try to stick to 5 minute charts and look for 3 hour trends or longer, anything else is too volatile
that's if the bitcoin market can stay stable enough to form a trend like that, i have no idea
I tried mining on an HP laptop that had an i7, it's CPU got 90 Mhash/s or more! I don't know man
[QUOTE=thf;30451226]~$23.5 at the current BTC price.[/QUOTE]
So badass, once you've paid off your card with the initial investment, it's plain profit.
I also wanna know what card it is.
[editline]14th June 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=StealthArcher;30452524]Okay, I'm not going to read through all 20 pages, what exactly is the backing for these? As in, what is the work we're doing while mining?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=SCopE5000;30446485]It's the same as gold.
Is gold a useful commodity? Is it accessible to everyone to mine?
No, it's not particularly useful, apart from being an appealing colour and good for jewellery (only because of the assumed value of it).
It used to be very accessible to be a gold miner, you could go to texas, grab a pick and then be a gold miner, risky, yes but accessible none-the-less.
Gold became the standard currency denominator when it's rarity was discovered, in reality it's just a metal much like iron, just a lot less common, and generally a lot less useful. Currency was created for the general populace to access, and is essentially coins and notes with denominations of value. This value was initially decided at a share rate of the national reserve in gold.
For example, $1,000,000 dollars total, distributed for circulation to a population of 100,000 people. that means everyone gets $10 and this is what is circulated, and thus the value of a dollar is relatively high.
The price of setting up a farm would be the full initial investment of $10 a year, but enable to a farmer to make a return of $16 a year, a total of $6 profit per year for himself, whilst providing him with housing and paying a staff member $2 (both calculated in the initial cost of $10). End of first year he has $16 in his pocket, which he can then take, and stop running the farm, or invest another $2 to run his farm for another year (we assume most of the initial build costs are now covered, and he can generate his own seeds), or even invest more, to make more the following years.
The staff member receives his $2 and is generally happy with this, as he doesn't have to invest his initial $10 in anything. End of first year he should theoretically have $12. But, he's had to pay for food, right?
We'll assume the single farmer above, with his farm, can sustain 50 people within the total population for a year. To make that $6, he is selling his food produce at $0.12 per household per year.
In general this is relatively affordable for the populace, they pay out $0.12, which equates to roughly 6% of their total worth, yet are able to survive for another year without worrying about food, and they can send 1 worker from each household to provide a service and thus make enough to cover themselves for future years.
Banks said to the general populace:- 'we'll keep hold of your money, and strategically invest it in other people who wish to start businesses, take a share of the profits, and give you a return on your investment in a years time'. This made sense to a lot of people, as they could essentially store their money at no cost, and make money from it, whilst preventing it from being stolen or lost.
This was all well and good for many years, but as population increased into the millions, so, inflation occurred, and money was injected into the economy, which devalued notes, so that over a 10 year period, the $0.10 of the previous years became $1.00 dollar today. How did this happen?
Immature lending was one cause. Previously banks required guarantors for personal loans, which assured they'd be paid off even if the person owing failed to pay it off, or died, so that people who invested in the banks, by opening accounts, were not at risk of losing money, banks also kept gold in stock (enough to pay everyone out if everyone suddenly came in at once to make a withdrawal) which they no longer do.
Loans became a bit of a 'funny money' situation, given out for shit people wanted [b]NOW[/b], like cars, houses and luxury items, and banks saw a lot of potential to make a lot of cash with personal loans. They could give a dude enough to buy his car, and assumed he'd be able to pay it back because he had a job that paid relatively well.
Unfortunately as time went on, housing prices went up, jobs lost their stability, and loans became all-too-common (such that 95% of families now have a loan or mortgage). Not only that but people decided to dilate their loans down so much that they expect to work 20 years before paying off a loan of $20,000, because they can't bare to be without spending a large quantity of cash on luxury items/ lifestyle on a yearly basis and pay off their loans quickly.
Banks got into trouble because of this, so the government/ adjudicators/ admin injected a whole pile of non-existant currency into the banks vaults, so they could cover peoples debts, but in reality, this currency has no real value, as there is not enough gold bullion in existence to cover the currency if everyone was to 'cash it in' for the gold it is worth.
Not that you can actually do that, because banks do not keep enough currency OR gold in their vaults to cover everyone's withdrawal at once, nor can you even ask for your money's amount in Gold anymore direct from banks, despite the note itself saying 'Bank of England promises to pay the bearer on demand the sum of £20' but in reality, [b]what is £20?[/b]
Bitcoin relies on the same principle, but is [i]theoretically[/i] a better investment, because over time, the difficulty increases, so the value [i]theoretically[/i] increases as well, counteracting the effects of inflation by large-scale adaption of the currency.[/QUOTE]
Anybody willing to buy 0.44BTC?
[QUOTE=SCopE5000;30452609]So badass, once you've paid off your card with the initial investment, it's plain profit.
I also wanna know what card it is.[/quote]
I answered above. It's a single 5970 with a very slight overclock (Stock voltages). CPU is a Q6600 @ 4.0 GHz.
[QUOTE=StealthArcher;30452524]Okay, I'm not going to read through all 20 pages, what exactly is the backing for these? As in, what is the work we're doing while mining?[/QUOTE]
You're performing hashes to keep the bitcoin currency secure
Finally got this working after some issues with CUDA. Sadly, it's all but useless on my hardware, but it should do much better when I get my 6970.
[QUOTE=Shadaez;30451593]I'd like to know what monster CPU you have that can get 60 Mhash/s[/QUOTE]
4 year old Core 2 Duo E6700 overclocked to 3.2 Ghz :v:
[IMG]http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/4641/namnlsoh.png[/IMG]
You're getting 60MH/s on a dual core CPU at 3.2 GHz
:what:
[QUOTE=demoguy08;30452966]4 year old Core 2 Duo E6700 overclocked to 3.2 Ghz :v:
[IMG]http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/4641/namnlsoh.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
I'm betting you're unknowingly running a GPU miner, my i5 2500k runs 16 MHash/s on a optimized SSE2 miner.
