Has there been any updates to the shipping timetable? I'm recently BFL free (except a monarch pre-order.....) and onto bitfury based replacements :-) so hoping my mining does not have a huge down time :-)
Yeah I would like an update too. I'm almost thinking of bailing. I may want to buy your boards. |
|
|
|
Hope you PPS folks have been enjoying yourselves the past day.
I guess so, 0.5BTC per day since I started and nothing has changed, which is good in a way. I run at 550GH/s. Anybody willing to be open and share a normal weekly average earnings from PPLNS at around 550GH/s? I've been debating a switch to PPLNS, but read that it's only about 5% better in the long run, whatever the long run means. Thanks. About 5.3 BTC since Nov 1 running about 575-600GH/s But, with this last enormous difficulty jump and some bad pool luck the last few days, I don't think I will see that being sustained for the next week. ;-( PPS is great until the pool goes on a lucky streak, then you start kicking yourself. I stick with PPLNS 'cuz I like the gambling feel of it. I'm at around 700 GH/s and I get about .17 btc per block, so I think at this time PPS breaks even with PPLNS at somewhere between 3-4 blocks per day. (*just remember that as soon as you switch that will be the day we find 8 blocks and then you'll be crying - at least that's what always happens to me.  *sidenote edit* has anyone noticed the graph of the estimated network hashrate? looks like we aren't the only ones having bad luck... also looks like we should see a big bounce soon, send some positive thoughts.  I think this would be a crazy time to switch to PPS. After a long drought we are due for some make-up blocks. After a really good run is probably the best time to switch. But I'm with you on the whole gambling feel. The odds even it all out but it still kind of feels like gambling. Plus over the longer term I think that 5% cost adds up. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah if you are going ballistic get frames.
I wish I could but I'm running out of amps.
|
|
|
|
I just received two new h-boards, V1.2 as I have a V1 M-board.
Both cards are running at 33-34 Gh/s out of the box.
I measured the R02F resistor and both boards read 2.1KOhm.
My other boards read 1.3KOhm.
Can I still attempt to mod the two new boards? If so, I don't want to move them much because they are already running high. But do have very good cooling, 4 fans on 6 cards.
Thoughts? Input from the wise men?
Yes, you can pencil mod them and they respond as well as the previous boards, do not go as low tough. I've found that any board can take 1.72 and ones with very good cooling (3 fans per bank and heatsinks) can go as low as 1.63KOhm. I'd try to lower the resistance by 0.05KOhm at a step and see how the cards respond. Makes sense. Thanks guys. |
|
|
|
|
Hope you PPS folks have been enjoying yourselves the past day.
|
|
|
|
|
Either the OP does not know how to price or he really let costs get away on this one. That would be bad. But I'm not a tech guy and could not price out all that went into it.
|
|
|
|
Nah, I don't know, guys.. The point of an offline wallet is that the privkeys nor the wallet password is never present on the online computer. Sure, you can encrypt the wallet once again with truecrypt, ssl or rar. But then, would you send someone to the battlefield with two bullet-proof vests? Should he use two different passwords? So he has a greater risk of mixing them up or forgetting one? Or shall he use the same password twice, so the "outer" encryption is the only one needed to break? So, the internal wallet-encryption is either secure enough, or it is not. And with the encryption set to need lots of ram (against GPU-bruteforcing), and knowing Alans level of quality-of-work, I lean out of the window to say that shall be enough. BUT, don't forget you add other risks by having a plain (encrypted) wallet visible: People see it's a wallet (filename and contents), and they even see the public keys. This might, in a worst case scenario, lead to attacks (computational or physical) which wouldn't happen if the wallet was encrypted in "diary.rar". ############### Alan, any thoughts on that? I have a general wallet question, which is partly about BIP32, and partly how Armory will implement it.
1) As I understand it, a seed creates a tree, where each branch itself may form a new branch or whole tree, so to speak. With that, will Armory allow to create multiple "wallets" from one single seed?
Right now I use several wallets, for bookkeeping and not mixing up inputs/outputs of different categories. So it would be important that change addresses and inputs only mix within one "wallet" or "wallettree" or whatever it would be called.
With security in mind:
2) From knowing the "public key seed" (or similar) and one single private key, all private keys may be reconstructed. I guess from the "public key seed" and one public address all public addresses may be reconstructed as well then.
