Here is my fingerprint: D22429DE16455CA98758EB277A611FCEC3E7A35E Encrypt a file for me to read!  Encrypting is fun! What keyserver did you upload your key to? I can't find it on pgp.mit.edu or pool.sks-keyservers.net. |
|
|
|
except for Con's "workaround" which discards valid shares from BFL devices in order to avoid stales.
It's a feature, not a bug, and it's been in the firmware of the Single right from the beginning. There's no reason to not use it, and you can't guarantee that a nonce was valid, especially after a longpoll. It's a bug. There is nothing to gain (except false advertising of lower stales), and plenty to lose (valid shares discarded). Fix your pool then, because a longpoll is only supposed to be sent when the current work has been invalidated. If you accept previous work as valid after a longpoll, you risk orphan blocks.  |
|
|
|
Others were guessing strychnine, wonder what the toxicology will say. Btw, for those of you that like "hush puppies" AKA cornbread balls, here is a fun fact for you: they got their name because the escaping slaves would lace them with strychnine and leave them where the search dogs would find them.  |
|
|
|
Oh ok, that makes sense. Looks like sadpandatech is the high bidder for now. |
|
|
|
except for Con's "workaround" which discards valid shares from BFL devices in order to avoid stales.
It's a feature, not a bug, and it's been in the firmware of the Single right from the beginning. There's no reason to not use it, and you can't guarantee that a nonce was valid, especially after a longpoll. |
|
|
|
The power supplies on the new SC (ASIC) Singles are supposed to be built in. I hope BFL doesn't spec some piece of crap for those since they will be much harder to circumvent.
Where did you hear that from? Just interested, especially seeing as we don't even have any pics or renders yet. It says it on the order form for the mid-priced Single: http://www.butterflylabs.com/order-form-bitforce-sc-single/"Product includes: Fully assembled enclosure, USB Cable, internal power supply & driver software (including BTC block mining application)." We can work around an external power supply, but if an internal one goes bad.... BFL will have a lot of returns and angry customers. Ah, I didn't notice that. True. |
|
|
|
I just had to make lazr noises with my mouth after seeing that picture pew pew pew! |
|
|
|
|
OK, I've decided to sell. Fjordbit, do you still want it for $799, or does anyone else want to renew their offers?
|
|
|
|
38BTC for two shipped? Should be right around your price target. Would you be able to mail this weekend?
Sorry I forgot to update this. zvs is asking for 2 of them and Leezyist wants the other 5, but neither have paid yet. I won't be able to ship until Monday or Tuesday at the latest because I need to find some packaging and stuff. |
|
|
|
The power supplies on the new SC (ASIC) Singles are supposed to be built in. I hope BFL doesn't spec some piece of crap for those since they will be much harder to circumvent.
Where did you hear that from? Just interested, especially seeing as we don't even have any pics or renders yet. |
|
|
|
We heard you liked mining so we put some mining in your mining so you could mine while you mine.
Umm.. am i allowed to quote that?  Only if you're Xibit.  |
|
|
|
Hello. I know none of the current softwares support this (and that's good), but what stops a person (aside from integrity and will to see pool mining work) from checking each hash they submit to see if it is the solution to the actual block, and if it is holding it for themselves, solving the block, then continue submitting shares that aren't the solution, effectively giving them all their hashing power at a pool, and then also giving them all the rewards they would receive from solo-mining. This would seem especially deadly to PPS pools...
It's very possible, but there is no reward to the person that is doing it. They can't claim the block as their own, so they would only do it if they intended to be malicious to the pool. |
|
|
|
I know they are Mean Wells and everything, but what's the actual efficiency of the stock brick? I'm betting it isn't too far different from 87%, and Inaba tested one with a clamp meter somwhere, just can't find the post atm. All I am saying is, the MW is rated LESS (102 watts instead of 120) than the stock brick, and so it might get just as hot.
Mine gets hot, but if you put it in the exhaust stream of the Single, it keeps cool. I don't think it's going to catch anything on fire.
The one in question gets so hot it shuts down.....the single will only mine for about 10 minutes. The damn thing is bulging even! I am just gonna run down to the local electronic store and try to find a replacement. OK well yeah, that's bad. |
|
|
|
Hi, I would like to see a awesome Bitcoin letter service where you can upload a document and the service prints it out. After the service has received the Bitcoins it forwards it to a real life address (worldwide). Fees can be charged e.g. by number of pages and color/black white. Of course it must have a API to automate that process. I am interested in it because I would use it for sending address verification letters to Bitmit users. I can imagine that many other (Bitcoin) services might be interested in that as well! Go go go  There was someone here that wanted to start such a thing using the PostalMethods API, but I don't know if it ever got past the idea stage. |
|
|
|
|
I know they are Mean Wells and everything, but what's the actual efficiency of the stock brick? I'm betting it isn't too far different from 87%, and Inaba tested one with a clamp meter somwhere, just can't find the post atm. All I am saying is, the MW is rated LESS (102 watts instead of 120) than the stock brick, and so it might get just as hot.
Mine gets hot, but if you put it in the exhaust stream of the Single, it keeps cool. I don't think it's going to catch anything on fire.
|
|
|
|
Done! With the exception of rg. Not sure who you meant there, if anyone.
~Bruno~
rg is short for rapeghost, and that's the nickname of the guy that runs BitVPS.com. |
|
|
|
@leofar,
The N word - really?
I understand your frustration but no need for that...
+1, that was childish and lame. |
|
|
|
So Comcast is blocking my email because I dont have Business class service. I can still receive orders, but recent orders will need to be resubmitted. (After 07/04/12)
ES000001 :: Mail to Comcast is rejected and is returned with an error message containing the code ES000001. What does this mean?
You have been blocked from sending to the Comcast network because we have determined that you are sending email from a dynamic/residential IP address within the Comcast domain. Comcast does not allow subscribers to send email from email servers other than smtp.comcast.net.
Just set up a quick relay on a VPS somewhere, and make sure it requires authentication. Either that or see if Comcast will relay your mail without mangling it too bad. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah I have no idea what they look like, but I'd be interested to know how they plan on cooling the thing when there is no coffee mug on it to act as a heatsink.
|
|
|
|
PLAN B
*popcorn* You have a public claim, but that means nothing. I could step up right here and now, and say that I have 8 sockpuppet accounts that were all signed up with fake data via Tor, and ask for a bunch of money, same as you. Is it valid? No, obviously not, because it cannot be verified. The same applies to your accounts. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
