Topic: Vladimir's essential self-defence guide for Bitcoin Miners - page 2. (Read 13271 times)
you two should get a room !
how predictable... once you ask k9quaint to show facts data and math in support of his silly argumens all you get another set of utter nonsense which has no basis in fact whatever.
let's try again and see if we can confirm it again:
If reasoning and method used in post https://bitcoin.org.uk/forums/topic/108-is-your-pool-cheating-you-essential-self-defence-course-for-bitcoin-miners-part-1/page__view__findpost__p__491 is incorrect please show how and please show you math.
?
let's try again and see if we can confirm it again:
If reasoning and method used in post https://bitcoin.org.uk/forums/topic/108-is-your-pool-cheating-you-essential-self-defence-course-for-bitcoin-miners-part-1/page__view__findpost__p__491 is incorrect please show how and please show you math.
?
experiment is successful. it works. k9quaint just followed up with another set of BS.
It was fun, but I have only some much time. Good bye, k9quaint. (I might unignore you tomorrow, so do not despair).
I am glad to hear I finally ran you off the boards. Next time you come back with stuff of this nature, you may expect the same treatment.
Don't worry, I will keep this thread alive so people can see you as you really are.
P.S. I will also keep my eyes peeled for that process server you promised me with a libel lawsuit in tow.
how predictable... once you ask k9quaint to show facts data and math in support of his silly argumens and you get another set of utter nonsense which have no basis in fact whatever.
let's try again and see if we can confirm it again:
If reasoning and method used in post https://bitcoin.org.uk/forums/topic/108-is-your-pool-cheating-you-essential-self-defence-course-for-bitcoin-miners-part-1/page__view__findpost__p__491 is incorrect please show how and please show you math.
?
let's try again and see if we can confirm it again:
If reasoning and method used in post https://bitcoin.org.uk/forums/topic/108-is-your-pool-cheating-you-essential-self-defence-course-for-bitcoin-miners-part-1/page__view__findpost__p__491 is incorrect please show how and please show you math.
?
More dodging and backpedaling from Vladimir.
http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php clearly shows that BTCguild is middle of the road at worst for pool luck. This directly contradicts your claims to the contrary. You claimed you have data to back this up but you refuse to post it.
The data at http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php is compiled out of more than 3000 blocks found. We are to believe Vladimir that 2400 blocks is significant when it shows what he likes but 3000+ blocks is not significant when it shows something he doesn't like?
It must be so humiliating for you to be shown to have plagiarized your article from Mad7Scientist at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/could-btcguild-be-cheating-its-miners-35505 and caught misrepresenting the data you compiled in support of it.
there is no smoke without the fire, I suppose.
this
out to be noticed by someone else too
if the above is incorrect please show how and please show you math.
this
Quote
It is quite possible that either data at https://www.btcguild.../all_blocks.php is somehow incorrect or maybe I made some huge mistake somewhere, therefore do not jump to any conclusions before double checking all the data, calculations and asking your pool operator to comment on your findings. Please note the results are only as good as data is.
Anyway, for those who is too lazy to look into the large and boring spreadsheet here are results I've got using this data for period 1st of June - 21st of Aug 2011. It appears that we have:
Blocks solved: 2275
Blocks expected: 2432.53
Probability of at most 2275 blocks solved when 2432.53 are expected: 0.0675%
Probability of something being badly wrong: 99.9325%
Number of blocks swallowed by "bad luck": 157.53
Amount of bitcoin swallowed by "bad luck": 7876.74 (not counting pool fees, block fees and pool donations)
Amount of US$ swallowed by "bad luck": 90582.50$ (at 11.5 $/BTC)
In other words these calculations show that, given such data, collectively, miners during Summer 2011 would be 90k$ better off mining solo than in this particular pool.
Anyway, for those who is too lazy to look into the large and boring spreadsheet here are results I've got using this data for period 1st of June - 21st of Aug 2011. It appears that we have:
Blocks solved: 2275
Blocks expected: 2432.53
Probability of at most 2275 blocks solved when 2432.53 are expected: 0.0675%
Probability of something being badly wrong: 99.9325%
Number of blocks swallowed by "bad luck": 157.53
Amount of bitcoin swallowed by "bad luck": 7876.74 (not counting pool fees, block fees and pool donations)
Amount of US$ swallowed by "bad luck": 90582.50$ (at 11.5 $/BTC)
In other words these calculations show that, given such data, collectively, miners during Summer 2011 would be 90k$ better off mining solo than in this particular pool.
out to be noticed by someone else too
if the above is incorrect please show how and please show you math.
Another example of Vladimir plagiarizing Mad7Scientist and passing off that individuals efforts as his own.
Another example of Vladimir refusing to show work he claims to have done.
Another example of Vladimir dodging and hoping to smear BTCguild for his own gain.
