If the time comes that certain coins are considered permanently clean and others permanently dirty in a future regulated world system,
the community as a whole should purposefully contaminate all clean coins found on the blockchain.
And what incentive does anyone have in doing that? Should we use the Bitcoin Honor System(TM) and hope people are willing to devalue their clean money? I have a better idea. Fungibility. I see a pattern happening here: 1. Issues raised with Bitcoin's fungibility get brought to light 2. Supporters of bitcoin's "fungibility" propose solution X 3. Those who want to see reality for what it is go on to debunk solution X given it is a patch to the system and not an actualy addition to bitcoin's protocol which attempts to fix bitcoin's fungibility issues in a ROUND-ABOUT-WAY. 4. repeat step 2 for solution X+1 until X+n is reached 5. agree to disagree There are so many supposed solutions to fixing bitcoin's fungibility problem but they don't hit the issue head on. It is always some sort of of chain (outside of bitocin protocol) PATCH which does not fix anything deterministically 100%. Fungibility isint a problem in the first place. Its not because a dead man said it need to be fungible than the principle still hold true. I very much doubt he could foresee hundreds of years in the future that money would become digital and ethereal. Now we're in the era of Security. So in the future if you took your bitcoins to all bitcoin merchants to spend them or exchange them and you are denied doing so because of your coins being tainted that's not a problem? I would see it as a problem. Most merchants that accept online transactions, FIAT AND BTC don't give a shit about USD or BTC, they get paid in the currency they want. And payment processors that handle BTC live on BTC, so suiciding by refusing 90% of coins is not going to happen. Wrong. You are comparing a digital transparent decentralized ledger (virtual and globally accessible in an instant) to physical analogies of perfume and dates printed on piece of paper? come on you can't compare the two as if they are equal ways to black list a currency from usage. You can clearly see where bitcoins come from and go to ON THE BLOCK CHAIN with the touch of a button and some software for parsing the block chain . <------ EFFICIENTYou can't clearly see your examples globally and instantly for blacklisting. <-----not EFFICIENT^ Nor can you easily trace the exact/full history of each physical fiat bill efficiently. 90%? Where did you come up with that number? You don't know the exact mechanism for black listing to be put into place at some future date. There are probably 50 shades of black listing that will probably spring up at some point depending upon each government/regulatory department's discretion. No, not wrong. Comparing it to fiat is just fine. You're using an idea, term and criteria that was built with no knowledge of how things could be in the future. The point is, *you* are using a term used for criteria on previous kind money and *you* are applying it to Bitcoin. *You* are basing your perspective on dated concept that hold no value here. And you. The 90% come from you. Even in the case 90% of merchants, and thats magnitude higher than it could happen in the worse case scenario. Then those going through that system would just collapse. Payments processor pays merchants in the currency they want, if they stop accepting any non clean 0x coins, the BTC portion of their dealings would just die. You're suggesting a problem based on fungibility when there is actually... None. Is there a problem with spending X vs Y bitcoin? No. Will there be one? No. So what i been saying in the few posts, if that wasn't clear enough, is that your whole perspective, your whole argument is based on a fallacy. 1. Fungibility is a concept used on money previous to bit coin - yes 2. Fungibility of fiat is different from bitcoin. Fiat fungibility is decreed by law (at least in the U.S.) bit coin fungibility is decreed by no CENTRAL authority/business/company. So the topic of fungibility is up to the marketplace and any laws/regulations that are enforced upon said businesses. Fungibility of precious metals such as gold and silver has its own take on it in its respective market place much like bitcoin. Only thing with precious metals you can't black list certain atoms of silver or gold.  You can't tell where a paper dollar has been by looking at it. You can't tell its completely transactional history by looking at it. Nor can you tell where an atom of silver or gold has been and its transactional history from the day it was dug out of the earth. Their respective histories are hard to identify. Bitcoins on the block chain are easily identified.3. You tried to equate all shops in the world stopping accepting bills with a particular date on them or perfume on them. THIS very comparison when used as an analogy of bitcoin blacklisting in reference to the concept of fungibility (every unit of account in a system is interchangeable and indistinguishable) is a flawed comparison as one is a physical form that cannot be efficiently executed (your example) and my example where a bitcoin business or government authority posts a digital list of addresses that are not to be accepted for commerce, which every person with an internet connection has access to, can be done efficiently. The two scenarios are worlds apart in terms of the ability to execute such tasks separately. 