Bitpenny probably have the easiest interface to configure for, so it's hard to understand what you might be doing wrong. What parameters are you trying to use now?

If it's happening, it's the participants in the other pools that are being cheated. They will end up sharing some of the profits for the long blocks, and all of the profits for the short ones. For those who use Slush's pool all the time it will mean that they will get a lower share for the long blocks, but they will also take shorter time to solve, so it averages out.

If you want to see the exact statistics you can try putting any number into the mining calculator. http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/calculator.php. It will show you that the average time to solve blocks is higher than it takes to solve the quickest 50% of the blocks. The problem is that you don't know in advance which blocks will end up within those 50%.

The distribution isn't normal, there is a graph at the pool which shows it: http://mining.bitcoin.cz/stats/graphs/

As you can se, it's kind of open ended. Your suggestion for fooling the pool requires there to be an upper limit to how low it can take to solve a block, and a normal distribution within this range. That's not how it works. In theory there can be a block that will never be solved.

No, it won't. Your mistake is to not understand how the randomness of mining works. If you do it your way, your average earnings for the time spent mining will be pretty much exactly the same as if you joined every round from the start. Hint: most rounds will last shorter than average.

- Right click on the new desktop icon and click properties

Or perhaps you haven't made the shortcut yet? Hold the right button down on the .exe and drag it to your desktop, select create shortcut when you let go.

Do you have one or more GPUs? The problem with 100% CPU is only there if you have more than one.

Sorry, I assumed your reply had some relevance to my initial message.

I guess we live in different worlds, then. In mine you can't eat the cake and have it.

- Open the C:\bitcoin\poclbm_py2exe_20110222 directory in explorer
- Create a short cut to poclbm.exe on your desktop by right clicking on it and dragging it
- Right click on the new desktop icon and click properties
- Add the parameters you need to the exe file
- Save.

I think this method is much easier. The GUI version makes it even easier, though.

Neither model encourages or discourages consumption, it just shifts the best way to preserve wealth. With inflation you should buy what you need early, but that doesn't mean you should consume it. Because it will be more valueable tomorrow than it is today, it makes just as much sense to delay consumption as it would with a deflationary model.

If there is disinflation there is still inflation, only less. Bitcoin leads to the opposite of inflation, which is deflation (provided there is economic growth and the population stays the same or increases).

Should have noticed that. Guess I'll have to agree that it's very similar, then.

It's probably a lot more than that. http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/sapphire_toxic_hd5970/18.htm

The only thing more memory will have an impact on when you're mining is your electricity bill.

Windows has probably put two process on the same core, then.

No, it just looks that way because Windows will say that 100% of one core on a dual core CPU is 25% instead of 50%. You still only have two cores, and a single process will 100% of it even if you enable HT. Enabling HT will not give you twice as many cores or twice as high performance. If two process use the same core with HT, it will only be a few percent more efficient than using a single core at best. Setting affinity is much better.

If you sell the new one unopened you can probably get a better price. I'd try the XFX, and if it overclocks fairly well I'd just keep it.

A lot of new sellers would appear if it looked like they actually could get for instance $1.50. It's just no point transferring funds to mtgox to add a sell order for a price they don't expect to get anyway.

CPU mining is pointless these days, and a 5% increase in performance wouldn't change that.

You have to try for yourself to see if it results in better performance with your card. -w 64 or 128, with and without -v.