They are a large, ponderous, confused corporation. Other than that missing detail, your analysis is reasonable.
Fair enough!  |
|
|
|
So something that was once used with a profit motive cannot be reused by the same person for a donation motive?
No, it can of course be reused by the same person for a donation motive But, they might find benefit in using the device towards non-profit purposes.
Sure and one of those non-profit purposes might be the free payment network that Bitcoin is. I'm scratching my head trying to figure out what your point is. So someone can donate electric costs worth of MH/s to the Bitcoin network by spending electric costs less small bitcents of revenues, OR someone can donate electric costs worth of computing power to other distributed computing projects. Do we both agree on this? Assuming so, a person would choose to donate towards the Bitcoin network or another distributed computing project based on what they believe and value. Do we both agree on this? Assuming so, what gives you the right to say that it makes no sense for someone to choose to donate their electric costs worth of computing power to distributed computing projects other than Bitcoin? |
|
|
|
|
What if AMD gets in the game and creates an ASIC at some point in the future? They are obviously aware of Bitcoin mining, as they advertise mining as a selling point on their latest and greatest video cards. So then, they are likely equally aware of the fact that GPU mining is on its way out the door. And they should also be aware of Bitcoin continuing to grow, creating a larger and larger market for mining devices.
They have the fabs, the engineers, and the reputation to make it happen.
Here's what I picture if AMD did it...
- PCI-e based (it would live inside your computer just the same as a video card).
- Different levels of miners, up to 200w of consumption (using the normal 6-pin or 8-pin power connectors as necessary).
- Unless Bitcoin mining grows SIGNIFICANTLY (would require a price upwards of several hundred dollars), I don't see them putting much more than just a small amount of engineering and fab time behind this. Thus, one could expect an older, larger process to be used - 65nm, or perhaps one step smaller. They have access to 28nm processes, but those modern processes are better off spent on GPU's and the like.
- Very competitive pricing (probably nothing that costs more than a top-end GPU).
- Targeted towards the more mainstream crowd of people, even towards (currently) non-Bitcoin users.
- Makes use of existing assets they have (perhaps reusing video card HSF assemblies, etc).
The 3rd point above is why I believe they haven't given it more than a token glance, but you never know what they might have going on behind the scenes. Bitcoin miners would likely accept up to a 1 year present-value break-even, especially with AMD giving Bitcoin some extra credibility. The remaining 3 ASIC vendors have likely pre-order-sold around $5M-$6M worth (I know this because of reasons), which means there's still $15M in potential sales to capture. If AMD determines they can do a complete process, start to finish, for only a couple million, they might see that there's still plenty of potential profit in it for them.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if this closure can be blamed, in part, on deflation? I mean, everyone generally agrees that people save more in a deflationary environment, which could be indicated both by the lower price of similar advertisements in BTC relative to USD and also the lack of "middle-class customers with relatively high (READ: expendable) income" to target.
|
|
|
|
No, you missunderstood that. It's the reason to change that doesn't make much sense. The reason was, that ASICs come around and you don't get (enough) bitcoins anymore on your FPGAs. And it still doesn't make much sense to me, to switch the good cause that i'm donating to, just because I don't get (enough) bitcoins in return for my donation anymore (especially to switch to something returning even less than not enough).  So something that was once used with a profit motive cannot be reused by the same person for a donation motive? Really, I feel like you are saying that someone who is motivated to make money cannot be motivated to donate. An FPGA would be useless for making money after ASICs are going in full force. If you make a couple of bitcents with one, but then have to pay out $5/month in electricity, you'd be losing money. Thus, if a person was solely profit-motivated, they wouldn't even turn it on after it became unprofitable. But, they might find benefit in using the device towards non-profit purposes. To put it another way, doing anything for profit or non-profit nets a benefit. A person will switch from for-profit mining to non-profit calculating when the benefit for the non-profit activity exceeds the benefit of the for-profit activity. Obviously, it's a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison, which is why each person has to decide for themselves exactly where that point is. |
|
|
|
If ASICs do come around and people plan to quit mining they probably do so because they don't get any high returns anymore.
Now what you ask them to do will give them even less than that, instead of keep mining for maybe 1, or 2 bitcents a month, which is way less than the power-cost to run those rigs, but at least it is something, you want them to run the rigs on some other project that doesn't return anything at all.
That doesn't make much sense to me.
