It has long been known that small amounts are processed a whole lot faster than big amounts. That just screams "they're broke". No, the only logical explanation has been posted in this thread about 20 times. They have a daily qouta in their bank, a specific daily amount, in outgoing SEPA transfers. Instead of letting a portion of their quota be unused every day, they fill the holes with small amounts when they can no longer fit the next transfer in queue. If the next transfer in queue is 7k EUR, and they only have 5k left on their daily quota, they start grabbing smaller transfers from the queue until the quota until it is completely filled. This is a sign of MtGox trying to pay as much as possible, which they wouldn't do if they were broke. (And please read previous postings before asking about the quota – the subject has been thoroughly discussed, someone called their bank and got it from them as well, etc.) If they have a daily quota which is not enough they just raise it, as any other business in the world would do. Not all banks have problems with BTC, they can open multiple accounts in different banks, the fact is if you have the money you can certainly find a solution to operate smoothly with it in a few weeks - and months have passed. |
|
|
|
So who is 215613? They can't be new since they've already solved 99 blocks. I guess, whoever it is, their order for 200 Jupiters just arrived. That's going to be one helluva fire!  It maybe KNC "Pool mining" Where is supposed to be meaning cloudhashing/cloudscamming? |
|
|
|
It has long been known that small amounts are processed a whole lot faster than big amounts. That just screams "they're broke". No, it's just that the bigger the amount, the more overwhelmed is the poor guy processing the withdrawals. You know, longer numbers have more figures and it takes more time to type them. |
|
|
|
|
O'Rama, do you know their position about having Olivas working on cgminer implementation? Will it happen, it won't, they don't know yet?
Any idea if they plan to release the code soon?
|
|
|
|
It's all in the details, literally.
How about a clear answer to my 2 numbered questions above? Bump. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=170332.msg3307588#msg3307588Surely with your obsession for detail, it must be eating you up not to reply to these? P.S. KNC still shipping in those unsuitable single walled boxes? Three whole questions for you to answer, in detail. P.P.S. How come on the controller board there are 6 terminals, but shipped miners are only being shipped with 4 in place? Four questions, awaiting details! Bump bump. Questions consolidated for our details man who loves to give people what they want: How about some answers to these questions: 1. How come the sub-standard cgminer from KNC? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg3294238#msg3294238This post suggests the KNC version is not doing a proper work restart. Any reason KNC are spending 9 days releasing firmware updates that doesn't even fix these issues? I'm fairly sure the guys who wrote cgminer could sort this quick fast. 1.5 Update: It seems the binary for knc cgminer has not been updated at all in any of the firmware updates (source: irc). How come? There is plenty to fix. 2. How come boards are bbq'ing? I know you wrote a post a few days ago trying to blame people for unplugging cables while the miner was still powered up, but that was scapegoating. There is plenty speculation on the hardware issues causing, but a total no-answer on this from you/KNC. Customers are worried about burning to death in their sleep. 3. Are KNC still shipping in those unsuitable single walled boxes? 4. How come on the controller board there are 6 terminals, but shipped miners are only being shipped with 4 in place? Five questions, awaiting details! thx I can confirm is a stale party indeed, flushwork seems not very good. Got a huge rate of stales. Well, I guess that when they will iron out the firmware we will see some impressive performance on knc gear |
|
|
|
|
FYI: I'm officially downgrading my two units running on 0.94. The temps on the webui are nice, but after 12 hours of testing I can say clearly that 0.94 heavily decreased the hashrate of my miners. It took a beast that run at 540GH/s average for almost a week on 0.91 to a pitiful 490/500GH/s. THe other miner ran stable at around 520GH/s, now below 500GH/s.
Its a pity I only have remote access now, so I can only downgrade to 0.93 - 0.91 is the best with no doubt... And I proved all versions for long on multiple machines.
|
|
|
|
Well they should just ship wit the miner protection if they are late, looks like nov delivery and I wont be buying more babyjet or upgrades, knc won the arms race! Little upset that I will not even get a RIO
You'll always get ROI, sometimes positive and sometimes negative. If you get negative ROI with HF and have miner protection you'll receive the additional GHs. So I don't get what the KnC won when their machines will never get positive ROI and they don't have miner protection. Well see who won in a few months when miner protection kicks in. Miner protection is BS. The more GH/s hashfast distributes, the more difficult will be to have positive ROI. The only possible miner protection is to sell the fastest and most energy effective machine in very small, limited batches. I mean batches of 300/500 machines, as Avalon did with batch #1. |
|
|
|
^^ 50btc was hit by another dos attack today. I was down for about an hour
40deg and 38deg temps on my Saturn (case cover off)
just upgraded to .094 and hash rate is a little slower but HW errors are at 10% . I purposely stayed on 0.91 before this as the results from the other 2 firmware patches didn't look too good. around 5% HW errors on 0.91
Agreed, the Jupiters I have on 0.91 are the fastest without any doubt. I have none on 0.90, most on 0.91, none on 0.92, two on 0.93 and one on 0.94. So far 0.91 is the real deal IMO. I wonder what firmware the guy whose boards caught fire was running. 0.92 |
|
|
|
Agreed, the Jupiters I have on 0.91 are the fastest without any doubt. I have none on 0.90, most on 0.91, none on 0.92, two on 0.93 and one on 0.94.
