|
I think a lot of Canadian miners do this.
Last winter I moved a few miners into the house and opened up my furnace plenum's air intake to accept the exhaust. Considering I have an electric furnace this allows me to run equipment at a cost I would have to spend anyways.
I have heard of people using smaller units in individual rooms to meet the demand or fight a cold spot. The first guy who sold me equipment has heated his business in Winterpeg for 5 years now without turning on his gas furnace.
I can only speak to Asics but I feel it is helpful for colder climates to at least keep a small percentage of the hash in the hands of the people.
Edit: Forgot to mention the only draw back is noise, so mine in the basement at the furnace was not a problem
*For a few months out of the year.
|
|
|
|
is it true the 500 RVN when creating an asset will be burned?
That's the number they are going with for now. The answer is yes though, you will have to burn RVN to create an asset. I've heard mention, nothing concrete, about maybe having the amount change if it becomes cost prohibitive. Could just be rumor mill stuff. |
|
|
|
I also don't think xandry has to explain themselves to any of us.
Ok so... taking it as an encouragement (since this is something coming from staff, highly reputable personal for this forum, right?), what if everyone of us starts creating an ANN to reward the reporter (that's what it seems) with 1 merit? Would you think it will look nice? The whole beauty of the merit system is going to be ruined IMO. So do you have a problem with this thread, which has been helpful in cleaning up the forum. With merit being a system I don't think there is any "beauty" to it. This would be the closest thing to beauty associated with the merit system in my opinion, objectively because I like the pattern. So here is the thing theymos has given their thoughts on how they would like the program to proceed but in no way has laid out a clear/cut line on how to do so.
May be s/he trusted our common sense however I think there should be a very clean clear guideline of spending sMerits. Thing is if we use common sense then we do not need the guideline. Of-course we can not expect everything to go 100% right. No one is perfect.
Perfection is definitely an unattainable aspiration; and not something this system can be. So in the end as long as the merits being given out in some way better the forum; make it rain. In this case with no harm befalling anyone, the ends justify the means. |
|
|
|
Honestly I don't really have an issue with Merit being given for posts being reported. I don't think that every report needs to be merited. I also don't think xandry has to explain themselves to any of us. They would have to explain themselves to theymos, and they may or may not make those conversations public. I'm hoping that this system will increase post quality by:
- Forcing people to post high-quality stuff in order to rank up. If you just post garbage, you will never get even 1 merit point, and you will therefore never be able to put links in your signature, etc.
- Highlighting good posts with the "Merited by" line.
While we will not be directly moderating this, I encourage people to give merit to posts that are objectively high-quality, not just posts that you agree with.
So here is the thing theymos has given their thoughts on how they would like the program to proceed but in no way has laid out a clear/cut line on how to do so. From what I've seen theymos prefers to leave things unregulated but with some boundaries. There are also a ton of Merits that have been granted and not just in the first few care free fun days to objectively low-quality posts; or as a Hi five Bro! Can't say I frequent the Russian board as it would all be Greek to me, but if this has improved the overall quality of the board then great. If it cleans up garbage and leaves quality posts in place, all the better. |
|
|
|
Check the OP again  I had already added https://cryptoubi.org/ to the OP at the bottom, under 'Sources + Interesting Links'. Sorry I wasn't clear lol, been a long nightshift. I just meant the extension of "/links" seeing as it brings you right to all the projects. When I was searching around it kept coming up before the main page. I did miss that TCUP copnnection. I'm sure they are connected in some way if only through the co-founders Jim Flynn and Phillip Silva. Maybe the zeropoverty was supposed to be an intial branch of kuwa. The zeropoverty site still makes me feel uneasy. The way they use the large border photo to draw you into donating. Can't really put my finger on anything else, but like I said my previous years in call centers have given me a bit of an idea when people are trying to manipulate you. I'm going to definitely check out the new batch that have popped up some seem promising. |
|
|
|
I took the time to read your article and I have a few problems. How to solve the problem?
Users can either trade Merit (send it to each other) or buy old accounts of people who no longer use Bitcointalk and want to sell them.
How ever these same old users are poisoning these type of deals by giving fake negative trust points to these people. They are really ready to do everything, in order not to take any more new people into their little club. This is the "poison" you refer to. These deals are terrible as they give other users the impression that they are dealing with someone who either provides valid advice or has gained knowledge through experience by the time they have spent in the crypto environment. It's not currently a perfect system, but it does work. Your idea of these deals would create a much shittier environment... in my humble opinion. This may seem as a good system to warn people of scammers, however old Bitcointalk users have found a way to poison this as well. Most negative trust rating is given not because a person really scammed someone, but because they are doing something what the old simply don’t like. The system isn't perfect. All that red trust really gets you is rejected from SIG campaigns. Especially when there is a reference users can make up their own mind about the person they may deal with. You are also mistaken as it is only the DT1 and maybe 2 trust that shows up as red for all to see. Where you are almost close to right here is that non DT trust isn't shown in any way unless users check for it, I do understand why it's not but I wish more people looked into it. The idea behind it is that they all feel you are doing something untrustworthy... which you were. It's no different than going to some other Forum and asking people to come here and give you fake positive feedback or Merit for nothing. EDIT: Oh I did forget as a Full Member, I have no power lol. As far as I know I can't do anything that others can't do or pay a small fee to do. It only really shows I've been here for about a year in my case. |
|
|
|
Discussion would be nice to have. I'm a little surprised there isn't more of a global feel to this topic= as of yet. Like you said maybe in the future. So I've been rabbitholing again, lol. Started with this one zeropoverty.io - Note I have a bad feeling about it just skimming through. Mostly focused on needing donations, and then I noticed there projected fundraising timeline had passed. There seem to have been no updates on the project either. I have a hard time outright calling this a scam though for 1 reason mostly they have Phillip Silva listed there and provide his linkedin profile where it does show he is a part of the project. The only other mention of a team member is Jim Flynn. Considering the above, I am surprised the community hasn't seen a lot more of these potential UBI scams, though I'm sure they're coming unfortunately, Then I found this, the Kuwa.org - This has a better feel to it. There appears to be a plan, a whitepaper, and a full team. The funny thing is the 2 of the co-founders are the only 2 team members mentioned in the zeropoverty site. That helped reaffirm my suspicions about them. One thing I like about them is that they are trying to avoid the roadblocks of passports and Id's. I found it an interesting consideration seeing as ideally a UBI in my mind can reach everyone, going so far as to say I'd rather it reached those in need before myself. A nice edit to your OP would be to ad this extended site link https://cryptoubi.org/linksI think there are a few more projects on there now. |
|
|
|
Posting in this forum is best done when you have something meaningful to say, or an interesting question to ask. If you are just going to rehash old topics, or to post rubbish, then please don't. The very fact that you ask the quaestion tends to brand you as yet another potential bounty spammer.
question. Couldn't help myself |
|
|
|
If you do run round 2 I'd be interested in a spot. Just notify me when it comes up. I've definitely wasted .01 on worse investments. |
|
|
|
My thoughts are they may extend that warranty on a case by case sale.
If I wanted to buy I would ask for a longer warranty or just order single units.
Good point, I never really considered bartering on the warranty period as opposed to the price point. I wonder how many people considering these would think the same way. |
|
|
|
|
Nice, they'll be even nicer when my extra 741's show up next week.
Found someone holding an unused pallet. Their sales dried up after the FOMO, so I got 3 at a decent price
Keep the blocks coming
|
|
|
|
Hello,
With many S9s how do you power your PSUs? via a PDU (HP EO4500) to a 30A 240V outlet or otherwise?
Hi there, I couldn't find the exact specs on your PDU so it will depend on a few things. What I did find appears to have it rated for 24 amps and up to 240 V. A rough estimate will be that you can use 3 S9's per PDU on this circuit. I'll use 1340 for watts and the worst case scenario add 10% so 1474W W/V=A = 6.14 amps per miner. So 4 miners will put you over the rating on that PDU as it's rated for 24 amps(common) Now, if you only receive 220V on the line this pushes the per miner amps to 6.7 amps. Which definitely puts you over. Hope all that helps. Do you know how many machines you want to bring online or what your plans are for expansion? |
|
|
|
|
Can you provide photos of the gear to prove ownership? please include a handwritten note with your BTC talk name and date on it.
|
|
|
|
Pretty sure you will receive the same answers as this person did https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3652698.0Really comes down to getting sucked in by a phishing link or having not changed your password after one of the database hacks. Good luck in recovering your account |
|
|
|
That's pretty bad ass, and the 156 Th/s is impressive in addition to making them stackable like that! The only drawbacks - the 15,480 Watts ±20% of power it consumes and the short 90 day warranty..
The power consumption is right on point with their original per unit ratings. Phil has run some tests on these I think, with settings provided by someone else and they prove to be fairly adjustable. Mind you if you are buying 1 of these I don't think you are worrying about the base power consumption. I would be surprised by the 90 day warranty being on the actual Miners, it wouldn't be worth it for anyone to give up 87.5% of their warranty just to have a plug and play model. They have been known to boilerplate some entries on the website before. I would think it may be more likely to pertain to breakers,plugs or non mining components. If you look at the 841 page on the Canaan website it also shows a 90 day warranty period. https://canaan.io/product/avalon-841-april/ |
|
|
|
|
I think this deserves a simple answer.
If you borrowed money and haven't paid back the full amount. Then yes pay them back. Pretty simple
Anything beyond that is just looking fort a Tit for Tat on repaying what you owe.
|
|
|
|
|
For sure.
Thanks for the Reddit link it'll give me somewhere else to spend my nightshifts.
I know it's tough to bring in the conversation. Odds are your in the right place the only other one I could think of would be "politics and society". Only because UBI would benefit society. You may also drum up more conversation about UBI itself.
|
|
|
|
This is true, my opinion is that we can maybe reduce the required merit to rank up for example if we reduce by 20-50% nothing will change, people with bad post will not rank up but will be easier for good people to rank up. Abusers will always abuse and for them is irrelevant.
That's how I felt mostly in regards to the first step. I posted about it sometime ago, and if Members started halfway to their next rank I would now be carrying the Senior Member Badge. I do like the idea of lowering the requirements though It would be a nice balance between the old timeline for ranking up and still needing to produce quality posts. I have also given up on caring, It'll be nice when I get there, but the second half is going to take longer for sure. The review services were nice but most of them died out, and a lot of people are beginning to hate searching out good posts to merit because they see there is still a ton of garbage out there. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
