Well no the lowest fee is 0 BTC (for high priority transactions). Only low priority transaction have a mandatory fee as a denial of service prevention mechanism. All tx fee (both mandatory or optional) go to miners.
Excuse my sounding like a newb, but this escaped me. What are low/high priority tx? It is calculated by a combination of transaction size, transaction value, and input age. Smaller transactions with old coins will be high priority. Larger transactions with new coins will be low priority and will require a fee. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees#Technical_infopriority = sum(input_value_in_base_units * input_age)/size_in_bytes
Likely a typo in there (smaller and larger mixed up). I meant smaller/larger size_in_bytes, but I'll clarify it. @molecular. A general rule of thumb (because nobody except the client is going to use the formula) is "one bitcoin day". If your inputs are "one bitcoin day" or greater then your tx is high priority and no mandatory fee is required. You may still wish to include an optional fee to faster processing but the tx will be relayed by all nodes as having sufficient priority for no fee.
The actual threshold is one bitcoin day per 250 Bytes. So your rule of thumb works as long as the total transaction doesn't have too many inputs/outputs. |
|
|
|
what miners do with those newly minted coints has inevitably an impact on price.
What they are doing with those coins should be fairly easy to analyse. I believe there is a site out there that shows how long coins are stagnant for. Shhh.... we don't like facts and data here. |
|
|
|
He must be one of the happy one.
 |
|
|
|
if i can't buy them, a lot of people can't. what's that mean then?
demand is high, we should raise the price. somebody gets it. There might be room for some price increase. However, I feel that forcing people to go through resellers will help to build out the distribution network, which will be good for the longer term health of the company. Dealing directly with small, retail customers is an unnecessary headache for friedcat. we don't have to raise the price, we just have to maximize profit. Supply shortages means that we are failing to do that. So either we raise the price, or we increase supply. It has nothing to do with the resellers, they cant get them either (see btcguild 2-3 week backorder). I must have been lucky then. My order came in 2 business days, but that was a week or so back. |
|
|
|
wages have not been keeping pace with food and energy price inflation, so it's hard to back up the claim that the price of labor is inflating.
LOL I guess that depends where you live. While minimum wage here inflates more slowly than a gallon of gas, it does still inflate. 20 years ago a cleaning lady cost $10/hr. 10 years ago it was up to $15. Now I pay mine $20 or she'll go sling beer at the local and make more in tips. Even that's not enough to compete for her cleaning services with the rich guys at the yacht club during the summer. As for that pound of herbs, the price has actually fallen in recent years.  So, exactly like I said.... it is not keeping pace with food and energy price inflation. |
|
|
|
if i can't buy them, a lot of people can't. what's that mean then?
demand is high, we should raise the price. somebody gets it. There might be room for some price increase. However, I feel that forcing people to go through resellers will help to build out the distribution network, which will be good for the longer term health of the company. Dealing directly with small, retail customers is an unnecessary headache for friedcat. |
|
|
|
Thank you. And please call me all kinds of nasty names if this isn't all cleared up in 1 - 1.5 months.
No need. If your money is where your mouth is, you'll end up calling yourself those nasty names. And just in case - should Gox ever pay all pending withdrawals without scamming anyone, I'll bump this thread and make public amend. Well, it is only a couple percent for my trading bot to play with. But I would trust any bitcoin exchange with more than a few percent. I just get tired of people freaking out when something that has been historically unreliable is.... unreliable. |
|
|
|
What happens to gold price if interest goes up, does it drop?
