I don't like the idea of having the electronics exposed with a Tech Station. All you'd have to do is drop a paperclip on it and you could potentially fry $1000 worth of hardware.
THIS x1000 It's always nice that the "NOOBIES" know whats BETTER They STILL haven't learned ...YET ... or "THE HARD WAY" Dust, critters, ACCIDENTS mean nothing it's all just a game WITH WHOSE MONEY Put valued equipment it in a good inclosure !!! Ventilate it !!! lock it up from invaders (the wife & kids) does PREVENTION mean anything  ? |
|
|
|
is it a mining rig or not ??
If you play game's it will effect anything you do
I'm not sure if the true miners will want to help "gamers"
My 2 cents is mine or play games make the choice
Don't expect others to figure it out for you
Don't listen to this troll.... He can't read obviously. But if you ever decide to mine while gaming, put the -f 120 flag. While I play Shogun 2, my hashraye is around 100Mh/s for each of my 6870 Thanks for the snipe you TROLL nster the troll hits every post made on this board with his TROLL turds |
|
|
|
each hd69900 is 375W thats 750 for 2
how can you add TWO 6950 or 6970 (aprox 140W each) to a Corsair HX950W power supply
more sales hype
I will also investigate in the possibility of adding two 6950 or 6970 to each rig, giving about 700 MHash/s more. (This will need a larger PSU) ok I missed the note wil require a bigger ps SORRY |
|
|
|
each hd69900 is 375W thats 750 for 2
how can you add TWO 6950 or 6970 (aprox 140W each) to a Corsair HX950W power supply
more sales hype
It's 2 GPUs per rig. Adding 2 more GPUs would be adding one more rig, which would include a new PSU. That's not how I read it And WHY would you add lower capability gpu's |
|
|
|
I will take 10 BTC per day in fees for power and internet connection.
i stopped reading there. does seem a mite high can anyone spell SCAM indeed. $10 a month sounds reasonable, but $10 a day is super expensive. electricity costs (where i live) $0.10 /KW/h. so * 24 = $2.4 per day. it's not necessary to have high speed internet, so a cheap DSL line (@$30 a month, $1 per day) will do. you can probably have multiple machines running on the same line, because bitcoin mining isn't bandwidth intensive, so it's probably less than $1 a day. that leaves ~$6 per day for managing the servers, which is pretty expensive considering setting up mining rigs isn't very hard. each hd69900 is 375W thats 750 for 2 how can you add TWO 6950 or 6970 (aprox 140W each) to a Corsair HX950W power supply more sales hype |
|
|
|
I will take 10 BTC per day in fees for power and internet connection.
i stopped reading there. does seem a mite high can anyone spell SCAM |
|
|
|
I just making reports trolls here are deciding what's real & whats troll turds "NOT ME" do as you will ... WHO CARES anyway Today was not very different I restarted / re did for a previous version of sdk was just an exercise in useless shit SDK 2.1 made no diff to SDK 2.3 saw NOTHING different as a note i did see an hr with nothing reported....10+ nothing to shows but mining everything REALLY helps Fyi I think i'm down coins since the eff limit even though THE NUMBERS say I'm more eff So what does that say oh ps even slush says ignore nster -- everyone knows he's a troll |
|
|
|
|
is it a mining rig or not ??
If you play game's it will effect anything you do
I'm not sure if the true miners will want to help "gamers"
My 2 cents is mine or play games make the choice
Don't expect others to figure it out for you
|
|
|
|
I'm keeping track cdhowie , bittertea all post for NO REASON but I'm a troll ain't that funny oh almost forgot the prime offender nster Ah bittertea another troll that posts nothing but nice to see you chime in Yep geck you did it all by yourself
had nothing to do with other miners doing work that got you there
WTF anything else you want credit for
bobR is my favorite troll. And we're back! I missed you, bobR, I really did  |
|
|
|
Ah bittertea another troll that posts nothing but nice to see you chime in Yep geck you did it all by yourself
had nothing to do with other miners doing work that got you there
WTF anything else you want credit for
bobR is my favorite troll. |
|
|
|
cdhowie go TROLL someware else YOU are a complete joke Troll turds are collecting Yep geck you did it all by yourself
had nothing to do with other miners doing work that got you there
WTF anything else you want credit for
Your jocularity detector is broken, please fix it. |
|
|
|
Yep geck you did it all by yourself had nothing to do with other miners doing work that got you there WTF anything else you want credit for I just noticed I've discovered 4 blocks for slush's pool, 3 in the last week. I seem to be speeding up:
Weeks 1-4 = no blocks
Weeks 5-8 = 1 block
Week 9 = 3 blocks
Better watch out! Soon, I'll mine so fast I have to start rehashing the entire blockchain just for something to do!
Also, I'm sure going from CPU mining to GPU had nothing to do with this.
|
|
|
|
|
Well of 349 get works so far 143 had no results
that's better than 1/3 that were worthless to hash to the last bit
these numbers are from poclbm-mod which continues running even now and has been running since yesterday on at least 5 different blocks
still only seeing like 1 in 8 above 75%
and FYI
after 4 days of excluded low efficiency's the pool efficiency is still around 80%
|
|
|
|
I have been watching mine like a hawk since I started mining just over a week ago and haven't had any problems with payouts except for when they were frozen due to the attacks, and has been resolved.
