|
Vigil
|
 |
December 30, 2013, 07:11:48 PM |
|
They are almost certainly not ActM miners, so no worries there. ActM would need 10,000 overclocked chips to achieve 200th/s and I strongly doubt that ActM would have that many with sample + low volume - sent out machines.
They need 8 fully-loaded Platinum One miners. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are several different types of Bitcoin clients. The most secure are full nodes like Bitcoin Core, which will follow the rules of the network no matter what miners do. Even if every miner decided to create 1000 bitcoins per block, full nodes would stick to the rules and reject those blocks.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ozymandias
|
|
December 30, 2013, 07:15:57 PM |
|
They are almost certainly not ActM miners, so no worries there. ActM would need 10,000 overclocked chips to achieve 200th/s and I strongly doubt that ActM would have that many with sample + low volume - sent out machines.
They need 8 fully-loaded Platinum One miners. Speaking of which, where would they be hosted? Last I recall ActM no longer had the SU facility due to the Avalons never being built and no new facilities have been announced. So is the plan to host them in the garage with the work benches or in a different facility? |
|
|
|
|
NickDanger
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
|
|
December 30, 2013, 07:17:29 PM |
|
I hope these arent ActM miners otherwise may have missed opportunity and need to act fast when trading happens. Another thought is that everyone is assuming the photo taken of quiet workbenches was taken around the time of photo posted but could it have been taken weeks before that?
Not unless Ken forged the EXIF data, no. How old are you, theBishop? EXIF
Make Apple
Camera Model Name iPhone 5
...
Exif Version 0221
Date/Time Original 2013:12:25 17:38:08
Create Date 2013:12:25 17:38:08 |
|
|
|
|
|
Vigil
|
|
December 30, 2013, 07:27:29 PM
Last edit: December 30, 2013, 07:46:19 PM by Vigil |
|
They are almost certainly not ActM miners, so no worries there. ActM would need 10,000 overclocked chips to achieve 200th/s and I strongly doubt that ActM would have that many with sample + low volume - sent out machines.
They need 8 fully-loaded Platinum One miners. Speaking of which, where would they be hosted? Last I recall ActM no longer had the SU facility due to the Avalons never being built and no new facilities have been announced. So is the plan to host them in the garage with the work benches or in a different facility? Not sure, but if you notice that everytime new hashing power is added to that account, the entire hash rate drops like a stone. As if the miners are shutting down - e.g., a tripped breaker. May not have enough amps on the receptacle wherever they are being hosted. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ozymandias
|
|
December 30, 2013, 07:30:06 PM |
|
They are almost certainly not ActM miners, so no worries there. ActM would need 10,000 overclocked chips to achieve 200th/s and I strongly doubt that ActM would have that many with sample + low volume - sent out machines.
They need 8 fully-loaded Platinum One miners. Speaking of which, where would they be hosted? Last I recall ActM no longer had the SU facility due to the Avalons never being built and no new facilities have been announced. So is the plan to host them in the garage with the work benches or in a different facility? Not sure, but if you notice that everytime new hashing power is added to that account, the entire hash rate drops like a stone. As if the miners are shutting down - e.g., a tripped breaker. May have enough amps on the receptacle wherever they are being hosted. Well, fingers crossed for this Wednesday giving us a good update! |
|
|
|
|
keepinithamsta
Member
Offline
Activity: 85
Merit: 10
|
|
December 30, 2013, 07:59:16 PM |
|
They are almost certainly not ActM miners, so no worries there. ActM would need 10,000 overclocked chips to achieve 200th/s and I strongly doubt that ActM would have that many with sample + low volume - sent out machines.
They need 8 fully-loaded Platinum One miners. Speaking of which, where would they be hosted? Last I recall ActM no longer had the SU facility due to the Avalons never being built and no new facilities have been announced. So is the plan to host them in the garage with the work benches or in a different facility? Not sure, but if you notice that everytime new hashing power is added to that account, the entire hash rate drops like a stone. As if the miners are shutting down - e.g., a tripped breaker. May have enough amps on the receptacle wherever they are being hosted. Well, fingers crossed for this Wednesday giving us a good update! Wednesday update will probably be along the lines of "major progress! Figured out how to install the fans inside of the bare case!" with no mention of trading or production of something that can actually hash. |
|
|
|
|
|
shadallion
|
|
December 30, 2013, 11:09:48 PM |
|
Please for the love of God list the shares on Crypto-Trade so we have something else to talk about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vigil
|
|
December 31, 2013, 12:31:10 AM
Last edit: December 31, 2013, 01:06:55 AM by Vigil |
|
Two of the 25 TH miners went down. Must be having some hardware/software difficulties or power-draw issues. Each one is drawing about 20,000 Watts. The whole system went down and then only 200 TH returned + the initial 9 TH. No other miner on Eligius is having these issues even though they are bringing new miners on over the last few days. That means that whoever is managing this operation is still working-out kinks in their miners, which would generally not be the case with final products from a manufacturer who was shipping consumer units. You can see in the chart below all of the power issues each time there is a power draw increase - as if the breaker is tripping. But there are also other minor "failures" throughout which are not systemic, which likely implies hardware/software issues or even miners on different breakers. But if they were on different breakers, this wouldn't explain why the entire system would go down.  The large down-time on the 28th was an Eligius-wide issue, not isolated to this miner. |
|
|
|
|
|
knybe
|
|
December 31, 2013, 02:34:36 AM |
|
hash tease.
