Topic: 📈 NastyFans: The Bitcoin Enthusiast Fan Club (est. 2012) - page 137. (Read 958990 times)

Okay thanks for your fast reply. So i just relax, drink my tea, and wait untill Carnth tells us what to do

Thanks OgNasty.

First... Do Not Panic.

Your Nasty-PT shares on btct.co are backed by Nasty Fans Seats which are not on btct.co. 100 shares still equals 1 Nasty Fans seat. The pass-through has (and always had) enough Nasty Fans Seats to back every Nasty-PT share. So there is no reason to panic and/or dump your shares.

There are a couple of options available, and I am evaluating them.

Nasty-PT will continue to operate normally until a decision has been made (all dividends paid according to the contract, etc.)
Again, there is no reason to panic; but I will leave the asset open to trading for those of you who wish to sell, or buy.

Thank you for your patience during this trying time.

Carnth runs that PT.  I have never used BTCT.co.  You can try to find more information on his thread for it here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/btc-tc-nasty-pt-100-shares-1-nasty-fans-seat-closed-268589

As btct.co is closing down, what will happen with our NASTY-PT shares we / I bought there?

I've added a Nasty Pool section to the OP complete with the new Nasty Pool logo.  Much more to come as we begin rolling out the new pool.  I've seen some screenshots of the fun nonnakip has in store for integrating the pool with NastyFans.org and I think everyone will be extremely pleased.  I'm very excited.

As a reminder, anyone can mine on Nasty Pool now by pointing your miner at NastyFans.org:9332 and using your Bitcoin address as your username.  The pool is currently operating at around 15GH/s.  I urge all NastyFans to try out the pool and see how much power we can amass.

Thanks.


And let's hope this week, variance swings our way.

Distribution 259076 is complete. We love Bitcoin!

Thanks for the amazingly quick response.. I kind of figured as much but am itching for you to get it back..(and the Monarch's of course!)

Keep up the great work OG!!

No. It's was just picked up yesterday by USPS so I imagine it will be early next week before we hear anything.

Any word from BFL on the orig 60 GH/s machine?  I take it, the machine may still be in transit still..

I actually consider that good news and good news! 

I do have good news and bad news...  The good news is that our miners have been updated to the latest version of cgminer and we are seeing a slight performance increase.  We have also added I0C to the coins that we are merged mining, as it appears I0C has risen from the dead.  The bad news is that we had a 60GH/s ASIC die on us yesterday.  I contacted BFL immediately and received a quick response from them.  I have an RMA # and will be sending the dead unit in tomorrow.  Hopefully there will be a quick turnaround.  The unit that died was the very first one we received, and honestly it always ran much hotter and slower than the others.  Short term this sucks, but long term I think we'll end up with a better unit and a cooler mining room because of it.  This unit was also the one that was hooked to our PSUs that kept blowing up, so it very well could have been the culprit.

the p2pool.info luck pages show exactly what you are talking about (essentially doing the experiment you are talking about). On September 1, the 90 days average showed p2pool earned 9% more than if they were on a large-scale PPLNS pool. Today the trailing average is 7% less than a large scale PPLNS pool over 90 days. Both numbers are including typical PPLNS fees.

And it isn't a hypothesis, it's a mathematically provable (analytically and verifiable via monte carlo simulations) that the expected value of mining p2pool is greater than that of any fee-based large scale pool. This is true even with increasing difficulty. However, at the current hashrates, it is mathematically provable that p2pool will have higher variance.

But Nasty has a point, nastyfans is more than just making money mining, it's doing things that are beneficial to the network. p2pool is one of the ways of maintaining decentralized control over inclusion of transactions in the blockchain.

