I doubt you're that naive.
Did you miss what happened to DMC? DMC got screwed by nefario, is what happened. Yeah, he screwed you for the last 10% of invested funds after you'd lost the first 90% all on your own Except nefario claimed he thoroughly vetted every asset on GLBSE, and did nothing when one or more mining companies flooded the market with shares not backed by assets and managed to collapse the market. In addition, around 2k was invested in DMC, and I've already paid half of that back and bought back half the shares before the collapse of GLBSE. The most you can claim is DMC lost half its value (the other half of the shares I have not repurchased yet), but then it'd still be nefario's fault because he closed GLBSE and fucked every asset issuer on there including the ones DMC invested in. |
|
|
|
I doubt you're that naive.
Did you miss what happened to DMC? DMC got screwed by nefario, is what happened. |
|
|
|
|
I noticed this wasn't mentioned in the thread yet. DMC is moving to BitFunder.
|
|
|
|
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=130401.0Seriously, as investors we're missing out by not having our shares floated on another exchange. Now that we've received the list from GLBSE, it's a trivial matter to import that onto https://btct.co/So why has this not been done? Some shareholders will want to sell ("Buy on Rumor, Sell on News") and some (like me) will want to BUY MORE! We're not missing out on anything unless you want to sell your shares. |
|
|
|
|
Update: Forcefully disconnect HTTP on any error
Should fix issues with some pools not properly killing the connection and spamming errors until DM restart.
|
|
|
|
Luke-Jr has been caught editing the Bitcoin wiki to favor BFL and remove at least one of their competitors.
Caught? It's public and the history is available for everyone to see and he edited it with his normal account. I'm sure he fears your amazing sleuthing powers! And ... "competitors"? In favor of BFL? The aforementioned 'competitor' is building a centralized mining farm, not selling a hashing product to the public (at least not in the immediate future). The page is about mining hardware for people building mining farms. Asicminer doesn't obviously have any reason to be there. (Frankly, none of the not-yet-shipping hardware really does, IMO, but that argument has been lost). Please don't abuse your moderator status to create new drama sticky threads, especially when you've so recently berrated other people for spreading pro/anti- BFL drama outside of the BFL thread. He removed the ASISCMiner text, which as it currently stands, they will end up being the only ASIC vendor shipping in 2012 as long as everything continues on schedule. Luke-Jr is afraid that he is going to lose his large investment in BFL, and doesn't understand he has already lost it because BFL seems to have no plans to ship the products their investors have paid for. So, yes, he is shilling for BFL, and I don't see why you're attacking ASICMiner either. They plan on selling to outside customers while also operating a small farm on behalf of investors. I think you're confused on what ASICMiner is actually doing. |
|
|
|
DiabloD3, as much as I dislike BFL, luke-jr actually postponed their shipping date from dec 2012 to jan 2013. He quoted ngazhang with Avalons shipping date. And I agree with him that as long as ASICMiner is not offering any consumer-products, it doesn't go on to that page.
I suggest you wear your mod-hat with ice inside it, as you must remain objective when moderating. Calling luke-jr a BFL shill in a pinned topic is a bit harsh, and just shows poor judgement as everyone know how much you loathe BFL.
Look at the entire changelog. He removed ASICMINER completely from the wiki. |
|
|
|
DMC takes slot #1. There are now 4 left  My understanding is that the plan is to allow users to continue to trade DMC and that you will be buying the shares back over time. Is this correct? Yes. Might take a year or more. |
|
|
|
Nobody "lost" any BTC because they didn't actually pay in BTC.
Just because BFL didn't receive the coins, doesn't mean people didn't pay in BTC. I actually have to agree here. How did BFL invoice/bill their customers? If BFL billed them in bitcoin, and the customers paid in bitcoin, then to my understanding, unless they have a clause in their terms of sale that specifically links the price to USD, then they are legally required to refund the full amount of purchase currency tendered. This would mean they legally can't just refund about half of the bitcoin because it roughly doubled in value. The fact that BFL used a third party that "invisibly to the customer" convert the received bitcoin to USD is irrelevant as the actual sale (and thus rights of sale) were conducted in BTC. This is my interpretation of US and EU consumer protection laws as well. |
|
|
|
Luke-Jr has been caught editing the Bitcoin wiki to favor BFL and remove at least one of their competitors.   |
|
|
|
Why does a bitcoin miner need a high bandwidth interface again?