|
|
|
|
|
|
NxtChoice
|
|
December 31, 2013, 02:45:51 AM |
|
1Nbq2XZaRsKknf5fcT2wTXvBS31PaUWSeX  |
|
|
|
|
minerpart
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
IIIIII====II====IIIIII
|
|
December 31, 2013, 03:03:27 AM |
|
The short-term complete power-downs could be the electrical installer cutting the live feed so that he can safely add more conections/breakers to the circuit. Isolation switches should be in place for this but in a new installation created in a rush you might require the occasional dead circuit to make alterations or new outlets.
|
|
|
|
|
thefunkybits
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1000
|
|
December 31, 2013, 03:11:01 AM |
|
I dont understand why all this is still under NDA?
This seems like a plausible connection considering the hashrate and electricity usage. I have always figured that we were working with alot more than 3TH ever since deposits from those chips stopped.
Hopefully Ken can clarify how much we actually have hashing and get our damn shares trading again, this is getting ridiculous
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vigil
|
|
December 31, 2013, 03:11:12 AM |
|
The short-term complete power-downs could be the electrical installer cutting the live feed so that he can safely add more conections/breakers to the circuit. Isolation switches should be in place for this but in a new installation created in a rush you might require the occasional dead circuit to make alterations or new outlets.
That is possible...they last about 10 minutes each. I'm not sure that one could use this much power from a residential line. I imagine this much power would require some specialized industrial arrangement. You are talking about 200,000 Watts with a setup like this. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vigil
|
|
December 31, 2013, 03:13:39 AM
Last edit: December 31, 2013, 03:26:19 AM by Vigil |
|
I dont understand why all this is still under NDA?
This seems like a plausible connection considering the hashrate and electricity usage. I have always figured that we were working with alot more than 3TH ever since deposits from those chips stopped.
Hopefully Ken can clarify how much we actually have hashing and get our damn shares trading again, this is getting ridiculous
If this is Ken it looks like he had about 9 TH running prior to Dec. 24th. The BTCGuild account is still up but haven't tried to calculate the hashrate. The 9 TH could have been from the sample chips in early-mid Nov. There are basically 10 25 TH miners and a 9 TH something. We know they are divided into 25 TH each because they come up and go down by that hash rate. I think Ken wanted to launch a sneak attack and catch competitors by surprise, whether that is a worthwhile goal has been questioned by some in this thread. But regardless, it makes sense to me, any information you don't have to provide to competitors, don't provide it. If a competitor knew that they were going to lose a significant percentage of their hash rate months in advance, they could sooner adjust plans to compensate. |
|
|
|
|
|
chairforce1
|
|
December 31, 2013, 04:11:10 AM |
|
Has it not already been established that this is not Ken, as Baragraphics knows the entity the address belongs to?
|
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, death has not come, and when death has come, we are not. #yolo
-Epicuru$
|
|
|
|
Ozymandias
|
|
December 31, 2013, 04:12:51 AM |
|
Has it not already been established that this is not Ken, as Baragraphics knows the entity the address belongs to?
I believe so: 225 TH/s is a nice, even 9x24.567 TH Fast-Hash One Platinum miners.
It goes from 65 TH (roughly 3x24.5 TH - could have been working out some bugs, bad chips, or hardware build issues), to 100 TH (roughly 4x24.5 TH), to 150 TH (roughly 6x24.5 TH), to 225 TH (roughly 9x24.5 Th)...
Whoever is mining is operating at roughly 2.25% of the global Bitcoin hash rate.
It's not ActM. I know this for a fact, as much as I would rather it be them. |
|
|
|
|
|
JoTheKhan
|
|
December 31, 2013, 04:19:23 AM |
|
Has it not already been established that this is not Ken, as Baragraphics knows the entity the address belongs to?
I believe so: 225 TH/s is a nice, even 9x24.567 TH Fast-Hash One Platinum miners.
It goes from 65 TH (roughly 3x24.5 TH - could have been working out some bugs, bad chips, or hardware build issues), to 100 TH (roughly 4x24.5 TH), to 150 TH (roughly 6x24.5 TH), to 225 TH (roughly 9x24.5 Th)...
Whoever is mining is operating at roughly 2.25% of the global Bitcoin hash rate.
It's not ActM. I know this for a fact, as much as I would rather it be them. Could be our first shipment. |
|
|
|
|
|
knybe
|
|
December 31, 2013, 04:30:18 AM |
|
well it sure as hell ain't HashFast. |
|
|
|
|
|
JoTheKhan
|
|
December 31, 2013, 04:33:09 AM |
|
We get it guys; its not HashFast and its not ActM. We don't have to continuously repeat this. It could be our first shipment from November though. The fact that they stayed confidential about who got the hardware and the fact that this person slowly adding TH to his operation hasn't come forward do suggest that we shipped our low volume chips to this user along with Canadian and whoever else was lucky enough to order first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
