I've been selected as a reviewer by Spondoolies-Tech for the SP10 miner. Here is a link to their official thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=521520.0And the website: http://www.spondoolies-tech.com/I received the unit today and as I was not prepared for that I will not be able to give a full review right away, so I will start with some impressions first  (Link to full gallery: http://imgur.com/a/kASCu#0 - Pictures are from my unit)  Note the text on the fans - "Xtreme" - that's exactly what they are. Make no mistake, this unit is loud. It's louder than my hairdryer. It offers multiple performance modes which also has an effect on the loudness. "Quiet" mode is about as loud as my hairdryer  I guess there is no doubt that Spondoolies-Tech is a legit a company, as they already have delivered regular orders. (I guess my sample unit is from April batch.) I've been running a 3 TH/s mining operation using BitFury hardware, which was very cumbersome to setup. The SP10 is incredible easy to setup - plugin power and LAN, have a look at your DHCP server or run a network scanner (I used http://www.softperfect.com/products/networkscanner/ ), navigate to that address using a webbrowser - done. The hardware by Spondoolies-Tech is not for hobby mining, that's for sure. Their hardware is a professional as it can get [which also manifests in things like the loudness  ] To be continued... (I will also happily answer any questions you may have.) |
|
|
|
Grate. About 2 hours before this showed up I lost 1,6 something BTC to this... And it took only about 2 hours of running application... So it is not that impossible... Well I think it was this since I have no clue what else could it be... Is there any trace left so I can be sure?
I guess wallet stealing trojans exists almost as long as Bitcoin, so your loss could have many (other) causes. First, scan your computer. Second, did you click on any "bitcoin:"-link? |
|
|
|
|
If you have bitcoind running, you can read pending tx from the mempool.
|
|
|
|
|
What is, in your experience, the fastest db to use with Abe?
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't kept up with the development of Abe, but is P2SH/Multisig supported now?
|
|
|
|
The thing is, if the community doesn't want ASICS, they will never mine successfully for long. Sorry, but you might have a bit naive thinking here. You are not going to change the algorithm just because you don't like ASICs and want to "save" hobby mining. That would destroy trust in your coin. |
|
|
|
I really do like the idea of Vertcoin. Still, two things come to my mind:
1.) Claiming something is "ASIC proof". No algorithm is that. You can always develop an ASIC. GPUs are ASICs, after all. Take the design of a GPU, strip everything not needed for Vertcoin mining and that's your VTC-ASIC. Still, of course, that ASIC would be way more complex than any SHA/BTC ASIC and would require loads of fast memory, thus making it very expensive (compared to SHA and even scrypt/LTC ASICS). But this immediately leads to my second point.
2.) How bad are ASICs after all? With SHA, there is a low entry level for developing an ASIC. With VTC, this "entry barrier" would be much higher. Imagine VTC would be as popular as BTC is now. I'm going to guarantee you that at least one person/group would be into developing a VTC ASIC. But that's the problem: Only few entities would have the funds to do so, much fewer than with Bitcoin. After all, this will lead to more centralization, not less.
I don't like that "hobby mining" is gone in the Bitcoin world, I don't like how much current ASICs are overpriced.
But I still think the Bitcoin network is better off with all the ASICs than the VTC network would be.
