iCEBREAKER
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 12:48:46 AM |
|
UPS and generators should keep us mining through blackouts. If the net goes down, failover to wireless?
Friendcat may deploy gen 2 at some posh tier 4/5 Colos and we won't have to worry/speculate about hosting issues.
|
██████████ ██████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████ ██████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████ ██████████ Monero
|
| "The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." David Chaum 1996 "Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect." Adam Back 2014
|
| | |
|
|
|
Pierre
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 01:21:47 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Muyser
Full Member
 
Offline
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
You can't kill math.
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 01:35:14 AM |
|
Yah, why is your graph so different Pierre?
|
@EricMuyser | EricMuyser.com | OTC - "Defeat is a state of mind; no one is ever defeated until defeat has been accepted as a reality" - Bruce Lee
|
|
|
Pierre
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 01:37:56 AM |
|
That's just what it looked like at the time I took the screenshot. No shenanigans I promise!
|
|
|
|
VolanicEruptor
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 01:53:50 AM |
|
That's just what it looked like at the time I took the screenshot. No shenanigans I promise!

|
|
|
|
benm
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 02:26:29 AM |
|
I haven't looked into this too closely, but all/most of the recent blocks awarded to ASICMINER have a much lower transaction count than those awarded to other miners/pools. Is that a coincidence, is it a consequence of the hardware design, is it somehow indicative of the recent drop in hashrate?
|
|
|
|
bitfair
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 02:30:19 AM |
|
I haven't looked into this too closely, but all/most of the recent blocks awarded to ASICMINER have a much lower transaction count than those awarded to other miners/pools. Is that a coincidence, is it a consequence of the hardware design, is it somehow indicative of the recent drop in hashrate?
I noticed too. I just imagined that the node they are running is not terribly well connected...
|
|
|
|
ianp
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 02:38:17 AM |
|
I haven't looked into this too closely, but all/most of the recent blocks awarded to ASICMINER have a much lower transaction count than those awarded to other miners/pools. Is that a coincidence, is it a consequence of the hardware design, is it somehow indicative of the recent drop in hashrate?
Coincidence. I saw one earlier with 600+ transactions. Regardless, there is no mechanism in BTC to selectively mine blocks. I.e., you can't mine a 100 transaction block more easily than you can mine a 1,000 transaction block with a given difficulty. This cannot be done by adjusting hashrate either. At a given difficulty, your probability for mining a block is fixed to a certain hashrate over a period of time. A lower hashrate will have a lower probability, and a higher hashrate will have a higher probability. In short, hashrate and difficulty have nothing to do with the size of the block you mine. Ian
|
|
|
|
bitfair
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 03:08:31 AM |
|
I haven't looked into this too closely, but all/most of the recent blocks awarded to ASICMINER have a much lower transaction count than those awarded to other miners/pools. Is that a coincidence, is it a consequence of the hardware design, is it somehow indicative of the recent drop in hashrate?
Coincidence. I saw one earlier with 600+ transactions. Regardless, there is no mechanism in BTC to selectively mine blocks. I.e., you can't mine a 100 transaction block more easily than you can mine a 1,000 transaction block with a given difficulty. This cannot be done by adjusting hashrate either. At a given difficulty, your probability for mining a block is fixed to a certain hashrate over a period of time. A lower hashrate will have a lower probability, and a higher hashrate will have a higher probability. In short, hashrate and difficulty have nothing to do with the size of the block you mine. Ian Hashrate and difficulty are unrelated to number of transactions, but a poorly connected node may show low number of transactions - which may also be a problem when broadcasting blocks! I.e. if two miners find a block almost at the same time, the well-connected node wins the block because it is broadcast more widely. Not saying that's the case, but a low transaction number could be a signal of a poorly connected node, which could be a disadvantage in a race.
|
|
|
|
Pierre
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 03:09:04 AM |
|
Is anyone else seeing this or is it just me? 
|
|
|
|
empoweoqwj
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 03:14:32 AM |
|
Is anyone else seeing this or is it just me?  Yep! Pump it up!!
|
|
|
|
nubbins
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1554
Merit: 1009
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 03:14:48 AM |
|
No, it's on the way back up. Any thoughts as to why it started dropping at the moment BTCGuild mining went to zero? 
|
|
|
|
dhenson
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 994
Merit: 1000
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 03:29:26 AM |
|
Any thoughts as to why it started dropping at the moment BTCGuild mining went to zero?
I have thoughts relating to timing, but am turning over a new leaf and won't air them here. It's a struggle for me so I've come up with a daily affirmation: It is for me to decide which companies to invest in. It is for those that run them to decide how to do so. Friedcat has proven himself to be above suspicion so I will choose to trust in his ability to safeguard my investment. And darnit, I'm a good person.

