The biggest problem will be the incompatibility of the blocks found by XT vs those found by Core. That's the definition of the fork. Some miners and pools will be mining blocks on the XT node. Others will be mining blocks on the Core. As has been explained, the item of interest in XT is the support for the larger block size (up to 8MB). To happen, as of January, 2016 at least 75% of the network must be mining on XT nodes. Today we saw the first XT block mined (by Slush) as far as I know: https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/block/00000000000000000174419fa2ba5003e123dbd97c6982aff1863f016b04789d |
|
|
|
Virtually every router allows you to assign IP addresses to machines within the network. Just assign a static IP address to the machine running the BTC node, then forward the traffic over port 8333 to that machine.
By the way... you might want to update to 0.11 as that's the latest release (not the 0.10.2 you quoted).
It's not dependent on the router. You need to configure it on the computer itself. You also do NOT need a static external IP. I'm assuming you have a router and aren't just plugging your computer straight into a modem that doesn't do any NAT. Here are the steps I would take. Note that I'm working from memory as I haven't used Windows in a while. 1. Press windows key+R for run dialog. Run ncpa.cpl (to open the network connections control panel page). 2. Right-click the wired or wireless interface you're using to connect to the internet. Click status. Head to the second tab and check that the address is of the form 192.168.X.Y. If this is not the case, these steps probably won't work. Record that address on a piece of paper. 3. Close that dialog. Right-click the interface again, properties. Select Internet protocol Version 4, and choose to edit its configuration. Give it the following settings: IP 192.168.X.200 (200 is a fairly high number so no risk of faulty routers causing weird DHCP conflicts). X must be the same as in step 2. Subnet mask is ALMOST always 255.255.255.0. Gateway is 192.168.X.1 (X must be the same as step 2) DNS servers can be 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 (Google public DNS). 4. Go to your router's page, and forward port 8333 to 192.168.X.200. Depends on the make and model of your router. No, it's not dependent upon the router. You can certainly tell your machine to give itself a static IP address. However, that won't prevent the DHCP server from attempting to assign that same IP address to another machine on the network. You try to get around that by giving a relatively high value for the last bit. My solution avoids the problem altogether by telling the DHCP server (i.e. your router) to always assign IP of x.x.x.x to the machine. No conflicts. In any case, the point is that the machine needs a static IP address in your home network so that you can properly forward traffic from your router to that machine. |
|
|
|
|
Yup, that's why I can see the pricing model as I described it... about $1000 for the unit. 250 day ROI puts it smack in the middle of their typical range.
|
|
|
|
|
I was a bit generous with the 2.5TH/s, but I just fudged it... you did the actual numbers and came up with a very acceptable value of 2.34TH/s for 590W at the wall. I wonder if they're going to go with the large heatsinks (like the S1/S3/S5) or if they're going to adopt the individual smaller heatsinks like in the S5+...
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed... I'd far more enjoy the noise levels of the S1/S3 than those of the S5 for this unit. 2.5TH/s for $1000? Hmmm... again overpriced as far as I'm concerned, but it does match up with S5 pricing. 575W to get that 2.5TH/s, so just over double the hash of the S5 for just a bit less power draw. Assuming that is indeed the spec of the unit (big assumption there), that's $5.37 a day before power costs at current difficulty and exchange rates. Subtract out $1.38 a day for power at $0.10 per kWh and you're at just under $4 a day. 250 day ROI with that.
|
|
|
|
|
Well... the BM1385 certainly beat our predictions in this thread... it's slated to be 0.23W per GH (or 230W per TH). Now we just have to wait and see what the actual units will look like. If they're still drawing the same 590W like the S5, that's about 2.5TH/s.
|
|
|
|
Perhaps I should have defined big  . I don't mean we're going to see giant 20% increases... those days are likely long over. By big, I meant we might see a few 8-10% increases. You're absolutely right about the price as well. They start selling these things at 4-5 BTC per TH, nobody's buying. I know I'm certainly not, considering I can get 1TH out of a couple S3s that are overclocked for well under 1 BTC. I'd have to run them for a long time to make up that 4 BTC difference from power usage. Just for fun... Assume the S7 is 1TH/s at 230W and costs 5 BTC. Assume also that I can get two overclocked S3s that will also get me 1TH/s for 800W. Both expect to mine 0.009543 BTC a day currently. At exchange of $225 (sure hope THAT goes back up), that's about $2.15 a day. At $0.10 per kWh, the S7 will cost $.55 a day to run. The S3s will cost $1.92 a day. So, I make $1.37 a day more with the S7. To make up that 4 BTC cost difference, it'll take me 657 days. |
|
|
|
maybe bitmaintech is putting them into their mines as I type
They are "under development". You know as well as I do that is code for "we're currently deploying them into our mines."  I wish they had announced the actual specs of the S7. 230W/TH is very nice, though. If these follow the same form factor as the S1/3/5, I can up my local hash to about 12TH/s for the same power draw as I have now with my S3s. I see some pretty big difficulty jumps in our future. |
|
|
|
|
Looks like I might finally have to cave and upgrade the S3s. Nice efficiency gains with the BM1385 Bitmain. At 230W / TH, I'll be able to push just about 12TH using the same power I do now with my S3s.
|
|
|
|
|
If you've got a spare PC you can run your own p2pool node. Or, you could try out OgNasty's node (it's in Germany): nastyfans.org.
|
|
|
|
I think someone should check my work but 2^32 * difficulty = hashes to find a block on average
Close enough for government work. The actual formula for calculating expected time to solve a block is: 2^256 / (((2^224 - 2^208) / difficulty) * hashrate) = expected time in seconds to find a block
@shadyyaser you're forgetting about the target difficulty in your stats. Use my formula, plug in the network difficulty and a hash rate, and you'll see that it's considerably different than what you're thinking. |
|
|
|
|
Ummm... It's just a standard p2pool node using Justin's front end. By the way your site has all kinds of template crap in it... Like "This is a paragraph."
