Latest posts of: jgarzik

Are any of the controllers going to be OpenCores' OpenRISC? That would be neat, if so.

Quote from: vesper39 on August 08, 2013, 05:01:04 AM

watching

Next time, try clicking the "watch" link. There is no need to respond to a thread, just to watch it. (look at Watchlist link in the upper left)

There is certainly "life at Avalon." I was poked by the team, to make sure my batch #3 arrived (it did, even after a shipping address mistake, though manual intervention with DHL was required).

Quote from: kano on August 07, 2013, 05:20:30 AM

Quote from: jgarzik on August 07, 2013, 12:18:27 AM

Update: 2x working Singles (~60GH each), 2x dead BFL-supplied PSUs.

You can see an example of the dead PSU on the left side of this picture (the PSU is on the left, the miner on the right):
https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/364783173869113344/photo/1

Had to purchase third party PSUs at Fry's, and fashion wires out of a child's toy, but the miners are happily mining.

Or just buy a proper PSU with PCIe connectors on it ......... like is in almost every desktop computer now-a-days Tongue

That's what I did -- but modern ATX often requires shorting a pin, to turn on the PSU.

See http://www.techpowerup.com/articles/other/22

Quote from: WinTame2012 on August 07, 2013, 03:16:10 AM

Jeff, when you've ordered them (singles)?

June 2012.

U.S. judge says SEC can pursue Bitcoin-related lawsuit
URL: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/06/us-court-sec-bitcoin-idUSBRE97517G20130806

Quote

U.S. regulators got the green light from a federal judge to proceed with their lawsuit against a Texas man accused of running a Ponzi scheme using Bitcoin, the virtual online money system.

Trendon Shavers of Bitcoin Savings & Trust had challenged the Securities and Exchange Commission's case against him, saying the regulator had no jurisdiction to sue him because the Bitcoin investments he offered are not securities or subject to any U.S. regulation.

But U.S. Magistrate Judge Amos L. Mazzant in the Eastern District of Texas ruled on Tuesday that his Bitcoin investments "meet the definition of investment contract, and as such, are securities."
[...]

Quote from: k9quaint on August 06, 2013, 06:12:32 PM

May never ROI. Since difficulty can fall (or stop rising), there are infinite scenarios under which a BFL Single could generate ROI.
However, the more BTC rises in USD, the better off the early pre-order people would have been just buying BTC from Gox or BTC-E instead of BFL.

In almost every case, buying bitcoins would have been smarter, easier and more lucrative than buying ASIC mining hardware.

That is a separate subject from whether or not my BFL hardware returns the initial investment (it will).

Quote from: snakee on August 06, 2013, 07:00:24 PM

Hey

Would someone be so nice and explain the following to a beginner ? ----"-loadblock=/path/to/file"----

Just drop bootstrap.dat into your bitcoin data directory, restart Bitcoin-Qt, and do not be confused by other, more complicated instructions.

Quote from: Syke on August 06, 2013, 04:20:07 PM

Difficulty has gone up 25x. That means that device is even less profitable now than when he made that comment.

True.

Quote

BFL is so late that their devices will never ROI.

Hogwash. My 2x $1300 SC Singles are quite likely to return their purchase price in a few months.

bfgminer worked out of the box on Fedora Linux.

One SC Single is happily mining away, seeing 55-60 GH as expected.

Another Single is not running currently, due to faulty BFL-supplied PSU. Will test second unit tomorrow.

The unboxing, if it matters: https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/364453387057643521

Looking to run mine via Fedora Linux, on a laptop. (Old laptops make great wireless/ethernet bridges, and they have USB too)

Although... it is tempting to use of these as the "mining hub". Just bought one at Fry's: http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/motherboards/desktop-motherboards/nuc.html

Just got 2x BFL SC Single miners, but cannot find my Kill-A-Watt.

Has anybody posted amps/watts numbers for the ASIC Single anywhere?

Thanks.

Need to make sure I don't blow a circuit or three.

Received 2x BFL Singles today (ordered June 2012).

Was a bit of a pleasant surprise, as I was only expecting one. (double-checked the order, I paid for two, just forgot)

Quote from: mitak64 on August 01, 2013, 02:31:52 PM

Quote from: jgarzik on August 01, 2013, 02:12:42 PM

My batch #3 order (1x machine, 3x modules) arrived.

With PSU ?

Yes.

Quote from: pmlyon on August 02, 2013, 01:41:16 PM

Thanks for checking into this! Was I correct to update the block headers table on the wiki to indicate that the value is a var_int that is always 0?

For the "headers" response message, that is correct.

Quote from: jgarzik on July 31, 2013, 08:49:43 PM

Sadly this is one of those cases where it can be easy to get it wrong. It does seem worth investigating whether there was any breakage or behavior changes since 0.3.x days. We have changed CBlock to CBlockHeader and it is entirely conceivable that one might have output the "number of transactions" variable, and another did not. Worth checking.

This may be the case.

Untested thesis, based on code read: "headers" message format changed when https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2013 was merged in Nov 2012.

~~You may have uncovered a protocol-related bitcoind bug.~~

Update: Incorrect. I was misreading some code.

Simply dropping bootstrap.dat into the folder is the safe, easy way. After the import is complete, the file is renamed to ensure it is not re-imported over and over again.

-loadblock is fine too, but requires a bit of extra work on the part of the user.

My batch #3 order (1x machine, 3x modules) arrived.