If it can only mine btc, I don't see how it can still be profitable right now to be honest. Some of those Z-Tex boards have 128MB memory, so if I'd even switch to FPGA now, it would have to be at least LTC compatible. Look at some of the people with their Minirigs in the wild threads. Several guys already with 150+Gh/s Minirigs. Not even talking about Asics.
@500mh/s you would make about $3 per day, using 25-30w of power costs about 10-15c per day. How are you doing your calculations? I am making my calculations on the fact that BTC difficulty is skyrocketing for the past weeks already and continues to go up quickly. Furthermore, there are very few months left until the reward halves. So good luck paying off your FPGA at all, particularly when BFL delivers Asics at some point in the next 6 months which is rather likely. Next btc difficulty adjustment in a few days alone will decrease your 2.85$ income to  . Even if difficulty stays at today's level, you will need 175 days to pay off one FPGA. And making an investment into FPGA right now isn't worthwhile if you can't make a profit with them in 2013. They will have zero resale value when difficulty doubles or quadruples. If I hadn't come across Litecoin, and if working Lancelots would have been actually available two months ago, I might have decided differently. You can check the countdown to 25 BTC per block reward here: http://serason.com/projects/emccharts/countdown.phpWe are only 4 months away from 25 BTC block reward. Lancelot and Icarus wouldn't be of zero value in 2013, it will be evaluated as a dev-kit. So I suggest anyone buying lancelot to buy the complete div kit, to be able to sell it to developers "away from BTC mining market". |
|
|
|
|
The site is fantastic! Functionalities rock! What I like the most about BitcoinMax.com is its security! I feel that my coins are secured @ BitcoinMax more than @ GLBSE, for one simple reason; that the withdraw address is fixed and can not be changed without a request+prove of ownership of the withdrawal address. It is such point that made me choose BitcoinMax over any PPT bonds @ GLBSE.
|
|
|
|
you've been sayin' this since $2.
I just want the same bargain as anyone else. I don't think I'd have a right to it but it certainly would be nifty  In the mean time I'll try to learn how to write a bot, if that doesn't work out. I wrote a bot for MTGox, I can share it with you. PM me if you are interested. |
|
|
|
I still don't get why people believe pirate is short in any significant way.
I too can't make much sense of it. He has to pay back his liabilities in BTC, thats true. So from week to week he has to pay less when prices are lower then the week before that. BUT:When he wants to cash out (lender's funds or own profits) he will get most for his BTCs if prices are high. He also seemed to have caused the unprofitable sell offs in the last 2 weeks in order to keep prices down. So why would he do that if he is richest when prices are up? The only way I see to solve this dilemma is that he may want to drive prices down as long as he accumulates bitcoin for his operation and has to pay out dividends to lenders and once we get closer to cash out day, he will encourage rallies to gain maximum profits for his sell out. Why most of you think that he needs to buy now? What if he already bought or currently buying before flying above 10? |
|
|
|
|
Please correct me if am wrong: @ 1.5 per bond and 1 BTC insurance, this is 66.6 % insurance. If I decide to invest in an uninsured PPT that pays 7% weekly instead of 5.5% "insured" and save 0.5 BTC per bond on the side. I would then self insure my bonds by 33.3%. I just can not see any huge deference between self insuring "33.3%" vs your insurance of "66.6%". Cause the 33.3% self insurance would grow weekly by adding the 1.5% to it "the 1.5% that will be lost in your insured PPT".
Bottom line, I don't see any great value in any of the current insured PPT including this one you are about to issue. Personally I found that the best thing about YARR is the daily dividends. However I've sold all my YARR shares and decided to switch to self insuring my PPT bonds "I guess that can easily be done by anyone". I would be interested in insured PPT that can introduce a magical formula, one that can not easily achieved through self insurance. For example 90% insurance: 1 Bond = 1 BTC 90% insured. But that is almost imposible to promis starting from day one. The only solution that I think would solve such problem is to engage mining hardware/hashing power in the insurance. For example 1 PPT bond = 1 BTC and insured by 100 MH/s of ASIC.
|
|
|
|
|
I like the idea of weekly withdraws on Mondays! On the other hand you can allow immediate withdraws for a fee, I guess 1% would be fair "the interest of one day". I guess making 1% on immediate withdraws can allow you to have liquide BTC that are always ready and devoted for immediate withdraws.
|
|
|
|
|
Congratulations Inaba! That is really good news, I am sure BFL customer service will keep improving from now on. I trust in BFL and in your abilities. Wish you Good Luck.
