Unfortunately it is impossible to define what exactly constitutes ''a post with content'' (other than not being empty, ie. being at least 1 character long) because it is entirely subjective.
A post which was quoted and answered by someone? |
|
|
|
If it's a FPGA, you should be able to reprogram it to perform whatever algorithms you want, provided you have the know-how, or know someone with the know-how that likes money.
The FPGA is one thing, how it is wired on the board is important as well. E.g. HDMI decryption would need high speed I/O in both directions. Up to 10.2 Gbit/s video + 36.86 Mbit/s audio. Which of the mining boards can do that? The application is very different from Bitcoin mining, where you don't need high speed I/O at all. 300 bit/s would be plenty. WPA2 needs a little more I/O than Bitcoin mining. Enough that I wonder if some boards may hit a bottleneck without adding some extra logic to the FPGA, but what do I know. There are many applications with I/O needs in between. E.g. filtering in a SDR. |
|
|
|
I am in again!
Why not simplify the rule to posting atleast 7 times during the contest period?
Posts with content. The object shouldn't be spamming the forum daily with pointless posts like those from Fcx35x10. He is on my ignore list due to postings with pages of quotes with nothing of interest added. I spend some time trying to post something which I think people will read every day, and I feel cheated if quoting a lot of images and adding "me too" in a random thread every day qualifies. |
|
|
|
Wow! I live in a country with a public health system, and I have no problems getting a doctor when I need it. If I don't need it, I may have to either wait or pay a private practicing doctor. Renewing my pilot medical certificate is an example of a service not covered by the public health system. I've never heard of people waiting months for something like that.
Your country produces what? 50% of the exports is just oil. Income from oil and gas exports goes straight to a fund for future pensions, and only 4% of it is spent every year by average. Depends if the economy needs it or not. Next year it will be 3%, I think. The economy can't take more due to almost 0 unemployment rate and more than 4% increase in wages every year for the last ten years at least. More money into this economy will only induce inflation while companies bid higher and higher wages for skilled workers. Other than that Norway exports finished goods of various kinds (e.g. weapons and furniture), fish, metals, electricity, machinery, and chemical products. And services, mainly shipping. And you keep refusing to join the EU for many years. EU membership is not compulsory. |
|
|
|
Really interested in getting BFL firware for WPA security test  Any FPGA. I hope there are reasonably priced FPGAs on the market by January. :-) |
|
|
|
The monkeys employed at TSA get money to spend on bananas, and lice picking. Companies get money for making devices to produce porn to entertain the monkeys at "work". The money still flows back to the economy, even if the activity itself hinders efficient travel and economic growth. Yes, 100%.
Yes, all the money does go back into the economy. but it goes back, by definition, in ways the market would not have done, left alone. For instance, warehouses full of scanners that never got installed. The scanners do a much better job in the warehouses than they would do at airports. By keeping them out of the way of travellers and paying for storage, it stimulates the economy rather than hindering it's development. Of course there are better ways to spend the money, but buying the scanners and keeping them in warehouses is not half as bad as installing them at airports. |
|
|
|
Much of those taxes are spent on solving real problems to make commerce more efficient. E.g. taxes on fuel which are spent on building roads and taking care of them. How much production and trade would be left if they just closed the roads and cut the taxes on petrol? Taxes on fuel is an effective and just way of making the users of the roads pay for them.
So why do I pay all other taxes, tolls for the bridges and highways? Because the fuel tax isn't enough. Bridges and highways are very expensive. Taxes on air traffic are mostly spent on the terrorist organization TSA. This *is* wasteful and very harmful, and a good example of not to do it. Governments exists to make production and trade efficient, and countries that do this most effectively will prosper.
There are a lot of other wasteful things countries do, take a look at the southern Europe. A good example of what happens when the tax money are spent unwisely, and for most of them corruption and tax evasion is a major part of the problem. This is obviously from the USA. An area where the the USA do extremely badly is healthcare. In most of Europe people enjoy free healthcare paid by the government, run by the government. In the USA healthcare is not free. It is a complicated system of insurances, government programs and private hospitals. Yet the U.S. government pays more per capita for healthcare than any other country in the world! This shows that taxes can be the most effective way of paying and getting done. Get rid of red tape and intermediates who take their cut, and it will turn out much cheaper for everyone. Reduced taxes _and_ no costly health insurance.
