For those who may not yet know I have updated the daily estimated return for hardware type. Below are 3 sheets display btc value 300 usd to 250 usd and electric cost of 13c to 10c. BTC @ $300 usd and 0.13 kwh  BTC @ $300 usd and 0.10 kwh  BTC @ $250 usd and 0.10 kwh  Assuming that the mining hardware is paid off and they have no added overhead then profits are still to be had. However we are at a point that many miners will decide as to the usefulness of continued operations. . Edited for clarity. |
|
|
|
Can somebody share with all of us, at what price level does BTC becomes unprofitable for the miners and they start shutting off they rigs and BTC collapses completely? Is this even possible?
At current difficulty, on 20 nm process and 10 cents per kWh, I'd guess around 200, maybe a little less... with free electricity around 0.1 dollars i guess There is overhead such as rent labour cost of miners and upkeep. The reality is that btc mining is not profitable if the network difficulty and price stay at its present rates. I have updated the Hardware return vs buying bitcoin spreadsheet. The link is in my posted history if you want a copy. I have a feeling that one reason for the low volume volitility may be due to coin-swap and associated fallout. |
|
|
|
5th amendment  to the filing this time I guess the juicy part was them outlining the shares to be sold. I wish the process would have a better time it will take the SEC to approve/disapprove So is it approved yet? I have no fucking clue, thanks to the vagueness of everything. Typical Wall Street If you read in the main sec.gov COIN page: Filing Date 2014-12-31 Accepted
2014-12-30 21:10:03Documents 14 So, I guess it is already accepted and nearly ready to launch. Hore Shet meme If this is the case, I must prepare my CCMF pics...  "Estimated solely for the purpose of calculating the registration fee pursuant to Rule 457(d) under the Securities Act of 1933. Each Share comprising the initial Baskets of Shares represents 0.20 bitcoins and is offered at a per Share price equal to the price equal to the number of bitcoins comprising such Share. The price of bitcoins is based on a weighted average of the average of the high and low transaction prices of bitcoins on June 27, 2013 on three major Bitcoin Exchange sites: Mt. Gox, BitStamp and BTC-e. On June 27, 2013, this price was $100.45/bitcoin." "Proposed maximum offering price per Share(1)" = $20.09  EDIT Note: network difficulty was Jun 29 2013 21,335,329 Total Speed 152,724 GH/s VS Today Dec 30 2014 40,640,955,017 Total Speed 290,919,288 GH/s |
|
|
|
you can call bs, but I get similar numbers - about 100~120 $ for 1 btc.
hardware cost excluded, but most hardware is working for months already. hell, i got bitfury gear which is more than 1 year old and still mining with profit.
So why is hashing rate dropping then? If you factor in the lower variance when the network difficulty is dropping then anyone who pays more then $0.14 per KWH and has the hardware paid off is making at most 12% profit not including any other overhead. Reality. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmeuPljmUNHCdEpqX2RmMDFwemJyLURVUWFtZ3J3aGc&usp=sharing |
|
|
|
1 Year ago today.  who here remembers this.. |
|
|
|
an IP is just an IP.
just because you think Tor or proxies are the only way to change/mask/borrow an IP. is again nothing to do with the bitcoin protocol. but more to do with human choice and human knowledge.
there are many many other ways to separate yourself so your real life info is not linked to bitcoin transactions. this is not a fault of bitcoin. this is again human choice
Yes there are other ways to obtain an IP that is untraceable to your identity such as an unregistered prepaid USB dongle, connecting through an unregistered WiFi connection, even using a botnet to get throw away IP addresses. But mining pools need to be at a stable IP address so none of those options above apply. Also you did not address the point I made about Bitcoin's protocol can't provide untraceability and unlinkability. The relevant analogy is you are the Philosopher's stone who can make gold with alchemy. Although it might be possible, it isn't practical nor realizable. I do agree with the underlying point of your thesis, which is that the more the government pushes, the more we will push back. So they would be wise not to regulate mining too soon. Wait and do it when they are really ready to take control so we don't have enough time to push back. Given your "don't worry" Philosopher's stone attitude, if they are wise and don't alert us, then we won't be able to implement fast enough once they go into rapid fire action around say 2017 or so. the way computers connect together for mining pools is not the bitcoin protocol.. there is nothing wrong with bitcoin... its not even the rules of POW either.. yet again you are not understanding the point im making, bitcoinD.exe is the protocol. there is nothing wrong with bitcoin or POW. i say this because i have had many people ask me if bitcoin is broke due to the stuff you have been saying. mining pool software is separate, there is already software available that allows people to automatically jump/switch to different pools, thus your static IP address is irrelevant as with just a couple lines of code anyone can tweak pool jumping software to jump to dynamic addresses that change daily or randomly. thus mining pools can change their own IP addresses freely if they chose to and people