Is bitcoin frowned upon here?

Status
Not open for further replies.
So as it currently stands, do you have to join a group to have any chance of being the first to encrypt a block? Is it possible for a single rig to even mint a block in time?

depends on your power. with two 5970 - probably mining solo is better. if you have single card - probably it will be the best to join pool. this way you will see you reward constantly (but probably less in total if you mine solo in the long-long run).

and pools are also nice 'cos you do not need to setup local bitcoin server. you even do not need to use it and withdraw coins directly to some exchanger lol (but I do not suggest to simplify process so much) =))
 
So it is CPU intensive. I was thinking about giving it a whirl on the 6950s and keep folding -smp on the CPU...what with Stanford totally lagging on supporting my cards and all.
 
Two 5970 at 950Mhz and 1.25v. This PSU should stand with that, so I blame shitty Chinese manufacture. Once I will get RMAed one and test it - will see if it's random bug or all these units are complete shit. With my experience with cheap chinese stuff - it's 50/50 usually and if you have warranty - it's not a problem.

Given the hardware that you have and given the response from Jebo may i suggest investing in a decent PSU that will stand the test of time, be more efficient than the one you have and be more than upto the job of driving a pair of 5970's
 
Given the hardware that you have and given the response from Jebo may i suggest investing in a decent PSU that will stand the test of time, be more efficient than the one you have and be more than upto the job of driving a pair of 5970's

Now I agree (it's my hackish nature do not allow me to follow public wisdom from the beginning - sometimes it benefits me, sometime - no =)). But right now I am hooked into this since I can not return it to newegg.com. Only if Xion will not have replacement and decide to refund it I will go with more expensive and proven to work PSU.
 
OK, I'm confused. downloaded the "client" found "generate coins" under settings, I'm getting an indication of 6xxx khash/sec, generating, 8 connections, 115511 blocks, but it sure isn't doing anything on my video cards and the interface is not particularly helpful.
 
OK, I'm confused. downloaded the "client" found "generate coins" under settings, I'm getting an indication of 6xxx khash/sec, generating, 8 connections, 115511 blocks, but it sure isn't doing anything on my video cards and the interface is not particularly helpful.

Standard client includes only CPU miner. CPU miner is not worth running today (only if you have free electricity). To setup mining with GPU you need to use one of the third-party miners. I am using poclbm. Another one is Diablo miner.

There is also GUI miner available - http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3878.0

I suggest you to start with pooled mining. I.e. register on deepbit.net, mining.bitcoin.cz or bitpenny.com and mine there with GUI miner.

I must warn anybody who want to generate some coins and do not have any prior knowledge about bitcoins - you will need to read quite a bit of documentation and forums... Right now there is no "Get Cash" button.
 
Standard client includes only CPU miner. CPU miner is not worth running today (only if you have free electricity). To setup mining with GPU you need to use one of the third-party miners. I am using poclbm. Another one is Diablo miner.

There is also GUI miner available - http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3878.0

I suggest you to start with pooled mining. I.e. register on deepbit.net, mining.bitcoin.cz or bitpenny.com and mine there with GUI miner.

I must warn anybody who want to generate some coins and do not have any prior knowledge about bitcoins - you will need to read quite a bit of documentation and forums... Right now there is no "Get Cash" button.
People should understand that there's no "get rich quick" involved in this, and that any scheme like that is a pile of fail.

EDIT: Also, this is beginning to remind me of Minecraft. :eek:

EDIT2: I can't run http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3878.0 because of...
Couldn't find any OpenCL devices. Check that your video card supports OpenCL and that you have a working version of OpenCL installed. If you have an AMD/ATI card you may need to install the ATI Stream SDK.

I can't run http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2444.0 because of...
The procedure entry point cuMemFree_v2 could not be located in the dynamic link library nvcuda.dll.
The program can't start because OpenCL.dll is missing from your computer. Try reinstalling the program to fix this problem.

I have a Quadro NVS 140M, which is on NVIDIA's list of supported CUDA GPUs.
 
