Topic: Laurentia Pool - BAD risk for miners (Read 2241 times)

Since this thread is on repeat every post I might as well just quote myself in reply. Maybe next time I'll simply do that entirely.


We'll just let our service and whitepaper speak for itself, feel free to disagree with our take on mining and the pooled environment as it is presented. Your critique, from your perspective holds no weight being incredibly biased, maliciously motivated, and intentionally inflammatory. Still you wonder why everything you spout is ignored.

There's no need for me to defend our whitepaper. It's simply our perspective, you can take it or leave it as it is. Just like every other in existence. There's nothing to hide or change. So embrace, consider, or get on with your life.

This thread only exists because you can't handle any genuine interaction or achieve any sort of discourse, while still continuing to manipulate the situation. As -ck is the dev for the pool and wont interact with you.

Kano wants to pretend that we're hiding something when his posts were simply deleted because he can't interact anywhere near civilly and always has -ck in his crosshairs. If he could pose a genuine query to the pool thread he wouldn't have had to come here to throw a tantrum as we would love nothing more than to have genuine, thoughtful conversation and inquiry outside this grotesque atmosphere Kano enjoys marinating in.

The gain is for your ego Kano, which includes pumping your pool and self constantly. All you're doing is baselessly slandering reputations publicly now and for what? What you call no personal gain? Then why all of this if not a "white knight'? I'm a lair, a marketing guy, out to deceive people, blinding following. . . You keep altering your narrative to suit, that's fine. Ours is always the same. You literally have no argument and it shows now that you're slandering and name calling like a child who has nothing to comeback with.

We have a great product where no one is at more risk using our service than they would be anywhere else. If anything we've eliminated risk as much as we could for all parties. We're not in the business of losing clients money, we're not in business of extreme rent seeking services. If anything we have an extremely great track record of taking care of all our clients and being very transparent.

So call me what ever you like. I'll take anything you throw at me and continue to point out your hypocrisy in fud you wish to spread and baseless lies, an now attacking my character of late. This is your bed here, sleep in it or wake up and get on with your life. But likely you'll just get bored from someone who's happy to defend themselves in public and move on to your next victim poised for harassment.

So again. .. .Please feel free to make genuine inquiries to our pool operations in our thread, for technical questions ck is our lead but will handle what I can. Again, it's our organizational expertise, the server we both picked, ck's code and maintenance. If you want to support his, our, or both our work please reach out anytime.

Kano can deflect, slander, continue spreading fud. We'll just keep this mentally ill circus going as long as he likes till he grows up and learns to interact like an adult or like I mentioned move on to his next victim. Likely someone more meek and weak cause your ego is going to need an easy win. If anything maybe he might learn some iota of professionalism and that would be a net gain for everyone here.

The point of this thread is to point out to your 'prospective' miners that they are agreeing to a sub-standard quality, risky pool.
The white paper is full of issues that suggest the person who wrote it doesn't even understand Bitcoin properly.
Some of these have been pointed out in this thread and ignored.
You wont and can't backup/fix the issues you have with your white paper, so the thread goes on.

No idea why you think someone must be a white knight to point out such things.
Like many, my interests are Bitcoin's prosperity, and not passing off lies to fill my wallet.

Clearly you like to turn a blind eye yourself at people risking other's money by lying to them.
I don't - and I'm pretty sure there are many people like that ... unless you consider most people to be scammer?
Again there is no gain for my pool making this thread though you kept saying over and over there was - without providing any.

If it was about money likely we'd have a higher fee, gone for a high rent seeking score like pps. Looked at generic devs who just want a paycheck as well.

I don't expect everyone to fawn over what we're doing either. It would be nice if this could be more of a discussion than embarrassing ranting but I learned I can't control others along time ago and focus on what I'm doing/looking to achieve. I also could easily hammer, flame, and fud kano pool in retaliation. So consider the absence of that for a moment. 

I expect criticism, skepticism, but this is on another level. We knew this would happen and likely will continue to.

I'll put "the crap" we're going to do simply: Organize miners in a way to predict reward cadence and be paid directly from the network while looking push as much revenue we can directly to the users of our pool.
ckpool code and our support in organization is the best way we could achieve this.

If you don't agree with the whitepaper consider it an op-ed, and feel free to move along.
Still out of thousands of views we've only received minor critiques, outside Kano the Karen of btctalk. Which only solidifies the interpretation of the underlining motives of your relentless pursuit to discredit our, and more so, ck's work.

