|
Mine is part making money. I sold some miners but I bought just a tad more then I sold. So I gained money... then lost just a little.
But ended up with more mining power with it. So still happy overall.
|
|
|
|
stick a piece of paper in your wall
This is actually not a horrible idea. I cannot remember the spy movie but they did this. What they did was had a vent or something that allowed a straight drop of item and used magnets. So say you stored your paper storage in the wall with a magnet on it. You use a string with another magnet on it and you can "fish" it out when needed. Only problem is fire etc that destroy it. Safe's do not have the fire issue assuming nice safe. |
|
|
|
Why don't you simply ask for a new IP address from your VPS provider and/or create a new VPS that is on a new IP address?
I think that would be more of a band-aid. It might allow it to work for hours or weeks. The problem is not that simple as it bans the IP for something. So not having a way to know what caused it, it would happen over and over most likely. If this IP can be unbanned and whitelisted or something were forum does not future ban. It works out better long term. |
|
|
|
Just throw a reminder here to power the control board after the hash boards are up if possible.
The bitmain wording was recently changed to something more along the lines of apply power to the power supply feeding the hash boards first, and then the control board.
Many have suggested this has to do with the issues people are seeing with low hashrates.
Personally, I follow their instructions to the letter, and even to the point of using a different power supply to power my control board on my S5+ so there is no doubt about my hash boards being powered first. I am not wasting the leftover power on the power supply I use on the control board, as I am also powering a couple of S5s from it was well.
To comment on the low hash people are experiencing where the soft boot seems to pickup, I have this exact same experience with some S3s where it is truly exaggerated behaviour. Literally a hard boot shows a hash rate of a few ghs, where a soft restart allows them to operate correctly. I have seen some of the same but not as bad behaviour with my S4s, and once I knew what to look for I see it with the S5 as well. I have no doubt there is an issue across the board which causes this scenario, but as for it being tied to when the control board is powered on, I cannot say. Whether this has to do with the S7 as well I cannot say as mine is late.
Good luck to you!
Have ONE s7. I'm running it on one bitmain 1600 watt psu. I'm going to try using two corsair rm1000 psu's with one on two hashboards and the other on one hashboard and the controller. I'm going to fire up the controller psu first and then the 2 hashboard psu and see what it does. Then I will do a soft reboot and see what THAT does. Ok here we go. I have a batch one running 575 as shipped. Has been 4600 for days (5 or so) Power on corsair with controller and one hashboard. Wait 5 seconds Power on corsair with two hashboards. After 15 minutes 4600 Soft reboot After 15 minutes 4600 I don't understand the hashboard first thing. Maybe 15 or 30 second delay between power on? The hashboard thing they have started since S5+'s. They make sure to warn you about it. I was really scared at first thinking of if miner loses power, etc. But my S5+ has handled a power outage and turned on all at once without issue. It's just happened one time but was no damage. So it's probley being to safe. But I will still follow it as I feel there has to be a reason for it. |
|
|
|
the most secure wallet is definitely hardware wallet
Depends on user. If done properly a paper wallet stored safely is still the best cold storage device there is. You cannot hack paper, it does not have internet. A hardware wallet is great security in most cases. But again it is not safer then a paper wallet (unless someone uses paper wallet wrong) |
|
|
|
your wallet as you hide all your money there
The hope is you have a bank account and are holding your money in there. If you are carrying all of your cash in wallet that is not a good idea. One person takes wallet you are broke. Kinda same with bitcoin don't carry it around when you don't need access to cold storage. Lock it up, get a bank deposit box. Anything with better security. |
|
|
|
Hi I'm Nyx2011 and I'm wondering what the best way to earn btc is at the moment? Are physical goods better to deal in than digital? What are the advantages of using bitcoin in my shops?
