I see a few of these in my future...
Do you do other sizes besides the 2.5/5.5 and 2.1/5.5? I'm planning on running my BFL off a laptop with a 1.7/4.8 jack, and having it run on the same PSU would be great!
Hang on, same PSU as what? The laptop? I doubt you want to do that - the laptop PSU is unlikely to be rated over about 60 to 90 watts, just for the laptop alone. The Single pulls a minimum of 70 watts continuously on its own. |
|
|
|
I looked through the FAQ for "bitcoin address" because it makes sense to me for one of the options under "PayTo?" at BitInstant to be "My Bitcoin address", but that option isn't there. Why is that?
Because Bitinstant isn't (currently?) an exchange; they only facilitate you getting money into the existing exchanges. |
|
|
|
It would probably be sufficient to match what he's about to get from the profit share model. Which I'd estimate at about 1000-1500 FPGAs * 5% * a year of mining. Probably like $20k or BTC4k.
I still wonder about the accuracy of the 1000-1500 FPGA numbers. I'm not saying anyone is wrong, but do those figures include the various privately licensed production runs that have been done around here? I'm sure Antirack isn't the only one to have done this, and I'm not even sure how many devices his run includes. |
|
|
|
I am looking for a board to support 7 cards without pin jumpering or x16/x16 cables required.....as this IS for Bitcoin Mining. (previous poster, please consider this a slap to your face  ) Unfortunately I wouldn't be able to guarantee that this is possible, as I have not been able to find any instances of anyone else using the board in that kind of situation. Sorry. Ideally, this would be used for 7x Quadro 4000 cards for CAD rendering, or 1 Quadro 6000 and 3 Tesla M2000 series cards. |
|
|
|
Gold is in stock!
May I suggest posting on Ogrr?  What is that? ogrr.com, d2jsp wannabe startup that uses bitcoins. Hopefully it succeeds beyond its wildest dreams so it can uproot and displace d2jsp. |
|
|
|
|
Just something like "Hi, my -otc nick is starsoccer9, and I approve of this message" and then sign that and post it here.
|
|
|
|
|
So if you use VPNs for everything and check ALL key fingerprints, you ought to be safe, but yeah it's hardly worth the risk to bring your daily driver to the show. VPN + Encrypted VNC to your main machine back at home, so that you can just use the local device as a dumb terminal.
|
|
|
|
The bipolar, scammy faggot is back. Lets see if i am indeed a scammer. These are for sale for 35% off.
No, let's NOT see, you dumb shit. Go fuck off and die in a hole. |
|
|
|
Do you know if you can use the same yubikey for several different services, or do you need to get a separate one for each account?
The Yubikey from Mt. Gox can only be used with Mt. Gox (and BlockChain.info wallet, apparently, which I'm guessing has permission to auth through Mt. Gox API or something) It doesn't work on other services where a Yubikay is used. The Yubikey from Yubico works at Mt. Gox and elsewhere where Yubikeys are supported. Slight correction - only keys programmed by MtGox can be used with MtGox - you can't use one that you got direct from Yubico. The reason is that MtGox runs their own authentication server with their own keypairs, instead of using Yubico's free cloud authentication system. However, any website that uses the free service provided by Yubico for authentication will support a generic device ordered from Yubico. |
|
|
|
I've got the 800 mh/s firmware loaded on my 2 new Singles with the stock power bricks, and the total power use according to my power meter is 145 watts (or about 72.5 watts each).
So it looks like the slower firmware uses a bit less power.
That's expected, same as a video card. Generally speaking, the power draw versus clock speed is linear. In that case, are the faster bitstreams more likely to burn out the power bricks faster? More heat? Hard to say, the bricks are rated for something like 120 watts, but they do get a bit hot. Usually for more than 2 or 3 singles, it's a good idea to use a standard power supply with converted connectors. |
|
|
|
I've got the 800 mh/s firmware loaded on my 2 new Singles with the stock power bricks, and the total power use according to my power meter is 145 watts (or about 72.5 watts each).
So it looks like the slower firmware uses a bit less power.
That's expected, same as a video card. Generally speaking, the power draw versus clock speed is linear. |
|
|
|
Sooo... the extra cost additional backups are just more snapshots on the LVM, essentially? If so, that's lame. Paying extra for something that is already happening is stupid. However, if the extra paid option is actually a full disk clone, I would suspect that it would therefore be trivial to restore deleted data from backup in that case.
