So you all see GLBSE listing as a wise step? I'm not real familiar with it, you'll have to gimme some pointers  . And screenshots are coming asap, it's gonna be here as the work gets here, the code I'm working in is verilog and I'm much more fond of VHDL... Thanks! I would hold off on glbse. I have plenty of negative experience with it. I'll elaborate later. I'm on my phone |
|
|
|
BFL has better Mhas/$ but worse Mhash/W. BFL should be idiot proof, and nanominer is in the development phase.
But is bfl real? |
|
|
|
It seems to me that Bitcoin is not only suffering from a lack of software developers, but also from a lack of hardware developers. The perfect savings account for me would be a small USB stick-type device, with a small screen, that with the touch of a button generates a new random key on the device. The USB stick contains no wireless communication chips - it only communicates with a host computer via USB. Whenever you want to spend money from your savings account (which is a key, or multiple keys, generated on this device) you connect the device to your computer, send a transaction to the device using some application, a message pops up on the device saying "Do you want to send X bitcoins to <address>" and if I press the OK button on the device it signs the transaction and sends it back to the host computer. The key never leaves the device; the device can only sign transactions. If we can implement a secure hardware device like this, the only way to steal the money on your savings account would be to steal the device itself. And if you have to steal the device itself, we can get no better security, if you ask me.
I believe what you're looking for is TPM Chips. I don't know much about them, but I know a lot of laptops actually come with them. However, you would need a customized TPM chip, specifically for accommodating multiple private keys, and ECDSA operations which are not usually part of the onboard encryption ops. Actually, I guess you could have one master key, and use a deterministic key generation algoritm with random access. Then the device takes the data to be signed, and a list of "key indices." Then, generating the correct keys will just be a preprocessing step of the signing algorithm. (btw, I believe the IronKey is a TPM-like device... all encryption/decryption happens on the device itself) At least, the nice thing about an offline computer is that you could technically do other stuff with it. It might be slightly less convenient for Bitcoin ops, but as long as you have it, you might as well do financial stuff on it that you would prefer to be offline, anyway. I'm sure there's other things you can do that would be appropriate for a crappy, offline laptop I believe I mentioned I do use Ironkeys to store my offline wallet. It does have its own built in encryption chip along with a lot of other cool features. I'd explain more but i'm on my phone now. If anyone has questions about it I'd be happy to try and help. |
|
|
|
|
a careful read of the article would reveal this is the author spouting off about the possible patents effect on Bitcoin, not Apple itself.
|
|
|
|
Facebook has clearly been using digital credits already, so it could be considered prior art, and may invalidate Apple's patent.
You obviously don't know how this game is played. Defending on basis of prior arts can cost millions and sometimes judges are stupid. Apple doesn't need to "win" they can just use it as a weapon even if they know they will lose. Against smaller companies they simply kill them in court. Many a company has won a patent lawsuit after 7-10 years only to go bankrupt shortly there after. Some don't even make it that far (those are the profitable ones). Against bigger companies Apple combines it with the 10,000 other patents they have and uses it as a massive assault. Filing hundreds of patent lawsuits in dozens of courts. Then Apple makes their target "an offer they can't refuse". If your legal teams says that defending is going to cost $80 million and there is a small but possible chance that you will lose 10x as much or you can licensing the patent library from Apple will only cost $10 million guess what happens? Lastly Apple will use the arsenal of patents as a weapon of mutually assured destruction. If company X files patent lawsuits against Apple then Apple files them back and both companies are looking at 9 figures in lost profits. The companies reach an agreement, do a cross licensing deal and only get stronger with increase patent arsenals to bully other companies with. * Note Apple is just an example every major tech company does the same thing. US Patent system is a downright joke. It simply allows companies to finance the destruction of their opponents directly (i.e. how much do you want to pay to kill company X). Merit doesn't and hasn't had much to do with it in last 20 or 30 years. have you ever heard of a cross complaint? it means that if medium to smaller size company feels a case by Apple has no merit, they can file a cross complaint which will afford them penalties or damages as a result of a frivolous lawsuit. yes Apple is big and formidable but its not like they can just sue everyone to oblivion by filing non meritorious lawsuits. |
|
|
|
do they diminish the power to the card? i see that some come with molex connectors.