Some people donate to charity too. That doesn't make much financial sense either. Nothing wrong with donations. It's not about which of both make financial sense, it's about what you think is a good cause. Is BOINC/folding/ET-search a better cause and thus more worth donating to, than having a free (as in freedom) payment network? Said this on some other thread already, but anyway: When I started mining (and that was back around the time when 1BTC was less than $0.01) I only did it because i thought having a free (as in freedom), decentralized, secure, non-government-related, non-bank-related payment network was a very nice idea worth donating some of my CPU-cycles to. And that hasn't changed yet, it's still a good idea and nice to have, worth donating to, even if that means i have to actually pay something for it. I can't really say it's worth donating to BOINC or similar, I simply don't know, nor does anyone else. Even if someone folds some proteins (or makes donators do so) and finds the cure for <insert-scary-disease-here>, those that are in deep need for it probably don't get/can't afford it anyway and only the Pharma-Mafia profits. Anyway, it's your resources, your choice how to use it and what to use it for.  Then why did you say it doesn't make much sense to run the rigs on some project that doesn't return anything at all (or to be more clear, hasn't returned anything yet)? Obviously, you were at that time asserting that you COULD say it wasn't worth donating to BOINC or similar. You're contradicting yourself. I agree with your latter post - each individual much determine what is worth it and what is not to themselves. |
|
|
|
If ASICs do come around and people plan to quit mining they probably do so because they don't get any high returns anymore.
Now what you ask them to do will give them even less than that, instead of keep mining for maybe 1, or 2 bitcents a month, which is way less than the power-cost to run those rigs, but at least it is something, you want them to run the rigs on some other project that doesn't return anything at all.
That doesn't make much sense to me.
Some people donate to charity too. That doesn't make much financial sense either. You can ask the aliens for a quantum mining rig when they get here. I've never been involved in the SETI@home program. I think aliens and other intelligent life is utter nonesense. But that doesn't mean I think people have no legitimate reason for putting computing power towards such a project. If they believe in it, why not? |
|
|
|
But the rules you would like to see happen would discourage the economy from creating a quality environment. You'd have fewer people attempting to start up small businesses, less innovation (equates to fewer products improving our lives), less jobs available (fewer people who want to invest in a larger labor force when the risk vs reward ratio is lower and their loans cost more?), etc.
I disagree. First off, my tax rates over all would be less than our current system. Around 10-19% seem to be a range I feel would be acceptable and would meet the needs of basic services. You can't compare our current system to a new system in a 1 to 1 manner. There are many other laws that would be changed or thrown out. Overall it would be a much more vibrant environment and it would encourage new business. What it would focus on is established businesses that continue to trying and monopolize or corner any industry. Usually other business are the biggest deterrent for new entrants, not the tax code. Again I state, I would want to discourage large concentrations of wealth in rent-seeking and interest gather operations. So in your system, you get to arbitrarily pay the taxes you want, arbitrarily tax whatever companies you want (under the pretext that they are "trying to monopolize or corner any industry", which is naturally a subjective observation), and somehow this is supposed to encourage new businesses and a more vibrant environment? If I am an investor, and an entrepreneur comes to me for capital to build a housing complex (thus reducing rental costs for the area, as more housing is available), I might look at my potential gains (profit of $100k on a $1M investment), your 60% capital gains tax (or whatever it is you wish to raise the capital gains tax rate to), and say, meh, tying up $1M for a $400k return over 10 years isn't worth it. Whereas I might look at the current capital gains tax rate (what is it, 25%?), and say, wow, $750k over a 10 year span for a $1M investment sounds like a great deal! Meanwhile, because I've decided not to invest in a housing complex, the housing complex doesn't get built, people struggle to find a place to live, and housing rental prices rise until the calculated return on investment is worth it for some investor somewhere. What am I missing here? How would a capital gains tax NOT discourage investment? Sgt. if you want to actually discuss this, then you need to read what I wrote. I never mentioned or support a 60% capital gains rate. I wrote a range of 10-19% is an acceptable tax range depending on the nature of the income. If you are going to just make up number and then do equations, I guess then you can make any example to make my statements seem unreasonable. I would like to address what I am actually saying and not wild speculation or assumptions. Agreeable? Dalkore Ok, so you want to reduce current capital gains taxes, and further reduce or eliminate all other taxes? I am all for smaller government, and any decrease in investor level taxes would certainly increase economic activity. I suppose the only remaining point of contention might lie along these lines: I would argue that a 5% tax rate on all would stimulate the economy more than a 10% tax only on capital gains. |
|
|
|
If ASICs do come around and people plan to quit mining they probably do so because they don't get any high returns anymore.
Now what you ask them to do will give them even less than that, instead of keep mining for maybe 1, or 2 bitcents a month, which is way less than the power-cost to run those rigs, but at least it is something, you want them to run the rigs on some other project that doesn't return anything at all.
That doesn't make much sense to me.
Some people donate to charity too. That doesn't make much financial sense either. |
|
|
|
Perhaps you should consider why that may be. I mean, when FUD comes fairly effortlessly it seems an indicator that there is plenty to be fearful, uncertain, and doubtful about.
Good point, though it could also be the result of a hefty dose of paranoia. The next 30 days will tell all. or 60 days... we don't know exactly how long it takes to assemble a unit. However, the best estimate we have for this is that if you order today, 13 January 2013, you would likely receive your order around the middle of March or possibly sooner if you're ordering a Jalapeno or a Single That's not when they are planning to start shipping preorders. IF YOU ORDER TODAY are the key words in that statement! |
|
|
|
This thread occasionally pays 100 chips (.1 btc)
put it in your my account "redeem code"
Jan-DCNU7%9*A!
1st one gets it! always a race!
That code was redeemed by atomicdog at 2013-01-16 05:16:43 for 100 chips. Apparently I missed out! Code must have been published somewhere else to be redeemed seconds before it was posted here? Either that, or Seals's clock is off by a few seconds compared to bitcointalk.org heh I'd say it is not entirely uncommon for server times to be off by several minutes between each other. |
|
|
|
just to REALLY beat a dead horse..
I'm pretty sure all that is left is an indent in the ground. Maybe a few pieces of bone. |
|
|
|
hmm do you have 2+ monitors on one video card? win7
One monitor, on Linux. Though that won't make any difference if the problem really is the monitor. If you're getting different behaviour with 2 monitors vs. 1 monitor, then it's your video card/driver doing something screwy as opposed to your monitor. Well then, you've probably got exactly what he's looking for! What brand/model are you using? I've never seen any monitor display anything immediately after being turned on - all the ones I have used seem to take at least 2-3 seconds before they display a picture.
I mean, as soon as an image comes up (usually in 1-2 seconds), it's what it's supposed to be, with no stupid splash screens. Oh, I took immediately to mean immediately. I think some of the older Dell monitors would show a splash screen as well, but yeah, that's garbage. Who wants to wait extra for the company logo to disappear? |
|
|
|
This thread occasionally pays 100 chips (.1 btc)
put it in your my account "redeem code"
Jan-DCNU7%9*A!
1st one gets it! always a race!
That code was redeemed by atomicdog at 2013-01-16 05:16:43 for 100 chips. Apparently I missed out! |
|
|
|
OMG.... <table>-layout in 2013
Hey now, I still use tables! They're much easier to work with than divs in some cases. Umm, why? Use tables, for actual tables. Use divs for layout. For tables... EDIT: Actually, I take that back. I think I have used tables even in one of my recent websites for layout. *shrug* I just find them easier to work with. Maybe I'm old fashioned. Probably I just haven't spent enough time with divs. I find some of their odd limitations (especially with regards to positioning) quite frustrating at times. It's just whatever works best with my limited programming knowledge. |
|
|
|
Hey BFL FAN BOY!