I am happy to point out your bad behavior as long as you would like to continue to engage in it.
20 days of data you are referring to is simply statistically insignificant.
So you claim. You refuse to post the data you claim to have, that you claim is more significant, that you claim BTCguild was the worst out of, and that you claimed contradicted the data I have posted. You alleged you compiled 3 months worth of data on many other pools from which you selected BTCguild. Where is this data and why do you refuse to upload it to the internet?
Why won't you release the rest of the data?
Perhaps you should contact Mad7Scientist who first brought this exact issue to light on these boards in this thread:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/could-btcguild-be-cheating-its-miners-35505
His claims are nearly identical to yours, and you participated in that thread, but you did not credit him for bringing this issue to light. Curiouser and curiouser. Could it be that his claims did not receive a good reception either? Or did you want your representations of BTCguild to gain a wider circulation?
@Vladimir:
I see you have edited your post to include the data you already presented about BTCguild.
That is not the data from the other pools you compiled stats for. The data from which you supposedly selected BTCguild as the one pool having extraordinary bad luck. The data which you claimed contradicts http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php.
I have to assume you never actually compiled it. That would leave you making false statements about BTCguild, from which you are likely to benefit materially. Not good.
I see you have edited your post to include the data you already presented about BTCguild.
That is not the data from the other pools you compiled stats for. The data from which you supposedly selected BTCguild as the one pool having extraordinary bad luck. The data which you claimed contradicts http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php.
I have to assume you never actually compiled it. That would leave you making false statements about BTCguild, from which you are likely to benefit materially. Not good.
Worst pool out of those which I tried. And I have just published for you one more. Your silly argument fails again.
You forgot the link to the "one more".
You said:
"I actually have started from that chart, and than I have calculated odds for 3 month performance of some pools on that chart. However, one pool have shown extremely high "bad luck" while others, even though, below average in last few weeks over longer period of time hit almost exactly 0 luck line."
All you have to do is post the 3 month datasets for the pools you compiled data for which supposedly contradicts the data from http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php (which I posted and you refute) and shows those pools having zero luck instead of a bias toward negative luck.
li·bel [lahy-buhl] Show IPA noun, verb, -beled, -bel·ing or ( especially British ) -belled, -bel·ling.
noun
1.
Law .
a.
defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words or gestures.
b.
the act or crime of publishing it.
c.
a formal written declaration or statement, as one containing the allegations of a plaintiff or the grounds of a charge.
2.
anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
Here you. k9quaint has accused me to be a fraudster. Fraud is a criminal offence. This is defamation in written form.
I think that such baseless accusation damages my reputation. The only valid defence would be truth. And since it is not true, and you trolls are probably hide behind 7 proxies anyway unfortunately I do not see cost effective ways to pursue you at the moment and out of respect to operators of this forums I surely will not pursue them either, even though it is technically possible.
noun
1.
Law .
a.
defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words or gestures.
b.
the act or crime of publishing it.
c.
a formal written declaration or statement, as one containing the allegations of a plaintiff or the grounds of a charge.
2.
anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
Here you. k9quaint has accused me to be a fraudster. Fraud is a criminal offence. This is defamation in written form.
I think that such baseless accusation damages my reputation. The only valid defence would be truth. And since it is not true, and you trolls are probably hide behind 7 proxies anyway unfortunately I do not see cost effective ways to pursue you at the moment and out of respect to operators of this forums I surely will not pursue them either, even though it is technically possible.
Let me raise the ante and post the statute that you appear to have violated by your actions in this thread:
Title 18 U.S.C. § 1343
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1343.html
Specifically, the part about transmitting false representations for the purpose of obtaining money.
You won't post the data on the other pools you claim to have compiled in order to determine that BTCguild is the "worst pool".
You now are backpedaling from your claim of libel, wisely as it turns out.
You should quit while you are behind.
li·bel [lahy-buhl] Show IPA noun, verb, -beled, -bel·ing or ( especially British ) -belled, -bel·ling.
noun
1.
Law .
a.
defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words or gestures.
b.
the act or crime of publishing it.
c.
a formal written declaration or statement, as one containing the allegations of a plaintiff or the grounds of a charge.
2.
anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
Here you go. k9quaint has accused me to be a fraudster. Fraud is a criminal offence. This is defamation in written form.
I think that such baseless accusation damages my reputation. The only valid defence would be truth. And since it is not true, and you trolls are probably hide behind 7 proxies anyway unfortunately I do not see cost effective ways to pursue you at the moment and out of respect to operators of this forums I surely will not pursue them either, even though it is technically possible.
Is it a new way to argue these days? Point to a dictionary definition which fits the case exactly and claim that it does not?
noun
1.
Law .
a.
defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words or gestures.
b.
the act or crime of publishing it.
c.
a formal written declaration or statement, as one containing the allegations of a plaintiff or the grounds of a charge.