Being an admin. It's not really fair to hold DDOS attacks against them. The only reason it would be justified to hold the recent breach against them is if it was gross neglect (which I don't think it was). Even the best admins can't stop someone if they really want to get into a system.
here here I agree lest we feed the trolls & their nonsense |
|
|
|
Yep your a BIG JOKE Have a nice day with your trolling We've also tracked the attacker to the russian federation/czech republic.
LOOOOOOOOOOOL No, I'm not the attacker (I'm from CZ) and believe that Tycho (Russia) isn't, too. hmmm joint effort from tycho and slush to eliminate the no fee competition?  it is quite a coincidence though  from nster the troll go figure I should make a poll.... who is the troll, BobR or nster.... guess what the answer will be  HINT: http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4540.0 in case your are a, in their words, "dumb ass" it is quite a coincidence though I don't want to evolve any kind of conspiration theory, but saying "attacker was from Czech Republic or Russia" has similar weight as "attacker was from USA or Chile, because I know two guys from those countries who may be interested in hurting my little baby". IP ranges, provider companies, language or whatever is completely different in CZ and Russia. Czech Rep was former Soviet union, but it is more than 20 years ago. I'm quite interested in evidence that attacker was from CZ _or_ Russia. But not too much to register on bitcoinpool forum and ask there (pardon - troll there). you make quite the argument |
|
|
|
MY point is Yes there are shares to be had in mining the whole getwork
but most are before 50% and certainly before the last 25% of the getwork
mining every possibility in every getwork doesn't seem to give the most
22 is not a statistically significant sample size in this context. Observing my miner for about a week, the valid shares found in each getwork seem pretty uniformly distributed through the nonce-space to me. That's not so say I haven't had a bad hour or two where I run a bunch of empty getworks. The way the numbers work, you should average almost exactly one share per getwork that is completely searched. In other words, your efficiency should be close to 100% on average. I have some days where I'm consistently around 60% and others I'll be at 150%. And discounting a small sample makes it invalid it shows that mining every last part of every get work is useless if you have a fast cruncher you never see the fallout ... wasted time cdhowie you are new and seem to be a troll last week don't mean to this week last week was good this week so what you missed the point its all LUCK period how can you base an efficiency on luck such an efficiency means NOTHING |
|
|
|
22 getshares crunched now of 25 shares returned 4 over 50% 2 over 75% You get the picture .. 16% in the last 50% of the getwork 8% in the last 25% of the getwork MY point is Yes there are shares to be had in mining the whole getwork but most are before 50% and certainly before the last 25% of the getwork mining every possibility in every getwork doesn't seem to give the most ok its becoming apparent 8 of 18 blocks yield results 9 results below 50% 2 results above 50% 1 results above 75% yield after 50% hash of a get work not much efficiency went from 200% down to 60% How can you possibly rate the efficiency of luck It's lucky when you find a share... it's lucky if that or any share finds the block My luck has no bearing on what happens in the future My past luck has nothing to do with now another thing I'm noticing I've only got shares on 4 of 7 blocks but have a 0 for emp (blocks with out share) Ive been monitoring poclbm-mod since the drive to remove those with low efficiency what i'm seeing is that it continues hashing the current getwork after it finds an invalid/stale share should it not get a fresh getwork after finding bad results I also tried using poclbm-mod for cpu First off my hash rate on the cpu was 20% of what pudinpop's rpc miner were my results also showed that after the first longpole block change most block changes were missed resulting in mostly invalid/stale shares being found This is NOT a bitch or complaint against the pool or the operators Just my findings - Yours results may differ |
|
|
|
|
Any one notice
no payout since the last totally 120 confirms
|
|
|
|
ok its becoming apparent 8 of 18 blocks yield results 9 results below 50% 2 results above 50% 1 results above 75% yield after 50% hash of a get work not much efficiency went from 200% down to 60% How can you possibly rate the efficiency of luck It's lucky when you find a share... it's lucky if that or any share finds the block My luck has no bearing on what happens in the future My past luck has nothing to do with now another thing I'm noticing I've only got shares on 4 of 7 blocks but have a 0 for emp (blocks with out share) Ive been monitoring poclbm-mod since the drive to remove those with low efficiency what i'm seeing is that it continues hashing the current getwork after it finds an invalid/stale share should it not get a fresh getwork after finding bad results I also tried using poclbm-mod for cpu First off my hash rate on the cpu was 20% of what pudinpop's rpc miner were my results also showed that after the first longpole block change most block changes were missed resulting in mostly invalid/stale shares being found This is NOT a bitch or complaint against the pool or the operators Just my findings - Yours results may differ |
|
|
|
another thing I'm noticing I've only got shares on 4 of 7 blocks but have a 0 for emp (blocks with out share) Ive been monitoring poclbm-mod since the drive to remove those with low efficiency what i'm seeing is that it continues hashing the current getwork after it finds an invalid/stale share should it not get a fresh getwork after finding bad results I also tried using poclbm-mod for cpu First off my hash rate on the cpu was 20% of what pudinpop's rpc miner were my results also showed that after the first longpole block change most block changes were missed resulting in mostly invalid/stale shares being found This is NOT a bitch or complaint against the pool or the operators Just my findings - Yours results may differ |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