Not the card, but they protect the mother board from "blowing a fuse" because of too much power draw. For instance if you have 4+ 7970s on one mobo you are drawing a great deal of power directly from the mother board. The molex connector can give you power directly from the power supply; then only a little power actually comes from the mobo, only the data. The very thin wires in the extenders do cause a bit more current to flow because of their added resistance. Rule of thumb is any and all dual-gpu cards with extenders should have molexes as well, and single gpu cards should be OK without them. However, the 7970 is a beast that needs more power, so it might be a good idea to have molexes, especially if you plan on overclocking. is a 6970 a "dual gpu" card? how do i tell? |
|
|
|
|
Irdial is a good read. he understands Bitcoin and is right about Flick's presentation.
|
|
|
|
The problem is that it's pretty hard to find people who know enough about all the different aspects of Bitcoin. The cryptographers don't know about economics, the economists don't know about networks, the networks guys don't know about cryptography. So each of them will essentially say the same thing "Bitcoin seems OK in my particular field, but it is surely flawed in one of the other fields".
It will take a while, but eventually enough experts will come through that will either have a working knowledge of all aspects of Bitcoin, or will associate with those who are knowledgeable in the areas they aren't. When that happens, slowly but surely, they will start to agree that Bitcoin is a good idea.
one of the things i do periodically is spend considerable time on the different subforums here. this has helped me gain a much better understanding of all the component parts of the community. recently i even started up some of my own rigs for the educational experience. i'm amazed at the commitment and intelligence of the mining community. the constant evolution and fine tuning that goes into mining is extraordinary and widespread. i can now appreciate a whole new level of devotion to what is happening here. Bitcoin is not going away. in fact, its building. edit: there is no investment i am aware that is as transparent as Bitcoin. EVERYTHING you need to evaluate it is here. contrast that with the stock, pm, UST, or bond market opacity. i actually feel safer here. |
|
|
|
Not sure why it matters,
7x 5970 would be the the max for an ATX motherboard
Around 5ghs I suppose.
Yeah sounds like you managed to hack the limit that ATI imposed on Linux of 8 GPUs for a system ... It is either 4 * 5970 or 4 * 7990 OR 8 * 5870 or 8 * 7970 to get maximum hashrate per rig but trust me that 8 * 5870 setup is impossible to do unless you live in Antartica with decent temps. Wouldn't extenders make this easy? If you ignore the fact that some machines have BIOS limitations on IRQ ranges and that kind of stuff and also that it really is hard to get Linux to run all 8 cards then good luck. Been trying to do a 8 * 5870 setup since June last year. Finally gave up and split into two 4 * 5870 rigs now. I'm no noob but unless you put them in a fridge or something the heat output in that small a space is very hard to cool down. Well I am a noob but the small amount of time I've been doing this I do know that spacing seems to make all the difference in heat buildup. Now software issues are a different thing... |
|
|
|
AFAIK, the molex connector to the motherboard is only used for grounding, in particular for the audio. You will find it even on some mATX boards with no PCIe slots. I say that because I once had such a board, and thats what the manual said, that the molex connector helped reduce audio static.
Well that may be perfectly true but in my mobo manual which has this connector ( two of them in fact ) it is specifically used to provide additional power to the PCIe slots when using triple or quad SLI / Crossfire configurations etc. I'm confused. Where does the molex connect? Mobo or psu? Power or ground? |
|
|
|
Not sure why it matters,
7x 5970 would be the the max for an ATX motherboard
Around 5ghs I suppose.