Is there anything I have to take care of in reality? As long as I only use regular Armory functions (sending and receiving) and don't export stuff and don't share my wallet file, nothing evil should happen? Is there anything to extract from the wallet file without knowing the encryption password?
3) I.e., is the "public key seed" encrypted too?
And, finally:
4) In case I can haz several "wallets" in one file, from one seed: Can I have several, different passwords for each "wallet"?
To make sense of all this:
Imagine I now have three wallets. One is my unencrypted playmoney, one is my regular funds, one is my long-term savings (with watch-only wallet), one is funds I manage for mom and grandpa. I don't want to lose all of those in case a keylogger steals my one password. I don't want my long-term savings on my online computer altogether.
Will I be able to have all this from one seed, with the new wallet format?
This would be a huge selling point for me, and differentiate Armory even more as a pro wallet, focusing on security and advanced features.
Ente
Ente Not to be a d$%k but you said "So, the internal wallet-encryption is either secure enough, or it is not." That really does not make sense to me. A lot of people like to say your data is "secure" but really it's only secure because no one has found a way around it YET. Then one day we hear on the news that all our credit card numbers are stolen. At that point it went from "secure enough" to "not." And it changed in a flash. I would not want to be the mark of someone far smarter and depraved than me when they obsolete the word secure for my thumb drive. |
|
|
|
|
I have used the HP 1000w PSU's with out incident or failure for months.
|
|
|
|
|
The full set up is a little flimsy due to the weight. But if you keep it on a large flat surface with psu backed up to a wall or board, it's fairly secure.
|
|
|
|
can someone post a pic of how they connected their psu to the mainboard. Looked all over and can't figure this out. I have the paperclip jumper on psu working so it will provide power but I don't know how to connect psu to the main bitfury board.
It's in the OP. But here are some shots. I have a small switch instead of a paperclip. They are about $9 at Robotshop. http://imgur.com/a/mXpyt |
|
|
|
|
I just received two new h-boards, V1.2 as I have a V1 M-board.
Both cards are running at 33-34 Gh/s out of the box.
I measured the R02F resistor and both boards read 2.1KOhm.
My other boards read 1.3KOhm.
Can I still attempt to mod the two new boards? If so, I don't want to move them much because they are already running high. But do have very good cooling, 4 fans on 6 cards.
Thoughts? Input from the wise men?
|
|
|
|
|
Cost: $292.00
Mining revenue in one year: $52.32
Joke.
|
|
|
|
Question - I am suppose to receive a second EOL board tomorrow. How do order them on the M-board.
The higher hashing one second to the end and then the lower one at the end of the line? Does it matter?
I don't want any screw ups as I'm adding two more regular h-boards on top of this.
EOL cards must be at the end of a bank, because no cards after them (even other EOL cards) will be seen. Do you have a single-bank v1 M-board, or a 4-bank v2/v3? I have one of the first ones shipped...order #12. It's V1 m-board but I thought it had four banks. Maybe not. Right now I have 4 cards and the EOL. EOL last. |
|
|
|
|
Question - I am suppose to receive a second EOL board tomorrow. How do order them on the M-board.
The higher hashing one second to the end and then the lower one at the end of the line? Does it matter?
I don't want any screw ups as I'm adding two more regular h-boards on top of this.
|
|
|
|
|
Question - I am suppose to receive a second EOL board today. How do order them on the M-board.
The higher hashing one first and then the lower one at the end of the line? Does it matter?
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your patience with me. I did figure that out.
I used to run BE's on this machine and decided to clean up all the unused Com Ports and USB hubs listed in the Device Mgr.
I was hoping to be able to get more than 13 Nano's to run. I have 20 right now.
But now Bfgminer won't start. It locks up. I think it has something to do with the fact that despite reinstalling all the Nano's I don't have any COM ports listed in the Device Mgr. They are just gone. Not even a heading that says "Ports"
Any idea how I get that back?
|
|
|
|
|
Ahhhhh...... .bat
Needs to be in .conf huh?
Kind of like instructions I suppose.
Thx
|
|
|
|
|
Well you had promise, but not at that price. As a reseller I would have bought 50. But if my cost is $260, I make more money selling my clients (2) 2.5 Gh/s USB miners. The Nano Fury cost about $60 and sells for $115. I sure as hell can't sell this thing for $360 when the same hash speed can be bought for $230.
As the hash speed gets higher you are suppose to REDUCE the cost per Gh/s to your Competitors. Not INCREASE it.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
