Correcting the error in getnetworkhashrateps

The discussion highlights a significant overestimation error in the calculation of network hash rate, specifically pointing out that the current method overestimates by a factor of N/(N-1), where N represents the number of blocks. The issue is particularly pronounced when N equals 1, leading to an overestimation by approximately seven times, while for N equals 2 and 3, the overestimation factors reduce to two times and 1.5 times, respectively. To address this, a correction method is proposed, involving the multiplication of the current estimate by (N-1)/N. This adjustment aims to more accurately reflect the actual hash rate by accounting for the statistical distribution underlying block discovery times.

An alternative suggestion to improve hash rate estimation involves modifying the approach from counting a fixed number of blocks to measure time, to instead counting blocks over a fixed period. This change would ensure the application of Poisson statistics, aligning with general expectations, rather than the Erlang distribution, which currently skews perceptions of network performance. This misunderstanding appears to be widespread, even among industry experts, as evidenced by references to discussions and observations such as those shared by PW on social media and analyzed in articles like the one by Lopp, available here. Despite the apparent lack of awareness within the broader community, including the significant $10 billion mining sector, correcting this oversight could lead to more accurate assessments of network capabilities and challenges.