Por cierto me acaband de comentar un proyecto muy similar al mio https://cloudhashing.com/ la pagina esta mucho mas currada (tendrán mas presupuesto) pero la diferencia principal entre este proyecto y el mio es que en esa pagina tu compras X GH/S durante 2 años, a los dos años tendrias que volver a comprar X GH/s. Aquí las participaciones son de por vida. Te queda mucho por investigar si acabas de descubir cloudhashing  Lo dicho, enhorabuena por la iniciativa, pero te recomiendo no dejarte llevar por las prisas y que te prepares para una oportunidad futura. Las prisas ya no sirven porque por desgracia ya llegaste tarde para la generación 1 de Avalon, pero puedes prepararte para estar en primera fila cuando salgan chips más con mejor relación potencia/consumo/precio. |
|
|
|
|
Te recomiendo ir acumulando BTC para estar preparando cuando salgan los chips gen. 2 de Avalon u otros, para ser de los primeros en adoptarlos, este es un factor fundamental en este mundo.
Además, si adelantas tú el dinero te resultará mucho más fácil e incluso más rentable ganarte la confianza de los inversores, te lo digo por experiencia.
|
|
|
|
Doesn't matter, their device use 28nm technology, the electricity cost is much more favorable than competitors, it will only be treatened by ASICs with even more advanced technology, and those are not readily available for at least one year
Source? I remind you that a couple of months ago all the ASIC vendors said that 28nm chips for BTC mining were impossible by this year. In fact, many of them keep saying that KnC is overpromising. |
|
|
|
Do you realize that those variables ( bid sum/ask sum & price; bid sum & ask sum) are displayed in those charts taking into account their own relative highest and lowest points in a given timeframe, and thus them intersecting on the chart is just arbitrary and meaningless, right?
In the "Bid sum/Ask skum & Price" chart, both graphs are in USD/BTC and both graphs use the same scale. That's not arbitrary and meaningless. Sure, I typed too fast and I incorrectly included the Bid sum/Ask sum & price chart. But the fact that the bid sum and ask sum crosses on a chart is 100% arbitrary and meaningless, do you agree? |
|
|
|
As long as the difficulty is lower than 800 million (assuming a btc/USD price of 100$), those devices make profit.
With a break-even of what, 800 years? exactly - these devices are probably only not good for mining alt coins anything at by this point. SHA256 alt coins particularly only.Corrected that for you. Corrected it further. You are correct, I beg you pardon. That's the harsh reality. BTW, are you really in contact with KnC miner for the development of cgminer for Jupiter and Saturn? Can you update us on the timeline if it's true? And sorry for the off-topic. |
|
|
|
It would be very useful to have an estimate on how many TH/s KnCMiner is planning to ship & deploy from September to the end the year. This is a very important point, as in the mining business if you deploy too many TH/s you are actually killing any ROI possibility for all your customers. I hope they have a plan to protect their customers investment - please advise.
I did ask and they said their customer's ROI is a priority. They can only sell items that give a return. That their pricing has never been too cheap, it's a case of predicting future global hashrate. They said they have a few options to make sure customers get a return. Thanks for that but I guess everybody would appreciate a concrete answer. What they plan to do? Firstly and foremost, how many TH/s are they planning to ship&deploy, and how fast? This is the very first step in a "paln" to make sure customers get a return. |
|
|
|
As long as the difficulty is lower than 800 million (assuming a btc/USD price of 100$), those devices make profit.
With a break-even of what, 800 years? exactly - these devices are probably only good for mining alt coins by this point. SHA256 alt coins particularly only. Corrected that for you. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the info Bitcoinorama and all the other folks that contributed. I think I've made up my mind about KnC and asic purchasing in general.
The way I see it. The arrival of asics in rapid and large scale as Knc and several others propose will kill profitability in the short to medium term. People who have invested thousand of dollars in asics will try to dump their bitcoin as soon as they mine it to pay for their investments before the dif goes through the roof. This will create a buyers market and the price of btc will plummet.
