|
I only posted to show these chips are running in large numbers now rather than test boards, so I see that as good news for everyone with a stake in future bitfury miners.
|
|
|
|
I already replied, asking for 100k+ chips and see if thats possible. The answer should be interesting, I guess. I'll ask about proof as well as the date since they have them ready.
Lol, that's a good one, 100k might be a bit large for them, my jaw will drop if it's not. 100k in nothing, some more group buys stuck in customs resold can cover that |
|
|
|
Wow, that's bad, is that really real?!
That's pretty brazen if it's in-fact a real advertisement. It's outright false advertising if so. BFL don't lie therefore it must be facebook's fault. Expect BFL's lawyers to be on the case if you haven't been keeping them too busy  |
|
|
|
I can tell you that it doesn't matter what chip they come up with in future I won't be spending any energy or money on it.
I have only a small number of chips ordered, so if they never arrive it's not a big loss personally. What annoys me most is the people like you and burnin, group buy organisers and the many manufacturers who have devoted huge amounts of their time and money into producing low cost miners are getting royally fucked by these delays. Things like the K1 are almost at the point of no ROI, if these delays continue and rumours of shady backroom deals to supply huge quantities of chips spike the hashrate (plus other asic manufacturers imminent arrival too) there may be no point buidling the bitburners and k16's either. BKK if you find yourself in the position of being out of pocket I'm happy to chip in some BTC to help out, hate seeing people getting shafted. |
|
|
|
So you say it really could be that this reseller bought a big chunk of chips but wanted it fast so that Yifu gave them our chips and ordered new ones for us? I thought about this but i doubted Yifu would do something so stupid and unethical. But the more time goes by...
I mean its another day over without anything...
Avalon & TSMC would both have pooled orders together, avalon to get a better price for volume and TSMC because it's easier to make large lots, the fact that 1 batch of 10k chips has been delivered show that they HAVE done a run of chips. So where are they  |
|
|
|
This is correct. Pooled mining works by everyone proving they are working on the problem. They don't submit all their shares, the difficulty is set so that you only submit some of your shares. That way you can prove you are working on the puzzle and you can proportion the effort by working out the percentage of everyone's submissions. The problem with a high difficulty for a fast coin is that some people might be working on the puzzle, but never get to submit any shares, therefor they never get to prove they were working on the puzzles - so for some blocks, they will actually miss out on a piece of the pie for that block.
But then the reverse is true because when you do have submitted shares, they will represent a much greater % of the pie than they should be, so in the end although it may appear that high diff is hurting it may not be. My gut further up this thread was that low diff for the fast coins would help, but now I'm not so sure. |
|
|
|
H20 looks like another Record setting day???  Indeed, was 312% for me yesterday, already at 290% confirmed today and still nearly 7 hours to go until payment time  |
|
|
|
This should pick a balance for BTC address from blockhain and add it to balances from other pools, but if people need to monitor more addresses I should consider adding more pool slots.  Been using it this way for a while now and it's been great, but now run out of addresses (I have several investements/rigs and like to use individual addresses to keep track of them easier) so if you could add more on the next update it would be great. If possible why not keep the existing pool settings and just add a new option to enter comma|pipe seperated addreses, that would keep functionality for existing users who just want pools and allow many addresses to be entered by those who want this. |
|
|
|
so when the pool switches to a low diff coin and the pools hash rate drops by like 100Mh and that 100Mh appears on the rejected Mh.....
how is that not hurting profits?
What the OP is saying is that the reject rate is taken in to account before deciding which coin to swap to. So if Coin A is 200% and 0% rejects, Coin B is 300% and 30% rejects coin B is still more profitable despite the higher rejects. (*see below) as of tomorrow im switching back to LTC as the diff is dropping and it will net me more profit
I'd be amazed if LTC isn't amongst the coin rotation. * The question is if lowering the difficulty would achieve less rejects and more profits for all. It would definately reduce the reject %, which my gut says should increase the profit, but I don't have the knowledge to know for sure. |
|
|
|
I'd suggest that rather than the difficulty being set by the user, the server should dynamically change it according to the length of time a block takes, so faster coins have low diff, slower coins have higher diff, the lower the reject rate for everyone the more the pool op and users both make. Anyway well done on the innovative pool, only been on 48 hours and working well so far |
|
|
|
|
timk225
You would be better off putting all the settings in a config file, eg make a new file in your cgminer directory called scrypt.conf, select it then use the inbuilt editor to fill all the settings in like gpu-engine etc
Then you would have
Miner Path:- C:\cgminer-3.3.0-windows\cgminer.exe
Config File:- C:\cgminer-3.3.0-windows\scrypt.conf
Coin:-
Arguments:- -o pool -u username -p password
I find this the easiest way as when you add a new coin you only need to change the last two items.
|
|
|
|
|
I think setting to 0 is a better option, any coin with no buy orders is almost certainly going to die, and mining it at that point is probably a waste of time, but it would be nice to keep the profile/settings intact just in case it makes a comeback.
Taking the infinitecoin above, there is a huge sell wall at the lowest possible price, so even if a buy order does appear it's going to be instantly filled so the program would be unlucky to check during that small window, and if that wall does dissapear then a switch would occur.
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the quick feedback will keep an eye on future developments |
|
|
|
|
Do you still intend to offer hosting ?
|
|
|
|
Does anybody know the actual status of this hosting plan run by HorseRider? I've received an email of which I like to respond to.
Thanks in advance.
I repsonded with my initial thoughts in the other thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=158295.0 |
|
|
|
Great program, only been trying it for a day but love it. I'm a newbie so maybe I'm doing something wrong, but think I might have found a problem I have profiles set up for individual coins, and it swaps as instructed according to the schedule, but it seems that when a coin drops off the coinchoose site it sends the entries funny. EG, I had a profile for InfiniteCoin  Because there are no buy orders, it has dropped off the coinchoose site and changed the coin selection to Feathercoin (which is next up in the list) and so when the time comes to swap to FTC it ends up mining on InfiniteCoin instead Edit: Question while I'm posting, currently have 4 mining rigs and each one is running a different coin due to the way the timers appear to work (I have it checking every xxx minutes). What's the easiest way to get them all to sync up so the checks are done at the same time. Edit 2: I think a good feature would be to allow the user to set a percentage in relation to switching pools, when it checks for the most profitable coin if it's within the figure set it doesn't swap, with most of the pools using last N shares I think sometimes it would be more profitable to stick where you are and would cut down on pool hopping when the difference is very small. IE Percentage 5% Coin currently being mined is at 200% To swap best alt coin would need to be 210% |
|
|
|
Not sure if you want discussion here or by email, I think here would be better save multiple people asking the same questions of you, so I hope you don't mind if I quote. 3. I had paid the order by bank wiring RMB, but not bitcoin transaction. Though the RMB pricing was based on the exchange rate of bitcoin pricing back in time, there is risk that Avalon team decide that they will refund the RMB amount I wired, which will not be able to buy back the same amount of Bitcoin as Bitcoin has appreciated a lot since then. If this happens, I need your support in the public discussion. This is going to be crucial to the decision, and I don't see you getting an answer from Avalon in time to make an informed decision EG ball park figures $75 at time of ordering, $95 now means on a 4 module unit we could lose 23BTC, obviously that is no good, and we would be better to take delivery as that gives a buffer to get the $ value back. Plus with the new cgminer build they are running a lot faster than originally thought which helps a lot too. I'm inclined to keep my order if possible. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
