Latest posts of: fumble

Show Posts
Pages: « 1 [2]

on: July 31, 2013, 07:02:24 PM

Quote from: HellDiverUK on July 27, 2013, 04:52:29 PM Before you say it, no I don't sell BEs. I do have 3 of them. But I do still have a number of GPUs mining, too. Did I also waste my money there, too? No because GPU's have alternate uses such as video display for a pc and processing power for gaming. They can mine alt-coins. They can run protein folding for cancer research. They also have a resale value. USB miner sticks will be landfill...just like the huge box full of 8MB-128MB usb thumb drives I just tossed.

on: July 25, 2013, 07:06:19 PM

Quote from: gateway on July 25, 2013, 04:19:57 AM Watching also, need a bit more hashing power .1 sounds awesome .6 is still to much :/ Yup, even with a GENEROUS 15% per 11 day diff increase these things will only make .44 BTC in their lifetime ( starting at currently difficulty of 31.3m)

on: July 21, 2013, 11:23:22 PM

Quote from: Strange Vlad on July 20, 2013, 06:46:02 PM ... feline deities. I rented that movie last night on pay-per-view!

on: July 19, 2013, 11:38:42 PM

Quote from: donut on July 19, 2013, 02:08:23 AM [offtopic] June 2013 was the 340th consecutive month of above-average global temperatures. http://blogs.agu.org/wildwildscience/2013/04/27/march-2013-is-337th-consecutive-month-above-20th-century-average/ [/offtopic] Yes because the last 100 years as a sample size is all we need to determine AGW as fact.

on: July 18, 2013, 09:25:14 PM

Quote from: pooler on July 18, 2013, 02:42:04 PM Quote from: fumble on July 17, 2013, 12:05:15 AM version 2.3.2 32bit version for sha256d is not working for me (just hangs) but works fine on scrypt. I have no problems with the 64bit version for scrypt or sha256d. Tested on 32bit win xp and server 2003 I use v2.2.3 if I need to run sha256d on 32bit systems. Confirmed on Windows XP, though interestingly enough it seems to run with no problem at all in wine. Even more interesting is the fact that if I build it with a different version of gcc it appears to run fine everywhere. I have now uploaded this build, please see if it works for you. sha256d is working on XP 32bit on new build. no more stratum proxies yay! (Although I did like seeing the difficulty level for each share) Thanks Pooler!

on: July 17, 2013, 12:05:15 AM

version 2.3.2 32bit version for sha256d is not working for me (just hangs) but works fine on scrypt. I have no problems with the 64bit version for scrypt or sha256d. Tested on 32bit win xp and server 2003 I use v2.2.3 if I need to run sha256d on 32bit systems.

on: July 16, 2013, 09:52:01 PM

Quote from: conv3rsion on July 16, 2013, 08:25:17 PM Quote from: velacreations on July 16, 2013, 07:35:40 PM Quote from: conv3rsion on July 16, 2013, 07:03:42 PM if i can't buy them, a lot of people can't. what's that mean then? demand is high, we should raise the price. somebody gets it. Greed? Seriously. Happy customers = repeat customers and invaluable word of mouth advertising. Its not going to be pretty when they realize their 1BTC device can only make .5 BTC in its lifetime.

on: July 15, 2013, 08:46:34 PM

Quote from: notme on July 15, 2013, 08:23:28 PM Quote from: VolanicEruptor on July 15, 2013, 08:20:50 PM Quote from: notme on July 15, 2013, 08:16:06 PM Quote from: VolanicEruptor on July 15, 2013, 08:04:48 PM So let's say someone decided to mine a huge portion of the network, such as Friedcat does. Then they get paid by someone who wants to destroy Bitcoin to deliberately slow their latency down so that they are able to solve blocks with a very minimal amount of transactions. You get a few people doing this, and it would destroy Bitcoin. Much more creative than a 51% attack.. It would not destroy bitcoin. It would drive up transaction fees until either not including them is too expensive or more honest miners come online. driving up transaction fees could destroy Bitcoin as an alternate currency, seeing as how low transaction fees is supposed to be one of it's strongest points. I don't see low transaction fees as among it's strongest features. More important are decentralized control, potential privacy, and censorship resistance. In fact these features provide the business case for paying more for transactions than with fiat based systems. Lower fees are just a nicety of the current economics. I strongly disagree. As a merchant paying 1.75% to 3% for credit card transactions (100's everyday) it adds up.

on: July 12, 2013, 09:16:22 PM

Quote from: Elmore ASIC on July 12, 2013, 03:09:31 PM >>>> ASICMINER <<<< BRUTEFORCE POWER HOUR HOD TURBO HASHRATE BOOM BOOM!! FOUNTAIN OF YOUTH PLAY MONSTER CLIMBER JACK RABBIT CHARGED BINGO SCORE FRIEDCAT SCRATCH AND WIN ! I'll have what he's having please.

on: July 09, 2013, 09:26:58 PM

I'd like to be whitelisted so I can participate in some of the group buys...when the price is right. Pic shows 1 of my 5 gpu mining rigs.

on: July 09, 2013, 08:40:50 PM

Hello, welcome to the forum!

on: July 09, 2013, 08:31:32 PM

I bought some at $102 and then some more at $83. Almost bought more at $70 but missed out.

on: July 09, 2013, 08:22:03 PM

Quote from: Moebius327 on July 09, 2013, 08:16:54 PM Quote from: Youngbill on July 09, 2013, 12:29:08 PM I'm mining with 7 USB ASICs at the moment. Not much I know but they were given to me and they run in my data center ( free electric and AC). My startup costs were zero so anything I make is profit at this point. I'm looking to add more equipment as soon as I have available funds. I have tons of space in the data center. Bill Sounds good, but don't buy USBs anymore. Unless the price drops to about $20 each

on: July 09, 2013, 06:41:55 PM

I agree but its not dead yet. ASICMINER is in it for the money. They do not care about bitcoin's future. Otherwise they should NOT be mining and just sell hardware. They could limit the amount of GHs per order so 1 person cant order several THs. This would at least slow down the centralization somewhat.

on: July 09, 2013, 06:12:23 PM

Hi

Pages: « 1 [2]