I've been considering that. Not exactly sure how well the angle connectors will conduct current though, some seem to be plastic, and others are bolted with a metal connector. It would suck to have the slightest loose connection, which is why I was considering copper busbar.

BTW, I could use some help in determining the correct sizing of the bus bar, as well as the best way to attach things to it. Each PSU is good for 200 amps, and there probably won't be more than 4 of them (or 5 at the most), so 800 to 1000 amps at 12 vdc. I can use crimp connectors on the 6 AWG wire, and then bolt the connectors to the bus with copper bolts, but how should I connect the dozens of little 16-18 AWG wires that go to the 6/8-pin connectors? Perhaps each connector could have its of pair of bolts, and each bolt gets 3 conductors using ring terminals? Like so:

        ===X==*=*=*=*==X==*=*=*=*==X==*=*=*=*==X==*=*=*=*==X===

= is Busbar
X is large power terminal
* is small load terminal

Also, I have been in contact with Advantech about getting a VT-d capable host board, but it will run me about a grand, including the Xeon E3-1225 and 8 GB of RAM . has anyone been able to test the "multiple x sessions" theory to see if it would work for many video cards (instead of VT-d)? I think an earlier poster mentioned that they were going to test it, but I'm not sure who and whether it ever happened.

Like this? Click it and zoom in for the full effect...

+1, not sure what OP was seeing. Here are some screenshots to make the "external images" thing clear:



When I connect to my router, for example, it shows the red crossed out HTTPS because the router has an invalid self generated certificate.

One other reason I think it could show up potentially in your case is if you use OpenDNS or similar - when OpenDNS blocks some HTTPS content, the certificate is invalid because it is for the OpenDNS domain, and not the domain that was expected by the browser when fetching the resource. That could be what is happening to you.

Why all the closed door stuff? Isn't it about time that someone --ANYONE-- were a little more open about things like this? When I hear things like FPGA and ASIC, things that spring to mind are insanities such as multi-thousand dollar costs for nothing more than a bit of software that can make the things work, engineering fees that far exceed the cost of the time and materials expended, and on and on and on. It is a pathetic shame that the industry has such a strangle hold on the hardware development that every detail must be kept under wraps.

A prime, shining example of a useful open hardware design is that of OpenSPARC T1/T2 - relatively modern processors with a completely open architecture (http://www.opensparc.net/). Take also for example the kernels used for video card mining - open source. Many minds can find optimizations that may never have been considered before, and everyone benefits. Even if you refuse to share your IP, there is no reason to be secretive about the other plans, since there isn't a whole lot anyone can do without both the IP and the investment money.

You went to a different page....

Me too!
This is half of it, since the other half had to be ordered and will ship soon:

FTFY

Oh god I laughed so hard. Great work Phin.

FYI,you can send commands to a running bitcoind instance from another window. It is annoying that it doesn't just log to stdout or else fork to the background by default, but since it doesn't, just open a new command window and run the commands to access bitcoind as usual, and the one that you run will talk to the already-running instance and send you the data.

So, to get information about the currently running instance of bitcoind, just open a new command window and type 'bitcoind getinfo' (no quotes) and it will start a new instance of bitcoind that talks to the running instance and will spit out the requested information.

Although I haven't tested it, I hear it should be possible to tell the GUI to talk to a running bitcoind as well, but I don't what arguments that would require.

I was explaining the general concept of a green address, not whether it is accurately used in this case. I assume there is an API call available that will confirm this though.

I believe it is correct that they are split to all the miners, and therefore would go to the -a address.

If you use the -a option, you can have p2pool mine to an offline address or to an address on a secured computer. You only need one instance of bitcoind and p2pool on a central computer, and once it is set up you can point all your nodes at it in the same way that you set up a pool. The central computer's bitcoind doesn't need to hold any bitcoins at all, and the wallet can be empty.

Bumping. Will probably end this tuesday (tomorrow).

I might note that it isn't totally clear that the python and twisted packages aren't necessary for the Windows users that wish to use the compiled binary. It might be good to make a note that those packages are only necessary if you are running the python script manually.

I was going to work on a NSIS based installer, but I abandoned that because it would be better if forrestv created it. There are a number of different ways that it could be installed, and I am not good at creating the script so that it will be foolproof.

For new users, it also might be handy to have it pause and say or something similar to that.

I think they've said that there won't be a "new single", but that will probably go in one of the multi-device rigs. Hmmm, wonder if we can have it as an aftermarket option?

I believe I could. Much larger heatsinks, (perhaps the height of where the individual fan would be if removed) and toss the individual fan on top of each "super single" (I like that term ). Same cross-ways fan arrangement, but less turbulence and localized heating. The case fans may need to be a little higher velocity.

I went and looked at the dimensions in the first post, and it looks like in its current form it will take up 7U of rack height, but it is 10 inches wide which would make it a tight squeeze to get 2 of them beside each other in a standard 19" rack. Perhaps it would be best to ignore potential improvements here though, because I don't want to delay anything by causing a redesign halfway through. However, for the future SuperComputer, if it isn't watercooled, the best thing to do would be to make it fit in a rack as best as possible. That could mean specially ducted airflow, offset processors (to prevent waste heat from cooking another processor), standard width, (no shelf needed), and no more than 4U height.

Take for example a 2U server with quad 90 watt processors: They have fairly large heatsinks, and none of them are in line with each other. Although these might have to be stacked several deep, an offset arrangement would prevent the heat from travelling linearly as it does now, cooking the rear devices.

So was it deducted from your account balance, and shows in the transaction list?

Yeah those are totally sexy. Wonder how many I could stack up with a parallel loop.

Surely, and I will say that I am far from being such a True Believer, but the combination of

• Evading answering of reasoned arguments
• Trollish sounding postings repeated with little to no variation
• Juvenile attitude

Are just a few of the things that goaded me into posting this. I wish to provide a thread to discuss this so that other threads don't have to suffer from the back-and-forth hate that inevitably ensues when this user jumps in. As an aside, the title was going to be "Cunicula is a whining bitch", but that would have done nothing to further the discussion legitimately. I wish to present a way of arguing that may very well be new to this user, namely that it is possible to have a reasoned discussion without the childish attacks and derailing.