I've tested your patch, and there are some great improvements from the original phoenix 1.50 miner indeed.
My 6950 gets improvement.
My 5870 gets improvement.
My 5850 gets improvement.

But I have noticed a regression with my 6870 (1005mhz core / 200 mhz mem)

Configuration:
-Using window 7
-Using Catalyst 11.6
-Using the aoclbf 1.74 frontend for phoenix 1.50
phatk
Vector
BFI_INT
Aggression 13
Work size 128

2011-07-03 kernel: 317 mhash/s (all 3 number are peak value)
2011-07-06 kernel: 283
2011-07-07 kernel: 283

...Needless to say, something bad happened between 07-03 and 07-06. I hope we can get to the bottom of this. If you need me to test something, I will be happy to do what I can for you.

-DiamondPlus

Great job, for simplecoin.

One thing that is important to know is that security by obscurity is a very bad thing, most of the times there are problems with the design and even when the design of the algorithm is good, there are security holes that go undetected until the cracker finds out.

-DiamondPlus

Open source security algorithms are the best, for example take a look at the security of the bitcoin network, it is very solid, and in the rare event that a security was found most likely it would be in the implementation and it would be fixed within hours.

There are a lot of commercial security closed source programs that use the vigenere cipher, of course that is a secret, the vigenere cipher is very easy to implement and it provides security against the average person, but by design it is insecure, it is used a lot due to its simplicity,  in closed source it is very hard to tell it uses the vigenere chipher, until someone does some reverse engineering, and after that the security completely colapses, any good cracker will crack the algorithm no very easy but doable. There are other algorithm that are also very simple and easy to implement used in closed source programs like rot13, or substitution cipher both very insecure and worse than vigenere.

Then there the famous one time pad very secure only algorithm proven to be unbreakable but also not very practical.

-DiamondPlus

The there are the good ones, but more complex idea, rsa, blowfish, etc, these can only be broken by brute force attacks, extremely difficult specially is the keys are large.

I used to be a cryptographer in the mid 90, so I am not up to date with the latest algorithms, but one thing I learned is that most close source packages are very insecure, and there are packages that break the security of those closed source programs, there was a programmer I do not remember his name that wrote software to unlock the locks, he was arrested in las vegas by the fbi after he gave a conference in defcon, he would talk a lot about insecure close source software with mathematical proofs, he sold unlock software for most closed source commerical packages.

-DiamondPlus

The lesson to be learned is that for the most security it is best to rely on a good algorithm, and not by security by obscurity, therefore most secure algorithms are usually open source. In theory if a person is a brilliant genius a close source security software could be secure, but for most of us, and most real world cases, open source is the way to go for security.

In many companies managers believe on closed source, the only reason for that is ignorance, they are usually not cryptographers, and know very little about programming, when working for a company like that vigenere cipher is great makes the manager happy and you are done quickly with the job, but for a job well done it is all in the algorithm and its implementation  and it takes more work when you have security in mind.

-DiamondPlus

Also, there concepts. Not the final word. I would also think that just a numpad would be bad. I might see about getting a base58 keypad made or other. I was thinking we could put a camera in the back that was perma-focused at about 5 inches for scanning qr-codes (maybe even upload images for some sort of OCR? Probably not, but its an idea. I actually based the design off a blockified blackberry, reduced to a numpad and with a d-pad instead of a trackpad. I've personally seen some people type pretty fast and accurate with a numpad though, i've even seen computer keyboards that were just a numpad.

That is nice, being able to change username, didn't even know about this. If I were to change my username, I'd put "AKA old username" in my signature, and leave it there for a month or so. I like how the these forums are so versatile, change username, lock your own thread, delete your own post, good forums, wish it would expand to be able to delete your own created thread, I've got a few floating around I'd like to delete as because I found my own answer to my question.

I find it interesting because of the FX2 chip, but apart from that it has too much: extra DDR SDRAM, extra EEPROM, extra CPLD, microSD card slot. The pricetag is only a factor of 2 above what we hope to achieve (note that they are missing the power supply section and need 3 different voltage rails).

I don't know about the others, but I am in it for the fun of developing a board. The board you linked may be a very good start to get FPGA developers to write code, but once our board is go, it won't be cost effective (unless you figure their support and warranty are worth the price). I am not arguing against the board: it is good for early adopters, but eventually we should beat it.

If it goes to -100% one day then +100% the next day there is manipulation going on, even though in that particular case there is no indication of stealing. If there is manipulation going on, it's very important to know that.

If there is manipulation, then most likely there is also stealing going on. Why would there be manipulation of the luck in the pool without stealing? Can anyone explain this?

I'm trying to show that there is a high probability of manipulation of the pool going on, not that there is stealing going on. Once we determine that there is manipulation, it will be easy to conclude that there is stealing, unless the long term output of the pool is above the expected amount.

So having it shoot up to +70% increases the chance that there is manipulation going on, just as -40% would, although it is hard to figure out where the pool got those extra solved blocks from if it was manipulation. Why? maybe somebody is trying to divert attention away from the low luck days, and if so it worked fairly well because people on the forum who started talking about the bad luck quit talking about it when luck shot way up.

And the probability of the 5 day period is is 0.0036 (277:1) not 0.01.

If someone wants to find out what the expected(?) deviation for positive and negative luck is on the pool that would be nice. Those are the numbers you would get if you took all the positive and then negative values over a very long time on a normal non manipulated pool and averaged them.

Exactly.

Every private key is just a 32-byte hex number.  Every 32-byte hex number can be used as a private key.  And hence, every 32-byte hex number has a corresponding Bitcoin address.

Just by coincidence (or perhaps not), the SHA256 hash algorithm can produce a 32-byte hex number from any text input.  And while the output isn't predictable, it always produces the same output given the same input text.

So the idea is just to pair these two ideas.  Pick a passphrase, compute the SHA256 of it, use that as a private key.

All the Casascius Bitcoin Utility does, is calculate the Bitcoin address that corresponds to your 32 bytes as the matching private key.

You aren't remembering the private key itself, you're merely remembering the text that will produce your private key when plugged back into the SHA256 hash algorithm.  Which is good enough.

(When using Casascius Bitcoin Utility / SHA256, the passphrases ARE case sensitive by the way)

The distro would probably just consist of the Linux/BSD kernel, X,  and the bitcoin client (probably custom). What we could do to provide an audit is have someone (probably using bitcoins coming from me) use the device from home for a length of time, and monitor the content of every packet it sends. A specialized device wouldn't use much bandwidth.

SMokeandMirrors is a thief/scammer.

As we all know through Bitcoin trades, especially when made through PayPal. As, BTC are irreversible it's most secure for both parties if the buyer sends the money first.

SmokeandMirrors is a thief!

HE WILL FILE A DISPUTE AFTER MAKING THE PAYMENT, HE USES PAYPAL FOR HIS TRANSACTIONS!

Skype: jay.schr

YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!

Tried Buying Bitcoins and Got Scammed TWICE..

Middleman and by someone else that got banned and deleted.

Just a warning to some of you noobs.. Be careful ffs..

Hey,

I'm selling Bitcoins,

Add me on Skype if your interested: Kenb27

Regards

jhas PayPal Information:
Nick Fajardo
3004 Idlewild way
San Diego, CA 92117
United States

Name: Nick Fajardo
Email: forgot139@yahoo.com

Skype: jonas.sulzbach

STAY AWAY!

UPDATE: He uses numerous Skype addresses! WARNING!

duh

lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFf2iPlI6yU

Interesting video, I thought I'd share it

Enjoy, Cheers!

There

Exactly

Delete