 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 »
|
Very sad news, but not unexpected.  Best of luck with the proceedings. At least it was an interesting experiment while it lasted. |
|
|
|
Also, I wonder if Josh's wife knows he was cheating on her every time he left town?
I must have missed that bit when I was scanning through the documents... |
|
|
|
|
Interesting...
Well, considering Josh has been the only higher-up employee to consistently interface with customers, I'm not too surprised. He always struck me as someone trying to save face and apologize for BFL's actions.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah for some reason the new site design looks straight out of those 90s websites trying to get you to "buy my book to solve all your problems!". I am not pleased with the color choices. Before, it had a better color scheme and layout.
|
|
|
|
|
A private pool with 12 PH/s should be MORE than enough to keep variance down... I know I have a measly 300 GH/s on p2pool and that has a total of 1 PH/s... and I get about one payout a day roughly.
I'm all for spreading the hashrate as evenly as possible... and I'm also baffled that "withholding winning blocks" is even a thing. Is there a way to defend against that in code?
|
|
|
|
The last ETA was heavy on the E and light on the A.
This sucks.
Needs more T+A. |
|
|
|
Is http://p2pool.info/ down? I had been wondering why it was showing 5 days since last block until I tried refreshing the page (I don't reload my browser very often). I'm definitely seeing recent payouts in my wallet so I'm guessing the site is having some major issues. |
|
|
|
Okay, I just emailed Lab_Rat for clarification.
Assuming 100 "original" contracts:
Option 1:
They get converted to 300 "original" contracts with 100 MH/s each and not a hash more.
Option 2:
They get converted to 300 "new" contracts with 100 MH/s each with potential variable growth on top of the guaranteed hash rate.
This is keeping in mind that before the change, contracts were getting roughly 300 MH/s apiece on average based on the proportional rate (75%/25% split). So this is effectively a clarification change and nothing more, with option 2 being the better option. I agree that there should be a lot more than that amount of hash rate by now, but there have been a lot of unfortunate manufacturer delays. The outlook right now is a little bleak but I am hopeful that one day my investment will still pay off.
problem with this is you're taking a snap shot measurement on the eve of us receiving our largest hashrate investment. These numbers are fine and dandy, except, we're just short of a large upgrade. Exactly what I wondered about. Which is why Option 2 would be the better option in this case. It is my sincere hope that, much like regular stock companies, Lab_Rat continues to "split" contracts when he is able to guarantee a higher base hashrate. In fact, if that were written up in some form, I would personally feel a lot more confident. Otherwise it would be a bit weird to eventually have a base hashrate of 100 MH/s on a contract with 900 MH/s as the "extra bonus". |
|
|
|
|
Okay, I just emailed Lab_Rat for clarification.
Assuming 100 "original" contracts:
Option 1:
They get converted to 300 "original" contracts with 100 MH/s each and not a hash more.
Option 2:
They get converted to 300 "new" contracts with 100 MH/s each with potential variable growth on top of the guaranteed hash rate.
This is keeping in mind that before the change, contracts were getting roughly 300 MH/s apiece on average based on the proportional rate (75%/25% split). So this is effectively a clarification change and nothing more, with option 2 being the better option. I agree that there should be a lot more than that amount of hash rate by now, but there have been a lot of unfortunate manufacturer delays. The outlook right now is a little bleak but I am hopeful that one day my investment will still pay off.
|
|
|
|
So to clarify, holders of original bonds are locked at 300Mh now? Then if "upgraded" to new contract they get 3 for 1 split at 100Mh each plus bonus which is depending on how much mine is costing to run and expand etc.
The effective rate of original contract holders is 300MH/s which is being paid at 100MH/s per contract due to the 3:1 split. Whomever goes to the new contracts, will receive 1 new contract for each current contract they currently hold. EX: If you hold 100 contracts currently, you will receive 100 new contracts at 100MH/s + bonus. The bonus will be based upon the then available funds to pay it. I'm confused. Assuming 100 "original" contracts: Option 1: They get converted to 300 "original" contracts with 100 MH/s each and not a hash more. Option 2: They get converted to 200 "new" contracts with 100 MH/s each with potential variable growth on top of the guaranteed hash rate. Unless I'm misreading LabRat, something doesn't quite add up. |
|
|
|
Will that mess up an apt-get install at all?
You might want to uninstall the old apt package so you don't accidentially run the wrong one at some point. But the binary is a standalone with no separate includes, libraries, etc needed. Just put the bitcoind wherever you want and run it from there directly. Thanks, I went ahead and did that. For now I'll just stick to manual updates of bitcoind so I don't have to rely on the PPA. |
|
|
|
Will that mess up an apt-get install at all? |
|
|
|
|
How do I manually update bitcoind on Ubuntu? apt-get is still out of date.
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't actually sold any of my bitcoins. About the only thing the IRS could possibly track (form-wise, not blockchain-wise) is that I bought some via Coinbase last year. All of my current bitcoins were earned via mining.
|
|
|
|
|
That doesn't tell me anything. At best it just means "for this year" not "for all previous years". My tax guy said this:
"Yeah since there's no reporting coming into them from any outside source yet, there's really no way for them to even know anything about mining or bitcoins being bought and sold prior to this year."
|
|
|
|
|
Wait, what?? Retroactive? Shit.
Edit: Where in the official pdf does it say that it's retroactive?
|
|
|
|
|
*reads 20 pages of posts*
So... my best guess is that we're moving into growth in the number of contracts you have over time, versus growth of the (as we have it now) individual bond hashrate? If that's the case, I'm cool with that. Otherwise it doesn't make sense to have a bunch of contracts trapped at 100 MH/s indefinitely.
|
|
|
|
|
Those would definitely entice a lot more people to give it a try. Good luck!! I have a dream that one day we will reach 500 TH/s.
|
|
|
|
|
Time for a reboot/purge/reinstall?
I noticed that somehow 2 p2pool instances were running on my VPS for the past week (I think one of the auto-check scripts flubbed) so I just rebooted the VPS. Though my shares found rate was still ok considering...
|
|
|
|
|