2.
anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
Here you go. k9quaint has accused me to be a fraudster. Fraud is a criminal offence. This is defamation in written form.
I think that such baseless accusation damages my reputation. The only valid defence would be truth. And since it is not true, and you trolls are probably hide behind 7 proxies anyway unfortunately I do not see cost effective ways to pursue you at the moment and out of respect to operators of this forums I surely will not pursue them either, even though it is technically possible.
Is it a new way to argue these days? Point to a dictionary definition which fits the case exactly and claim that it does not?
First the courts aren't going to use your definition. They will use the legal one.
Second , truth is not a defense.
Third the only definition that ultimately matters would be the one the jury gets.
Quote
The intent with which a publication is made rather than it's truth or falsity, it the correct criterion by which a jury is to determine whether such a publication is a libel. State v Nichols
Libel is about malicious intent not truth.
pay me 100 BTC and I'll publish the data prepared using the same method for Summer 2011 period for every bitcoin pool in top 10, which publishes historical data on solved blocks and shares, with exceptions of slush's' and deepbit.
pay another 100 BTC and I will do slush's and deepbit for you.
simple really.
PM me your mailing address if you really looking forward to defend a lawsuit and it can be arranged.
pay another 100 BTC and I will do slush's and deepbit for you.
simple really.
PM me your mailing address if you really looking forward to defend a lawsuit and it can be arranged.
It should be even more simple than that. Since you claimed to have already prepared the data, you can just upload it to the internet and post a link to it here. Or was that claim false?
Your claim:
"I actually have started from that chart, and than I have calculated odds for 3 month performance of some pools on that chart."
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38785.60 (post #80)
I already told you how to go about finding me with the courts. Any competent lawyer should be able to accomplish it.
I'd watch your going to end up paying his legal costs and probably a fine for a frivolous filing. You might want to look up the definition if libel first.
here's a good start
Judicial and statutory definitions of words and phrases Volume 5
http://books.google.com/books?id=cJENAAAAYAAJ&printsec=titlepage#v=onepage&q&f=false
here's a good start
Judicial and statutory definitions of words and phrases Volume 5
http://books.google.com/books?id=cJENAAAAYAAJ&printsec=titlepage#v=onepage&q&f=false
Another one with illogical and incoherent arguments, taken out of content quotes and all the stupid dirty tricks. Not worth my time responding really.
Translation: Vlad will not post the data he claimed to have for reasons he does not want to get into.
I am waiting for the process server to notify me I am the defendant in a lawsuit.
Since there is no known way to consistently find blocks faster than the difficulty level and there are many ways to lower the over all return (DDoS, bugs, fees, latency, etc) there is a persistent negative bias on the distribution of pool performance.
Let's see:DDoS:
Might make accepting shares difficult/impossible, maybe even sending out valid blocks to the network --> more invalids, but surely not more shares/block
Bugs:
They could lead to accepting + paying solutions twice, acepting + paying invalid solutions etc --> Might increase the shares per block
Fees:
Are an arbitrary concept, do not influence the shares per block, only the payment per share
Latency:
Maybe from miner <--> pool? Increases the stale share rate and might even cause some valid solutions not being pushed to the net (if pushpoold is not "brave" enough to dare to cause a chain split) --> might lead to more invalid blocks or even more shares/block
The real question is: How high is this persistent negative bias (that HAS to exist, with solo mining on a very well connected node as a baseline) throughout all pools and which pool is best there? Also: Why do some pools have a bigger negative bias consistently?
Oh and by the way:
Long Polls are also far too often VERY ineffective or too late, if you look at statistics by pool hoppers! These are the main cause for stale shares and can lead to significantly lower payouts, if you have a pool that performs porly there.
Vlad the Petulant had cited overall return as the gold standard for pools. I was pointing out that overall returns are likely never to be perfectly efficient for pools given all the things that can go wrong and the lack of known incidents/methods/etc that increase positive luck. That was why I was interested in the distribution of all the other pools Vladdie searched through. The data at http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php shows this bias for the previous 20 days and as more data is gathered, it should give us an idea of the size of the bias.
As for Vladdums claims to not understand how system failures could lead to invalid blocks, Mainframe Mining Cooperative cited the following:
"...with some unfortunate side effects of reduced I/O to one of the storage array disk clusters the pool cluster is using which was causing some latency and load issues for the pool. At the very moment we found block 142,496 we were getting this array back up to speed and im convinced that everything running a bit slower is what caused us to lose our first race."
https://bitcoin.org.uk/forums/topic/125-the-story-behind-our-little-orphan-block-142496/
@Vlad, now that you cry libel defense you can either come at me with a lawyer by filing a john doe lawsuit and compel bitcointalk.org to reveal my IP address and then subpoena my ISP for my identity and then proceed with the lawsuit to recover damages. Or you can add your claims of a libel defense to the list of things you have posted in this thread that are not correct.