The big question is what kind off shops do you have? Physical and digital both have their places. So it would depend on what product you carry in your shop you talk about. There is not one best way to make BTC. Find your niche is the best and go with it. It might take a bit but the best profit differs from person to person. Just a lot of individual factors that everyone does not share. |
|
|
|
Well, I'm not talking about mining here.
Also how much can you make on localbitcoins?
Because it has more traders and greater competition.
The margin on Localbitcoins is about 5%-10%, so if you want to make $1000 per month, then you need to sell $10k - $20k worth of bitcoins per month. Depending on where you are, that might be difficult to do. Even if you can't make a living at it, you can do it as a hobby. I used to sell bitcoins on LocalBitcoins and it was fun meeting all those people getting Bitcoins for the first time. I generally met at Starbucks and the commission paid for my drink an sometimes for lunch. And the problem again is getting 10-20k worth of BTC. Legal exchanges following rules likely will stop account if doing this volume, they might ask questions or worse assume selling and lock account where no purchasing depending on exchange. So you really would have to find a VERY big miner and partner up. And likely you would have to cut him in on part of it as a big supplier who can do this is few and far between. And the sad thing is a few bad deals with a scammer could eat up a big chunk of the profit. When dealing with hundreds of dollars per BTC. It is risky to say the least. |
|
|
|
My understanding is Miner design is LK Group, chips assumed to be InnoSilicon? BW.com is planning using them in their B-Eleven Cloud Mining Investment program with a target of 10000TH.
Rich
Ok that makes sense. Kinda disappointing if first X number get sold to them for that. That would be a while till LKETC needs us regular customers. I was hoping they would open with Customers. But if they do this it's likely a lot will be going to data centers if that is the model they already are mmaking deals with. |
|
|
|
Interesting BW is a big name to get behind the miners. So is it LKETC or BW that is doing that design? I'm suspecting that it will be later then January 1st aswell. With us still not seeing a prototype and it only having 2 months left in year not a lot of time to get mass production, unless they are just very secretive which is possible. |
|
|
|
So today I spent a bit more time with a multi-chip board, a PCB I had worked up a while back but never actually got around to testing. Only problem with it is the topology isn't quite right so I'm having to jumper a few things, but I want it working to test some node-level stuff I'll need to know before I can work up a pod miner. Right now I have two chips on there, but the second chip doesn't initialize reliably. I wasn't sure if that was hardware or software so I grabbed an old two-chip test board and fired it up (UART adapter to stock cgminer) and it lit up both chips from the get-go so it must be a hardware issue. I hope to work on it more tomorrow, get at least four chips to light up which should tell me pretty much everything I need to know for the 8-chip layout I have planned. Maybe when it's working I'll put up some pictures. The fun thing about using cgminer is apparently U3 code shares out work differently than these chips require because, while I can get it to initialize two chips off the U3 driver, the second chip returns the same shares as the first so while I see two chips' hashrate I only see one chip's WU and multiple errors per second because cgminer labeles duplicates as errors. The pod survey is still open over here, where I'm looking at community/customer interest in a BM1384-based pod miner. Like the Compac, this will basically be considered a dev step that becomes a full product; it'll include all of the controls we'd put on a larger board and give a bit more data on topology and efficiency without having to build a whole big board. I think the survey results no matter what is take our money  . Only thing I hope with pods is possibly a limit of 1 per person at start. I really want a chance of getting one and know it will be a limited amount. But I am still willing to pre-order once you do decide to sale. And I think a lot of others will to once you decide to start selling. But I respect your decision on whatever you decide. I'd be interested but i can't do it with the expensive shipping if its only one unit. I could give a dead S5 board + money and that would be possibly enough for nearly 4 pods, which would then be doable. I think you missed the idea behind the dead board. Re-read the topic here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1203190.0Shipping 1x dead S5 board would be payment for 1 pod (I believe). Sidehack can confirm If I'm reading it right. But I do not think shipping in 1 dead board get's you 4 pods. The other chips would be "recycled" and sold in other pods. And you get one for the dead board. I said one dead board, enough chips for 3 pods and a bit more assuming they would all be in working condition and to that add money to cover the rest. Since i am supplying my own chips, i'd be taking idealistically under 1 pod worth of supplies from sidehack, hereby leaving plenty to others. So i'm pretty sure i did not miss the idea behind the dead board. The idea is he only has chips for 50 pods. If i supply him the parts, i do not see a problem. But you are saying: I'd be interested but i can't do it with the expensive shipping if its only one unit. I could give a dead S5 board + money and that would be possibly enough for nearly 4 pods, which would then be doable.
You said you could not do it for 1 pod. So it sounded like you want multiple pods so it really does not supply chips to other pods if you get 3-4 made from it. It would still be pretty limited. But this is taking away from thread. Feel free to PM me. I don't want sidehacks thread to contain debates that are really not needed. |
|
|
|
I saw the same renderings in another post yesterday where people were discussing Avalon, Insolicon, etc. I will dig it up.
I hope it is true, but I fear it may not be.
It's strange that 14nm-based miner has the same power consupmtion as S7, but it looks more expensive than S7... I hope real specs will differ for the better. It is really since BM took the 28nm and perfected it in a way. They kept same NM but found a way to get a lot more out of same NM. SP did the same I believe and got even lower they are reporting. On the 14 NM it is very very new (I don't know if we have even seen a working prototype). But hope is later on they will be able to get even more out of it. But it's looking like those who choose to stick with 28 NM are the winners right now as they are able to sell. |
|
|
|
So today I spent a bit more time with a multi-chip board, a PCB I had worked up a while back but never actually got around to testing. Only problem with it is the topology isn't quite right so I'm having to jumper a few things, but I want it working to test some node-level stuff I'll need to know before I can work up a pod miner. Right now I have two chips on there, but the second chip doesn't initialize reliably. I wasn't sure if that was hardware or software so I grabbed an old two-chip test board and fired it up (UART adapter to stock cgminer) and it lit up both chips from the get-go so it must be a hardware issue. I hope to work on it more tomorrow, get at least four chips to light up which should tell me pretty much everything I need to know for the 8-chip layout I have planned. Maybe when it's working I'll put up some pictures. The fun thing about using cgminer is apparently U3 code shares out work differently than these chips require because, while I can get it to initialize two chips off the U3 driver, the second chip returns the same shares as the first so while I see two chips' hashrate I only see one chip's WU and multiple errors per second because cgminer labeles duplicates as errors. The pod survey is still open over here, where I'm looking at community/customer interest in a BM1384-based pod miner. Like the Compac, this will basically be considered a dev step that becomes a full product; it'll include all of the controls we'd put on a larger board and give a bit more data on topology and efficiency without having to build a whole big board. I think the survey results no matter what is take our money . Only thing I hope with pods is possibly a limit of 1 per person at start. I really want a chance of getting one and know it will be a limited amount. But I am still willing to pre-order once you do decide to sale. And I think a lot of others will to once you decide to start selling. But I respect your decision on whatever you decide. I'd be interested but i can't do it with the expensive shipping if its only one unit. I could give a dead S5 board + money and that would be possibly enough for nearly 4 pods, which would then be doable. I think you missed the idea behind the dead board. Re-read the topic here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1203190.0Shipping 1x dead S5 board would be payment for 1 pod (I believe). Sidehack can confirm If I'm reading it right. But I do not think shipping in 1 dead board get's you 4 pods. The other chips would be "recycled" and sold in other pods. And you get one for the dead board. |
|
|
|
I saw the same renderings in another post yesterday where people were discussing Avalon, Insolicon, etc. I will dig it up.
I hope it is true, but I fear it may not be.
