An Intel chip has a TDP of 125 watts (thats the big ones) and yes you can over clock them band make them run in the hundreds of watts... like 200, maybe even 250 watts max. The Intel chips never run at 300 watts or 400 watts during normal use. Sure, there are over clocking crews that make them do that, as one-offs, using liquid nitrogen cooling... but for normal pc use, the intel chip never gets that hot and doesn't need extreme cooling.... whereas, on a mining rig, we're expecting our 'extremely powerful hashing chips' to use 'extremely high amounts of watts' and run 'extremely hot' all of the time... which is why the cooling system for a bitcoin mining rig must have extremely efficient cooling. Actually, the cooling problem is far greater with CPU's. Overall power consumption per mm² of a cpu may look lower than for a bitcoin chip, but its not, because in a cpu the power consumption (and thus heat) is highly concentrated in a few tiny tiny parts of the cpu. For reference, here is an infrared picture of an Intel cpu:  Basically all the power is consumed in a just a few % of the die, less than 1mm². A bitcoin miner will not have such hotspots and be much more homogeneous. That makes cooling a lot easier because silicon is not the best heat conductor. Sure you still have to get rid of those 100s of watts, but thats not rocket science when they are spread over a far great area, at least with current designs. |
|
|
|
Bitcoinorama has said in this thread something to the effect,
there will be a 30 day pause between the first batch and the November orders.
(he was passing along KnCMiner statement from Sam I think)
If that is 30 days from end of september, then that wont be much of a pause. |
|
|
|
here are mine -
why arent my imgs showing up?
Because you are linking to a page, not the image itself. Click on "get embeded codes" at the bottom, then click "large thumbnail" and copy paste the linked BBcode. [URL=http://imgur.com/VS0ngGT][IMG]https://i.imgur.com/VS0ngGTl.jpg[/img][/URL]  |
|
|
|
The HK SFC has responded. Anyone want to help me with a response? Pls PM me. Also if anyone has contacted HK police about this let me know as well. I think we can delay replying until Nov 1st since people are still hoping for that deadline. Here are their questions:
...
1. Whether you are an investor of Labcoin. If so, please explain in details its operation and
advise how you subscribed to the shares of Labcoin.
2. The detailed operation of the “virtual currency bitcoin”;
3. Whether the scheme is promoted in Hong Kong? If yes, how it is promoted in Hong Kong;
4. Whether you had reported the matter to Hong Kong Police; and
5. Please provide a copy of the prospectus of Labcoin as we are unable to access the file
via the hyperlink provided in your email.
...
Regarding point 3, this may be useful: When are you subject to SFC regulation?
As a general principle, the SFC has stated that it will not seek to regulate the provision of financial services that are conducted from outside Hong Kong and over the Internet, unless such activities are targeted at people residing in Hong Kong or are detrimental to the interests of the investing public in Hong Kong or to the market integrity of Hong Kong.
In determining whether or not an activity conducted over the Internet is targeted at people residing in Hong Kong, the SFC will consider the following factors:
• Whether the information is targeted, via ‘push’ technology, to people whom the financial services provider knows, or should reasonably know, reside in Hong Kong. ‘Push technology’ refers to any technology which broadcasts or directs information to a particular person or group of persons and includes e-mail, direct mailshots and the like.
• Whether the information available over the Internet is presented in a manner which gives the appearance that people residing in Hong Kong are targeted. Common examples cited by the SFC that may suggest Hong Kong people are targeted include the:
- use of local distribution agents in Hong Kong;
- use of references to Hong Kong dollars;
- use of Chinese language; and
- publication in Hong Kong newspapers/magazines of the Internet address.
• Whether the information presented includes a disclaimer clearly indicating that the services or products are not available to people residing in Hong Kong. A general statement that the service or product is not being made available in any jurisdiction in which the service or product would or could be illegal is not sufficient (either for the SFC or for other regulators). What is required is either a positive statement of the countries in which the service or product is available (eg, this service/product is only available to Hong Kong residents) or a negative statement that the service or product is not available to Hong Kong residents.
• Whether reasonable precautions are taken to guard against the acceptance of purchases from, or provision of services to, people residing in Hong Kong.
These precautions may include checking the mailing addresses of potential clients and the use of blocking technology to restrict access to the information and services provided. As a matter of practice, blocking technology is likely to be only partially effective at best and so other precautions will need to be adopted.
A simple check box on a website for a person to indicate that he or she is, or is not, a Hong Kong resident would not by itself be a sufficient precaution.
The SFC’s Guidance Note on Internet Regulation makes it clear that the use of precautions or disclaimers will not necessarily preclude the SFC from exercising its powers of enforcement if the conduct of the people who are responsible for the particular activity over the Internet or some other circumstances so warrant.
