-
crypto_grampy[m]
Fyi, XmrSale posted an update in their CCS and they put up a fake demo store:
store.xmrsale.org
-
crypto_grampy[m]
-
geonic
-
midipoet
crypto_grampy[m]: how do you mean a 'fake demo store'?
-
midipoet
geonic: what's with people asking about voting on the blockchain? That is a questionable idea, if there is ever one.
-
zogiqa[m]
hello, monero wallet never connects.
-
zogiqa[m]
it is the gui wallet
-
zogiqa[m]
monerod gives this error:
-
zogiqa[m]
ERROR torsocks[6311]: General SOCKS server failure (in socks5_recv_connect_reply() at socks5.c:527)
-
anarkiocrypto[m]
Try in Whonix Workstation without torsocks (everything is routed via Tor there anyway).
-
aksion[m]
Hello! Why not include P2Pool mining in the official Montero wallet? Obviously, solo mining has outlived its usefulness for a long time. Replace the solo mining option in the official monero wallet with P2Pool mining.
-
aksion[m]
And also make a commission for those who connect to a remote node, so that the holders of the full node recoup the costs
-
mechanic41turk[m
I am also positive to the idea of replacing solo mining in the GUI wallet with p2pool mining.
-
mechanic41turk[m
P2pool should get a higher hashrate share.
-
mechanic41turk[m
mechanic41turk[m: Even if not replacing, perhaps a checkbox option between the two can be offered.
-
aksion[m]
<mechanic41turk[m> "I am also positive to the idea..." <- Thanks!
-
aksion[m]
I wonder if at least someone uses solo mining in a wallet? Do you have statistics?
-
aksion[m]
After all, the probability of getting a block in 6-10 years is unlikely to attract anyone. Is there really someone who runs a solo mining option in the official wallet?
-
aksion[m]
But p2pool mining would probably be used by everyone
-
chad[m]1
Transactions and solo mining are basic requirements of any blockchain. The core/reference wallet should support them, if for no other reason than to provide a reference implementation for how the blockchain works.
-
chad[m]1
IMO, if you want other fancy features, those can be implemented by other teams in other software.
-
aksion[m]
> <@chad:monero.social> Transactions and solo mining are basic requirements of any blockchain. The core/reference wallet should support them, if for no other reason than to provide a reference implementation for how the blockchain works.
-
aksion[m]
>
-
aksion[m]
> IMO, if you want other fancy features, those can be implemented by other teams in other software.
-
aksion[m]
Yes, but after Monroe introduced the random X algorithm, solo mining of this coin became completely impossible from the point of view of practicality and in general the probability of obtaining a result.
-
BusyBoredom[m]
+1 for making the GUI p2pool by default. It's practical, and I don't think it'd be a bad thing if p2pool started to be seen as the primary means of mining monero.
-
aksion[m]
<BusyBoredom[m]> "+1 for making the GUI p2pool..." <- If you do not introduce p2pool mining into the official Monero wallet on a par with solo mining, then people will continue to mine on simple pools, killing the decentralization of the Monero network and enriching the owners of simple pools. The p2pool miner in the Monero wallet is the only way to motivate people to keep a full node on their computers. I support that p2pool
-
aksion[m]
mining in general should become the main one for Monroe.
-
yanmaani
hello, is group still active?
-
chad[m]1
My point is not that P2Pool shouldn't be used. Obviously it should be highly encouraged. The problem is, the reference wallet needs to provide the bare minimum features for someone to use Monero. Its not the place for hot new features. It needs to run on 20yr computers by people who intend to audit every line of code before running a wallet. The reference wallet should only have features which are necessary, and P2Pool isn't strictly
-
chad[m]1
necessary.
-
chad[m]1
The necessary functions are: run a node, send/receive money, mine a block. Everything else is extra, and those should come in other software projects
-
DataHoarder
also, to connect to p2pool, you also need to sync the sidechain (does not take long, but has additional cases)
-
DataHoarder
privacy wise it has different meanings compared to solo mining as well
-
DataHoarder
your Primary Address would be exposed, in addition to peer ips attached to that.
-
chad[m]1
* someone to safely use Monero.
-
BusyBoredom[m]
^ Ah good point on the primary address exposure. I take back my previous +1 for adding p2pool to the wallet.
