Topic: Optimal Bitcoin Mining Corp. now offering remote GPU use contracts! - page 2. (Read 11188 times)
November 28, 2011, 04:44:12 PM
id really like i reply from optimal about this. and what he plans to do hopefully he is a good bissness man and owns up to his negligence and holds true to his contract but we will see
November 28, 2011, 02:31:55 PM
So just to chime in on this, I've "reset"optimals account by transfering to a new one, and it seems he's having issues with his password. So I'm doing that again.
Having his assets switched to a new account does not copy transaction records to the new account, only all the assets, so he doesn't have access to previous transactions.
PS. I've begun development of the next version of GLBSE, I'm aiming for a testing release before new years.
Nefario
Having his assets switched to a new account does not copy transaction records to the new account, only all the assets, so he doesn't have access to previous transactions.
PS. I've begun development of the next version of GLBSE, I'm aiming for a testing release before new years.
Nefario
November 27, 2011, 08:24:01 PM
CONTACT OPTIMALBITCOINMINING
PM:Send private message
USER STATISTICS
Joined:Fri Jun 17, 2011 4:49 amLast visited:Wed Jun 29, 2011 7:55 amTotal posts:3 | Search user’s posts
(0.40% of all posts / 0.02 posts per day) Most active forum:Assets and shares
(2 Posts / 66.67% of user’s posts)Most active topic:Optimal Bitcoin Mining Corp. Bond IPO NOW AVAILABLE!
hmmm maybe thats his problem to lazy to log on to the glbse forum to let nef know he locked himself out? and he was last on this forum at 655 pm and still no responce from him i think this is looking more and more shady.
November 27, 2011, 09:40:55 AM
For future reference, GLBSE is currently fully accessible and the depth for OPTIMALBITCOIN asset is as follows ...
ben@ben-laptop2:~/bitcoin_stuff/bmc/black-market-client$ ./bmc.py depth OPTIMALBITCOIN
Enter passphrase:
bids --:-- [[1, 80000000]]
asks --:-- [[3, 89999990], [1, 100000000], [11, 100000000], [10, 100000000], [25, 100000000], [10, 100000000], [54, 100000000], [2, 110000000]]
ben@ben-laptop2:~/bitcoin_stuff/bmc/black-market-client$ ./bmc.py depth OPTIMALBITCOIN
Enter passphrase:
bids --:-- [[1, 80000000]]
asks --:-- [[3, 89999990], [1, 100000000], [11, 100000000], [10, 100000000], [25, 100000000], [10, 100000000], [54, 100000000], [2, 110000000]]
November 27, 2011, 07:51:34 AM
just an fyi nef has been taking care of issuse last nihgt he transfered my old account for me so nef has been taking care of his end on glbse i belive that ootimal you should just own up to your own mistakes and pay your lenders what you disclosed in the contract that you provided.
edit as of checking it also seems the extra 2000 or so shares have been taking down hmmm how could that be unless you got your account info???
ps still waiting for a response
edit as of checking it also seems the extra 2000 or so shares have been taking down hmmm how could that be unless you got your account info???
ps still waiting for a response
November 26, 2011, 11:55:27 AM
@dmcurser
Thanks for bringing this to the attention of myself and the other shareholders. Much appreciated.
@OPTIMALBITCOIN
I'd like a response from you on this. Nefario states in the linked thread on the GLBSE forums that he spoke to you recently. Are you saying that he did not ?
Nefario will be able to provide details of when the relevant accounts were accessed. At this stage, it appears you were able to remove the sell order if you wanted to.
The costs of your failure to do so should not be beared by those who invested in your endeavour in good faith.
EDIT : with -> who
Thanks for bringing this to the attention of myself and the other shareholders. Much appreciated.
@OPTIMALBITCOIN
I'd like a response from you on this. Nefario states in the linked thread on the GLBSE forums that he spoke to you recently. Are you saying that he did not ?
Nefario will be able to provide details of when the relevant accounts were accessed. At this stage, it appears you were able to remove the sell order if you wanted to.
The costs of your failure to do so should not be beared by those who invested in your endeavour in good faith.
EDIT : with -> who
November 26, 2011, 11:27:38 AM
Hey look as far as im concerned it is on you for your losses. you losing your api key and such is your problem. you cant change your contract anytime you feel like it. I do agree yes neferion was unable to responed to ppl for a while but i know i have talked to him on glbse about 5 times in the last two weeks and he has indicated on the glbse forum that he has spoken to you so this bs about im unable to contact him and such is just seeming like a poor mans excuse not to follow thur with what your contract agreement states.
https://glbse.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=50
https://glbse.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=50
November 26, 2011, 06:21:47 AM
I refuse to accept any punishment for the actions and behaviours in the business relationships between Optimal Bitcoin Mining Corporation and others.
I am responsible ONLY for the actions and behaviours in the business relationship between Optimal Bitcoin Mining Corporation and MYSELF.
I am responsible ONLY for the actions and behaviours in the business relationship between Optimal Bitcoin Mining Corporation and MYSELF.
Initially I was going to, but I now I see that people bought up a large amount of shares to try to take advantage of the fact that they will be repaid in 5 days and turn a quick profit. This was never the purpose of the bonds and as I stated earlier, the bonds were intended to raise capital for the company. Additional funds are of no use to me to have for 5 days at this point. In any case, I have been unable to access my account lately and have been in contact with Nefario to try to access my account. I have not heard from him recently, so I am taking the following course of action:
If Nefario does not get back to me by December 1st, I will have no way to access my account, thus the bonds cannot be repaid. If Nefario does get back to me by December 1st, the bonds will be repaid such that only those bonds that were purchased in the 30 days prior to December 1st will be repaid at 1 BTC each and bonds purchased in the past 30 days will receive the original 0.9 BTC only, which (without being able to view my account) is about 163 BTC total. There were 63.78 BTC purchased in the last 30 days, so a total of 219.7 BTC will be paid out, with each bond will receiving 0.97 BTC. If the number of bonds purchased in the last 30 days is greater than 71 on December 1st, that means that people are trying to take advantage of me and, therefore, everyone will only receive 0.9 BTC at maturation on Dec 1st, and you can thank the few people that don't play by the rules for screwing it up for you, (this assumes Nefario gets back to me by Dec 1st).
It sounds like a fair deal but for next time don't issue more bond then you can sell simply issued in batches of shares until the market seems saturated. Nefario has been online and has been talking to the community recently, Please send him a pm on this forum and on the GLBSE and I am sure he can help you If Nefario does not get back to me by December 1st, I will have no way to access my account, thus the bonds cannot be repaid. If Nefario does get back to me by December 1st, the bonds will be repaid such that only those bonds that were purchased in the 30 days prior to December 1st will be repaid at 1 BTC each and bonds purchased in the past 30 days will receive the original 0.9 BTC only, which (without being able to view my account) is about 163 BTC total. There were 63.78 BTC purchased in the last 30 days, so a total of 219.7 BTC will be paid out, with each bond will receiving 0.97 BTC. If the number of bonds purchased in the last 30 days is greater than 71 on December 1st, that means that people are trying to take advantage of me and, therefore, everyone will only receive 0.9 BTC at maturation on Dec 1st, and you can thank the few people that don't play by the rules for screwing it up for you, (this assumes Nefario gets back to me by Dec 1st).
November 26, 2011, 06:14:13 AM
Any issues you have with the GLBSE stock exchange are purely between yourself and GLBSE. You should seek compensation from GLBSE for all reasonable losses you incur.
The significant downtime is not just impacting you - I have been unable to trade (both buying and selling) shares when I wanted to - I have suffered losses as a result too, however, I took reasonable steps to mitigate the risk of such losses (which I considered to be HIGH given the clearly stated BETA status of GLBSE) - something any business does as a matter of course.
The significant downtime is not just impacting you - I have been unable to trade (both buying and selling) shares when I wanted to - I have suffered losses as a result too, however, I took reasonable steps to mitigate the risk of such losses (which I considered to be HIGH given the clearly stated BETA status of GLBSE) - something any business does as a matter of course.
November 26, 2011, 06:05:01 AM
The term bond is very clear.
I agreed a contract with you which very clearly states that I will receive 1 BTC for the significant number of bonds I purchased from you at the time when they were first issued.
I have not purchased any subsequent bonds.
You are massively damaging any possible future business I (and I suspect many others) will consider conducting with you - including further bond purchases, other investment in your business (other businesses) and purchases of products / services you offer through your businesses. This is possibly the best form of anti-advertising you could possibly have come up with.
I demonstrated massive faith and trust in you, considering you to be an honest and trustworthy person.
The "rules" you mention are the contract terms and conditions we both agreed to when I purchased the bonds.
I agreed a contract with you which very clearly states that I will receive 1 BTC for the significant number of bonds I purchased from you at the time when they were first issued.
I have not purchased any subsequent bonds.
You are massively damaging any possible future business I (and I suspect many others) will consider conducting with you - including further bond purchases, other investment in your business (other businesses) and purchases of products / services you offer through your businesses. This is possibly the best form of anti-advertising you could possibly have come up with.
I demonstrated massive faith and trust in you, considering you to be an honest and trustworthy person.
The "rules" you mention are the contract terms and conditions we both agreed to when I purchased the bonds.
November 26, 2011, 05:09:29 AM
Initially I was going to, but I now I see that people bought up a large amount of shares to try to take advantage of the fact that they will be repaid in 5 days and turn a quick profit. This was never the purpose of the bonds and as I stated earlier, the bonds were intended to raise capital for the company. Additional funds are of no use to me to have for 5 days at this point. In any case, I have been unable to access my account lately and have been in contact with Nefario to try to access my account. I have not heard from him recently, so I am taking the following course of action:
Not trying to be mean, but the GLBSE problems were only intermittent and in the past few weeks. It was your responsibility to cancel the sell orders on nov 1st or 15 or whenever you wanted. Nobody is "taking advantage" if you don't, and you are expected to stand by your contract, even if the shares are sold on Nov 30th, 23:59:59. Changing the rules just because you feel like it is childish.
So how about you take is as a business man, cancel the sell orders (GLBSE works perfectly now) and repay 1 BTC/share on dec 1st as per your contract, no matter when they were bought?
Full disclosure: no, I didn't buy shares in the past days, and I don't intend to buy. I have exactly 10 shares bought on august 30th.
November 26, 2011, 04:57:08 AM
Initially I was going to, but I now I see that people bought up a large amount of shares to try to take advantage of the fact that they will be repaid in 5 days and turn a quick profit. This was never the purpose of the bonds and as I stated earlier, the bonds were intended to raise capital for the company. Additional funds are of no use to me to have for 5 days at this point. In any case, I have been unable to access my account lately and have been in contact with Nefario to try to access my account. I have not heard from him recently, so I am taking the following course of action:
If Nefario does not get back to me by December 1st, I will have no way to access my account, thus the bonds cannot be repaid. If Nefario does get back to me by December 1st, the bonds will be repaid such that only those bonds that were purchased in the 30 days prior to December 1st will be repaid at 1 BTC each and bonds purchased in the past 30 days will receive the original 0.9 BTC only, which (without being able to view my account) is about 163 BTC total. There were 63.78 BTC purchased in the last 30 days, so a total of 219.7 BTC will be paid out, with each bond will receiving 0.97 BTC. If the number of bonds purchased in the last 30 days is greater than 71 on December 1st, that means that people are trying to take advantage of me and, therefore, everyone will only receive 0.9 BTC at maturation on Dec 1st, and you can thank the few people that don't play by the rules for screwing it up for you, (this assumes Nefario gets back to me by Dec 1st).
It sounds like a fair deal but for next time don't issue more bond then you can sell simply issued in batches of shares until the market seems saturated. Nefario has been online and has been talking to the community recently, Please send him a pm on this forum and on the GLBSE and I am sure he can help you If Nefario does not get back to me by December 1st, I will have no way to access my account, thus the bonds cannot be repaid. If Nefario does get back to me by December 1st, the bonds will be repaid such that only those bonds that were purchased in the 30 days prior to December 1st will be repaid at 1 BTC each and bonds purchased in the past 30 days will receive the original 0.9 BTC only, which (without being able to view my account) is about 163 BTC total. There were 63.78 BTC purchased in the last 30 days, so a total of 219.7 BTC will be paid out, with each bond will receiving 0.97 BTC. If the number of bonds purchased in the last 30 days is greater than 71 on December 1st, that means that people are trying to take advantage of me and, therefore, everyone will only receive 0.9 BTC at maturation on Dec 1st, and you can thank the few people that don't play by the rules for screwing it up for you, (this assumes Nefario gets back to me by Dec 1st).
November 26, 2011, 02:48:40 AM
Initially I was going to, but I now I see that people bought up a large amount of shares to try to take advantage of the fact that they will be repaid in 5 days and turn a quick profit. This was never the purpose of the bonds and as I stated earlier, the bonds were intended to raise capital for the company. Additional funds are of no use to me to have for 5 days at this point. In any case, I have been unable to access my account lately and have been in contact with Nefario to try to access my account. I have not heard from him recently, so I am taking the following course of action:
If Nefario does not get back to me by December 1st, I will have no way to access my account, thus the bonds cannot be repaid. If Nefario does get back to me by December 1st, the bonds will be repaid such that only those bonds that were purchased in the 30 days prior to December 1st will be repaid at 1 BTC each and bonds purchased in the past 30 days will receive the original 0.9 BTC only, which (without being able to view my account) is about 163 BTC total. There were 63.78 BTC purchased in the last 30 days, so a total of 219.7 BTC will be paid out, with each bond will receiving 0.97 BTC. If the number of bonds purchased in the last 30 days is greater than 71 on December 1st, that means that people are trying to take advantage of me and, therefore, everyone will only receive 0.9 BTC at maturation on Dec 1st, and you can thank the few people that don't play by the rules for screwing it up for you, (this assumes Nefario gets back to me by Dec 1st).
If Nefario does not get back to me by December 1st, I will have no way to access my account, thus the bonds cannot be repaid. If Nefario does get back to me by December 1st, the bonds will be repaid such that only those bonds that were purchased in the 30 days prior to December 1st will be repaid at 1 BTC each and bonds purchased in the past 30 days will receive the original 0.9 BTC only, which (without being able to view my account) is about 163 BTC total. There were 63.78 BTC purchased in the last 30 days, so a total of 219.7 BTC will be paid out, with each bond will receiving 0.97 BTC. If the number of bonds purchased in the last 30 days is greater than 71 on December 1st, that means that people are trying to take advantage of me and, therefore, everyone will only receive 0.9 BTC at maturation on Dec 1st, and you can thank the few people that don't play by the rules for screwing it up for you, (this assumes Nefario gets back to me by Dec 1st).
November 24, 2011, 01:26:19 PM
Are you guys still planing on buying up the shares for 1 BTC each?
September 01, 2011, 12:18:44 AM
Today is Sept. 1st and bonds prices are increasing to 0.9 BTC! Buy them while you still can!
August 30, 2011, 02:41:23 AM
Update:
Our first customer received service and was happy with the service. Their contract has ended. I currently have 5 computers available for rental and am looking for new customers. Please send me a PM if you are interested!
Our first customer received service and was happy with the service. Their contract has ended. I currently have 5 computers available for rental and am looking for new customers. Please send me a PM if you are interested!
This business model is flawed. If the miners are at all profitable, it doesn't make sense to rent them out. It only makes sense if mining is not profitable.
For example:
If I rent a computer from you for 24 hours for 1BTC, and I manage to mine 2BTC, then you lose 1BTC. You would have made more BTC by not renting it to me and simply using it to mine and keep the 2 BTC for yourself.
If I pay you 1 BTC to rent the computer but I only manage to mine 0.5 BTC then you gain 0.5 BTC.
The correct business model is:
Float the company on GLBSE with an IPO to raise the investment you need to buy enough computers to fill all availble space, then the company mines using this equipment and pays out any profits after covering electricity costs to shareholders. You do not own the company in this setup, the shareholders do, but as long as you keep 25-50% of shares then you keep 25-50% of all profit made, and use none of your own money to buy the computers.
If the company needs to liquidate (eg mining is no longer profitable), then you sell everything you bought with share capital and buy all shares back from shareholders (including your own shares) at as close to the initial IPO as you can afford with the proceeds from what you earn in selling the equipment.
This is pretty much the model that most mining companies on GLBSE have taken(exception being centimine). And I think if you're going to get into mining this is the least risky way to go. Thus far none of the mining shares on GLBSE have repaid their capital in profit.
I might add that some operations(SIN) the operator charges a managment fee, which may considerably effect the profitability of the share.
August 30, 2011, 01:30:20 AM
Quite honestly, I'm interested, but your info just doesn't work. If you WERE able to put this together with the numbers that you provided, and everything went according to plan, then it might be possible to make money. I see this as flawed as you are "over-estimating", Your numbers change (slightly) per post, and the overall net is not high enough to offset the startup and upkeep as you would otherwise not profit much. Not to mention your "investors" are the ones bearing the costs, not you; if something goes wrong, or profitability disintegrates before your eyes you can just disappear, along with any net and tech.
I may seem naive, inconsiderate, or speculative (well I AM speculating) but without even thinking about the numbers, there are holes
I may seem naive, inconsiderate, or speculative (well I AM speculating) but without even thinking about the numbers, there are holes
August 27, 2011, 10:23:39 PM
Last chance to purchase Optimal Bitcoin Mining Corp. bonds at 0.8 BTC! On Sept 1st the bond prices will be increasing to 0.9 BTC! Get them while they're hot! Four Computers currently available for rental!
August 18, 2011, 08:17:13 PM
We just had another satisfied customer rent 3 computers for 1 day. Once again 5 computers are available for rental if anyone is interested!
Actually you might be surprised.
Amazon does not offer Cluster GPU computing for Windows, I do. Amazon only offers Cluster GPU computing for Linux on the US East Coast. You also did not mention that Amazon charges for data transfer, which I don't. You cannot pay for Amazon in Bitcoin, as far as I know. I don't know about you, but I would rather pay 0.14 BTC/hour than $2.10/hour.
Comparison:
nVIDIA Tesla c2050: 1288 GFLOPs Single Precision/ 515 GFLOPs Double Precision 3 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 5870: 2720 GFLOPs Single Precision/ 544 GFLOPs Double Precision 1 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 5970: 4640 GFLOPs Single Precision/ 928 GFLOPs Double Precision 2 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 6870: 2703 GLFOPs Single Precision/ 675 GFLOPs Double Precision 1 GB RAM
My machines dominate Amazon's nVIDIA Tesla machines in Single Precision calculations and my machines also win in Double Precision Calculations. Amazon's machines have greater CPU computations, but if you are renting for GPU use, as long as the CPU is not a bottleneck, it does not really matter as you need to compare GPU performance, not CPU performance. The only real difference where nVIDIA Tesla have an advantage are more memory, which tends to only be a concern for rendering applications and not if you are using them for GPGPU applications such as password cracking, etc, so it really depends on the application. Even so, the rendering capabilities of my machines are nothing to sneeze at and I can tell you they would perform quite comparably to the Tesla machines.
My current machines use the following hardware:
1: HD 5970 and one HD 5870
2: one HD 5870 and one HD 6870
3: three HD 5870s
4: three HD 5870s
5: two HD 5870s
Each machine has either 4 GB or 8 GB of 1333 mHz RAM, a 2.8 GHz, 3.1 GHz, or 3.2 GHz Phenom II x4 or Athlon II x4.
Investors and those concerned about any advantages that nVIDIA cards might offer for rendering applications should keep in mind that I have a deal to get 40% off nVIDIA cards for my new cluster, half of which will be built using nVIDIA graphics machines, and include nVIDIA Tesla cards and GTX 590s to cover this base.
If you have specific hardware requirements let me know what they are and I will make sure they are included in the new cluster that is built, which will be very competitive with Amazon's specifications and rates and most importantly, we will accept Bitcoins.
I cannot spend any more time discussing hardware specifics. If you are interested in using service or investing in my company, that is great, please let me know, but otherwise please do not waste my time asking questions that you can figure out yourself. If you would like to make a larger investment than simply bonds on GLBSE, please send me a PM.
Now I've realised what the problem is ...
You are assuming the only use people would put "remote GPU use contracts" to is mining Bitcoins ... there are numerous uses for GPU clusters - Bitcoin mining is just a tiny fraction of what people are doing with GPU clusters.
Take a look at the OpenCL and OpenGL projects.
If I only needed a GPU cluster for a couple of hours in total, I would definitely consider making use of something like this, at the right price.
Perhaps OptimalBitcoin would like to reply with how the machine specs available at $1.50/hour compare to the equivalent provided by Amazon in terms other than Bitcoin mining performance ...
"Cluster GPU Quadruple Extra Large 22 GB memory, 33.5 EC2 Compute Units, 2 x NVIDIA Tesla “Fermi” M2050 GPUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, 64-bit platform, 10 Gigabit Ethernet"
You also have the benefit that you can pay for these in Bitcoin ... I could easily see a Bitcoin business formed around using these in a "on-demand" fashion for something like an online video encoding service for example.
OptimalBitcoin might also want to consider further time/money investment in promotion/advertising of these "remote GPU use contracts".
Whenever there is an offer for "remote GPU use contract" that is greater than ~$0.46/hr, it makes more sense to stop the mining and have them work on the "remote GPU use contract".
Yes indeed, but this relies on people being stupid enough to pay so much. You won't get many repeat customers once they realise they lose coins overall.
You are assuming the only use people would put "remote GPU use contracts" to is mining Bitcoins ... there are numerous uses for GPU clusters - Bitcoin mining is just a tiny fraction of what people are doing with GPU clusters.
Take a look at the OpenCL and OpenGL projects.
If I only needed a GPU cluster for a couple of hours in total, I would definitely consider making use of something like this, at the right price.
Perhaps OptimalBitcoin would like to reply with how the machine specs available at $1.50/hour compare to the equivalent provided by Amazon in terms other than Bitcoin mining performance ...
"Cluster GPU Quadruple Extra Large 22 GB memory, 33.5 EC2 Compute Units, 2 x NVIDIA Tesla “Fermi” M2050 GPUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, 64-bit platform, 10 Gigabit Ethernet"
You also have the benefit that you can pay for these in Bitcoin ... I could easily see a Bitcoin business formed around using these in a "on-demand" fashion for something like an online video encoding service for example.
OptimalBitcoin might also want to consider further time/money investment in promotion/advertising of these "remote GPU use contracts".
Whenever there is an offer for "remote GPU use contract" that is greater than ~$0.46/hr, it makes more sense to stop the mining and have them work on the "remote GPU use contract".
Yes indeed, but this relies on people being stupid enough to pay so much. You won't get many repeat customers once they realise they lose coins overall.
Actually you might be surprised.
Amazon does not offer Cluster GPU computing for Windows, I do. Amazon only offers Cluster GPU computing for Linux on the US East Coast. You also did not mention that Amazon charges for data transfer, which I don't. You cannot pay for Amazon in Bitcoin, as far as I know. I don't know about you, but I would rather pay 0.14 BTC/hour than $2.10/hour.
Comparison:
nVIDIA Tesla c2050: 1288 GFLOPs Single Precision/ 515 GFLOPs Double Precision 3 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 5870: 2720 GFLOPs Single Precision/ 544 GFLOPs Double Precision 1 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 5970: 4640 GFLOPs Single Precision/ 928 GFLOPs Double Precision 2 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 6870: 2703 GLFOPs Single Precision/ 675 GFLOPs Double Precision 1 GB RAM
My machines dominate Amazon's nVIDIA Tesla machines in Single Precision calculations and my machines also win in Double Precision Calculations. Amazon's machines have greater CPU computations, but if you are renting for GPU use, as long as the CPU is not a bottleneck, it does not really matter as you need to compare GPU performance, not CPU performance. The only real difference where nVIDIA Tesla have an advantage are more memory, which tends to only be a concern for rendering applications and not if you are using them for GPGPU applications such as password cracking, etc, so it really depends on the application. Even so, the rendering capabilities of my machines are nothing to sneeze at and I can tell you they would perform quite comparably to the Tesla machines.
My current machines use the following hardware:
1: HD 5970 and one HD 5870
2: one HD 5870 and one HD 6870
3: three HD 5870s
4: three HD 5870s
5: two HD 5870s
Each machine has either 4 GB or 8 GB of 1333 mHz RAM, a 2.8 GHz, 3.1 GHz, or 3.2 GHz Phenom II x4 or Athlon II x4.
Investors and those concerned about any advantages that nVIDIA cards might offer for rendering applications should keep in mind that I have a deal to get 40% off nVIDIA cards for my new cluster, half of which will be built using nVIDIA graphics machines, and include nVIDIA Tesla cards and GTX 590s to cover this base.
If you have specific hardware requirements let me know what they are and I will make sure they are included in the new cluster that is built, which will be very competitive with Amazon's specifications and rates and most importantly, we will accept Bitcoins.
I cannot spend any more time discussing hardware specifics. If you are interested in using service or investing in my company, that is great, please let me know, but otherwise please do not waste my time asking questions that you can figure out yourself. If you would like to make a larger investment than simply bonds on GLBSE, please send me a PM.
August 18, 2011, 11:03:01 AM
Possibly, I haven't yet used this service, so I won't comment on it's quality, but try getting the service from Amazon anonymously and paying in Bitcoin.
For Bitcoin businesses, the more costs they can meet through Bitcoin the better and the lower the volatility of Bitcoin price as a result.
Perhaps OptimalBitcoin would like to reply with how the machine specs available at $1.50/hour compare to the equivalent provided by Amazon in terms other than Bitcoin mining performance ...
"Cluster GPU Quadruple Extra Large 22 GB memory, 33.5 EC2 Compute Units, 2 x NVIDIA Tesla “Fermi” M2050 GPUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, 64-bit platform, 10 Gigabit Ethernet"
I should imagine Amazon offer a far superior service, and for $2.10 per hour.
For Bitcoin businesses, the more costs they can meet through Bitcoin the better and the lower the volatility of Bitcoin price as a result.
Perhaps OptimalBitcoin would like to reply with how the machine specs available at $1.50/hour compare to the equivalent provided by Amazon in terms other than Bitcoin mining performance ...
"Cluster GPU Quadruple Extra Large 22 GB memory, 33.5 EC2 Compute Units, 2 x NVIDIA Tesla “Fermi” M2050 GPUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, 64-bit platform, 10 Gigabit Ethernet"
I should imagine Amazon offer a far superior service, and for $2.10 per hour.
Jump to: