I kind of hate to bring this up, but given that jav gets to keep all the coins that go unclaimed.... well, I'd call that pretty big incentive to shut it down.
I seriously don't see the point of this post. Do you believe that that's why he is shutting down? If he feels that he doesn't have time to run it there is really nothing else to do than what he did. Everyone can get their funds back, he will handle requests manually after the site has been shut down. He also told people to get in touch if they wanted to acquire it. Well, he could not require everyone to withdraw their funds or they are lost while he looks for a buyer. There's no reason to shut it down and require everyone withdraw their funds. Yes, you are right - everyone can get their funds back so long as they know who to contact, they contact them within a certain amount of time, etc. What about those who forgot about the handful of BTC they left on instawallet, and stumble across their address 3 months from now? Sure, you could say they deserved to lose it, but that doesn't change the fact that there IS incentive for jav to shut it down. I hope I am proven wrong, that someone does come along and buy the site (or that jav decides to keep it going until the right buyer comes along). But even if I had the money, it'd be hard for me to cough up the asking price for a site that doesn't have any method of generating revenue. |
|
|
|
|
I kind of hate to bring this up, but given that jav gets to keep all the coins that go unclaimed.... well, I'd call that pretty big incentive to shut it down.
|
|
|
|
I just looked at some air con models available here. 12,000 BTU, split and window type, around 1.05 to 1.2x kWh. I hope that's max and not some sort of average.
Pay close attention to the EER (Energy Efficiency Ratio). For window types, most don't go above 10.8 (divide the BTUs by the ratio to get watts used). The highest I've seen is 11.7 EER (1025 watts) Hmm, something doesn't add up here. It's probably because the site I am using (HK's electricity provider) messed up the numbers. https://www.clponline.com.hk/MyHome/EnergyEfficiencyIdeas/AdoptEEApp/EcoLivingRoom/ReverseCycleAirConditioner/Pages/ProductDetail.aspx?model=CW-C1211VA(click on English on the top in case you want to confirm my numbers) Panasonic CW-C1211VA Cooling 12100 BTU Power Consumption 1.26 kW EER 2.82 W/W 12100 / 2.82 = 4290 Same for a few other models on that site. You forgot the last part of the calculation - divide by BTUs/kw. 4290 / 3413 = 1.26 kW. |
|
|
|
I am trying to figure something out about the Rig Box. For people not following all the BFL threads, I had initially paid 20 singles and made a down payment for a Rig Box. But I cancelled my order a week or two ago, until I see more single units out there (3 rev ones, without extra fans and holes in the bottom) and at least one or two Rig Boxes in the wild. I am sitting here in a friends office who is designing a new server room for their business. I've been joking he could house my mining rigs in there once he is done, which started a lengthy discussion about heat and A/C. He has been reading this article: Calculate heat dissipation for better server room design http://www.techrepublic.com/article/get-it-done-calculate-heat-dissipation-for-better-server-room-design/5031678Now here is what I am trying to figure out. BFL says the Rig Box does 50.4 Giga Hash @ 2,500 Watt. They haven't said anything about the "required" or "recommended" temperature, but they said it's 22C with the singles (correct me if I am wrong). Now for the Rig Box I don't expect it to be different, on the contrary, 2500W is a lot of heat for a box with dimensions of 24.5x17.7x13.5cm. Honestly, I believe the case is just a preliminary picture, and they are probably using something completely different, but that's not of any concern in this post. The point is that the heat dissipation is 2,500 Watt. Probably more than that given their track record of getting it wrong. Since we don't have heat dissipation specifications from BFL, we are going to use a formula provided by the above server room design article. (2 500 * 0.80 * 1.73) / 0.293 = 11 809 BTU. An air conditioner rated at 1 ton is roughly capable of handling 12,000 BTU (or 3517 watts!!) per hour of capacity, as specified by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. So does that mean you need a 1 ton (12,000 BTU) A/C for a Rig Box and pay an additional 3517 watts of electricity? I can't imagine you'd need an A/C if you run a couple of GPU mining rigs with a total of 2,500 watt (to stay with the same number) and clearly, people run mining rigs in hotter climates (ie. Goat in Thailand). Why would you need one for servers? Or would it only matter if you have multiples of those (as it is usually the case for server rooms)? As you can see, I am clearly confused about his. For reference, temperature averages here in my city: Jan-Dec, Degree Centigrade
18.6 18.6 21.5 25.1 28.4 30.4 31.3 31.1 30.2 27.7 24.0 20.3
If you use 2500w in a small space, you most certainly will need 1 ton of A/C to keep it cool. And 1 ton might not be enough come summertime! But, remember an A/C is a heatpump, so it is more efficient than a resistive heating heat source. Hard to explain. But basically, a 1 ton A/C will NOT be anywhere close to 3500 watts. I have a 10,000 BTU window A/C and it uses 1,020w. And it's fairly old, so I am sure there's better and even more efficient units out there. I bet you could get 12,000 BTU of cooling for under 1,000w now. |
|
|
|
|
Three reasons US healthcare is expensive:
1. People are allowed to sue doctors, hospitals, and drug companies for hundreds of millions of dollars. I mean, come on, does hundreds of millions really compensate a person better than a few million would? Either way, they're set for life.
