Why do you mine on deepbit? | Bitcointalksearch.org

Jack of Diamonds

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: os2sam on November 05, 2011, 12:06:40 AM

You guys could really care less about why anyone mines and deepbit or any other pool. You just want to belittle and be condescending to those make a choice contrary to your exalted and obviously superior intellect. If you really don't like the big three pools and/or their payout methods, then just start your own pool with your own methodology and I'm sure you will lay deepbit and the other big pools to waste in no time. Otherwise just shut up and let folks make their own decisions and/or mistakes, for that is how we grow.

I for one am through listening to your childish diatribe.
I wish you all the best.
Sincerely,
Sam

They wont be ever laid to rest because people like you feel honoured to give up 3-10% of their earnings for no good reason.

Better pools (like 0% PPS) will show up and grow, but it will be a long time (if ever) until they surpass the big proportional dinosaurs.
It really does seem like some people want to mine for "fun" no matter how autistic that sounds.

They either don't care about their profit margins, have no electricity bills, or enjoy dedicating a proportion of their mining capacity to strangers.

They prevent the large scale evolution of mining into most efficient possible forms.
Proportional shouldn't even exist anymore at this point in time, yet it continues to draw in new suckers whom predatory pool hoppers can profit from.

One could even suspect you are advocating such inefficient mining forms because you are one of these predators,
who wants to discourage these proportional 'suckers' from working for you for free.

os2sam

legendary

Activity: 3586

Merit: 1098

Think for yourself

You guys could really care less about why anyone mines and deepbit or any other pool. You just want to belittle and be condescending to those make a choice contrary to your exalted and obviously superior intellect. If you really don't like the big three pools and/or their payout methods, then just start your own pool with your own methodology and I'm sure you will lay deepbit and the other big pools to waste in no time. Otherwise just shut up and let folks make their own decisions and/or mistakes, for that is how we grow.

I for one am through listening to your childish diatribe.
I wish you all the best.
Sincerely,
Sam

teukon

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1011

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on November 04, 2011, 06:44:17 PM

Quote from: teukon on November 04, 2011, 04:17:10 PM

Yeah, sounds good. How would the bonus be divided between the miners? Would it be "fair" to distribute it proportionally each day? I expect this way that if the difficulty changed in the middle of a day that you'd have to split the day into two parts and distribute proportionally on each part.

Not sure need to think about that. One idea off the top of my head would be to track number of shares in the month and the difficulty of each share and divide any bonus proportionally to overall work for the month.

I think better in formulas so something like:

Total Work = SUM(Work Done = (shares) * (difficulty))
"Monthly Bonus" = (total revenue of the pool) - (PPS payouts) - (Pool cost server/bandwidth).
Miner Share = (50% of Monthly Bonus) * (Miner Total Work) / (Pool Total Work)

That may well work but, as you say, it needs some careful thought. If this does work properly then it is a rather graceful way of handling difficulty changes.

Ah well, we can dream.

I heard BitMinter was off to a splendid start with merged mining! Good stuff.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: teukon on November 04, 2011, 04:17:10 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on November 04, 2011, 03:01:23 PM

Sometimes I do things for non-economic reasons. I thought the rise of pool hopping mining clients would be sufficient to drive people out of "unfair" payout methods. Maybe a hop-pool could do it. I like your thinking of 50% cut of the "bonus". Since determining all the bonus amounts could be challenging (no way to know hop "bonus" other than after the fact and that is subject to variance) then maybe pay 100% PPS and at end of the month issue a "bonus" payment based on the pool's revenue - PPS payout. It would be less risk to the pool operator and worst case scenario it is a 0% PPS which isn't bad.

Yeah, sounds good. How would the bonus be divided between the miners? Would it be "fair" to distribute it proportionally each day? I expect this way that if the difficulty changed in the middle of a day that you'd have to split the day into two parts and distribute proportionally on each part.

Not sure need to think about that. One idea off the top of my head would be to track number of shares in the month and the difficulty of each share and divide any bonus proportionally to overall work for the month.

