BFL: if you have a BFL Single, an early FPGA MiniRig (cgminer has a parameter for later ones to fix them, check its documentation) or a BFL SC (ASIC) don't waste their hashrate on P2Pool, they have huge latencies and can't perform well on P2Pool. Put them on a traditional pool.
Are you sure, or are you just going off the FUD on these forums? Clearly the FPGA products have an issue, but these guys claim the ASICs blow through an entire nonce range in a few ms: https://forums.butterflylabs.com/jalapeno-single-sc-support/3367-reducing-20%25-hash-rate-penalty-using-bfl-hardware-p2pool.html#post42224It would be a pity if the p2pool guide was turning away major hashpower unnecessarily. In fact, looking above the linked post, there is the exact quote from above used to justify not participating in p2pool. ckolivas and kano confirmed this. The instruction supposed to be implemented in the communication protocol by BFL to interrupt work doesn't work and BFL didn't answer when asked if/when it will be fixed. I didn't read the link but a Jalapeno is supposed to have 2 chips for ~5GH/s a whole nonce range is 4GH (nonce is a 32 bit field), do the math... Well, in the link we have an example of a Jalapeno in the wild running on a p2pool instance with better 100% efficiency. But thanks for ignoring it. Don't post inaccurate information and I won't ignore it. You reference a post quoting an assertion that is clearly bullshit: "these guys claim the ASICs blow through an entire nonce range in a few ms". Why do you still expect me to waste my time with a post like this when I clearly explained it was impossible 2 posts earlier? Now a newbie user (seems to be the same) claimed in the P2Pool thread that he got 106% efficiency after enough shares that it shouldn't be a fluke so I'll update my guide to reflect that. But I certainly won't write that BFL Asics are working properly, only that they might: between a newbie report I don't know at all and ckolivas' report there's clearly a difference in trust. This would change if for example ckolivas confirmed that his device is working properly and he made a mistake in his earlier tests, there's a new firmware for BFL ASICs solving early problems or there are some other trusted user reporting good efficiency. Currently I have conflicting reports with the most trusted user claiming it doesn't work properly with p2pool and a newbie I don't know claiming otherwise, like I said in my earlier post... do the math! If I were in your shoes, I'll look for an explanation for why ckolivas' ASIC didn't work like it should or find trusted members of the forum to verify the newbie's claim. I'm only collecting information here, if there isn't enough information I can't do much. I'm sorry I didn't do the digging to figure it out for you. It appears it is raising the share difficulty that saves your efficiency. I just figured you were the expert and could figure it out easier. Sorry for wasting your time. I clearly keyed in on an incorrect statement, which caused you to dismiss everything I had to say. |
|
|
|
"It grabs answers from another dimension."
I think that is as good an explanation as any. But I'm no a physicist. What works for me is thinking of a quantum computer as an analogue computer with infinite signal/noise ratio. Can you give some simple examples of algorithms for quantum computers? What kinds of questions can I ask this magic ball? |
|
|
|
Hi I'm that user on forums.butterflylabs.com talking about my jalepeno which works fine on p2pool, my current efficiency is 105%. I'm not sure why the p2pool guide claims ASICs can't work on p2pool, it's working fine for me. Once I get my 60GH singles in I'll be trying them there too so we'll see if they hold up as well. It's odd, that's for sure. You have 105% efficiency, but you also have a 20% DOA rate (which is horribly bad). Not sure which number to believe... Isn't 20% DOA pretty average for p2pool? 4.8% DOA with ASICMiner USB Edit: To be fair, I'm also running a p2pool backed mining pool[1], so that's probably why my DOA's are higher. 1. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=234841.0 |
|
|
|
Hi,
I bank with Chase. I asked them specifically and the answer I received was that they could not comment on why the alleged accounts were closed or frozen but that my account was not in danger of being closed if all I was doing was transfering money to and from a legal exchange, regardless of what type of commodoties that exchange dealt with.
My suspicion is that the reddit thread is a load of balderdash, that they either were doing something illegal (such as acting as an exchange without the proper paperwork), laundering money, or something else that triggered the accounts to be closed and/or frozen.
reddit is a neat place but it frequently is full of half-truths so take reports there with a lot of salt. Sometimes truth is stretched, sometimes outright lies are told.
