Topic: what the hell ever happened to deepbit? - page 2. (Read 5662 times)

Fine, start your own pool and set your own fee structure.  Put your money where your mouth is.


DGM is virtually unverifiable my the average miner.  I would never use it DGM unless I trusted the pool without reservation.


So in the end we end up agreeing.  You choose what pool you support and I choose the pool(s) I support.  I'm not irritated with your choice.

Why are you irritated with me exercising my freedom?
Sam

Who mines PPS at Deepbit anymore?


That is in line with most other fee based pools.


Not a good analogy, it would clearly depend on the car.  There are cars that sell many times what they cost new.


Why?  What's wrong with supporting a quality pool so that it can stay in business?  Some people want pools to go away, is that why you hold this point of view?


How does a pool force a person to pay a fee?  A person has a choice where they mine, a pool cannot force anyone to mine there, thus pay a fee.


I shouldn't have made a blanket statement about 0 fee pools.  I'm not all are a "rip-Off".


Or maybe it wasn't feasible at that fee structure?


The only I hype I ever hear about Deepbit is FUD.  I have never seen/read/heard [Tycho] market his pool.  People use it because they have a good experience with it.  If it ain't broke, don't fix it.



The only reason I have an iPhone (stupid name) is because my employer requires me to have it.  If I had my choice I would still be using my Motorola StarTac flip phone.

We all have the freedom of choice, you are trying to restrict my freedom, I won't stand for it.  You make your choices for your reasons, fine I respect that.  Respect my freedom to make my choices!
Sam

10% fee PPS is unnaceptable, max 5% should be it.
3% fee for Prop is unnaceptable too, 3% DGM would be the max too. But DGM is totally different from Prop!

If i would want a 0% fee pool i continue at EMC and set the donation to 0%, but no my donation isnt at 0%!

Can you give me your rip off limits for DGM and PPLNS too? I'm trying to decide if you're one of those miners who want something for nothing.

deepbit should lower its fees in order to get more hash power
it isn't 100% ddos proof thus the continuing 3% fee is too much now days!

PPS:
#DEFINE rip-off (ACTUALWORK/100)*90

Prop:
#DEFINE rip-off (ACTUALWORK/100)*97

this was fine in the start due to no other pools (expect sluh's) were able to compete with deepbit, but now the situation is different.
its like selling a 10 year old car still for the same prices as you bought it -> rip-off.
so to clarify, nowadays deepbit is a rip-off.

Not even to talk about this from us2sam
"I pay higher fees/contributions at the other pools I use."
all i have to say to that is total retardness, sry if this sound harsh but its  a fact.
and for the point, 0 fee pools are rip-off. there are scampools (yes 0 fee pools, 100+% PPS pools, etc) but you setting a fee is forcing ppl. as example take a look at EMC, 0% fee per default but you can donate on your own, most dont but thats because they are selfish. Another example would be ArsBitcoin (which failed due to bad luck and developer having no time to work on his pool), 1% fee per default but you can set it to 0% if you want.

Mining at a hyped pool dosnt mean its worth it. This discussion would lead to marketing and there isnt a good idea to discus. Or are you one of the guys just buying a new iPhone because everyone else has it, or because i has the Apple Logo on it? I bet so...

os2sam can't be wrong unless you clearly define "rip off".I can think of many values of "rip off" for which os2sam would be correct and you would not.

Please define "rip off" in terms that can be tested.

totaly wrong, this is OSS. If you dont understand the basics, just dont even try to argue 

I just got sick of it and moved to something without fees.

I wouldn't call using the most reliable pool, which one can use unattended with complete confidence, a "rip-off".  I pay higher fees/contributions at the other pools I use.  And I don't, particularly, have a problem with hoppers.  If I did have a problem with hoppers I would hop myself to offset the loss, which anyone can do if they want to put forth the time and effort.  0 fee pools are a rip-off if you ask me.  You just can't get something for nothing, no way to get around that fact, learn it, live it, know it!
Sam

If you meant that the variance would be lower than blockchain's because it's based on a longer time period, then I agree. It's much better to use your table than blockchain's pie chart. But it's even more accurate to calculate data based on total hashes / seconds as reported by the website - as I do on the chart I linked to on the last page.

My method is not perfect, that's true.  However, people use blockchain's graphs to look at pool shares, which is a) often incorrect by attributing blocks to the wrong pool and b) calculated over only a few days..  That makes it completly unreliable...

Blockchain is too often wrong...

blockchain has reported multiple triplemining and btc50 blocks as 'deepbit' blocks when it records my node as relaying them first (5.9.24.81).  seems as if I got the 'deepbit' tag on myself.

most of the deepbit blocks will be relayed by 82.130.102.160, as it's my understanding that deepbit blocks the blockchain IPs

people finally understood deepbit is a rip-off. hard but true

The variance based on blocks/time period isn't that low. Atm, for Deepbit, you list 309 blocks and 50btc 378 blocks. The 95% confidence interval for Deepbit's hashrate will be +/- 11% and for 50btc it will be +/- 10%. Not very large, but not negligible either. Your site provides a great estimate though.

The only way to get an accurate estimate of hashrate for a given period is to add up all the hashes and divide by the total time in seconds - you have to rely on the pool's website providing accurate data to do that.

Deepbit has indeed been decreasing in market share.  They're now at 15% of the total mining power.

Allow me to spam my site again: http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/top.php

This data is much more accurate then the info on blockchain, and as my data always calculates in real time over the last 2 weeks, you get low variance numbers.

They're at ~3.5TH/s and from my own observations probably being hopped by about 400Gh/s.

It's a pity for me personally - deepbit being healthy massively increases my profitability 

I didn't see this post until ckolivas quoted, so here's your answer, Beans:

from http://organofcorti.blogspot.com :

2 major things. The non English speaking miners (mainly Russia and China) and inertia. The time deepbit took off was when bitcoin mining exploded in popularity and all the other pools were struggling under the load. Tycho took a chance and kept throwing lots of hardware at the problem which was an investment on his part that paid off, and it was the only reliable pool at the time. That reliability has kept a lot of users there since then, even though most other pools have since caught up and offer lower fees.

It is the least modernised pool out there despite being the largest for almost 18 months and having changed very little in design or features and having high fees since then in spite of the bitcoin mining scene changing substantially in that time.

All that will change dramatically with ASICs because throwing lots of pool hardware at the server end (which was the deepbit way) is just not going to cut it when we're talking about things being 50x the current demand. Even if the server will be able to take it, miners' internet connections will not be able to take it.

Either deepbit will change its business plan to revolve around being an ASIC provider and slowly but surely shut down their mining pool, or they'll totally revamp their pool to support a new mining protocol (hopefully stratum) and start again to support their hardware.