Recent screenshot:  |
|
|
|
Put me down for 2nd interested, shipping to N.A. Contact me if the above doesn't go through.
Nothing came of the above as the guy didn't want a Bitcoin miner he wanted an altcoin miner. Where is NA? |
|
|
|
me wanty me wanty... damn i wish i had the money  Same here. Always wanted an R4 but undeclocked an S9 instead. Wish i could justify going back to bigger machines. But electricity cost made it pointless. Good luck with the sale Bifta. Out of curiousity what abouts in the UK are you? Surrey and London |
|
|
|
|
Probably some big concerns who have slush as a backup pool, their primary pool goes offline for some reason and they flip over to slush, then flip back when their primary comes back.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey its Gadi..
Ex spondoolies running bitmain israel..
|
|
|
|
|
T9 is designed for a data center. It's hot and very loud. R4 is designed for the home. It's quiet like a PC.
|
|
|
|
It's how bitmain always prices their kit based on hashrate. I didn't say it made financial sense  |
|
|
|
|
Ckpool is open-source software as per the thread linked above if you go read it.
|
|
|
|
I really don't get the need for lots of daily payouts. A payout ever day, even every few days or so is fine. Do people really need 10 small payouts a day? I would rather get 1 large payout a day than 10 small ones. If nothing else, it makes less work for the accounting.
Agreed. I do not see any point for it, other than extreme insecurity perhaps. If one does not trust the pool operator to reasonably protect/hold the rewards until adequately verified, one should probably mine elsewhere...methinks. Additionally, it puts the miners' accounting load on Kano, where it doesn't belong...again, methinks. But then, I've been occasionally told I think too much...methinks.  Sorry, but do you have multiple personality disorder today?  That first paragraph first agrees with larger payments, then the second part disagrees with larger payments, because larger consolidated payments mean the pool operator running a wallet that holds those payments until they are ready to payout. So do you agree with one large consolidated payment a day or not? I think for this pool it works fine without, all you need to do is have a mining wallet and a cold, or spending wallet, the mining income goes into the mining wallet, and every week or so you send the coins from your mining wallet into your cold wallet, which consolidates the dust for you. Then when you want to trade or buy something with your coin you do so from the cold/spending wallet and, if you use a reasonable sized transaction fee, that spend will go through alot faster than if you sent it from your mining wallet. Interesting. I said nothing about size of payments. It was about frequency. I also said nothing about consolidation. However, I do have an opinion on it...I don't like it. I do my accounting traceable to the block, and I'd like to keep it that way. Really? If you normally 5 small payments per day, but consolidate them into one payment per day then thats going to be a single larger payment surely The frequency of payments in this example is directly correlated to the size of payment. Thanks for clarifying your stance, I'm not having a go, just that you surprised me as your normal position is one of someone who likes the way things work here, but your first sentence is agreeing with the OP saying that they'd rather have one payout per day rather than lots of small payouts. |
|
|
|
I really don't get the need for lots of daily payouts. A payout ever day, even every few days or so is fine. Do people really need 10 small payouts a day? I would rather get 1 large payout a day than 10 small ones. If nothing else, it makes less work for the accounting.
Agreed. I do not see any point for it, other than extreme insecurity perhaps. If one does not trust the pool operator to reasonably protect/hold the rewards until adequately verified, one should probably mine elsewhere...methinks. Additionally, it puts the miners' accounting load on Kano, where it doesn't belong...again, methinks. But then, I've been occasionally told I think too much...methinks. Sorry, but do you have multiple personality disorder today? That first paragraph first agrees with larger payments, then the second part disagrees with larger payments, because larger consolidated payments mean the pool operator running a wallet that holds those payments until they are ready to payout. So do you agree with one large consolidated payment a day or not? I think for this pool it works fine without, all you need to do is have a mining wallet and a cold, or spending wallet, the mining income goes into the mining wallet, and every week or so you send the coins from your mining wallet into your cold wallet, which consolidates the dust for you. Then when you want to trade or buy something with your coin you do so from the cold/spending wallet and, if you use a reasonable sized transaction fee, that spend will go through alot faster than if you sent it from your mining wallet. |
|
|
|
.... I hesitate to call the loss of fan control and the easy changing of frequencies an upgrade....
Changing freq on older rigs with 2.0 hasn't changed, it's just hidden... It's still at h ttp://your_rig's_IP_here/cgi-bin/minerAdvanced.cgi Very interesting. It DOES take you to a frequency control page. However, when I decided to bump one of miners from 550 to 575, it popped up a warning saying it would take 3 hours to search frequencies before it starts mining. I decided, No. Thanks for the tip anyway. I've done it loads of times, it doesn't take 3 hours. |
|
|
|
Block! by Cuba8085 1.2 BTC in txnfees S9v2 NOM! |
|
|
|
|
That would be crazy luck. 22ph should avg just over 1 block per day. If we could hit 3 blocks every 2 days at this difficulty we would be doing amazingly well.
|
|
|
|
|
It's too late is already the next day.
What we really want is the next one to come just after these three mature.
|
|
|
|
Woot! Bout time I got another one. Glad to be of service folks |
|
|
|
|
This thread is a sig spam honeypot
|
|
|
|
Did not happen to know that it was possible to steal open source code They took the code which is legal. But they then labeled it incorrectly. When you take open source code you need to tell people that is what you are using. Or at the very least tell people it is modified open source code. But as I said it is difficult to see the split between ck and Kano play out. Phil this pool has nothing to do with ck/kano split. The MLM scam referenced there is BitClub pool not this one. These guys are just using ckpool (by -ck) and ckdb (by kano) which is perfectly fine as its open source, but then they have taken kano's web front end to the db and removed all reference to him from the web code and replaced it with their own. That being said, it appears the only web page left or that they used from kano's code is http://gbminers.com/index.php?k=blocks which you can compare to https://kano.is/index.php?k=blocksThink thats it. [edit] Johhnybravo, not sure thats quite accurate, we don't know they have removed reference to the authors from the codebase of either ckpool or ckdb thats running, we can't see that really, all we can see is they removed reference to kano's copywrite on the web pages they used ( |
|
|
|
|
If you claim it as your own without acknowledging the authors then its theft.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