2. Because the US takes a free and capitalist approach to the medical world, companies pour tens of billions of dollars into R&D for innovative new treatments and techniques. So, the US has the latest and greatest treatments, but it costs a lot to recover those R&D expenditures.
3. Because people are allowed to be treated without paying for it. Illegals included. Hospitals have to recover costs from people who don't pay somehow...
So, if you really want to fix US healthcare costs, stop allowing people to get $200M judgments when someone is maimed for life, learn to deal with a decrease in innovation of new medical technologies and treatments, and stop treating people who can't pay for it.
|
|
|
|
|
Probably PM Theymos or Maged about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Someone please buy this and keep it running...!
|
|
|
|
Wikipedia. I am still very skeptical but I want to be a part, because I love the ideals and the implementation. Here are my two reservations about bitcoin:
1. the longterm viability of mining/transaction fees is really dubious to me. Even now, as evident in this thread, people are not mining because it is not profitable. It should always be profitable, whether it is by mining or by transaction fees. Thoughts, all disclaimed with a "maybe":When they cut the reward in half, sh*t is gonna happen, right? Even after the transaction fees stabilize, only the miners with access to the cheapest electricity and most efficient machines will come out on top. Nobody else will be able to compete. Is it heading towards a monopoly? Also, why not gradually reduce the reward instead of cutting it in half intermittently? It's pre-programmed market trauma, as it now stands.
2. Some more "maybes": The vision seems too small scale. People talk all day about how infinitely divisible coins is so amazing, but it's really not that great considering that a very small handful of people are sitting on 5%ish of the long term total and 12%ish of btc in circulation. I realize that they deserve a payoff, and that early adopters in any bubble are rewarded. But until all of the hoarders and speculators (early and newcoming) start spending, btc will remain a daytrading playground and retirement delusion. Hell, I wish Mt. Gox made their limit even smaller. I also think the 21 million get out way too fast.
Unless we have a few more Mt. Gox freakouts in a short time, I think btc will be around for awhile.
1. Why would mining become a monopoly? There's many people with good electric rates that have huge mining farms - not just one person. And to make the argument that in the future, mining will be viable to few enough people that Bitcoin is susceptible to a 51% attack, you'd have to do some detailed analysis to figure out what total hashing power makes staging a 51% attack practical/profitable. Mining doesn't need to be profitable to everyone, just so long as there are enough miners to secure the network from a single party taking over the network. 2. I agree with you there. Having 7% of the coins owned by a single person (Satoshi), and several others with smaller whole percents is absurd if this can ever hope to be a currency on the scale of the USD. The current richest man in the world only has enough wealth to equate about 0.5% of the USD in circulation. Who knows though - maybe 50 years down the road, if none of those original coins are moving, people might assume that Satoshi got hit by a car and died, without leaving anyone else any information about his wallet. In other words, those coins would be assumed dead and never moving. |
|
|
|
Guys, CoinExchanger is turning out to be the likely culprit in the hack. I am almost sure that bitcoinica.com is out of funds and they are keeping the site open to get more deposits and ponzi those deposits on those who want to withdrawal. The 17 year old just lost 250,000 Dollars and I doubt he has an extra 250K to cover his loss. I would encourage everyone to withdrawal your funds from bitcoinica and watch the shit hit the fan. Visit, www.coinexchanger.com We will lower our withdrawal fee in the next couple of days, in the meantime 9% is fair. CoinExchanger.com is an admittedly unregistered MLB (money license business) that must be registered by FinCEN within 6 months of opening their doors and sharing their first stored value. They have not done so and are in direct violation of federal law. The owner of CoinExchanger.com is Leo Camilo, who advertises his address as 440 9th ave, New york, New York,10001 US and personal telephone number 1 (347) 469-1040. His private email (search google) is atqcapital@gmail.com. He has publicly stated on multiple occasions that: - bitcoin is fake money, "monopoly money" and has no value and should not be trusted for this reason.