I appreciate the reply. I don't know you so I dont know what your transaction volume is like. But the reddit caught my eye because I dont get to see too many people who do large BTC volume. I'm not saying I'm the biggest out there, I'm not, but I'm probably not the average Chase customer with 1 or 2 BTC exchange deposits every once in a while. Literally all my deposits are from exchanges and I average about 5-8 deposits every day. I'm sure the reddit people were similar or (more likely) higher than that. If you are a US citizen and you are not operating under a registered money services provider, you are breaking the law and will have your account closed if someone ever decides to look into your transactions. Take it easy there, Bernanke . . . 1 - Nowhere did I say that I was not a registered MSB. You are making a ton of assumptions there. 2 - The law only requires registration after 180 days - I have not operated that long. I am in the process of establishing my LLC and will have all FinCen paperwork in place before my 180 days is up. 3 - Even legitimate businesses that ARE registered as MSBs are still getting their accounts seized & shut down. In conclusion, you don't know what you're talking about . . . I didn't make assumptions, I added conditions to my statement.... see how it starts with IF. I just wanted you to be aware since you were asking if your account could potentially be closed. In conclusion, you are an ass. |
|
|
|
Hi,
I bank with Chase. I asked them specifically and the answer I received was that they could not comment on why the alleged accounts were closed or frozen but that my account was not in danger of being closed if all I was doing was transfering money to and from a legal exchange, regardless of what type of commodoties that exchange dealt with.
My suspicion is that the reddit thread is a load of balderdash, that they either were doing something illegal (such as acting as an exchange without the proper paperwork), laundering money, or something else that triggered the accounts to be closed and/or frozen.
reddit is a neat place but it frequently is full of half-truths so take reports there with a lot of salt. Sometimes truth is stretched, sometimes outright lies are told.
I appreciate the reply. I don't know you so I dont know what your transaction volume is like. But the reddit caught my eye because I dont get to see too many people who do large BTC volume. I'm not saying I'm the biggest out there, I'm not, but I'm probably not the average Chase customer with 1 or 2 BTC exchange deposits every once in a while. Literally all my deposits are from exchanges and I average about 5-8 deposits every day. I'm sure the reddit people were similar or (more likely) higher than that. If you are a US citizen and you are not operating under a registered money services provider, you are breaking the law and will have your account closed if someone ever decides to look into your transactions. |
|
|
|
He was free to file bankruptcy, as any person or company can when their liabilities exceed their obligations.
You do know what happens when a Limited Liability Corporation that has no money at all files for bankruptcy, right? I certainly do. I expect that the domain name, trademarks and software would have sold in liquidation for more than was recovered by waiting and hoping Roman would turn out to be a responsible adult. Someone competent could have stepped in and operated what was a promising contender to replace Mt.Gox. They might even have offered to transform the bitcoin debt into equity in the new company. Now, between the damage to goodwill that Roman has done to the trademark, and Fincen's position on regulation, the company is probably worthless. That is the problem with allowing an incompetent to continue operating a company; they actually reduce the value of the company over time instead of increasing it. All you need is 3 creditors and a lawyer: http://bankruptcy.cooley.com/2012/05/articles/business-bankruptcy-issues/forced-into-bankruptcy-the-involuntary-bankruptcy-process/Go for it. |
|
|
|
Yeap what calender are you using? If according to Mayan, we were gone in May
Just because the long count resets to 0 doesn't mean time ends. |
|
|
|
Like who? Mitt Romney, John McCain, or maybe you mean Al Gore? Or was George Bush the right answer in that one and the US managed to get one right?
Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, Michael Badnarik, Harry Browne.... Agreed, but although one of them got my vote last election (I'll let you guess which one) they didn't have a shot in hell of winning. 90% of people probably went to the polls as said "who the fuck are these guys?". Unfortunately, in America if you aren't Democrat or Republican you are a fringe nut job and the media will paint you as such at every opportunity. |
|
|
|
It does not matter who you elect, always will end up like this, maybe some entropy related phenomenon
There have been viable options in the USA for quite some time now. The voters just keep ignoring these options and instead insist on electing politicians that want to create a collectivist/socialist/nanny state that provides for their every need, funded with colossal debt and currency debasement. Like who? Mitt Romney, John McCain, or maybe you mean Al Gore? Or was George Bush the right answer in that one and the US managed to get one right? |
|
|
|
|
Giving definitions might help you get results that make any sense. Private and personal can mean many different things depending on context. Such as with private. Do you mean private as in private property or private as in secret.
|
|
|
|
|
Full employment is never possible.
|
|
|
|
is it just me or does anyone else have a problem viewing those in chrome? Chrome on OSX works fine. Fine in Linux too. |
|
|
|
mine 4 days but no block , is this normal ?  Expected time to block: 41.7 hours So, no but it is well within the variance range. |
|
|
|
Hi I'm that user on forums.butterflylabs.com talking about my jalepeno which works fine on p2pool, my current efficiency is 105%. I'm not sure why the p2pool guide claims ASICs can't work on p2pool, it's working fine for me. Once I get my 60GH singles in I'll be trying them there too so we'll see if they hold up as well. Can you make a post here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=153232.msg2545270#msg2545270I'm hoping we can at least get the forum guide updated. |
|
|
|
Sooner or later they're going to have to jack up the interest rates or risk rampant inflation. Right now, I think the Fed is still far more worried about unemployment than inflation, but it's bound to happen eventually. I'm kind of surprised he's still buying assets at such a rapid rate, personally.
