Topic: Mining Probability Calculation and market predictions. (Read 17132 times)
But what affect does the quantity and quality of your connections have on probability?
Unless you buy more cards, no.
Are there things I can do to increase my probability of finding a block?
I've been following my mining results over the last month, and at any given point in time the actual blocks found has varied from a low of 70% to a high of 132% of expected return. It's currently at 95%. This is with 14 GPUs and CPUs and a lucky head start. If you have fewer devices, you can expect the variance to be higher.
The following thought has crossed my mind: "Maybe the SHA256 algorithm isn't as truly random as is thought, and there is some sort of bias against results with so many zeroes in the beginning, and the total hash power on the network is greater than estimated, and mine is therefore a smaller proportion than I thought".
Not that I seriously suspect this to be the case...
Not that I seriously suspect this to be the case...
There is no known bias in sha256.
The problem is that you have to have tens of thousands of blocks found to be within 1% of theoretical value. Even after 100 blocks, there is 17% probablility of finding 10% less blocks than the average value. With 10000 blocks found, you have 16% of getting 99% of the theoretical value. Every time you double your theoretical blocks number, you have sqrt(2) less variance.
I run a modified miner that prints all hashes with difficulty one. And after collecting more than 200k of such results, it agrees with the printed hashrate to less than 0.2%. Imagine running this experiment with the current difficulty.
If you know the proverb "A watched pot never boils", it also applies to Bitcoin generation.
Don't go checking for generated blocks. Then, occasionally, when you least expect it you will be delightfully surprised to see a new block maturing.
Don't go checking for generated blocks. Then, occasionally, when you least expect it you will be delightfully surprised to see a new block maturing.
The following thought has crossed my mind: "Maybe the SHA256 algorithm isn't as truly random as is thought, and there is some sort of bias against results with so many zeroes in the beginning, and the total hash power on the network is greater than estimated, and mine is therefore a smaller proportion than I thought".
Not that I seriously suspect this to be the case...
It's like they say in poker, superstition means bad luck. It causes you to make bad decisions, which lowers your chance of winning. The time you spend doing these things wastes cycles, and that lowers your chance of solving a block.
If you know the proverb "A watched pot never boils", it also applies to Bitcoin generation.
Don't go checking for generated blocks. Then, occasionally, when you least expect it you will be delightfully surprised to see a new block maturing.
Don't go checking for generated blocks. Then, occasionally, when you least expect it you will be delightfully surprised to see a new block maturing.
Being confronted with not finding any coins for days, I can't help but think about reasons why I haven't found them. I keep thinking that perhaps if I restart the client more often, or restart my PC, or erase my entire Bitcoin folder and start from scratch, that I'll find as much coins as I did in the beginning.
I know that all of that does not make any sense based on the things I know about bitcoins. The system simply doesn't (shouldn't?) work that way, technically. But has anyone actually tried this? I wonder if people have their own 'good luck charms' - eg. actions that you perform that makes you think that you'll find bitcoins faster. Thoughts?
I know that all of that does not make any sense based on the things I know about bitcoins. The system simply doesn't (shouldn't?) work that way, technically. But has anyone actually tried this? I wonder if people have their own 'good luck charms' - eg. actions that you perform that makes you think that you'll find bitcoins faster. Thoughts?
the chance of finding 3 blocks this quickly would be less than 0.1%
If there are a thousand people generating, someone's likely to have a 0.1% experience. This was your turn. Don't worry, you're unlikely to find the next three so quickly.If you play the lottery I am sure your chance of winning is much worse than 0.1% but people still win.
It's expected value is higher of what I get on slush's pool, and since the pool is meant to get your throughput (almost) at the expected value, it's either something wrong with me and the pool, or an over optimistic calculator.
Also, I went mining for about 5 days, with an expected 3 days of payout, but I found nothing. But that sounded perfectly normal to my ears.
Also, I went mining for about 5 days, with an expected 3 days of payout, but I found nothing. But that sounded perfectly normal to my ears.
1) My pool keeps 2%, not 10%
2) Mining is still probabilistic, even in the pool. Even pool have bad or good days.
3) There were some outages, because keep getwork based pool up is quite difficult. This also cut the daily reward
4) I don't know your hashrate, but score based system makes pool mining more probabilistic than share based. If you have poor hashrate, you still might be more unlucky.
Slush keeps the 10% for himself
You mean he keeps more than the advised 2% ?
No, it means caucasius is not aware variability can be that high.
Slush's pool has some daily variability. Bad day for the pool, and your mining income can be 20% lower.
