How is variable difficulty being calculated? I ask because I have a stratum proxy running on a server with several miners connecting to Slush's pool through it, all using different worker names. It looks like the difficulty is being adjusted based upon the total number of shares being submitted through the proxy and not on the basis of individual workers. I'm guessing that difficulty is calculated independently for each connection, as all my workers use a single connection to the pool, but just wanted to verify.

Just found this on Amazon: Orico usb 3.0 10 ports hub with 12V2.5A power adapter- Piano Black

At 12V, 2.5A, it looks like it should be able to support 10 BEs @ $3.50/port.

I have a server PC right next to the blades, running off the same power strip, running a stratum proxy which the blades all use. The server hasn't been restarting, so it's not the power blinking, at least not at the wall. If the proxy restarts could that cause the blades to reset?

My new-gen blades periodically restart all at once. There are 10 of them connected to a backplane and powered by one of the plug-in PSU models. The uptime never seems to go higher than a couple of hours, so that's approximately how long they're going before restarting. It happens to all of them at the same time. What might the issue be?

Yeah, it's a new-gen blade. Just curious, what's the ASICMiner warranty policy? I know it's good for 6 months but I'm sure sure what the stipulations are. Obviously, I wouldn't want to send it back for replacement right now anyway.

Does the single x here mean that the blade has one bad chip? It persists after restart.

A friend of mine just reported that he received the exact same message to his only address, which he had shared with no one other than me.

I opened the link in a sandbox, only to see a HTTP 500 error.

Edit: I just received the same message to my own address, which I've used only twice, from address BM-2D8yr4fzoMzwndqPwLMVyzUcdfK9LWZXjY

Thanks for looking at and fixing my problem so quickly! v1.2.4.1 is working great.

I've noticed that CGWatcher 1.2.4 is not distinguishing between the "Current Total Hashrate" and "Average Total Hashrate" on the status tab. Both fields always have the same value. This negates the functionality of monitoring and restarting the miner if the current hashrate falls below a specified value.

I tested this by starting CGWatcher and allowing the miner to run for a few minutes. I then disabled one of my GPUs, causing the 5-second hashrate as reported in CGMiner to drop significantly. However, CGWatcher continued to report identical values for both the current and average total hashrate. They fell slowly as the average hashrate decreased, and the miner was not restarted until the average hashrate fell below the specified value for 3 monitoring periods, even though the actual current hashrate had been below the specified value for much longer.

Edit: I don't know if it's related, but on the Devices tab, CGWatcher does not correctly report stats for any of the GPUs on the system while CGMiner is running. They are all reported as inactive, with a current and average total hashrate of 0, and accepted share count of 0.

I am using CGMiner 3.3.1.

I am a small seller of BTC on localbitcoins.com. After conducting a dozen or so trades in a few days for which I accepted Moneygram transfer as payment, Moneygram decided to block payments to me without offering any explanation. Last week, I had multiple buyers caught in a bad situation in which they were informed that their payments were placed on hold and they had to call Moneygram in order to receive a refund. Most were able to complete the transactions by sending payment to me through alternative means. One buyer reported that a Moneygram representative informed him that payments to me had been blacklisted due to suspicion of fraud (a completely speculative and baseless accusation). I have contacted them and Moneygram refuses to review the case or their decision. In an e-mailed response, a rep wrote to me that Moneygram offers “person-to-person wire transfer service directed towards fulfilling the customers’ needs of sending money to friends and family members. Person-to-person service cannot be used for any business purposes.” However, this stipulation is not openly advertised on their website and I was not informed at any time prior to being blacklisted from receiving payments. Their customer support reps are generally curt and unhelpful. I strongly recommend not utilizing their services.

I have one buyer who has been trying, unsuccessfully, to receive a refund for nearly a week now. Moneygram will not refund the money to him, and they will not pay it out to me. At this point I'm not sure what to do about this outstanding transaction. The buyer is getting impatient, and I'm sympathetic. I may end up sending him the BTC anyway, although it will cost me personally, in order to maintain my flawless reputation. Now I understand why so few sellers on localbitcoins.com offer Moneygram as a payment method. It was a mistake for me to do so.

PM'd.

How long does the loan approval process typically take? I have an application that's been pending for a few days and I'm just wondering. Thanks.

Why would you have any funds there? You only need to interface with a single online exchange in order to re-sell bitcoins.

What's the easiest way for someone in the US to get funds into BTC-e?

Touché. I'd read that post before. It's about time to implement it.


Cool, I was just wondering if you were using MtGox data, or a weighted average, etc.

That is a very nice feature. Currency fluctuation is one of the risks I have to account for on localbitcoins, because some buyers will try to exploit price changes in just that fashion. Where are you pulling historical market data from -- is it the price on a particular exchange or a weighted average?

The escrow timeout for online transactions is 90 minutes if payment is not made, so make sure that you pay via Dwolla and then mark the payment as complete within 90 minutes of requesting the trade. Once payment is marked complete, the bitcoins will stay in escrow until released by the seller (or by localbitcoins staff, if a complaint is filed and the buyer has proof of payment).

I figured as much, since I'd assumed that you're doing manual trade matching. I'm intrigued enough that I may have to give it a try.

And to think that I was just about to give up on this conversation as being futile! It takes fortitude and humility to publicly admit error, and for that you've certainly earned my respect. I think that your business, in terms of total bitcoins exchanged and thus net profit, will improve as a result of this realization and subsequent changes. How long will it take you to implement your proposed changes?

The laws of economics are immutable, no matter what your business is, in the same way that the law of gravitation is the same no matter what country you live in.


If there's never going to be a balance, it's because you refuse to raise your prices. Price ceilings which are below the market equilibrium will always, without fail, attract more buyers than sellers. It's an economic fact and it's an unavoidable consequence of holding prices lower than they should be.

For determined individuals, it's entirely possible to wire money internationally and buy up large sums of bitcoins to resell through your service. But doing so comes with risks which cannot be ignored. Unless you can offer high enough profit to justify taking on those risks, I rather doubt you'll be able to attract the supply you want.

I'm speaking not only from an economic perspective, but as an active re-seller of bitcoins. 4% is the bare minimum which I aim to make on any sale, and that's on top of the fees I pay. My average profit is 6-7%, which puts my sell prices at about 8-10% above the spot price on any exchange. And yet I still have a multitude of buyers and probably need to raise my own prices because I ran short on supply just today.

The bottom line is, for 4% it's easy for me to decline your offer. If you were offering at least 6% I could consider it.


Do you seriously think that, no matter how high the price is, supply will be unaffected? Offer a substantial enough profit margin and I can guarantee that those ice cream suppliers would find ways to get more inventory. The same applies to any product or service.

What you're failing to understand is that the two are actually one and the same. You have a lack of supply because the price is too low. Allow the price to fluctuate freely and it would rise, increasing supply and decreasing demand until an economic equilibrium is reached.

Oddly, despite the above misconception, throughout the remainder of your post you seem to recognize the fact that your prices need to rise to attract more suppliers.