1) The lead "coder" was very young and inexperienced, should not that have shaved ~$140M off the max they could raise? So are many other internet entrepreneurs. Sometimes they make it big, others just disappear, never to be heard from again. Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Sean Parker, Sean Fanning, Mark Zuckerberg, and many others got started fairly young and made it big. People were willing to bet a lot of money on them. This isn't all that different; just a variation on a theme. 1) The 2) Why did this happen (yet again) and how can similar things be avoided, without interfering with the benefits that can come from a free market environment? It happened because people do not learn from history, or they believe that they are "special." Visionaries are all snowflakes, believing that they are "more unique" than others, and perhaps they are. The free market would not be the same if there was nobody willing to risk it all to try something new. So what's the trick to make it work? As a provider of funds (fiat, crypto coin, etc.) your definition of "all" needs to be what you are willing to see disappear with no hope of ever seeing a return. What's my deal? I "invested" less than I have spent on a ho-hum meal at a purportedly "really good" restaurant with my wife. Am I pissed? Nope. Not at all. I didn't bet more than I was willing to completely write off, if TheDAO fell on it's face, like it did. If TheDAO had hit it big, perhaps with the growth of my investment I could buy a set of dentures when I got older. Personally I think that Ethereum will survive. Solidity will be fixed, and smart contracts will move forward. In fact I am holding onto my ETH and still running my one-GPU mining rig that earns me about one ETH per week. The "weakness" that was exploited to drain TheDAO was known, as were the ways to prevent it from being exploited, but the writers of the smart contract used to create TheDAO apparently didn't think anyone would exploit it. It was likely a combination of hubris and naiveté. Will it happen again? Yep, that much I know for certain. Just don't ask me when. For what it's worth, Bitcoin wasn't much different in it's early days. When I stumbled upon it back in late 2011 it was trading hands for about the price in USD as ETH is today. I didn't "invest" in it back then as crypto currency was even newer and less known than it is today. Bitcoin was "Goxxed" and survived, so there is precedent for ETH surviving. Sometimes you're the bug; sometimes you're the windshield. Cheers, - zed |
|
|
|
|
perhaps the breaker of TheDAO is really Satoshi. We've seen about the same level of "verified confirmation" from all the pretenders...
- zed
|
|
|
|
... a solution to "no access to chips, no access to specifications and parts". I like how that sounds. Well it's something that's just come up in the last few days Blockchain karma. This is the blockchain's way of compensating you for the grief last week with your transactions during the big spike... - zed |
|
|
|
this pool is dead.. peercoin is on a fork.. it was resolved with an update that they have not done yet.. all your shares on this pool are being wasted, and if you find a block it will not be paid out. for your compacs might i suggest digibyte.. http://dgbsha.cryptopools.com/index.php?page=loginyou dont get much, but the coin is low diff.. so you at least get paid something. OK. Thanks. - zed |
|
|
|
Trying to mine Peercoin, but can not. The difficulty is far too high for my Compac miner. I know I'm hashing:  No shares being reported on the miner screen, and the stats panel, http://mining.securepayment.cc/pools/ppcoin/stats.php?address=deleted&submit=Lookup+Stats, shows zero. I tried to use the control panel, http://mining.securepayment.cc/pools/ppcoin/settings.php?address=deleted, to change from vardiff to a custom diff more appropriate for the Compac miner, but no matter what I try to do to sign the message it fails with this error: Signature Verification Failed:
The signature's public key was incorrect or the messages did not match.