The smart players and long term investors will hoard and bottom feed but they will be the few. Many many more will sell as long as its still profitable for fear of losses. Unfortunately human nature being what it is a lot of people have jumped in feet first thinking this would be an endless source of easy money, probably going into debt to fund it. They will be the first to panic and flood the market with cheap coin. This will probably start a snowball effect that will collapse the market for months until things level out. The proverbial "fire sale"
And when the dust settles the time for small miners will be gone. Unless you are willing to constantly upgrade and treat this as a business you will eventually have a nice warm metal brick sitting in your garage. Bitcoin will be dominated by those with deep pockets and ebay will be flooded with cheap asics.
This might sound alarmist but this has a similar feel to the dotcom and housing bubbles that many people lost their shirts in. People saw a rising market and jumped in without looking at the fundamentals betting more than they could afford on the promise of easy cash. Not that long ago btc was at $260 probably for the same reason. Fools rushing in.
Personally, I'll just keep my renderfarm (12gh) chugging away at ltc and leave asics to the gamblers, for now.
I think this is a hugely important post. I have answers to your Q's to add later. I'm just waiting on Daggeteo to give me a green light on video... It would be very useful to have an estimate on how many TH/s KnCMiner is planning to ship & deploy from September to the end the year. This is a very important point, as in the mining business if you deploy too many TH/s you are actually killing any ROI possibility for all your customers. I hope they have a plan to protect their customers investment - please advise. |
|
|
|
isn't it actually the same situation when CPU->GPU change was made?
I think it's going to be similar to the "mining rush" that happened during the 2011 bubble. Everybody hopped on the bandwagon expecting huge returns to then bitterly realize that without almost free power and no storage costs (some miners do not mine home but rent spaces to host their operations) it was very difficult to make any money at all. In fact we had a drop in the hashrate because mining was quite a big loss for many folks. I expect the same situation to happen just now. The big winners were Avalon batch #1 customers and ASICminer first shareholders, the ones coming behind will just "pay for their party", unless until a new very superior technology arrives to the market. The difference this time however is people won't be turning their ASIC's off like they did with GPU's. These machine do but one thing- and users aren't going to let them sit idle. No, they will just resell them for peanuts if they are unprofitable to run. Many people (most of people) cannot afford to mine at a loss. |
|
|
|
Once upon a time there was a village where one rich man who had ten breads while the rest of the village was poor and starved. The rich man said to the poor people: "listen, I will share one bread with the rest of you, that should keep you satisfied" the villagers responded: "one bread wont feed us all" The rich man said "Oh, that is no problem, the bread can be cut into 20 slices". But The villagers responded "that is not enough, we are thousands of starving people" The rich man then said "that is still not a problem, because each slice of bread can be divided into hundreds of crumbles - and if that is not enough for you, each crumble can actually be divided into billions of molecules"
Stupid story? Well it is exactly the same logic that a disturbingly lot of people here believe can solve the problem of the limited supply of bitcoins.
 |
|
|
|
Each time the sum of bids and asks on the book was lower than the price, we could observe a local price minimum and trend reversal following.  Do you realize that those variables ( bid sum/ask sum & price; bid sum & ask sum) are displayed in those charts taking into account their own relative highest and lowest points in a given timeframe, and thus them intersecting on the chart is just arbitrary and meaningless, right? You should pay attention to the values, but the fact they cross on the chart has no meaning at all. EDIT: I will try to explain you visually the example. In the chart you posted, the bid sum and ask sum crossed for a moment at the beginning of June, and nowadays are very far away one from each other. Now look at the 15 days timeframe, they are crossing each other consistently for the last days. Thus, the fact they intersect or not depends on how they are charted, it will depend on their relative values on an arbitrary timeframe, and therefore is 100% meaningless.  |
|
|
|
I don't think that this bubble will "burst" any time soon. Also, it will not stop from inflating, anytime soon... If the btc price drops to 30$, that will only stop new hardware from coming online, but existing asic miners will stay still.
