Putting the 4 hashing boards from two S3+'s into a single box - one could mount a second controller board and remove the stick-on cover over the second RJ45 hole.  It would be as if running the two S3+'s, two ethernet cables, but the water or liquid cooling would be a plus especially taking advantage of putting the heat outside while the machine is inside.

Removing the sticker wouldn't be enough to allow the RJ45 access to be used as the controller boards would overlap.  Perhaps cutting away above the RJ45 access and putting the second controller board on standoffs would allow both to fit.

So if the PCB layout is different with the connector pinout different, it could mean that there are other differences that prohibit a half C1 cooler being used for a pair of S3+ boards, like the PCB mounting screws placed elsewhere.  Any knowledge if this is so?  Thanks.

Although the cover is heavy enough that a nibbler might not cut it for adding PCI-E connector ports, a Dremel with a number of small cutting disks might get it done.

Was the idea to have a channeled heatsink on each board positioned as they are now in the S3's?  I confess the sandwiching idea comes from looking at the C1.  But that cover doesn't look like it would lend itself to modification with a nibbler for new PCIE positions.

Personally going to Freon would be too much given that it will vaporize if free and without a compressor how is it better than 50/50 auto antifreeze/water (the non-hole plugging antifreeze)?  Maybe it has good thermal carrying characteristics (under pressure) but so does water/antifreeze (non-pressurized).  With a pre-cooling radiator outside, heck even an old junkyard radiator would work (leaking, plugged with J B Weld).  For some months I have a window fan exhausting heat before I turn on the AC.  Mid-summer, a window fan outside on low pushing air thru a car radiator before it's routed back in to the stock fans/radiator might not be too costly if there were multiple machines.

Of course now we see using a half round routing bit to run tracks for the copper tubing in the aluminum slabs.  Having the faces flush would really be better so as to reduce warping due to temperature differences that might lift the slap from the PCB.

Let's see.  Two aluminum slabs the dimensions of S3 heatsinks drilled and tapped to fit S3 boards, additional thru holes to sandwich two slabs together.  Copper tubing loops dragon-like sandwiched between the aluminum slabs contacting the slabs well with heatsink compound.

Somebody with a machine shop could whip those up and offer then for sale to S3+ users who want to roll  their own water cooling.

Besides, if you don't purge the freon properly before heating, like if it's from an older AC, you'll produce a gas that causes massive chromosomal dislocation.  Very unhealthy stuff.

I have and am awaiting it now.

I happen to have a couple of radiators from an old window AC.  I do think I'll have one outside in series with the provided C1 radiator.  I started using my S3+'s late in the fall.  I'm thinking with the profit margin so low I may have to shut them down next summer unless I can get a cooling solution that doesn't jack up my electric too much.
 

Anyone tried converting a pair of S3+'s to C1 cooling?

Cold storage is simply an address assigned to a wallet that isn't connected to the internet.  The perp could have purchased a laptop, opened a wallet, transferred the stolen Bitcoins to an address of that wallet, saved the wallet to a thumbdrive, smashed the laptop with a hammer and tossed it in the Seine.

A record of the stolen Bitcoins getting to that cold storage wallet exists in the blockchain but those stolen Bitcoins can't be moved to any other address without bringing that address in the wallet.dat of the thumbdrive back onto the internet and getting it seen by the blockchain.

Any other stolen MtGox Bitcoins that aren't in cold storage would have been mixed into some existing online accounts that don't maintain a history of each and every fractional Bitcoin's history giving the holder the argument he can't tell which are which?  But it can be shown that X number of stolen Bitcoins did enter some account address.  If the mixed Bitcoins are held by a company holding Bitcoins for many users and not differentiating which are which the company claims it's not responsible and not to be held accountable for those stolen Bitcoins that it acquired?

Are there any other places the stolen Bitcoins can be?  I understand the double spending of Bitcoins on MtGox was only a small fraction of those stolen.

So, perhaps the price had reached its stable low and is rebounding a little.

The latest contact from those handling the MtGox debacle say they've contracted with a company to "recover" stolen Bitcoins.  How I wonder.  Steal them back perhaps?

One of the early big spikes in Bitcoin value was when Russian money in Cyprus banks had been threatened.  I can't envision the Russian money completely trusting the Cyrpus banking system ever since but even after almost seeing reverse interest rates on savings (didn't the Swiss just do that?) they perhaps trust it more than Bitcoin.  (Hope Karpeles was looking in a mirror when he gave that finger.)

One word answer: Cyprus.

The low Russian ruble and no cash flow into Bitcoin points to a very real loss of confidence in those who have defacto control and the idea itself. 

That photo of Karpeles giving the world the finger while wearing a very expensive suit comes to mine.

I like the idea of limited availability.  There will never be enough Bitcoins that every living US college graduate could own one.

But the falling price as it relates to large farms dumping the mined coins leads me to consider that KnC has had the most efficient Bitcoin miners and prices those too high but sells to a relative's farm.  Tactically they'd dump BTC until their efficient farms are the only viable farms  (I'm discounting miners who get free electric as they're unlikely unless government supported) and less efficient large farms would shutdown.  A disturbing facet is that if they then allowed the price to rise the previously mothballed farms would fire up so they would keep the price at that low.  They'd be harvesting a large slice of the mined Bitcoins until the payout for a discovered block drops from 25 to 12½.

Since KnC has some of the most efficient machines on the farms associated with it, the mined coins might arguably continue to be dumped until the price is so low that even their farms will just barely be making a profit.  When that becomes true the majority of less efficient large farms will have shut down - unless they're getting free electric.  At which point only the very efficient large farms will afford to mine Bitcoins - until reward for finding a block drops from 25 to 12½.

I can't find mention of it on Wikipedia but in the not too distant past I think the Polish zloty banknotes were printed in Great Britain but Poland couldn't pay for the printing because the mint required payment in a hard currency.  I think it's something of the same idea when the manufacturers of Bitcoin mining equipment dump Bitcoins for immediate hard cash.

So if we focus on the large farms continuing to dump their mined Bitcoins although there's no telling what their investors, those who buy slices of the farm, do with theirs, and figure that when they feel that their large farms are too-big-too-fail from new investments in Bitcoin miners,  perhaps they'll curtail their Bitcoin dumping and allow the price to rise.  If the small miner were to follow suit, say next year starting to sell each Bitcoin as it accumulates and recording the blockchain value of each payout for tax computations, then when the small miner sees a rising trend in Bitcoin price, he might buy back each Bitcoin as it approaches the value it sold at.  That would seem to be the safest way to play it.  Heck the average realtime blockchain value for the Bitcoins I mined this year is ~$569 while the Bitcoin value right now is ~$348.  So, the large farms are hurting Bitcoin on the scale of Karpeles.  It did level out the hashrate tho.

The early hype was that since the number of Bitcoins that can exist won't change it will have better long term value than fiat.  This was after some years of savings accounts earning pennies per thousand dollars per year.  So, I'd say it was presented as an investment.

The long term slow drop in Bitcoin value, is it the result of bad press foist by banks or the dumping of mined Bitcoins by large farms like those associated with KnC?

A long slow decline is bad for miner/investors like myself who don't dump the mined Bitcoins.  But, it would seem ideal for owners of large farms who see the decline as reducing the number of users getting into mining and therefore the reduction in private purchase of mining gear.

Historically, since KnC's gear came on the market, the best thing to have done with the mined Bitcoins is to have dumped the Bitcoins for cash.  Did they foresee the result of constantly dumping the Bitcoins?  Would the slow decline in value have happened anyway?  We know the banks don't object to Bitcoin become useless as an investment.