Quote from: HR on February 21, 2016, 10:15:57 PM

Quote from: bitkapp on February 21, 2016, 10:00:52 PM

HR as far as I understand it 20% of the blocks are ASIC, 20% are Scrypt, 60% are GPU (I do not know if these are equally distributed).

That's not the issue. The block find distribution is 20/20/20/20/20. About that there is no doubt.

The question is how does MultiShield adjust each algo's diff and as a function of exactly what? We know that before the most recent hardfork, global network hashrate (that is the combined total of the 5 algos) was key, and that all the algos diffs adjusted in response to changes in aggregate hashrate. The question is how much did that change? To what precise degree are the algos currently independent, and to what degree are they still inter-dependent?

I suggest reading the source code. That's exactly right: you should do your own work, especially since you haven't already done it on your own and of your own initiative. Or do you think I'm here to work for you? I've done my job by alerting you to the fact that with basic coding skills and the source code mentioned (that is freely available to the public), anyone can confirm it. It's your problem, not mine, if you don't care, and judging by your attitude, I guess it's just that, correct? If you don't care, why should I?

Trolling aside, it turns out you don't even need that. Even if the only thing you know about MultiShield is that it keeps each algorithm's share at 20%, that is already sufficient to answer your question (with basic math skills, of course). You can multiply and divide can't you?

Okay, trolling truly off now. One thing you seem to be confused about is the latest hardfork. MultiShield was not changed at all in the DigiSpeed hardfork (other than changing a few constants so blocks would be faster). The formula that estimates work per block was changed, but this is unrelated to difficulty adjustments.

Edit: apparently HR didn't get it, so here's some context:

Quote from: HR on February 21, 2016, 09:51:37 PM

Quote from: MentalCollatz on February 21, 2016, 08:31:43 PM

Your analysis may very well be rigorous, but I can't find your analysis - only your conclusions and a rough description of your sources. If you want a serious response, post your source data, the conclusions you derive from the source data, and any required logical steps that go beyond "basic math skills". I shouldn't have to re-do all your work just to have a conversation with you about the results.

That's exactly right: you should do your own work, especially since you haven't already done it on your own and of your own initiative. Or do you think I'm here to work for you? I've done my job by alerting you to the fact that with basic math skills and the data source mentioned (that is freely available to the public), anyone can confirm it. It's your problem, not mine, if you don't care, and judging by your attitude, I guess it's just that, correct? If you don't care, why should I?

The "multiply and divide" line was similarly copied from one of your posts which seems to no longer exist.