Moores law man (kinda). At some point ASIC will become the "new" GPU and it will have to be upgraded or completely changed at some point. Will it destroy bitcoin? That was just a title to entice readers. It will only strengthen competition for miners which can only be good right?
And what can be wrong with strengthening the power of the miners? It will only make it more difficult for a 51% attack.
you don't use ASICs for gaming how will it strengthen competition for miners? strengthen competition amongst the 2% that are left? who cares about a 51% attack when nobody cares about bitcoins anymore? surely i'm not the only one that solely became interested because I could use my existing equipment to procure my 'own' bitcoins i wouldn't have thought twice about it had it required some POS that was useless otherwise. ed: (and why in the hell would more people have ASICs than GPUs, making a "51% attack" less likely? since when does total hash power figure in here, rather than # of players?) If the only reason you like Bitcoin is because you could make money from mining, then it's not much of a loss when you leave. |
|
|
|
|
Nope, I don't use adblocker or anything like that. The only extension I have is the MtGox Peek.
|
|
|
|
... so then what do you see?
BTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
BTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
BTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
BTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTC
I just see the letters B T C. |
|
|
|
|
Still can't see it in any of my chrome browsers on any of the computers I use.
|
|
|
|
The person who claimed to order 1000 Jalapenos also claimed to order 100 singles and 10 MRs, so that is obviously BS. There are other responses that look suspect in terms of order size (though not as obviously so), and there are others that are suspect b/c they report things like 17,001,846 as the order number.
Anyway, I'm not going to take the time to sort through this. I'm not convinced that enough people took the survey seriously enough to give solid data. And we have other data where it's easier to extract the info I care about (i.e. average Gh/order).
I kind of came to the same conclusion. It's easier to sift through the data when people are willing to tie forum names to it (i.e., the "order date" threads). |
|
|
|
|
Lol, JJ, continuing on your ranting as always. If you don't like the company, don't buy from them. Why do you have to crap on every BFL thread you find?
|
|
|
|
I received 3 more singles today. BF must have the worst quality control team in the world. None of the screws were tightened. One had a bad fan on the bottom that was making a very loud noise. They also didn't put in the bottom rubber pieces for them to sit on. I spent about a hour taking them apart and putting them back together properly. I've never spent this kind of money and gotten such poor customer service and quality control. Hopefully they learn how to tighten screws before the SC Singles come out.
Agreed. It's right up there with how well they communicate with their customers on both pre and post sales. For the thousands of USD I have spent I expected more. Out of my first batch of five, three of my bottom fans have already failed and needed to be replaced after running for almost six weeks. In a word, shoddy. Let's hope they step it up on the SC line. (They did send me the replacement fans right away though, and extras.) It is definitely a hands on endeavor. I have had to "tune up" each unit in some way or another wither it be loose screws, stuff rattling inside, missing feet, or fans crapping out. Maybe it has something to do with the shipping. Mine came with very little shipping material to protect them, that whole "if it fits it ships" box from the USPS is not the way to go IMO. I am thankful I actually have BFL's to utilize all things considered with respect to lead times on order to delivery. In reality they have been less maintenance per Ghash then all my 20+ GPUs. So there is that going for them I guess.  I had a few issues as well with loose heat sink clamps, I had to open mine up and re attach them. It is interesting that despite the sub par customer service, shipping times and customer control, we still seem to order products, and I too am guilty of getting in on the SC line. Just a testimony to their amazing product line I guess. Exactly. People need to vote with their wallets. The fact that BFL is still getting monies only shows that the end product is worth all the pains in getting it. |
|
|
|
What I am talking about is how the difficulty will rise tenfold (at least) when people receive these ASIC's, so each one will make 1/10th of what it is currently projected to make.
Do you really think that difficulty rise 10fold? I thought it doubled.... It would only take 12 minirigs to double the current difficulty. It'll rise 10 fold very quickly, just based on the fact that there's 800+ orders. |
|
|
|
It won't last for very long...
Well, Maybe the quote ( http://bitcoin.clarkmoody.com/ ) of BTC rises. This quote is not depended of the difficulty... EDIT: When this quote doubles, then the problem of devaluation does not exists  .. Right? I don't understand what you are saying. What I am talking about is how the difficulty will rise tenfold (at least) when people receive these ASIC's, so each one will make 1/10th of what it is currently projected to make. |
|
|
|
Difficulty would probably be lower as GPUs shut off due to being unprofitable, but let's run with it. Each single is still earning almost 3BTC a day, and the November ones are also paid off.
