Good news is that if you managed to sell on word of this news at 116+ like I did, you'll be able to buy back in some cheap coins soon.
If you haven't sold yet, sell now!
Bitcoins will be on sale, probably just temporarily though.
Yeah huge sell off now. 40k coins and counting.  |
|
|
|
And I'm quite sure that BitFury will not overlook the simple logic of setting the ASIC clocks to idle when there's no work in the queue - unlike BFL.
When would it be idle? |
|
|
|
|
Libcurl gone then? Or still needed for other stuff?
|
|
|
|
|
That can happen to wall-wart PSUs.
The voltage 'floats' anywhere it likes, so if you have two, the grounds can be at different potentials.
Maybe you can try another 12V supply?
|
|
|
|
This is good journalism. Objective reporting on only the facts. Your thread title warps it to double-speak. I'm not sure what your point is. My title is the copy and paste from the link to the story from the main page. I didn't notice that the story title way different. See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology/(but it won't be there for long) |
|
|
|
Try and sell it. People are paying crazy money for ASICs that are unlikely to meet ROI.
Unlikely to meet ROI? Let's see... on June 23, 2012, when preorders were opened up for BFL ASICs, difficulty was around 1.8 million. Now, difficulty is just over 10 million. That's a 5.5x increase. And yet, on June 23, 2012, the expected return on investment would have been calculated using $6 as the price per BTC. Now, the price is $140. That's a 23x increase. So it's actually 4 times as profitable now as it was when preorders first opened up.BFL miners will be quite profitable for quite some time. BFL would have to ship around 1.75 MILLION Single SC's in order for it to be unprofitable to run a Single SC at $0.08/kwh. I also don't get people worried about ROI... I did calculations, and up to a difficulty of 500M, a single will pay itself off within a year. And that assuming BTC=$150... that's reasonably likely to increase. |
|
|
|
|
Ah good.
How curious though :/
|
|
|
|
|
You're trying to create the table manually but importing the file directly? '<?' is the php marker, so SQL won't understand that.
If you're going to do it that way, you need to use every thing from CREATE to )
|
|
|
|
Just a general FYI: From Kano's post here: https://forums.butterflylabs.com/announcements/913-bitforce-sc-communication-protocol-draft-revision-2-a-7.html#post27722He says the Rpi uses 3% CPU running a single Jalapenos. The Rpi has a 700MHz ARM processor. The N routers are ~ 480MHz MIPS processors. Just a ball-park figure, i'd say the Jalapenos will use 4-5% CPU on the MIPS, so you won't be able to run too many on the routers. Say 10 for ~50% CPU usage (don't think you'd want to maintain much over that). I wonder what usage the singles would use... since the difficulty should just scale, I'm thinking the singles would also use ~5% CPU each. |
|
|
|
|
You can leave them. Should have no affect.
|
|
|
|
|
You should just need to copy cgminer binary and cgminer.sh script.
That should do it.
|
|
|
|
|
using uclibc v0.9.30 won't compile cgminer either. Entware did compile it no problem.
Although Entware is supposed to be a modern optware replacement, no-one has written nice automatic scripts to install the usually require packages.
I'm thinking of using OTRW2 script and hacking it to use entware instead.
The other issue is that anyone wanting to use cgminer on their router, will have to wipe their USB sticks and reinstall everything.
|
|
|
|
I think it might be a no-go. Cgminer is now using some code which is too new for the old compiler used with Optware. Specifically, the new USB handling uses 'semtimedop' which is a semaphore timed operation. It's first appearance is in uclibc v 0.9.30. Optware uses 0.9.28. The reason It all messed up last time was becuase I was using a newer compiler, one used with entware ( https://code.google.com/p/wl500g-repo/) which is supposed to be an updated version of optware, but the two are incompatible with each other. I'm trying now to build uclibc 0.9.30 into the toolchain, but at the very best it'll require copying over the dd-wrt version of uclibc, at worst... mess optware up. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I missed out there.
Bought at 139 & 135 :/
|
|
|
|
|
Still waiting for the crash....
|
|
|
|
OMG SELL!!!111  |
|
|
|
|
Also on the other side of the paper too, behind the actual private key.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
