evoorhees, it appears that you have set the Satoshi Dice profit spreadsheet to private, barring me access to it. Was this accidental? I found it very useful (as I'm sure many others do).

Any updates?

Must have good OTC ratings for me to give the code first. Auction is for code and PIN only, not the card.

My original post was not meant to claim gigavps is ripping us off or that he is charging too much. I merely wanted to give my input as an investor, and why I am still iffy about the upgrade, especially with the .29 and 90% PPS. With ASICs being cheaper than the BFL Single, and using less power and outputting less heat, it's a lot more attractive to buy the ASICs themselves rather than pay 300%+ markup. Besides, BFL isn't the only company working on ASICs, and there will be cheaper options available (hopefully by the end of the year).

But sure, let's look at it from giga's perspective. He has 4 mini rigs, which BFL says they'll honor at market price, credited towards the purchase of ASICs. That's $60k, rounded down. 4 mini rig SCs cost ~$120k. So he essentially can cover half the cost of the upgrade merely from the IPO, even assuming he has 0 BTC left from the IPO (which as we all know, isn't true). Given the price he wants for the upgrade, I can't imagine many (if ANYONE) would not take the upgrade path. Assuming everyone paid upgrades, that's  11.6k bitcoins -- $139,200 at current market values. The cost of the upgrade is worth more than the ASICs themselves, giga can pocket all of the original IPO. $79k (plus whatever money is left over from IPO, which I imagine is quite a bit) is a ton of money. It's almost half a year of full time work at $100/hr.

Has giga really put in 40+ hours of week, every week, for the past 6 months, solely into GIGAMINING? No one can really say but him. I don't believe he has.

OPEX isn't that much, especially when you consider 90% PPS. It's obviously impossible to determine difficulty when ASICs hit the public, but lets assume giga were getting 10% of current mining. 200ghash means he gets 20ghash. My estimates put him at 20-25kw at the moment. I'll round it up to 30kw at $0.05/kwh (of course, this is all pure speculation, it could be higher). That's about $1k per month in electricity, netting him a cool $1.5k per month to cover other OPEX. When you then consider that TERA's CAPEX cost for investors is 50% higher than what bonds are currently going for (compared to BFL prices), it just seems iffy. Of course, electricity/storage/air condition costs all go down with ASICs, which means OPEX will be significantly lower than what I have listed here. It just seems that giga would make a considerable amount from the initial upgrade fees, and have the 10% to cover all of his expenses (while probably pocketing a decent amount)

Also, I did my original estimates based on the 0.40 BTC upgrade price. 0.29 BTC should be a bit better. I'm still not sure if it is worth it with the 90% PPS.

Hello giga,

Can you try to justify the increased upgrade price to us? As it stands, a BFL Single gives $0.75 per mhash, a gigamining bond gives $1.44 per mhash. That's effectively 100% markup over the very base model (which offers lower $/mhash than the rigs you use). With the coming of ASICs, an upgraded TERAMINING bond will be $0.13/mhash (giga market price price + upgrade), while a BFL Jalapeño is $0.04/mhash. As you can no doubt see, it has moved from under 100% markup to over 200% markup. That's quite a difference in value.

With the BFL Jalapeño being significantly cheaper and more powerful than the BFL Single, the investment (as well as risk) is lower, which makes buying your own ASICs a much more attractive option compared to TERAMINING. It's certainly much more attractive than a BFL Single was to GIGAMINING.

Just tossing my 2 bits in -- I'm still unsure of what I am going to do with my own bonds.

Thanks,
Gary13579

Yeah, I figured the PINs were stored offline, hence the delay. It isn't much of a hassle, but maybe it could be made clearer on the website that it may take a few hours after hitting 6 confirmations.

Smooth trade -- takes a bit to get a MoneyPak PIN but cheap rates makes this vendor better than the competition. Will use again.

Took a few hours but the MoneyPak info came through. There's a service dedicated to MoneyPak for Bitcoins, but they wanted $10 more than your service. Thanks for the trade .

How long does it take to get MoneyPak? I was under the impression it would be immediate as soon as the transaction was confirmed by blockchain, but I still haven't gotten anything.

Well, keep it in mind. It'd be way under half as cheap as the server you bought. I'm sure he'll still be in stock whenever you want to expand. I first saw his listing up over 2 weeks ago, and he keeps relisting it, with 275 servers left. I don't think it'll go anywhere anytime soon .

If you're interested in buying more servers, this is a fucking steal: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rackable-C1001-1U-2x-AMD-2356-Quad-Core-2-3Ghz-Server-w-KFSN4-DRE-system-board-/190662831803?pt=COMP_EN_Servers&hash=item2c6463eebb#ht_4755wt_835

Hope this isn't looked upon as spamming. I obviously can't prove that auction isn't mine, but I've been debating buying one or two or ten of those for a few weeks now. You'd have to swap out the PSU (or find a -48VDC power source), but $100 for the case/CPUs/motherboard is g'damn.