If Vlad ever bothers to post the data he supposedly gathered on the other pools we might get to the bottom of this. I doubt he will, since it will likely make his claims look baseless. Until that time, http://www.l0ss.net/index30.php speaks volumes with nothing to refute it.
I say it as it is. Anyone accusing anyone publicly in writing of committing a criminal offence without supporting it with proof on "beyond reasonable doubt" standard is committing exactly libel, by definition (with some exceptions but even that there must be a reasonable cause and presumption of innocence must be used until crime is proven). Go an and read some law books if you do not believe me.
If I only had mailing address of k9quaint some legal paperwork would be put in motion right now.
If I only had mailing address of k9quaint some legal paperwork would be put in motion right now.
So the Jr. Member of the forums, k9quaint, is supposed to be viewed as such an expert on the matters of the article and comments of the Hero Member, yourself, that we the unwashed masses would mistake his statement that you are a fraud as a statement of fact instead of a mere opinion?
Further we are to suppose that k9quaint's opinion is in fact an intentional false communication, and that it harms your reputation(assumes you have a good reputation, no?)? decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which you are held(assumes you are held in any regard, respect or confidence, no?)? or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against you(more than you induce yourself?)?
This is now twice that I've observed you reference libel as a defense in a debate. Here is the other: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/annc-mainframe-mc-moves-to-pplns-reward-system-38668. Calls of libel are the last defense (or perhaps in your case, the first defense) of the coward. The only thing that appears to be factual in this whole exchange is the level of your pusillanimity and the weakness of your argument.
Oh and you are welcome for the bump.
I am just keeping the flame afloat so that the thread is on the top all the time. Trolls are only helping me out.
Hahahahahaha!
Never thought about that. Sir, you have my utmost respect!
Since there is no known way to consistently find blocks faster than the difficulty level and there are many ways to lower the over all return (DDoS, bugs, fees, latency, etc) there is a persistent negative bias on the distribution of pool performance.
Let's see:DDoS:
Might make accepting shares difficult/impossible, maybe even sending out valid blocks to the network --> more invalids, but surely not more shares/block
Bugs:
They could lead to accepting + paying solutions twice, acepting + paying invalid solutions etc --> Might increase the shares per block
Fees:
Are an arbitrary concept, do not influence the shares per block, only the payment per share
Latency:
Maybe from miner <--> pool? Increases the stale share rate and might even cause some valid solutions not being pushed to the net (if pushpoold is not "brave" enough to dare to cause a chain split) --> might lead to more invalid blocks or even more shares/block
The real question is: How high is this persistent negative bias (that HAS to exist, with solo mining on a very well connected node as a baseline) throughout all pools and which pool is best there? Also: Why do some pools have a bigger negative bias consistently?
Oh and by the way:
Long Polls are also far too often VERY ineffective or too late, if you look at statistics by pool hoppers! These are the main cause for stale shares and can lead to significantly lower payouts, if you have a pool that performs porly there.
k9quaint, FFS, there are no fee PPS pools, this is your perfect benchmark if you want a baseline. Show your math or shut up. Instead of hard facts here is only endless innuendo, unintelligent accusation and finally libel is coming out of you. Way to discredit yourself. Ohh.. looky 40 posts many of which is just trolling me, nice job.
It turns out that you a committing libel right here and right now. Cease and desist immediately. I demand retraction of libellous statements and an apology.
It turns out, it is just fraud.
It turns out that you a committing libel right here and right now. Cease and desist immediately. I demand retraction of libellous statements and an apology.
Don't worry Vladimir. Some of the silent guys around here already read your article, found it interesting and well-thought, and have followed your advices. I've quitted BTCGuild, and I found a new pool I'm really satisfied with.
It's normal to have criticism when you do something interesting (like your articles), it's part of the game. Just don't blow a fuse over them
Again, your math is incorrect, even after trying to "correct" yourself.
Now that I know you are running your own pool and trying to grow it's membership it becomes clear that you are only interested in getting people to leave BTCguild and Deepbit and hoping to pick up some more subscribers in the process. Here I was just thinking you didn't understand and all I had to do was explain your misrepresentation of that data. It turns out, it is justfraud(don't want to be accused of being libelous... again). C'est la vie.
Now that I know you are running your own pool and trying to grow it's membership it becomes clear that you are only interested in getting people to leave BTCguild and Deepbit and hoping to pick up some more subscribers in the process. Here I was just thinking you didn't understand and all I had to do was explain your misrepresentation of that data. It turns out, it is just
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!
-Upton Sinclair
This quote can be used over and over in the BitCoin community, it seems.
God, Vladimir. You throw libel accusations around far too often. Please go learn a new legal term. You have completely worn out this one through cavalier misuse.
Thanks for the article. I enjoyed it!
Jump to: