I think you can look at some of the forum posts that have order and delivery history to help get some data. Interesting question.
I'm curious why you are curious
I have convinced myself that network hashrate is essentially irrelevant for my understanding of mining economy. What I want to know is the history of total mining investment: hashing power expressed in USD (equipment cost), and hashing efficiency in electricity USD/day. Many things could be inferred from such estimates, for example how expected ROI has evolved over time. I'm afraid you are right: the only way to get some estimates would be to skim through old advertisements. That's lots of work for someone who is simply curious. |
|
|
|
I think many of these threads can be recycled very nicely.
I think most of this forum can be automated. |
|
|
|
|
Many governments are already actively controling the traffic (not just listening, which is what pretty much every government is doing). Is there any example of a country where Bitcoin has technical problems due to control and regulation? It works in China, Russia, Thailand, the U.S., U.K. So, while you may dislike this story for ideological reasons, there is no direct threat to Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
|
Also, slightly off-topic: since you say you only see eight connections, your client is not listening for new connections. Try enabling uPnP on your router and in the client, or manually forward port 8333 from your router to your machine. Note, you should asign a static LAN IP to your machine in the case of manual forward.
|
|
|
|
Would it hurt to start asking shareholders to submit their claims to you now? Perhaps it would turn out that no p2p trades are claimed. Even if they are claimed, both seller and buyer would need to claim their part, and it would all need to add up in your book.
Let's give it a try Shareholders: If you held BAKEWELL shares at the time the glbse went down, please PM me any information you have regarding your holdings. Have you received the claims from everyone? Anyone missing? |
|
|
|
BFL did that to Avalon.
FTFY Avalon was originally supposed to sell their Pre-orders for 1299, and later sell their hardware for 1999. They could get away with this because they were 50% faster than BFL, and over 2x as fast as the bASIC. When BFL upped their specs (due to the bASIC upping theirs), Avalon had to lower their price to remain competitive. ...and then we had to read this thread. So, basically, everyone is screwed. |
|
|
|
Now, you could get almost free power if you tied your mining rig into your ECU. While accelerating you wouldn't actively hash but would just keep valid work queued up. As soon as you tap the brake, start hashing. The increased draw on the alternator would act as a form of really expensive engine braking and would save wear on your brake pads.
Once a rally starts on the market, massive pileups follow on highways... All miners hitting brakes suddenly  Seriously, we are onto something here... A hashing unit can be used whenever there is lots power to be dissipated quickly, from vehicular brakes to cut-back protection in high voltage power supplies... |
|
|
|
If you can download the source and compile it, I will be amazed, it isn't easily stuff. But of course it is just rumors, and stuff, you do what you want, I personal stopped using truecrypt on extremely sensitive data, more cause the Identities of these programmer(s) have never been release and that never sits well with me.
You made me do some more learning, and you are right. It is a little bit shady. It'd be nice if at least they specified details of their compiler, so people can confirm independantly that provided executables come from the provided source code. |
|
|
|
EDIT: Now if you're talking about running it on a car that is moving, I'd say the electricity is virtually free.
I'd say no way it is free. You put a load on the generator, it adds mechanical load to the system, leading to higher consumption of fuel. In case of a hybrid, you could say it's cheap because some of it comes from regenerative braking, but this would require some tweaking of the control systems to ensure optimal capture of energy for this additional load. |
|
|
|
Can a car battery provide 120W constantly? Won't that burn out your alternator?
Quite easily. Your typical alternator can push out 50 amps @ 14v, so 700w. Certainly, some of that is used for other electrical items (lights being a big user), but a large part of that amperage goes unused. It needs the extra overhead to be able to recharge batteries drained while the car is off, so using that overhead for other purposes is entirely possible. Any reliable information on how much a kWh costs in a running car? |
|
|
|
Well heck, by that criteria BFL is fine, too... since we've always maintained that we would would target October but it would be as late as December (hence the January 1st refund policy, which has been there since day one.)
Thanks for the confirmation that BFL is on target timeframe wise as well, I appreciate it!
You said you "hoped" the chips would be arriving by now. Any update on that? One would think you'd have a tracking number or something... Yes, the CYA January 1st has been there since the beginning. One little detail, buried under the pile of promises and hints that implied shipping in October, then November, then December. Regardless of who says what, the fact is that BFL profited from these failed statements by locking in a huge chunk of miners' investment funds against their competitors. A rather convenient failure. |
|
|
|
@niko. So how much money does a potential attacker have available to them? How many times stronger is the network than it needs to be?
I see your point. As I said above, the incentive to disrupt the network depends on how disruptive the network is to the establishment. At the same time, network security (in terms of total mining investment) also increases as the Bitcoin economy grows, and presumably becomes more disruptive for potential attackers. Historically, smart people - those in the establishment included - are more likely to embrace disruptive yet promising technologies than to try to supress them. Therefore, I don't think we should try to spend time quantifying the factors you brought up. If Bitcoin is truly useful, it will continue to grow strong. Another important question is - what would you do with the "network security index" (or whatever we call it), even if we managed to define it and calculate it? What if you felt it was too low? |
|
|
|
I pledge $0 cause True Crypt is getting shadier and shadier.
Please explain. There are rumors floating around that the developer(s) have left big backdoors in the software, and that they are a honeypot. *Tin Foil Hats ON* Anyone can review the code, build their own executables, and compare them to what is offered. The unspecified rumors you are referring to are not very sensible. In fact, you referring to them is not sensible. No offense. It would be much easier and effective to modify downloads of truecrypt en route to your target, or to compromise their system in some other way, then to install backdoor in genuine tc installers. |
|
|
|
I think you ask an important question Yogi, but I agree with Niko's approach. Looking at it in dollar terms makes more sense and will remain correct in the future. Thanks for the calculations, Niko, I was looking for something similar. 10-50 million is a lot of money for small-timers, but if paypal or visa or... would feel really threatened by bitcoin, it seems to me that they could quite easily spend this kind of money. Not sure just how devastating a 51% attack would be to the bitcoin project though. Would it be lights out, or just a (big) bump in the road? Also, how easy would it be to perform a 51% attack anonymously? Would it be possible to pinpoint the origin of the attack, and follow the money to the culprit? I have absolutely no idea about these things  . It doesn't mater if you want to measure it in dollars or terraFLOPS. To get the relative strength you still need to compare it to something. In this case we would have to ask, what is the maximum amount of money a single entity is prepared to spend in order to attack the network. This might be a harder value to determine. To get an idea about what it takes to build a house, I don't need to compare it to building a yacht. I'd say a useful metric is money in that case, and doubly so in case of Bitcoin. Ten to fifty million USD to outcompete honest miners. One of great things about Bitcoin is that the price of a "51%" disruption is directly related to the size of Bitcoin economy, which in turn is related to the level, of disruption it causes to old-school banks and governments. Therefore, I am only concerned as much as these old-school entities are forward-thinking. Even then, 51% attack would really not be that big of a deal. While payments may be temporarilly disrupted, coins would remain safe. |
|
|
|
The peer-to-peer network is more vulnerable to low level network attack, than the ever-discussed 51% hashing attack.
You can help, by running a full node that accepts incoming connections.
I am not suggesting a 51% attack is the greatest threat to bitcoin, quite the opposite in fact. A redundancy of 29 is overly redundant a wasteful. I would sleep well at night if it only had a redundancy of 8. What do you think a good level of redundancy would be? What redundancy give us is a means of judging relative computational capacity. You could use redundancy to judge the relative growth or contraction of computation strength over time without having to cancel out the effect of Moors Law. How close are we to a low level network attack, and how are you calculating that? @hazek. Why have you moved this post to mining? It's about judging bitcoins relative computational strength not mining. As I explained above, your concept of redundancy is based on an arbitrarily chosen value of "external power". Therefore, it is not a a particularly useful measure of anything. |
|
|
|
New to the forum so thought I'd introduce myself, I've been buying and selling bit-coins locally for about a year now on Local Bitcoins. I've honestly only ever done it as a hobby hoping that Btc price would explode. After a year I now have a large excess of coins and more people are selling me coins then purchasing so it has gotten to the point where I am turning down a large number of trades as its coming out of my own pocket to be constantly buying coins.
I was told by a fellow buyer/seller to come to the forum and I would be able to find reputable sellers to sell bitcoins too, I'm looking for cash options as I prefer anonymity.
Any tips or suggestions would be much appreciated!
-Nestle
Why don't you adjust your price then and sell them locally, just the way you say you've been buying them? |
|
|
|
The peer-to-peer network is more vulnerable to low level network attack, than the ever-discussed 51% hashing attack.
You can help, by running a full node that accepts incoming connections.
this * 1000
Oh, why not introduce some incentives to encourage running a full node then? If not, then won't the number of full nodes just continue to decrease as the blockchain grows? Could you comment on the incentives to maintain full nodes described here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_StakeI would appreciate more feedback. I have been running a full node, and will continue to do so. I don't need any monetary incentive, and obviously I am not alone. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin has not hit critical mass. It may never given how much bad press bitcoin has gotten. Having merchant stop using bitcoin is a bad sign. Not sure if others have stopped.
One of the hotels that made a news last year when they announced they were accepting btc: I spoke recently with Kim, who told me the only Bitcoin transaction he handled was the one that the New Yorkerwriter, Joshua Davis, insisted on using to pay for his stay at the Howard Johnson.And, Kim said, it was a hassle.Davis first transferred regular cash to one of the Bitcoin exchanges. He then transferred the Bitcoins to Kim, who in turn had to exchange them once more into dollars before he could transfer them to the hotel’s deposit account.“I don’t even care about Bitcoin anymore,” Kim says. Davis “might as well have given me his credit card information; it would have been way simpler."
http://www.americanbanker.com/bankthink/The-Good-Wife-Bitcoin-for-Dummies-1045987-1.htmlThings have changed, though. For those business owners who prefer pure fiat, there are Paysius and BitPay and MtGox merchant solutions to automatically and seemlessly accept bitcoin payments and get USD in their bank accounts. Irreversible, jnlike cc. Cheaper. Better. In fact, I always argue that we shouldn't even tell these kinds of merchants they should start "accepting bitcoins" - they should start accepting payments through the Bitcoin network. There is Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, Interac, Dwolla, and there is Bitcoin, too. Open source, extremely low cost, extremely secure. Don't even mention coins, wallets, exchanges, any of that. |
|
|
|
I did not receive any reply to my April inquiry.
I'm not sure who to ask again.
I herein pledge 30$ worth of BTC to TrueCrypt if they make it visible as a donation option. Anyone willing to pool their donations ?
I pledge $12. I use truecrypt, and would love to donate, but having to fill out PayPal forms with all the information, then having to remember to pay off my credit card is just too much when I can simply send a coin from my wallet in three clicks. They could have my coins, or they could have them automatically converted to usd and deposited to their bank account via Paysius or BitPay. I don't understand why they are so irresponsive. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
