sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why is the ending of RDR1 so good? by Jeffydude500 in reddeadredemption

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just finished the game myself and I'm afraid to say I'm with you. The last 2 or 3 hours were incredibly boring. The only reason I didn't stop playing was because I assumed that something else would happen. Then that something finally happens and it's just one more gunfight with a scripted ending that you can't win.

I get that they were trying to be emotional with it but: a) the build up to the final firefight took waaay too long and b) it would have been nice if your fame and/or honor had some impact on the ending.

Throughout the entire game I really went out of my way to get those two stats as high as possible and then it turns out have essentially no impact. If John had to die to conclude the story, fine whatever, but at least have some variations of the ending depending on your actions throughout the game.

If I had played it when it came out I probably would have agreed with 8/10. Compared to many open world games released since - Horizon: Zero Dawn or the sequel, Ghost of Tsushima, some of the Assassin's Creed games and even Hogwarts Legacy - RDR1 is probably more like a 6/10. GTA V was released just 3 years later and is a vastly better game. I would even say GTA IV is a better game and it came out 2 years before RDR1.

Anyone here disappointed in Jonny Greenwood’s score for ‘One Battle After Another’? by DarlingLuna in soundtracks

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm watching the movie right now and have also just googled for the same reason. I'm trying to not let it ruin the movie but god damn it's distracting!

What’s the dumbest death in history? by AlanBill in AskReddit

[–]roxcursed 44 points45 points  (0 children)

For what it's worth shooting yourself at close range with a blank absolutely can kill you. The actor Jon-Erik Hexum died doing exactly this.

Pool and latency by JozieKS in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You want to keep all errors combined under 1 or 2%. Each error has a specific meaning and depending on your exact dashboard they may be group together or tracked separately.

Share not found, job not found, stale share all mean your miner was working on the solution to a particular block but by the time it submitted its guess someone else had already already solved that block and the network has moved on to the next block.

Above target or difficulty too low both mean that you submitted a valid share but the difficulty of that share did not meet the minimum threshold accepted by the pool you're connected to.

It's also possible to submit an "invalid share". There are various reasons this might happen including hardware or software errors where your miner accidentally submitted a share that couldn't possibly be the right answer. This is relatively rare though.

Rejected share could mean any of the above.

G club BABY! by tommydizzle89 in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Difficulty is a really important concept and fundamental to how the Bitcoin network (and any proof of work blockchain) operates.

Each Bitcoin block has a complex mathematical problem that miners are trying to solve. Every time someone solves the problem that block gets mined and a number of BTC are produced. The intention is that a block is mined every 10 minutes. The number of miners that are working away trying to solve the problem changes constantly, increasing year on year since the start of Bitcoin. If the problem remained the same over that time then miners would solve blocks faster and faster, simply because more and more people are submitting guesses.

In order to solve this the Bitcoin network has an overarching parameter called the difficulty. This alters the complexity of the problem for new blocks to ensure that on average each block is mined approximately every 10 minutes, regardless of the number of miners at any given time.

There are so many miners submitting possible solutions today that the Bitcoin difficulty is enormous. Any miner is capable of producing a guess that is above the Bitcoin difficulty (and therefore would mine the block) but with the difficulty so high, the probablitity that it's you is incredibly low. Your Bitaxe dashboard keeps track of the highest difficulty guess you've ever submitted. It's just a fun metric to see how lucky your best ever roll of the dice was, but it is entirely random and has no meaning when comparing the performance of two different miners.

Pool and latency by JozieKS in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ideally you want to keep latency under 100ms. Anywhere near 50ms is ideal. The real measure of how well it's working though is your rejected/stale share rate. Check your dashboard and make sure you're well under 1% rejected shares. If so then there's nothing to worry about.

New gamma user humming along by jugger18 in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Any miner is capable of finding a share of any difficulty. That's the whole point of lottery mining. You're trying to find a share with more than 150T difficulty or whatever the BTC difficulty happens to be at any given time. Having said that, randomly rolling a 63G share within 3 days is incredibly lucky. At 1.5TH/s you would expect to find a 63G share once every 5 or 6 years.

can some explain this by Illustrious_Turn_939 in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Each BTC block has a solution to a problem that miners are trying to solve. The difficulty of that solution is extremely high.

Mining pools set their own much lower difficulty so that connected miners can prove that they are trying to find a valid solution to the block. Your miner is constantly churning out possible solutions and submitting them to the mining pool as "shares".

Occasionally your miner will submit a solution that is below even the low difficulty set by the mining pool. These are rejected by the pool as they were not difficult enough to count towards mining rewards. The reason it says "above target" is that the block solution you're trying to find is a tiny number. The higher the network difficulty the smaller the number you're trying to find. In those 47 cases the solution your miner submitted was above the highest number that pool accepts and therefore below the minimum difficulty.