I think better in formulas so something like:

Total Work = SUM(Work Done = (shares) * (difficulty))
"Monthly Bonus" = (total revenue of the pool) - (PPS payouts) - (Pool cost server/bandwidth).
Miner Share = (50% of Monthly Bonus) * (Miner Total Work) / (Pool Total Work)

teukon

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1011

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on November 04, 2011, 03:01:23 PM

Sometimes I do things for non-economic reasons. I thought the rise of pool hopping mining clients would be sufficient to drive people out of "unfair" payout methods. Maybe a hop-pool could do it. I like your thinking of 50% cut of the "bonus". Since determining all the bonus amounts could be challenging (no way to know hop "bonus" other than after the fact and that is subject to variance) then maybe pay 100% PPS and at end of the month issue a "bonus" payment based on the pool's revenue - PPS payout. It would be less risk to the pool operator and worst case scenario it is a 0% PPS which isn't bad.

Yeah, sounds good. How would the bonus be divided between the miners? Would it be "fair" to distribute it proportionally each day? I expect this way that if the difficulty changed in the middle of a day that you'd have to split the day into two parts and distribute proportionally on each part.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: teukon on November 04, 2011, 10:03:38 AM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on November 04, 2011, 09:41:01 AM

Quote from: Jack of Diamonds on November 04, 2011, 09:18:00 AM

I do realize pool hopping prop. pools and taking advantage of gullible newbies is the most profitable option, but that's not a 'pool model'
that's just taking money from those with limited information on how mining works.

Well it could be. I think it will take a 110% payout PPS pool which hops other pools in order to make people realize the stupidity of proportional based pools.

+1

Actually what I'd prefer to see is a pool which gave out 0% PPS + half of anything extra the pool operator is able to make with that hashing power, be it merged mining, alternative blockchains, taking advantage of weaknesses in existing reward systems. Provided the server was reliable and I could withdraw all of my income at any point I'd definiely send it hashing power! They would be providing a useful service to miners and accelerating the evolution of mining. Of course, the business model of such a pool would be based purely on irrationality of miners and pools but I doubt this is going anywhere anytime soon. Unfortunately, the meager profit is not worth the work of setting up such a pool so it's unlikely to happen.

Sometimes I do things for non-economic reasons. I thought the rise of pool hopping mining clients would be sufficient to drive people out of "unfair" payout methods. Maybe a hop-pool could do it. I like your thinking of 50% cut of the "bonus". Since determining all the bonus amounts could be challenging (no way to know hop "bonus" other than after the fact and that is subject to variance) then maybe pay 100% PPS and at end of the month issue a "bonus" payment based on the pool's revenue - PPS payout. It would be less risk to the pool operator and worst case scenario it is a 0% PPS which isn't bad.

teukon

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1011

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on November 04, 2011, 09:41:01 AM

Quote from: Jack of Diamonds on November 04, 2011, 09:18:00 AM

I do realize pool hopping prop. pools and taking advantage of gullible newbies is the most profitable option, but that's not a 'pool model'
that's just taking money from those with limited information on how mining works.

Well it could be. I think it will take a 110% payout PPS pool which hops other pools in order to make people realize the stupidity of proportional based pools.

+1

Actually what I'd prefer to see is a pool which gave out 0% PPS + half of anything extra the pool operator is able to make with that hashing power, be it merged mining, alternative blockchains, taking advantage of weaknesses in existing reward systems. Provided the server was reliable and I could withdraw all of my income at any point I'd definiely send it hashing power! They would be providing a useful service to miners and accelerating the evolution of mining. Of course, the business model of such a pool would be based purely on irrationality of miners and pools but I doubt this is going anywhere anytime soon. Unfortunately, the meager profit is not worth the work of setting up such a pool so it's unlikely to happen.

teukon

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1011

Quote from: Jack of Diamonds on November 04, 2011, 09:18:00 AM

No, there is no luck in pure PPS. In fact if you look at the site of abcpool.co, there isn't even a round history.
You only get paid for the shares you submit, hence your risk is 0 as you earn the same amount every day.
Your earnings are not based on any blocks being found or not because all earnings come from a private wallet.

Since the site has had a 0% fee for months, it is also the best possible way to mine bitcoins.
Mining at non-0% pure PPS pools is therefore done either out of idiocy, lack of logical capability or for ideological reasons
(supporting a certain pool owner, supporting proportional models, etc.)

P.S. I do realize pool hopping prop. pools and taking advantage of gullible newbies is the most profitable option, but that's not a 'pool model'
that's just taking money from those with limited information on how mining works.

Adding to this slightly. Sometimes pool operators add a promotion to attract miners. Thus, sometimes you can mine more profitably elsewhere for a limited time.