|
|
|
|
It seems more like a Man-in-the-Middle attack, there would have been sniffing involved in uncovering the secret keys. It is also possible that a simple XSS "Cross-Site-Scripting" vulnerability been involved in revealing the secrets "it could be the account number field  ". Except this API key shouldn't be doing anything that would be overly vulnerable to XSS. MiM is possible, but if LR isn't using HTTPS, or they were not verifying the certificate chain (entirely possible) then someone is an idiot. I often hear man-in-the-middle attacks mentioned, but how do they work exactly? I mean, I know the attacker is able to position himself between the target and whatever server the target is trying to reach, but how on earth does he do this? By poisoning the DNS cache of the target? Or through some other means? I mean, I find it pretty hard to understand how I can connect to a site, and someone can somehow inject himself into the path between me and the site. There are multiple MITM techniques. The simplest ones are the ones that take place in the same local network where you and the attacker are connected to the same network/subnet. Anyways, what I mean by MITM attack here is that the secret keys were not cracked but been captured. It could have been done by an insider or even someone in the ISP! |
|
|
|
I think it should be pretty obvious that nobody bruteforced sha-256 or the key, you are overcomplicating - there are so many ways the password can be leaked and so few ways it could be cracked, that I'd bet my car against a beer on chances of crack vs leak In most of these API implementations, they key is checked by an endpoint, and in some badly written systems it stores the key for verification directly in code or config files, which in some badly managed systems can be seen by developers or god knows who while in transit. Even if they key only exists on production servers where only trusted admin has access to, who can be sure that their cheap hosting company (interserver) which does backups for them does proper encryption? All in all, if site operators really believe in what they posted, then it's a good enough reason to never put any BTC on that exchange, as they obviously don't understand what happened. Or lied. Or both PS but at least they handled the situation well. Better than most other victims of the bitcoin economy It seems more like a Man-in-the-Middle attack, there would have been sniffing involved in uncovering the secret keys. It is also possible that a simple XSS "Cross-Site-Scripting" vulnerability been involved in revealing the secrets "it could be the account number field ". |
|
|
|
dev: we got some fake LR deposits so they just bought btc and withdraw
dev: karl1982, exchange not hacked, we just receive fake LR USD
I'm kind of having a hard time seeing what the difference is. If you can get fake USD into an exchange, you've hacked it. Maybe he means that the hack was LR side? |
|
|
|
dev: we got some fake LR deposits so they just bought btc and withdraw
dev: karl1982, exchange not hacked, we just receive fake LR USD
I'm kind of having a hard time seeing what the difference is. If you can get fake USD into an exchange, you've hacked it. INDEED! |
|
|
|
|
Hey Mr. Poker Man! If you have no clue how BTCST is paying the weekly interest "7%", so you better zip it up and try to put your mind into it for a while! Yes BTCST owns a % of all BTC that came to existence, and this is the KEY! Here is a question that may help you while zipping it up thinking about it: If you own 1 to 5% of all BTC that exists what would you do to double your coins once per 3 months?
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid: ~120% PPS: 0.00441122 per Bond
|
|
|
|
p.s. it would be great if everyone could give their opinion of the new page  I'm not sure I agree with it. It's quite possible that BS&T is a scam and will default one day. We all know that, hopefully have taken that possibility into account when deciding whether or not to get involved, and shouldn't feel threatened by others warning about that possibility. I agree that there has been enough argument about this already, and so it's a good idea not to engage in yet more fruitless discussion of "is it a scam or not", but attempting to hide dissenting comments from view doesn't seem right either. If BTC price remains stable for more than 7 days at any given time "stable = +/- 1 to 2%", I would then and only then conceder BS&T a scam. BS&T is day/week trading BTC "just a speculation that makes sense for me". I've developed a trading bot for MTGox last year and been using it for months, I can tell you that an average of 1% daily profit is not that hard to achieve. It seems to me lately that BS&T savings is more like participating in a huge BTC trading operation where only the high trading volume "+huge ask/bid walls" can rule the game! |
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid: ~130% PPS: 0.00523162 per bond.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that the lending services OPs have started to do their thing in the range of 7.8$ <-> 9.2$. Do you really think that there are any kind of demand on borrowing BTC for such lending services? I think the lending services are collecting BTC just for day trading with huge amounts. It seems that their target now is 1$ profit per round. This is just speculation.
|
|
|
|
Thats why difficulty increases with every single GH added to the network.
No it doesn't. Difficulty increases with a higher GH/s rate, not just with every GH. So the current -speed- of mining decides difficulty. Less people currently mining = less difficulty. http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ shows this clearly. Between 1 year and 6 months ago the difficulty was falling because hashrate was falling because the price was falling. So the first event should be a rise in BTC price "with no relation to mining". Good point! So what do you think about the price of BTC @ 25$ by the end of the year? |
|
|
|
Bitcoin's price comes not from the cost of producing it, but from the ever-changing balance of supply and demand of the coins. The price is far more reliant on "how useful the world finds Bitcoin to be" and far less reliant on "how much it costs to make a new one."