-
aksion[m]
<chad[m]1> "My point is not that P2Pool..." <- P2Pool mining has become strictly necessary to avoid centralization of mining. Otherwise, death. People don't keep a full node, they go to centralized pools. This has become more important than checking every line of code. Let them make P2Pool mining a separate application - I don't mind, but as simple as solo mining in a wallet (one button).
-
aksion[m]
If you do not introduce p2pool mining into the official Monero wallet on a par with solo mining, then people will continue to mine on simple pools, killing the decentralization of the Monero network and enriching the owners of simple pools. The p2pool miner in the Monero wallet is the only way to motivate people to keep a full node on their computers. I support that p2pool mining in general should become the main one for Monero.
-
aksion[m]
DataHoarder: You can do this from a non-core wallet
-
DataHoarder
non-core?
-
DataHoarder
yes, p2pool documentation explains you should make a different address for all this
-
DataHoarder
I might be mistaken, but is it not monerod (not the wallet) the part that mines even on GUI?
-
DataHoarder
-
DataHoarder
so now official monerod would need to also sync the p2pool sidechain, which is its own complex piece of code
-
chad[m]1
> <@aksion:matrix.org> P2Pool mining has become strictly necessary to avoid centralization of mining. Otherwise, death. People don't keep a full node, they go to centralized pools. This has become more important than checking every line of code. Let them make P2Pool mining a separate application - I don't mind, but as simple as solo mining in a wallet (one button).
-
chad[m]1
> If you do not introduce p2pool mining into the official Monero wallet on a par with solo mining, then people will continue to mine on simple pools, killing the decentralization of the Monero network and enriching the owners of simple pools. The p2pool miner in the Monero wallet is the only way to motivate people to keep a full node on their computers. I support that p2pool mining in general should become the main one for Monero.
-
chad[m]1
Your perspective only applies to miners. As someone who runs Monero GUI on a 15yr old laptop, I cannot run P2Pool (another blockchain). P2Pool is great, but it is not part of the "strictly necessary" base functionality
-
BusyBoredom[m]
Making a separate GUI for p2pool and linking to it prominently on getmonero.org seems like a nice compromise.
-
BusyBoredom[m]
As in a standalone p2pool gui. No wallet.
-
DataHoarder
^ I am working on that
-
aksion[m]
chad[m]1: Yes, but people like you don't keep a full node, and use those who do, which is unfair. Then let's introduce a commission for those who connect to a third-party node, so that those who contain at least somehow recoup the costs of maintaining a full node and decentralization and network responsiveness.
-
BusyBoredom[m]
Just p2pool with buttons.
-
DataHoarder
made an installer for p2pool on windows, it opens monerod and p2pool stuff
-
BusyBoredom[m]
Oh that's awesome DataHoarder! Thanks
-
DataHoarder
it's this, linked on p2pool.io / p2pool.observer as well
github.com/WeebDataHoarder/p2pool-nsis
-
DataHoarder
GUI will take longer cause I hate GUIs and Windows :)
-
BusyBoredom[m]
Fair, I also hate making GUIs.
-
chad[m]1
aksion[m]: People like me definitely do run full nodes. For privacy reasons. Not sure where you are getting your info from
-
aksion[m]
chad[m]1: Well, well...on a 15-year-old laptop? You yourself wrote that you advocate for the convenience of those who have a 15-year-old laptop, so that it is easier for them, and not for those who hold and contain a node.
-
chad[m]1
People who run a 15 year old laptop should be able to run a wallet and node
-
chad[m]1
Would I recommend mining on the 15 yr old laptop? Hell no.
-
aksion[m]
chad[m]1: I don't mind if they don't turn on mining and don't keep a full node on a 15-year-old laptop, but then let them pay a commission to those who contain it for them (to whom they connect to a remote node). Those who support the security and operability of the network
-
anarkiocrypto[m]
Full nodes sadly require a large SSD (expensive), high bandwidth/no data cap, and difficult to run via Tor without IP leaks. But a wallet with a remote node should support all hardware (my daily driver is a 8 year old laptop for example).
-
ComplyLast
anarkiocrypto[m], run it over whonix, ip leaks solved
-
anarkiocrypto[m]
People with old hardware generally don't have the money to pay a remote node fee.
-
anarkiocrypto[m]
Many people run remote nodes to voluntarily support the network, not for profit.