How is it that this ad has any reward score at all? http://anonymousads.com/ad/56 it links to this forum, so I don't see how the advertiser could pay out for clicks as they cannot track affiliates.

edit: ahh, I see, the CSV for clicks has a list of all affiliates and number of clicks. Seems like a bad way to payout, but their choice!

Thanks for your response. I still think there needs to be more, or at least more clear, documentation on how it works. I don't see why Dragon's Tale would have dumped 20 BTC into bootstrapping when they could have spent that money on affiliates and gotten more impressions/clicks for those BTC. My thoughts are that they didn't entirely understand how the system works?

It all seems rather complicated when I first approached it, and it took a while to wrap my head around it, as this network is so vastly different compared to existing ad networks.

Deposited 30.49293495 btc thus gaining ~60955 impressions, CPM = 0.50025076 btc
Paid 10.65445235 btc to affiliates thus gaining ~548597 impressions, CPM = 0.01942125 btc

am I right in reading this to mean that 30 BTC has been paid for bootstrapping, while only 10 BTC has been paid to affiliates? I know/understand that AA needs bootstrap BTC for income, but these numbers seem waaaay too out of whack. AA getting 75% of the BTC seems a bit much, doesn't it? I understand that currently you are using bootstrap money to pay affiliates (according to one of your previous posts in this thread), but if the 3:1 trend continues, do you plan on continuing to pump this money into affiliates? And I think there should be more transparency as to where those coins go... if I look at the affiliate section I see:

Brought 609553 impressions, 8028 clicks, CTR = 0.01317
Earned: 10.65445235 btc
Withdrew: 10.04922624 btc
Paid fees: 0.32200000 btc
Left to withdraw: 0.28322611 btc

Which to me seems to imply we have only earned what advertisers have paid us, and that we've gotten none of the 30 BTC from bootstrapping.

Hi again gat3way --

awesome job with the load balancing! the work is much appreciated. think I found a bug with it though... when using deepbit with -f, it segfaults... everytime. I think this is because of the @ symbol in the file?

The following will work:
hashkill-gpu -p bitcoin username@email.com_0:password:deepbit.net:8332

so does this:
hashkill-gpu -p bitcoin -f pools

cat pools:
username_minername:password:uscentral.btcguild.com:8332

But when you try using the deepbit URL in "pools", it segfaults.

Minnesota represent o/

but I doubt you'll find someone selling for $8.50. cash in hand doesn't mean much when that's 50% what you're basically guaranteed to get at tradehill.

This is pretty much idiotic. You're saying Windows and Linux work the same way, yet you clearly have no idea how the different distributions are setup. Why wouldn't you want to take advantage of the fact that we have package repositories? ffs, it took a grand total of 10 minutes to setup mining on my Arch box from a 100% fresh install.

btw, why poclbm over hashkill? hashkill is easier to setup and faster with less dependencies and overhead.

It shouldn't help, but I suggest trying it anyway.

Edit: actually, I'm positive that it won't help. What pool are you using? I'd try btcguild.


You don't need 0.9.8, I'm running it just fine with 1.0.0 on Arch Linux.


[gary@snuggles lib]$ ls -lah /usr/lib/ | grep libcrypto
-rw-r--r--   1 root root 3.5M Feb  8 12:58 libcrypto.a
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root   18 Feb  8 12:58 libcrypto.so -> libcrypto.so.1.0.0
-r-xr-xr-x   1 root root 2.0M Feb  8 12:58 libcrypto.so.1.0.0


I suggest manually symlinking libcrypto.so and libssl.so to the latest versions (which would be libcrypto.so.1.0.0d and libssl.so..1.0.0d on Fedora, apparently).

sudo ln -s /lib/libcrypto.so /lib/libcrypto.so.1.0.0d
sudo ln -s /lib/libssl.so /lib/libssl.so.1.0.0d

if that doesn't work, rm them and try symlinking against .so.10. Or switch to a distro that doesn't suck

Hey guys, I've figured out an edge case bug on some networks which can cause a very large amount of stale shares, up to 30%. The problem is that hashkill uses curl to open a connection to the longpolling server, and it idles on that connection until a new block is available. This is fine and dandy, but a lot of networks and firewalls will kill a connection if it has been idle for a certain amount of time. This was set to 10 minutes on my network. This meant that every time a block went for longer than 10 minutes, longpolling would break and you'd submit a bunch of stale shares not knowing they are stale.

A fix for this should be coming in hashkill as it's a very simple thing to fix, ~5 lines of code. Until then you can run the following command to fix it (note that it must be ran as root):

[root@snuggles]# echo "300" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_keepalive_time

This sets the keepalive time to be 5 minutes, which means every 5 minutes, your Linux box will send an empty packet to the server which keeps the connection alive. Adjust this value based on your network/firewall configuration.