Do you have any particular suggestions?

This is correct, in the case we're referring to. (Certain methods more efficient than guessing and checking are usable with some hashing algorithms, but not SHA256 to my knowledge)

Since raw passwords are never (should never be) stored on the server, when a user signs up, their password is hashed at least once and hopefully salted (though not as frequently as they should be) before being put in a database. Through various methods irrelevant to this discussion, a hacker can gain access to that database and consequentially the hashed passwords.

Hopefully the server uses a good hashing algorithm such as bcrypt (multi-layered salted SHA256/512 isn't as good, but is usually sufficient). In this case, the hacker can't do much of anything with the database, as it is inefficient to brute force and impossible to reverse-hash.

However, in a startling number of cases (the MtGox hack for example), passwords are not well-hashed and salted, and are stored in a hashing algorithm such as SHA256, SHA1, or (heaven forbid) MD5 that is efficient. (read: hashes can be calculated quickly)

The hacker then proceeds to find a hash he/she wishes to crack and then attempts to brute force it by hashing standard alphanumeric strings until he finds the one giving the hash he has obtained. He can then use that string (which should be the user's password, except in rare cases) in order to log in to the website and wreak havoc.

Now, for some math. In the 95 character ASCII printable keyspace (usually around the number of different characters allowed in a password), checking every possible password up to 8 characters would take around 6.6 e+15 tries. While that seems like a lot, a 1 TH/s (1 e+12 hashes/sec) unit could process all of those in under two hours. (this is hypothetical, I'm not accounting for bandwidth limitations and the like)

Sorry, that was a bit long winded. Hopefully it's at least moderately understandable.

Not relevant, but you might want to take that TradeHill link out of your sig.

I suspect it would be convertible, but they probably don't want to publicize that fact - more negative press is the last thing both Bitcoin and BFL need right now. I can just see the headlines:

"Shady Bitcoin Company Launches New Units, Hackers Reverse Engineer Them and Hack <Insert Major Website Here>'s Password Database"

"Password Theft - The Future of Bitcoin Mining?"

"Bitcoin - The Virtual Currency it Appears to Be OR The Largest Hacking Operation the World Has Ever Seen?"

And similarly, the choice is yours to "deal" with this "shithole" or simply ignore it. Your opinion changes nothing.

To elaborate: a change in network hashing power will not cause a change in the rate of Bitcoin generation. A (roughly) set number of Bitcoins is added to the system per unit time, regardless of network speed. If speed increases, difficulty will increase proportionally.

They would still achieve market dominance if they priced all of those products at 10 times what they announced, and they would make much more money. Regardless of whatever altruistic motives BFL may have, it is and will remain a business.

Protecting the network is a valid goal, but pricing them this low is actually extremely dangerous for the network in the short run. If these predictions and prices are correct, someone could 51% the network with less than half a million USD invested into BFL ASICs. Sure, once they produced and sent out many, difficulty would jump, but initially, someone could purchase a large portion of the first batch and pose a serious threat to the network and consequentially BFL's business.

Again, I simply cannot see why this move makes sense for them...

This strikes me as very odd. You could make a much higher profit margin. Why on earth would you price these this low?

You seem to have delivered, if a bit tardily, so far, but this just leaves me stunned. Pricing this low cannot make any sense for your bottom line.

At what point can we pre-order?

You linked it in your sig and seemed knowledgeable, so I assumed. Thanks for correcting me.

Every revolutionary idea is subjected to a good healthy round of skepticism. Nothing wrong with that. And progress towards understanding seems to be happening.

Plus, excellent entertainment. From that thread and a few others:







Ah, SA is such a treasure trove.

This. People who can use a VPS for their operation (a) probably don't need DDOS protection and (b) certainly won't pay for the expensive kind. CloudFlare and a good knowledge of IPtables can make a site fairly resilient without paying anything extra.

The concept is valid (though I'm not a fan of Pyramining, for other reasons), but I don't think you'll generate much interest or investment.

Two main problems: Firstly, an ROI of 19% for a year, while HYIP-materiel in USD/EUR/GBP investing, is extremely low ATM in the world of Bitcoin. With what I think most consider an extremely stable, constant-rate investment with a publicly identified issuer, BDK.BND, pays 1% a week or 52% a year, and will make 19% in only a few months. Something perhaps considered more risky, BS&T, will generate 19% in a few weeks. 19% in 12 months just doesn't look too appealing.

Secondly: Passthroughs with fees are based on a simple premise: They offer something which the investor couldn't easily invest in otherwise. If Pirate had open accounts and no minimum investment requirements, BS&T passthroughs wouldn't exist; there would be no need for them. (Only possible exception being ones which offered additional "features", such as partial insurance) Pyramining is open and there is no minimum investment.

In short, I just can't see people buying a moderately but not extremely stable passthrough for as much interest in a year as a more stable option offers in a few months using a website with no entry barriers.

Not exactly what you were looking for, but I hope it helps. Good luck.

And now the exchange rate is at $6.50.

You may have a hard time attracting investors, with the way the markets have been moving lately. So volatile...

TBH I can't think of a good reason to lock a thread. If trolling becomes excessive, moderators will delete posts. Otherwise, it seems to me it's your duty as a business operator to answer any valid questions posed.

I haven't been following this particularly closely, though, all I've really seen is the name "Rugatu" spammed around the forum in various irrelevant threads. Rugatu/the_joint, can/will you provide an explanation for the thread-locking?

Now that's more like it. Eloquent prose helps me feel less insufficient for browsing web forums on a Friday night. Thanks Bitlane.

I know, but man, these forums are my source of Friday night entertainment. The trolling today seems to be just... subpar.

The difference between the two is fairly stark. Pirate's complainers/trolls are people not using his services. BFL's are people who are using their services.

Now, what does that tell you?

To be honest, I'm a bit disappointed. From the thread title, I was hoping you were going to argue that Pirate@40 and BFL were conspirators in a gigantic doomsday scheme through cybernetically enhanced bugs, funded by BFL and Pirate, swarming throughout the world, entering computers, and stealing Bitcoin wallets. Now that would have been something.

It's certainly possible, look at http://gigamining.com/mgpumon/.

How are you running cgminer? Manually, through BAMT, or through crontab as described in my above post?

The concept is interesting, but no verification worries me, I must admit. Nothing against you personally, but many GLBSE assets with lofty goals have proven to be scams...