If they let the housing market fall to fundamental levels many more people will lose their homes. But with the world's stock markets rolling over they will have to make some tough choices soon. Fall? The housing market is already picking up quite a bit. But yes, you're right that a lot of that may very well be due to the dirt cheap interest rates. 3.5% is almost unheard of, even 5% would be relatively cheap historically. But I don't think the Feds really care that much about the housing market. Maybe it's just me, but there are several things that could have been done to improve the housing market that aren't that complicated. But yeah, it'd involve things like marking people's mortgages down to the actual property value and the bank would be forced to take a loss on it. That's really what it comes down to, the banks have more clout than the millions of underwater homeowners. I saw a post in our weekly newspaper where they were talking about an eminent domain idea where the city would come in, seize the property, sell it back and market value to the original owner so that they wouldn't be paying grossly inflated prices. Sadly, it never got off the ground. It'd really be a win win for everyone - except, of course, the banks which sold this whole song and dance to begin with. If the housing market is picking up, why is the Fed spending $85 billion a month on mortgage backed securities while millions of homes sit empty and are being held off the market.... just waiting for a recovery so the banks don't have to book the losses. |
|
|
|
Over what time period??
I don't think this correlation is valid - maybe for a very short time period. My own long-term correlation studies (utilizing ALL the data) don't match up with this.
Just the last 50 days. |
|
|
|
It's the only legal way to get fiat out of bitcoin.
Huh? |
|
|
|
And the smart money is on deflation in the short term. What the many think is thankfully not how things play out. The many are usually woefully uninformed when it comes to economic theory and data.
Also, IMO, this correlation only holds if you look at markets since the May top in stocks and will cease to exist when stocks find a bottom. During deflation, cash is king, and the market is affirming that it views bitcoin as cash. Gold not so much because it has major liquidity problems.
And how does gold have a liquidity problem? Any coin dealer will buy it or peeps on Ebay, etc. Yeah, for 25% below spot  And you can't easily buy consumer goods or assets with gold. Transaction (are you sure it is gold?) and transportation costs are too high. Gold is also not easily divisible (takes a lot of energy). Unless you mean paper gold, and then there are counterparty risks. I'll stick to bitcoin. |
|
|
|
BFL: if you have a BFL Single, an early FPGA MiniRig (cgminer has a parameter for later ones to fix them, check its documentation) or a BFL SC (ASIC) don't waste their hashrate on P2Pool, they have huge latencies and can't perform well on P2Pool. Put them on a traditional pool.
Are you sure, or are you just going off the FUD on these forums? Clearly the FPGA products have an issue, but these guys claim the ASICs blow through an entire nonce range in a few ms: https://forums.butterflylabs.com/jalapeno-single-sc-support/3367-reducing-20%25-hash-rate-penalty-using-bfl-hardware-p2pool.html#post42224It would be a pity if the p2pool guide was turning away major hashpower unnecessarily. In fact, looking above the linked post, there is the exact quote from above used to justify not participating in p2pool. ckolivas and kano confirmed this. The instruction supposed to be implemented in the communication protocol by BFL to interrupt work doesn't work and BFL didn't answer when asked if/when it will be fixed. I didn't read the link but a Jalapeno is supposed to have 2 chips for ~5GH/s a whole nonce range is 4GH (nonce is a 32 bit field), do the math... Well, in the link we have an example of a Jalapeno in the wild running on a p2pool instance with better 100% efficiency. But thanks for ignoring it. |
|
|
|
It's based on 50 days of data (since 1st May) ... I wouldn't want to be betting too much on that  ^^This^^ You can pick any currency, stock or whatever and find periods where it correlates with BTC or any other commodity. The reason why it correlates so much with USD and not something like gold is because USD is what the price is based heavily on. Other currencies get converted to USD to make trades. It's a bit more complicated than this, but it's not superstition. If the correlation was based on USD being the other half of the trade, the correlation would be inverse. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