I'm just trying to understand wtf this is about -- is this an issue about BFL fan boys versus people who don't like BFL? Or if BFL is scamming? It's been said a couple of times that this is not a "court of law" and that legalese or line-by-line responses are sperging. There is another side to that coin. It's not okay to waltz in here and say that someone is a scammer because you don't like them. That's why I asked for a list of facts earlier. In response I got a bunch of facts like "Sonny committed a crime 10 years ago" and "Josh is a big fat jerk". I'm sorry, I should have said, facts related to whether or not BFL is scamming. Anyway, no one said your facts had to prove anything. Relax bro. It's okay to hate someone. You have a right to hate people and talk shit in a free society. LOL I like how you are telling me "how things are". Thanks but no thanks. No one asked for you input. But keep trying to sound intelligent.  No one asked for your input either. We're all just weighing in. What Monster Trent said has some real weight. We need to get the address of the fab, and have someone go down there and pay a visit. Excellent idea! I say six of us should go to the FAB and they should give us free reign to walk around and inspect the plant. The FAB should have nothing to hide. Why didn't I think of this earlier?  Josh actually said something about allowing people to visit the fab as soon as they have it all set up, just so long as you called ahead of time to make sure someone would be available to provide a tour, since they're going to be in and out a whole bunch in the coming weeks. Our new manufacturing facility is almost complete. We will be posting a video walk through hopefully by the end of the week so that you can see the facility and all the parts we have, ready and waiting for the chips to finish baking (Mmmm delicious chips). We will accept visitors, but please call before you decide to drop by so that we know when to expect you and can make time to show you around. We are (understandably) very busy right now and I do not want to turn anyone away because everyone is already engaged with other tasks. I will be traveling a lot, as will several other members of our team, so make sure we are there if you want to talk to us about anything.
https://forums.butterflylabs.com/announcements/692-bfl-asic-status.htmlhttps://forums.butterflylabs.com/bfl-forum-miscellaneous/690-13-jan-2013-asic-update-discussion-thread-12.html#post10590Depends on your perspective... BFL has ~12,000 chips coming that will put out 7.5 GHash each, for a total of 90,000 GHash. The first week of BFL's shipments will equal Avalon's first batch. Unless your BFL order was paid for in June, Avalon doubling the hashrate won't mean that much.
But whatever. I'm content with BFL's performance for the most part. Ask me in 2 or 3 months how the various manufacturers have done.
12,000 chips @ $1,300 each = $15.6M in pre-order monies this is not science. This is 1 post on the BFL forums. Quoted for mathematical failure! BTW, you still haven't taken me up on my bet. Should be easy money right? I'll bet 20 BTC that BFL will deliver a working ASIC product to multiple end customers before the end of 2013. |
|
|
|
Yup. Very good product!
Blocks avg. per hour: 4.92
Difficulty: 3,249,550
Next Difficulty: in 947 blocks 3,035,068
Network Hashrate: 21.73 Terahashs/s
I was looking at this set of graphs: http://bitcoin.sipa.be/index.htmland it seems like there was a bit of a spike just a little while ago which could have been testing. Of course, it could be other things as well even testing by BFL (cough, cough) - and there is the DISTINCT possibility i am misinterpreting the graphs. BFL won't be testing anything until February based on their timeline. |
|
|
|
If you have no personal knowledge of "what I did the day before" then please read this post that pretty much shut down BFL's weak excuses for Josh Zerlan acting in such an unprofessional manner: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133487.msg1452374#msg1452374 which is worth a full repost in this thread, as that was the first BFL defense mechanism for explaining why their empolyee would talk to a known skeptic in such a way. I am also adding this to the OP for full context of when watching the video: This is to the best I can remember. I wasn't recording anything day 1, wasn't planning on anything but sneaking into CES to shake some BTC hands as I always do when BTC companies buy booths in Vegas for conventions. Ok, fair enough. I can't really substantiate any claims, as I wasn't there and can only base my statements on hearsay. |
|
|
|
So, you all saw this right? I have seen it already a month ago, 2 months ago, 3 months ago, 4 months ago... How many times should I watch this movies again and again? Tis certainly entirely up to you. Get a refund if you're tired of it. Do u work for BFL ? Nope. Though to be fair, they did pay me to advertise my signature space a while back (along with many others). I just like to defend against logical fallacies. You know, the whole "Someone is WRONG on the internet!" xkcd thing? Yeah, that's me. Working for BFl was a bit over the top.....we all make mistakes "Would have run by now" thats the only thing that is really shaky in my book We all have our crosses to bear (Catholic) or Allahu Akba to my muslim friends & Hey "i brought a goat" for my pagan brothers I just can't understand why BFL would still be around (along with all it's 25 paid employees) if they were scammers. What would they be trying to accomplish right now? They are losing money that they could have run with every day, both through issuance of refunds and through payment of rent/employees/etc, and Josh in particular is spending a great deal of time creating elaborate stories and specific details that they couldn't release earlier not. If they were scammers, why didn't they make up these stories much earlier on? Why not give out these details from day one? Or at the very least, months ago? I just see so many things that point to them not being scammers, I really can't see it as a serious possibility. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