4. You say that fungibility holds "no value" here? How is it not a valuable topic of discussion or concern when a bitcoin user (BOB) buys bitcoins from someone buy does not realize those coins were stolen from an exchange (via a hack/heist) now bob is being told his coins are not accepted at particular merchants and in some cases his coins could be confiscated if he deposits it to an exchange and they refuse to allow him to have it because "coins are blacklisted" by a government authority who regulates said business. <---- You see no value in fungibility here at all? 5. The 90% did not come from me. Please post a quote/link. I never mentioned 90% to my knowledge. 6. Bitpay just stopped accepting "tainted" bitcoins from their own black list not even a month ago. LINK: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3mea6b/bitpay_is_blacklisting_certain_bitcoins_rejecting/7. Is there a problem? In my view yes there is. At the moment it isn't at the crux of everyone's attention like THA BLAWK SAIZE DEEHBATE but it will be if users start getting turned away from using/spending/exchanging their bitcoins because those coins have a history from a past theft/crime. My argument is based on fact. MTGOX refused to allow bitcoinica coins to go back to their depositors after bitcoinica was hacked. BTC-e disallowed withdraw/exchange of the coins from the evolution marketplace theft. Bitpay is black listing certain bitcoins and rejecting customers. Fallacy? No.... fact! Get it straight. As I said, right now the issue of fungibility is not a hot topic like other topics but it is a huge issue for users that want to have a currency that is fungible and allows them to have financial privacy. At some point I see the topic of bitcoin fungibility being in the bitcoin headlines more and more as time goes on. Time will tell if I am right. You have not referenced any links/quotes/examples that prove my argument is flawed. You still do not understand one word of what i said. You don't even understand the 90% bits. You say its a problem, its only a problem if nearly all do it. Hence 90%. I'll simplify. If 5% of the volume from sellers and exchanges decide to block any non clean BTC coins, what does happen? That business will be brought to the rest of 95%. If 40% of the volume from sellers and exchanges decide to block any non clean BTC coins, what does happen? That business will be brought to the rest of 60% And thats goes on and on, until about 90%. If that didn't explain clearly enough, i'll explain that too; As long as people can go somewhere and get full value with their coins, the other portion that does not value those coins at the exchange rate will just be walked around. Its not a complicated concept. TLDR: Fungibility is not a concept relevant to BTC. Conclusion: Everything you say is based on a Fallacy. |
|
|
|
I don't suggest that you remove it since it's very popular, but I would suggest that you at least put a little warning about using the blockchain.info online wallet.
The wallet has many problems lately. It's very buggy, it is prone to malleability attacks more than any other wallet out there and all it does, it confuses new people with its buggines.
Just my opinion and my suggestion though!
And its a good opinion because its based on actual facts. Like it being the most prone to malleability attacks and also have a definitively buggy API. All in all it make you doubt them and suggest you go somewhere else. If you really need a webwallet, which i don't recommend in the first place, i'd go with Coinbase for sure. At least if you,re in North America. |
|
|
|
The growth in the usage of bitcoin has been exponential from the start... As the rate of adoption inceases, the pace of growth accelerates even more
yet we are stuck since more than a year already, the impact if the last ATH from the big dumping that happened afterward, has frozen the good opinion that many had about bitcoin now, because of that they are reluctant to trust bitcoin again, and this will not change until further improvements on any aspect of bitcoin Well in the last year we were rebalancing after MtGox's fake pushing up of the price. If you compare to 2 years, we're at 270$~ vs 110$~ which seem pretty good imo. Now that we're mostly stabilized after the aforementioned bubble, we can start getting real growth data from what will happen from now on. Unless another bubble hit soon... |
|
|
|
Last thing to keep in mind, if your PSU is pulling 1200watts at the wall, its not running 300watts per pci-e, since you need to deduct the watts wasted by the PSU conversion and also the fan's usage.
