Quote from: psahx on July 27, 2014, 10:43:40 PM

Quote from: sjc1490 on July 27, 2014, 07:49:31 PM

Quote from: eleuthria on July 26, 2014, 06:02:41 PM

Quote from: nottm28 on July 26, 2014, 10:28:54 AM

I don't understand how bitminter can win block 312400 and our find becomes orphaned.

Slush reported 312400 at

2014-07-25 09:02:11

Bitminter reported 312400 at

2014-07-25 09:02:58

That's 47 seconds later than us. I can understand if the time between two pools finding the same block is very short, but 47 seconds?

https://blockchain.info/block-height/312400

Block timestamps should not be considered the actual times they were made. The timestamp for the block is part of your header data before you start hashing it, and is based off the pool server's clock. It also doesn't have to be updated as you continue to hash. Blockchain.info used to have 'Received time' vs 'Timestamp', but for the last few months that has been broken and they just use the timestamp for both.

I don't know about them but reading a previous post on the matter I would research any pool you are thinking about switching to as this could be effecting more than us. All I know is it sucks.

Come to BTCGuild. Orphan rate is less then 0.01%

We haven't had that many invalids this year, just had a few of late. It has nothing to do with the pools functionality.