-
ComplyLast
large SSD (expensive)
-
ComplyLast
it's not like we are in 2010 anymore either
-
mandelbrot42[m]
Would be dope if there was a Monero version of this:
azte.co
-
anarkiocrypto[m]
With my hardware, even regular Whonix Workstation tasks are slow. Plus I can't afford to buy a large SSD and the sync over Tor would take multiple days with my fairly slow internet.
-
ComplyLast
largish ssds can be found reasonably cheap these days
-
anarkiocrypto[m]
Anything above $50+ is expensive for me.
-
anarkiocrypto[m]
Anyway, this is irrelevant to the P2Pool discussion (I'm happy with a simple wallet connected to an onion remote node, no mining or full node).
-
DataHoarder
p2pool also needs some custom configuration to provide full features, like huge pages
-
mandelbrot42[m]
mandelbrot42[m]: Redeem directly in Monerujo and/or Cake wallet
-
aksion[m]
anarkiocrypto[m]: We are not talking about profit, we are talking at least about non-losses для тех кто содержит полную ноду
-
anarkiocrypto[m]
Then put a donation address somewhere. Running a full node isn't a business, it is supporting the network. Bitcoin full node operators also aren't paid.
-
Rucknium[m]
aksion: No need to fix what isn't broken. There are plenty of full nodes being run on a volunteer basis. Also, why are you liking your own posts? That's unseemly.
-
anarkiocrypto[m]
For example, Seth runs a full node (with onion remote node) and has a donation address here:
blog.sethforprivacy.com/about/#my-recommended-privacy-tools
-
anarkiocrypto[m]
So if you use his remote node, you can choose to send a donation.
-
anarkiocrypto[m]
This is better than gatekeeping remote node access (which is intended for people who can't run a full node, e.g. due to finances, hardware, internet, etc. limitations, who may not be able to afford a remote node fee).
-
aksion[m]
Rucknium[m]: Why is it indecent? There is a "like" function...I really like my posts.
-
aksion[m]
But with posts like yours and your position, you only kill decentralization and people's desire to support Monroe. Everyone knows that there should be a lot of full nodes. Many people can be motivated to keep a full node either by the commission of those who connect to them as to a remote node, and/or by the possibility of p2pool mining at least
-
Rucknium[m]
aksion: "Everyone knows that there should be a lot of full nodes." Show me an academic paper that supports this conclusion. From a mathematical point of view, having lots of nodes can slow down block propagation, depending on certain factors. I am unaware of any rigorous work in this area, however.
-
yanmaani
p2pool doesn't really work
-
yanmaani
is the problem
-
yanmaani
you have to fix the issues with it first
-
yanmaani
it can't scale
-
aksion[m]
To strengthen the stability of the Monroe network and eliminate the centralization of mining as a phenomenon, it is necessary to completely eliminate the possibility of mining in pools programmatically. The main way of mining for Montero is to make p2pool mining. Make a convenient p2pool mining miner on the official website of Montero
-
aksion[m]
s/Montero/Monero/, s/Montero/Monero/
-
BusyBoredom[m]
aksion, keep your conversation in one place. reposting across multiple channels will piss off the people you are trying to convince.
-
aksion[m]
s/Monroe/Monero/, s/Montero/Monero/, s/Montero/Monero/
-
aksion[m]
BusyBoredom[m]: Thanks! I just switch when I reply to messages, and have already lost which place is the main one
-
DataHoarder
yanmaani: can't scale?
-
DataHoarder
please describe the issues you found with it
-
DataHoarder
note specifically, Monero P2Pool's
-
yanmaani
DataHoarder: monero has a block time of 2 minutes, if I'm not mistaken
-
DataHoarder
correct
-
yanmaani
the minimum feasible block time for PoW is something like 5 seconds, give or take
-
yanmaani
below that level, you get crazy orphan rates
-
DataHoarder
p2pool has uncles
-
DataHoarder
10 seconds atm
-
yanmaani
this means p2pool has a max gearing ratio of 120/5 = 24x
-
DataHoarder
80% to uncle, 20% for whoever added the uncle
-
DataHoarder
also difficulty increases as more join p2pool
-
DataHoarder
so you end up with similar uncle sizes
-
yanmaani
yes, that's your problem
-
DataHoarder
on last window
-
DataHoarder
: 2160 blocks (+69 uncles)
-
yanmaani
because if the difficulty is 1/24 of the mainchain difficulty, which it would be with 100% adoption
-
yanmaani
then that's not really that much better than solo mining
-
DataHoarder
it is better than solo mining, more even payments, and you can always have multiple p2pools (it already supports so). There are some drawbacks, but it scales already
-
DataHoarder
sech11 can probably speak a bit about that
-
yanmaani
it is "better than solo mining", but not better than pool mining.