One of the options includes back up to other media including rotated tapes. You have a choice about whether to have absolutely everything including your OS backed up or just specific items. They actually discuss which backup processes are best for what types of businesses and how the various options affect restoration time. OK, that makes sense. So the "default" backups are at server level, backing up all the hosted virtual machines simultaneously, and are only used to restore in the event of a catastrophic storage server failure. (Most "clouds" have all their storage abstracted onto dedicated SAN or DAS devices.) And the paid version is the same as the dedicated servers I assume - they install a software agent running as its own user, which then backs up whatever directories and databases you request. That's how it works on our dedis, anyway. |
|
|
|
Will the first issue of Bitcoin Magazine become a valuable collectible in the future?
I ordered 2, just so I could keep one wrapped in its plastic bag.  |
|
|
|
The entire Cloud Sites FTP structure is backed up every four hours, which totals six daily backups. Those backups are rolled into a nightly backup, which are retained for two days. However, these backups are for disaster recovery on the server side. If for any reason a storage node on our side were to crash, our backups will be there to replace any lost data.
That said, we recommend that you make periodic backups of your site and data to your local computer since we are unable to extract an individual site's data from the nightly backups. Was it, or was it not, possible to recover lost data from Rackspaces servers during that first 48 hour window? I don't understand how Rackspace is able to recover data from their servers following a "disaster" yet unable to after a phone call is made to them about data being erased by other means. I'm puzzled! ~Bruno~ it means they do backup entire cloud cluster with all their cloud customer's sites in one snapshot, which in case of disaster would be more or less easy to restore, the whole cloud structure. problem is they cannot extract data of any individual client from it. the answer to your question is no, it wasn't possible by the sound of that citation. Sooo... the extra cost additional backups are just more snapshots on the LVM, essentially? If so, that's lame. Paying extra for something that is already happening is stupid. However, if the extra paid option is actually a full disk clone, I would suspect that it would therefore be trivial to restore deleted data from backup in that case. |
|
|
|
It's inconceivable to me that after the Linode compromise they chose one of the cheapest shared hosting options with Rackspace and that they didn't regard redundancy and being able to shut down access to the server if it was compromised as critical. They made these choices after they'd performed a security audit which should have revealed that their servers were still vulnerable.
Just to make sure everyone has it straight - Bitcoinica was on the RS cloud long before the Consultancy came along. The Linode VPS was just an attempt to keep the hot wallet off the rackspace cluster to spread the risk around. Obviously we saw how that failed. I'm sure that excuses them from not tightening up their security at Rackspace after the Linode hack. They performed a security audit in March according to Tihan - a proper audit should have revealed the Rackspace vulnerability. Another attack should have been expected. Even if the same attacker doesn't come back for a second bite at the cherry, once a vulnerability has been exploited other people will try to exploit that same vulnerability in respect of both the company which was originally attacked and similar businesses. I'm just saying this from the point of view as someone who has read all the things said about this incident and not as defending them in any way, but if an audit had been performed at that time it wouldn't have caught a later security breach. The later breach was that of an insecure server containing the credentials to access an otherwise-secure mail server, which then cascaded into allowing access via a password reset into the control panel. The 2 Bitcoinica incidents had similar qualities, but were not the same hack. It's kind of hard to audit the hosting provider's control panel from all angles, especially when you have no access to the backend of it. Obviously all this stuff should have been on a dedicated server stack a long time ago. |
|
|
|
The problem with no backup pool is... miners don't come back so pricing would bounce around like crazy.
Miners would come back right away when work is being requested. At least with cgminer. Unfortunately not all miners are smart enough to use cgminer and configure backup pools in it. However, making the offline pool optional would be a bonus for those that have a good cgminer config set up already. |
|
|
|
It's inconceivable to me that after the Linode compromise they chose one of the cheapest shared hosting options with Rackspace and that they didn't regard redundancy and being able to shut down access to the server if it was compromised as critical. They made these choices after they'd performed a security audit which should have revealed that their servers were still vulnerable.
Just to make sure everyone has it straight - Bitcoinica was on the RS cloud long before the Consultancy came along. The Linode VPS was just an attempt to keep the hot wallet off the rackspace cluster to spread the risk around. Obviously we saw how that failed. |
|
|
|
"cum hoc ergo propter hoc" <3 latin |
|
|
|
I almost get the feeling they arbitrarily delay postage. like they wanna mine themselves as much as they can before shipping it. Ofcourse they deny this.
The current wait is because of a lack of cases, apparently the boards are ready to ship but there's nothing to put them in. Yeah. Like the case is somehow connected to mining. Great excuse to delay shipping and mine some coins. In case you missed it, they have stated that they only hash test data for testing, and it makes a lot of sense too. I don't know why others don't do it - they should have a suite a verifiable hashes that each device must pass in order to be considered accurate. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