Yeah sounds like you managed to hack the limit that ATI imposed on Linux of 8 GPUs for a system ... It is either 4 * 5970 or 4 * 7990 OR 8 * 5870 or 8 * 7970 to get maximum hashrate per rig but trust me that 8 * 5870 setup is impossible to do unless you live in Antartica with decent temps. Wouldn't extenders make this easy? |
|
|
|
i have a bunch of these from my Blackberry's of the past. will they work just as well? |
|
|
|
I noticed there is no option for "print only". I am interested in purchasing this issue of the magazine, and I am willing to buy 10 of this one issue if I can get them exclusively in print for a smaller fee than print + digital, and maybe a discount for buying in bulk.
me too. |
|
|
|
With all these professional papers and lectures I've noticed a commonality. None of them promote Bitcoin itself, they promote the idea of Bitcoin. It suggests they they don't really understand the real world evolution of the network of developers, miners, enthusiasts, and what they have been through. This is a revolution. It's like saying, "Hey Arab Spring, you have a good idea, but I think you should do it this way." They can bite me.
this is how these things start off; they are grudgingly giving way, step by step. pretty soon they will understand that Bitcoin satisfies all that they recommend. |
|
|
|
A 5% inflation would allow the largest computer networks (owned by governments and large corporations) to eventually decrease the value of anyone's savings. It would make mining unprofitable and more costly to maintain the network than just printing fiat money.
he didn't really say 5% "inflation", he said 5% "spending" whatever the heck that means. |
|
|
|
A 5% inflation would allow the largest computer networks (owned by governments and large corporations) to eventually decrease the value of anyone's savings. It would make mining unprofitable and more costly to maintain the network than just printing fiat money.
but u would have to assume that the Bitcoin price would go up a corresponding 5% keeping mining profitably constant. |
|
|
|
|
i looked at my AMD driver and have APP SDK RUNTIME. hashing at 402Mh/s with my 6970's. would this improve with APP SDK 2.5?
|
|
|
|
The interesting part is for such a theft to happen, the thief needed to know that there was an accessible bitcoind on that IP. So, either it is someone close to OP who's stealing him, or there are hackers with crawlers searching for such vulnerable nodes. The latter sounds quite possible, what would mean people using bitcoind RPC should really pay attention to their access rules.
Every node on the network knows the IP addresses of every other node. More or less. And the port is well known.except rpc port which could be changed freely. -rpcport=<port> I'm changing my RPC ports to a higher area (10000+) to keep my wallets safe. It's set to allow *.*.*.* with very simple username and password. This incident(accident) is not the first in cryptocurrency area. several weeks ago somebody lost all(2850) his fairbrix. Also because of open RPC. how do u do this? |
|
|
|
|
i consider this to be significant endorsement for Bitcoin. for someone of Selgins reputation to be advocating for the USD monetary system to be based on a computerized concept such as Bitcoin is highly relevant.
he advocates a hard target for 5% spending which i don't see meshing well with Bitcoin's set supply. whats wrong with a fixed supply of money? prices will just decrease over time as the economy grows. there is nothing wrong with this. the main bullish argument for a fixed supply of money is that businesses and savers can count on their money retaining its value. i, being an inherent saver, would be more than willing to lend out my savings for additional return or even for investing in risk assets such as stock. with the exchange value of my money whipping all over the place under the current regime, i am LESS willing to speculate with my money b/c now i have to worry about exchange value along with speculative risk.
he also misunderstands the part where he says that alt cryptocurrencies can appear alongside the "original" Bitcoin which will "always survive". if an alt chain rises up that is better than Bitcoin, it will take over and eliminate Bitcoin. he should describe this market based phenomenon as a "democratic" voting process whereby the best product will win. this is a good thing. if a gov't tries to subvert the Bitcoin code to re establish an advantage for itself, the rest of the open market will reject the code and the longest chain will prevail essentially thru a democratic voting process to adopt the code or not.
all in all he's on the right track in endorsing an automated system that eliminates the "discretionary" printing press that favors crony capitalists for a system that is inherently democratic and favors no one group. this is the essence of Bitcoin and we now can see that the establishment is beginning to come around.
the Bitcoin pessimists here will say that gov'ts will fight Bitcoin and establish their own server farms to destroy it. i say that the collective will of humanity will not reject a good idea like Bitcoin but will in fact over time embrace it.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