can still mine. so i do not see a problem with trying to hide pool locations and i definitely dont see a problem with the bitcoin protocol. nothing has failed and everything can be "rescued" in answering your other worries relating to taxation/regulation of mining mining pools are just a small part of bitcoin and no matter what law comes about to attempt to control bitcoin, people can just change the software as mentioned above to flip between IP addresses to lessen the chances of being traced. and also people can use different types of pool software such as p2pool etc which offer different features. all of which would mean that mining pool hosts themselves never really touch the reward and all funds go directly to the individual decentralized miners, thus government cant tax or regulate someone that never receives the funds. the problem is not with any software, code or protocol. its with peoples choices. already their are pools that instant payout to individual addresses, as oppose to hoarding the coins and then only pay out on day X per week. this is not POW mining fault. this is the user interface and custom software the mining pool host chooses to use. it takes months to integrate new laws into different countries and only minutes/hours to get new software out there. i can (although already mentioning a couple scenarios) can think of atleast 10 ways to keep bitcoin out of jurisdiction of a country, but all of them have nothing to do with changing the main bitcoin or POW protocols, but to change PEOPLES minds about how they work on their own individual systems. which i tried to explain earlier as being that there is nothing wrong with the underlying code, but people and the choices they make Bitcoin has built in incentive and it's users are able to adapt. Any disruptions increase the incentive to adapt. |
|
|
|
I would still be vary careful dealing with this company; -- We are a bit new here, aren't we?  +1 |
|
|
|
So once again: If you fall for something so painfully stupid, please destroy any and all of your electronics because you are a danger to the internet. Anybody careless enough to fall for a .jar attachment phishing email is obviously not running a functional computer, but some kind of virus breeding pit which is spewing out spam, worms, and UDP packets with reckless abandon.
+1 |
|
|
|
What's happened to bitstamp?
Volume has flatlined.
it is not only an issue on bitstamp. |
|
|
|
debating an a rather large bet here... large wall on virtex would allow me to do it with no slippage... fucking tempting...
You bet  just remember there is 800 more where that came from. |
|
|
|
I have no idea whatsoever why you quoted me to write this. But it is nice, makes me feel noticed.
Do you think its forcing, rather then just market indications being faster on btc-e?
for now yes. especialy since Huobi, BTCChina, OKCoin BTC holdings have reduced. October 3rd before the "crash"  October 8th ....  |
|
|
|
 Cmon now... Or have i just poured myself another glass of whisky for no reason? Let's do this like the last rally. For every $1 bitcoin rises tonight, I will shotgun 1 beer, until I pass out or run out of beers (~120 in the fridge at the moment). LOL your fridge must be filled with nothing but beer! not for long buddy, not for long... I havent got any beer in my fridge. Should i eat a bit of cheese or over due sausage for every +btc? I'd need beer donations again ^^ If you eat all your cheese now, you will prevent future dumps. I would eat the cheese. I would stay away from the sausage. Your name. Your name and this post. I love it. Im gonna go straight for my cheese now, and hold you to your word (that is: in case of future dumps, you owe me cheese). What I find amazing is that a low volume exchange like BTC-e can force Huobi, OKCoin, and BTCChina to move up the price. |
|
|
|
bulltrap?
BTCChina, OKCoin, and Huobi have no choice but to stay ahead of the other exchanges or suffer arbitrage death spiral like mtgox. |
|
|
|
 Let the games begin! |
|
|
|
THANKS! Wow!. So it looks like everything before this summer is more than 1 J/GH. Assuming all in operating cost of 0.10/KWH, that means they are already negative on power or (1J/GH) go negative in December (assumes 10% difficulty bumps). Think about it. The capital investment made in Apr-Jun quarter by the big miners is obsolete in 9 months. This is not a viable business model at $300 BTC. IMHO, BTC prices are dropping because some large miners must sell to keep the lights on. That is a vicious circle. People who believe in BTC are going to hold while the miners dig themselves into a deeper hole. I'm increasingly convinced new capital will stop flowing into new hashing capacity and difficulty increases will slow, perhaps by a lot. you do realize a builder such as asicminer can build a long tube doing 1.4 or 1.5 th for under 200 usd ? in China he can get low cost power at 6 cents or less. you do realize bitmaintech stopped selling the lower priced s-3's because they can build a farm at 225 usd a th. hashnest is its name. The reality is that many will have hardware on the shelf. Especially if they are already capped at their present location. Building infrastructure to operate miners is not cheep. It would be better to have that off the network then having it effect your present operation. So if you take that into consideration. Buying BTC at Sub $300 is far better then any hardware investment. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
