Currently (Feb 2013), we have about 50000 tx per day, or 0.579 tx per second (tps), or 347 tx per block (tpb). We are paying miners 25 BTC per block, or $500 per block at current rate. If bitcoin becomes the VISA scale, it has to handle 4000 tps, or 2400000 tpb, or 6916x of the current volume. To keep mining profitable, we may need to pay $50000 per block (to pay electricity, harddrive space, bandwidth, CPU time for ECDSA). As the block reward will become 0 in the future, this $50000 has to be covered by fee. Since we will have 2400000 tpb, each tx will pay $0.021, not too bad when you can send unlimited amount of money to anywhere in the world in no time.
That means mining is profitable even without any block size limit.
On the other hand, the 1MB constraint will certainly kill bitcoin. 1MB is only about 2500 tpb, or 0.1% of VISA scale. We are already at 13.9% of this limit. If we don't act before problem arises, people will start migrating to alt-coins.
Let's assume a miner with moderate hashing power can mine 1 in 10000 blocks (i.e. one block in 10 weeks). With $50000/block, he will get about $5/block. 2500000tpb (VISA scale) means about 1GB/block. Currently a 2000GB drive costs about $100, or $0.05/GB. Therefore, the harddrive cost is only 1% of his mining income. It's negligible. (and harddrive will be much cheaper in the future) A quad-core Intel core i7 is able to handle 4000tps ( https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability#CPU) at 77W. Assuming $0.15/kWh, it costs about $0.012/h, or $0.002/block. Even energy is 10x more expensive in the future, it's still negligible. (and CPU will be much efficient in the future) 1GB/block needs a bandwidth of 4.3TB/month. Including all overhead it may take 10TB/month, and may cost $300/month currently for a dedicated server in datacentre. It is $300/(30*24*6) = 0.069/block. Again, it is negligible comparing with the $5/block reward. He will still earn $5-0.05-0.002-0.069 = $4.879/block after deducting the harddrive, CPU, and bandwidth cost. It is $29/hr or $21077/month and is a ridiculous amount given he only owns 0.01% of total hashing power. He still needs to pay for the electricity bill for the mining equipment. It is hard to estimate but even if he uses 90% of the earning for the electricity bill, he will still earn $2107/month. |
|
|
|
|
Currently (Feb 2013), we have about 50000 tx per day, or 0.579 tx per second (tps), or 347 tx per block (tpb). We are paying miners 25 BTC per block, or $500 per block at current rate. If bitcoin becomes the VISA scale, it has to handle 4000 tps, or 2400000 tpb, or 6916x of the current volume. To keep mining profitable, we may need to pay $50000 per block (to pay electricity, harddrive space, bandwidth, CPU time for ECDSA). As the block reward will become 0 in the future, this $50000 has to be covered by fee. Since we will have 2400000 tpb, each tx will pay $0.021, not too bad when you can send unlimited amount of money to anywhere in the world in no time.
That means mining is profitable even without any block size limit.
On the other hand, the 1MB constraint will certainly kill bitcoin. 1MB is only about 2500 tpb, or 0.1% of VISA scale. We are already at 13.9% of this limit. If we don't act before problem arises, people will start migrating to alt-coins.
|
|
|
|
我只是个新人,还在学习中╮(￣▽￣")╭ 123c5Y3EnTv6NWJLRVT6QioHKa2sztu3BE
谢谢 新人求照应
1G7DsdfDDaj6CejFcMUdrSPskM6uUrJ8dF
你們平時在哪個中文論壇? 叫什麼名字?  |
|
|
|
Can you guys keep on buying? I need the price of BTC to reach 20ish to purchase an Avalon. I've only put 80 BTC aside for this, accounting a small dip.. but not this huge of a dip!
