Topic: Laurentia Pool - BAD risk for miners - page 4. (Read 2247 times)

Then to claim that your pool has never lost a block is not accurate, the proper way of stating this would be "your pool never lost a block that you know of" since the connection between the miner and the pool depends on both the miner's connection and the pool's connection, there is a chance that at the time when a miner submitted a share your sever wasn't listening for many reasons such as bad connectivity which resulted in a packet loss of some kind, and that person didn't happen to check his miner's status page, he could have rebooted the miner a while later, and proof of a block went missing forever, "when it's techinally possible, it can happen, it could have happened".


Most pools have worldwide node distribution, so this isn't Kano pool's exulsive feature.


Do you have access to the code and servers of every mining pool on planet earth? if not then I call bullshit, you don't know how the other pools operate, you are using CKpool which he himself admitted to be running on an inadequate server with a code which he probably hasn't improved forever because he doesn't treat his mining pools as a source of income, and just because your pool is better than CK's you have the nerve to claim without a proof that your pool distributes blocks faster than ALL pools.


Comparing your servers' specs and connectivity to CKpool and coming up with the conclusion that your pool runs on the BEST servers, and has the BEST connectivity and the BEST code is plain stupid really, the only way for your claims to be real is if they are backed by solid evidence, those include a breakdown of ALL the other pool's servers, connectivity and code, but since most of that is private information nobody in thier right mind will claim thier pool is the best when they can't see what their competitors actually have.

I do know that you are a professional developer, you probably invested all you could afford on the pool's resources, I am not debating that, but I also know that pools which generate millions of dollars in profit, and owned by multi-billion $ companies most likely have and 'can' afford a better code, servers and worldwide connectivity than a pool of your size.

Having said that, I am not against your pool, I have actually told people in this very forum that if they don't have a problem with your terrible attitude they should certainly mine at your pool, I benifit directly by more pools and more competition in the mining industry, so I indeed wish to see your pool grow bigger, but without the b.s of it being the BEST pool.

“Laurentia Pool - BADLY advertising kano pool”

Take care bud.

Heh funny about all that merit you got - even the mod who doesn't follow the forum rules unless he's told to

Firstly, you've been on ignore for a long time, so I never read your posts.
The only reason I read it was all the merit

Fun fact, all this information about my pool configuration is available in many posts I've made in the past in detail

That being: the pool has nodes all over the world, working on accepting shares and distributing blocks as quickly as possible.
The nodes themselves submit blocks to the bitcoin network as soon as a share, that is a block, arrives to them from the miner.
The share is of course also sent back to the master server where ckpool and KDB both process it (KDB accurately, unlike ckpool) and they both submit the block also.
ckpool also sends the share to every other node to do the same block submission.
This point also was completely confused in the Laurentia white paper - mfb clearly does not even understand ckpool.
His paper says he uses ckpool without this advantage, that some of the 137 BTC I gave -ck covered the cost of adding.
Of course the current ckpool git doesn't work with AB blocks but I fixed that in my copy when I first did all the AB testing before putting the AB changes live.

Secondly, you are, like phil did, simply trashing -ck with most of this comment.
As I've pointed out here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54855598

Now there's probably also some explanation necessary since I'd guess you don't understand what's meant by 'lost' blocks in all this discussion.
Your comments about not even caring if you find blocks or not, are alarming at the least, so I doubt you understand the various issues with finding blocks.

By 'lost' I specifically mean lost by negligence and code bugs.

In these cases, the miner may know it found a block, the pool will get the share that represents a block, but the block was not sent out to the network when it should have been or not sent out at all, due to a code fault or in the most recent cksolo one, server management negligence.

There are of course also stale and orphan blocks, caused by rare block find timing (orphans) slow pools (orphans/stales) remote miners not well connected to the pool (stales) or miners generally slow getting the block to the pool for whatever reason (stales)
But they don't fall under the heading of 'lost' - but all 'should' be displayed by all pools (though I doubt most of them do)

If instead a block is lost due to network issues like the share never being delivered to the pool, well then there's no way for the pool to handle that, since it never got the share - only the miner could know about that one, assuming cgminer actually reports it.