To me, the calculator looks off by a 10% factor or more.
It's expected value is higher of what I get on slush's pool, and since the pool is meant to get your throughput (almost) at the expected value, it's either something wrong with me and the pool, or an over optimistic calculator.
Also, I went mining for about 5 days, with an expected 3 days of payout, but I found nothing. But that sounded perfectly normal to my ears.
It's expected value is higher of what I get on slush's pool, and since the pool is meant to get your throughput (almost) at the expected value, it's either something wrong with me and the pool, or an over optimistic calculator.
Also, I went mining for about 5 days, with an expected 3 days of payout, but I found nothing. But that sounded perfectly normal to my ears.
Slush keeps the 10% for himself
You mean he keeps more than the advised 2% ?
To me, the calculator looks off by a 10% factor or more.
It's expected value is higher of what I get on slush's pool, and since the pool is meant to get your throughput (almost) at the expected value, it's either something wrong with me and the pool, or an over optimistic calculator.
Also, I went mining for about 5 days, with an expected 3 days of payout, but I found nothing. But that sounded perfectly normal to my ears.
It's expected value is higher of what I get on slush's pool, and since the pool is meant to get your throughput (almost) at the expected value, it's either something wrong with me and the pool, or an over optimistic calculator.
Also, I went mining for about 5 days, with an expected 3 days of payout, but I found nothing. But that sounded perfectly normal to my ears.
Slush keeps the 10% for himself
To me, the calculator looks off by a 10% factor or more.
It's expected value is higher of what I get on slush's pool, and since the pool is meant to get your throughput (almost) at the expected value, it's either something wrong with me and the pool, or an over optimistic calculator.
Also, I went mining for about 5 days, with an expected 3 days of payout, but I found nothing. But that sounded perfectly normal to my ears.
It's expected value is higher of what I get on slush's pool, and since the pool is meant to get your throughput (almost) at the expected value, it's either something wrong with me and the pool, or an over optimistic calculator.
Also, I went mining for about 5 days, with an expected 3 days of payout, but I found nothing. But that sounded perfectly normal to my ears.
Also, one more question. The wiki here (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Target) says that 'the network' decides the next target for each round. Who is 'the network'? Am I correct in understanding that each client analyzes the past block chain and then decides for itself what the next target will be? I feel there's still a gap in my understanding between the network acknowledging what constitutes a 'winning' hash and that hash actually being converted into tangible (well..) bitcoins.
Yes, that is exactly true, but only on certain block numbers where that is allowed - once every 2016 blocks. If you are the miner that mines one of those blocks, your calculation of difficulty is the one that sticks. It is saved in the block itself, and everybody uses it for the next 2016 blocks.
What converts the block into bitcoins is... each miner is constantly attempting to hash a block of all the most recent transactions, plus an acknowledgment of the latest block, plus a brand new transaction that gives 50 new btc to himself. So every miner is trying to hash a different "version" of the most recent block...one that pays himself the reward.
Also, one more question. The wiki here (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Target) says that 'the network' decides the next target for each round. Who is 'the network'? Am I correct in understanding that each client analyzes the past block chain and then decides for itself what the next target will be? I feel there's still a gap in my understanding between the network acknowledging what constitutes a 'winning' hash and that hash actually being converted into tangible (well..) bitcoins.
Would welcome some feedback: http://rheide.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/thoughts-on-bitcoin-mining/
You wrote in the article that "eventually everyone will hit the jackpot". I think it's important not to raise people's expectations too high. Already, you need a GPU to have a reliable chance of generating blocks. And the difficulty is likely to keep rising. Many of those who are generating with a CPU will never generate a block.Thanks. I added a note about it.
Would welcome some feedback: http://rheide.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/thoughts-on-bitcoin-mining/
You wrote in the article that "eventually everyone will hit the jackpot". I think it's important not to raise people's expectations too high. Already, you need a GPU to have a reliable chance of generating blocks. And the difficulty is likely to keep rising. Many of those who are generating with a CPU will never generate a block.
That's pretty interesting. So I'm less lucky than I thought, and the calculation was correct. That's good news then, since it's not entirely unlikely for me to expect a similar result in the future 
I tried to summarize what I know about bitcoins and bitcoin mining on my blog. Would welcome some feedback: http://rheide.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/thoughts-on-bitcoin-mining/
I tried to summarize what I know about bitcoins and bitcoin mining on my blog. Would welcome some feedback: http://rheide.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/thoughts-on-bitcoin-mining/
Jump to: