Zagitta

I'm using an XPS 13 with 16GB of RAM right now and I certainly didn't solder in 8GB extra so that might be regional issue :)

Sadly this isn't quite the case with skylake IGPU, there's a ton of issues with power management options rendering the system very unstable or down right unusable.

Also worth noting is that NVME ssd power management is flat out unsupported resulting in additional 3W power draw on DELL XPS 13 pcs out of the 6W that's currently possible with stable power options enabled.

You don't need to transfer between forks or anything of the like, the only difference for you is that you now have two types of coins. Eg if you had 21 ETH before the fork you now have 21 ETH on the hardfork chain and 21 ETC (ethereum classic is what they call it) on the hardfork opposing chain.

Besides there are light clients that don't require the entire chain to be stored on disk, there are even some that run entirely in your browser like https://www.myetherwallet.com

Now if you want to interact with the hardfork opposing chain things gets a bit more difficult because it doesn't have much dev support and as far as I know there are no light clients supporting it.

i did not mean to imply that a hardfork can't be implemented in that fashion, I should indeed have written "the hardfork" instead of "a hardfork" as that's the way this specific hardfork has been implemented, I appologies English is not my native language.

My understanding of that blog post is only what the default value of supporting or not supporting is meaning the hardfork code will be merged in either case and that it's only whether it's active by default that's changed depending on the vote.

Not that it really matters anymore as block number 1894000 has already passed and the code merged with hardfork support enabled by default.

The way it invalidates the above statement is that there's no code that decides whether the fork happens beside what flags the nodes are launched with. At the specific block number the nodes that accept the fork will only validate the hardfork blocks as correct while the nodes that don't support the fork will reject these blocks. Thus two chains will co-exist for an unknown amount of time, not just one or the other.

To some extend what you're saying is true though as it's very unlikely that both chains will remain active/retain it's value and therefore miners on the losing chain will likely move to the winning chain very fast to avoid losses incurred from the cost of power.

That's how the softfork worked before it got scrapped. A hardfork literally splits the network in in two, it's basically like creating a new coin shares the previous history.

I talked to a very nice service rep about the coilwhine and he said there wasn't much point because all of them suffer from it in varying degrees and they would only do something about it if it was very audible and then only if RMA'ed within the first 2 months or so. His suggestion was to disable the GPU power states but that sort of defeats the whole point of an ultrabook. It's a sad issue because it really detracts from an otherwise excellent laptop. I have not heard about that specific wifi issue though, have you updated to the latest firmware? I know there's been quite a lot of versions with various fixes.

If it's a skylake CPU, chances are it has nothing todo with USB3. There are some coilwhine issues in the power delivery system when the GPU is entering and exiting power saving modes and is heavily plaguing the recent Dell XPS 13 model amongst others.

I don't know if you've seen it already but some people on reddit talked about some improvements/tips here: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/4rcss2/buildin...

I agree with most of their sentiments, especially the parsing part could be made cleaner/more C#'ish :)

Otherwise nice work and very interesting writeup!

Perhaps I'm misundertanding you but how exactly are the funds not clearly owned? It's my understanding that each ethereum invested in the DOA still belongs to whoever invested them because they at any point can chose to split their funds from the original DOA into a different DOA where they then can extract the funds. Returns on investments come back in the form of etheruem that will be evenly distributed to the DOA token holders meaning that even they will have a clear owner. With that in mind I don't see how the fund are any less clearly owned by anyone than bitcoins, maybe you can explain?

Can't say I expected to see Nvidia fanboys on HN but the R9 Fury X exists and beats 980ti at >1080p resolutions in games not gimped by Nvidia Gameworks: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9390/the-amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-... At the same price point using only slightly more power and having nice and quite closed loop water cooling.

Gaming benchmarks by preforming better in an older game? Yeah, no :)

A lot of the big games are often optimized on the driver level by both Nvidia and AMD which is why new graphics drivers are released very often compared to other hardware drivers. It's very common to see driver releases the same week as new triple A title that improve performance 40-50% and fix various broken things such as multi-gpu scaling.

In this case it's two games with the same engine (source 1) where the same optimizations happens to work but AMD likely hasn't gotten around to actually verify the optimizations and as such haven't enabled them for CS:GO (Remember steam hardware survey says only ~1% game on Linux so it's hardly worth their time to spend time optimizing Linux gaming)

Thank you! I've been reading about Flux for a while now but your simple explanation just made it click