|
Interested. Do you have to short pins A1 and B17 to use x1 to x16 risers?
Have any CPUs/RAM to throw in with them?
|
|
|
|
Anyone else notice a payment go out for .00000001 BTC? I'm assuming it's coming from here, since I don't use that addy for anything else.
Was wondering when someone was going to mention this... Someone sent all Middlecoin users 2 miniscule transactions earlier today. Check the two send addresses, there's a built in Olympic message...  Did you send them out? What is the Olympic message? Is .00000001 the percentage of athletes happy with their hotel accommodations?  Nope wasn't me. Who knows, it may have been h2o. Or maybe Sean White since he was bored after messing up the half pipe. Here are the transactions. The message is in the Send Address (Enjoy Sochi) 1Enjoy1C4bYBr3tN4sMKxvvJDqG8NkdR4Z Today 01:55:26 Unconfirmed Transaction! 0.00000001 BTC 1SochiWwFFySPjQoi2biVftXn8NRPCSQC Today 00:31:17 Unconfirmed Transaction! 0.00000001 BTC That's really cool. I didn't get any but I just switched addresses that I used for the pool so that might have something to do with it. Man, I was bummed about the half-pipe. Everyone was slipping around. Fair competition but I wanna see them go nuts. Hard to do in those conditions  |
|
|
|
Anyone else notice a payment go out for .00000001 BTC? I'm assuming it's coming from here, since I don't use that addy for anything else.
Was wondering when someone was going to mention this... Someone sent all Middlecoin users 2 miniscule transactions earlier today. Check the two send addresses, there's a built in Olympic message... Did you send them out? What is the Olympic message? Is .00000001 the percentage of athletes happy with their hotel accommodations? |
|
|
|
Give me the specs and I can build it and ship it tomorrow  |
|
|
|
Price too low to be true?
Pretty much. Above post says it's a scam, too. Beware! |
|
|
|
Take a round that only has a few submitted shares before it is solved. On at least one of the pools I mine against, if you didn't submit any shares in a given round, regardless of your PPLNS shares, you get zilch, zero, nada. If you submit even 1 share, you get your full PLNS value, which generally nets a huge payout on really short rounds.
So it evens out in the end... But I only mine for about 12-15 minutes on any given server. I tested Middlecoin for a few minutes and it was giving me like soooo many rejects. Bumps that yo. Ah, the casual drive-by Sunday miner technique. Yes, it appears ineffective against variance, but remember that if 100 people did what you did, one of them would get a bigger payout. About the reject, does it matter if everyone else has the same rejects? Someone who understands mining and difficulty. This is so rare to see in this thread. <3 <3 <3 |
|
|
|
Take a round that only has a few submitted shares before it is solved. On at least one of the pools I mine against, if you didn't submit any shares in a given round, regardless of your PPLNS shares, you get zilch, zero, nada. If you submit even 1 share, you get your full PLNS value, which generally nets a huge payout on really short rounds.
So it evens out in the end... But I only mine for about 12-15 minutes on any given server. I tested Middlecoin for a few minutes and it was giving me like soooo many rejects. Bumps that yo. |
|
|
|
Looks great. Seems to be a bit taller than others i've seen. Maybe an issue for those with smaller 6-10 inch risers
Already addressed that in the OP. I'll be building the stackable prototype tomorrow and it will be 4-6" shorter, but will have pegs on the bottom to stack with. I'll probably not be lazy and use the drill press to pre-drill the holes, so that I can switch my current wooden behemoth into it for a photoshoot. The weather sucked today so I did a quick job on this unstackable prototype. I'll be ordering samples for the designs this week after I go over the specifications and prepare the parts for labeling and packaging. Shipping should be pretty affordable as they don't weigh too much. I also need to build a few more rigs so that i can test the stability of them when they are stacked so I can come up with a recommendation for how high they can go. The final dimensions will be more specific and they will have well detailed pictures. |
|
|
|
I finished up my first prototype for an aluminum case and have done pricing analysis for both a stackable and a non-stackable version. These are the pictures of the prototype, but there will be a few slight changes as I made it just a little bit too tall. They will be predrilled for Motherboard, PSU, and GPU mounting. Both version will support up to 6 GPUs. Dimensions for the unstackable version: 24x10x8 Dimensions for the stackable version: 24x10x8 Pricing is not set in stone, but will likely be $169 for the nonstackable, and $199 for the stackable. (edited: I miscalculated the cost of the aluminum company precutting the aluminum. I may reduce costs by building a proper workshop and doing it myself.)I'm in talks with the aluminum company about reducing the costs by getting a discount on a large order. Not really looking to sell this as a pre-order, but if there is a large enough interest then I might change my mind on that to reduce costs further and hopefully lower the price. The pictures below are just for the non-stackable prototype. These will be ready to ship within 7-10 days. Have the aluminum for 1-2 units right now, with another order on the way. Out of aluminum. Waiting for a large shipment this week. Going to put up a site to take custom orders and post some more detailed pictures.    |
|
|
|
The .plan is for H2O to count each share equally, but we're not there yet (unless I missed the memo).