Yeah, you are right. A "bubble burst" would imply a lot of hashrate leaving the network, which won't happen. With "bubble burst" I just meant the end of exponential increase and the resuming of linear increase, probably with a smallish drop in hashrate as we had in 2011. This obviously is not a bubble burst from a technical point of view, but in any case the final outcome will be quite similar: a lot of people burnt because they spent more money they could afford to lose just because they were blinded by a promise of golden profits that will never happen. I know you agree, you have been preaching that ROI was dead for Batch #2 since months ago |
|
|
|
That will probably never happen. BTC would still be a running success if 10-50M people used it daily. What would you reckon the price range would be? 500 to 2500 USD (pro-rata or some other factor might apply?)
You made my day  I bet you were serious I am. His calculation is based on gold, so he simply swaps Bitcoin for gold. Using historical data for gold, rounding errors and whatnot and he obtains a nice round figure of 300.000USD (2013 value) per Bitcoin. But that's only when everyone uses Bitcoin (I'm counting 6 billion people, which might be a little too low). It's quite a simple calculation. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=174620.msg1886147#msg1886147The problem is whether this can stand the reality test. Maybe his assumptions are wrong etc. Bitcoin is not tied to a physical item, so, unlike gold, it can vanish. Will that risk factor be included in the price? OTOH, you can absolutely store paper wallets. You could thus make Bitcoin banknotes (or IOUs), so the market cap could be multiplied (but then we're right back where we started: a debt ridden system). Anyway, the whole Bitcoin experience is very interesting. Man, $300k per BTC this year is just a delusion of a crazy guy. You have to be as dumb as you could possibly get to do not see that Bitcoin's infrastructure is too weak to support that kind of adoption. The blockchain is not technically ready to support that kind of use (block size hard limit, etc.), let's leave apart Gox and the other exchanges managing that kind of "singularity" (LOL) in just a few months from now. Everybody in here sees the amazing potential of BTC. How it can go to the moon and skrocket very fast. We all see that, you don't need to be a Supernode 1337 trad3r. But the difference between the sane and the crazy guy is the latter loses touch with reality, being blind to hard facts like the very real limits of Bitcoin's infrastructure. That's why you should never trust your money to a guy like Rpietila, because when he goes nuts he loses sight with reality's knocking on his door. And he may very well end up leaving your BTC's in a Sauna. This is not about the Bitcoin reaching 300K this year. It's the simple evaluation of his reasoning to get to the 300K figure in 2013-valued US Dollars (so the 300K might become 310K in 2014 USD with inflation, etc). He's basically postulating that if everyone were to use Bitcoin, it's value would reach 300K. He gets to that number by estimating the average number of Bitcoins each person would have and equates that with the average gold weight that everyone uses (historical data 1913-2013). He uses the average wage for a skilled worker (in the "West") as the basis of his price verification. Even if the number is totally wrong, his math looks alright and his reasoning has some merit. I do find it ironic that he turns Bitcoin on its head by making it the new gold though (the basis for the old monetary system). The math is not wrong, but the assumptions are. Before that kind of adoption many things have to improve, and he is just forgetting about all that, blinded by his delusions of grandeur. If my grandmother had wheels and an engine, she would be a motorcycle. But there's no way to implant wheels+engine on a grandma, unless you give her a wheelchair, which does not make her a living motorcycle but a poor disabled woman. I don't know if you are getting the metaphor, I admit it was a long shot  |
|
|
|
|
So, chips will be delivered before than most of preorders, right?
Good job, BFL. Good job indeed.
|
|
|
|
Man, $300k per BTC this year is just a delusion of a crazy guy. You have to be as dumb as you could possibly get to do not see that Bitcoin's infrastructure is too weak to support that kind of adoption. The blockchain is not technically ready to support that kind of use (block size hard limit, etc.), let's leave apart Gox and the other exchanges managing that kind of "singularity" (LOL) in just a few months from now.
Everybody in here sees the amazing potential of BTC. How it can go to the moon and skrocket very fast. We all see that, you don't need to be a Supernode 1337 trad3r. But the difference between the sane and the crazy guy is the latter loses touch with reality, being blind to hard facts like the very real limits of Bitcoin's infrastructure.