I am using Peerunity v0.2.2 to sign the message, and using the copy/paste method to get the message from the web page into Peerunity, then using copy/paste to get the signature from Peerunity back to the web page. Got any suggestions? - zed |
|
|
|
Also, I just got ship notification for the second round, which means both batches of miners are in transit. I'll probably have them all tested and out the middle of next week. Sweet! Looking forward to adding to my collection of operating miners.  - zed |
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/DIoWndhYYwoA somber salute to cryptocurrency miners of yesteryear from Pseudorandom 08: Bitcoin, including the Block Erupter USB, Klondike, a custom Bitfury array, and KNC Mercury. Cheers, - zed |
|
|
|
Bekonik .... those are maybe not the best options for s7 and s9 The 4 outlet version description says : Max Rated Current Output 15.0 Amp max total for all 4 outlets 10.0 Amp max per each power outletThe 2 outlet version description says : Max Rated Current Output 12.0 Amp max total for both outlets. 8.0 Amp max per each power outlet.The cheapest version : Input 125~250Vac, 50/60hz Output 10AThose output amp's are not enough for our miners . If you are using 2 power supply to feed one miners and ordering a 4 or 2 outlet version then you are good to go. But the 2 outlet version will be very close to pull the max 12 amp , no more than 8 amps / outlet , no more than 12amps on both outlet .. And you need to forget about overclocking your miners  hmm, I didn't think about this :] You have right... So, do you think that will be problem with 4 outlet option to connect 2 pcs s7 with 1600w power supplies? Plan for worst case max current of each attached PSU. Remember that the 1600w is output power, so the "at the wall" power will be higher, depending on the efficiency of the PSU. so 1600w/0.80 = 2000w at the wall (0.80 is an 80% efficient power supply). 2000w at the wall using 120v power is 16.66 amps for EACH power supply. I also don't think you can run two S7s on a single 1600w PSU as they are spec'd as something like 1210w at the wall using a 93% efficient power supply. 1210w is approximately 10 amps if using 120v input. Would your neighbors/roommates/family be pissed if your house burned down? Not saying it would happen for sure, but i've seen power strips burn up because they were overloaded. - zed I'm from EU, 230V power and 1600W power supplies from bitmain. So, what will be calculation? On bitmain page there is information that this power supply have 93.8% efficiency, so 1600/0,93 = 1720w / 230V 7,5 amps? yes? 7,5 is less than 10, so one outlet to one power supply is ok? 2x7,5 is 15, so this is total max for this device, yes? Your math is correct. Personally I would try it with one of the PSUs for a while, perhaps a few hours, and see if anything gets overly warm, especially the power cord from the wall to the switcher. I'd also try to verify the actual at the wall current draw. Once you are happy with the numbers and temperature(s) go from there. You could also send an email to the manufacturer and ask them if two 7.5a 230v loads would be OK. - zed |
|
|
|
Bekonik .... those are maybe not the best options for s7 and s9 The 4 outlet version description says : Max Rated Current Output 15.0 Amp max total for all 4 outlets 10.0 Amp max per each power outletThe 2 outlet version description says : Max Rated Current Output 12.0 Amp max total for both outlets. 8.0 Amp max per each power outlet.The cheapest version : Input 125~250Vac, 50/60hz Output 10AThose output amp's are not enough for our miners . If you are using 2 power supply to feed one miners and ordering a 4 or 2 outlet version then you are good to go. But the 2 outlet version will be very close to pull the max 12 amp , no more than 8 amps / outlet , no more than 12amps on both outlet .. And you need to forget about overclocking your miners hmm, I didn't think about this :] You have right... So, do you think that will be problem with 4 outlet option to connect 2 pcs s7 with 1600w power supplies? Plan for worst case max current of each attached PSU. Remember that the 1600w is output power, so the "at the wall" power will be higher, depending on the efficiency of the PSU. so 1600w/0.80 = 2000w at the wall (0.80 is an 80% efficient power supply). 2000w at the wall using 120v power is 16.66 amps for EACH power supply. I also don't think you can run two S7s on a single 1600w PSU as they are spec'd as something like 1210w at the wall using a 93% efficient power supply. 1210w is approximately 10 amps if using 120v input. Would your neighbors/roommates/family be pissed if your house burned down? Not saying it would happen for sure, but i've seen power strips burn up because they were overloaded. - zed |
|
|
|
Looks like they upgraded from PIC12F1572 to PIC16F1704 for the regulator control. Still has about a 3600-opcode program on it, probably pretty similar to the stock code in the S7 but this chip has built-in I2C so that actually makes some things a lot easier.
data sheet for the new PIC: http://www.microchip.com/wwwproducts/en/PIC16F1704- zed |
|
|
|
8.6ish at more like 900w - just take 2/3ds of the TH and watt spec of the S9, then add a few watts 'cause you still have the controller and fans eating the same power.