So far 0.91 is the real deal IMO.
wow, how many machines you have?.) I think O'Rama packed my boxes, ask him  |
|
|
|
^^ 50btc was hit by another dos attack today. I was down for about an hour
40deg and 38deg temps on my Saturn (case cover off)
just upgraded to .094 and hash rate is a little slower but HW errors are at 10% . I purposely stayed on 0.91 before this as the results from the other 2 firmware patches didn't look too good. around 5% HW errors on 0.91
Agreed, the Jupiters I have on 0.91 are the fastest without any doubt. I have none on 0.90, most on 0.91, none on 0.92, two on 0.93 and one on 0.94. So far 0.91 is the real deal IMO. |
|
|
|
Geez man, who is not solo mining with 100TH? It's bigger than many small pools  |
|
|
|
I can understand peoples frustration, we're all dreaming of a future in which our bitcoin hoarding makes us millionaires but I don't think it's necessary to start cloudbashing just yet. Throwing words like 'scam' around is just irresponsible, we know that's not what they're doing and announcing that emails have just been sent asking for a refund to the world as a scare tactic is not professional. Some of us have a client base, deadlines and are in for thousands but you don't see us acting this way. They will do their level best to turn a profit for us, their business depends on it because nobody in the future would buy a contract otherwise. Disneyland didn't work when it first opened, columbia exploded, nobody went to see the shawshank redemption at the cinema. Have a little faith my cloudhashing brethren Then you should have just bought bitcoins. You do realize that buying bitcoins has ALWAYS been more profitable than mining, apart from a very few exceptions like being the lucky owner of an Avalon batch #1, right? In other words: if you'd bought BTC with the $$$ with which you bought your cloudhashing contract you would have got way more bitcoins than you will EVER get with that contract.I guess noobs don't do due diligence, but anyhow even on blockchained.com and other mining calculators is stated clearly "Mostly buying has been historically more profitable than mining" Plus, buying cloudhashing contracts you are paying: a) the mark up of the hardware manufacturers + b) cloudhashing markup; too much profit going out from your pocket to other people's pocket, an unprofitable move indeed. |
|
|
|
Private servers are down.
Private servers have never gone down, it's a local issue if you're seeing them down. Well, none of my units could connect to them earlier today. I will try again now and report back. EDIT: now they are working, but they definitely got disconnected this 10 hours ago and then I couldn't reconnect to them... I switched to the public servers and they worked fine. |
|
|
|
Bitcoinorama: so, there are still around 1,000 units to be shipped? Wow, that's 500TH/s to be added yet to the network, add to that the competitors machines... Boy, ROI is going to be hard, but nevertheless that's not KnC's fault, its just as it is. As I said many times, I expect a 2014 similar to 2012 in terms of hashrate, meaning pleateau and then decline because of unprofitability... That if BTC exchange rate is stable (as it happened in 2012), if it grows obviously the story changes. Anyhow, good job Bitcoinorama. Hope you could finally found yourself a position inside KnC, maybe you could be their "josh", but much nicer and way more reasonable |
|
|
|
I found this after work :  Dammit, I hate UPS !!! I never received a call and never called them. It's too late now to call, I hope that it isn't an other person that is trying to get my miners ! Day 2, Order 7x, Paid 3 June, Received today in France. Somebody tried to collect my packages at the UPS center. Fortunately UPS asked for an ID and he just went away. Be careful ! Holy fuck! How the hell could somebody know you were going to receive the miners? Any clue on which was the attack vector? We should rule out that is somebody inside UPS Sweden who knows what's going on and giving the heads up to others.. |
|
|
|
|
Update on miner with 0.94: hw errors going through the roof, they were previously 8% and they are now 19%
Hashrate slowly climbing to previous levels thou
|
|
|
|
It's interesting. With 0.93 in the first 12 hours there were a few cgminer restarts, the av hashrate were 495 Gh/s, with high HW errors.
After about a day, hash rate climbed to 506 Gh/s and stayed there for 24 hours, not a single cgminer restart. The HW errors dropped too.
Just upgraded to 0.94 45 minutes ago, speed now is 473 Gh/s and climbing slowly. We'll see what happens in a day.
Yep, I had the same experience - the more the miners run, the more stable and fast they become. For example, I have one Jupiter that worked flawlessly from day one, at the beginning hashrate was around 500GH/s, after +5 days running is now stable at 530GH/s (3 hours avg.) |
|
|
|
Upgrade 0.94 has been released.
I'm getting way more hardware errors with that, the miner I update was steadily hashing at 525GH/s (+3 hours average) and its now struggling to keep up to 500GH/s (just a few minutes hashing thou). I'd not recommend upgrading if your miners are running fine. You know how we say, "if ain't broke..." What they added to the webui is the temps, pretty scary stuff, ASIC slots preaking at 70 Celsius thanks for sharing Rampion. edit: are you planning to downgrade the fw was installed before? I updated only one of my miners, will wait 3 hours to check the average and decide then. About temperatures: ASIC slot #1: 57.0 ℃ ASIC slot #2: - ASIC slot #3: 63.0 ℃ ASIC slot #4: 69.0 ℃ ASIC slot #5: 63.5 ℃ ASIC slot #6: - What I can tell you is that for now I'm seeing much more hardware errors and a crazy amount of this "core disabled - core enabled" messages, way more than before. |
|
|
|
Upgrade 0.94 has been released.
I'm getting way more hardware errors with that, the miner I update was steadily hashing at 525GH/s (+3 hours average) and its now struggling to keep up to 500GH/s (just a few minutes hashing thou). I'd not recommend upgrading if your miners are running fine. You know how we say, "if ain't broke..." What they added to the webui is the temps, pretty scary stuff, ASIC slots preaking at 70 Celsius |
|
|
|
Why did you obscured the "profit" (but not the "wagered")? If guess there's no strategy good enough? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