Most people thought there would be a massive dump after Avalon starts getting BTC. However, I think the dump has already done before the pre-order starts I think this is exactly why we have a dump here: 1. Avalon team bought a lot of BTC @$13-18 2. They announce their BTC-only batch #2, price raised to $21 3. They postpone the pre-order to Saturday to let more people to buy BTC, and they sell part of their holding, price dropped to $20 (Profit!) 4. They dump 20k BTC trying to crash the price. (Edit: they bought below $18 so the dump stopped exactly at $18, profit once again!!) Not very successful, but still make the spot price <$19.5. Lack of USD funding in weekend restricts the rebound 5. Pre-order starts. Due to a lowered spot price, they will receive more BTC for their USD-priced machine (Profit twice again!!!) So they have earned a lot USD in step 3 and 4, and get all of the BTC back (or even more than that) in step 5 later. The USD profit alone is enough for them to buy parts for #2 Avalon, so you won't see the anticipated post-sale massive dump. A small dump is possible if some in the team do not appreciate bitcoin. |
|
|
|
怎麼領錢的全部都是Post=1的Newbie......
大多数人都喜欢潜水。。。国内的”几大“比特币论坛人气更差，几乎是死的。 全部是新戶口, 如果是不同人還好, 否則你就成了提款機了 |
|
|
|
|
怎麼領錢的全部都是Post=1的Newbie......
|
|
|
|
Just wondering.
edit: added D&T's good point, miners count too
I do it daily |
|
|
|
For the record:
I'm on the "let there be no fixed maximum block size" side of the debate right now.
I'd like to let that experiment run for at least a few months before arguing that we do or do not need to eliminate the 1MB hard limit, and start arguing about what the default rules for acceptable block size should be.
Isn't waiting dangerous? If we want to do it, this is the best moment. As ASICs start running, mining becomes less decentralized for a short period, which means we don't need to persuade so many people |
|
|
|
As of now, there will only ever be 21 million bitcions in circulation.
I'm told that this is usually an inconsequential fact, due to the fact that bitcoins can be subdivided into 8 decimal places (and these can be expanded in the future if needed)
But, is that really the most convenient of routes?
In the far future, lost coins may add up to a very big problem. Currently, I know of no way in which a truly lost coin can be returned to the market. Imagine someone with thousands of BTC in their wallet for instance, if their computer crashes, or they die, or forget their password, or they accidentally send the BTC to the wrong address, their bitcoins can become unrecoverable. Implicitly, this increases the value of all the others because now there are BTC that can never be spent, but it's difficult to track this.
So what happens decades from now, when a truly significant number of coins are lost?
Does the system ever have a sense for how old coins really are? Is it a good idea to find them and re-introduce them back into circulation after an appropriate time? Or are we faced with an ever-dwindling supply of coins?
Search before you ask, this question has been asked repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly, and repeatedly |
|
|
|
Expiration won't happen and is off topic. Bitcoins for your children is a great idea. I recommend a paper wallet or casascius physical bitcoins. That way your coins are safe from hackers and hard drive failures.
Surprised people discuss paper option at length but ignore your casascius suggestion. There's a thousand ways your paper key will get lost forever (or stolen if you put it in too many locations); physical coin on the other hand can only be lost to thief or extreme fire, not humidity, age, sunlight, insects, bad ink, bad paper, etc. I just use some 25 btc coins for this purpose stored in various places for the future use. Does any experiment show that private key printed on Casascius coin is durable for decades or centuries? How about extreme conditions, e.g. high/low temperature, high/low humidity, soaking in water/organic solvent, fire? |