No worries. The coin is software. ASICs are hardware. A simple algorithm tweak proposed by the VTC developers and agreed upon by the community will shake off an ASIC. Even a change to N-factor schedule would wreak havoc on ASIC makers' business plans. As long as Vertans say ASICs are not welcome here, we'll be able to preserve the 'hobby mining' angle for a good while. Edit: BTW I don't like the asics at all, mostly because of the incredible disruption they caused. There are not many companies that can make asics this complex, and when they do have working units they extensivly 'test' them before they ship them out. That's what I think BFL and such did. HinnomTX, ShadesOfMarble does have a point though, IMO. Asics (and FPGAs) are sort of in between hardware and software. The GPU (the core itself) is basically an ASIC. With lots of functionality that's not required for mining. So if you could strip the unneeded parts from a graphicscard's GPU you could create an mining-specific PCB with a higher efficiency and probably lower power requirements. And you could change the N-factor just as easily. I think that would would require an incredible amount of engineering though, you'd be doing AMD's and Nvidia's work basically. To me that doesn't sound feasible. Unless AMD and Nvidia themselves would start producing those miners. Then again, the downside of anything application specific is that they're completely useless if this whole *coin-world collapses. I don't think that will happen, but for a company this is probably a big risk. This is my whole point. If there is enough money in it, some entity will do it. But only companies with a very good funding will be able to do it. Fast forward to 2017, everybody is using Vertcoin now because they thought it will free the cryptocurrency world from "those ASIC companies". But, boom! AMD just developed an ASIC miner, because their GPUs are really good at mining anyway, so they just removed everything not needed for mining, no video output etc, high power VRMs for insane clock speeds, loads of high-speed memory (because they are such a big company and buy tons of it they get it cheaper than anyone else), so they run 10-100x more efficient (both MH/s/J and USD/(Mh/s)) than the GPUs they sell. So now all the hashing power basically lays in the hand of one company. Because the design of the ASIC is very complex, no other company competes with AMD. What now? With SHA, you could even go the "ultra cheap" route and do a hardcopy ASIC with existing (open source) HDL code. How many SHA ASICs do we have? A dozen? They all compete and are at least an oligopoly. Anyway: The statement "No more ASICs" ist just not true. It should say "Currently no ASICs". |
|
|
|
|
I really do like the idea of Vertcoin. Still, two things come to my mind:
1.) Claiming something is "ASIC proof". No algorithm is that. You can always develop an ASIC. GPUs are ASICs, after all. Take the design of a GPU, strip everything not needed for Vertcoin mining and that's your VTC-ASIC. Still, of course, that ASIC would be way more complex than any SHA/BTC ASIC and would require loads of fast memory, thus making it very expensive (compared to SHA and even scrypt/LTC ASICS). But this immediately leads to my second point.
2.) How bad are ASICs after all? With SHA, there is a low entry level for developing an ASIC. With VTC, this "entry barrier" would be much higher. Imagine VTC would be as popular as BTC is now. I'm going to guarantee you that at least one person/group would be into developing a VTC ASIC. But that's the problem: Only few entities would have the funds to do so, much fewer than with Bitcoin. After all, this will lead to more centralization, not less.
I don't like that "hobby mining" is gone in the Bitcoin world, I don't like how much current ASICs are overpriced.
But I still think the Bitcoin network is better off with all the ASICs than the VTC network would be.
|
|
|
|
Ok...so it seems the unexchanged coins are pretty fluctuating, because im having now again about 0.013... Read the FAQ. |
|
|
|
Average block reward over the past 24 hours is only ~453k, I believe this is because middlecoin switches block to block and only mines the higher reward blocks, but I could be wrong.
I haven't read into DOGE that much, so maybe someone can just clarify this. The block reward is random, but is the block reward set at the time the block is found (so "truly random") or is it possible to predict the block reward? (Only then it middlecoin could do what you suggested.) |
|
|
|
|
They are sold out in minutes. Price seems to be right, at least from the vendor-perspective.
|
|
|
|
alternatively, they fix the rPi SD-corrupting issues and ill buy its a massive pissoff that i am scared to reboot the unit or otherwise touch it at all when in operation, even if i think a few more GH/s could be had "sudo poweroff" before you cycle power and everything will be fine. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the clarification. Yes, that's expensive.
|
|
|
|
|
Grid seed bitcoin litecoin miner 10pcs usb litecoin miner set
US $4,369.00
Power: 60W for one , 600W for 10pcs
rated speed :80G BTC + 3M LTC
So you get 10x 80GH/s SHA and 10x 3MH/s scrypt for $4,369.00 or how is this listing to be understood?