The best answer is maybe. Rising rates are deflationary for the money supply. Historically, with gold backed money, this meant gold price would rise as people needed gold to pay the higher interest. In modern times, however there is no such link. One might argue gold could drop due to people needing to raise liquid capital. But then again, one could argue that gold could rise because the large institutions shorting it would need to close out their positions to recover their collateral. |
|
|
|
That one on Amazon looks like it is only 9 functional ports and one charging port. Interesting. I received one of these from Amazon two weeks ago. Same box but advertised 10 ports. I had 9 miners and a fan in it. It worked fine. Now wondering if it's only a 9 port. I don't have the miners now so I'll have to wait to test it. But it looks exactly the same as this box and was advertised as 10 port. Oh... it worked fine with the 9 I had in there. The fan would work in the charging port. Assuming you put the fan on an end, you had a 50/50 shot of setting it up that way. I could very well be wrong, but the 13 port hub I have with a charging port does not connect the charging port to the host. That's probably enough about the OP's competitor though  . |
|
|
|
Again: Put your money where your mouth is. Everything else is useless chatter.
+1 BTW, I have some funds sitting on MtGox, so my money is precisely where my mouth is. |
|
|
|
Well no the lowest fee is 0 BTC (for high priority transactions). Only low priority transaction have a mandatory fee as a denial of service prevention mechanism. All tx fee (both mandatory or optional) go to miners.
Excuse my sounding like a newb, but this escaped me. What are low/high priority tx? It is calculated by a combination of transaction size, transaction value, and input age. Smaller size transactions with old coins will be high priority. Larger size transactions with new coins will be low priority and will require a fee. Larger value increases the priority. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees#Technical_infopriority = sum(input_value_in_base_units * input_age)/size_in_bytes
|
|
|
|
They are sending withdraws, they are just backlogged. They are able to fulfill withdrawal requests, it will just take time.
And yet this very thread is about a total of 0.75 BTC unclaimed bounty vs showing a successful withdrawal. You'd think someone would come up try and claim that money. (sorry for condescending tone) Right... a bounty for a withdrawal started less than 8 business days ago when MtGox said it would take several weeks to get caught on on the queue before they can deal with new requests. (sorry for throwing reasonableness in your face) Quoting for posterity. Thank you. And please call me all kinds of nasty names if this isn't all cleared up in 1 - 1.5 months. |
|
|
|
The two things you really want to know:
Is it limited to 5A out or does it add an extra .5A it takes from the downstream? If not, 10 erupters will be dicey.
Is it monolithic or chained? If it's chained, many of the ports won't work on an rPi.
I plan on a full test and I will send it to Canary to also test to make sure it will work properly. The power supply is 12V at 5 amps = 60 watts. @ 2.5 watts per USB miner = Power enough for 24 USB miners. I think if you open it up you will find a 12VDC-5VDC step down inside that will give you 5V x 5A = 25VA which is enough for 10 USB miners cheers, kev Not that it matters since it only has 10 ports, but the original figure of 24 miners is closer to correct. Watts are volt-amps. When you step down the voltage, the amps increase and watts stay constant. There will be some loss in the conversion, so it might be able to only handle 23 miners (not counting the 0.9A@12 V on the USB cable). But like I said, it doesn't matter since there are only 10 ports. Now if you could make a 20 port hub with the same power system, that would be awesome. You will have much less competition than you will have with this 10 port hub. |
|
|
|
Look at the 10-port Apple style one (it's in the "size" selection on the same page as other product). Seems to be more what you're describing. (is $57.99 instead of $49.99 though)
(ETA: only 20 "Apple style" ones in-stock, though...!)
"connected devices should not exceed a combined current of 7A." (note isn't made on the 9+1 hub, though that doesn't necessarily mean the limitation doesn't exist on the 9 non-charging ports)
USB3 hubs should provide 900mA per design. For 10 ports that not even with a 5A psu possible even with the power given by the usb-port the hub is connected to. They probably think that no one will max out the power. so how many OC'ed Klondike 1s can run in one of these?  it does handle 10 ASICMiner USBs just fine. How many amps does a Klondike use and at what voltage? AM USBs are 500ma@5V = 2.5W.... this hub is 5A@12V = 60W. If the Klondike is a USB 1 or USB 2 device it must be under 2.5W. If it is a USB3 device, it will be under 0.9A@12V = 10.8W |
|
|
|
That one on Amazon looks like it is only 9 functional ports and one charging port. |
|
|
|
Price isn't driven by miners, but by traders and commodity speculation as has been amply demonstrated elsewhere.
