It still requires 100% of nodes to upgrade.  Existing nodes would see those outputs as valid.  Your modifications is less effective.  If either or both of tx have fees it would require miners to intentionally choose less fees as opposed to just including the tx with highers fees.

No miners is going to do that so the complexity and risk is for nothing.  Worse any miners that does (say both tx have no fees or they are a non-profit miner) will still leaving existing nodes vulnerable to deception from the "dead" outputs that the existing nodes don't see as dead.

Come on this is just asinine.  THEY ARE STILL SAYING 4-6 weeks for a single.
As far as "meeting shipping targets".  Not one single order has shipped in <6 weeks.  How exactly is that meeting targets?

It wasn't they were wrong about shipping back in Nov and then quickly provided more realistic estimates.

In Oct offered boards for delivery in 4-6 weeks for new orders.
In Nov (nothing had shipped and they realized their performance/power estimates were way) knowing it would require new boards guaranteed delivery on new orders in 4-6 weeks.
In Dec (nothing had shipped) still guaranteed delivery on new orders in 4-6 weeks.
In Jan (nothing had shipped and they had delays due to Chinese new year) still guaranteed delivery on new orders in 4-6 weeks.
In Feb finally shipped the first boards had huge backlog and ... still guaranteed delivery on new orders in 4-6 weeks.
In March had some delays, very early (up to Dec) boards shipped and ... still guaranteed delivery on new orders in 4-6 weeks.
In April the January orders (mostly?) shipped but they haven't even touched the Feb, March, April orders but new orders ... still guaranteed delivery on new orders in 4-6 weeks.

99% of the complaints against BFL are just stupid but defending their shipping timelines and saying they are "meeting shipping targets" is just as stupid.

You think they are on "target"?    How about a bet?  I will buy a Single today and if it ships in <6 weeks I pay you $600 (or equiv in BTC).  If it doesn't you pay me $600.  Why $600?  Well because I am 100% convinced I would get the Single for free I just won't be getting it in no 6 weeks.

No it won't.  For example 100 GH/s on mini rigs is ~5KW.  That is going to be a sizable cost electrical bill.   As the average mining farm grows larger and network grows larger the zero sum aspect comes into play.

I would say for the next 18-24 months power costs won't matter much but on a long enough time horizon they will.  Remember GPU are about 10x as efficient (in MH/W) then CPU were.  So when GPU mining first hit the network power costs really didn't matter either but all that "cheap" MH drove up difficulty.

FPGA/ASICS will do the same thing eventually.

Which don't support OpenCL.

AMD has a limit of 8 GPUs.

You didn't read the next sentence ...

Why would the new node include the orphan coinbase in the next block?

Also you are rewarding non security.  Block height = security.  Parallel blocks don't increase security.  We want miners to be competitive to minimze wasted hashing power.  You aren't throwing out work you are throwing out duplicated work.  Work which has no value to network.  As pointed out above.  If orphan rate is zero then network will simply compensate for higher difficulty.  globally miners will get same compensation and spend the same amount of energy you just have take away some of the consequence to avoid slow sloppy duplicated code.

TL/DR you would be rewarding duplicated worthless work that provides no security to the network, gives miners no compensation, and provides no incentive for miners to include orphaned blocks (other than their own) thus increasing centralization.

So the question becomes why?  Is it can OCD thing?

That is asinine.

A 1 MH/s bond should pay out 1 MH/s not 0.75 MH/s.  If you can cover your costs for 0.2 BTC per 1 MH/s then .... I don't know RAISE your price.

A 1 MH/s bond (which is really 0.75 MH/s) @ 0.2 BTC is the same thing as a REAL 1 MH/s bond @ 0.267 BTC.

1) TX times will always be 10 minutes.  The network adjusts to ensure that.
2) 51% attack isn't economical at 10TH/s.  A non-economical attack is just as viable at 20 TH/s as it is at 10 TH/s.  Now 100TH/s or 1000 TH/s that is a different story but the network won't grow that large without a vibrant economy behind it.

3) Why would Bitcoin die if miners stopped expanding the network?  That doesn't even make sense.

Your funds, your risk but please don't pretend like you are saving Bitcoin.

I would have though someone dropping 15 large on hashing hardware would have at least a rudimentary knowledge of how the network works and the economics behind it.  .... I guess not.

What happens if the wallet is unavailable.