|
|
|
|
Then go buy one |
|
|
|
My point is, with the puzzle difficulty getting higher and higher, wouldn't we need equipment that actually solves a single hash faster? Or is that not a factor? What matters is the GH/s display in your miner software. Nobody cares if that is achieved by massive parallelisation or massive increase in clock speed (which means solving a single hash faster). Over the long run, both will happen. Right, the time-to-hash for any single hash attempt doesn't matter that much. Everyone is in a race to find a nonce that solves the criteria for the difficulty of the current block, and everyone is attempting different nonces. If everyone counted from "0" and incremented from there, and there was a fixed integer that solved the "puzzle", then the fastest hasher would always win. But that's not how it works. The nonce that will solve the puzzle depends a lot on the header of the block you're solving, which is different for each node, plus I suspect each node starts at a random nonce position in an attempt to not duplicate work with other nodes. So in simple terms, assuming I understand this correctly (which I admit may not be the case... ) is that the node with 1 GHs versus the node with 100 GHs is like a guy buying one lottery ticket versus a guy buying 100 lottery tickets? ...per second/minute/whatever. yes. |
|
|
|
My point is, with the puzzle difficulty getting higher and higher, wouldn't we need equipment that actually solves a single hash faster? Or is that not a factor? What matters is the GH/s display in your miner software. Nobody cares if that is achieved by massive parallelisation or massive increase in clock speed (which means solving a single hash faster). Over the long run, both will happen. |
|
|
|
Your assumptions of always negative ROI in Bitcoin terms are completely false and superficial nonsense. Wow! This: http://thegenesisblock.com/mining/a/391de737f5 will hold as long as difficulty keeps increasing the way it did the last months. It's all about difficulty, no "business model" in the world is going to change growth of difficulty, unless it contains buying up all ASIC hardware manufacturers. As some companies just start(ed) shipping, difficulty will grow for a long time before it saturates. By the time saturation is reached, current mining hardware is going to mine a few satoshis per day. You're basically asking me to deliver a business model to you on a platter in order for my words not to be "meaningless", which is retarded.
No, I don't want that. I can think of some business models myself that could make buying mining hardware profitable (think cex), but that's way more complex than just buying the hardware, plugging it in and let it mine. And that's what 99% of people are doing. It's really difficult to have a discussion if you don't tell us your arguments. There are some people who provided numbers and explanations and you just come by and use some highbrow wording to discredit people who actually provided proof to their statements while you provided none and just keep saying "Nah, you are stupid, I know better". |
|
|
|
It only doesn't make sense because not everyone has the same goals in this entire financial enterprise as you, just a blanket statement about buying and holding is projecting your own objectives onto people who may have entirely different objectives over completely different timeframes with a desire to be exposed to different amounts of risk.
Nicely written, but your words are meaningless. Please explain to me why one should choose the objective "I have an amount X of BTC now, I'm spending all of it and I will get an amount 0.7*X BTC in the future". And please do so by showing some numbers, like prawda did. There is only one reason why buying mining hardware now could make sense: If you expect difficulty to NOT grow 20-30% every 2016 blocks. But seriously, who does believe that? |
|
|
|
He's referring to market timing. Most people are shit at timing the market (don't blame them, even the wall-street pros are the same), so if you don't get shaken out of the market during the mini crashes that eventually occur you will end up making profit _IF_ you hold on to your coins. So buying mining equipment helps you with "market timing" because your coins are locked for months? And if(!) you get your mining hardware the coins are slowly dropping into your wallet again. Maybe I should offer an "I'm holding your coins"-service for people who are unable to hold onto their coins. The issue is that most miners are cash poor so they did not have a lot of capital in fiat to put into mining hardware, so they were forced to pay for that hardware with btc. What's the point of this statement? This discussion has nothing to do whether you are poor or filthy rich. You have an amount X which you can either invest in BTC directly or in mining hardware. If you have already have an amount Y of BTC you can keep them or sell them. (Buying mining hardware is equivalent to selling them.). It does not matter if you have 1 BTC and 1 EUR on your bank account or 1000 BTC and 1000 EUR. This is kind of like being bullish on gold and wanting to invest in gold mining companies but since you have no cash you sell all your jewelry or gold coins and bars to buy gold stocks in the hope of getting more physical gold later on. It's just stupid. I did it myself and all I can say now it's just stupid*. Mining hardware that does not ROI in BTC does not make any sense, as it has been stated multiple times. See the post by prawda with this very simple calculations. Yeah, it's that easy. Don't agree? Show some calculations that prove him false. * I made a ROI of 200+% on my Bitfury investment. So why am I advising against buying hardware? Because I don't want the network to grow so I can have more profit? Nah, that's not going to work. There are so many (semi-)private mines (100 TH project, ghash.io etc etc) which deploy mining hardware at cost, it's useless to convince consumers to not buy mining hardware. It's because I'm genuinely convinced current mining hardware offers are a rip-off (now even more than before the race to 1000$/BTC). Why buy mining hardware now that will only produce 30-40% of the BTC you could have if you just bought BTC directly. It does not make any sense. Not at all. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
