I can say there is no phallophobia in recent posts leading me to conclude the existance of heterophobia with a pronounced coitophobia or eurotophobia steming from gynephobia. Seriously, and psy only retracts autoinitiated dinner offers because of severe deipnophobia. Just my homophobic perspective.  |
|
|
|
You are working too hard and taking up too many slots! How will you automate turning on your system?  You are at the beach checking out the opposite sex when your Bitcoin miner crashes and you are not there to choose from the menu because you are busy choosing from a different menu.  You need to enable USB Storage function and maybe USB Legacy Function, in Integrated Peripherals.
At the F12 screen slect + Hard Disk, then the USB drive. http://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/44384-unable-boot-usb-key-ga-890fxa-ud5.htmlHi there,
I have this mobo and am also running the F6 BIOS and can BOOT and install various Linux distros without problem from the USB Stick. You might want to use this: Universal USB Installer – Easy as 1 2 3 | USB Pen Drive Linux to create a Bootable pendrive.
Once you have created the install drive shut down the PC and plug the USB stick into one of the USB2 ports (don't try using the USB3 ones).
Restart the PC and press F12 to get to the BOOT menu. You need to choose the USB-HDD option to access the pendrive.
Apart from keyboard and mouse do not have any other devices plugged into the USB ports. Although this is not essential it does help eliminate any issues. http://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/44384-unable-boot-usb-key-ga-890fxa-ud5.htmlGuys, it sounds like his stick is bootable already as he mentions using it on other PC's, I think he just needs to learn the "Gigabyte Way" of booting to USB  No need to jump through too many hoops 01BTC10, just learn the "Gigabyte Way" of booting to USB.   |
|
|
|
|
The biggest problem with learning to compile is developers aren't putting exact dependencies required in their README's or website. For example, a developer might put "libxyz" as a dependency in their README, but in reality "libxyz-dev-2.56" is specifically needed. It is a huge problem for those learning to compile because there is no guidance from the developer. This forces "newbs" to join forums where they get ridiculed for not knowing how to do a simple Linux task or ignored, as a hint, to google it.
The only good compiling guide that I've found is from RedHat, it's as explicit as a guide can be. Now we just need developers to list non-standard dependencies which are required.
...off to check youtube for compiling guides.
|
|
|
|
|
Is Intensity the only factor to affect the DOA work?
Can you add the % of avg. DOA from avg. MH/s to graphs? -Mean: is meaningless to me when comparing to other miners as parameters vary. 4.9TH, 300TH, 48TH
|
|
|
|
TURN DOWN INTENSITY ON YOUR MINERS.
Some miners are wasting there hashs because of high DOA shares. DOA shares don't count towards your payout so your only hurting your own payout. The hashrate shown on the website includes DOA shares. I will soon be showing DOA hashrate and % DOA.
Intensity should not be set any higher than 8
Do you mean Intensity when using CGMiner? Are the Intensity scales identicle with other mining software, like Phoenix or POCLBM for instance? How would some one notice? What would be occuring in CGMiner for instance that would suggest intensity is too high? GUIMiner? POCLBM alone? The Intensity scale within CGMiner covers -10 to +10. |
|
|
|
enforcing orders, much like no one can simply change the bitcoin app. code, and start doing fraudulent transactions, the p2p exchange will work in similar way.
By enforcing orders I mean - let's say I put up a bid to buy 1000 bitcoins for $4 each. Someone takes me up on my offer. What makes sure I will go forward with it? Maybe I have no interest at all in buying bitcoins and am just trying to manipulate the market? So there is: ------------------------Exchanger -------------------------------^ ----------------------------/___\ -------------------------/______\ ----------------------/_________\ -------------------/____________\ ---------------/________________\ -----------/____________________\ Buyer------------------------------------------Seller In the traditional view the "Exchanger" is a trading platform. What we need is some type of escrow coin that uses split keys and a Diffie-Hellman exchange, basically a way that can be an agreement of offers and encrypt electronic fund transfer details between 2 parties. |
|
|
|
|
The Alpha Betas. At least when it comes to nerds.
|
|
|
|
I just wanted to report that I am getting more consistent and higher earnings through this pool than I was with bitcoins.lc. Thanks for all the hard work Jaycoin.
Also, thanks to whoever recommend Vircurex, I've created addresses for merged mining through Vircures to automatically receive payments. It works great!