-
DataHoarder
it is pool
-
yanmaani
so it's an altruistic action. we all know how that goes
-
DataHoarder
it's PPLNS, last n shares
-
yanmaani
yeah ok I mean centralized pool mining, come on now
-
zogiqa[m]
hello which exchange do you recommend to use?
-
DataHoarder
in the end with current limits, unless centralized pools lower their min yanmaani, you will always get paid out first on p2pool
-
yanmaani
zogiqa[m]: fiat or crypto?
-
yanmaani
DataHoarder: yes, but there's other issues in terms of efficiency etc. Basically, p2pool only really works if a tiny percentage use it
-
zogiqa[m]
both
-
DataHoarder
cannot really beat the current ~0.00029 min per payout, instant, without a fee
-
Rucknium[m]
yanmaani: What's preventing multiple independent P2Pools from running? Then effective difficulty will not be that high.
-
DataHoarder
remember, again yanmaani, you can have many p2pools
-
DataHoarder
it works if everyone uses it
-
DataHoarder
or if a few use it
-
yanmaani
There's a good reason that big miners aren't really doing that for bitcoin
-
DataHoarder
or even if there are many mini-p2pools
-
yanmaani
because it's less profitable
-
yanmaani
Rucknium[m]: that sort of works, yes
-
DataHoarder
original p2pool there had no uncle support either ;)
-
yanmaani
DataHoarder: yeah OK, but riddle me this
-
aksion[m]
I have a suggestion on how to make Monero instantly the most popular in the World.
-
aksion[m]
Let's give each person on Earth an equal number of coins (not anonymously), so that people can start mutual settlements. It won't make anyone richer or poorer. But there will be mutual settlements in Monero. Those who want anonymity - let them buy or mine for themselves additionally.
-
yanmaani
miners are on something like 20% profit margin
-
DataHoarder
on Monero?
-
yanmaani
pools take like 1%
-
yanmaani
DataHoarder: on bitcoin
-
yanmaani
so for every $100 of revenue, $20 of profits
-
DataHoarder
anyhow, I'm responding to the "p2pool can't scale" argument
-
yanmaani
without the pool fee, that would be $21
-
DataHoarder
there are no technical reasons why it can't scale, and sure, low hashrate miners
-
yanmaani
so they'd grow profits by 5%
-
DataHoarder
they can take a while to find a share
-
yanmaani
why don't big miners fund p2pool development?
-
DataHoarder
but so do they take a while on PPLNS pools
-
DataHoarder
and they will not hit min withdrawal limits
-
yanmaani
DataHoarder: But PPLNS can run arbitrarily small shares, because it's all in a database. There's a reason not everyone uses p2pool.
-
DataHoarder
so even while p2pool grows, they will hit their minimums sooner
-
yanmaani
it's not impossible, but it's less profitable
-
DataHoarder
is it less? no
-
DataHoarder
I mean, the p2pool for monero has been also funded by an actual pool operator that closed after it was released
-
DataHoarder
you can reduce share size on p2pool, and even support "Dynamic" sizes (this is NOT implemented atm). That would just give you more outputs to deal with, so at the moment it works alright. Let me calculate one second if everyone used p2pool, and given 100% blocks found over current PPLNS window are p2pool's, what would be the average payout it hits
-
mechanic41turk[m
<zogiqa[m]> "hello which exchange do you..." <- localmonero.co
-
yanmaani
zogiqa[m]: tradeogre for crypto
-
DataHoarder
alright yanmaani for 60 blocks across the ~6h pplns window of p2pool, you would get on average during it with only one share about 0.021 at once
-
yanmaani
DataHoarder: running multiple p2pools is what you need, but the problem is that with too many p2pools, each p2pool has quite a large variance
-
DataHoarder
indeed at that point you would split into a few p2pool networks for lower hashrate
-
DataHoarder
yep too many vs a few
-
DataHoarder
this has been discussed extensively on p2pool channels btw, where at least two "makes sense"
-
DataHoarder
still better than solo mining :)
-
DataHoarder
also, centralized pools can directly mine to "p2pool"
-
yanmaani
"better than solo mining" is not a reasonable goal
-
DataHoarder
they reduce their own variance
-
DataHoarder
> "better than solo mining" is not a reasonable goal
-
yanmaani
has to be the most economically viable
-
DataHoarder
it's a very nice goal already achieved, and economically viable
-
DataHoarder
reduced my variance quite a bit
-
DataHoarder
even on centralized pools
-
yanmaani
e.g. second to none
-
yanmaani
not "economically viable", but "the most economically viable"
-
DataHoarder
I'm 15% up from even profit switching, but that's just pure luck
-
DataHoarder
payouts are the same, on average
-
DataHoarder
why does "economic viability" enter here, when you get paid out the same, but quicker via p2pool (Reduces variance)
-
DataHoarder
again
-
DataHoarder
you claim it does not scale
-
yanmaani
DataHoarder: evidently they are not being paid the same, or else everyone would use it
-
DataHoarder
while it seems it scales pretty well and adjust fine to such changes
-
yanmaani
using multiple p2pools exposes you more to the cross-pool variance, where you also have the risk that your 2% p2pool won't find a block.