Partly correct. The fan usage DOES come out of one or more of those PCI-E connectors (I think it's probably split between 2 of them, but haven't pulled my SP20 apart long enough to actually check it). DON'T count on 1.7 TH - you have to have a very cold room to even have a prayer of achieving that. 1.3-1.4 TH range is achieveable easily even in somewhat warm rooms though, and is quite a bit more efficient to achieve. Do NOT under any circumstances try to run 2 connectors from one cable, unless it is a VERY custom cable with something on the order of 12AWG wiring. SP20 does not have wireless. Standard twisted-pair Ethernet only. The official spec on the MOLEX connectors that the PCI-E power specification uses works out to 288 watts per connector (the pins are rated more, but have to derate for use in that particular connector style). Exceeding this tends to lead to issues like the KnC Neptune and some Titans had with MELTED connectors and resultant fire and damage-to-unit risk. Most power supplies use 18AWG on their PCI-E connections - this is plenty for a SINGLE connector at 225 watts (per the PCI-E spec), it gets a bit marginal at 288 watts. I wonder, what is the highlighted based on? I run Sp20E very downclocked at ~1200Gh using ~640-650W at the wall from a single Corsair CX750M, which has 2 split PCIE cords providing 4 required connectors. The cords or connectors never exceeded 45C and I have a lazer temperature probe. I grant you that you have to first connect a more powerful PSU (like EVGA 1300) or two CX750, then change settings on the machine to downclock, check power usage, achieve stable hash and then optionally changeover to a single CX750, but it is doable. I run a machine like this for almost 9 mo with no problems whatsoever. I'm doing the same thing. I have been running underclocked for quite a while now. It just made sense. The 1.7 I don't care how cold you won't get this. But for everyone except "free" electricity it makes much more sense to underclock you make more BTC mining this way on SP20 Jackson. I have never had issues with PCIe cable's. But I have had nice PSU's on my miners and always been careful. Thats fine, good double cables at 650*0.9=585/4=146.25watts per connector, well in the 190w per connector's limit for doubles. Op was talking about running effectively twice the power through the same setup. @Quint, The PSU has a fan, and it does not go down PCI-e connectors. Also for the ASIC's their consumption is also lower at the machine than at the wall. Not that it changes much. |
|
|
|
Thats how my S5 with a dead board read. Try removing the good board then plugging the dead board in different slots. Then if you can try plugging it in a different controller. Any troubleshooting after this gets kinda complicated. But keep in mind a dead S5 board is not worthless. |
|
|
|
I dont think they even had good internet right?
Posting here+ offering offline services like photo editing doesn't require a high speed internet. You can also offer btc for goods services , and many more, not everything requires a good/stable internet. You can mine on poor cellphone wifi connection so i don't think mining in such area with slow internet is really all that much of a problem in the first place. And sadly the discrimination of earning, or well at least mining Bitcoin is well here and its called your electricity costs. The only other thing i would consider as BTC earning is trading it or investing it. The other things you can do that input your times isint particularily BTC specific. I find that internet connection matters in mining. Everytime I launch ethminer to mine Ethereum on Suprnova, I lost my internet connection, that come back only when ethminer has been closed. That is weird, i do not have that issue. I have some miners on slow wifi as well and beside occasional short disconnects, their performance isint impacted, they have the same hashrate accepted on the pool side. And ethminer is a pain, there's tons of thing that make it crash, so annoying. Had to change antivirus for one. Also if you have super slow internet speed you could also setup a proxy on your home network and then submit everything with one connection. That way you can have a big mine using nearly no hashrate. The only problem is that you lose a tiny bit of time when you submit, so on fast block switch or in the event where you find a block at the same time as someone else, then only you are penalized. If you mine on a pool it should not really be a problem either way. Since BTC itself has very slow blockchange rate, because of the average mining time. |
|
|
|
i removed it compeltely a long time ago, because bitcointalk itself, was pointing me about the dangerous part of having one
i just write down my pass on a A4 paper, which is not hackable, and i'm done
I always warry of doing this, so i don't instead i write down a reminder sequence that will let me rebuild the password safely, but without being me or going through massive efforts, its not possible to just check my drawer to find my password. I figure if i leave home for a while or lose my wallet, i don't want to have to change my passwords too. |
|
|
|
I dont think they even had good internet right?
