By then we'll be Leet members.   

lightfoot has purchased us an SP20 as promised in exchange for our non-functioning Monarchs.  Thanks lightfoot!

I like my SP20 and am appreciate of Spondoolies for sending me one, so I decided to place an order to buy another one. 

YES!

Order placed.   

Anyone interested in owning this piece of Bitcoin mining history?  It's quiet, efficient, and commemorates one of the biggest goxxings to date.  PM me.

(recycling this thread instead of starting a new one and cluttering the sales forum)

I've sold our Prisma for 1.37 BTC.  This is 0.02 BTC less than we would get by returning it through ASICMINER, but I think it's a good trade off in order to get our BTC up front and this way the cooler will get used by someone instead of collecting dust. 

https://blockchain.info/tx/c9533718f38165ff9b05628c83ec8f586459492c51759a586c56af2b65a3b9c9

How does 0.06 BTC and you pay shipping sound? I should mention it does not come with the power cable. You would need to buy a compatible one.

Sold for 1.37 BTC.

I still have a controller if anyone wants one.  I'm open to any offer.

In an effort to sweeten this deal even further and bring these coins to life, I'm going to throw in both our 1g silver collector coins with each pre-order!

Reserve your spot for $100 or pay the full $400 now and you will receive:

• 5oz .999 Silver Minted 5 Seat Coin
• 1oz .999 Silver Minted 1 Seat Coin
• 1g .999 Silver NastyFans Coin
• 1g .999 Silver NastyPool Coin
• Stay Nasty T-Shirt

Update from Alpha Technologies on our 250MH/s scrypt miner order.


The actual message was quite a bit longer and showed pictures of a working miner, but the bottom line is that they will be shipping soon.

Lightfoot has been unable to restore full functionality to our Monarchs and wants to do some "destructive testing" because it is "more fun anyway."    For this reason, he has offered to purchase us a Spondoolies SP20 in exchange for taking ownership of the 2-700GH/s and 1-300GH/s Monarchs that are currently in his possession.  Before agreeing, I wanted to give fans an opportunity to chime in their opinions on this offer.

If you are unfamiliar with Spondoolies, they recently gave me a SP20 to review.  You can read my review of it here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=901021.0

Lightfoot is going above and beyond what was expected here.  He's doing a great thing for NastyMining and I love it when community members step up to help support the project.

I haven't had it lock up on me at all since I got it. They are noisy though, like a hairdryer.  With ASICMINER offering to buy back boards at the same price I am asking, if there were any problems you could send the boards back for a full refund and keep the fan/cooler.

Great job so far.  I've been really impressed with how quickly the NastyPoP Ticker updates for new miners.  I can't wait to start seeing some more NastyPool stats added to the nasty.json feed.

Settings?  I didn't go below 0.62 volts with a 0.65 volt maximum. (looking now to the philipma1957 review)

I've got an ASICMINER PRISMA I'm willing to sell.  All 4 boards are working and I have both types of controllers.

I'm looking to get the price that ASICMINER would pay for compensation.  I am doing this because 1) I don't need to keep the fan/heatsinks and 2) I want to receive payment now as opposed to shipping back the boards and waiting for compensation.


So I'm looking for 1.459 BTC + actual shipping cost (I'll throw in the uart controllers free).  PM me to make it yours.

Me too.  Their P2Pool performance is impressive as well.

I don't have any questions about his lack of transparency.  I fully understand what he is doing.  He can chime in on why he decided to test Standard P2Pool payouts from a lower latency node if he wants to explain why he decided to handicap NastyPoP payouts for this test.  That would be relevant.



The NastyPoP software was developed by nonnakip.  It is not mine.  However, the actual count of hashes is published in the NastyPoP Standings page and updated every 5 minutes as well as the payouts being public record.  That is pretty transparent.  If you feel we aren't being honest, you can count your hashes and check the public payout records to make sure everything is being reported accurately.  Giving away the code (it's a completely separate program written in C that runs NastyFans.org, most P2Pool users wouldn't know what they were looking at or how to integrate it with their node anyway) does not equal transparency, as there is no guarantee that we would actually be using the same code we gave out anyway.  Publishing the number of hashes so users can confirm and making our overall hashrate and payouts public via P2Pool is more transparent than handing out code that can't be confirmed is identical to what we are using in my opinion.  With all the efforts that are made to be transparent (look at all the automated statistics in my NastyMining thread, my free iOS App, naypalm's 3rd party coin analyzer, and how nonnakip improved upon P2Pool's hashrate estimate and charts, not to mention the wealth of statistics available to members at NastyFans.org), I am disappointed to be accused of not being transparent.



I know we are doing great things and we will continue to do so for a long time.  Thank you for the kind words.

I asked him to do a fair test and even told him how it could be done with total transparency. When he gave the information that showed their was no transparency and the numbers weren't matching up to what P2Pool was reporting for his hashrate, he says his miner was lucky. While having incredible luck for months is a possibility, that isn't my issue with this test. Although, standing behind a lack of transparency for no legitimate reason and claiming a lucky streak does leave a bad taste in my mouth. Especially when there's a transparent and fair method to test readily available. I don't care about falling out with anyone. I care about accurate, transparent, and fair results when running a test.

I was calling him out because his test is flawed and not a representation of NastyPoP vs Standard P2Pool. He is testing a payout method yet is using different nodes with drastically different latency and claiming that it's an accurate portrayal of NastyPoP vs Standard P2Pool, which it is not. Someone in another location closer to our node doing his same test and using his same nodes would see the opposite results. That's why this is a joke. OP is aware of the latency issue, but ignores it for some reason even though it could easily be corrected. Why purposely run a flawed test when it's been pointed out that the way you're doing it is flawed and has no transparency is the question you should be asking. Especially when a transparent method with the same latency is available...

Thank you for the opportunity.