-
DataHoarder
with same average payout either way
-
yanmaani
average payout is not the only thing
-
yanmaani
variance matters to
-
yanmaani
o
-
DataHoarder
yep, variance decreased since I joined p2pool, though maybe I should give it a bit more
-
DataHoarder
only a month and a half
-
yanmaani
DataHoarder: you can't compare to solo mining
-
yanmaani
you have to compare to centralized pool mining
-
DataHoarder
I do both
-
DataHoarder
I'm comparing against MO
-
yanmaani
has someone written a simulator for this btw?
-
DataHoarder
simulator for?
-
yanmaani
p2pool variance under different conditions
-
yanmaani
if you're looking at something the scale of bitcoin for example, we have:
-
sethsimmons
It's simple probability, solo mining will take the longest time to equal out, then p2pool, then centralized pools, but all will (in the long run) have roughly the same payouts.
-
yanmaani
$47MM / 24h
-
sethsimmons
p2pool still "feels" worse than centralized mining for small miners as payouts are less frequent, but we can't fix psychology.
-
yanmaani
sethsimmons: right. and if the purpose of pooled mining is to reduce variance, maybe you can see the problem with p2pool :)
-
yanmaani
that's not a matter of psychology, that's legit business risk management
-
DataHoarder
sethsimmons: payouts to their wallet, or in UI
-
DataHoarder
?
-
sethsimmons
This is an education problem, p2pool has fixed the technical issues with solo mining by allowing a decentralized way to reduce variance.
-
sethsimmons
Now people just need to understand what that means and why it's worth switching (if they care at all about Monero as a tool).
-
yanmaani
sethsimmons: alleviated them somewhat, but not resolved them
-
DataHoarder
if it's to their monero wallet, I have observed payments are earlier on p2pool due to lower thresholds
-
yanmaani
you're presuming altruism
-
sethsimmons
yanmaani: No, it reduces variance massively.
-
yanmaani
and that people will introduce variance for the sake of strengthening the network
-
sethsimmons
You're comparing to large centralized pools.
-
sethsimmons
My variance is down from my old small centralized pool.
-
yanmaani
sethsimmons: yes, but not 100%. Centralized pools are still better, for the miners.
-
yanmaani
Yes I am. That's what the miners are comparing it to.
-
sethsimmons
yanmaani: There is also an economic incentive - 0% fees.
-
yanmaani
sethsimmons: right. are you familiar with the kelly criterion?
-
sethsimmons
yanmaani: Yes
-
sethsimmons
Which is why p2pool will likely never be 100% (or close) of the network hashrate, but that's fine.
-
sethsimmons
But remember -- you're not comparing equal things.
-
sethsimmons
yanmaani: Blatantly false 🙂
-
sethsimmons
Large centralized pools reduce variance more than p2pool but charge fees.
-
sethsimmons
Smaller centralized pools offer similar or worse variance.
-
sethsimmons
Variance will not effect payouts over the long run between p2pool and even large centralized pools.
-
sethsimmons
yanmaani: No.
-
yanmaani
sethsimmons: so say you're a business. you want to maximize your probability of being the largest business
-
yanmaani
the way you do this is by maximizing the geometric growth rate
-
yanmaani
e.g. E[ln(value)]
-
yanmaani
this is usually used for gambling
-
carrington[m]
RPC-Pay would be more useful if it worked like P2Pool
-
yanmaani
say I have two bets
-
yanmaani
1: 50% chance of getting 2.1x my money
-
sethsimmons
p2pool has managed to create something that is better for Monero and better for miners. That is incredible, and the only remaining piece is getting past the psychology of variance.
