Quote from: DPoS2 on February 09, 2018, 04:39:09 AM

Quote from: kano on February 09, 2018, 03:55:58 AM

Quote from: Biodom on February 09, 2018, 02:43:07 AM

Want to make a point re luck, CDF, etc.
Let me start with a point that long term luck is fine, I have no qualms.

In a more granular picture, if you started mining in May of last year, then you are "missing" about 14 blocks, give or take, which is about 4% of all blocks during that period. Granted, if you extend to one year, then you'll have what is expected, even slightly more.

As you can see by sheer number, there were much more blocks coming even a few months ago.
Kano cannot control how many miners mine here, but the result is that with a current trend of relatively stable hash, it would be difficult to 'gain back' those 14 blocks in a reasonable time frame.

In fact, going forward, you always have 100% luck expectation, there is no 'compensation' for bad luck.
That said, maybe he will have 110% luck for half a year, i would be fine with that.

In general, this used to be a much happier place, even when the luck was temporarily low.
Suggestion: need another 100-150 PH hash, pronto.

But there's also a point to make about that drop in luck that occurred ...

It's expected to happen ... on every pool.

There will always be changes in luck - sometimes up, sometimes down.

If someone can handle the up-swings, but can't handle the down-swings, then high fee PPS is where I guess they need to be.

Luck doesn't scale down very well. You keep thinking that a small set will be as consistent as a large set... small sets bottom out. I have ran out of ways to explain this to ya'll

That's called increased variance ... I've said that every time.

The problem is that you have yet to specify what is 'small'.

Some arbitrary unspecified number that covers any pool smaller than slush?

In the Bitcoin world you'd specify it as some specific number of blocks expected per diff change and qualify why.