|
|
|
|
benm
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 03:38:54 AM |
|
I haven't looked into this too closely, but all/most of the recent blocks awarded to ASICMINER have a much lower transaction count than those awarded to other miners/pools. Is that a coincidence, is it a consequence of the hardware design, is it somehow indicative of the recent drop in hashrate?
Coincidence. I saw one earlier with 600+ transactions. Regardless, there is no mechanism in BTC to selectively mine blocks. I.e., you can't mine a 100 transaction block more easily than you can mine a 1,000 transaction block with a given difficulty. This cannot be done by adjusting hashrate either. At a given difficulty, your probability for mining a block is fixed to a certain hashrate over a period of time. A lower hashrate will have a lower probability, and a higher hashrate will have a higher probability. In short, hashrate and difficulty have nothing to do with the size of the block you mine. Ian Hashrate and difficulty are unrelated to number of transactions, but a poorly connected node may show low number of transactions - which may also be a problem when broadcasting blocks! I.e. if two miners find a block almost at the same time, the well-connected node wins the block because it is broadcast more widely. Not saying that's the case, but a low transaction number could be a signal of a poorly connected node, which could be a disadvantage in a race. So... the drop in effective hashrate could actually be the result of a DDOS on the ASICMINER node(s)? It did conveniently stop after the dividend payout - it could be someone trying to manipulate the price, or one of the other pool operators.
|
|
|
|
bitfair
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 03:46:48 AM |
|
I haven't looked into this too closely, but all/most of the recent blocks awarded to ASICMINER have a much lower transaction count than those awarded to other miners/pools. Is that a coincidence, is it a consequence of the hardware design, is it somehow indicative of the recent drop in hashrate?
Coincidence. I saw one earlier with 600+ transactions. Regardless, there is no mechanism in BTC to selectively mine blocks. I.e., you can't mine a 100 transaction block more easily than you can mine a 1,000 transaction block with a given difficulty. This cannot be done by adjusting hashrate either. At a given difficulty, your probability for mining a block is fixed to a certain hashrate over a period of time. A lower hashrate will have a lower probability, and a higher hashrate will have a higher probability. In short, hashrate and difficulty have nothing to do with the size of the block you mine. Ian Hashrate and difficulty are unrelated to number of transactions, but a poorly connected node may show low number of transactions - which may also be a problem when broadcasting blocks! I.e. if two miners find a block almost at the same time, the well-connected node wins the block because it is broadcast more widely. Not saying that's the case, but a low transaction number could be a signal of a poorly connected node, which could be a disadvantage in a race. So... the drop in effective hashrate could actually be the result of a DDOS on the ASICMINER node(s)? It did conveniently stop after the dividend payout - it could be someone trying to manipulate the price, or one of the other pool operators. It may possibly suggest network issues, but it's a bit of a leap to say DDOS...
|
|
|
|
keystroke
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 04:52:25 AM |
|
I expect friedcat will be posting soon to update us. It is nice to see the hash rate recovering. I would only ask that in the future updates be made more frequently as a matter of company policy in the event of an outage to avoid harming the share price.
So far so good. ASICMINER has exceeded all expectations and I am eager to see what they have in store for us next.
|
"The difference between a castle and a prison is only a question of who holds the keys."
|
|
|
gogxmagog
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1010
Ad maiora!
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 04:56:33 AM |
|
Any thoughts as to why it started dropping at the moment BTCGuild mining went to zero?
I have thoughts relating to timing, but am turning over a new leaf and won't air them here. It's a struggle for me so I've come up with a daily affirmation: It is for me to decide which companies to invest in. It is for those that run them to decide how to do so. Friedcat has proven himself to be above suspicion so I will choose to trust in his ability to safeguard my investment. And darnit, I'm a good person.
 yeah! listen to ol' Liberace there!
|
|
|
|
Eric Muyser
Full Member
 
Offline
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
You can't kill math.
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 05:01:49 AM |
|
Any thoughts as to why it started dropping at the moment BTCGuild mining went to zero?
I have thoughts relating to timing, but am turning over a new leaf and won't air them here. It's a struggle for me so I've come up with a daily affirmation: It is for me to decide which companies to invest in. It is for those that run them to decide how to do so. Friedcat has proven himself to be above suspicion so I will choose to trust in his ability to safeguard my investment. And darnit, I'm a good person.
 Good dhenson, good 
|
@EricMuyser | EricMuyser.com | OTC - "Defeat is a state of mind; no one is ever defeated until defeat has been accepted as a reality" - Bruce Lee
|
|
|
Vycid
Sr. Member
  
Offline
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
♫ the AM bear who cares ♫
|
 |
June 20, 2013, 05:07:13 AM |
|
Hey all, Since the price has stabilized some I am pleased to announce I am once again buying ASICMiner puts. ~90 day exp, strike of 1.95BTC, and premium of 0.14BTC. BTCT please. You can either throw 'em up on the market, or PM me first. Looking for up to 18 more contracts.
|
|
|
|
|