We can keep going around and around but the point of this thread is to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Stemming from your malice of ck predominantly. It's obvious, was expected, and as soon as we unlocked our thread you were first in line raring to go. So who is misdirecting, who's being deceptive? Maybe you're just being deceptive to yourself and your own motivations. idk, idc, but you're certainly all over the place and all over us.

I've directed you and others to reach out on our thread in an appropriate manner, reach out to ck directly on technicals. Which you like to twist and manipulate into being blind and following, in place of what it is, simply delivering the user experience side of service.

Our service is competitive in the current market, there's no negligence. If anything we're responsible and transparent enough to ensure every user knows exactly what they're getting into before hand. So more fud, more harassment, more malice, more slander, and still only specifically from you.

The case remains you'll flame anything ck touches, you pump yourself and your pool here consistently in almost every reply but are even consistent in this in every thread you touch on the forum. These are just very easy observations to make. Like calling me a "marketing guy" isn't deceptive or misdirection, calling Laurentia Pool negligent when no incidents have occurred, intentionally flaming our thread with accusations and assumptions. You have some weird interpretation of what it is to be a white knight if your true goal is expose some sort of wrong doing, which doesn't even exist.

I would love to have a genuine conversation with you about the pool, still because of our division of labor and expertise you are better off speaking with ck. So reach out to him if you really want to help the pool or others. Otherwise without an honest genuine effort there is clearly malice of intent/motive with every one of your posts and you simply can't deny that.

If people think we're being deceiving, disingenuous, then I wish them the best and can only say that's far from the truth.

Well I guess the point that is relevant to all this is as follows:

In the past, for a very long time, I've been posting about pools that are doing their miners wrong, long before I ran a pool of my own.
-ck has been doing this also.

In the past those pools tended to not try and justify their wrong doing and we usually gave up on responding to their miners who would post like religious zealots, ignorant of the facts.
Some of these pools disappeared, some continued to run.
This is about money, so pools in general will do whatever they can to get some and not care too much about how they do it.
Miners will tend to see they are getting a reward and not really care too much if they are being filched - especially of course if they don't know.

Alas, mfb and -ck have fallen into this same arena of mismanagement, lies and deception, like those other pools we've made posts about in the past.

Your main problem has been trying to justify the crap you are going to do.
Which is it? Ignorance? You've been fed gospel by your god and won't check if it's correct? Money?

The service you will be running is sub-standard and probably better described as negligent due to your involvement with -ck in this.

I really am not interested in getting your miners, that you've misled into believing your pool will be of high quality and reliable.
They are of course already mining somewhere else, they wont come to my pool even if they do finally understand the deceptions your white paper is full of.
You are simply trying to misdirect the facts about your sub-standard offering and point this thread discussion at my pool.
Misdirection is a typical tactic of those trying to deceive others.

Marketing guy? We don’t have copywriters or the such. How unsurprisingly assumptive of you to speak on what we do.

Link your site again and deflect this thread isn’t about you or your pool.

Again, this is your/Kano’s narrative.

All I communicated was the results of my and others testing. Of course the pool or miner software don’t know cause to them it doesn’t matter that a unit hashes just what it produces. which with a well operating device should be on/close to spec. And sorry I choose to convey and communicate in a manner that isn’t pompous, belittling, or assumptive of peoples intelligence. Maybe that’s what makes me a “marketing guy”, being able to communicate well to broad audiences respectfully?

Laurentia Pool statistics are like all other pools statistics which it seems you may need a refresh on the definition. They are accurate but like all, they will have variance within a tolerable range to give users insight into their operations performance.

1% is the variance that was monitored overtime. If you’d like to talk about decay I’d reach out to ck. The long decay though is optimal for our environment in a service aspect as if a commitment doesn’t decide to comeback they still have potential for reward next block allowing us to compete more inline with PPS but incentivize continued participation to retain maximum payout potential.

And yes because of the decay hr pool side will appear higher, that’s a bit obvious and known to those who are familiar. Still the pool will have a set hr every diffadj as organized and stats would be better displayed for the pool on our dashboard page.

But back to marketing all these CI’s and customs decelerations just like on Mad Men.

Again ignoring facts and as usual trying to divert this away to being about KanoPool.
Simply because you have no idea of the details about what you are discussing.
You are just reporting numbers displayed or told to you and words told to you by someone else.
A pool run by a marketing guy - oh dear - the thread title just gets more and more correct every day.
Learn a little: https://kano.is/index.php?k=workdiff

Not even a miner knows it's hash rate.
It must calculate it based on shares submitted since the advent of AsicBoost, though the drivers have already been doing this for a long time anyway, assuming that each share generated represents the difficulty of the request to the miner hardware.
The same way that a pool has to calculate it, as an estimate based on shares submitted, since a pool will never know how many hashes a miner has actually done.

