Yeah what is POD?

Already asked and answered.

So you haven't yet bought a HDTV right?  I mean they likely will be cheaper next year (and they were cheaper this year compared to last, and both were cheaper than 2 years ago, etc).

So you are still waiting?  Same thing with cellphones, laptops, gaming consoles, video games, DVD/Blurays, Video on demand, etc.

You haven't bought any of those right?  Price deflation has destroyed all those industries.  I mean just look at Apple.  Its stock is at a 52 week low because people are delaying purchasing an ipad because the KNOW there will be one cheaper/better out in less than a year.

That is just on the consumer side.  Businesses (where ROI% rules) haven't even upgraded to gigabit LANs yet.  I mean the cost is bound to keep falling by 30% or more per port every year.  What kind of idiot company would pay $20 per port today for a managed switch when Moore's law all but ensures they can get the same managed switch for $10 per port next year.  Don't even get me started on the internet.  We all know deflation has killed backbone spending.  Nobody is upgrading carrier grade switches and routers.  CISCO is almost bankrupt with all the backbone grade equipment which goes unsold every year.  The internet backbone is only going to get faster once we see some price inflation in bandwidth costs.

Well not exactly.  I for example was able to raise the stock voltage on my 5970s by modifying the BIOS.  Had the limit been enforced by ADL I would have no options.


I don't think so.  GPU-Z is useful because nobody else can do it.  The author has indicated he has absolutely no interest in ever providing a GPU-Z for Linux.  He has also indicated he will never release the source code to allow anyone else to write it.  I don't have a link as I researched it well over a year ago and when I saw that I was like "ok guess it won't be happening". Yes a very "non open" attitude but open source isn't embraced by all software developers.

My understanding is there is no reference to 21,000,000 anywhere in the code.

The "limit" is simply an enforcement of what subsidy can be included in a block (which is based on the block's height) and be considered valid by other nodes.  Since the subsidy on each block must follow a required decrease the total # of coins that will be minted can be calculated.

All values are stored as 64 bit integers in satoshis (1E-8 BTC).
The initial subsidy is  5,000,000,000  (50 BTC).

The subsidy is right shifted once for every 210,000 blocks in height.
At block height 210,000 a valid node will reduce the subsidy to 2,500,000,000  (25 BTC).  Any node that doesn't will have their block rejected by other nodes as invalid.

So at block 6,720,000 the subsidy will be right shifted from 2 satoshi to 1 satoshi.
At block 7,140,000 the subsidy will be right shifted from 1 satoshi to 0 satoshi and no more coins will be minted.
Any block after 7,140,000 with a subsidy of any amount will be considered invalid by other nodes.

If you add up all the block rewards for the first 7,140,000 blocks it adds up to 21M BTC (2,100,000,000,000,000 discrete units).

Actually unless my understanding is incorrect there will never be 21M coins.  Due to truncation of some rewards there will be exactly 2,099,999,997,690,000 satoshis mined ( 20,999,999.9769 BTC).

I think you are confusing two things.

ADL doesn't access low level components.  Not on 7000 series, not on 5000 series, not on Windows, not on Linux.
ADL simply ASKS the BIOS to make a change.  The BIOS is free to ignore that request (and routinely does). Even the return value is nearly worthless (success simply means ADL request was received by the card "please set voltage to 10,000V".  "success").

cgminer -> ADL -> GPU BIOS -> low level hardware.
ADL functionality is not materially different under Linux compared to Windows and is completely BIOS dependent.

Sadly AMD has crippled ADL access so various utilities complete bypass the ADL and directly read/write from underlying hardware.  IMHO AMD restrictive ADL defeats the entire purpose.  Since it is so painfully limited (for frack sake it doesn't even provide all GPU temp values) 3rd parties go around the entire system and write directly to the hardware which is far more dangerous than simply providing an unlocked ADL library.

Support and capabilities of those tools (GPU-Z, Afterburner, Radeonvolt, etc) are limited to what has been manually hacked together and reverse engineered as it totally bypasses all of AMD drivers and libraries.

I agree. Most of the changes to drivers has to do with gaming functionality, improved compatibility with new games, and new feature bug fixes (tesselation, hydravision, etc).  

Until we reach a point that
a) existing drivers/SDK either can't be used anymore (most likel)
b) offer better performance
c) offer improved stability
d) offer more features (expanded under/overclocking & under/overvolting, etc)

I don't see a reason to upgrade downgrade.

Priorities.  Developers have more pressing issues.  In the short term barring an explosion in tx volume the blockchain size will grow linear (maybe geometrically if tx volume continues to grow).  It simply isn't that pressing of an issue.

Still that is the power of open source. If you feel it is the #1 priority you can
* code it yourself
* pay someone else to code it
* convince others it should be a higher priority.

Oh yuck blowing heat out both ends. 

After finding no valid solution for Linux I just flashed all my cards with custom BIOS using RBE.  Granted that is not an attractive option for everyone but just pointing out an option does exist.  

*D&T is not responsible for any bricked cards as a result of flawed bios installs.

Depends on how the fraud was orchestrated.  If you wired $10M to a bank account in say Cuba due to instructions on the site w/ fake cert well the money is likely never going to be recovered. 

Of course you are ignoring the larger point.  The $10M you personally lose is nothing compared to the tens of billions of losses globally which would occur.  Verisign alone would likely be wiped out between the lawsuits, civil penalties, and loss of business.  Collectively companies would spend billions more to replace their now compromised certs with ones issues by another CA.  Billions more would be lost collectively by victims and with some victims running browsers 10 years out of date the losses would continue to trickle in for years. 

A CA which loses their root cert is bankrupt.  Totally worthless, every shareholder wiped out.  Nobody (an I mean nobody) will be buying certs from a CA which can't ensure their root cert isn't compromised.  So $10B+ is riding on Verisign's ability to prevent a compromise of the root cert.  They have a vested interest in ensuring that doesn't ever (not even once) happen.  Similarly a fund would be bankrupted if they lost their deposited BTC so they have a vested interest to ensure that doesn't happen.  If Verisign can protect a key who's compromise would result in $10B+ in losses I am sure a financial company "could" do the same for keys (no reason to only have 1 account) worth 1/1000th of that.


Well of course there is.  Just because it is difficulty it doesn't mean a thief couldn't be caught by law enforcement and forced to return stolen coins as part of sentencing agreement (10 yrs in prison conditionally on successful return of victims money vs 150 years in prison for 150 counts of wire fraud). 

Banks don't need a blockchain.  The purpose of a blockchain is to provide consensus in an anonymous decentralized environment without any central authority.

Banks using a blockchain makes about as much sense as dictatorship holding annual elections with only 1 candidate on the ballot.

Neither miner nor driver are shutting down the GPU it simply stops responding to commands.  The GPU is almost like a self cointained computing environment (think OS for math).  The host system gives the GPU a kernel to run, provides inputs, collects output, and periodically provides GPU control instructions.  Other than that the GPU operates autonomously. 

If the GPU is making errors some of those errors could manifest themselves in just computations (2+2=5) some can manifest themselves in flow control.  The first will manifest themselves are HW error.  The second can manifest themselves are an unresponsive GPU.

When a GPU crashes it often is still at full load.  So it is doing "something" just not anything useful and no longer responding to any command and control signals from the driver.  There is nothing you can do to avoid that other than not pushing GPU past their point of stability.

As for why does author of BAMT push new users towards cgminer.  He feels phoenix is superior.  Some of us disagree but he has marginalized cgminer in favor of phoenix.  That likely isn't ever going to change.

Well your options aren't just run or fight.  They are acceptance, changing the view of the voters, fighting, or running.


Your opinions on democracy being slavery are irrelevant to the point at hand.  Slavery or not you rant only reinforces the fact that Bitcoin is very much like a Democracy.