Also, if you are willing to stretch "bitcoin mining" into "earn bitcoins for hashing" then there are merged mining pools which convert NMC->BTC automatically (see sig) and so can offer 9% more income (soon to drop to 7%). Things have improved a great deal in the past week or so thanks to shads' work.

There are lots of things to consider but if you want an excellent rate with practically no risk or variance, abcpool.co's 0% PPS is highly recommended.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: Jack of Diamonds on November 04, 2011, 09:18:00 AM

I do realize pool hopping prop. pools and taking advantage of gullible newbies is the most profitable option, but that's not a 'pool model'
that's just taking money from those with limited information on how mining works.

Well it could be. I think it will take a 110% payout PPS pool which hops other pools in order to make people realize the stupidity of proportional based pools.

Jack of Diamonds

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: os2sam on November 03, 2011, 12:46:57 AM

Quote from: Jack of Diamonds on November 03, 2011, 12:28:46 AM

Quote from: localhost on November 02, 2011, 12:21:54 PM

I just don't like PPS, pool owner takes away the "risk" of bad (and good!) luck at the cost of a huge fee: I prefer keeping the luck for a much lower fee.

There are 0% PPS pools like abcpool.co which means you have zero risk as well as zero fees.
If you don't mine in such a pool then you either support other models for ideological reasons, or like to earn less money for some masochistic reason.

With PPS, fee or no fee, you mine at a flat rate. So if, so called, luck is good you loose if it is bad then you win or least break even.

What do you call "ideological reasons"?

You get what you pay for. There is no such thing as a free ride.
Sam

No, there is no luck in pure PPS. In fact if you look at the site of abcpool.co, there isn't even a round history.
You only get paid for the shares you submit, hence your risk is 0 as you earn the same amount every day.
Your earnings are not based on any blocks being found or not because all earnings come from a private wallet.

Since the site has had a 0% fee for months, it is also the best possible way to mine bitcoins.
Mining at non-0% pure PPS pools is therefore done either out of idiocy, lack of logical capability or for ideological reasons
(supporting a certain pool owner, supporting proportional models, etc.)

P.S. I do realize pool hopping prop. pools and taking advantage of gullible newbies is the most profitable option, but that's not a 'pool model'
that's just taking money from those with limited information on how mining works.

os2sam

legendary

Activity: 3586

Merit: 1098

Think for yourself

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on November 03, 2011, 11:54:24 AM

If you have access to a 0% PPS pool then it is "wrong" (as in stupid) to use a proportional pool.

----snip-----

In the long run you can't earn more than 0% fee PPS unless you are pool hopping.

Doing something wrong=immoral. Being stupid isn't the same as being immoral.

How does a 0% PPS pool make a profit? Or stay in business/service?
Sam

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: teukon on November 03, 2011, 12:25:36 PM

What would you do if practically everyone left the pool and the buffer was large and negative?

It's impossible for the buffer to go negative.

teukon

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1011

Quote from: Luke-Jr on November 03, 2011, 11:53:36 AM

Quote from: teukon on November 03, 2011, 11:49:13 AM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on November 03, 2011, 10:03:11 AM

Quote from: os2sam on November 03, 2011, 09:31:24 AM

How do some pools plan on staying in business? I prefer to use pools that have a clear and disclosed plan for maintaining sustainability.

That's the difference between PPS and SMPPS: the latter has a clear plan for not going under in extreme bad luck.

Ok, I'll bite. What is the plan?

... it's well documented, too.

While I have a certain respect for a pool that goes into sufficent detail on it's reward system to include pseudo-code, this page tell me nothing about how the pool intends to stay in business in the long term. What would you do if practically everyone left the pool and the buffer was large and negative?

teukon

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1011

Quote from: Luke-Jr on November 03, 2011, 11:44:55 AM

No. You need to review the law of large numbers again.

Firstly, the issue of arbitrarily long delays in payment is one level more subtle than that described by the weak or strong law of large numbers.

Secondly, It seems to me that you are thinking within a mathematical model of a SMPPS pool. I put it to you that your model is making one or more very unrealistic assumptions.

Quote from: teukon on November 03, 2011, 11:38:05 AM

... so long as it continues to function.

Here's one such faulty assumption. One can easily argue that a pyramid scheme is a win for everyone "so long as it continues to function".