Shares have a Poisson distribution just like blocks and have the same CDF properties.
Thus hash rate has variance, and it's not 1%

Ckpool itself also does not show an accurate hash rate, that's also a fact.
At the pool level, after a long period of running (usually a month or so) it over reports the pool hash rate.
This is blatantly obvious when you group shares into shifts and have a shift by shift calculation of the pool hash rate.
The average of those shifts, over time, will be lower than the ckpool displayed value.
The ckpool displayed value is a decaying function based on the 'current' value, not based on a set from history.
It's also not the values it claims to be 5 min/1 hr, since the decay takes longer than that to reach zero - e.g. a miner doing no mining for the past hour 'should' have a 1 hour hash rate of 0 but it usually doesn't

I don’t recall specifying a time frame. Again you don’t pose any queries just assume.

For everyone else 1% is a median based on the data I have specifically from analysis of front end which is what I manage. From my own equipment and others, who have compatible factory fw, asicboost, and operate within advertised spec. From 1hr and longer.

But whatever narrative you’d like push here is gospel. I do like bullshit but mostly over beer and good food, not about the service I provide.

Funny thing is if anyone thinks Kano has their best interests at heart here they’re mistaken. This all about ck, kano’s ego, the failing of Kano pool, and some weird, chaotic, flailing attempt to kill our project here because of all of the above.

Pool side variance on a shift of 50 minutes is about +/- 7%
Statistical fact.

Read about CDF here: https://kano.is/index.php?k=poisson
Shares are also a CDF distribution. Just a lot more of them that (obviously) makes the variance lower.
Oh you didn't know that? -ck probably doesn't either.

Reality please, no idea where you got that 1% number from, but since your ckpool pool has no shifts, no collection of groups of data, just a stupidly named herp derp as at some specific point of time, written to a text file every so often, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

If you claim that your 5min/hourly hash rate numbers are always within +/-1% of the miner's hash rate, then you are bull shitting people.

No pool side variance is about +/-1% for well operating equipment. Everything overtime reports extremely accurate. Guess again fren.

"I know a specific case that shows wide ranges in hash rate shown on the pool"
Those numbers you have stated are more likely to be bugs in ckpool than a miner.

Typical response from you. Ignorance is bliss.

Alas for any future miners considering or having so called 'Commitments', that ignorance is indeed a BAD risk

Laurentia Pool - BAD risk for miners

Fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

I’d imagine lower hr would as well. Then reward will have less variance on our server with a locked in hr per diffadj specifically with well operating  equipment.

Ive seen poor fw in action and imagine you have as well. It was easy to determine within five to ten minutes of mining seeing equipment struggle to produce shares and  extreme variance at 50+Th/s than a r606 at 900 gh/s.

But you know what’s best for everyone, so I imagine we’ll hear more about your greatness soon so we don’t forget.

Alas you are again making claims that are either lies being told to you by someone else, or fabrications on your part.

This rubbish you posted is based on the false assumption that because the reward system,
that has the ridiculously named and implemented herp derp system (aside "herp derp" means stupid accident: https://www.dictionary.com/e/memes/herp-derp/ )
where higher diff shares are rewarded more i.e. smaller miners get MUCH higher reward variance vs larger miners on the same pool,
that somehow this very tiny tiny fraction of a percentage of shares that will produce this effect you are talking about will make it easy to identify mining problems?

No, the fact of the matter is that there is NO statistical analysis of the shares in your ckpool.
None, Nada, Nothing, Zero.

The Kano pump thread continues.

Most of your white paper is based on ignorance due either someone telling you false information, or you being unable to understand what they said.
I do know a heck of a lot more more about Bitcoin and programming and server management than -ck and have on occasion told him to do things properly that he has ignored.

The appropriate scenario is to ask why we prefer to retain coinbase payout, not assume ignorance in retaining it.

LOL - my post deleted from the other thread a short while ago:

One of the reasons he shut down the derp ckpool but still runs solo was that some firmware will NOT work with a coinbase payout.
Your only fix for that is to remove the coinbase payout.
Coinbase payout is a bad idea to start with due to the reasons I've already posted and you've ignored.
Ignoring something coz you don't understand it is a very bad idea (like a lot of your white paper)