So related specifically to this item - my pool's worldwide node distribution is relevant to that - miners have nodes close to them - nodes that submit blocks to the bitcoin network immediately, not waiting until they are processed less than 100ms later by the master server.
(the ckpool master node latency report for each KanoPool node is under 70ms for all but the Singapore node which is 86ms)

But what this also leads to, by design, is that every node on the Worldwide KanoPool network submits the block to the area it is in.
The block submission does not require the full block to be sent to each node, only the tiny share data, thus it distributes the blocks around the world faster than any other pool - and there certainly can be no argument against this now that the Fibre Block relay is gone - though when the Fibre Block relay was working, the process of only sending a share via TCP rather than the full block via UDP was also probably faster than the Fibre Block relay, since the incoming block to the FIbre Block relay, and outgoing to the other pools on the network 'at the other end', was also TCP.
Also, of course, the KanoPool nodes are all interconnected with their bitcoinds as well.

As for blocks 'missing'
Well this is a rather curious suggestion that a pool could make blocks disappear but still get the BTC
To do this would require:
1) sending a miner different work to the rest of the pool, not identifying the block as Kano
2) the miner would then find a block and have to never notice that it found a block
Both of these things, any miner 'can' check, so I'd magically have to know which miners would never check this and hope I never get caught even once over the years.

While this has never happened on KanoPool, I guess I 'could' come up with some excuses like ckpool has over the years for losing blocks ... if it ever did happen

Lastly, as can been seen in the old git, but of course not my current private git, but has happened with every block found on the pool, KDB immediately displays the block found irrelevant of if it is valid/stale/orphan/rejected and I also do this in IRC and Discord.
... unlike all the ckpools ... including laurentia

--

Edit: While people may say that 'the big pools' must have more resources and a better network:
There are currently 11 KanoPool nodes around the world, 4 of which are bare metal hardware, the equivalent power of the server that's runs all of cksolo or laurentia (4Core/8Thread, SSD, 32GB RAM though one has 64GB), the other 7 are VPS, 16GB/4vCPU/SSD AWS/Vultr/RamNode/Aliyun.
Also the 3 main connections, Netherland, US-West and US-East, have two nodes each, one metal and one VPS i.e. with 2 providers to handle the case if there is an issue involving one or the other provider.
These are the servers I add as needed, or also for large miners to have a dedicated node, part of the KanoPool network.
The main (metal) server is a 'bit' more powerful ... 24Core/48Thread 96GB RAM, SSD ... though I'll probably upgrade that soon.
The web server is also a separate metal server the same as the nodes (4Core/8Thread/32GB/SSD)

Exactly what I am trying to state here, Kano claims his pool has the best code and connectivity, the only source for these claims are obviously his own words which I for obvious reasons can't trust without an inpedenent review of his claims, he could have lost 10 blocks and all went unnoticed, just like any pool could, so to claim that you never lost a block without providing a proof on how does your code/connectivety prevent this and how do they differ from other well known large pools who can afford to pay the best devs on planet and rent or probably own their own high-end servers.

We know about the last block cksolo pool lost because that person happen to check his miner's best share (mainly due to the fact that he was mining solo) we don't know many blocks in TOTAL did ckpool (non-solo) lose neither do we know about Kano's pool, and since "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" we can't tell if Kano lost a few blocks without knowing or actually he knows but never admitted it, it remains a guess, so unless he states a straight forward proof to support his claim, I will still believe that he is simply promoting his mining pool.

Actually it's quite simple

Firstly, while I've made no where near the BTC of the large pools charging large fees and -ck charging ridiculous amounts to write crappy, buggy code, so they have to pay him more again to fix it,
I have made enough to be happy (2 digits) and also keep the pool running for the future - even though it's running at a loss at the moment.
Where did that BTC I made come from? Running a pool of course - so why not keep it running using that BTC ...

Anyway the simple answer is, as has happened a number of times in the past on my pool, some large miner gets fed up with the fees and lies of the pool they are using, and they come by and talk to me.
Unfortunately the last two (900PH and 200PH) couldn't convince their board that joining a small pool would be a good idea.
Odd though, since the pool wouldn't be small any more

But it happens on occasion, and it will only take one of them to come on board, then lots of small and medium miners will join again after that.

The sooner the better of course, but alas, it's random when it happens.

Maybe some of the new features I've spent so much time and effort on will help convince the next one

My pool is the best connected and best for Bitcoin pool, without doubt.
Alas at the moment it's too small to attract lots of small to medium miners.

agreed.

