Someone should create a forum/reddit/slashdot that requires an IQ over 120 to post anything. Anyone else can only watch.
Lol  Subsections for people with PhD's, word count minimums, the whole nine yards! And better yet, a requirement should be writing a dissertation on something to do with Bitcoin. If the dissertation is approved, then you are qualified as a "Bitcoin Expert". |
|
|
|
thank you both SgtSpike and Shadow383  Shadow383: using the flag where? BitMinter? He was talking about guiminer, which again, I wouldn't recommend using! It is old and slow compared to BitMinter and the other mining software out today. |
|
|
|
|
Someone should create a forum/reddit/slashdot that requires an IQ over 120 to post anything. Anyone else can only watch.
|
|
|
|
|
DON'T use guiminer! It is significantly slower than BitMinter and cgminer (up to 10% I've seen in some cases).
BitMinter is a great pool, especially for newbies or people who don't want to mess around. I've been mining at it for months with their miner, namely because I hate messing with flags, batch files and perfect syntax, and I enjoy a good gui interface. BitMinter is perfect for me, and I get just as much MH/s as others report with some of the best command-line miners. It is really nicely optimized.
The wallet from bitcoin.org is just fine. There are better options out there for different use-cases (such as lite clients that don't bog down your computer so much), but there's no reason the default Bitcoin-QT client won't work just fine for you. I use it.
|
|
|
|
What's stopping someone from obtaining my wallet address and stealing from me?
It seems to me that once you have the actual address you can pretend to be that person with any other wallet application out there.
Give it a try, tell us how it works out for you.  |
|
|
|
|
Basically, even with all the computing power in the world at your disposal, you wouldn't (on average) find a key containing someone else's Bitcoins before the universe completely burnt out.
|
|
|
|
This is an important conversation to be having!
I've been concerned about the large blockchain since I first started studying and using bitcoin in 2011. I recently installed the Satoshi client on a new PC and it took many hours to download/calculate the blockchain. With so many users now having fast broadband Internet access, the size of the chain isn't the killer. It is the huge I/O tasks involved. I have been trying the Satoshi client out in a Virtual Box Windows 7 image and it is nearly unusable for 2-3 hours if I haven't run it for a few days and the client has to catch back up. The hard drive just is maxed out making the physical machine nearly unusable. I've been looking at alternative clients that don't require the full block chain and am glad to see work progressing in that area.
It is pretty amazing how long it takes these days... I had a client that was updated through block 135,000 or so, then turned off for months. Started it back up the other day, and it took 3 days on a 1TB WD Black drive to finally get up to date - HDD crunching away the whole time. |
|
|
|
Mining will likely become a game of 'keeping up with the Joneses'. No matter how fast your own hashing power is, you are always competing for a finite amount of coins and there's always a bigger fish. Those with the means to invest will make more money and those that don't will be on the sidelines.
I was a bit concerned to learn that the ASIC warranty was only 6 months. I sure do hope these things don't go *pop* after only a few months of use, since it will never get to pay for itself if it dies on or after 6 months, 1 day of uptime.
Depends on when you ordered. I have an ASIC order that will definitely ship out in the first batch, and if the price/difficulty ratio doesn't change much from today, it'll pay for itself in 5 days. I certainly wouldn't count on a new order written up today having a payback less than 6 months though. But if difficulty only rises by 10 times (which is what some people are projecting), it should *technically* pay for itself within 1.5 months, which still isn't bad. I just think difficulty is going to rise far past 1000% once all of the ASIC preorders have shipped. Certainly, if it isn't going to pay back within 6 months, I wouldn't buy it with only a 6 month warranty - too much risk for my taste. |
|
|
|
if i read that correctly bfl only has to ship one unit before Nov 7th for the people betting "yes" to win? That is correct. Most people so far seem to think that will not happen. EDIT: To be clear, it has to be delivered (not just shipped) on the 7th, and it has to be a unit that someone actually ordered (i.e., an end customer, not just a demo unit sent to a dev). |
|
|
|
|
Mad scientist indeed...