ASICs crunch the numbers much faster. That means that the time to sweep a full nonce range is significantly shorter. Okay, another dumb question then... Can't you tune the expected response time by picking a lower target? No, because ASICs, just like any other miner, will be looking for diff 1 candidates (ie, H == 0). |
|
|
|
When it comes to connections, something which supports broadcasts may be good. You can feed data in one burst and collect only those data blocks (results) which are interesting - this can be done on a p2p basis. Broadcasts can also be emulated in node based system where the p2p connections are distributed as a tree. However, that requires the nodes to have an understanding of the global layout.
I'd like to review an expert opinion on ethernet vs. USB interface. Any good links?
With Ethernet, the miners would just be emulating the miner interface itself (ie, directly connect to bitcoind). Does it support UDP? Otherwise the handshake imposed by the TCP connection could be a problem in a scalable design. Bitcoin JSONRPC doesn't do TCP, and UDP isn't recommended for reliability reasons. Existing miners don't have issues with TCP because we keep the connection open over long periods. Plus, even if you don't, each mining box itself (no matter how many chips are on it) would have one controller. Modern machines can handle a million TCP connections concurrently without breaking (usually its the software handling the connections that fails to scale long before any OS's given kernel breaks). I don't recommend machines implement their own miner though: leave it to the experts like me and ck. |
|
|
|
DMC takes slot #1. There are now 4 left |
|
|
|
When it comes to connections, something which supports broadcasts may be good. You can feed data in one burst and collect only those data blocks (results) which are interesting - this can be done on a p2p basis. Broadcasts can also be emulated in node based system where the p2p connections are distributed as a tree. However, that requires the nodes to have an understanding of the global layout.
I'd like to review an expert opinion on ethernet vs. USB interface. Any good links?
With Ethernet, the miners would just be emulating the miner interface itself (ie, directly connect to bitcoind). |
|
|
|
All code with ASIC should be using USB direct not serial-USB And having the serial-USB can cause problems on windows (and usually means a manual driver fix) I've been screwing around with this for the last few weeks on an MMQ-FPGA converting it from serial-USB to USB only to find all the windows problems were driver related - not my code. Lucky I've had access in IRC to the guy who does libusb, to help me sort it out  Heh. There is exactly one prior FPGA mining setup I know of that speaks native USB - my toy 25 MH/s miner which isn't actually running at the moment. (Implements USB 1.1 on the FPGA itself using a cheap USB transceiver chip. Never caught on with anyone else for various reasons.) OT but yeah this is all the crap that Luke-Jr keeps going on about claiming cgminer is a fork of his miner - coz he wrote the first FPGA Serial-USB driver in cgminer ... that has been recoded in almost every possible place that matters since then ... ... and he started the whole problem I'm removing ...  Code done already for the ModMinerQuad - as my first step in the lead up to ASIC - so I could do something while waiting - should be in cgminer RSN Interesting however, that from a hardware point of view, USB itself may end up being the bottleneck in processing in the not too distant future. So ... who's planning a better hardware interface If we're just going to transfer data & not draw any power,how about SATA.It's very fast & most mobo's have several extra & a card can installed to add more  Are you retarded, or just trolling? |
|
|
|
|
Enough with the goddamned BFL threads!
|
|
|
|
Update
Please let me buy the first completed unit. Even if you don't sell any of the other units and keep them all for the shareholder farm, let me buy the first one. 1) I want to get it working on DiabloMiner. 2) I can prove to the rest of the Bitcoin community that it really does exist and everyone can quit with the bullshit on the forums. |
|
|
|
lighting my cigars with your dollars.
I hope not. Cigars should always be lit with wood matches, otherwise it ruins the flavor. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
