There is nothing radical in not supporting XT. Being on the fence as in "half adopting" XT is simply a disingenuous stance. Sort of like the "atheism is a religion" argument. Or being on the fence about the Pol Pot genocide because opposing all murders is radical, "let's compromise and murder just half of the opposition and their families".
Problem is, the public argument pretty quickly turned into a binary choice of sorts, pro XT vs. pro status quo. Given that choice, anything other than being on the fence would be naive. XT is a bit of a red herring. It's more about BIP101 (and friends) and more broadly, it's about how the protocol is managed. |
|
|
|
Referring to the part of your statement that I have bolded above. Even though this is the final auction of this particular series of ceased coins, I would NOT put it past the Feds and/or other Governments from time to time come across BTC and/or other crypto assets in large quantities and to have similar future auctions.
Anyone heard of any pools on this one? I'd love to drop 1/2 mil on some coins but cash flow & all, y'know... |
|
|
|
If you rectified & smoothed 120V Mains would give 168V. You are going to need a very long string, like 210 Chips. Could be done but the strings work better with more than one chip at each stage. S5 has 2, S7 has 3. So that means 420 or 660 so not very practical, and without an isolating transformer, which will have losses, not very safe.  When I first thought of it, I had in mind that the chips were 3-4V but that would certainly be a lot of chips. Safety though? Pshaw. Just think of the hashes per Joule  |
|
|
|
Read through that earlier. Hurting and panicking? Potato/potato, I guess. |
|
|
|
Have a look at the subreddit if you want to see the XT crew literally hurting and panicking that other scalability solutions are progressing, undermining their efforts to enforce 8GigaByte blocks and node de-anonymising code.
It's kind of fun to see.
Which subreddit? I don't check in on /r/bitcoinxt that often but a quick look and things seem fairly innocuous. The sidechain thread has 6 comments. |
|
|
|
"String" or "Module" refers to the way the Chips are powered. Might be better to think of it as Series or Parallel. In the S1 & S3 the chips are powered in Parallel. In practice it is slightly more complex with the 12V powering a number of Buck Converters that drop the 12V to the voltage required for the Core (0.7V -1.0V) Each Buck Converter then powers a number of chips, 8 in the S1 and 2 in the S3.
In the S5 & S7 the chips power is connected in Series (Just like old style Christmas Tree Lights) So in the case of the S5 there are 15 pairs of chips in the chain, 12V /15 = 0.8V / chip. All very neat and efficient as there are no Buck Converters needed, saves money and is very efficient, But....
If one of the chips in the chain fails then at best you loose all the chips after that one and often you loose the whole chain, dependant on the failure mode. If a chip goes open circuit (Like a bulb blowing in the Christmas Lights) as the voltages to the chips are messed.
Also worth remembering that as well as the power all of the data & control signals in all of the Miners is chained through the chips. It seems that sometimes even if a chip is not hashing it continues to pass through these signals enabling the chips further down to keep operating , however with more major failures downstream chips will stop working.
Rich
It would be interesting to see a design based on rectified and smoothed 120V. No external PSU needed Just as an aside on the Christmas lights, I have those ones where a dead bulb does not kill the lights. Problem is, it does that by shorting the connection through the bulb, leading to increased voltage to the other bulbs and more rapid failure. By the time you get to three dead bulbs in a row, it's game-over for that segment. Not sure this is relevant but I felt like sharing |
|
|
|
|
Haha. I guess a bunch of the people who left will be flooding back. Probably for another dry spell.
Has anyone done any calculation as to how much fickle miners benefit those of us who stick with it?
|
|
|
|
|
Mine allowed me to click on "skip upgrade" *shrug*
|
|
|
|
Do you think he would get banned for sig + spam if he joined a signature campaign? He makes 168 posts every week and money from a signature campaign would help to pay for the rent of his server. One of the campaigns might make an exception for his very bad quality posts because he is providing a service.
I've had a couple of offers but decided against it. Now that I'm hosting the images on imgur, it's really not costing me anything to do it. One thing I was considering was no advertising on the forum but maybe some advertising in the linked images. I'm not sure how many people actually view those though (not that it would be hard to find out). |
|
|
|
I think you can also just use the smit1237 firmware. If I remember correctly, if you want to use a custom cgminer with smit1237's FW, you just stick the new cgminer into /config (which is non-volatile) and that becomes the new default.