The usual debate, while I am not a fan of US system, the free systems have problems too. USA vs Canada: in US I can get a doctor next day, in Canada I have to wait months. Wow! I live in a country with a public health system, and I have no problems getting a doctor when I need it. If I don't need it, I may have to either wait or pay a private practicing doctor. Renewing my pilot medical certificate is an example of a service not covered by the public health system. I've never heard of people waiting months for something like that. And don't forget, even if 52% is eaten by taxes, 100% of the money will come out again. The government isn't collecting the money in a large treasure chest and keeping it. This was done by some kings in Europe back in the middle ages, to save up for the next war, but the practice got abolished. Nowadays wars are paid for using credit cards. To build a road they need building materials, machines and workers, who will again spend their money and contribute to economic growth.
100%? Wow. You don't make a lot of sense. Read your own comment about TSA. Governments are wasteful, all of them. Some are less, some are more. The monkeys employed at TSA get money to spend on bananas, and lice picking. Companies get money for making devices to produce porn to entertain the monkeys at "work". The money still flows back to the economy, even if the activity itself hinders efficient travel and economic growth. Yes, 100%. |
|
|
|
Also, consider that the price of everything you pay for is already inflated by taxes that the business pays: staff, fuel, corporate tax, etc. The government is probably eating %90 of societies production. Not to mention the stagnation of economic growth that results. IMAGINE the prosperity if this burden was lifted! How many problems that the government "solves" would be irrelevant in such a wealthy environment. It would be like The Jetsons!
Much of those taxes are spent on solving real problems to make commerce more efficient. E.g. taxes on fuel which are spent on building roads and taking care of them. How much production and trade would be left if they just closed the roads and cut the taxes on petrol? Taxes on fuel is an effective and just way of making the users of the roads pay for them. Taxes on air traffic are mostly spent on the terrorist organization TSA. This *is* wasteful and very harmful, and a good example of not to do it. Governments exists to make production and trade efficient, and countries that do this most effectively will prosper. This is obviously from the USA. An area where the the USA do extremely badly is healthcare. In most of Europe people enjoy free healthcare paid by the government, run by the government. In the USA healthcare is not free. It is a complicated system of insurances, government programs and private hospitals. Yet the U.S. government pays more per capita for healthcare than any other country in the world! This shows that taxes can be the most effective way of paying and getting done. Get rid of red tape and intermediates who take their cut, and it will turn out much cheaper for everyone. Reduced taxes _and_ no costly health insurance. And don't forget, even if 52% is eaten by taxes, 100% of the money will come out again. The government isn't collecting the money in a large treasure chest and keeping it. This was done by some kings in Europe back in the middle ages, to save up for the next war, but the practice got abolished. Nowadays wars are paid for using credit cards. To build a road they need building materials, machines and workers, who will again spend their money and contribute to economic growth. |
|
|
|
[...]
But how do we compare an operating cost with one-time cost? Trying to figure in lifetime costs creates confusion because we don't know what the devices lifetime is: we don't know how long it will last, how long until 13nm ASICs, when really clever SHA256 optimizations make it obsolete, or what its resale value would be. So instead lets use the opportunity cost. Opportunity cost is especially useful when the good in question is durable and can be resold later at a stable price, which may not apply here but it frees us from having to pick a bunch of debatable parameters.
Lets say you have $1000. You could buy a miner or you could put it in another investment, so one way to look at the price of a miner is the forgone income which you could have received by doing something else with it. 8%/yr is a common used figure for very long term average stock market returns, so lets use that.
[...]