If a website is considered to be targeted at Hong Kong investors, the person responsible for the website needs to be licensed for the relevant regulated activity carried on via the website. http://www.worldservicesgroup.com/publications.asp?action=article&artid=2358Since Labcoin is now listed on cryptostocks, the above will get cryptostocks in trouble with the SFC, but thats unavoidable, just like its unavoidable they will get in trouble with the SEC and just about any other commission in the world. |
|
|
|
Are people near the front still waiting for their orders? Or is October getting cleared out?
Looks like some are still waiting, but october delivery orders may be close to being all shipped: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=249065.0Curious if KnC will start shipping november orders in october or if they will have to wait for components to arrive. |
|
|
|
|
Dont know what to think of that uberhub. At the same time I think its one of the coolest things Ive seen a while, and yet its one of the daftest ideas, especially so late in the game. I mean, if you think about it, assigning a USB port per asic when you could solder 25 or 50 on them straight on the PCB and save a fair chunk of money, it doesnt make a lot of sense.
|
|
|
|
Not exactly high res with just one datapoint per day |
|
|
|
|
hashrate is fungible, there is no difference between lots of small miners or fewer big ones. Its not one or the other causing your problem, its just that far too many people thought asic mining would be profitable, and therefore, it isnt. Its a zero sum game after all. With closed book preorders, this self defeating prophecy was predictable and predicted. Count yourself lucky though, with KnC you made the least worst 28nm choice; you will not break even (bitcoin denominated) but you will be far better off than hashfast, cointerra and BFL customers.
|
|
|
|
I would definitely turn off my ASICs if the electricity costing to run them was less than the value of the BTC they were returning. I would take that electricity money I saved and buy BTC with it.
I'd end up with more BTC and the same money spent. The choice is simple.
You give miners too much credit for being rational  . Thing is, even a 65nm BFL rig is still operationally profitable at a difficulty of 4 billion and their hashrate will be statistical noise next year. A KnC rig will be profitable until ~25B and a hashfast/cointerra/bitmine/monarch, if they meet their goals, until ~50B. OF course, all assuming todays BTC rate and depending on electricity cost, which many will value near zero in winter due to the heating. Point being, not a lot is going to be turned off anytime soon, even if miners would suddenly start acting rationally. |
|
|
|
why burn bridges?
Some bridges are better burnt because of where they lead.  |
|
|
|
Yes, hashrate will not drop until we hit 30 billion difficulty or so. The only thing that could cause it to drop is a huge drop in BTC. Like down to $50 or below. As long as it stays above 100 we won't see difficulty drop for a long time.
I do see it happen earlier than 30 billion; at that point growth will be slow enough that statistical variation might cause a small drop in difficulty. I guess a massive DDoS could also help. But in general, yeah hashrate isnt going to go down for the foreseeable future. I dont even think a BTC price drop to $50 will do that any time soon, very few people will turn off their expensive asics just because BTC rate imploded "temporarily". Particularly since most of them would still be operationally profitable for quite some time, even at that price. |
|
|
|
Im wodering how this will go... obviously Jan is 1500-2000 MM diff and very shortly by end of Q1 / 2014 weŕe at 5000 diff, but from that to 10.000 MM means again doubling the whole network from around 35TH to 70TH... how long this will take!?
Hard to say how long it will take, much will depend on how fast these companies can produce and ship, but its relatively straightforward to calculate roughly where it will end: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=295270.0 |
|
|
|
|
ghash.io now at 630TH. Id love to know how much of them is their own hardware, and how much from miners just using their pool. Anyone have a clue?
|
|
|
|
Lets fill this thread with it  |
|
|
|
I hear the figure 30PH/s tossed around for this coming January. Then to stay current we need to buy 10x the hashing power we have now. Ouch.
ITs that kind of twisted reasoning that may lead to 30PH in January. And will then cause people like you to go out and buy 10x more yet again, ignoring the fact mining is a zero sum game. When will people understand buying mining gear simply isnt going to be profitable for the next 6 months at least, and if/when it ever becomes profitable again, it will be with razor thin margins for those with the cheapest electricity. That said, 30PH in January is likely exaggerated, unless Im underestimating the number of HF preorders and their manufacturing capability. |
|
|
|
yes, i still maintain that the HR will stabilize or even drop at some point; probably sometime early next year after Cointerra ships (if they do at all).
How much do you want to bet? Im willing to bet just about anything you want that we will not see a single difficulty decrease before March 2014 (and thats playing it safe). As for being too early to tell who is less unlucky; it isnt. Next difficulty will be 420M or more and is due in just 3 days. And almost certainly *all* HF customers will have to stomach at least one more difficulty adjustment around November 2 or 3 before they can unpack their miner, and more than likely many or most of them will have to stomach 2 more difficulty adjustments. At that point, we are looking at a difficulty close to 1B before you mined your first satoshi. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