Posting here+ offering offline services like photo editing doesn't require a high speed internet. You can also offer btc for goods services , and many more, not everything requires a good/stable internet. You can mine on poor cellphone wifi connection so i don't think mining in such area with slow internet is really all that much of a problem in the first place. And sadly the discrimination of earning, or well at least mining Bitcoin is well here and its called your electricity costs. The only other thing i would consider as BTC earning is trading it or investing it. The other things you can do that input your times isint particularily BTC specific. |
|
|
|
Hi guys, my problem is exactly the same, I think that can use the post for request help. I have 2 S5 connected each on to a psu, i ahve one week the miner with ~600Mh hashrate, I just shutdown and power up for solve the problem, the last days the ASIC status show oooooo oooooooo oooooooo ooooo-oo in the chain 1, but at the moment the chain 1 is cooled and now show ------ -------- -------- --------  , i switched the psu and the ethernal cord, I reinstated to defaults default, and decrease the frequency to 325m and nothing, without solve! I wasted all my ideas and need help guys!.  Well try 100mhz, to see if its a power limitation on the PSU. Maybe the second board is dead but the first one is not, so its weird to see it drop a chip. See if that make the second blade work. You should try with another, trustable PSU, see if its the same thing. And then you should try just running one board at the same time. Collect all the results and post them. |
|
|
|
I've been reading up all I can on the s4 Doggies set up guide doesn't seem to have been updated recently about firmware? can someone point me towards what I should do to get this up and running at it's best? I have read a lot of concerns around different pools and difficulty settings which I don't quite understand yet.
You can safely get the firmwares you want from Bitmain's website. https://bitmaintech.com/support.htm?pid=00720140930114518599JXGHWWD80660It is possible to flash your sd card to a old version and get volt control. If you use the latest Firmware that fix most serious issues, then you will lose volt control. The way to keep volt control while having smit's firmware + the proper cgminer version is convoluted to say the least. |
|
|
|
Alright guys, thanks. Yeah, I already have a bunch of PSU's lying around (from S3's)... I'm honestly thinking of selling them off in favor of SP20's... So much freakin' headache to have to run a crap ton of Antminers.
I do have a couple other questions and I hope you guys can help. Does the SP20 have built-in wireless? And if it does, is it less advanced than setting it up on an Ant? I don't mind either way because I'd have many less units, but just curious...
Secondly... I believe for 1.7 TH/s, you need to be supplying the unit with about 300 watts in each 6 pin slot... Suppose I were using a CX750m for two of those... Power-wise, the PSU can handle it I think... But the problem that concerns me is the 8 pin to 6+2 pin connectors. They kind of daisy chain two 6 pin connectors to that. Now, I know I would have to use each 8 pin independantly, because those two 6 pin connectors would want 600 watts, so that's out. And I guess the SP20 can adapt, but like I said, I want max hashrate...
If I take one 6 pin from each of the two 8 pin connectors, will that single 6 pin on each connector be able to give 300 watts to each slot? I hope what I'm saying makes sense...
I mean, I know for a fact that a single 8 pin to 2x 6+2 can power an Antminer S1, S3 etc with no overclock (though the wires get warm) Of course, each blade is only 130 watts, so it's a combined 360. Fine... What I'm asking is, can one of those 6 pin connectors be capable of delivering 300 watts on it's own through one of the connectors? My Rosewill Photon came with 8 pin to single 6+2 pin connector, as opposed to the double ones... Would that be required? We already know the 8 pin can supply the power... But is the single connector tough enough for that current? If both are daisy chained and all that current is running into one connector, then into the other, I would think maybe so... But I'm not sure.
Sorry for the novel... I just wanna make sure I'm equipt for getting these units only to have them sit and have to mess with things for too long. :/
First, ignore the +2 pins on both end, they're just extra grounds. Second, a double cable would work, the problem is it would probably heat, then melt, then maybe fry your stuff. I believe the safe level is 190w each for double. In this case you definitively will want to only plug one 6 pin per cable. For the 6 pins @ 300watts, it depend on the connectors and the cables themselves. If its 16AWG it should be fine, you can easily find out by just touching it after its been running for few. If its hot, then its not good. Basically avoid 18AWG wires if you want to run 300watts in a connector. Keep checking every other week because if it heat up, it may get worse and worse. I've had bad cables work fine, warm, then hot, then melted after 1.5 years of 250watts each. Last thing to keep in mind, if your PSU is pulling 1200watts at the wall, its not running 300watts per pci-e, since you need to deduct the watts wasted by the PSU conversion and also the fan's usage. |
|
|
|
If the time comes that certain coins are considered permanently clean and others permanently dirty in a future regulated world system,
the community as a whole should purposefully contaminate all clean coins found on the blockchain.