For example lets let imagine both strongcoin and instawallet go offline tomorrow.  Operators gone nobody knows why.  Strongcoin users could use their  backup of private keys to ensure they don't lose funds.  Instawallet users are just SOL.

Now strongcoin's key backup is propreitary but imagine if all/most/some wallets understood it.  You simply select "import" give it the encryption key and are up and running.

Now I used online wallet because the case is easier to understand but the same thing could apply to standalone wallet.  A bug could prevent creating new tx.  Users risk losing funds unless they have a way to export private keys.


Most of the OP is too complicated and likely won't accompish anything but having wallets import/export keys in a uniform manner is a good feature. 

One thing you may wish to be careful about is that violating debt collection laws in the US opens YOURSELF up to significant damages even if the debt is legit.  I can't speak for other countries but US actually gives debtors pretty significant legal protection.

We are talking up to $1000 per violation.   Those damages are punitive so the debtor doesn't have to suffer any actual damages (in the legal sense) to win.   A debtor could collect more in damages then the amount of the debt.

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/credit/cre18.shtm

If you go forward you will want to become very aware of the FDCPA.  There are debtors in the US who use the FDCPA and sloppy debt collection practices by some companies to rack up hundreds of violations and then sue debt collection agencies for six figures.   You will definately want to form an LLC or Corporation to protect your personal assets.

"Not paying a peer loan is still considered theft."
This is one example.  Something as simple as this statement (even made casually) while attempting to collect a debt that would be a violation of the FDCPA.  Not paying a debt isn't theft under US law.   Failing to pay a debt is a contract dispute not a criminal matter.  Indicating it is theft is a "false or misleading representation" regarding the legal status of the debt (see section 807).

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/credit/cre27.pdf

That is just one example of the hundreds of regs which you could find yourself in violation of.    Debt collection agencies spend a significant amount of money training collector, and continually monitoring/coaching/evaluating collectors to protect the company from damages.  Good agencies know how to bend the rules without breaking them.

Now will any of your Bitcoin debtors ever decide to press you for violating the FDCPA? Probably not but you should be aware of the risk.  It would be an interesting court case.

Well it was your example.  Mining isn't that big.  GPU market in long run will absorb sell off just fine.  

The discrete GPU market is $20B a year (note that excludes integrated and hybrid GPU/CPU products).  

Lets say all 10TH/s are GPUs (not a single CPU miner, no FPGA, no botnets, etc).  
Lets use an average of $0.50 per MH.  
That's ~$5M in GPUs used for mining.  Hell lets double that and say ~$10M in GPUs are used in mining world wide.

That is out of a market that moves $20B in product annually.   
Now lets pretend they were all purchased in one year.

Under the most unrealistic of scenarios GPU used for mining are still <1% of global market. 

Let me help you ...

"a POTENTIAL solution would be a kill or fill value".

Nobody except you claimed "x" exists.

LOLZ.  Yup GPU would be worthless.  $10 you sure you don't want to retract that?  A 5970 which can still play just about any game out there at high resolution will be selling for $10?  A 7970 which is current the #2 gamer card will be selling for $10?  No gamer on the planet would be willing to buy one for say $400?  or $350? or hell $300?

answer was already given

1180 - 150 = 1030.  975 is too low so it resets to stock.


cgminer also has a mem-diff parameter.  You can set it to 150, set no memclock and cgminer will always set memclock to core clock - memdiff.
I'll have to keep playing around with it.

I have found Intensity 8, 1 thread to work well for 5970. <0.2% DOA and <5% orphan without too much of a hit in throughput.  I did try Inensity 8 and Intensity 7 w/ 2 threads and got worse results.  Intensity 9, 1 thread also worked but had a higher stale rate.  There is some variance in stales so I opted for the I:8, T:1 instead.  I:9, T:2 was downright horrible with stales, 10%+.

+1.  Something is wrong somewhere.  Even if AC/DC loss was 0 and MB/CPU was 50W.  We are talking <130W per 6990? 

They were mined at the start of v2.  Still I am done.  You think it is a good investment so did hundreds of people before you who were burned.  Good luck.

Well like I said I am sure the people who mined millions in a span of weeks will love you for taking worthless coins off their hands.

Have fun.

1) They are only unspendable until the code changes and a single person can force any changes to the code he wants.

2) Even if #1 wasn't true the "unspendable" coins are transfered to the CDF every even block where they are most certainly spendable once again by the same person.

subbbed.  should be interesting but I am afraid it will end up like this ...