 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 [2]
|
I don't see this as affecting the value in that way. It's not an overall supply issue. Most bitcoin is not in circulation - it's mined and held. That's not going to change; if you're selling to cover your operating cost, you're going to continue to do that at the same rate. If the value goes up, you will need to sell less coin to cover the same cost. However, the truly critical variable is hashrate. All of the hardware out there is reflected in the marketplace as hash rate, and (for the most part) is governed by the rules of economics. There is sunk cost that needs to be recovered, and that hashrate will be applied in the most profitable way (again, generally - there will be people who run "unprofitable" rigs and bet on the exchange rate increasing). After the halving, what will happen to the difficulty of SHA256 altcoins? Will hashrate move to those coins and re-level the profitability and difficulty across all coins? The hardware situation is also interesting. A few years ago, you had choices for your hardware purchase. Now you don't. At this point, there is bitmain and other Chinese industry that has exclusive control over the hardware supply and access to state-subsidized energy. At the current hardware price, exchange rate, and "western" electricity prices ($.10/kwh), an S9 WILL NEVER PAY FOR ITSELF. It certainly looks like we're a bunch of suckers. The other thing I'd like to know is what happened on 25 May. It's like the exchange rate went cuckoo all at once. Miners are going to keep mining, everyone will keep doing what they've been doing, aside from the value going up so the miners can compensate for the smaller supply. A halving of the supply doesn't mean that everyone has to shut down, it just means they sell their Bitcoin for more.
It's like how gold is mined, because there is less available in the ground not everyone doesn't mean everyone shuts down, it means they sell it for more, to cover their costs.
I do not quite agree, you see when the rate at which btc is mined reduces, it's true that demand will still remain high and more miners will open their 'treasure house' and sell. This is exactly what will bring the price down, so many people selling btc will make the price drop... |
|
|
|
I've had that on another pool - I forget which one, as I stopped using it pretty quickly. I've *never* had it on Zpool. Correct. I'm not having that problem - my hashrate on Lyra2v2 is 74-75 mh/s with 2x GTX980ti, and 99.91% accepted. Curious, anyone know why you get like 80% of your normal hashrate on Zpool compared to mining on other Lyra2v2 pools?
You're using Nanashi's CCminer? Seems as though this might've been a bug. After I run Nanashi's for a couple days it starts giving me 'invalid argument' errors on each GPU randomly with increasing succession. Could've also been switching from r6 to r8, I'll test this more. |
|
|
|
Correct. I'm not having that problem - my hashrate on Lyra2v2 is 74-75 mh/s with 2x GTX980ti, and 99.91% accepted. Curious, anyone know why you get like 80% of your normal hashrate on Zpool compared to mining on other Lyra2v2 pools?
You're using Nanashi's CCminer? |
|
|
|
I'm not having that problem - my hashrate on Lyra2v2 is 74-75 mh/s with 2x GTX980ti, and 99.91% accepted. Curious, anyone know why you get like 80% of your normal hashrate on Zpool compared to mining on other Lyra2v2 pools?
|
|
|
|
I'm very interested to see what is going to happen in the SHA256 altcoin universe after the halving. Now days i think the best is to sell of miners if you have make your ROI, and then start playin with Alt coins , Its gonna eat up all your free time tho, but bigger profit will come along, risky tho but...It is what i did ! ^^  |
|
|
|
Affirmative - all is well after the password change! Many thanks!
So the password change is holding on?
I have had this with 1 s-7 I altered password and was fine from then on.
|
|
|
|
It's the latest customer equipment from Verizon for their fiber service. It's a router (wouldn't call it a modem). I've gone through that whole evolution with Verizon (now Frontier) on the configuration. If they put it in a non-standard config, then I get zero support when there is a network issue (until it is reverted to a supported configuration). With the change from Verizon to Frontier, let's just say that it's already difficult enough to get support. It's actually a fine device for a consumer. I've been running powerline ethernet for a day or two now with no dropouts. There has to be something wonky in bitmain's default image that gets refreshed/overwritten when the password is changed. ...
I really hate it when a fox for something makes no sense in terms of cause and effect, but at the moment I can't argue with the actual results.