Last edited:
I have no illusions of "get rich quick".

That said, any open source effort that undermines the federal reserve's monopoly on currency creation has my attention.
 
People should understand that there's no "get rich quick" involved in this, and that any scheme like that is a pile of fail.

EDIT: Also, this is beginning to remind me of Minecraft. :eek:

EDIT2: I can't run http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3878.0 because of...


I can't run http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2444.0 because of...



I have a Quadro NVS 140M, which is on NVIDIA's list of supported CUDA GPUs.



I am sorry, can't help you with Windows. In Ubuntu it is very straightforward. With windows - I do not know. Try to ask in bitcoin.org Mining forum - people usually respond quickly.
 
When I get home, I'll go over my setup and we'll see if it'll run for you. I have 2x 5770s, but the only difference should be in the arguments passed to the .exe at launch.
 
I have no illusions of "get rich quick".

That said, any open source effort that undermines the federal reserve's monopoly on currency creation has my attention.

People printing money (e.g. open source) is always a bad idea.

And monopoly on currency creation is kind of a myth. If you want to use another currency, you can always move elsewhere. Not really an issue to get paid in one currency and spend/ invest in others these days.
 
Satoshi said:
The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust thats required to make it
work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of
fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our
money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles
with barely a fraction in reserve. We have to trust them with our privacy, trust them
not to let identity thieves drain our accounts. Their massive overhead costs make
micropayments impossible.
A generation ago, multi-user time-sharing computer systems had a similar problem.
Before strong encryption, users had to rely on password protection to secure their
files, placing trust in the system administrator to keep their information private.
Privacy could always be overridden by the admin based on his judgment call weighing the
principle of privacy against other concerns, or at the behest of his superiors. Then
strong encryption became available to the masses, and trust was no longer required.
Data could be secured in a way that was physically impossible for others to access, no
matter for what reason, no matter how good the excuse, no matter what.
Its time we had the same thing for money. With e-currency based on cryptographic
proof, without the need to trust a third party middleman, money can be secure and
transactions effortless.

A quick summation from the creator.
 
People printing money (e.g. open source) is always a bad idea.

Open source is a bad idea? Do you prefer closed source code where no one knows what's going on behind the curtain?

And monopoly on currency creation is kind of a myth. If you want to use another currency, you can always move elsewhere. Not really an issue to get paid in one currency and spend/ invest in others these days.

Sooo...BTC is a good idea now? This reeks of ignorance and unbased prejudice, and that's on top of it not making any sense!
 
Open source is a bad idea? Do you prefer closed source code where no one knows what's going on behind the curtain?



Sooo...BTC is a good idea now? This reeks of ignorance and unbased prejudice, and that's on top of it not making any sense!

Money only has value if either people believe in it or it is backed by a tangible good (gold/ silver). Open source, e.g. people printing their own money has little point unless it is backed by one of those two. The US Treasury and Federal Reserve are actually more open with records than people give them credit for.

Feel free to read the Ascent of Money by Niall Ferguson. Skip the last chapter if you are short on time because it digresses from being interesting at that point. If you are passionate about this subject, I'm guessing you already have, but it may be interesting to you if not.

Then again, I don't really care if someone wants to buy into bitcoin. It isn't my money. I may be a relic of "the man" since I've done the BBA, MBA, JD thing and am pretty well indoctrinated in the current system. The day I cannot buy bread at a local grocery store, I may reconsider.
 
A quick summation from the creator.

There's two problems with the quote you provided:

A) The "value" of the BitCoins is based on the USD. This means it's directly tied with the USD, just like every other currency on the planet. What makes this different than using a well-established currency, such as the Euro?

B) Encryption of the currency doesn't help with any of the problems that were quoted in the brief synopsis you provided. His exact quote:

Some Guy said:
With e-currency based on cryptographic proof, without the need to trust a third party middleman, money can be secure and transactions effortless.

The problems he described were:

Some Guy said:
The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust thats required to make it work.

1) The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust.
2) Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve.
3) We have to trust them with our privacy, trust them not to let identity thieves drain our accounts.
4) Their massive overhead costs make micropayments impossible.

And regarding each of these items is my response:

1) With encrypted currency you still have to trust that the 'bank' will not debase the currency. In addition to inflation is deflation. If the 'bank' owns the bulk of the currency and then it deflates the currency the 'bank' stands to profit. Data breaches could simply wipe out the currency, and with no physical proof that the currency exists (i.e. coin and paper currency.)
2) Banks aren't required to hold and transfer it, you can use transfer services such as Western Union, or simply mail cash if you're foolhearty enough to perform such an action. There are people who don't trust banks enough to use them, and they seem to get along just fine.
3) How is a virtual currency going to provide additional protection against identity theft? It seems to me the weakest link in identity theft is the user, not the bank. I fail to see a difference between a virtual currency 'bank' being told "transfer this to that person" vs. someone walking in with a fraudulent check and demanding it be cashed. Username/password schemes are well-known to have issues because users are required to utilize them, and therefore users will create their own vulnerabilities (i.e. use 'password' as their password.)
4) This doesn't make sense either, and something else you (or someone else advocating this virtual currency) mentioned earlier directly contradicts this idea. The quote:

hippich said:
Answer - there is ability to give reward to anyone who generated block with your transaction. Right now it's purely optional, but once number of transactions and/or cost of mining will raise - the only way to send money will be offering a reward with it. That's how miners will be getting paid in future.

The 'reward' is a fee, is it not? Whether it's disguised as a fee or a reward the bottom line is the same: those who have the money will be charging those who don't for the privilege of using the virtual currency.

-----

I fail to see how a currency that is directly translated to the USD doesn't inflate or deflate based on the current value of the USD. I also fail to see how a currency with a finite supply will protect itself from common issues that occur when there's a finite supply of a product that's in demand (or worse, required.)
 
1) With encrypted currency you still have to trust that the 'bank' will not debase the currency. In addition to inflation is deflation. If the 'bank' owns the bulk of the currency and then it deflates the currency the 'bank' stands to profit. Data breaches could simply wipe out the currency, and with no physical proof that the currency exists (i.e. coin and paper currency.)
2) Banks aren't required to hold and transfer it, you can use transfer services such as Western Union, or simply mail cash if you're foolhearty enough to perform such an action. There are people who don't trust banks enough to use them, and they seem to get along just fine.
3) How is a virtual currency going to provide additional protection against identity theft? It seems to me the weakest link in identity theft is the user, not the bank. I fail to see a difference between a virtual currency 'bank' being told "transfer this to that person" vs. someone walking in with a fraudulent check and demanding it be cashed. Username/password schemes are well-known to have issues because users are required to utilize them, and therefore users will create their own vulnerabilities (i.e. use 'password' as their password.)
4) This doesn't make sense either, and something else you (or someone else advocating this virtual currency) mentioned earlier directly contradicts this idea. The quote:

1. This just simply isn't how bitcoin works, the "bank" "owns" no currency.
2. Once again - no bank, no point.
3. "Real" currencies have no built-in provision for this either, so no point.
4. Those who have all the USD charge the rest of us for the privilege of using them too, so what's new?

I fail to see how a currency that is directly translated to the USD doesn't inflate or deflate based on the current value of the USD. I also fail to see how a currency with a finite supply will protect itself from common issues that occur when there's a finite supply of a product that's in demand (or worse, required.)

BTC are not directly tied to USD, you can trade them in any currency or use them as-is without conversion to an existing currency. As far as supply goes, if BTC blew up and became popular it would take a 50% or greater majority of users to change any of the central tenets of the currency - but they can be changed. It can be stopped at 21MM BTC or it could be increased, so who knows what will happen.
 
Last edited:
oh God...

another Ponzi

ask me via pm if you don't understand how this "works"
 
no thread necro'ing plz
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top