Ozcoin gets my vote, Graet is great to do with as well.
+1 |
|
|
|
It seems the only reason he's so vehemently against stratum is that it was a competing protocol to what he was working on, and therefore anything he didn't do must be wrong in his eyes. Essentially what it comes down to. As far as I can tell, we have: GBT: + Easier to implement in existing code - Larger bandwidth requirements - Includes redundant features for miners Stratum: + Tiny bandwidth + Streamlined features for mining - Difficult to implement in existing code To my mind, Stratum wins. Maybe initially more difficult to roll out, but ultimately will hold out better as hash rates continue to increase. You forgot, their intention to reduce/eliminate pools (to paraphrase "they (pools) have too much power/influence") via GBT as an eventual p2pool way of mining. Otherwise why would they not have made bitcoind v0.7.0 backward compatible with existing pool software and allow new protocols to compete on an even playing field. |
|
|
|
Trade in value of only 300$ is a huge loss for most customers =/
So you want Tom to take the loss instead? PLEASE understand - that was a hypothetical number. It is not a number I am offering. I may not be able to offer anything. I may give you a lot more. I am really not sure yet - this is a priority and am actively researching ways to make this happen that will work for both of us. I am not sure how BFL can afford to take the full trade in value. They certainly have me beat there because I could not afford to give even half in trade and still make a profit. Anyways thanks for the input and if anyone has any ideas in this regard please share them - I am actively looking for ways to offer buybacks/rebate/upgrade path for current BTCFPGA ModMiner owners. thanks! How about a scrypt firmware - could be sold in that market. |
|
|
|
dissappointed - no rounded corners  |
|
|
|
Cablepair... why not create a new topic for your ASIC products separate from this thread? I assume that'll help focus on the ASIC news/updates and help unclutter the two different designs .
+1 |
|
|
|
I run p2pool, it returns
...
what's the red box means?
Thus, the miner works at normal speed, but accept is 0, p2pool's Local is also 0,
and there's no show at p2pool.info_active users
bitcoin-qt's datadir is at D:\bitcoin\
how to solve the problem?
thanks
The red box isn't unusual.. It just means that querying bitcoin for something timed out, but unless it's happening all the time, it's harmless. Local may be displayed as 0 if you're mining to a non-default address, because you've set your miner's username to a Bitcoin address. This isn't recommended - instead you should use P2Pool's -a option. If you need to use the username way, you can look at the graphs on http://127.0.0.1:9332/ to get some information. I'd already use -a [address], and miner's username was a norml word, not an address. Another, my GPU is HD6470M which has only ~30Mh/s speed, is it too slowly to get an accept? http://127.0.0.1:9332/ shows nothing--even no pool speed and other users' speed, but the graphs shows my speed and pool speed. use http://127.0.0.1:9332/static/ |
|
|
|
Ok I'm getting back into this since btc is like $12~!
I lost all my settings as I deleted it as it was not worthwhile, anyway just doing this as a hobby since I leave my pc on most days due to bittorent heh.
Anyway whats some good settings for a HD6950? I'm currently running @ mem:core of 800:800 and intesity of 5, seemt o get about 325Mhas/sec is that good for my hardware?
Has someone gone to the trouble of making a cgiminer tweak guide?
Thanks
Check out: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparisonM You should be able to do I 9 with no problem. |
|
|
|
Sell outs! Every one of you is a sell out. You should be ashamed of yourselves. If you had any decency, you would change your sig back to what it was and delete you post from this thread.
Go ahead, lead by example. |
|
|
|
|
I'm in
I hereby post a response in this thread to officially enter the contest.
|
|
|
|
Anyone noticed it? Facebook CGI pics, iteration on the forums, events so that they make you lose time discussing who has the right to go on their HQ, etc.
Why have they started to care only now?
What are they afraid of? What changed? Was that the strategy since the beginning?
If you translate the schematics for the ASIC design BFL is showing it turns out to be a cookbook! "How to serve man" |
|
|
|
I wouldn't care about it either. If one is implementing Stratum in the first place, including difficulty in each job really doesn't help any. Does that indicate you won't be copying ("merging") ckolivas' stratum code into your spork? or Will you'll be developing your own code or waiting for someone else to copy ("merge") from? I was responding to Kano's request to change the Stratum protocol in a stupid way because of some implementation problem he imagines exists. As I said before, if someone else writes the code, I will (probably - ie, if the code is reasonable) merge it into BFGMiner. Con is capable of producing reasonable code, so I expect that when he finishes it, I will accept it into BFGMiner. It will be interesting to see how you alter his code when you copy it into your cgmerge branch to suit your needs. |
|
|
|
I wouldn't care about it either. If one is implementing Stratum in the first place, including difficulty in each job really doesn't help any.
Does that indicate you won't be copying ("merging") ckolivas' stratum code into your spork? or Will you'll be developing your own code or waiting for someone else to copy ("merge") from? |
|
|
|
I do not have the --real-target in my cgminer it just exits when I add that command. I can not see it in the help either. CGminer 2.7.6 windows. Any ideas?
. it's a command line option for the proxy, not cgminer |
|
|
|
|
Is that a light cycle doing a figure 8 on the BFL logo?
|
|
|
|
Is the --net-delay option still useful with the latest version of cgminer?
Thanks,
gigavps
Still active in the README |
|
|
|
Anyone who has been compensated by BFL or is already a public proponent should be excluded, let's keep this an unbiased site visit. I agree. I think gmaxwell would be a good choice, if he's interested. I don't, the developers/maintainers of bitcoin should remain neutral on all hardware issues and eliminate any possible conflict of interest. |
|
|
|
|
Anyone who has been compensated by BFL or is already a public proponent should be excluded, let's keep this an unbiased site visit.
|
|
|
|
me me me me  I 2nd abracadabra and sunbreak. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