Mining cost + difficulty indeed affect the supply! The supply of newly mined coins is constant (7200 per day right now). No amount of new mining technology, or new interest in mining, will ever change this new supply rate. When the rate halves in December, perhaps the price will be higher due to somewhat smaller supply (remember new coins are only a part of supply at any given time), but again this has nothing at all to do with mining.
The only way that mining would significantly influence Bitcoin price is if it changed the rate of coin production. And in this case, the new technology would make greater supply, and thus push the bitcoin price down, not up.
The total amount of mined BTC daily is constant "nothing is gonna change that". Thats why difficulty increases with every single GH added to the network. If you can mine 1 btc a day @ difficulty 1000, you would need 2 days to mine 1 btc @ difficulty 2000. If you can mine 1 BTC a day @ the current difficulty, with the same hashing power it would require at least 20 days to mine 1 BTC when ASIC hits the network. Still the total amount of the network daily mined BTC will remain the same. Most of the mined BTC by then will go to ASIC farms. What I wanna point here is that there will be great changes in the supply chain. Realizing such fact today, makes bitcoiners evaluate their currently owned bitcoins at a higher value, and increases the market demand on buying BTC before it crosses 10$. |
|
|
|
Actually its vice versa: Any one who claims that the rise in the price has no relation with mining, ASIC, FPGA, BFL, ... is totally misunderstanding Bitcoin Why? The price of Bitcoin is usually related at a certain level to the expenses involved in producing 1 BTC. Many people believe this. It's nonsense. Consider the expenses required in producing one bucket of fine sand from the bottom of the ocean floor. This sand would cost thousands of dollars to bring to market. How much will the sand be worth? It won't be worth anything, because nobody wants it. It is not useful. Bitcoin's price comes not from the cost of producing it, but from the ever-changing balance of supply and demand of the coins. The price is far more reliant on "how useful the world finds Bitcoin to be" and far less reliant on "how much it costs to make a new one." The supply of newly mined coins is constant (7200 per day right now). No amount of new mining technology, or new interest in mining, will ever change this new supply rate. When the rate halves in December, perhaps the price will be higher due to somewhat smaller supply (remember new coins are only a part of supply at any given time), but again this has nothing at all to do with mining. The only way that mining would significantly influence Bitcoin price is if it changed the rate of coin production. And in this case, the new technology would make greater supply, and thus push the bitcoin price down, not up. Thus it is strongly related to difficulty and the ROI of the mining hardware. If you can buy a mining device that has a ROI of 4 to 8 months, so immediately Bitcoin price adjusts to such value. No one would buy BTC @ 20$ where he can buy a device for 400$ to 600$ that has a ROI of 4 to 8 months. Also difficulty plays a big rule here. The easier it is to mine 1 BTC the lower value its gonna be traded, and when difficulty and ROI of hardware rises "which is the situation with ASIC", only then BTC price can start to rise.
What makes me confident about BTC price reaching 25$ by the end of 2012 beginning of 2013 is that when ASIC hits the network the ROI of any FPGA device will turn into 3 to 5 years instead of ~6 months. And with the 25 BTC block reward, the ROI of ASIC devices would be more than 12 months. So the price of BTC will adjust according to these facts "whenever it happen" to turn ROI of ASIC into an acceptable level of around "6 months".
^all of the above is irrelevant, given my prior statement Suppliers can not go lower than the ROI of 12 months of the mining cost "thats why BTC didn't drop lower than ~2$", and can not go higher than the ROI of 3 to 4 months of mining cost "thats why BTC highest traded price during the last year was ~7.2". But today the equation has changed with the ASIC expected delivery date! GPU and FPGA miners has to return the investment in a shorter time frame. Such time frame is geting shorter every single day. |
|
|
|
Actually its vice versa: Any one who claims that the rise in the price has no relation with mining, ASIC, FPGA, BFL, ... is totally misunderstanding Bitcoin Why? The price of Bitcoin is usually related at a certain level to the expenses involved in producing 1 BTC. Thus it is strongly related to difficulty and the ROI of the mining hardware. If you can buy a mining device that has a ROI of 4 to 8 months, so immediately Bitcoin price adjusts to such value. No one would buy BTC @ 20$ where he can buy a device for 400$ to 600$ that has a ROI of 4 to 8 months. Also difficulty plays a big rule here. The easier it is to mine 1 BTC the lower value its gonna be traded, and when difficulty and ROI of hardware rises "which is the situation with ASIC", only then BTC price can start to rise. What makes me confident about BTC price reaching 25$ by the end of 2012 beginning of 2013 is that when ASIC hits the network the ROI of any FPGA device will turn into 3 to 5 years instead of ~6 months. And with the 25 BTC block reward, the ROI of ASIC devices would be more than 12 months. So the price of BTC will adjust according to these facts "whenever it happen" to turn ROI of ASIC into an acceptable level of around "6 months". |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