You can sell those stocks at any time, and your calculations make the assumption that you will be able to sell the miner again at the same price as you bought it for at any time. I don't think that is a realistic assumption. If you must write it off over e.g. three years, linearly for simplicity, you can add 27.78 USD to the monthly operating costs for a $1000 miner. I have re-done your calculations below assuming three years useful life: For the BFL: $1300 costs you $8.36/month in forgone investment income and $36.11/month in lost resale value. At 60 watts it takes 43.83 KWH/month, or $5.26 at .12/KWH to power. Only 11% of the monthly cost ($49.73) is power. For the BTCFPGA: $1070 costs you $6.88/month in forgone investment income and $29.72/month in lost resale value. For the BTCFPGA device to match the BFL operating cost ($ * 9/10 =36.60) under this model it must use less than 49.73 - 36.60 = $13.13 in power or 149.77 watts. Due to lower initial investment per Ghash, the BTCFPGA is still the most profitable at more than twice the power consumption, assuming a three year useful life for both devices. (Power consumption becomes more important with increasing expected lifetime, but one should not forget Moore's Law.) |
|
|
|
Power costs is only a concern for miners using old technology. ASIC miners only have to worry about price per Ghash/s, because power costs will be negligible compared to their initial investment.
Power cost does matter, but it's negligible for single device, or small-scale mining. Scale the issue up, and you will be forced to consider those costs more seriously. Wrong. If you buy one, two or a hundred ASIC miners, the initial costs vs power consumption equation comes out exactly the same. Small or large scale makes no difference at all. |
|
|
|
Power usage is *everything* when it comes to ASIC. If you think it's not, you have no grasp on the economics of mining.
My simple math shows that power usage is almost irrelevant for an ASIC miner. Price per Ghash produced throughout the miners lifetime will almost certainly always be dominated by the initial investment, not power consumption. Price per Ghash/s is the important factor. Is my math wrong? No, just your assumptions on difficulty. I don't expect any of these 60 GH range ASIC products to make even $1000 in 2013 alone. By design, difficulty will always bring the cost-to-mine very close to power costs. When it catches up, power costs will be all that matters. Until then, delivery dates before it adjusts are the key importance. I didn't make any assumptions on difficulty. I fully agree with you there. Plugging it in first of all matters, but the gold rush will be over in a few days. Almost everyone buying ASIC miners will get them after the few first difficulty jumps, and probably after the block reward halving as well. I do not agree that power costs matters as a competition factor between different current ASIC designs. All are going to be within the same order of magnitude. If it takes 25 years to spend as much on power for the product as you spent for the product itself, the price of the product is all that matters. In 25 years the next generation graphene ASICs will make the current ones compare to CPU mining in 2013. Power costs is only a concern for miners using old technology. ASIC miners only have to worry about price per Ghash/s, because power costs will be negligible compared to their initial investment. |
|
|
|
I'm putting up 1000 BTC against BFL hardware @ 1.1w / GH against your "competitive" definition. That's it. Simple. Define "competitive" and you can win $12,000.
Why this obsession with wattage per Ghash/s? It is of no importance whatsoever, as long as they play roughly in the same league. This whole discussion is pointless. There are two important factors that determine profitability, assuming both are reasonably stable. Price per Ghash/s and delivery date. |
|
|
|
difficulty follows price (all else being equal)... it's as simple as that. People thinking it's the other way around must think again.
Only if technology didn't improve, if ASIC is available in abundance, then difficulty can double quickly without seeing any movement in price. Doubling, tripling or a a thousandfold increase in difficulty will have no effect on price. Technology improvement or not. Halving of difficulty will have no effect on the price. There is simply no reason for mining difficulty to have any effect on the price. |
|
|
|
Power usage is *everything* when it comes to ASIC. If you think it's not, you have no grasp on the economics of mining.