And what incentive does anyone have in doing that? Should we use the Bitcoin Honor System(TM) and hope people are willing to devalue their clean money? I have a better idea. Fungibility. I see a pattern happening here: 1. Issues raised with Bitcoin's fungibility get brought to light 2. Supporters of bitcoin's "fungibility" propose solution X 3. Those who want to see reality for what it is go on to debunk solution X given it is a patch to the system and not an actualy addition to bitcoin's protocol which attempts to fix bitcoin's fungibility issues in a ROUND-ABOUT-WAY. 4. repeat step 2 for solution X+1 until X+n is reached 5. agree to disagree There are so many supposed solutions to fixing bitcoin's fungibility problem but they don't hit the issue head on. It is always some sort of of chain (outside of bitocin protocol) PATCH which does not fix anything deterministically 100%. Fungibility isint a problem in the first place. Its not because a dead man said it need to be fungible than the principle still hold true. I very much doubt he could foresee hundreds of years in the future that money would become digital and ethereal. Now we're in the era of Security. So in the future if you took your bitcoins to all bitcoin merchants to spend them or exchange them and you are denied doing so because of your coins being tainted that's not a problem? I would see it as a problem. Most merchants that accept online transactions, FIAT AND BTC don't give a shit about USD or BTC, they get paid in the currency they want. And payment processors that handle BTC live on BTC, so suiciding by refusing 90% of coins is not going to happen. Wrong. You are comparing a digital transparent decentralized ledger (virtual and globally accessible in an instant) to physical analogies of perfume and dates printed on piece of paper? come on you can't compare the two as if they are equal ways to black list a currency from usage. You can clearly see where bitcoins come from and go to ON THE BLOCK CHAIN with the touch of a button and some software for parsing the block chain . <------ EFFICIENTYou can't clearly see your examples globally and instantly for blacklisting. <-----not EFFICIENT^ Nor can you easily trace the exact/full history of each physical fiat bill efficiently. 90%? Where did you come up with that number? You don't know the exact mechanism for black listing to be put into place at some future date. There are probably 50 shades of black listing that will probably spring up at some point depending upon each government/regulatory department's discretion. No, not wrong. Comparing it to fiat is just fine. You're using an idea, term and criteria that was built with no knowledge of how things could be in the future. The point is, *you* are using a term used for criteria on previous kind money and *you* are applying it to Bitcoin. *You* are basing your perspective on dated concept that hold no value here. And you. The 90% come from you. Even in the case 90% of merchants, and thats magnitude higher than it could happen in the worse case scenario. Then those going through that system would just collapse. Payments processor pays merchants in the currency they want, if they stop accepting any non clean 0x coins, the BTC portion of their dealings would just die. You're suggesting a problem based on fungibility when there is actually... None. Is there a problem with spending X vs Y bitcoin? No. Will there be one? No. So what i been saying in the few posts, if that wasn't clear enough, is that your whole perspective, your whole argument is based on a fallacy. |
|
|
|
the person I sent the coins to has received .1 so who has the other .1?
Technically, that person does, but that transaction is useless. It cannot be spent from and just takes up space. Everything is exactly how you intended it, except that there happens to be an extra transaction floating around. You can get rid of it from your wallet, but we will need to know what wallet you are using. Just ignore the malleability attack, it doesn't really change anything. You sent the same coins twice to the same person, the second transaction confirmed, so he still got the money. All in all, just ignore the double spend, its like it never happened. It's not like it never happened because my coins are gone and I spent twice as much for something. No, as i'm saying, ignore them, they don't change anything. You sent the same coins twice to the same person. Not different coins each time. You did not spend 0.2. You only spent 0.1. Just ignore the malleability'd double spend. In all cause an effect, you can safely pretend they don't exist, because they don't actually do anything. |
|
|
|
Yea there is no warranty. If I keep it then it has one. This is my third time time owning it. Its beenbin rma twice. Thats why I jumped to Zowie and ditching this crap shoot mouse and also, u must have internet to use the mouse. Razer is stupid.