And you don't have 1.5PH... The entire p2pool network does. Your node has zero hash rate.
|
|
|
|
First, backup your wallet.dat file. You can place it on your desktop. Second, make sure you really did make a copy of your wallet.dat file and that it's in a location you can retrieve it later. This is very important. You lose this, and your coins truly are lost. If your user name is MstrMynd, you'll find your wallet (and all other related files) here: /Users/MstrMynd/Library/Application Support/Bitcoin
Open a terminal window and type this: cp /Users/MstrMynd/Library/Application\ Support/Bitcoin/wallet.dat /Users/MstrMynd/Desktop
That copies your existing wallet to your desktop. Now, to completely uninstall the application, drag it into the trash. Then, delete the contents of the folder above. You DID save your wallet.dat file, right? If you didn't now you've truly lost your coins. In the same terminal window, type this: rm -rf /Users/MstrMynd/Library/Application\ Support/Bitcoin
Now, download the latest Bitcoin Core client (v 0.11.0). Drag it into your Applications folder as usual. Start up the application. It should connect and start downloading the blockchain again. Yeah, it's going to take a while. Once you actually have some connections, stop the client. Copy your old wallet.dat file back into the folder: cp /Users/MstrMynd/Desktop/wallet.dat /Users/MstrMynd/Library/Application\ Support/Bitcoin
Launch the Bitcoin application again. It'll continue downloading blocks, and when everything is caught back up, you'll have your coins. |
|
|
|
|
Virtually every router allows you to assign IP addresses to machines within the network. Just assign a static IP address to the machine running the BTC node, then forward the traffic over port 8333 to that machine.
By the way... you might want to update to 0.11 as that's the latest release (not the 0.10.2 you quoted).
|
|
|
|
You couldn't buy the new Radeons, and resellers who did manage to get them in stock jacked up the price to double and triple the price AMD listed. You only got those nice ROI figures if you happened to jump on a card early enough to get them at an acceptable price. Same thing happened with ASIC hardware. If you were one of the lucky few that managed to get into them early (and didn't purchase the BFL vaporware) you mined a ton of coin, and potentially made a fortune selling them at $1000 a whack at the end of 2013. Now it's not so much a magic internet money printing machine |
|
|
|
looks to me more like a altcoin, or an sabotage of the bitcoin or an take over....
It's actually how it's supposed to work. There is no central authority to approve changes. Anyone can come up with a fork, I could make a code change that gives me a million coins and tell everyone to start using it. Obviously I'd be told to stuff it into various cavities but if someone comes up with a reasonable fork and asks to join and gets the consensus - it will happen. Funny, you just described 99.9% of all alt coins out there... looks to me more like a altcoin, or an sabotage of the bitcoin or an take over....
It's a lot like an alt coin with one primary difference: there isn't a new blockchain. These changes are intended to ride on the existing BTC blockchain. Anyone can make their own coin. In fact quite a few people have done precisely that. Somebody didn't like the SHA-256 algorithm, so they used scrypt (hi LTC, how are you). Some don't like the block halving, so they change that. Some don't like the total number of coins, so they change that. Some want proof of stake (PPC anyone). In every case, each of these became its own entity - and they're collectively known as alt coins. What XT is proposing is nothing more than a fork. A change to the core code that increases block size (among a few other things like better double spend detection/tracking) means there are two disparate entities now competing to add blocks to the chain. If enough people follow the XT path, then that fork will win... leaving everyone who doesn't follow it on a useless chain. |
|
|
|
If your partner just wants to see what a mining setup looks like, there are plenty of videos out there to browse through. For example, here's a setup in the US (video is from 2014): https://youtu.be/ELA91d_mx80 |
|
|
|
It won't really matter what pool you use - the expected payout will be about the same on any of them. Assuming 7 BE with 333MH/s each, that's 2.331GH/s. Math will show you that expects to earn 0.00002224 BTC per day at current network difficulty. In other words, even if you were to make expectations, the network difficulty never changed, and the block reward remained static at 25 BTC a block, it would take you approximately 170 years to earn a single bitcoin. Perhaps you should try your luck and mine on a solo pool: http://solo.ckpool.org for example. |
|
|
|
|
Ideally you run your own node, local to the miners.
If that's not feasible, then nodes.p2pool.co offers up a decent list - but it also doesn't take every node into account. For example, OgNasty runs his p2pool node in Germany. I'm surprised it isn't on the list. Also, my own node doesn't ever show up on the list. I figure the nodes that don't show up are probably because we've set strict rules about what traffic we allow to reach the server.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