-
yanmaani
2: 1% chance of getting 200x my money
-
sethsimmons
Large miners benefit as well from p2pool as they can ensure no custodial risk and lessen profit losses due to fees, while not needing to trust centralized infra for their uptime.
-
yanmaani
naively, my best bet is to bet 100% of bankroll on (2). But that has a high risk of bankruptcy. But if we're optimizing the log bankroll growth rate, we can reach more intelligent conclusions.
-
yanmaani
this gives us, this is the key point, a way to compare "apples and oranges"
-
DataHoarder
I mined 4 or 5 Monero blocks already for p2pool
-
yanmaani
e.g. what fees are "worth it" to reduce what variance
-
yanmaani
from that point, you can see why centralized mining is worth it in some cases.
-
yanmaani
sethsimmons: but nobody actually lives "in the long run". In the short run, I have bills to pay.
-
chad[m]1
Correct me if I'm wrong, but variance only matters for intermittent miners / pool hoppers, right? Long term miners do not care about variance (at least not the difference between small pool/p2pool/large pool)
-
sethsimmons
I don't think you're seeing the mining landscape properly. There are 3 major entities:... (full message at
libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/do…2e894ad1db3a5bd45310c62fc3cb1a6fa4b)
-
sethsimmons
chad[m]1: Yes.
-
sethsimmons
yanmaani: You're a hobbyist miner who cares about daily/hourly payout variance for bills?
-
yanmaani
chad[m]1: yeah, you're wrong unfortunately
-
chad[m]1
yanmaani: Educate me. Why does variance matter to a business who will commit permanent hashrate for a long time?
-
sethsimmons
> <@sethsimmons:monero.social> I don't think you're seeing the mining landscape properly. There are 3 major entities:... (full message at
libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/do…00ab8189f7f2acdb7678d697fdf3c40ab85)
-
Rucknium[m]
yanmaani: Kelly criterion does not apply universally. Its applicability is dependent upon the entity's utility function. See the "Criticism" section of the Kelly criterion Wikipedia page.
-
yanmaani
chad[m]1: if they're running very large hashrates, then variance is of little concern, but if they're running modest hashrates, it can be
-
yanmaani
this can be mathematically calculated
-
sethsimmons
chad[m]1: The few small miners that care just need to be educated on how it doesn't matter over the long run. If they choose a centralized pool with fees for variance purposes we've failed in education and marketing.
-
Rucknium[m]
yanmaani: If you want to discuss risk analysis, I can do that all day.
-
sethsimmons
chad[m]1: It does matter, but a large business op won't rely on a public pool unless they're a pretty small op.
-
chad[m]1
* Educate me. Why does variance matter to a business who will invest continuous hashrate for a long time?
-
yanmaani
say you invest $2k into mining gear. and then you have bad luck
-
yanmaani
oops! there comes the bankruptcy
-
sethsimmons
Enter, p2pool.
-
Rucknium[m]
yanmaani: Right. For risk neutrality, variance doesn't matter at all.
-
aksion[m]
sethsimmons: Yes, just programmatically prohibit simple bullets, leave the only basic P2P, and who wants solo
-
sethsimmons
Yet again, p2pool solved the technical problem. Now we just need to solve the psychological and educational problem.
-
sethsimmons
yanmaani: $2k miner would be served plenty well by p2pool, likely daily payouts at worst.
-
yanmaani
Rucknium[m]: doesn't depend on the utility function strictly, because log utility function has more than intuitive justification.
-
yanmaani
sethsimmons: at current network conditions yes
-
sethsimmons
And that's the current small p2pool chain.
-
sethsimmons
This is all much ado about nothing.
-
yanmaani
Rucknium[m]: in the real world, hardly anyone is risk neutral
-
Rucknium[m]
yanmaani: "log utility function has more than intuitive justification" What do you mean by this?
-
yanmaani
Rucknium[m]: If you have N agents, and they can make bets, and they're all given the same options, and all judge the probabilities the same, then as t->infinity, the probability that the one with log utility function is the richest one goes to 1.
-
Rucknium[m]
There are a lot of risk-loving people in cryptocurrency. They prefer solo mining.