Are you sure your black spots aren't a result of chemtrails?
|
|
|
|
How can they use firmware to increase speed? Wouldn't this mean that they are simply overclocking it in order to increase the cycles/sec? In order to do that it would require more power.. so then how can say in range of their supposed power specs? I'd love to see a working prototype =/
Picture it this way: They were underclocked before. Or, to be more accurate, they were originally designed with the newly-release specs in mind, but BFL underestimated them in order to be certain to overdeliver instead of underdeliver. Has BFL gone on record that this data is from prototypes or is this all theoretical? I haven't seen a single quote by a BFL that this is actual hardware data and not estimation. Even their original message they were very careful to say something along the lines of "the original intent all along was to increase the rate with firmware should a price war occur". Never did they say that this increase was due to optimization after testing physical hardware. It's still all theoretical. Here's the storyline: 1) BFL released specs below what they thought they would be able to achieve, to "be on the safe side". 2) A competitor released specs exceeding BFL's safe-side specs. 3) BFL didn't want to lose the lead of GHash/$$$, so they have now released their full estimated specs. |
|
|
|
How can they use firmware to increase speed? Wouldn't this mean that they are simply overclocking it in order to increase the cycles/sec? In order to do that it would require more power.. so then how can say in range of their supposed power specs? I'd love to see a working prototype =/
Picture it this way: They were underclocked before. Or, to be more accurate, they were originally designed with the newly-release specs in mind, but BFL underestimated them in order to be certain to overdeliver instead of underdeliver. |
|
|
|
|
I'll consider it. I did do it one more time (only listed it in the base Gambling subforum instead of the Games and rounds subforum, which seemed to garner more interest). I lost money that time around though! Needed even more people to play...
|
|
|
|
|
“I have never understood why it is 'greed' to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.” - Thomas Sowell
Discuss.
|
|
|
|
|
Vegas: Make It Big™ - 0.05 BTC
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive Beta Gift - 0.05 BTC (no idea if this is even useful to anyone anymore)
|
|
|
|
I know a few retailers/merchants who were considering using Bitcoin. They've backed out since the "foundation" was announced. Sad.
Anecdotal. I know others, who are big, who like to see some form of structure and are more enthusiastic about getting involved with Bitcoin now that the Foundation was announced. And to say that the Bitcoin Foundation wants to be an "authorian hegemony" is absurd. People need to stop confusing voluntary order and voluntary structure with coercive, mandated structure. Don't let your legitimate fear of the latter cloud your ability to see the virtue in the former. Hegemony can be voluntary but it is still a social force with a sphere of influence. This can become a central cult of personality. Some of us do not want a central sphere of influence around Bitcoin regardless if its opt-in or opt-out. Social power can change everything. We do not want Bitcoin becoming a neutered project at the hands of big business. Feel free to say its your right to try to be a leader. It's my right to try to stop this leadership as well. Too bad you can't do anything about it. |
|
|
|
|
So out of the list of blocks relayed by that IP, how many were generated by known mining pools?
|
|
|
|
I did some rough calculations based on our sales figures and at least for the case of BFL, we will not cause a 10x increase. I can't speak for the other manufacturers numbers, of course.
I do (at this point) trust Inaba, but he does have incentive to lie here. The lower the projected difficulty increase, the more pre-order sales BFL can continue to acquire. That said, I've always felt that most people's estimates based on order numbers were quite high. I bet there are people who go on BFL's site every day and just punch a few unpaid orders in, just to increase the order numbers that much more and try to scare people into not ordering more. I'd guess that 75% of the order numbers are unpaid. Time will tell... Right now, one single is projected to make around $150/day. At a 10x difficulty increase, that's still $15/day, or $450/month. That's still a lot of money... I'll be happy with it, for sure. |
|
|
|
Ermm... it's a computer rendering, not a real picture. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