Checked my GPU activity and it's at around 70% so no, it's not just the CPU it seems. Although it's weird the GPU is active seeing as how GUIMiner reported my card isn't supported.
[QUOTE=Shadaez;30453143]I'm betting you're unknowingly running a GPU miner, my i5 2500k runs 16 MHash/s on a optimized SSE2 miner.[/QUOTE]
Why else would he black out the path?
[QUOTE=demoguy08;30453167]Checked my GPU activity and it's at around 70% so no, it's not just the CPU it seems. Although it's weird the GPU is active seeing as how GUIMiner reported my card isn't supported.[/QUOTE]
You're using an external worker, GUIMiner might not support your GPU but external workers would.
Aha, mystery solved then.
Hurrah! After a few hours of mining I have 0.01 BTC!
[QUOTE=Nexus435;30452696]Anybody willing to buy 0.44BTC?[/QUOTE]
I'll buy .44 BTC for .44 BTC. :downs:
Damn, bitclockers take a LONG time for a block to get solved.
Anyone recommend a good card for this process? Looking at spending around £300
Currently mining on my laptop, barely scraping 14 Mhash/s.
[QUOTE=Giraffen93;30454060]Damn, bitclockers take a LONG time for a block to get solved.[/QUOTE]
oh snap they just solved one, i'm up to another .09 BTC. almost ready to cash out again
Should i keep going with BitClockers or should i go with another pool? I'm using a 4650 if that matters.
Bitclockers is awful. Tiny pools are hit hardest by bad luck.
[QUOTE=demonguard;30455521]Bitclockers is awful. Tiny pools are hit hardest by bad luck.[/QUOTE]
What pool should i go with then?
[QUOTE=demonguard;30455521]Bitclockers is awful. Tiny pools are hit hardest by bad luck.[/QUOTE]
Just thinking about this. Now I'm not sure if it's the same with other pools but I'm quite sure slush's gives you a massive cut in your predicted share (as well as the fact your share isn't rising and other people's are so your % drops) if you leave mid round. So therefore wouldn't it be best to be on a server which completes shares fastest, aka somewhere like slush? Or do other mining pools not cut down your share if you quit mid round (I believe it's done to stop hit and run users building up loads of share counts on different rounds)
Also it's nice having a 5850 now, 2400 shares completed today so far.
[QUOTE=demonguard;30455521]Bitclockers is awful. Tiny pools are hit hardest by bad luck.[/QUOTE]
they must've hit an influx of new people because my BTC per share has gone down from 0.27 to 0.09 and they're mining at 87ghash/s as opposed to be previous 63
[img]http://gyazo.com/98dc54bf07ffaefc75fd259fda4de568.png[/img]
lods of emone!
if only there was a gif where he is waving the wad of dosh at the camera then £OADS OF MONEY diagonally flashes on the screen
OK, theoretical question.
I'm in my school's Network Security club. We've got a decent amount of donated hardware that mostly just sits around doing nothing. I floated the idea of using them for bitcoin mining to raise funds for club-related stuff.
They're old machines, mostly, but I figure enough of them in parallel might be able to mine a worthwhile amount.
So far, we have three dual-processor Pentium III Xeon servers, one Pentium IV-level Xeon server, a truly ancient Compaq server (dual Pentiums), and two unidentified servers that are probably relatively powerful - I'm guessing they're either late P4-Xeons, early Core Xeons, or maybe Opterons. One might even be a POWER server.
We also have eight desktops that we normally use as clients. Crappy Dells, the lot of them, but there's a bunch of them, and bitcoin mining is mostly parallel anyways, right?
Does anyone have a rough guess of how much those would make after running for a week? I just want to know if we're talking $2, $20 or $200 here.
(Not that it matters, but the money would mostly go to more useful hardware - we could really, really use a KVM switch, and we need rail kits for most of these computers. After that, UPS units are likely, then maybe upgrading some of the machines (more RAM, more disk space, etc.)).
[QUOTE=gman003-main;30456715]OK, theoretical question.
I'm in my school's Network Security club. We've got a decent amount of donated hardware that mostly just sits around doing nothing. I floated the idea of using them for bitcoin mining to raise funds for club-related stuff.
They're old machines, mostly, but I figure enough of them in parallel might be able to mine a worthwhile amount.
So far, we have three dual-processor Pentium III Xeon servers, one Pentium IV-level Xeon server, a truly ancient Compaq server (dual Pentiums), and two unidentified servers that are probably relatively powerful - I'm guessing they're either late P4-Xeons, early Core Xeons, or maybe Opterons. One might even be a POWER server.
We also have eight desktops that we normally use as clients. Crappy Dells, the lot of them, but there's a bunch of them, and bitcoin mining is mostly parallel anyways, right?
Does anyone have a rough guess of how much those would make after running for a week? I just want to know if we're talking $2, $20 or $200 here.
(Not that it matters, but the money would mostly go to more useful hardware - we could really, really use a KVM switch, and we need rail kits for most of these computers. After that, UPS units are likely, then maybe upgrading some of the machines (more RAM, more disk space, etc.)).[/QUOTE]
Worst case scenario they scrape 20 Mhash/s
Roughly $51 a week for just the 8 desktops
[QUOTE=Trumple;30456796]Worst case scenario they scrape 20 Mhash/s
Roughly $51 a week for just the 8 desktops[/QUOTE]
Cool. I'll see if I can get that going, then - that's about $200/mo, which is about 20x our current budget.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