Do not order. I believe the renderings were from LKETC (insolicon's long term partner). - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1033676.msg12650782#msg12650782So the B-Eleven is actually someone Else's rendering. Unless LKETC is letting them use the design which is unlikely. |
|
|
|
Everyone assumed they would be fair.
and thats the point there is only a hand of companys in bitcoin-business that had a little rest of trust, and i thought bitmaintech is one of them. but what i see here is the same strategy that all the other shit companys have, eat or die i lost a lot of money in the one and other bitcoin-company and thought bitmaintech is a safe deal, and so the disappointment for this compensation is big And the key word there is assumed. It was a assumption it would be fair, not a promise or a contract. All they promised was after X date it is considered late. They left it wide open to make it up to them. I understand that it sucks, and really can see compensation is really low. But when you talk about say refund's they did not do anything that they have to give refunds, or even great compensation as they made up the selling rules. So it is not nice but boils down to a business decision over customer happiness. Will all these thread's change their mind? I doubt it but you never know. |
|
|
|
You aren't running it with damaged cables are you? It appears anwser is yes on mutiple... with electrical tape. I wondered what wiring was like dang..... OP you really need to think about shutting down rig. It just is scary on the wiring. That is a fire hazard. |
|
|
|
so that we do with the PCB faulty,? the throw? and we expect that fail as well as other left without miner?
If out of warranty you talk nice to bitmain, and ask them how much to send in for another. And if they are out you don't have a ton of options you have to turn to 3rd party options. You can sell it, buy a new one from a 3rd party. Is that great? No... but you are not going to get a coupon for a broken PCB. Just look at S7 refunds they are not into coupons at the moment. And they just never have bought old gear back. |
|
|
|
- There are no refunds, all sales are final
ok maybe, but i do a sale to a fixed time frame, they not handle the sale in this timeframe, there is no final sale, there is no valid contract - The procedure of the warranty is quite clear
this is no warranty inquiry, this has nothing todo with a valid warranty if there is no valid sale They did warn if it was X day's past it would be considered late. They did not have any TOS that offered refund if late. Everyone assumed they would be fair and do something like a coupon for a decent amount. But they did not do this they surprised everyone. Since they don't a TOS on being late they don't really break any contract. Did they lose peoples trust? Possibly. But makes sales not valid, no as they don't have any TOS even close to that. |
|
|
|
So wait, reading through this thread, even if you have a free electricity and you buy the latest miners, S7 for example, you will not be able to get any profits and ROI? How the heck is this possible?
You will ROI. But "free" electricity in many cases are better off with a generation old gear or so. They don't need the most efficient as it is free. Lets say S3 or S5 likely are a lot better choice for "free" electricity. They need to get cheapest per GH/T on buying. The efficiency of newest machine does not mean near as much to them as it does for someone paying .10 cents. |
|
|
|
I've noticed recently that mining profits in Bitcoin have gone down. They are still the same in USD, if not more, but slightly lower on a BTC basis. I'm curious what people think will happen to mining profits over the next six months taking into account all of the fundamental developments affecting Bitcoin. If someone is making 1 BTC a month today with their hash rate what do you think it will be in six months based on your projections? I know there are a lot of variables and this is a tough question to answer but I'm still interested to see if anyone is willing to take a shot at it. Thanks!
It is not easy to predict 6 month's away. In mining time this is a LONG LONG time. We try to predict it weekly and even then there are surprises. With difficulty it will go down in 6 months. But how much no one can say for sure. If we knew there would not be speculation. I agree. 6 months is a huge time frame in the mining world. Also we need to calculate the upcoming halving into the equation. How will the miners that are barely making their ROI react with the upcoming halving? Will they drop out of the game? It makes sense that they will if the price stays the same and reward halfs. There are many many questions and many decisions that must be anticipated ahead of the time in the mining game. Having is the big scary thing a lot don't think about. We can hope that we get BTC to go up in value. But 2x in value.... that might take a while. I just am afraid what will happen at having. And I could be afraid for nothing possibly for having someone comes out with a miner that efficiency is amazing and it does not make much of a difference. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