Could you / someone explain your calculation of 3BTC a day for each Single ‘SC? When I calculate for 24h day with a 40960 MH/s (=40 GH/s ) with Deepbit it displays 21.17 BTC/24h:  He means the older singles I think. Okay... thanks... It still sounds so unbelievable to me that you can earn that amount a day with an investment of $1300.... ! Even with half that amount you don't have to work anymore for income..... It won't last for very long... |
|
|
|
Difficulty would probably be lower as GPUs shut off due to being unprofitable, but let's run with it. Each single is still earning almost 3BTC a day, and the November ones are also paid off.
Could you / someone explain your calculation of 3BTC a day for each Single ‘SC? When I calculate for 24h day with a 40960 MH/s (=40 GH/s ) with Deepbit it displays 21.17 BTC/24h: He means the older singles I think. |
|
|
|
The passphrase private keys I've used have typically been pretty long. Seems to me they wouldn't be found in rainbowtables. For example, they might look something Like this. The passphrase private keys I've used have typically been pretty long. Seems to me they wouldn't be found in rainbowtables. For example, they might look something Like this. If any value in the rainbow table produces the same hash as your passphrase for any one of the thousands of hashing rounds that is a collision. Once a collision occurs any subsequent rounds will always produce identical hashes. The more rounds in the chained hashing system the higher the potential for a collision. If the rainbow table has a value which produces the same hash as your passphrase on any round (not just the first round) then the attacker can generate the same private key. The attacker may never know what you passphrase is. It doesn't matter. Same private key is same private key no matter how it is generated. This is defeated by including a deterministic salt on each round of the hashing function to ensure that hash for one round can't be compared to any other round. Of course that warning wasn't intended to be exhaustive. There are dozens of potential design flaws waiting to render a system cryptographically weak. Simple version: Don't try to do it yourself because the odds are you will make some flawed decision based on incomplete knowledge. Anyone other than a cryptographer is best served by using an existing cryptographically strong peer review system (and yes that include me). I take my own advice. FastCash4Bitcoins stores all passwords as bcrypt hashes. But if any value in the rainbow table produces the same SHA256 hash (easily collides with different inputs), doesn't that mean SHA256 would be broken? I guess I don't understand why simple English phrases would be more likely to collide than any other set of random characters, unless the exact same English phrase is chosen. |
|
|
|
Sorry it took so long! I basically just copy/pasta into excel from the backend reporting. http://www.filefactory.com/file/52q0t33n3yb7/n/Bitcoin_survey_xlsxSome results seem to be significant outliers... such as the guy who "ordered" 1000 jalapenos and 15 minirigs. Anyway, if someone wants to compile some nice summaries from this data, go for it! |
|
|
|
The 256-bit number of the private key doesn't have to be low. As long as it is less than:
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEBAAEDCE6AF48A03BBFD25E8CD0364141
you'll be safe.
Oh, I misunderstood that. I was reading it as 00000000000000000000000000000EBAAEDCE6AF48A03BBFD25E8CD0364141. Obviously, it's the other way around, and it would actually be very difficult to create a SHA256 hash that isn't a valid Bitcoin private key. Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
What's the best/easiest way to turn text into a VALID Bitcoin private key (one that starts with a 5)? As I understand it, a valid private key must be a 256-bit number, but a very low 256-bit number. Is this true?
|
|
|
|
|
Will BitMinter have BFL SC support before they are released?
|
|
|
|
Ok Sukrim, everything you said makes sense. I agree with you.  Ideally, a special torrent client would be used that automatically reports how much they downloaded from whom to service.com. And like you said, that communication would happen nearly instantly. |
|
|
|
|
1HzH4YtFwBQXyF2NCCwyY2qFCCsBsmdN3j
Total Received 0.20115289 BTC
Final Balance 0.20115289 BTC
I lol'd.
|
|
|
|
Not worth it today you mean. If litecoin was $100 per coin, you might feel different. Plan for the long run future, not selling cryptocoins short. Still not worth it. If I was going to pay $9/month in electricity to mine $2.44 worth of LTC, then I just lost $6.56 for no good reason. Instead, it would be much smarter to put that $9 into the coins themselves. Then, at the end of the month, I have $9 worth of LTC, instead of $2.44 worth of LTC. Mining at a loss makes no sense. Buy instead of mine at that point. Yes you have the right idea. Some mine for the novelty of mining despite the loss. Early bitcoin miners mined at a loss too. It was for the novelty and look at them now with their stashes of BTC  Early bitcoin miners who were mining at a loss also could have had even larger stashes of BTC if they had bought instead of mined. I can understand it from the novelty or hobby perspective, but from any other perspective, especially financial, it just doesn't make sense. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