That's why you should never trust your money to a guy like Rpietila, because when he goes nuts he loses sight with reality's knocking on his door. And he may very well end up leaving your BTC's in a Sauna.
You're spot on with the infrastructure. Block chain is the easy thing to fix. True. EDIT: anyhow, as the block size gets bigger, it will be more difficult to run full nodes on home computers. If the block size is not fixed and it adjust automatically, big miners could just push out small miners creating on purpouse very big blocks. This has been discussed ad nauseam, and there's no easy answer. Higher capacity of transactions per second will inevitably lead to a bigger centralization (only "servers" running full nodes), the point is to reach an equilibrium in which a lot of transactions per second can happen while the average Joe can still run a full node. Anyhow, what you said is true: blockchain can be fixed quickly and easily to accomodate more transaction per seconds (the negative side of that is a different discussion). What's slower is the enhancement of the trading platforms and other infrastructure (services). |
|
|
|
That will probably never happen. BTC would still be a running success if 10-50M people used it daily. What would you reckon the price range would be? 500 to 2500 USD (pro-rata or some other factor might apply?)
You made my day I bet you were serious I am. His calculation is based on gold, so he simply swaps Bitcoin for gold. Using historical data for gold, rounding errors and whatnot and he obtains a nice round figure of 300.000USD (2013 value) per Bitcoin. But that's only when everyone uses Bitcoin (I'm counting 6 billion people, which might be a little too low). It's quite a simple calculation. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=174620.msg1886147#msg1886147The problem is whether this can stand the reality test. Maybe his assumptions are wrong etc. Bitcoin is not tied to a physical item, so, unlike gold, it can vanish. Will that risk factor be included in the price? OTOH, you can absolutely store paper wallets. You could thus make Bitcoin banknotes (or IOUs), so the market cap could be multiplied (but then we're right back where we started: a debt ridden system). Anyway, the whole Bitcoin experience is very interesting. Man, $300k per BTC this year is just a delusion of a crazy guy. You have to be as dumb as you could possibly get to do not see that Bitcoin's infrastructure is too weak to support that kind of adoption. The blockchain is not technically ready to support that kind of use (block size hard limit, etc.), let's leave apart Gox and the other exchanges managing that kind of "singularity" (LOL) in just a few months from now. Everybody in here sees the amazing potential of BTC. How it can go to the moon and skrocket very fast. We all see that, you don't need to be a Supernode 1337 trad3r. But the difference between the sane and the crazy guy is the latter loses touch with reality, being blind to hard facts like the very real limits of Bitcoin's infrastructure. That's why you should never trust your money to a guy like Rpietila, because when he goes nuts he loses sight with reality's knocking on his door. And he may very well end up leaving your BTC's in a Sauna. |
|
|
|
Playing with KnC's order system I get this message:  Sam said recently that they will just manufacture and ship hundreds of units per day, so even if you are not in the "first 500" Jupiters you will get your units in September. He also said they are not producing "closed batches", just manufacturing and shipping sequentially following the order backlog. But it looks to me they are indeed making batches, as there are only 1,487 Jupiter left to be ordered in their system. We have people in here that is very close to them. Does anybody knows how many TH/s are they planning to ship and deploy from September to December 2013? This is crucial information in order to be able to calculate ROI. |
|
|
|
Somebody stole from me around 15 BTC back in 2010, I trusted a guy and send the bitcoins first. But one thing I regret is formatting my HDD with around 100 BTC in 2010.
What was your forum account in 2010? Because yours was registered yesterday, and in 2010 most of the transactions happened on these forums. Just curious |
|
|
|
I'm fine, thank you, just don't like dumb people They were not for you |
|
|
|
If all the world uses bitcoin exactly as much as they use gold now, 1 bitcoin will be valued at $300,000.
If ... If ... If ... If I were rich, I would be rich. Nice, but who cares? Bitcoin will never ever be close to be used as much as gold is used now. Come back in real life plz.  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