I would avoid them, they can't set up an HTTPS certificate properly. I visited their home page and login page and SSL is broken. (Raspberry through thumb and forefinger circle.) |
|
|
|
Switch over is complete. P2pmining.com:9332 should work fine now.
What about people that don't use DNS? How about 50.22.130.100:9332, does that still work? Some problems
Timestamp didn't match up with the last block found and it started paying out extras to a couple people.
What are your plans for resolving this bonus issue? Will you be seeking remuneration? (Yes! Finally found a place to use remuneration.) You can never lose anything that really belongs to you, and you can't keep that which belongs to someone else. Bitcoin is strange. The block chain I downloaded on the new server had different timestamps on blocks than the other chain. I upgraded the bitcoind version at the same time. Maybe that had something to do with it.
Note to self: Copy block chain over to new server when it coincides with a database, don't download new block chain.
Other Note: Chrome acts all wonky when changing a DNS entry on a website
One more note: Checking "Watch Here For Latest News" and still no News about a server switch over with DNS change. How much advanced knowledge should users have had before the changeover? There is progress whether you are going forward or backward! The thing is to move! |
|
|
|
|
Why not just have people make payments to offline addresses. When they fill in their shipping address there is an extra box for the bitcoin address they make the payment from. This way MyDoodads.com can verify the payment via the blockchain by using a PHP spider on blockexplorer from an alternate internet connection. Totally automated and hacker has no access to the stores offline wallet. Evil hacker can deface the site, load an exploit pack onto the site to attack vulnerable users but can't steal any money because no money goes through the site. Stealing names and shipping addresses has no immediate compensation reward unless I'm selling some shady or embarrassing products.
|
|
|
|
"I went to the bank to get my $0.40 back out, and it wasn't even the same $0.40, I checked the mint marks on the dimes! The bank teller told me that they have a computerized balance that shows how many dollars I have, but clearly they are just taking someone else's money to pay me back mine!" Paraphrasing in hyperbole my hyperbole? Well, I guess I opened the door. MtGox is a huge coin mixing service, no reason to break that functionality. There is enough reason to remove it from Mt. Gox. They are currently the defacto price and trend setter for Bitcoins, their influence can wholly affect Bitcoins value, for it's good or for it's detriment. They are regulated in Japan I'm sure their laws only affect monetary transactions not Bitcoin transactions, like every other country. Can you legislate the hearts of men? Mt. Gox is not a bank. In my analogy, Mt. Gox = Stock Market. Do you not understand that EVERY SINGLE Bitcoin-based service does this? It is flawed and can be used by those in control of said system to accumulate funds for what ever purpose it so chooses, i.e. to make daily market trades of buy low sell high for profit; to fund an account and accumulate a quantity sufficient enough to crash that market. They can generate multiple addresses, n% of transactions per day, mixing them in with the legitimate transactions, so that after collecting deposits pay n% to n% of addresses which they have exclusive control over. As deepceleron pointed out, your expectations are about as ridiculous as wanting to get the same coins and bills you deposited back from the bank when you withdraw. deepceleron paraphrased in hyperbole my hyperbole, poking in fun at me. You can withdraw this comment if you want. So, how else do I monitor my Mt. Gox address to find out if my password gets "hacked" and some "hacker" dumps my funds to crash the market. (When reading this use hand gestures to simulate quotations and assume I have millions in a single Mt. Gox Account.) Not at all surprised by what your reporting, just another proof to me, of how valuable BitCoins really are, and the transparency that the BlockChain tools allow individuals to discover for themselves. My take is that whatever any given organization is really doing behind the scenes with customer funds, is their affair and hopefully built on mutual trust as being a priority, but never forget that what you see in your 'personal' account balances with any of them, is only as real as you want to believe it is, until it's safely back in your own personal wallet, I would consider it <transitory>. Hope one day soon, to understand things well enough that I can figure out when & how to view my own blockchain transactions as you do. Rapidly coming up the learning curve, but still have a long way to go, compared to most of you. Many mysteries to be solved....lov'n it! Currently Bitcoins are worth approximately 40+ million. Mt. Gox is in a position that could kill Bitcoins and there is not much anyone in the community can do about it. It has already been demonstrated that their platform does have a catastrofic affect on Bitcoins value, what has already happened will happen again. Security resides outside such a centralization of control. I wonder if Namecoin could handle buy and sell requests and make trading decentralized. ABM's could be used for those who don't have existing bank accounts. Of course this would only be a temporary solution to ween people off of FIAT currencies. Once Bitcoin trades to cash reduce to n% cash transactions could be depricated and Bitcoin wins. |
|
|
|
The Art Of War
I also read The Art of War twice, albeit many years ago--when it first came out. ~Bruno~ So you are 2600 years old? |
|
|
|
|
The Tesla's were targeting graphics professionals like CAD Engineering or Architecture where there is a need to display large files without any hiccups.