Of course it's above 10K sat. How else do you get to $7.50  


Which as a miner kind of puts you into a loop. Do you mine on a small PPLNS pool that might never find a block so you never get paid before they close? (bitminter). Or do you take a loss and pay the 3% or 4% fee and mine on a PPS pool?

If you are creating a pool, how do you encourage people to join if they might not get paid more then once a month or possibly every other month or once a quarter? Same loop as above just from the other side.

Which brings us back to the original thought of this thread. "Laurentia Pool - BAD risk for miners". It's might be, it might not be. For me, even if they had the best coders in the world and the best pool infrastructure in the world etc. It would be because if they don't find blocks or have them orphaned then I'm loosing money. Same with your pool Kano.

On the flip side, if I needed to squeeze every last $ out of my miners and could wait for payment, then PPS @ 4% would be a bad risk. And I should be mining someplace else.

Blanket statements are bad

If it's just about the coding and the back end and connectivity, then without a full review of their code and a complete network and peer map then it's just a guess.

-Dave

Ok perhaps that was poor wordings on my side, changed that nobody to almost nobody, you are right, but this doesn't invalidate the point that the motive to watch blocks found on a PPS pool or a very large PPLNS is slim to nothing when compared to mining solo, maybe even "almost nobody" is far from accurate but i am sure you get the point.

Still waiting for Kano to answer my question and show us all on what bases can a mining pool claim they never lost a block when nobody has access to their database, not saying it can't be done, i am simply asking a question and willing to be educated on the subject.

If it's above dust 10,000 sat, I'll probably get around to sending it out sooner or later.
I've been very busy with coding on the KanoPool.
As everyone knows we have a full 100% proof of payment page (uses the blockchain information to prove the payments)
with a CSV download

I've also been doing dust payouts to any miner who gets a payout
i.e. Block reward + owed dust, so most of the current miners have zero dust left
(there were only a few owed extra in the last block)

The KDB code has had sizeable additions done over the last months (and still uses way less CPU than ckpool), and soon there'll also be the option for Solo mining on KanoPool.
For a limited few medium long term miners (of my choice) they'll also be able to mine 50% PPS until the PPS funds run out

PPS is normally NOT an option for small pools, since to run it long term, the backing is a large amount of BTC.
Using Meni's calculation from my post here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.48795003
Current reward 6.25 BTC for a 0.1% chance of the pool going bankrupt, with a 3% fee, the backing required is:
719.5625 BTC or about $6.8 million

(my PPS I'll have is simply to have a buffer that when it runs out, they'll simply have to switch their miners elsewhere or to PPLNS - but no losses since I'll payout the trailing end of mining of course and can switch off PPS mining with a command)

oh kano is right i will stay off this thread. i opened another. here in the pool section.

PPS is more and more what people want.

If it's good for the miner / pool operator has to be determined on an individual basis.

Personally, I have about $7.50 in dust left on Kano's pool since 2016. Due to PPLNS and the lack of luck, it's just a write off to me at the moment, never going to get paid and unless I put some crap miner on there when they happen to get lucky and find a block I'm never going to get paid. In terms of crypto mining losses it's a small one.

For smaller pools like Kano and Laurentia, PPS is looking to be the only way to gain more users. A small user might mine there knowing they will get paid what they mine (minus the fee) if they grow into a larger miner they might stay.
But, very few larger miners are going to move to or start with a small PPLNS pool.

Same with Laurentia I am not going to mine here, I just changed out some equipment and barely have 1PH.

It's all older, outdated, inefficient gear. But since I have fixed power costs it works for me.
Since I have fixed expenses PPS works best for me.

Having had many discussions with other people what I am doing seems to be a recurring theme.

-Dave

i have deleted all my posts. kano is right i am stupid.

Firstly, this is off topic.
Post it in my pool thread, which is only what you are posting about.

Secondly, again, mr gambler shows his complete lack of understanding of statistics.
You do this over and over again and pretend you know what you are talking about and each time I point out why you don't.

I will again point out what you are showing and clearly unable to read:

So you picked the worst PAPPS% line in the whole table
1) Last 50 Blocks   87.9wks   117.94%   103.35%   0.8937   84.79%   86.84%

This is 50 blocks. Not 100, not 1000, simply 50 blocks.
What does the CDF[Erl] say about the probability - 0.8937 i.e. it's inside even the 90th percentile.
Approx one in ten chance of that happening ... damn that's ... one in ten wow - why is this an issue?