If that's the one in the link, that was for the S4 (though they may be compatible?). I'll look into it a bit more. I may want to add some extra stuff in in any case. |
|
|
|
For which Antminer? The S7? Also, step 8 seems a bit off... you sure you want to tell people to brick their Antminers?  Interesting random fact: 9 of the last 20 p2pool blocks are BIP101. No, this is for the S5. 4.9.0 cgminer is working fine but I want to make it survive a reboot. |
|
|
|
|
From looking through the update code on the Antminer, it looks like it's a fairly straightforward process...
1)Obtain latest firmware
2)Unpack firmware
3)Uncompress RamFS image
4)Substitute custom cgminer for original cgminer
5)Recompress RamFS image
6)zip only new image into tgz file
7)Use upgrade page on the web interface to update
8)Cry over bricked antminer (?)
If anyone is interested in this and it works, I could put it for download somewhere.
Any other changes that might be worth slipping in?
|
|
|
|
I kind of feel like i don't want to spend money on getting more stuff than i already have on hand since i have no guarantee that this will allow the board to function. Hence, kind of wasted money.
Thermal paste is like $1 on ebay including shipping. $5 if you want to go for the fancy stuff. |
|
|
|
I see, i'm not very knowledgeable with circuits but i do have the tools for this, could you tell me more about what to look for? I can tell what a capacitor is because its a cylinder, but you know thats pretty much it. I could make do with an example however. Capacitors often look just like resistors with SMT (small rectangular blocks). If you google "solder dry joint" you'll get an idea of what you might be looking for. All the parts on the board should be designed to withstand that temperature (though there may be labels etc added after the board was assembled) |
|
|
|
Hell no! I never spend my money, not on frivolities like lunch I don't.
When my grandpappy raised me in the Deep South he drummed it into me to think of eating as not frivolous. Our family has a tragic history of loved ones forgetting to eat and passing away. If I remember to keep eating I'll pass on the same wisdom to my future kinfolk. Mmmmm....eating kinfolk. AKA Kentucky love. |
|
|
|
bake it at 350 degree for 5 mins
Be careful with F or C. One will have your chips sitting in a pile in the bottom of the oven. Pretty sure thats in F. But i'd still like more information on this. I'm not going to slap my S5 blade in an oven because someone told me to before properly understanding the risk even though i understand the concept. Yep. Solder melts at 180-190C. What you're doing here is if there are any stress-fractures in the solder which are causing issues, you are hoping the solder will melt just a little and reform a good joint. It's not a great way to do it but it's cheap. Personally I would first inspect all solder joints with a magnifying glass. These joints can sometimes be seen. Additionally, it looks like most of the joints are accessible so you possibly could attempt this with just a soldering iron. Personally, I'm a bit skeptical given that the chips are reporting good but I don't know enough to speak with confidence and someone else is reporting that the reflow worked for him. If nothing else seems to help though... Edit: Just went back and saw it reported --- when run in tandem so I'm no longer very skeptical. |
|
|
|
bake it at 350 degree for 5 mins
Be careful with F or C. One will have your chips sitting in a pile in the bottom of the oven. |
|
|
|
 There was zero reason for him to inject the block size discussion into this thread, particularly the way he chose to do so. I have a side but I see no need to denigrate those who have a different opinion. |
|
|
|
|
Mildly curious (only mildly) about how the blades are controlled and whether it would be possible to replace the controller board with a Pi (for example). More effort than it would be worth for me though.
(Sorry, definitely getting off-topic there)
|
|
|
|
I see no reason why fees can't pay for a pretty hefty pow network when there's no block reward but thousands of transactions a second and $30k-$70k coins. Any artificial scarcity on this front now will strangle Bitcoin.
I agree. Though I am not actually all that worried about the block size limit as I believe the dynamics of Bitcoin will ensure it is disposed of. If not in good time then in time enough. I'm more of a cheerleader for the process than for any decision in particular. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