-
yanmaani
polite synonym for gambling addict lol
-
yanmaani
but yeah, true. if you're into gambling, solo mining is your thing
-
chad[m]1
If you zoom out to years (as a business would), a business who invests $2k into equipment, but experiences %50 variance month over month, will be equally profitable to an identical business with only %15 variance. The more important difference will be fees
-
yanmaani
chad[m]1: businesses do not "zoom out to years"
-
chad[m]1
So your proposed business expects to invest $2k in equipment, make ROI in a month, and then sell their equipment?
-
aksion[m]
s/bullets/pools/
-
chad[m]1
What business is not planning for long term profitability?
-
yanmaani
chad[m]1: this depends on the variance. some amount is OK, some amount isn't
-
sethsimmons
Ok, so many things to address here lol:
-
sethsimmons
1) $2k is nothing, that isn't a business
-
sethsimmons
2) A real large mining op acting as a business has no issues with daily payouts vs hourly, that variance is negligible
-
sethsimmons
3) p2pool would work fine for even this oddly tiny business to ensure they don't have massive variance
-
yanmaani
but if you're running p2pool on bitcoin right now, this is not really suitable
-
yanmaani
2k is i would say a large hobbyist
-
DataHoarder
we are not talking bitcoin here, but monero one, which has uncle blocks thankfully
-
DataHoarder
allowing it to scale for quick blocks :)
-
chad[m]1
I wouldn't even say "large" hobbyists
-
sethsimmons
Exactly, DataHoarder, this p2pool implementation is excellent and solves many of the issues that caused Bitcoin p2pool to fail.
-
yanmaani
you basically need a two numbers to calculate this: probability that you make a share and probability that share gets paid out
-
sethsimmons
Right now variance is minimal and excellent even for quite small miners, as it grows in usage we can start new chains that can accommodate different size miners.
-
sethsimmons
If someone is mining on their lappy at home, their variance will be pitiful anyways on acentralized pool.
-
sethsimmons
All sizes of miners can be served well by p2pool.
-
yanmaani
problem with "many small p2pools" is that as p(make share) gets bigger, p(payout) gets smaller
-
yanmaani
has someone made a simulator for this?
-
sethsimmons
No, go for it.
-
Rucknium[m]
Give me the problem outline and I will write an R simulation for it. I can even make a browser-based GUI with R Shiny
-
Rucknium[m]
Seems like with this stuff you could easily compute everything analytically, however. No need to run a numerical simulation.
-
sgp_
new website for Monero Means Money!
moneromeans.money
-
yanmaani
Rucknium[m]: if you have 50 p2pools with 2% hashrate each, so 100% p2pool adoption, 2 minute blocktimes for monero, and 10s blocktimes for p2pool, what's the probability a miner with X% of network hashrate gets paid out after Y days of mining?
-
yanmaani
for example, 0.001% of network hashrate and 1 month
-
sethsimmons
yanmaani: 50 pools of the same size is a pointless exercise.
-
mechanic41turk[m
<DataHoarder> "we are not talking bitcoin here,..." <- where can I read about those "uncle blocks"?
-
yanmaani
sethsimmons: why so?
-
sethsimmons
There would be a cascading range of sizes, most likely.
-
mechanic41turk[m
the term is pretty foregin to me.
-
DataHoarder
-
sethsimmons
mechanic41turk[m: Just this for p2pool specifically: Uncle blocks are supported to avoid orphans - all your shares will be accounted for!
-
mechanic41turk[m
sounds good
-
mechanic41turk[m
but what's the catch?
-
DataHoarder
allows your share of work to be counted, and an incentive for people to include them
-
DataHoarder
uncles are valued 80%, 20% goes to finder
-
sethsimmons
yanmaani: Thinking about it more I guess that could be a realistic scenario.
-
yanmaani
sethsimmons: OK, one pool of 2% and 98% of whatever
-
yanmaani
mechanic41turk[m: more complexity, but it's basically a free lunch
-
mechanic41turk[m
yanmaani: makes me skeptical
-
mechanic41turk[m
but if so, I'll take my free lunch.
-
mechanic41turk[m
Just because I don't understand how I digest my lunch doesn't mean I will reject to eat it.
-
DataHoarder
mechanic41turk[m: given only one block with the same "height" can exist, other uncles are added further down the line to denote they "existed", adds PoW weight to that chain :)
-
sethsimmons
It's just ensuring work is counted, that's it. There's nothing crazy to it.
