Diff goes up, cex ghs price goes down. Not as much as I'd like, but their prices beat the ass off of preorders that take forever / never arrive.
Plus the Ghs at cex being liquid makes them instantly tradeable on the highs and lows, which is harder to do with actual mining hardware. Ain't no other circumstance where you can spend a mining reward on Ghs as soon as you get it, and that time saved = lesser losses.
I agree with everything you wrote. You don't lose as much money with cex.io as you do with mining hardware. My question is why do you choose to lose money? This. |
|
|
|
Is this forum skewed and a dangerous place to lurk for advice and an objective view? Yes. You should leave now, especially if you're not good at recognizing other people's motives. which scam did you get caught up in ? None, yet. But I'm fairly circumspect. |
|
|
|
(2) Increases in P should cause more people to invest in mining, which in turn increases the rate of production of bitcoin. This should exert a downward force on P (S increases). This is the point where your entire argument falls apart. The rate of Bitcoin production is only a function of the investment in mining on a short-term (i.e. 10-14 days) basis, at which point the difficulty increases to account for the specific increase of production experienced in the previous period. Theoretically speaking, there are only 25 BTC minted every 10 minutes. Practically speaking, it's a bit faster than that (on average) but the rate is directly limited by the production capacity so as to keep the rate as close to 25 BTC per 10 minutes as possible. In other words, you're attempting to apply conventional economic theory to something which is designed from the start to thwart conventional economics (at least as far as production rate goes). So basically, you've gone to all this trouble to make a grand pronouncement about Bitcoin without even attempting to understand the very first thing about Bitcoin. And that's a big fat fail on your part. Do not pass go, do not collect 25BTC. |
|
|
|
Is this forum skewed and a dangerous place to lurk for advice and an objective view? Yes. You should leave now, especially if you're not good at recognizing other people's motives. |
|
|
|
The manufactures have to be careful they don't make the hardware they sold 6 months ago worthless by selling new hardware that will make it worthless. This is wrong. There are zero hardware manufacturers (whether related to Bitcoin or not) who have even the slightest concern for whether the new product will obsolete the old product. In fact, the opposite is true -- the more obsolete the old product, the more money they make. I would think the next step would be the manufactures will start limiting production as to not cannibalize their current customers. That's ridiculous on the face of it. Any manufacturer that limits production will simply provide an opportunity for someone else to sweep in and steal market share. In a capitalist economy, the scenario you've outlined Does Not Exist. |
|
|
|
You should sell me some GHs for 0.001btc and then laugh at how dumb I am then. At that price and the current difficulty, I'd be on the losing end of that deal. So what's my incentive for doing so? What price point would be break-even for you? The exact same price that would be break even for you, plus or minus the price of electricity for me. |
|
|
|
You should sell me some GHs for 0.001btc and then laugh at how dumb I am then. At that price and the current difficulty, I'd be on the losing end of that deal. So what's my incentive for doing so? |
|
|
|
However you make assumptions in the second part as if the parties involved can see the future. A miner selling GH to a real market would be hedging his outlay against a horrible rise in difficulty. He sacrifices potential profit to guarantee a return he can live with. There are other ways to hedge with futures and options, but the market is illiquid and reliant on 3rd parties. Agreed, though this particular factor is largely predictable (at least in the short term). If a buyer lived somewhere where electricity rates were ludacris, buying GH would be his only option to mine. That might in fact be the case, but (again, assuming profit were the sole motivation) this doesn't change the equitability of the transaction. It's still lopsided, no matter how much electricity costs for the renter. Maybe he lacks the technical skills to operate a miner. Again, this doesn't change the equitability. A loss is still a loss. Or he cannot acquire and build a miner in a time-frame quick enough to satisfy his predictions of coming difficulty increases. Nope. Still doesn't change the equitability. If I give you 1BTC and get back 0.5BTC, it's still a loss. There are lots of incentives for buyers and sellers of GH to arrive at a fair price for both. That's just it -- there aren't. Fundamentally, if everything being exchanged is fungible, the only equitable solution is a 1:1 exchange, at which point it becomes pointless. If I pay you five oranges in exchange for three identical oranges, I've been screwed. If I pay you six oranges in exchange for 10 identical oranges, you've been screwed. If the fee and the goods are of the same thing, any transaction between them is essentially pointless. |
|
|
|
In exchange for what? What is the renter doing for you? Why would you make a deal where you mine 1 BTC per month and give half of it to someone else? And that right there is why renting GHs is an intractable problem. Nobody* would pay more per month than each GH can mine, and nobody who owned the hardware would rent it out for less than they could mine with it themselves. Fundamentally, there isn't a way to make the transaction equitable for both parties. * Clearly, people are still buying GHs at cex.io, despite this fundamental and insurmountable flaw. One can only conclude (assuming all parties are driven by profit alone) that one party to the transaction is being unilaterally screwed by the other. You can decide for yourselves which is which. |
|
|
|
I know that is all that matters to you. Which is why it is improper for you to try and browbeat a pool op in lowering or getting rid of his fee's. He knows what his costs, R&D, and reinvestment costs. We, especially you, do not.