Anyone remember what process the 4004 used?
If the Wikipedia entry is correct, the 4004 was 10um (micro-meter). That seems consistent with the previous mention regarding the 8080 earlier in the thread (6 micro-meter). By today's standards one would have used a hammer and chisel to make those. to keep on topic: I wonder if the hash rate issues jtoomim is experiencing are heat related? It seems possible as the hash rates came up when the clock rate was decreased. - zed |
|
|
|
That's actually why I got into mining was because the hardware was fun to mess with. Yes, sir. That's the truth. I started back in the late 70s hacking on an Intel 8080A stuck on a breadboard, and just recently have come back to messing with hardware. The 8080 had a feature minimum size of 6um (6000nm), and to think that the S9 has a feature size of 16nm. |
|
|
|
If it's a "legit" co-lo facility, security can be part of the package. How secure depends on the facility and how much you want to pay...
Paying for physical security and achieving a physical security always were (and are) two different things. I do remember working at one of those "secure colocation centers" which had armed guards and hand geometry scanners near the front door and a wide-open elephant door in the back where theft was going by the truckloads. Co-location was and still is full of completely fraudulent security theater. Since this thread has IBM in the title I also remember that IBM used to do "security ratings" for their partners. The suburban office with separate alarm circuit for the IBM-partner equipment room, no guards whatsoever and the receptionist and all employees mutually recognizing each other by sight would get higher rating than that "secure colocation center". Edit: Found the link to those "secure" co-locators: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exodus_Communications Yep. Caveat emptor, and verify everything if it is that important. I did a security guard gig for a couple of years while I was going to college before I worked for the chip maker (also while going to college). I can't/won't vouch for the other shifts but when I was on duty I knew who was where and who belonged where. I also knew when there was someone new on the shift. I know I annoyed the fsck out of people making sure that they had their required ID, but it kept the questions down when "things" happened, like the time I discovered the door to the CEO's office unlocked. |
|
|
|
another transaction pending Just sent an updated PM. |
|
|
|
I'd consider buying an S9LN, and then take it apart.
I find that hard to believe.  |
|
|
|
Then the only remaining issue is the physical security: that the miners using experimental chips did not go missing in the night or the owner of premises for the mining farm repossesses/places a lien on the equipment for nonpayment of the rent or electricity bills. If it's a "legit" co-lo facility, security can be part of the package. How secure depends on the facility and how much you want to pay... Edit: I remember seeing the photographs of the DRAM banks for the aforementioned hardware RAM disks. The DRAM chips were all in DIP packages and all socketed. To avoid the theft the DRAM banks were then cemented to steel plates on top to prevent individual removal. One of the "thefts" to prevent was actually not theft (chips goes missing) but unauthorized replacement (experimental chip replaced with an off-the-shelf equivalent). Apparently in the DRAM business seeing and measuring un-binned chips would allow detailed reverse-engineering of the manufacturing process. This includes not only taking the actual possession of the experimental chip and de-capping it but also a temporary removal from the original socket to run a battery of post-manufacturing electrical tests and then putting the chip back in the original circuit. When I was working for a prominent US DSP chip maker on one of their engineering test floors, there was a Schlumberger scanning electron microscope (I believe) that was used to test silicon. What it displayed on the screen was pretty interesting and what it could do was pretty sweet. You could see all sorts of details, and based on the colors tell what elements were used and whether a particular trace was energized or not, and if I recall you could tell the difference between voltage levels. Virtual probes allowed you to measure signals and display them in a "scope" window. Granted this was in 1989-1990 time-frame so I know there is way more capable and cooler sch!@t available now. - zed EDIT: fixed spelling of Schlumberger... |
|
|
|
|
payment and PM sent a few minutes ago.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm in for one. Like Phil I'll be running this one at home. I will PM you when I have sent funds, but probably tomorrow (Tuesday) or Wednesday.
- zed
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