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: os2sam on November 03, 2011, 09:31:24 AM

I have no problem with PPS model/pools.

A person was making a point that it is somehow wrong to use anything but a 0% PPS pool. I was just trying to explain that PPS is just a flat rate payment. A proportional type payment varies from round to round according to how many shares were contributed. There is nothing "wrong" with using either method.

If you have access to a 0% PPS pool then it is "wrong" (as in stupid) to use a proportional pool. Pool hoppers will reduce your share of the reward to less than PPS value. So in the long run (even ignoring the variable payouts) you will earn less. The only reason to avoid PPS pools is if they have a high fee.

In the long run you can't earn more than 0% fee PPS unless you are pool hopping.

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: teukon on November 03, 2011, 11:49:13 AM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on November 03, 2011, 10:03:11 AM

Quote from: os2sam on November 03, 2011, 09:31:24 AM

How do some pools plan on staying in business? I prefer to use pools that have a clear and disclosed plan for maintaining sustainability.

That's the difference between PPS and SMPPS: the latter has a clear plan for not going under in extreme bad luck.

Ok, I'll bite. What is the plan?

... it's well documented, too.

teukon

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1011

Quote from: Luke-Jr on November 03, 2011, 10:03:11 AM

Quote from: os2sam on November 03, 2011, 09:31:24 AM

How do some pools plan on staying in business? I prefer to use pools that have a clear and disclosed plan for maintaining sustainability.

That's the difference between PPS and SMPPS: the latter has a clear plan for not going under in extreme bad luck.

Ok, I'll bite. What is the plan?

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: teukon on November 03, 2011, 11:38:05 AM

As I said, Ideology is the primary motivation in my selecting a pool and/or reward system. Both 0% PPS and SMPPS pools are doomed to collapse and, therefore, unattractive to me.

No. You need to review the law of large numbers again.

Quote from: teukon on November 03, 2011, 11:38:05 AM

Also, there is a significant difference between 0% PPS and SMPPS.

With 0% PPS the risk lies with the pool. With SMPPS the risk lies with the miners.

No, with both systems, the risk lies with the miners. Mere PPS will simply go bankrupt, while SMPPS has a defined rule on survival in such a circumstance. (As a reminder, the only risk is someone cheating by withholding valid blocks.)

Quote from: teukon on November 03, 2011, 11:38:05 AM

However, with a negative buffer, the miner must accept the risk that the pool will never again achieve a positive buffer and that they will never be paid for their work.

No. The law of large numbers means there is no chance the pool will never again break even, so long as it continues to function.

teukon

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1011

Quote from: Luke-Jr on November 03, 2011, 08:17:25 AM

Quote from: teukon on November 03, 2011, 07:58:29 AM

If the only options were Proportional, SMPPS, and PPS+10%, I'd mine solo. I'd happily pay 5% for PPS or 4% for a good PPLNS/DGM pool.

You say that as if there were a significant difference between PPS and SMPPS. (there isn't)

As I said, Ideology is the primary motivation in my selecting a pool and/or reward system. Both 0% PPS and SMPPS pools are doomed to collapse and, therefore, unattractive to me.

Also, there is a significant difference between 0% PPS and SMPPS.

With 0% PPS the risk lies with the pool. With SMPPS the risk lies with the miners.

From a miner's perspective, a share submitted to a 0% PPS pool has the same value as one submitted to a SMPPS pool with a positive buffer. However, with a negative buffer, the miner must accept the risk that the pool will never again achieve a positive buffer and that they will never be paid for their work. When the buffer is just below 0 this risk is small (because there are so many irrational miners) but the further from 0 the buffer goes, the larger the risk. Even if you owned all of the shares submitted after the buffer became negative and were the only one left at the pool it would be rational to give up on the pool and move to solo mining. If you don't own all of the risky shares and/or there are other people are still mining with the pool the incentive to hop away is even greater.

os2sam

legendary

Activity: 3586

Merit: 1098

Think for yourself

Quote from: Luke-Jr on November 03, 2011, 11:02:39 AM

Quote from: os2sam on November 03, 2011, 10:57:44 AM

What is your reasoning for operating a pool? For profit? or for some other reason(s)?

Everything I do with Bitcoin is for the sole purpose of promoting the Tonal number system.

Hmm, OK. Just picking up after Nystrom I guess.
Have fun with that,
Sam

Topic: Why do you mine on deepbit? (Read 8231 times)