I doubt the pool operator will change anything only because I like it to happen  But why should he stop people from expressing their views? This pool is changing drastically and constantly. Major updates, which are very costly and have risk, are under way right now. This pool is very responsive to customers needs and wishes. This, in my opinion, is not the right place to express pool fee views since it isn't just this pool your irritated with. Your earnings theology could and should be discussed in a separate thread. Agreed. I check this pool regularly for updates about the pool. This constant agitation about pool fees is getting to be very much an annoyance. Cyper, I'd like to politely suggest that you start a thread somewhere else about pool fees and what you consider "reasonable". The fact of the matter is that everyone gets to make the decision for themselves -- by either joining the pool or, you know... not. And that's all that needs to be said about that here. |
|
|
|
Well, that depends on when. If you had that BFL 600GH PCIe card in your hands today, you'd make a pretty decent return. By the time they actually ship, however, that's going to be significantly reduced. |
|
|
|
Do not accept these FBI/drug coins in the market.
This is the dumbest thing I've heard yet this morning. But the morning is still young. |
|
|
|
Not much better you can do in terms of stress testing than putting it up against the server that is constantly being spammed by botnets. Just out of curiosity, how do you filter out the botnet connections? On second thought, this is probably something you don't want to disclose publicly. And it's just an intellectual curiosity on my part. I run a forum (unrelated to Bitcoin) and botnet countermeasures (to combat forum spam) have become something of a sport for me, so I'm always eager to hear how other people have solved similar problems. |
|
|
|
|
I do get that everyone is a beginner at some point and doesn't necessarily have a complete grasp of the entirety of Bitcoin. Heck, there's much I don't know about it, and I'm a software engineer with years of experience.
That said, the OP's question smacks of an agenda. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the OP registered for the sole purpose of stirring the shit on the topic of Bitcoin's alleged carbon footprint.
|
|
|
|
do u take in consideration to make btcguild 0% fees pool ?
And then how to pay for anything? Donations? Unlikely. |
|
|
|
Well I was thinking we're on a bit of a roll today. Not so much?
Can't call it a roll yet, but we've finally broken the streak of < 100% shifts. I cant wait until we are on a roll then Definitely improving. |
|
|
|
Didn't they already do a double-spend or attempt one against a casino? Splitting into multiple pools doesn't change anything. The same with allowing miners to redirect cloud mining. They still control the hash rate.
This is important to understand. Too much hashpower controllable from one point is the danger. It doesn't matter where the machines are hashing right now, or whether the people usually in control are super nice. It's my understanding they attempted a double spend against a dice game. That doesn't speak well to their intentions. I also agree that the problem is they COULD do a 51% at any time, even if they "let" their members direct their hashing at other pools. They need to agree they will put a hard limit on the amount of hashing power they'll accept. Just curious - where did you get your "understanding" from? That's a pretty serious allegation .... Here, let me google that for you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ghash.io+double+spend |
|
|
|
|
And the "Order Now" button goes to a dead page on Coinbase, which tells us that "This item is no longer available".
Yeah. Not legit.
|
|
|
|
I am not so egocentric to expect you to "track shit" for me. Are you sure about that? I mean, are you 100% positive? |
|
|
|
I think anyone who has spent some time as a miner with BTC Guild thoroughly appreciates the extremely high level of service and attention to detail that Eleuthria provides on an everyday basis and his efforts to blunt and quickly overcome the widespread DDoS attacks last year were quite simply outstanding. This. The great thing about the phone is that if there is an idiot on the line you just hang up but with a forum people can repeat themselves ad nauseum so I'd like to strongly encourage that the 'self moderated thread' be adopted immediately and this thread locked for read-only reference. Given the level of support that we receive as miners from Eleuthria, it's only right that we support him too, so I urge other BTCG miners to voice their support for this positive and liberating change. Hear, hear! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
