Stop quoting other quotes (or do your usual report to moderator), you fraudster.

I'll say what I see fit .... and with 80% luck, its nowhere near a bad day for me, so give me more. As for you, wait for your threshhold and say what you will, if you desire.

You are getting facts mixed-up here (pool finding 2 more blocks since notwithstanding). A day's pool luck has little to no bearing (on its own) to what constitutes a good / bad day for me.
80% day's pool luck may be below what you were expecting, but that does not make it a bad day, not for me at least. Hit at or about 50% day's pool luck, for 7 days on the trot and I'll have a bad day. And no, that is not disputeable, just the way it is.

You talking to me there? Me having a bad day?
Last I checked, we had 11 blocks today already .... and counting! If that is a bad day, give me more (bad days I mean)!

You missed the point as I never intended to "lie", rather to pick any other day that slush had better luck than f2pool (?) and then make a comparison thereof and henceforth paint slush in better light (NOTE: The operative word here is DAY). But like most have already said, compare over a longer period (actually, you / I could make a very rough estimate based on blocks won by each pool @25BTC each factored by the percentage of 4TH over average pool hashrate since the start of August).

So there you have my made up image with reversed numbers. It does not clear up the non-argument that is luck, but it has a clean crisp font anyways.

Not to be disrespectful to you, but I too could make up an image with the numbers reversed ....!

I suppose it'd have to be one step at a time then .... when you get these off the PCB press then that would be a good time to go bigger (and count me in those interested ..). With regard to drawing / preparing the schematics, I am not expert either (electronics et al!) but using Eagle I've done a few in my time for personal use, as I am sure most people have.

Saying that, your price point, if you can pull it off for the dual blade controller, is a good one.

I honestly wish your numbers could be right, and that merged mining is not worth the effort .... if only to prove that luck does play a big part in finding and "winning" blocks, but I know you are no where near the mark.

If your numbers were right, in the multiples of the hash on slush (pre and post BIP101 block flagging cum XT, with and without fees), no one would mine here. But that pool hash-rate has literally doubled in the last few weeks is even more telling. Thats why you are wrong.

Depending on your price point, I'd be interested in a few of these (populated or otherwise). Any guide on that?
Also, would be a good idea (if at all technically feasible) to be able to handle more than two boards .... 6 even 10 would not hurt.

Where did you get the PCB's done? OSH Park are dirt cheap (and I'd use them for shipping boards) but DirtyPCB's could beat them on both price and turnaround time (and I'd use them for protos)!

Whoever is moving their big hash here is more likely a farm hedging against something, or against BIP101 (thus voting for the status quo), the latter more likely applying to the over 2PH switchers. Another theory I hold is they are just here for the free ride (and the NMC bonus to boot!).
Saying that, the coinscape has shifted a bit with the bold BIP101 (and XT) support thats been shown networkwide. The fall in BTC rate, as a consequence, also makes slush quite appealing to "bigger" miners, what with (as mentioned above) being fee free and the inspired merged mining. May the luck improve!

Looks like you have connectivity issues .... the first fall in hashrate is clearly that (all but two workers offline), and the rest are most likely intermitent connection / connectivity issues.

That variance cum luck can be a whatsit when it chooses ..... But the rate jumping could just possibly be that non-BIP101 fans would prefer more blocks for the default thus switching to slush (and not pointing to port 3301).
I know there are some extremists (verging on terrorists!) when it comes to BIP101, but the flip side also sees reasonable people who choose the power of the vote, and that ONLY slush offers it could indeed be the simple explanation for the new pool hashrate burst not voting BIP101.

I am not usually quick to jump the gun, but you could be right on the pool being a victim of a block withholding attack, only to the extent that pool luck has not been markedly improved by the more than doubling of pool hash ..... then again, it may be ealy days still as its only been a few days since the hashspeed burst.

Thus far, looks like all BIP100 block flagging pools are doing so on the pool operators' choice rather than offering miners the vote.
Saying that, the biggest BIP101 flagging pool (slush) only has 3PH mining BIP101 flagged blocks and the rest (~20PH) opting for the status quo, so no surprise there that BIP100 surpassed the lifetime BIP101 blocks in a day.

There is lots of research in quatum computing, but not enough consumer level demand (and application) to justify / for mass production. So yes, we are (and always will and have been) at that edge of computing consumer technology, quantum and all (as the market dictates that).

S5+'s (as well as used S5's) are out of stock.
I am pretty sure S5+'s have simply been removed from the market due to the dip in BTC value (not so sure about the used S5's though).
With that in mind, what chance the much vaunted S7 hits the shelves in the foreseeable future? I'd say very slim to ridiculously expensive.

Its probably trivial, but it was a tad under 15PH (14.86PH and now 23PH+)





EDIT: Seems to be dropping though .....

Yep ... hash rate just shot up +8PH in the last couple of hours ..... hope that comes hand inglove with improved luck to boot!

Those so called distinct differences are what belong to (and should have) another thread.
Bottom line is, the vote is for larger blocksizes as I have repeatedly quoted (however much you may scream to the contrary). It is secondary that slush is actually both running XT (which offers larger blocksizes as opposed to core) and core, the important point being there is an option to easily "vote" either way. (I wonder, does the pool you mine at offer even a choice to vote for 100?)

YOU are wrong as the vote (which I quoted) clearly says otherwise. Other pools do not offer the vote, they just vote using (amongst others) others' hash.

That XT offers a larger blocksize (as opposed to core) is sufficient for the vote to be about blocksize, notwithstanding (and irrelevant to the fact) that it'd also result in a hardfork. In any case, there is a vote so may the one who garners the highest blocks (at the core specified time) win. If it is XT, then we get the bigger blocksize that has been voted for.