payment to bitmain this week, that went through but it took 1,354 minutes to confirm.  So I had to email bitmain since my order expired to make sure they will still fill it since it does say paid.  I have change my fee setting to generous in blockchain which is .001 and that is as high as I can set it.  Then today, I purchased some bitcoins from cex.io (btw is there a cheaper place or someone I can by them from here, 3.5% is ridiculous) and had them transferred to my blockchain account.  I almost instantly hear a beep when I hit send.  This morning, it took 27 minutes before it hit my wallet.   So yes that will be my topic, why miners need to jump off the big whales that hold all the transaction fees for themselves and start mining with smaller pools that share them.  Not only that I read this morning about CKs Pool software for a couple hours but the piece that really got my attention was this:

"We aim to remove the dependency of pool owners on custom software and the requirement for massive hardware infrastructure to run a stable and performant mining pool, thus dramatically lowering the barrier for entry for more pools to be created. In the process, we also aim to be providing tools to allow large mining farms to mine for themselves instead of directing their power to a large pool which would otherwise make them even larger and risking the security of the bitcoin network. While it may seem counter to the small miner's benefit to make large miners capable of running their own pool, it is an acceptance of where the bulk of the mining power is coming from and not make that mining power a risk to bitcoin. By providing them with software to mine in a manner that isn't designed to just mine blocks quickly but does so in a way that can lay down all transactions currently in flight without detriment to their block generating capacity, this will benefit the bitcoin network far more than them adding their hashes to a large pool."
 

This is exactly what bitcoin needs. But from where I stand I see it going the other direction.  I see everyone going to the the larger pools and if you go look at the larger pools they are all in China not to mention people who mine with those pools are not getting any of the transaction fees which are starting to grow.  We need to to get this out there and get a some more pools running on CK's code and try to reverse what to me appears to becoming more a centralized situation.

That brings me to my next point.  The bitcoin classic or bitcoin core.  The hard fork from 1 MB to 2 MB or you have another camp that wants to see it go to 8 MB.  I have not read enough on the subject, to give an educated opinion but I am hoping that Kano and CK and jump in here and tell me their thoughts.