Someone posted slush's luck stats in my discord channel this morning before I kicked him ... hmm let me go get them ...


OhMyFuckingGod - they had 83.69% luck over their last 50 blocks - we better go call the police ... that's worse than kano.is luck ...

Yes I do get sick of this rubbish from phil who clearly has no understanding of statistics and keeps making posts like these


... I don't suppose you know how bad the statistics are on the CKPools? No he hides that information.
LA pool will have none also - he'll be hiding that as well.
The ckpool single block difficulty ratio/luck calculation is also WRONG

--
Edit:

and he's now deleted all the accusations he made

The luck isn't terrible - it's expected approx 1 in 10 runs of 50 blocks - so every 500 blocks on every pool you'd expect to get a run of 50 blocks with that luck.

Any client or potential is able to contact -ck. I have already recommend making a genuine inquiry on our thread or our other contact methods. Even invited Kano to do so. There’s no reason I'm needed as a proxy or mediator for discourse especially by what should be amongst peers.

I will not ask ck or mandate he, or anyone engage with someone like Kano regardless of any history.

I wouldn't say "NOBODY watches their status" - I track every block I find on any algo and or pool - now on PPS that can be tedious to go thru the blocks but it is not impossible. I keep screenshots as well.

Not debating or arguing any other point of your statement but you can't say NOBODY tracks it because I know I am not the only one.

here is just the past few months - some images are of one block - some images have details on quite a few blocks. I store the block number - hash - and diff of each block in a spreadsheet as well.

How can anyone tell if your pool or any other mining pool for that matter actually lost a block and the miner didn't notice it? what if due to a packet loss caused by a server faliture or a connection problem from the pool side caused a loss of a block and went unnoticed, or even worse what if the pool lost a block due to the exact reasons CK pool lost some blocks?

I am not attacking your pool or anything else, I know CK could have prevented the last block if he had the right resources, I am not making excuses for him, actually running a solo pool is the best test since almost EVERYONE looks at their miner's status, but when mining on a pool especially if it's a PPS and in the grand scheme of things almost NOBODY watches their status simply because finding a block won't make them earn an extra penny, so really, how can someone (doesn't have to be you) claim that their pool never lost a block? based on what?



I am probably the one who likes Kano the least here, but the concerns he has should be answered, if -ck refuses to answer them, then it's your duty as the pool owner to answer these questions and deny Kano's accusations, if the software your pool uses is the same one that lost a few blocks due to what Kano claims to be "lack of testing" then why would miners trust your pool? if -ck has has already fixed those issues (assuming there are issues aside from the inadequate server resources he had) then him or you should state that, if -ck now runs a different version from the one on github then that should be also stated, if Kano is making stuff up because of the personal issues between him and -ck then -ck should at least deny the allegations either by posting here personally or through you as the pool owner/manager.

Feel free to ignore my oppinion since i am not one of your clients, I have zero issues with -ck in fact I do like him, but when it comes to being honest when giving unbiased oppinion, Kano's terrible attitude doesn't get in the way of my judgment.

Blah blah blah repeat the same stuff I've already pointed out the problems with - that you clearly do not understand.

Lulz - you sure you're not a -ck sock puppet?

He thinks that anyone who reads all of the pool section of this forum is a stalker of him?

I made one post in the past year on one of his threads and that is called being a stalker?

Not sure why anyone thinks that one post in the past year on his pool page is called stalking ...
That's called paranoia. Read up all about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoia

My one line post that means I'm a stalker
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54139427

But that was his 'stalker' comment you copied:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54140865

The guy spends most of his time working on animated child porn.
Check his reddit page.
He's the one who sounds like a stalker ...

I just find it "odd" we work with a rival and you proceed with a full attack. Then we expected it.

You also know: That we don't work on the technicals for the pool. That -ck refuses to interact with you. So it's opportunistic "5N" for you to fud the shit out of the thread. Or ours, but I won't allow your bullshit. Likely you'll play your righteous card from a soap box and quote this line pushing your deflective, deceptive narrative towards us.