A working unit is all that matters, but it does seem strange from a networking standpoint. I would agree leave it alone if working. Reading I saw "Gateway (G1100)" with quick google looks like possibly modem/router. Is you modem and router an all in one? Some all in ones are total crap. I had one I could turn off every security option it gave me tell it to allow item's on network... and it was miserable my security system did not work outside network it blocked it. And at the time I was really into renting miners (cant remember site it's long gone), but it blocked that to. Point is some all in ones are just total crud. What I did was talk to fiber company (luckily mine is very nice) and got modem turned into a pass-through mode. I needed modem as it is for my 1 gigabit internet connection but with pass-through it turned it from router to just modem, and allowed me to use my own router. I used a asus nighthawk (takes a decent router to handle 1 gigabit, some you will lose speed if router is not made for 1 gigabit). But that was my magic setup that worked was getting rid of combo modem/router and using pass-through mode. |
|
|
|
I'm on fiber (formerly Verizon) that is pretty solid. Definitely not going down at the rate indicated by the S7LN. I have tried the following configs: 1. Gateway (G1100) >>> Powerline adapter >>> miner 2. Gateway (G1100) >>> Wireless to wired client (a TP link device in client mode) >>> miner 3. Gateway (G1100) >>> CAT5e >>> miner I had issues with all of those configs. Have had zero drops since changing the password. I've switched back to the powerline adapter to see how it performs. I really hate it when a fox for something makes no sense in terms of cause and effect, but at the moment I can't argue with the actual results. I have 2x S7-LN that sit together behind two different routers and a wireless bridge. The username/password was left at their default values and I have experienced no network issues.
modem>>>router>>>wireless bridge>>>router>>>switch>>>miners
At one point, I had the miners arranged behind three routers and there were no issues there as well.
modem>>>router>>>wireless bridge>>>router>>>router>>>switch>>>miners
Do you have anything that could be interrupting your connection for long periods of time?
|
|
|
|
|
After the halving, anything less efficient than a S-7 will cost you money to mine (unless you have "free" electricity), unless enough hashrate goes offline to bring the difficulty down. Also, I don't think you're going to see the BTC exchange rate change much as a result of the halving - the adjustment has been underway since May.
I think the larger question going forward is, will there be a continuing reduction in profit margin that results in further consolidation of mining power? If you get to the point that 2 or 3 operators could collude on a 51% attack, it calls the viability of bitcoin into question.
|
|
|
|
Solo mining is like the worst kind of lottery. Let's say that you buy one ticket a day for $3.50 (cost of electricity) and the max payout is about $16,000. Would you play that lottery? Calculate the odds here: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/16687/solo-mining-just-for-luck-realisticI would recommend that you not put a lot of faith in anyone's anecdotes about their solo mining results. Feel free to solo mine, but you'd probably be better off spending that $3.50 on actual lottery tickets. |
|
|
|
It is completely inexplicable, but that fixed it. I'm going to go back and see if it holds with the wireless bridge and powerline ethernet options. Thank you! try using a different password not root.
also is it behind a router that has a password.
all my miners are behind a router that has a long password.
modem>>> router >>>> switch>>>> miners with a different password then root
|
|
|
|
Don't mind me - was able to get it working with this miner: https://mega.nz/#!2Q9AyJbT!2fLnh_5JKzXp_gGGW9_6uoEDvAERYAoPe2npeCK4OZc |
|
|
|
I am having the same issue - any minerd.exe that supports yescrypt crashes. I have tried multiple builds. I have an Intel Core i7-6700k. Instructions: MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, EM64T, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, TSX Any thoughts? I have tested your minerd and your script and it works perfect on my intel cpu. I think your cpu doesn't support some simd instructions like SSE4.1. can you test with this minerd. https://mega.nz/#!2dtBQaTI!PXXZzUHRWA0rnUQWRAp9uAKvCO6222aH1IvWWikLFU8 hi thanks for help  you mean i upload my files ? here the last one i tested http://www.megafileupload.com/vMqT/cpu_BSTY.rari also try the one in the wallet on pool mining, crash too in solo mining it s stay solo mining started but nothing happens |
|
|
|
|
I have it set up with a Static IP address, using a wired connection. After a random period of time, it disappears off the network and is obviously not submitting shares. No red light or beeping, solid green light on the controller. Only way to get it back up is to power cycle. Not doing anything weird in the settings or elsewhere in the network. THe current setup is the most stable - it will go for 24 hours or so. I was using a wireless bridge at first that would cause this problem in just a few hours.