- his exchange is functional with a large user base, when not a single user has ever reportedly done business with him
- he is holding coins stolen from Zhou Tong's Bitcoinica and says "fuck you Zhou, you're just a stupid 17 year old kid, these coins are mine now" basically.
He also: - goes under the sock puppet scammer account name "Maria"
- claims to be a millionaire and restaurant owner
He is currently in possession of stolen Bitcoins from the Linode hack and any coins purchased from him will not be accepted by MtGox or anyone in the Bitcoin community.
The part in big letters there... how do you know that he is in possession of coins from the hack? |
|
|
|
There's probably enough leeway there for the government to construe widespread defacement of bills with adverts for competing currency as illegal. I wouldn't try to start such a movement, more likely to attract the kind of attention bitcoin doesn't want.
The fed don't need to take up any "leeway" they gave, advertising on money is illegal. OP is 100 years too late to the idea of putting advertisements on US money. Somebody already annoyed them enough they made a law against it before we were born. I was sure that was the case, thanks for digging up the statute. I'd estimate this idea has a negatively assymetrically skewed expected payoff for bitcoin as a whole, better to shelve it and come up with something else that doesn't directly antagonize governments. Why isn't wheresgeorge shut down then? There must be some way around it if they have managed to keep straight for so long. I think you'll get a lot fewer people participating when they have to put the money in themselves though. I know I wouldn't. It's not that I don't want to see Bitcoin expand, it's that I don't want to be at a net loss for doing so. And I think a lot of other people are as... stingy... as I am in that regard.
If it can be done for free, there will be a lot more people participating.
How about a combination of both? You can enter in a serial number, fund it yourself, and release it into the wild or you can enter it and wait for the site admin to fund it. Now that's not a bad idea... |
|
|
|
I like the idea of a small sticker with a QR Code. Stickers aren't expensive to produce and ship, plus the notes stay clean.
In my opinion this should be crowd-funded, i.e. each person puts a few bitcents on a few bills and hands them out to strangers. The idea is not to get rich, but to metaphorically use fiat money to spread the word about a new kind of money. With crowd-funding there is no need for complicated means of verification via IP/email/whatever, it's first come first served.
I think you'll get a lot fewer people participating when they have to put the money in themselves though. I know I wouldn't. It's not that I don't want to see Bitcoin expand, it's that I don't want to be at a net loss for doing so. And I think a lot of other people are as... stingy... as I am in that regard. If it can be done for free, there will be a lot more people participating. |
|
|
|
I agree with edd about keeping things simple, but actually the game I described is no different in simplicity from a user's perspective. They're still just entering bills into a site. The site does all the rest of the work for calculations.
I also agree a note can't give credit the first time entered, or people will make up serial numbers. I think the key validation is having the second person verify the details of the bill. From the tech standpoint checking the I.P. geo location is the best way to guard against one person pretending to be many others.
As for the illegality of marking bills it's interesting that wheresgeorge.com has set a precedent. The Secret Service themselves commented that as long as the site ceased selling the rubber stamps to mark with they wouldn't look into it too much. If bitcoin created its own game that did nothing different what would justify a new crack down?
It's a gray area, but it's interesting that the current system has no problem using gray area to their own benefit, such as with so-called "voluntary" income taxes and capital gains taxes on legal tender gold/silver coins.
The anonymous features of Bitcoin makes it possible to safely take a political stand. It's just a question of whether the resulting PR would do more harm than any benefits of exposure from actions taken.
