Prohashing Mining Pool Forums

I"m all in - stopped renting my machines and am now waiting....

excelerator wrote:I"m all in - stopped renting my machines and am now waiting....

Anyone who wants to start immediately can use c=litecoin to start mining SegWit blocks.

I still need to hear from ethercap about getting more hashrate before we can make a full-site switchover, because I don't want other miners to suffer if they disagree. I also want to do some math. I'm not convinced that we can activate SegWit given that they have 38% of the network right now, even if we devoted all our miners to the effort. That would just waste money if it's true.

Steve Sokolowski wrote:

excelerator wrote:I"m all in - stopped renting my machines and am now waiting....

Anyone who wants to start immediately can use c=litecoin to start mining SegWit blocks.

I still need to hear from ethercap about getting more hashrate before we can make a full-site switchover, because I don't want other miners to suffer if they disagree. I also want to do some math. I'm not convinced that we can activate SegWit given that they have 38% of the network right now, even if we devoted all our miners to the effort. That would just waste money if it's true.

While you're doing your math, your stated strategy is the equivalent of "Bid Sniping" and this only works if you're not bidding (mining) unitl the last second. If you find you do have enough miners to push it over, shouldn't we NOT be mining LTC so they believe they have enough resource in place, then we unload all our miners on LTC at once?

Seems if we all start solo mining LTC they will just add more L3+s to counteract us.

We're certainly battling new LTC rigs coming on line at a rate that I've never seen.
https://bitcoinwisdom.com/assets/diffic ... 1492610407

In the last few days the equivalent of about 1,900 L3+s have been deployed to LTC - tough battle

https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/

I found an awesome article that explains everything in detail, at least from the bitcoin side. I am of the understanding that the litecoin implementation is identical save for a different threshold of acceptance percentages.

https://medium.com/@ViaBTC/why-we-dont- ... d44475cc18

I found the disadvantages of SegWit too. Hope it can help.

I did some research into this last night, and I think my opinion is that we should wait for a few days and reevaluate then.

A lot of miners went offline last night, so SegWit again has a chance. These swings are probably going to continue, and we don't want to waste money unless we know we can make a difference. I think that if we go all-out now, they will simply turn those miners back on. We can't ask miners to give up so much money without pretty good assurance that there was a reason for doing so.

It may be that the next activation period is the best time to step in, as well. Let's wait a few more days until this period starts to draw to a close, and then we can decide whether to make a last-minute push or not.

In the meantime, if you want to support SegWit directly, you can use "c=litecoin," but keep in mind that your profit is likely to fall by 1/3.

Steve Sokolowski wrote:I did some research into this last night, and I think my opinion is that we should wait for a few days and reevaluate then.

A lot of miners went offline last night, so SegWit again has a chance. These swings are probably going to continue, and we don't want to waste money unless we know we can make a difference. I think that if we go all-out now, they will simply turn those miners back on. We can't ask miners to give up so much money without pretty good assurance that there was a reason for doing so.

It may be that the next activation period is the best time to step in, as well. Let's wait a few more days until this period starts to draw to a close, and then we can decide whether to make a last-minute push or not.

In the meantime, if you want to support SegWit directly, you can use "c=litecoin," but keep in mind that your profit is likely to fall by 1/3.

A few things.

1) If the plan is try on the next period, shouldn't we go silent as much as possible and not use "c=litecoin"? It's noble to show support, but strategically seems to be self defeating with an adversary with superior resources. Perhaps we should appear as harmless as possible and keep our powder dry.
2) Those "switched off" machines were likely redirected to non-LTC or they are actually shipping to large, and very irate, customers and adding new machines to maintain the hash rate. If it's the latter, then we have an opportunity. During this signalling period, can we do a burst and see if they react ie they redirect back to LTC and increase hash rate? It doesn't need to take a long time, just enough time to get noticed then switch off and hope they'll react out of emotion rather than reason. We need to develop better intel here. These are all WAGs but we need actionable data and we should try to tease it out when and where possible at as little expense to PH and miners.

excelerator wrote:

Steve Sokolowski wrote:I did some research into this last night, and I think my opinion is that we should wait for a few days and reevaluate then.

A lot of miners went offline last night, so SegWit again has a chance. These swings are probably going to continue, and we don't want to waste money unless we know we can make a difference. I think that if we go all-out now, they will simply turn those miners back on. We can't ask miners to give up so much money without pretty good assurance that there was a reason for doing so.

It may be that the next activation period is the best time to step in, as well. Let's wait a few more days until this period starts to draw to a close, and then we can decide whether to make a last-minute push or not.

In the meantime, if you want to support SegWit directly, you can use "c=litecoin," but keep in mind that your profit is likely to fall by 1/3.

A few things.

1) If the plan is try on the next period, shouldn't we go silent as much as possible and not use "c=litecoin"? It's noble to show support, but strategically seems to be self defeating with an adversary with superior resources. Perhaps we should appear as harmless as possible and keep our powder dry.
2) Those "switched off" machines were likely redirected to non-LTC or they are actually shipping to large, and very irate, customers and adding new machines to maintain the hash rate. If it's the latter, then we have an opportunity. During this signalling period, can we do a burst and see if they react ie they redirect back to LTC and increase hash rate? It doesn't need to take a long time, just enough time to get noticed then switch off and hope they'll react out of emotion rather than reason. We need to develop better intel here. These are all WAGs but we need actionable data and we should try to tease it out when and where possible at as little expense to PH and miners.

Who, though, will pay for the losses miners incur during this period? I'm still somewhat uncomfortable with changing people's configurations without their direct acceptance. If the people supporting SegWit are willing to take an additional cut to pay for the people who haven't replied, then that would be acceptable, too.

Steve Sokolowski wrote:

excelerator wrote:

Steve Sokolowski wrote:I did some research into this last night, and I think my opinion is that we should wait for a few days and reevaluate then.

A lot of miners went offline last night, so SegWit again has a chance. These swings are probably going to continue, and we don't want to waste money unless we know we can make a difference. I think that if we go all-out now, they will simply turn those miners back on. We can't ask miners to give up so much money without pretty good assurance that there was a reason for doing so.

It may be that the next activation period is the best time to step in, as well. Let's wait a few more days until this period starts to draw to a close, and then we can decide whether to make a last-minute push or not.

In the meantime, if you want to support SegWit directly, you can use "c=litecoin," but keep in mind that your profit is likely to fall by 1/3.

A few things.

1) If the plan is try on the next period, shouldn't we go silent as much as possible and not use "c=litecoin"? It's noble to show support, but strategically seems to be self defeating with an adversary with superior resources. Perhaps we should appear as harmless as possible and keep our powder dry.
2) Those "switched off" machines were likely redirected to non-LTC or they are actually shipping to large, and very irate, customers and adding new machines to maintain the hash rate. If it's the latter, then we have an opportunity. During this signalling period, can we do a burst and see if they react ie they redirect back to LTC and increase hash rate? It doesn't need to take a long time, just enough time to get noticed then switch off and hope they'll react out of emotion rather than reason. We need to develop better intel here. These are all WAGs but we need actionable data and we should try to tease it out when and where possible at as little expense to PH and miners.

Who, though, will pay for the losses miners incur during this period? I'm still somewhat uncomfortable with changing people's configurations without their direct acceptance. If the people supporting SegWit are willing to take an additional cut to pay for the people who haven't replied, then that would be acceptable, too.

If the required "period" is a full 14 days, then I agree it's unsustainable and unreasonable. If it can be activated by your previous strategy of "bid sniping" and kicking it over to 75% to activate, then that's a completely different approach and losses could be minimized and absorbed by the previous individuals you've identified.

I suggest a vote on the fate of the profits.... those abstaining should signal with segwit.