This. It's obvious that price is not driven by difficulty, but inflation does have an impact on price - at this stage inflation in BTC its non negligible, and its in fact built into the system to pay for the work and costs of mining during the early days of Bitcoin. Thus, looking at growing difficulty and expecting growing price is a fallacy (in fact its the other way around) - but nevertheless Bitcoin is currently inflating at a 12.5% yearly rate, and what miners do with those newly minted coints has inevitably an impact on price. I believe that there will be lots of newly minted coins hitting the exchanges in late 2013, will just wait and see. EDIT: in fewer words, wether miners decide to speculate (holding) or to pay for their fiat costs (selling the coins for good) has inevitably an immediate impact on price. this is like concentrating on only one of your girlfriends butt cheaks, you know very well what the counter argument is. Inflation rate of 12.5%, how is that even a point? That's the fifth year in Bitcoin Survival= even if we assume linear and not exponential spread in bitcoin awareness, that's 20% more people using and storing value in BTC. -7.5% I love this bears latching onto a miners value case- they attribute psychological values wherever they please... when the price rose it was because everyone wanted to buy btc to buy asicminers, but asicminer wasn't selling his btc, even though 'asicminer is running it as a business' like they like to say whenever it suits them. suddenly asicminer and all the miners want to sell all their coins and only if the price dips, which is when they panic and drive the price further. What about last year, when inflation rate was 25%, how come the price went up 1000%... and the year before when it was 40%, why did it go up 1000%? frankly if miners drive price I'm surprised it isn't at -0.1 cent He didn't say difficulty drives price, he said it has a non negligible influence. Your numbers seem to support that. That said, I agree that counting on miners to sell out is a horrible assumption. |
|
|
|
My understanding was never amiss on this, though I've been quoted out of context in order to make it appear that it was.
(I did maintain the "20% backing" descriptor as used by molecular without correcting it on first use to keep the response in context.) I agree it would have been a good point to work out definitions of what "backing" means, because it looks to have led to some confusion by others further in the thread, though it seemed to be getting off the point at the time, as it does now as well.
I trust this is better understood by everyone now? The huge difference between 100% backing by .2 Bitcoin and 20% backing by one share which merits all this recrimination?
This is why I don't get into arguments over details with these shitbags. If they want to buy "shares" of bitcoins when its easier to just buy the actual thing, I'd rather just call them out for how stupid the general concept is. Not everybody has the same technical skills, motivations, and ideology as you. That doesn't make them shitbags or stupid. And no, I won't be selling my bitcoin to buy shares. But I am able to step outside of my little world and see how it might be useful for many people for many different reasons. The fact that you are unwilling or unable to see any of these as anything but stupid shows just how narrow minded you are. People like you give anarchy a bad name. You are trying to act like an authority when you say your way is the only way. |
|
|
|
Ok sorry if these answers are somewhere in the 306 pages of this post, I did not read them all. Is the real pool site www.p2pool.org? The reason I ask is, the Wiki talks about needing to run the wallet program with some arguments, and a p2p program. The .org site says you can mine with just the wallet address as your user name. I'm also interested in mining several coins(one a day depending on value) with your site and was wondering if that is a bad idea, it sounds like my return goes up the longer I mine a particular coin. Thanks Rotor If you want to run your own node, you need bitcoind and the p2pool program. If you want to connect to a public node, you can just use your wallet address as your user name. If you run your own node, you can merge mine any coin that supports it. |
|
|
|
Just make sure you bump up the starting difficulty to account for what it may be by the time you actually have the hardware in hand. |
|
|
|
Because you can't point that much hashing power at your Bitcoin-QT client.
Why is that? Sounds incredible. You need some lighter weight software to proxy for you. If you don't have a proxy to throw away most of the results, you will keep bitcoind too busy to do the other things it needs to do. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