-
mechanic41turk[m
interesting
-
sethsimmons
It's especially advantageous because it only affects the p2pool sidechain, not the mainchain, so no need to have orphan block logic on the main chain.
-
sethsimmons
It's a win-win 😀
-
mechanic41turk[m
very nice
-
sethsimmons
if it's not clear, an uncle block is an orphaned block that is counted in some way for payouts.
-
yanmaani
if I walk this through in my head, I get: p2pool gearing ratio 120/10 = 12x. there's 50 p2pools. 12*50 = 600. so share difficulty is 1/600 of mainnet difficulty
-
mechanic41turk[m
we gotta get every other centralized pool to re-invent themselves as another p2pool
-
yanmaani
1440m/24h. so 720blk/d. 100% share = 720blk/d avg, or 720*600 = 432'000 shares. at 0.001% of network, that's an average of 4.3 shr/d. there's a formula for translating that to p(> 0 shares). Is it just poisson?
-
sethsimmons
XMRvBeast has already done so quite successfully, and have even transitioned their raffle for free hashrate to p2pool.
-
yanmaani
and each pool should naively do 600/50 = 12 blk/d. if each pool gets 432000/50 = 8640 shr/d, that's a 720 shr/b backlog to keep
-
nioc
btw p2pool having no fees does not work in practice
-
nioc
you get many more payouts that you will need to combine
-
nioc
I combined the first 21 p2pool payouts that I received
-
nioc
all where when I had just one share so this is a worst case scenario but one that a small miner will see often
-
nioc
the cost of sweeping those 21 outputs was 0.7% of the amount of tx
-
yanmaani
i think there's some theoretical issues with multiple p2pools
-
yanmaani
but haven't thought about it
-
yanmaani
but 720 share backlog seems reasonable tbh
-
yanmaani
like it's an engineering challenge but those numbers aren't prima facie fucked
-
sethsimmons
nioc: That's still lower than centralized pools, but good call out.
-
nioc
some yes and some no :)
-
nioc
my last tx was 0.56%
-
Rucknium[m]
<yanmaani> "for example, 0.001% of network..." <- My preliminary results suggest nearly 100% probability of at least one payout occurring for the miner. Let me double check everything. Then I will post a Gist.
-
nioc
also more use of the blockchain
-
nioc
the bigger the miner the lower the "fee"
-
Rucknium[m]
I mean, I do not simulations. This is an analytical solution. But Gist is nice for posting these things.
-
Rucknium[m]
* I do no simulations
-
yanmaani
Rucknium[m]: yeah for 1 month I get it to naively 9.462629465836421e-57
-
yanmaani
of no payouts
-
yanmaani
assuming I did everything right
-
yanmaani
wonder if you could use p2pool as a 2nd layer solution
-
yanmaani
if you implemented smart contracts on it you could even do PPS
-
Rucknium[m]
I get slightly different, but "nearly 100%" and "nearly 100%" are close enough. It pays to work out the math with these things :)
-
yanmaani
will Monero/Critical Decentralization Cluster be attending the remote CCC this year?
-
DaveyJones
afaik CCC this year is canceled already
-
DaveyJones
maybe there will be a digital one
-
DaveyJones
ah you said remote - by apology :D
-
DaveyJones
my
-
sech1
yanmaani p2pool can scale no problems
-
midnightmage[m]
Been watching that squid games show, wonder how much Monero that would be
-
chad[m]1
<yanmaani> "Rucknium: yeah for 1 month I get..." <- Just catching up... So, does this mean that from a business perspective, a business looking to operate for at least several months would not be impacted by the variance between p2pool and a similarly sized centralized pool?
-
Rucknium[m]
chad: I would say, "No, since (1) it depends on the assumptions, e.g. 0.001% of network hashrate still seems high for some miners, (2) The numbers we calculated is just 'get at least one payout', but it doesn't give the full distribution nor the variance (note that variance has a specific formula in statistics)...
-
Rucknium[m]
"...(3) it doesn't account for the fact that different miners may have different risk/utility/whatever-you-want-to-call-it functions."
-
Rucknium[m]
P.S. If you want to use the term "variance" in a general way rather than referring to a specific formula, the term "dispersion" is preferred. The corresponding term for mean/median/mode would be "central tendency". The more you know... 🌈
-
chad[m]1
I guess the real test will be to see if businesses start building on p2pool or not :)