Bitcoin Forum

I noticed a user 'TheBlueMatt' posted this on reddit - https://twitter.com/cnledger/status/793675026402717698

The Bitmain's possible new mining farm would be completed this december and would easily own a lot of mining power and hashrate. Does this seem exciting or concerns you over centralized mining power in China?

I feel this is good investment for the Chinese and I'm sure they're earning a lot from mining Bitcoins. I'm just hoping that all of this is for the benefit of the Bitcoin network as well.

How much mining power this can bring will be main question as well as i don't think this one mining farm can centralize mining power but this will add up more hashing power coming from china.

Images on twitter post showing really huge farms, but couldn't get info regarding total hashpower they will be adding to bitcoin mining.

If that is true, this will be a huge farm in this year over 1000 s9.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5aoskg/bitmains_new_xinjiang_computing_center_to_be/

"Centralization" is not that worrying really but cartelization of mining is. What might happen is Bitcoin could be ruled and controlled by a few elite and influential groups and/or individuals. I can foresee the creation of Bitcoin lobbies that would try to influence the key groups and individuals on decisions both critical and uncritical.

I have read that Bitmain supports Bitcoin Unlimited. Could this be a starting push to get Bitcoin to fork?

I doubt that they will use S9's. My guess is to gear up for their next antminer 10?.
From most of the post i've read the s9 breaks down a lot so why invest in a new facility with a poor miner.

Exactly if the antminer 10 generation will coming, but for use S9 it's just more on the personal assumption because it's the latest antminer in this time.
Yes, you're right.

For the purposes of my comment here, I will assume your arithmetic is OK, shinra.

140,000 kW works out to perhaps 15% - 20% the power of a typical nuclear power plant.  That's a lot of juice.  And probably a HUGE percentage of the world's hashpower, as you calculate.

Xinjiang...  Hmm, I wonder if electric power is cheap there, perhaps not as it is remote desert.  That's also a lot of (risky?) investment, BTC mining is capital intensive.

Interesting thread though, xdrpx.

I Googled Xinjiang and got this, " Xinjiang, an autonomous territory in northwest China, is a vast region of deserts and mountains. It's home to many ethnic minority groups, including the Turkic Uyghur people. The ancient Silk Road trade route linking China and the Middle East passed through Xinjiang, a legacy that can be seen in the traditional open-air bazaars of its oasis cities, Hotan and Kashgar. "

A lot of interesting non-related words pop up there. < Highlighted in bold >

I was just wondering why they would chose a desert for a mining farm? A huge mining farm needs cooling and a desert will need even more cooling? It gets pretty cold at night and I see the geographical map shows high mountains?

Anyone have more info?

Exactly you get the right point, and how must in the Xinjiang. but there is no more are giving the another explanation about the placing of a computing center in the Xinjiang desert. According to the geographic of the Xinjiang, it's looks like so crap for building the computing center in there. The desert is so hot at the daylight and pretty cold at night. There is no more info about that, we are just able for waiting about the fact of that.

They can build it somewhere in the mountains, mining farm at 4-5000 meters it's not a bad idea if you have electricity at this height. Also the temperatures will be more than perfect.

What`s the point of such investment if bitcoin mining will stop after a few years.

I guess mining in China is very profitable.

Chinese will dominate bitcoin.This is for sure.I don`t know if this is good or bad for the community. 

That is huge. However the post only shows CGI, no real photos. So I think we should be a bit cautious regarding the stated facts of size and operational availability.


I agree with you. It's unlikely that miners will try to directly damage Bitcoin by abusing their hashpower, simply because it counters their financial incentive. What's more worrying is the potential to prevent technological progress out of self-interest or political motives. Questionable characters like Roger Ver could bribe miners to not support certain improvements.

So it would be really nice to see some form of re-decentralization of Bitcoin mining, maybe in the form of mining devices that use generated heat for some secondary purpose (for example toasters, coffee machines).

ya.ya.yo!

The word "desert" does not mean "hot". It means "low precipitation." Xinjiang borders the Himalayas and is pretty high elevation itself, so depending on the exact location it could very well be in a very cold (overall) spot with access to hydroelectric power (from mountain runoff) that is woefully underutilized - and thus available on the cheap. That's just speculation on my part.

desert means deserted which means wasteland, vacant. not HOT

the term desert applies also to urban deserts/food desert. when talking about things like the distance residents have to travel to reach a grocery store

being a desert usually means cheap land value.
also being near the mountains means cooler air, thus less requirement of artificial cooling is needed

Well to my surprise Bitmain has tweeted with an update regarding this on their twitter profile stating that they only own a minor share in that facility and the majority is owned by other miners and altcoins with various types of mining hardware involved. This could probably mean that they may not be able to own a large hash rate, but still could have future chances of expansion by investing in more hardware.

Source from where I saw this: https://twitter.com/BITMAINtech/status/794071770173050880

I don't see a mine this big being built out of nowhere with all this hashpower. They will not be able to fill the mine timely enough to own a dangerously high percentage of hashrate... So I don't think centralization can be questioned here, at least for now...