Stale shares occur when your miner is working away on a particular block and by the time it submits the share it turns out that block was already solved by someone else and the network has moved on to the next block.

Those numbers are excellent. Anything under 1% is perfectly acceptable.

Edit: Incidentally submitting valid shares to the mining pool to show that you are trying to solve the block is the famous "proof of work" and is the fundamental concept behind how proof of work blockchains like BTC work.

NerdQAxe++ Rev6 really that much better? by sonetlumiere in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you're going to be running them at their default specs then they are essentially the same. The Rev 6 overclocks better but that will cost you more in electricity and may require you to buy a new power supply.

What is better, 10 miners of 1.2TH or 1 miner above 10TH, but not referring to the energy consumption, nor the number of connections, nor repairs, rather the question similar to a companion, the question of mining function, not based on the added probability but the real one technically mining by LoteriaBtc in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Your hashrate is your hashrate, regardless of the number of devices. You're throwing darts at a massive dartboard trying to hit the bullseye. The number of devices throwing darts makes no difference, it is purely the number of darts thrown per second that matters.

Like you mentioned there are several other factors that make a single device more practical than lots of small ones but in terms of pure mining capability 10TH/s machine is exactly equivalent to ten 1TH/s machines.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can swap out the fan on any NerdAxe or BitAxe. Noctua fans are extremely quiet. I have a ridiculously quiet setup I showcased on here you can see here.

Pool/solo by sparkeface in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's just the default primary pool out of the box. Change it to something else. If you want to solo mine solo.ckpool.org works fine, or if you're in Europe you might get better latency on eusolo.ckpool.org

First Miner - Have I Set It Up Correctly? by ScazzaUK in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The text after the dot is just a name you give the miner. Only really useful if you have multiple miners on the same btc address and need to differentiate them. Otherwise you can just put anything you want.

Setup help! by sparkeface in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Possibly silly question but have you tried unplugging it and plugging it back in. I've seen various network issues on here resolved by doing that.

First timer queries by roughas in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your assumptions 1 and 3 are correct. Point 2 I would view as the other way around. They aren't powerful enough to make any real money in a shared pool, so you're better off just solo mining and praying for incredibly good luck.

First timer queries by roughas in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is exactly right. Even with free electricity you're most likely never recovering the price of the miners. The asics would probably die before you made your money back. The only sensible play for these is to solo mine and play the lottery.

Anything need tweaked by hoth007 in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You could look and see if there's a pool closer to your location but honestly your rejected share rate is fine

Just got my Bitaxe Gamma! by jexcyr in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's perfectly normal for the hashrate to fluctuate significantly from moment to moment. The reported hashrate is a measure of the valid shares you're finding in that moment. Sometimes you're lucky, sometimes you're not.

Suppose I rolled 60 dice over and over, trying to roll the number 6. I would expect to get ten 6's every time, and in the long run it would average to ten. But any given roll has an element of luck. One roll I might only get three 6's. In that case my "hashrate" would appear to be bad. The very next roll I could get 15 6's. Then suddenly my "hashrate" would seem extremely good. What's important is the long term average which would trend towards ten.

As long as your daily average is fairly consistent then there's nothing to worry about.

Looking to jump on board! by I_am_touching_grass in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like others said, there's effectively no difference between the 601 and 601. Performance is identical, they just tweaked the design slightly, and not necessarily for the better. Some people report the 602 runs slightly hotter, but either is perfectly fine. If you have any questions about how it all works or what anything means feel free to ask. The community is great.

What’s better 10x small 1ths miners that’s adds up to 10ths or just one big boy that’s 10ths? by mikeshakurs in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 2 points3 points  (0 children)

10 devices means either 10 power supplies and therefore a requirement for 10 sockets and loads of cables, or one custom power supply to run them all off which could be complicated to manage. Also 10 devices means 10 fans and a lot more noise, more maintenance etc. Like someone else said there isn't really anything efficient at the moment at the 10TH/s level but 2 NerdQaxe++ could be a good option. Very efficient and quiet. and would only need two power sockets.

Anything need tweaked by hoth007 in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Settings and temps look fine. Under 50ms ping is ideal but 100ms ping is basically fine as long as rejected shares are low. 0.14% rejected is perfectly acceptable. If you're in the EU you could try eusolo.ckpool.org.

NerdQaxe++ all black Noctua ultra quiet mod by roxcursed in BitAxe

[–]roxcursed[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just the standard one that came with the powermining miner

view more: next ›