Maybe he is working this hard to try and get the people their 23,000 BTC from the FIRST screwup he did? Model BTC citizen this guy is. His level of respect for customers is so low, he probably could not even get a job at BFL or Avalon.
lol +1 |
|
|
|
Do you have a longer history of PPLNS average rate than the last 100 shifts? Or any charts?
It looks like PPLNS is 8-10% less than PPS. If I'm not mistake, that's after all the fees are taken out... Been that way for a couple of days.
PPLNS has been paying less than PPS for the last 3 weeks roughly (with a few days being exceptions). In general, you will spend more *time* influenced by bad luck, but periods of good luck should make up for it. Over the last 18 months since BTC Guild has been PPS (and 2 years as a pool), the pool luck is extremely close to neutral (less than 1% off, and that is influenced by orphans and software issues in the early days more than anything). Extending the PPLNS average rate is a bit hard to do in a way that provides any meaning since different difficulties would mean different expectations for payouts. It's already a bad number to use for comparison for a few days after difficulties change. Fair enough. The only time that they are inaccurate is when the difficulty changes, correct? Or am I understanding what the difficulties would be? You've got great miner charts on there. I think what I would love to see on a chart, would be the rolling 100 shift rate on a chart throughout history. Of course at a difficulty change it would drop by whatever percentage the difficulty would be up. When looking day after day and seeing PPS kicks your but, it would be nice to see those short spikes in a chart somewhere making up for loneliness of PPS  And as usual, Murphy's law strikes  . Look at the PPLNS Shift Stats right now. A few shifts which pay enough above PPS to make up for a few bad shifts each, and still more time for them to go even higher. You can just PM me and I'll check those ones out lol. I still see this though. The average per-share rate for the last 100 closed shifts was 0.0000019227508055. |
|
|
|
Do you have a longer history of PPLNS average rate than the last 100 shifts? Or any charts?
It looks like PPLNS is 8-10% less than PPS. If I'm not mistake, that's after all the fees are taken out... Been that way for a couple of days.
PPLNS has been paying less than PPS for the last 3 weeks roughly (with a few days being exceptions). In general, you will spend more *time* influenced by bad luck, but periods of good luck should make up for it. Over the last 18 months since BTC Guild has been PPS (and 2 years as a pool), the pool luck is extremely close to neutral (less than 1% off, and that is influenced by orphans and software issues in the early days more than anything). Extending the PPLNS average rate is a bit hard to do in a way that provides any meaning since different difficulties would mean different expectations for payouts. It's already a bad number to use for comparison for a few days after difficulties change. Fair enough. The only time that they are inaccurate is when the difficulty changes, correct? Or am I understanding what the difficulties would be? You've got great miner charts on there. I think what I would love to see on a chart, would be the rolling 100 shift rate on a chart throughout history. Of course at a difficulty change it would drop by whatever percentage the difficulty would be up. When looking day after day and seeing PPS kicks your but, it would be nice to see those short spikes in a chart somewhere making up for loneliness of PPS |
|
|
|
|
Do you have a longer history of PPLNS average rate than the last 100 shifts? Or any charts?
It looks like PPLNS is 8-10% less than PPS. If I'm not mistake, that's after all the fees are taken out... Been that way for a couple of days.
|
|
|
|
Here is something interesting taken from edonkey as well. It's talking about it's improvements over the popular napster of the day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EDonkey2000A third improvement compared to Napster was the use of file hashes instead of simple filenames in search results. File searches initiated by the user were keyword-based and matched against the filename list stored on the eDonkey2000 server, but the server returned a list of filenames paired with the hash values of those files to the client. When selecting a file from the list presented to the user, the client would actually initiate a download by hash value. This meant that a file could have many different filenames across different peers, but would be considered identical for purposes of downloading if its hash was the same. Hmmm, Jed was integrating a hashing function into P2P back in 2000. Interesting |
|
|
|
|
Newest gossip I think I heard regarding this subject was Satoshi = Jed McCaleb
Creator of Edonkey2000. A p2p file sharing system. Creator of MtGox. Fascination with Japanese for some reason. And now CTO over at ripple.
|
|
|
|
Free bitcoin my ass, your definitly not paying out anything.
WTF! This thread is only where people can't spell you're correctly.  Just because you gave a few satoshis away doesn't mean you'll distribute additional funds. You aren't even set up to do it automatically, and have no verification for funds going in and out. You have no security plan if you were to actually have any amount of actual funds donated, etc. I would warn anyone against from donating to you unless they just want to donate to you and don't really anticipate it going elsewhere. |
|
|
|
I realized my fuck up Mess up Sorry and hey im trying to do something good here so back off Does the .tk website software include a spell check?
Just refreshed, and you're is still spelled your. What good are you trying to do again? Remind me. You want other people to send you Bitcoins. Then, since you are such a good guy, you're going to give them away to other people? Without stealing them? You're such a good guy. |
|
|
|
|
Does the .tk website software include a spell check?
|
|
|
|
It has been relayed to me that you are unhappy with our company...
If I paid 11 months ago for my order, I would be very unhappy too. That wouldn't mean that I want a refund, unless it's the original BTC as paid with the first few orders. A refund around January, still would suck, but at this point the only thing I'm sure you're praying for is you'll still get it early enough to have a rat's chance in hell of getting a portion of what you paid in BTC back. |
|
|
|
1) Leave US access open, continue collecting that revenue, and maintain exposure to tail-risk shut-down event.
or
2) Block US IP access to the website, and greatly reduce the catastrophic tail risk.
I understand the sentiment here is negative. I would encourage everyone involved in Bitcoin to start playing the long game, and I'll leave it at that.
If people in the US do not like this, then they should be working to get rid of the freedom-crushing laws which caused this action to be taken. Blocking is for the website only though, right? So, if you are in the US, get a list of addresses and continue to use it, am I wrong? Or for crying out loud, use a VPN service? Am I the only one that uses private internet access? I don't want my ISP recording EVERYTHING I do to hand over to the US whenever they want it. I break no laws, but that doesn't mean that I should just allow them to have anything they want about me. |
|
|
|
In order to have that much hashing power, BFL would have to actually PRODUCE something. Did you forget that one important detail?
rofl They have though! A few super jalapenos given to their friends. And they have enough chips coming to make a dozen more. |
|
|
|
Where can I find Satoshi Nakamoto's old posts? Are they in a central location?
i heard he used to post here, maybe try searching in the archives? It was actually answered just before you. |
|
|
|
|
Maybe the title should be changed to something like:
SatoshiDICE.com - Everywhere in the World (Except the USA)'s Most Popular Bitcoin Game
|
|
|
|
Past performance is not an indication of future performance, lesson 1.
Past performance may not be a guarantee, but it sure is a good indiction of future growth. Lesson 2, past performance is not a good indication of future growth, it is NOTHING. Rolling a dice a billion times does not give you any more information on what the next outcome will be. That absolutely is not true. Unless the dice were perfectly weighted, rolling a billion times would definitely give you information about that specific dice. |
|
|
|
Asicminer is brinigng online THEIR OWN 262 TH/sec over the next 3 months
Avalon is shipping 200 TH/sec worth of Chips in 2 months
BFL will add anything between 0 and 400+ TH/sec
When is your estimate for BFL? If it's the 2-3 month time frame, your estimate should be more like 0 - 1 TH/sec If you mean in 2-3 years, 0-400 is probably fair. |
|
|
|
So I see that BFL has started shipping their 5.0Gh machines. Anyone know how many have been shipped and what the potential wait time on one would be if I ordered today?
Shipping a few test boards absolutely does not mean they are shipping. Josh just posted and said they have 100 more chips on the way but they are having more problems with their single boards. So they can possibly make 50 Jal's with the chips that are on their way... They are not shipping. They have some test chips coming to them and they are sending them out as they go. Shipping would be more along the lines of they have some many fucking chips they can't assemble them fast enough and ship a finished product out. At this point, they are still in R&D and trying to figure out how they fucked up so bad. Because their power consumption is out of this world and they still have idiots throwing their money at them. When asked this question by a UK user via BFL's official Twitter feed, the response was " two months". I think someone spiked the water in Kansas City. This was also the reply from BFL in September, November, January, February, March, April, and now. See a pattern? |
|
|
|
Early on it is all network latency. Hazard could mine with a TI 99/4 next to one of the seed nodes on the same LAN and get all the blocks
That is why every one of these "starting difficulty 0" coins is a scam. The developer picks the hard coded nodes and can put a low end GPU right next to them and get *ALL* the initial blocks
This means that there can be no crypto which was not premined even BTC Not that I'm asking for more crap coins. But a fair start could be had. Start the difficulty at something reasonable. When LTC was made, there was no GPU miner. The difficulty was very low. So, set the difficulty to start at something where 10-20 GPU's can hit the target that the coin starts with. For each of the difficulty changes (2016 blocks?) Double the coins. Start with 1 per block, double it until it increases to the desired amount, say 64 per block. You would have 6 difficulty changes, and the difficulty could then by 100 or more for an scrypt coin. But of course, you can't scam a bunch of people if you actually try and make it fair. If you really want to make it not a gigantic premine, maybe the first 10,000 blocks (still starting at the higher difficulty) should only be 1 coin blocks and you don't crank it up until pools are available and the open source code and binaries are available for all platforms. Please no more alt coins. |
|
|
|
You're going to find it hard for anything that doesn't have lots of $$$$$$ signs in it being anywhere close to DDoS proof.
How DDOS proof does it really need to be. I'd suggest the announcements still get posted here too, so it wouldn't be like taking down the blog would black out all ASICMINER information. What would be the consequences of having the blog taken offline by a DDOS You guys are all quoting the wrong person. I never said the blog needs to be DDoS proof. The guy I quoted thought that paying wordpress directly would make it DDoS proof, I'm merely saying that is simply misguided and such a thing scenario would cost a lot of money. What's wrong with a cheap blog? What's wrong with mirroring it on a cheap VPS as a hidden service? And why wouldn't he also make those posts here? He doesn't even have to run the blog, someone else could and just copy his posts he makes here to it. It would only be a convenience factor. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
