Quote from: kano on Today at 02:51:38 PM

Quote from: DaveF on Today at 02:04:05 PM

...
Personally, I have about $7.50 in dust left on Kano's pool since 2016.
...

If it's above dust 10,000 sat, I'll probably get around to sending it out sooner or later.

Of course it's above 10K sat. How else do you get to $7.50 Grin

Quote from: kano on Today at 02:51:38 PM

PPS is normally NOT an option for small pools, since to run it long term, the backing is a large amount of BTC.
Using Meni's calculation from my post here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=104664.msg48795003#msg48795003
Current reward 6.25 BTC for a 0.1% chance of the pool going bankrupt, with a 3% fee, the backing required is:
719.5625 BTC or about $6.8 million

(my PPS I'll have is simply to have a buffer that when it runs out, they'll simply have to switch their miners elsewhere or to PPLNS - but no losses since I'll payout the trailing end of mining of course and can switch off PPS mining with a command)

Which as a miner kind of puts you into a loop.
Do you mine on a small PPLNS pool that might never find a block so you never get paid before they close? (bitminter)
Or do you take a loss and pay the 3% or 4% fee and mine on a PPS pool?

If you are creating a pool, how do you encourage people to join if they might not get paid more then once a month or possibly every other month or once a quarter?
Same loop as above just from the other side.

Which brings us back to the original thought of this thread. "Laurentia Pool - BAD risk for miners"
It's might be, it might not be. For me, even if they had the best coders in the world and the best pool infrastructure in the world etc. It would be because if they don't find blocks or have them orphaned then I'm loosing money. Same with your pool Kano.

On the flip side, if I needed to squeeze every last $ out of my miners and could wait for payment, then PPS @ 4% would be a bad risk. And I should be mining someplace else.

Blanket statements are bad.

-Dave