Please explain your economics of mining. By my calculations power usage at this order of magnitude is pretty much irrelevant compared to price. Take a BFL Single, 60 Ghash/s, 60 W. The miner costs 1299 USD and will use 1.44 kW/day. 14.4 cents a day at 0.10 USD/kWh. You can run this miner 24/7 for almost 25 years before you have spent the same amount for power to run the device that you paid for the device itself! There may even be better miners to buy at a lower price in 2037, making it obsolete before the owner has spent more on power to run it than on the device itself. If the device is still working. (How long is your warranty and what is the expected lifetime of a BFL Single, btw?) Hardly anyone will ever pay more for the power to run the miner through it's lifetime than they did for the miner itself. My simple math shows that power usage is almost irrelevant for an ASIC miner. Price per Ghash produced throughout the miners lifetime will almost certainly always be dominated by the initial investment, not power consumption. Price per Ghash/s is the important factor. Is my math wrong? |
|
|
|
This little gem should have more than enough CPU power to run typical mining software at less than 0.5 W. It includes both wired and wireless network in addition to an USB port. I just got one off eBay at less than 25 USD. The board itself is so small, it is probably enough space for it inside the ASIC miner box. Wifi makes the miner a nice portable space heater. (If the miner is in a metal box, you need to add an external antenna to get reliable wifi.) Sounds like you have possibly found a viable candidate to remove the extra tethered wattage. Any idea how to configure one for bASIC or BFL mining hardware? Check out this thread. The router he uses is physically very different, and his setup looks quite messy, but the software setup would be pretty much the same. |
|
|
|
maxconnections=1000
...
Your not kidding..... You quoted more than 1000 lines to say this? Are you the AOL guy who destroyed Usenet in the last part of the 1990ies? More nodes will not make block chain downloading faster, btw. It will start downloading from a random node (one of the first), and download each block sequentially from that node. you are wrong, Yes, partly. It will start downloading from the first connected node, not one of the first. From main.cpp: // Ask the first connected node for block updates
static int nAskedForBlocks = 0;
if (!pfrom->fClient && !pfrom->fOneShot &&
(pfrom->nVersion < NOBLKS_VERSION_START ||
pfrom->nVersion >= NOBLKS_VERSION_END) &&
(nAskedForBlocks < 1 || vNodes.size() <= 1))
{
nAskedForBlocks++;
pfrom->PushGetBlocks(pindexBest, uint256(0));
}
If you want it faster, just use the torrent. I am uploading proof to youtube and will link to it.
25% of the block chain in less than 5 minutes
Eh? I don't think you know what a proof is. A video on YouTube can not prove anything, and there are a lot more amusing videos to watch. Code is the only possible way to prove this. And if it is the first 25%, it would surprise me if it took any longer than 5 minutes. Try showing the 25% last blocks. Tip: Keep netstat -tc or tcpdump port 8333 running while downloading, and see how many peers you get a lot of data from.  |
|
|
|
maxconnections=1000
This is asking for memory corruption and or FD exhaustion that will cause it to crash and potentially corrupt your wallet. Good luck with that. is there an optimum #connections for a solo miner using linux? I use maxconnections=16 and 8 addnode lines adding the largest pools and blockchain.info. This reduces the risk of uploading a new block to ten slow nodes before finding a well connected one. |
|
|
|
maxconnections=1000
...
Your not kidding..... You quoted more than 1000 lines to say this? Are you the AOL guy who destroyed Usenet in the last part of the 1990ies? More nodes will not make block chain downloading faster, btw. It will start downloading from a random node (one of the first), and download each block sequentially from that node. |
|
|
|
Respectfully, the first issue is that BFL and bASIC are both selling a tethered device which means it must be connected to a desktop PC, Laptop PC, or other mobile device.
...
The average desktop PC at idle consumes about 150watts.
...
So you are never actually running a BFL device with a mere 60 watts. You are consuming 60 watts plus the overhead for the tethered PC. At best your total power consumption is greater than 60watts. Either it is at 30watts extra or closer to 210watts.
This little gem should have more than enough CPU power to run typical mining software at less than 0.5 W. It includes both wired and wireless network in addition to an USB port. I just got one off eBay at less than 25 USD. The board itself is so small, it is probably enough space for it inside the ASIC miner box. Wifi makes the miner a nice portable space heater. (If the miner is in a metal box, you need to add an external antenna to get reliable wifi.) Edit: Fixed link |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