Given the fast switching, I was wondering whether having more cards with a lower hashrate would be more advantageous than having less but faster ones, for the same total hashrate. I'd love to see some empirical data.
I really don't understand this line of thinking... 1MH/s = 1MH/s = 1MH/s Doesn't matter if you are using 2 cards or 200... you are still submitting the same amount of hashes that has the same percentage of being within the target difficulty to submit a share or solve a block. |
|
|
|
Yes it is now closed. Thanks again for all of the entries |
|
|
|
Assembled, now the fun begins!  Looks good! Maybe I'll get mine soon  |
|
|
|
If you need it to be 4:1 or even 5:1 - it's true. It is not feasible. The question is just: What do you need the logo for? If your goal is to have it as small as possible or fit in any layout - then it would of course be best if it would be only one line. Like many people did. If that's not required it doesn't matter.
It's for a website, and I will probably get stickers made with the logo to apply to the product I am making. Anyways, I think this topic is about to be closed as I am talking with gjeric right now about purchasing his design. Thanks for all of the submissions! |
|
|
|
Good luck everyone.
I like gjeric approach on the original concept, but it is quite hard to fill the negative space with that one, that's why I decided to take a different approach.
The target could be more translucent and in the background of the lettering to condense it more and elongate it... but you will end up with the actual shape covering or being covered by the text, and that world defeat the purpose of it being in there in the first place. There might be some clever way to make it work, I have a couple of years working as a designer and personally I just can't see it working like that. Right on. I have no idea. Lol. Like I said I'm not a graphic designer. Just made a quick sketch. Lots of good work here but I shouldn't have included my sketch because too many people tried to make it work when it's not feasible. |
|
|
|
Another one, this will better fit 4:1 or 5:1  Pretty sure this going to be the winner. Love it! The guy doing the web design has a few ideas he is going to float my way too but this one is great! |
|
|
|
Good luck everyone.
I like gjeric approach on the original concept, but it is quite hard to fill the negative space with that one, that's why I decided to take a different approach.
The target could be more translucent and in the background of the lettering to condense it more and elongate it... |
|
|
|
|
Hey, I'll take that 4 port off your hands.
Was about to run up to Fry's and get one, but I can wait a few days. I'm in Texas, too, so I should get it pretty quick.
Where should I send the coin?
|
|
|
|
Target pointing at coin  Ohhhhh I like this one! Can you make it a little more elongated? Looking for a 4:1 or 5:1 ratio on width:height. |
|
|
|
Ah now the good old insults, eh?
Think I finally understand why h2o completely stopped visiting this thread. Bye.
Yeah, it's because of all of the ignorant people like yourself that think changing the difficulty will solve whatever problems they are having. Learn what difficulty is before complaining about it, dummy. |
|
|
|
You expect the pool operator to change the difficulty on his pool just so you can test something that everyone can guarantee you is not causing your system to crash?
No I don't, and I did not say anything like that. Read my post again. Of cource chances are you simply misunderstood because you're not native english speaker like me. Didn't say ANYTHING like that... sure... ur native enrish is vurry g00d
How the hell am I supposed to know? Maybe if h2o changed it I'd have the possibility to test it.
-snip-
Besides, I don't even understand how it works. In cgminer's window, there are like 500 different difficulties showing at the same time.
Yeah... sounds like you are just another idiot on this pool that thinks he knows more than he does. Just go mine on a lower difficulty pool since you can't get it to work. Stop blaming other people for your own ignorance. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