I disagree.  The decision to go with P2Pool over a more centralized system was based on ideals, not emotions.  I also believe that luck will always balance out to 100% over the long term, so you using the past as it relates to this point in time after a period of bad luck seems like a biased argument that will quickly turn around (see the 2 block rewards in 11 minutes we received earlier today).  Each time we experience a period of bad luck people want change.  It always balances out...  Changing after a period of bad luck will always be the wrong thing to do.  It would make more sense to me if people were calling for change after an extreme period of good luck...  That would at least be sensible.  Don't get me wrong, I completely understand your argument and I have stated in the past that I believe we would make higher profits by chasing whatever pool is offering the best deal of the day.  I choose to support P2Pool because I believe it is better for Bitcoin, and Bitcoin succeeding will have a far greater effect on the value of your BTC than squeezing a few % points by supporting a centralized mining pool.  

I also believe your math is flawed due to our P2Pool node being local, which is causing the % of our accepted shares to be higher than the average P2Pool user. That gives us a larger slice of the reward pie.  Not to mention we're paying 0.9% in fees as opposed to paying 7.5% to mine PPS @ BTCGuild.

I understand concept of luck and variance as it relates to bitcoin mining.  Unfortunately the results speak for themselves.  The data says you've already lost the 'luck' game.

As of exactly right now, if you have been mining on p2pool for the past 3 months, you have paid a 9.8% premium entirely due to luck.     (I don't know if this percentage includes those orphaned blocks I see on p2pool.info)

During this time, for the past 3 months, the difficulty has ranged from about 19 million 3 months ago to 112 million today.  You don't get another chance to mine at this difficulty range to make up for your lost gamble on luck.

Assuming your luck changes such that you will break even on luck over the next 3 months and you regain your 9.8% premium so that you are back to 100% over past 180 days, you are still mining at a higher difficulty of 112 million - 180+million.  (forecast of a conservative 10% increase each difficulty adjustment for 3 months)

I believe you are making an emotional judgment staying with p2pool and gambling that your luck will turn around during the next 3 months. (gambler's fallacy)  It is better to cut your losses and switch to a stable pool, with a reasonable fee and then switch back to p2pool when difficulty stabilizes so you are not gambling low-difficulty-mining-time.

disclosure: I ran p2pool with a LS for a month spending time tweaking, adjusting, and watching my mining rewards dwindle away due to difficulty increases, bad luck, and orphaned blocks before I realized what was happening.  I then quickly put a stop to it.  I know how difficult it would be to toss out all the hard work you've done building the p2pool node.  I know it's not easy.  

My realistic suggestion is this:
Do an experiment where you assign one BFL single to commercial pool of your choice (say Eclipse, because I know you don't hate BFL/Josh yet ), and another to an independant p2pool payout address and have a competition.  See which miner generates the most income after 3 months.  This will conclusively confirm or deny your hypothesis that p2pool is an appropriate choice for maximizing mining rewards.

There will be good luck days as well though. You're assuming luck will always start badly. You could just as easily start mining on the pool right now and have good luck immediately. Most people have bad luck and then switch pools because they're frustrated. That's the same mindset that makes you want to sell something when the price drops. It's human emotion clouding judgement. Nothing wrong with that. Look at all the people mining BTC Guild with 7.5% pps fees so they can get regular payouts. Over time and with a rising BTC, that peace of mind can get costly. That being said, NastyPool isn't even officially "live" yet. I just thought I'd let people know there was a P2Pool node currently only charging 0.9% fees.

Good point - both of you. Well, given that difficulty just recently jumped up, perhaps I'll FINALLY switch over to NastyPool - hopefully tonight. I've been meaning to move 2 NastyPool for some time now but have been super busy with home stuff - not to mention working 10 + hours a day...

Come on BTC, hit $1000 so I can retire!

This works if difficulty stays relatively stable, but when difficulty is constantly rising, you are gamblling low difficulty ming time vs high difficulty mining time and right now you are 3% on the losing side.

It always balances out over time but instant regular payouts are nice.  Most pools charge quite a bit in fees for that compared to the 0.9% NastyPool is currently charging (and donating to P2Pool developers).  I think the recent run of bad luck makes it a pretty good time to give NastyPool a try.

The variance on p2pool is what finally drove me back to a larger pool.  I will re-evaluate that decision when the difficulty settles down for a few months. (if my miners still happen to be profitable) I believe that the distributed mining truly is best for bitcoin as a whole but not if it means sacrificing valuable early ASIC mining time.