|
I see, reality seldom match dreams.
But that's still interesting. I wonder what are the odds of Bitmain coming up with a BM1386 or such in that time frame.
|
|
|
|
|
It's pretty hard to believe 4.5BTC is 1% of what people have invested. This sound pretty blatantly scammy now. ^_^"
|
|
|
|
Increase the BlockSize on Core.
As the Core developers will not allow for a block size increase on Core, the only logical solution is to vote for XT. If you want to drop XT in it's tracks, support a block size increase on Core.
There is no difference for the XT or core being increased blocksize! The debate is to focu on the increase of blocksize. XT has gained the consensus from the majority! What is the point of finding counter arguments to be against the public? What consensus? You mean the 400 nodes running less than 1% of the total hashrate? XT is a sham, people don't actually support it |
|
|
|
|
That doesn't sound like a particularly horrible timeline. 3 Months or so after having received some chips?
I personally wouldn't mind the wait for some PCB's, maybe prototypes, for testing and reviewing at a good price. Sound like fun and possibly rewarding.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, conspiracy aside. Gradually increasing the block size limit on demand/need of bitcoin core would certainly keep the sheep mass from adopting XT without understanding that it comes with code commits not related to the block size limit.
|
|
|
|
There are new physical bitcoins?, this could be a problem after the fork of course.
I don't think so! Please check previous comments. The bitcoin will be always kept there. They are the same chain until the fork happen, the chain will be different! Ha, this doesn't answer his questions. There are not any new Casascius physical coins. There are other physical coins that serve as wallets for bitcoin and other alt currencies. XT wants to keep the blockchain so they would work fine, but i think XT is pretty bad considering it contain codes not relevant to block size limit that could cause serious issues down the road.
So far its mostly noise and there isint much adoption for XT but hopefully new users and pools/big farms won't adopt it.
What issues could arise down the road? What issues could happen when you allow the dev to upload a blacklist of IP? https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/commit/73c9efe74c5cc8faea9c2b2c785a2f5b68aa4c23Maybe you can read it and tell me if you see the same security risk as me. |
|
|
|
|
I see. Well that sound fair enough but if it come down to a bit extra fund i think me and several other wouldn't mind keeping it small and doing some kind of mini private funding. If that would let us get some custom PCB that work well, it could draw enough interest to do proper crowdfunding and scale it up a bit if desired. Some kind of limited gamble.
But i understand its a bit early for that, since i'm guessing Bitmain didn't even reply to or give more information on date and pricing of the next chip yet.
|
|
|
|
|
XT wants to keep the blockchain so they would work fine, but i think XT is pretty bad considering it contain codes not relevant to block size limit that could cause serious issues down the road.
So far its mostly noise and there isint much adoption for XT but hopefully new users and pools/big farms won't adopt it.
|
|
|
|
|
This could be a great opportunity to get a better fan with better cooling/noise ratio. It suck but you could make the most of it at least. They're also cheaper than the replacement stock fan i think.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting for running S5+ boards on S5 controller.
I suppose this also mean you could run some salvaged S5+ blades on S5 controllers later on. That could come in handy.
|
|
|
|
|
If the work seem easier with these chips, maybe we could think of a crowdfunding plan for obtaining a batch of these chips? Kind of a group buy thing.
|
|
|
|
It would have taken some other major news to cause that flash crash and assuming it was FUD instilled by XT isint much of a stretch.
XT is definitively going at this the wrong way.
I wouldn't say it's the wrong way, it's how Bitcoin is supposed to work - consensus decides. The sad part is that we got to that point. There's been talk about block size for months if not years and if the problem doesn't get solved by the "official" devs then sooner or later someone would attempt a fork like that. Also makes you wonder if Bitcoin 2.0 stuff (sidechains et al) has any chance of ever happening in a climate like this. I don't have any problem with the block size code. Its all the other shifty code unrelated to it that they perhaps maliciously implemented. Like the IP blacklist code. I don't think that's in there. Some click-bait "news" sites may have spread some rumors as far as I've seen. https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxthttps://bitcoinxt.software/patches.htmlHere is the commit i am referring to; https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt/commit/73c9efe74c5cc8faea9c2b2c785a2f5b68aa4c23Properly used, it could be of some use, albeit not necessary, but this add centralized authority to a decentralized body, as i understand it. At any rate there's better ways of doing this. |
|
|
|
That's why we shouldn't made something decentralized become centralized because something like this would happen someday.
But, limit maximum withdraw to 70% or 90% is stupid. Sometimes people need their money quickly & don't have time to contact others
I better keep using my usual wallet than any bitcoin card
There's no limit on withdraw, you can get all your BTC back. The limit is on only debit transaction. Not on your BTC balance. |
|
|
|
It would have taken some other major news to cause that flash crash and assuming it was FUD instilled by XT isint much of a stretch.
XT is definitively going at this the wrong way.
I wouldn't say it's the wrong way, it's how Bitcoin is supposed to work - consensus decides. The sad part is that we got to that point. There's been talk about block size for months if not years and if the problem doesn't get solved by the "official" devs then sooner or later someone would attempt a fork like that. Also makes you wonder if Bitcoin 2.0 stuff (sidechains et al) has any chance of ever happening in a climate like this. I don't have any problem with the block size code. Its all the other shifty code unrelated to it that they perhaps maliciously implemented. Like the IP blacklist code. |
|
|
|
I just restarted the pool to change the sig.
There should have been little if any failover since it was a normal immediate restart.
I've changed the sig to now say "/Kano /BIP100/"
I see BIP100 as the best option in all this crap that's been going on recently since it gives block size control (up to 32MB) to the pools/miners.
I see XP-BIP101 giving control to Herne/Gavin without even proper consensus - so I'm am clearly stating I'm against XT-BIP101
The sig change itself is not following any officially defined voting anywhere and since it is a sig change only it is not changing the blocks produced either.
I can only strongly second that, even though i don't really have any voice power. I've seen the code for things such as blacklisting ip which outright could lead to centralized power being applied. It makes BTC vulnerable to malicious intent from the inside... |
|
|
|
|
VirosaGITS 5 18csgC2arHyJD1Ss3ARgjd7FaZys3mE4rH
|
|
|
|
|
It would have taken some other major news to cause that flash crash and assuming it was FUD instilled by XT isint much of a stretch.
XT is definitively going at this the wrong way.
|
|
|
|
I did, the miner on the website linked at says 28nm. But the website is down now. Just to add suspicions top of suspicions. |
|
|
|
But i think those are claims on 16nm technology. The op's miner are 28nm. Therefor it sound fairly impossible to engineer such ASIC with that chip technology. |
|
|
|
Hello, is replacing the fans in this units with 4x Silverstone FHP-141 possible and a benefit to cooling/dB ratio?
I would be willing to bet that those fans (140mm with 120mm mounts) are too big and will not fit in the S4. with max RPMs being 2000 I also dont think they will move enough air to cool them appropriately. I don't think they are really larger. Is the 120mm such a tight fit it barely fit itself? Yes. Are you certain? It has the same CFM as the stock fans. The only portion i'm not sure is the impact of its static pressure value. Its not just about CFM, its about CFM at a given static pressure which on the stock fans is infinitely higher. The best you can do for noise is to replace the front 2 fans with Corsair SP120s but even that won't do much. [/quote] Yeah i'm saying i'm not sure about its static pressure impact since i can't find the Ultra Kaze's static pressure spec. Its not even on frozencpu. The silverstone has More static pressure than the sp120 and thrice the CFM. But still around 1 third of stocks. Basically i don't need it super quiet. 45-60dB depending ambient temp would be great. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
)