|
|
|
|
|
With flash media there are different Class types. Class 4 will drop some bits when writing to the flash medium. For pictures it may not be a big deal if there is a little missing data, but for binary files and Operating Systems it is a nightmare. To prevent this, make sure you purchase Class 10 flash media, which will preserve all of your bits when writing to the media. When you buy cheap flash media you get what you pay for unfortunately, and Class 4 is the cheapest. Currently, Class4 2GB Micro SD cards sell for $2-$4 while Class 10 2GB Micro SD cards sell for $4-$6 dollars each.
I'm writing this from an OS installed on a 16GB Micro SD card and have been running this computer for 5 months like this. This is my minimalist phase.
|
|
|
|
|
Mt. Gox is adding complexity to the blockchain, making it more difficult to see at a glance the additions and subtractions I made relating to my address they gave me. I use the blockchain to monitor the activity on that address and they are poluting it with their accounting system. I'm monitoring the blockchain looking to see what value I'm getting mining at the pool I joined, to understand my earning ability with current set up.
The right way for Mt. Gox to pay out withdraws is from a withdraw address funded from 'cold storage' directly, not incoming deposits. Incoming deposits should be moved to "cold storage" addresses only.
You could say the Mt. Gox system of accounting which includes paying withdraws and moving to "cold storage" using a single address would make it easy, if they were so inclined, to hide shady payouts in the noise of their odd acounting system. Who would expend the effort to look through 4.5 million BTC of Mt. Gox transactions to find nK of shady BTC deals which would fund some obfuscated account which might then be used at some future time to crash the system for profit.
Have we not learned anything from how the Federal Reserve was created. Bankers created the stock market, got average Joe's to invest in it with money they borrowed from the independent banks, engineered the stock market crashes and while we were dealing with a financial crisis they offered to solve the volatility problem by creating a central bank.
|
|
|
|
True, but I was hoping that by then we'll be forced to go down to 1E-12 or so just because a satoshi will be worth too much Well even then there is a deadline it just gets pushed back every time the discrete unit is made smaller. Still global money supply is ~$60T. If the entire world adopted Bitcoin for all transactions displacing all other forms of money 1 Bitcoin would be $60T / 21M = ~$3 million ea. 1 Satoshi would then be ~ 3 cents. Unlikely we will ever need more than 8 decimal places unless a significant number of them were lost. Currently wealth is concentrated in specific regions of the world, US, UK, parts of EU, South Africa, etc. So your $60T figure is mostly linked to those wealthy geographic/population regions. In a one world government scenario new wealth will be created in areas that were previously unable to obtain the level the US, UK, parts of EU, South Africa, etc. enjoyed. It is my opinion that the $60T figure will grow, potentially to $500T (WAG), and in such a scenario Bitcoin would need at least 12 decimal places to be able to become in actuality the world currency. How many decimal places would be required would be dependent on how best to fit both micro and macro payments into Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
1. Nearly every First Ammendment case appearing before contemporary courts contains a phrase declaring "the First Ammendment made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Ammendment..."
by using this phrase, the court is invoking it's decisions from the 1940s which reinterpreted the Fourteenth Ammendment. That reinterpretation created a mechanism for the court whereby, for the first time, it could intervene in all practices of States and local communities, including religion.
---
In the Fourteenth Ammendment, the "evil intended to be remedied" and "the intent of Congress" was clear: to make recently freed slaves citizens of the state in which they resided. Very simply-and very specifically-the Fourteenth Ammendment was a badly needed racial civil rights ammendment.
How, then, could the courts of the 1940s manage so completely to rewrite the intent?
As a result of seperating the wording from it's intent, in Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940), Murdock v. Pennsylvania (1943), Everson v. Board of Education (1947), and other decisions, the Court substituted a totaly revised and foreign interpretation for the Fourteenth Ammendment. In those decisions, the Court declared that the purpose of the Fourteenth Ammendment was to limit the States not just on racial civil rights issues, but on numerous items contained within the Bill of Rights. Chapter 10 The Court's Selective Use of History, pages 197-198 Original Intent by David Barton |
|
|
|
|
...You think this thread is about you and begin to troll it.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