I believe our mission is 110% explained in detail in our whitepaper. And I'm being frugal with that number. Our server is highly optimized, and ready for mining
https://laurentiapool.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/laurentiapool_whitepaper.pdf 

We do client services, and seek dev on UI by user review, interested devs can dm me for contract or split of fee agreement (please read on). -ck works the server. We collaborate well, and are proactive in management. If you have interest in mining with Laurentia Pool it's entirely up to you and we can be easily contacted for any matter unless you're a complete douche. What we're driving to achieve is to highly compete to out perform F/PPS score and increase revenue directly to the user. All while reducing as much trust as possible for all parties in our methods. All we require is a 2016 block commitment. Using what we believe are the best tools and code to do that to date and pouring our fee into exactly what matters; our server, ui, and development. Our minimum operation cadence, or hashrate, is a projected 5 blockfinds per diffadj, with a score system that will still payout after exit, yet incentivizing continued participation.

If you have millions of dollars in infra, it's likely you'd appreciate and value a full coinbase derived payment directly to your own control. If you have a usb stick you can still mine here, likely we would not be counting you as a dedicated user since your payout would be deferred greatly, still we'd suggest you solo mine. Yet all potential users are allowed to mine right away, knowing fully the risks involved regarding probability and conflicts with fw, hosts, or rentals. Essentially our pool is gauged to those who actually own equipment in possession due to our pw strength. Every hash is scored and accounted and does payout till fall off.

And yes, 70Ph is a feat in this environment for a self funded start up. Debatable to be under expectation but is still a celebrated feat, and we look forward to continued commitments. https://laurentiapool.org/commitment

We're proud of the work we've accomplished, as we know full well none of this easy. We can fund the server without use, as it costs less for us than to manage it than active and also to not have already had preset expectations directly with a user before entrance.
We can easily manage 100 active mining users daily with our recourses. Our fee scales so it incentivizes us to grow and develop, incentivizes participation from any active miner dedicated to the bitcoin network, and obviously and greatly our own.

I really don't care what you say or how much stalk -ck with your weird manic depressive compulsive disorder.

And just to make clear our post was originally locked because we knew you'd be the first to flame, and voila  . . here we are. We also are able to bump once every 24 hours, per forum rules. I'd think a "legend" here would know that. Still we adjusted our method to support the the fluidity of the forum to just major announcements/updates as they occur. Which are reformatted and unfortunately to our unliking so we revise to default, and without complaint.

Again, our only karen is you, as our feedback has been great. Which brings me back to the first line of this reply.

#mineon

Using a common tactic to hide the truth.
... there's nothing I've stated about your pool design or -ck that isn't fact.

The opening post here is about why you should use different software.
Alas you're ignorance of Bitcoin and server management will be leading people astray and probably losing money unnecessarily.

I'm not sure what rubbish -ck has been telling you to make you pay him, but his priority is not Bitcoin at all.
You can find all about his priority here on his reddit account:
https://www.reddit.com/user/ittaku

... and lastly ...
The 'k' in ckpool stands for 'kano'

Funnily enough many people also know all this.

--

Now you seem to think that there's something special about how you are planning to run a pool that will make people flock to it.
Yet you have been posting about it here for months and your pool shows nothing for it.
Don't forget the obvious, there's currently well over 100EH of miners out there ... so yaw so called 'great design' that 'works' should have easily got that exceptionally tiny % of that 100EH that you 'need' by now ...

Running the best pool for Bitcoin (which I do) does not guarantee hash rate.

Most Bitcoin miners are ignorant of how bitcoin works - like you.
Most pools have large miner bases either due to requiring them to mine on their pool or by deception in their marketing.
Alas I'm not happy to do that.

Your white paper clearly says you are happy to do that - though it's not working for you either yet ...
Just post after post trying to bump your own thread ... against the rules of the forum

I don’t think it’s easy at all, considering the effort we’ve put into our project. You’re just on a personal vendetta that has nothing to do with LP and the time you waste here could be spent being much more productive on your own work. Specifically your user base, is the point I’m attempting to communicate. Which that and everyother point you mischaracterize to suit the narrative you’re after. Or just simply avoid.
We’ll keep building and you’ll keep complaining, constantly presenting yourself as a desperate, sad, forum troll short on fluoxetine and vitamin D.

If people don’t already know, spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt to intentionally disadvantage competition is a widely known tactic, used typically in desperation and obviously with malice of intent. And why my first comment here was that this entire thread is defamation and the actual narrative here is just a really sad attempt to pump yourself and shit all over someone who is actually respected by bitcoiners.

You just enjoy your night there thinking of more ways to be unproductive.

We’ll catch up again in a few weeks and let everyone here enjoy some popcorn again ok?

#mineon