Topic: KanoPool kano.is lowest 0.9% fee 🐈 since 2014 - Worldwide - 2432 blocks - page 923. (Read 5352420 times)

Was unaware. Wow. So out of sync node clock is yet another dirty contribution. Waters are already muddied enough by Internet infra and BGP issues. Although... I guess that block timestamp issue can be fixed with a central Bitcoin NTP server /s

If your electricity is almost free I would recommend you getting a credit from a bank ( if you don't have the funds) and bumping it up to at least 100th and start making some money here at Kano!!!

The catch there is that the times shown by many sites is the timestamp in the block header.
That timestamp is not when the block was found, or even when the web site first saw it.

It's up to the pool to decide what to put there, then it sends the work to the miner, who may later find a block, and here that will be some time in the 30 seconds after the work was sent to the miner, with an already 'locked in' timestamp.

I'm not quite understanding, either...I've got three S7s in Labrador that are profitable, and I'm paying hosting. I've got another two machines at home, Avalons, where the juice is free.

If your electricity is free, why stop mining? you already paid for the S7's. I have S5,S4 and S7 mining and still get some btc, not a lot but with "almost free electricity" it's hard to find a reason not to power them up.

Besides there are other ways to make money with your S7s. Selling them is but one option. msg me privately if you want more ideas.

No. As you can see at the same link, 466705 by Kano pool on 2017‑05‑16 is a full 40 seconds later than Bixin propagated to blockchain.info but we won the orphan race regardless. This can be possible due to an unfavorable circumstance within a single BGP ASN area. Imagine a broken sea cable, and a small backup line which gets fully congested and lacks throughput during peak hours. Furthermore, complete outages of 15-30 seconds between two big ASNs always occur, a simple BGP routing issue somewhere in the Internet does suffice. No broken cables or devices required.

Well conspiracy theories aren't much use without actual proof - that's why they are called conspiracy theories
Yes it's possible that there's a cartel of pools ... possible, but not likely.
The only real cartel is Bitmain coz they run a few pools .......

Of course the fun point to know is that it was me who instigated getting core to add a usable interface to switching blocks ...
My point about it was if there ever was another fork caused by the SPV mining used on all pools in china ...
It would seem that -ck liked the idea about overriding the block that arrived first by coding that into ckpool recently ...

My request:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/6995
Sipa's implementation:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6996

-ck's commit to 'always' use it:
https://bitbucket.org/ckolivas/ckpool/commits/8a66c4811bf3ccd247c4eb7fe1cba991c9761cae

Is there any possibility for foul play here?  I.E. the top 6-10 pools have agreements that they will prioritize eachothers blocks over other pools if found within x seconds or something?  Since it's really up to the next pool who finds a block to decide?

Looking here:
https://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocks

according to them ours was 3 seconds earlier, but I've noticed some are quite a bit more... I.E. 471114 which was 25 seconds apart (according to blockchain) and the later block won.  

A single S9 probably would not make sense. Keep your mind free of the hassle. For a Bitcoin mining business, 10x S9's or equivalent is absolute worthwhile minimum, unless it's just a hobby. As general advice, you should go with Ethereum mining instead. As Ethereum mining has been more profitable than Bitcoin mining for 4 consecutive months in a row, it just makes more sense as an investment opportunity for virtually anyone who gets started with crypto mining today, or is at a point of having to replace legacy hardware. I'm getting my own feet wet in Ether mining just this week.

In regards to S7's, I know an investor in wind turbine farm business. He bulk buys S7's on second hand market for peanuts, and then feeds the excess electricity into S7s when production significantly exceeds demand. He says its "much better than selling it back to grid". Your observation is correct, for mining all year around, their worthiness is questionable to say the least. At the end of their life cycle. Perhaps scrap metal for good in 12-18 months.

And then there are other interesting and worthwhile hybrid mining business models where older units or low quantity of miners could make fiscal sense. I don't know much about such hybrid models, but there are now a number of booze makers who find valuable use for the heat generated by crypto miners. Ref: https://news.bitcoin.com/south-florida-distillers-bitcoin/

Block by RealInvest!  Welcome to the Acclaim Board with your 1st Kano block!

This is our 2nd of BLOCK WEDNESDAY!

It's all a matter of what you're in it for and what you have available. Tbh, "making money" in ASIC Bitcoin mining isn't a "poor man's sport".

Hey guys, a bit of an semi off topic question, but i'm mining with 2 S7's. My electricity is almost free.
Since the last diff increase and seeing the BTC profits halve every 3 months i'm actually thinking of quitting mining.
As getting a S9 doesn't seem to be a great ROI either.

Just selling the miners and hodling that in BTC seems to be more profitable in the long run than keeping them on.
Anybody else feels the same? Or am i just having a bit of fud?.

This has been your smartest post yet.

Yeah I've spent a few hours going through all the logs (and writing stuff to make that possible on my little laptop screen), so without going into conspiracy theory mode, it's simply been a case of 2 orphans close together.

All our nodes accepted our block - i.e. none of our nodes around the world, that are all connected to the relay, saw slush's block before our block.
That is a significant point, since it means that the 2 competing blocks must have been very close together.
All the node block change times were 500ms or less, except for Silicon Valley was 2s, but that's one node in a group in that area, so all that matters is if one of the group processes it quickly and gets it to the relay quickly, which of course did happen.

Yet it would seem that all the well known sites saw slush's block before our block.

Bottom line is, there's that 500ms (or less) gap, which is almost certainly less than any of the larger pools that are confirming blocks properly, and during that time if another pool manages to submit a block to the relay, we 'can' be orphaned, which isn't of course impossible.

This pool and Slush both found a "471190" block within seconds of each other (both building on top of the same previous 471189 block). The timing was so close that the "network" gets to decide which block is the "valid" block by waiting to see which one the next block (471191) is built on top of. If it's ours, then we get declared the valid block and theirs gets orphaned; if it's on top of Slush's, they get declared the valid block and ours gets orphaned.

Hi kano. What is it with the Orphan block against Slush? Can you please explain? Thanks!

Orphan? Again?  What the hell is going on??? 

now shows orphaned. Looks like we lost

all the sites are showing theirs.  btc.com, blocktrail, blockchain.info, ect

So are we at a disadvantage in this situation since we are a smaller pool?

Edit: so if we were to find the next one, then we would get both?

now blockchain.info showing us...

Looks like we are on a race with slush again.
Lets see if next block is going to confirm ours or theirs.