If the majority of voters (1 citizen = 1 vote) in a democracy disagree with you then your choices are limited to:
1) accept the will of the majority
2) change the opinion of the majority (voting)
3) fight (doesn't have to be violence, you can encourage revolution/change by nonviolent means)
4) run (move to somewhere outside the realm of control by the majority)

In Bitcoin (1 hash = 1 vote) if majority of hashing power disagrees with you then you choices are very similar:
1) accept the will of the majority
2) change the opinion of the majority (voting)
3) fight (destroy the network from within to make room for a new network, or force a change)
4) run (yes making a fork would be running, you risk losing anything and everything you have created & invested in this fork)

The same thing applies in a corporation (1 share = 1 vote).  Your choices are limited to:
1) accept the will of the majority
2) change the opinion of the majority (voting)
3) fight (damage the company valuation to encourage aquisition by another company)
4) run (sell your stake potentially at a loss)

That is a false correction.

IT IS A VOTE.  I can't enforce ANYTHING.  I can only vote toward one of many possible blockchains.  The block chain with the most votes (via hashing power) BECOMES the consensus.  A block only remains in the primary chain because it has been deemed the best block by a majority of the hashing power.  

Anytime two blocks are in conflict is can only be resolved via voting.

They aren't mutually exclusive.  Hashing is voting 1 hash = 1 vote.  Majority of hashing power chooses the consensus.  Not sure why that is hard for you to understand.



False.  Move to a non-democratic state.   Tada the votes of a Democracy would have no more consequences than the votes of miners have on non-Bitcoin users.

The thing you seem to be missing is your claim is:
Bitcoin consequences don't affect me because I can choose to live outside of Bitcoin (i.e. don't use Bitcoin).

How is that any different than:
Consequences of voting in the US doesn't affect me because I can choose to live outside the United States (i.e. move to Somalia).

Now you may say "I don't want to move to Somolia" to which I would say that is no different than someone not wanting to stop using Bitcoin.  Also in both instances the effect or lack of effect on you doesn't change the fact that voting is occurring.

Please tell me you are kidding.  Whole house PFC are snake oil in a box.  Completely worthless.

Low power power factor increases phantom load observed by power company (and their cost) but power meters measure watts not volt amps so low powerfactor has no cost to residential users.  High demand industrial consumers are penalized for having a poor PF but residences are not.  PF isn't even calculated for residential users.  If you wanted to you could intentionally reduce your PF to stick it to the power company (same amount of work at same amount of cost to you and higher cost to power company).

If it is just one why not just run the one "problem card" at higher memclock and save (by your calculations ... 30w)?

Of course it is voting.

I can vote to support a double spender.  I can vote to support a 51% attack.  Now I likely never would but each miner (well each informed miner, pools = uninformed miners) is voting on which block is accurate representation of the current status of the network.   Conflicting views are resolved via hashing power with the majority enforcing the consensus on the minority.

There absolutely are consequences for those votes.

You can't kill ideas.  

Napster -> Limewire -> Bit torrent.  Torrents today are 1000x more popular than Napster was.  
Killing napster was a horribly short sighted move.  Regulating and controlling it would have had a higher ROI%.

Napster's critical flaw was the central server.  When Napster imploded the obvious target for future designs was .... no central server.

If something does 51% attack Bitcoin then the "next Bitcoin" will be 51% proof/resistant.  Proof of work can be enhanced by proof of stake or even more exotic concepts like proof of reputation.

You don't kill something that isn't revolutionary.  Someone trying to kill Bitcoin simply reinforces the concept that this is something that can change the world.  People tend not to abandon world changing concepts.

Donation Sent.
tx id: 3b728fab90a603507b35acfca3cf9bd96c67ac02825793108c8bfe3963c45b87

Glad to see p2pool made it through the deadline without issue.

A minor request if I can make one. 
On the graphs page would it be possible to add "current" next to the mean value.  Even better would be a min, max, avg, and current values.


Also adding an expected daily payout after Current Payout Value would be a nice addition.
Essentially it would be (Current Payout Value)*(24 hours) / (expected block time in hours)