Thoughts?
Thank you!
|
|
|
|
Any tips for Top 3 Algos this week?
1. neoscrypt
2. X11evo
3. NIST5
There were some crazy spikes in XRE coin reward share/value I got today. My boxes did stay on that algo for a bit as well... but my script has been switching me between a lot of the algos.. and with great frequency...... Id have to say x11evo, skein, x14, x17 in that order for my GTX980. Can't comment on neoscrypt cause the reject bar graph is scaled wrong. If someone knows where that graph is in the yaamp code, ill probably be able to figure out where the decimal really goes.... but I think its supposed to be a percentage of current hashrate, not the whole number its showing. I'm about to put online a dual GTX275 for giggles. My friend brought me some kinda older PC's and 2 had the same card... so I figured... why not see what they can do for fun =) I wonder if it will hash more than a single GTX560. Was pretty cool; got two watercooled i7 machines, and one core 2 quad file server machine to build some miners out of. Recently there have been some good deals on GTX 960's... why is NH reporting lyra2v2 as their best algo for 980 Ti? Because the 980ti is great at that algo..... compared to other cards. And a lot of renters. But you need to use the right software for it. Not all ccminer forks has it optimized and the difference is huge. Roughly 8.8 MH vs. 20.5 MH on my GTX970. Yes true. I have the optimized version. In the bin folder of the latest NH windows miner (v1.6), there is a "ccMiner 1.7.6-r6 Nanashi Meiyo-Meijin" that is suppose to be optimised for 970, 980 and 980Ti. I've had similar results with the Lyra2v2 optimised version of ccminer in both the v1.6 and 1.5.1 bundles of NH. On an ASUS Strix GTX980ti, I easily get 37.6 MH/s @ 215 watts. The best hashes per watt I get is backing down the voltage: 33.2 MH/s @ 177 watts. The optimised version is a must. |
|
|
|
|
I'm having a strange problem... I'm connecting to the SHA256 pool (stratum+tcp://mine.zpool.ca:3333#xnsub), and it will randomly show as Dead. It just happened occasionally until today, and now it's happening all the time. Zpool is in the 0 slot, but the antminer will roll to one of the other pools, even if Zpool shows as alive. Not sure how to troubleshoot it. Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
In looking at all the variables, I must be missing something. Variables: - Hash rate - Difficulty - Hardware cost - Electricity cost - Block reward - BTC to fiat currency exchange rate If all of the existing trends hold true (except for the BTC exchange rate - that cannot continue) I don't see how any of the hardware currently on the market (including the S9) could ever pay for itself. With the continually increasing difficulty/hashrate, a S9 would never pay for itself (unless you have free electricity, and even then you will have a LONG road). After the halving, your S7 is going to make less than a dollar a day, with decreasing profitability. An S9 will make under $7/day on day 1 ($0.11/kWh). The potential exists for a new S9 to never pay for itself. The way I see it, the only potential mitigations are that transaction fees increase dramatically, or a lot of hardware is shut off. I MUST be missing something, because it doesn't make any sense. If the profit margin becomes razor thin, only large huge operators will survive, and you have the potential very quickly for two operators to collude on a 51% attack. I'm really open to being corrected here, as people are still buying hardware, so they must see something I don't. http://www.bitcoinblockhalf.com/So I was interested in hearing peoples' perspectives on what they think will happen on block halving day ( I'm actually excited about it -_-  ) my own personal theory is that the price of Bitcoin itself and the fees from the trading volume rising so much will actually balance everything out and miners will either make the same as they did before or perhaps more because trade volume isn't limited in the way that block rewards are. What do you think will happen? Do you think I'm right? Do you think maybe we'll see a severe drop short term? Give me your reasoning, it's just interesting seeing the panic around block halving because we've seen all the hysteria surrounding ASICs and Scrypt mining and so on which makes me wonder if people aren't overreacting to the whole thing. |
|
|
|
|