If you go by IP geo location, wouldn't that cause problems? Most bills stay in the same locale for quite a long time before moving elsewhere in the country. I believe Phinnaeus was on the right track:
I don't see this solving the problem of people making up serial numbers. Sure, you can make sure the serial numbers match a specific pattern, but I could just take a legitimate bill and start incrementing values by 1. What would stop me? Or put a random set of numbers in. The only way to protect from people making up serial numbers is to have numbers funded when they are initially entered. Don't give out any prizes or anything, but after the bill is entered a first time, you can give out BTC when it is entered a second time. |
|
|
|
"Defacing" bills is against US law but it hasn't really been enforced: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where%27s_George%3F#ControversyI'm afraid blatantly encouraging individuals to do this would give the Secret Service a reason to prosecute bitcoiners, even if it's a flimsy one. I still prefer keeping it very simple. Person finds bill with URL, visits website, enters serial numbers, possibly wins BTC. Person learns that even unmarked bills may unlock BTC. Person visits site often to check bills, investigates the BTC market and becomes immersed in the bitcoin community. Person becomes an advocate of bitcoin themselves and begins proselytizing and spreading the word with bills marked with the URL. Contests over how many bills you've marked, how far they've traveled, etc should just be gravy. Again though, how would you prevent people from making up serial numbers? The first time a note is entered, it CANNOT give out BTC, or else people will just start making up serial numbers. |
|
|
|
It all depends on how slush manages this ordeal, worst case I would atleast want to get partial damages reimbursed.
Slush already said he'd cover it from his own pocket. No loss to anyone mining with him. |
|
|
|
$100,000s of client assets & zero customer support - unfuckingbelievable  No one is forcing clients to put their money in Bitcoinica. If you don't like their customer service, don't user their service. I don't. |
|
|
|
Wow, quite the attack. I'd go straight after Linode with a lawsuit.
There may be something in their EULA to protect them against this type of lawsuit EULA's aren't the end-all that companies make them out to be though. Even if they say "we will not be held liable for blah blah blah", doesn't mean that a court won't hold them liable. |
|
|
|
|
Wow, quite the attack. I'd go straight after Linode with a lawsuit.
|
|
|
|
It's a good idea, but wouldn't work very well. You can easily have access to IP addresses from all over the world if you know what you are doing.
I wonder if it is possible to filter for only ISP-given IP addresses. I mean, gather up the IP ranges for all the major ISP's around, and then see if the IP fits the criteria. If not, throw an error and tell them they must enter their bills from a residential ISP carrier.
Then again, people would start creating IP address circles. Mailing lists with lists of serial codes, and they just keep circulating them round-robin style. Of course, that could/would happen with any of the methods talked about so far...
Hmmmm...
Also, 6 wouldn't work, because a person could just keep a log of the serial numbers, then periodically re-enter them to see if they had been entered somewhere else and thus "returned".
EDIT: An epiphony! Only pay out for the first bill entered for a second time every 24 hours. In other words, it wouldn't be normally expected that the same person could find two bills that had already been written on it in the same 24 hour period, so anyone who does would be considered a cheat, and would not be paid out for that bill. BUT, a person can enter as many first-time bills as they want in any given period of time. Thus, the incentive to write on fresh bills would likely outweigh the incentive to cheat on existing ones!
You'd still probably have rings of people trying to enter each others bills to game the system, but ultimately, it wouldn't really be worth it for them. And it would probably be much easier to catch them just running some simple queries on the DB.
Yes, gaming the system by I.P. is possible, but I think it's one of those things where it's easier to play correctly. A time delay would help. For anyone with sufficient skill to do so it wouldn't be worth the elaborate effort needed. As for friends entering each other's bills, remember that credit is only given once, then the bill is expected to be entered from another location and credit is given to the last person. But even the limited cheating of friends is the essence of what going viral is about. I'm thinking the max reward issued wouldn't be more than $500-1K. - Enter bill - Rent VPS across the country - Enter bill again - Win $500-$1k. What am I missing here? And why is credit given only once? Wouldn't you want people to continue entering the bills, even after it has been entered once? The more people exposed, the better, etc. I think you and I are on completely different paths of ideas. :p |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