I see, i saw that many pro gamers were using it, but i suspect they use it because they are being sponsored. Anyhow, i went for something with a bit more backing and much less vapor; http://gaming.logitech.com/en-ca/product/g502-proteus-core-tunable-gaming-mouseWork like my old microsoft mouse i've used for like 20 years, but more accurate(Real high DPI processor), ergonomic and all the feature i could possibly want. Can't you just get refunded? When its failed twice... |
|
|
|
|
So, i'm wondering, is the 16 pins pinout otherwise the same as the 18 pins. In short i'm wondering about running a 16pins blade into a 18pins controller safely. I'm pretty sure i read somewhere that it was done, can't find it now, so i'm wondering on how to do it safely.
Anyone knows?
|
|
|
|
take a look here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOyrCut0y30also you can rise the miner on some stands and put other 2 fans under it. total of 6 fans for a quiet miner problem will be that the controller wants its own high rpm fan Very interesting idea to turn idea. Problem I see is that still did not sound quiet. I think you would have to do a mixture of low sound fans. Since they are lower RPM then regular S5 fan it will take multiple. At one time there was a 3d printing set to make the S5 have a enclosed case. I wonder if you could 3d print one and add fans from bottom to top. Use quiet and push from bottom and pull from top. And quiet on front/ back of miner. Only thing is that is a lot of quiet fan's so would add up on cost. Could simply put a low max RPM/CFM fan on FAN_1 of the controller. Unless there is a way to disable the fan check. But at lowest fan speed, 2x S1 fans are very quiet. Also OP did not miss the option to control the fan speed with the latest firmware, right? |
|
|
|
Is it important to "register" my small donation using the .alhdonation suffix? While it was only 1+ TH for a little more than 2 hours, I thought I would ask. It seems that the CK pool software recognized and recorded info for it.
If you want to get credited for it in the eventually where we get a Block in this run, then yes. I believe previous run's hashrate won't be counted, though that would be good to get confirmation*. At the moment it seem that half the reward would be shared evenly and the other half shared based on shares submitted, so registering your donation could be worth it. |
|
|
|
Well thats the thing, ebay is selling it for 42 usd, other places like amazon, newegg, bestbuy are selling them for 67-70usd.
In all honesty I do not know what to ask for it.
Throw an honest price out there.
Afaik, since you're a second hand seller, the warranty typically does not apply to the third hand. Some companies like EVGA offer a lesser warranty to third hand owners. It would be a good idea for you to check it out. Typically, even though its new, you would be selling it at used prices, albeit at its upper echelon. |
|
|
|
I see all kinds of prices on Ebay like well over $400, but given current state of things, that's kind of a lot...
I'm thinking that since price is looking good right now, and I have cheap electricity, ideally I didn't want to put more then $300 into one...
Any thoughts?
"Don't mine, it's a fool's game". Tbh, I just like the feeling of mining, and my electricity bills here aren't unbearable... Plus, if you get cheap hardware, in the longrun if you can front your electricity costs, the BTC you'll make, and their value in the longrun, could be much higher and your actual price/BTC may be lower in the end. Like I said, mining is just fun. When you're not having trouble...
What's the absolute max you'd pay for an SP20 nowadays?
Low 300's sound good. Anymore and you run the risk of it devaluating highly before you can make up the difference. On the other hand with the BTC price looking strong, it sound like a overall good deal if you can get it for 360$ shipped or less. |
|
|
|
what is this ?
i see at your address
Warning! this bitcoin address contains transactions which may be double spends. You should be extremely careful when trusting any transactions to or from this address.
I don't know? What should I do? Why am I seeing this? Does this happen often? Should I shut down this wallet and start a new one? hemmm maybe yess No. Just no. Ignore ^ comment. The malleability attacks has nothing to do with whether you're personally compromised or not. Your wallet is fine, its something to do that is completely unrelated. https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-attack-coinkite-reports-malleability-attack-urges-caution/Etc, its not really related to you. It doesn't really change anything. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
