pull down to refresh
25 sats \ 3 replies \ @02c545170e OP 4 Oct 2022 \ parent \ on: New Hashrate ATH 271.9258 EH/s bitcoin
On the one hand you suggest hashrate is "probably" higher based on a block to block examination and then on the other hand you suggest that the daily hashrate is not accurate enough, must use 7 day average. :)
On the one hand you suggest hashrate is "probably" higher based on a block to block examination
I did no such thing. I pointed out how meaningless it is to use a short timeframe when trying to estimate hashrate.
Hashrate doesn't jump much day to day. It technically could bump up a bit (e.g., 2%) in
a day if a very large mining farm were to become energized all at once (which they don't necessarily do it that way), but then the hashrate would stay at that higher level. What that "raw values" chart is showing is variance. Essentially that "raw values" view is meaningless as an indication of actual hashrate increase or decrease.
reply
Yeah, you did exactly that. It's all in your first comment. I don't care that much, it's just an interesting observation.
reply
Ok,... firstly there is no such thing as a hashrate measurement. There is a difficulty data point, and a hashrate estimate can be derived from that. But that difficulty data point only changes every 2,016 blocks.
So every single claim of the hashrate level is an estimate. I can use a timeframe that is just a specific few seconds and from that data claim that the hashrate estimate has suddenly increased 100X from its level just before. But I would be seen a fool, as everyone knows the difficulty will not be increasing 100X from one moment to the next.
If you want a sensible estimate, use a more sensible timeframe, like 7 days. That's all I'm saying.
reply