|
|
|
Is this currently working? I tried to do a transfer, and it said it sent one testnet BTC, but the total amount it says it has didn't go down. If somebody could send a testnet coin or two to muc6ULwWdAPAHtETQGLFbXJM9xp4xJEqhi, I'd be grateful and would return back to the sending address or wherever you specify. 2.5 sent. please return to the sending address later |
|
|
|
|
There is a simple way but you will lose anonymity. Publish your deterministic watch-only wallet and sign with your PGP key so people can verify the addresses easily
Few month ago there was a discussion for the idea of "anonymous donation". It used some public-private key tricks. I forgot the details but based on some information provided by the donee, donors can generate an address which only the donee may spend, while no one may link the address to the donee. Unless the donor tells the donee, he has to check all addresses on the blockchain one-by-one to see whether he has received any donation. I think this may also work for you (just publish the deterministic account information with PGP key, and ask your customers to tell you the address they have sent)
|
|
|
|
如果有两个虚拟货币在市场上竞争
真的是总算力越大的就越好吗？
算力的分散度就象支撑整个体系的基座
现在忽然基座要缩减到1/100
我们却认为这个体系还是稳定的，自欺欺人而已。
唉，过年结帐忙，结完了再来折腾吧。
這種討論太多了. 但只有成功的虚拟货币才會有人願意制作ASIC (LTC也可以有ASIC, 只是成本高些, 但不是不可能), 如果有ASIC就是死路, 結論就是任何虚拟货币都是註定死路一條 印鈔只是挖礦的其中一個功能, 而這個礦也有挖光的一天, 將來挖礦的主要目的不會再是印鈔, 而是BTC使用者保護自己財富的手段. 而那些挖了就賣, 完全不懂BTC的人, 少了他們也不可惜 你的话错误很多，要是回到原点上再看BTC，会发现ASIC之后的BTC已经完全变了性质，嗯...明天抽点时间来好好写写。 希望沒有ASIC只是你的主觀願望, 事實就是成功的cryto currency就必會有研究ASIC. 沒有Avalon和BFL, 也會有人秘密制作ASIC, 秘密挖礦, 甚至秘密發動攻擊. Avalon和BFL最少也能讓大眾買得到, 在競爭下價格也只能下降. |
|
|
|
Yeah, that's not going to happen.
Witnessed  |
|
|
|
如果有两个虚拟货币在市场上竞争
真的是总算力越大的就越好吗？
算力的分散度就象支撑整个体系的基座
现在忽然基座要缩减到1/100
我们却认为这个体系还是稳定的，自欺欺人而已。
唉，过年结帐忙，结完了再来折腾吧。
這種討論太多了. 但只有成功的虚拟货币才會有人願意制作ASIC (LTC也可以有ASIC, 只是成本高些, 但不是不可能), 如果有ASIC就是死路, 結論就是任何虚拟货币都是註定死路一條 印鈔只是挖礦的其中一個功能, 而這個礦也有挖光的一天, 將來挖礦的主要目的不會再是印鈔, 而是BTC使用者保護自己財富的手段. 而那些挖了就賣, 完全不懂BTC的人, 少了他們也不可惜 |
|
|
|
Let say they are working with 50% profit.
Today they will get about 45000BTC (75BTC x 600 units).
If MFG get 22500 BTC and dumps them for FIAT, $22 will not last for very long.
That why I say we may see less than 20$ soon.
They wouldnt be that stupid to dump to lower than a price that they accepted bitcoins for goods. DUH lol And if they are clever enough, they should have accumulated a lot of BTC before the announcement: 1. Accumulate a lot of BTC from $13 to $17 2. Announce their 2nd batch which accepts BTC only 3. BTC/USD rate increases as demand increases 4. People buy BTC to pay for pre-order, they sell their BTC to them at current rate ($19.5-20.5) 5. They earn 15-50% profit in USD, and get all BTC sold in step 4 back as pre-order funding. Since they have already got 15-50% extra profit in USD, they will use this to build 2nd batch and keep all BTC as profit and don't need to dump them right away. |
|
|
|
|
It'd be very stupid if Avalon is really going to dump the BTC right away. Since the price is denominated in USD but the pre-order funding is collected in BTC, dumping the BTC just means they end up with less USD.
I guess this is their plan:
1. Accumulate a lot of BTC from $13 to $17
2. Announce their 2nd batch which accepts BTC only
3. BTC/USD rate increases as demand increases
4. People buy BTC to pay for pre-order, they sell their BTC to them at current rate ($19.5)
5. They earn 15-50% profit in USD, and get all BTC sold in step 4 back as pre-order funding.
Since they have already got 15-50% extra profit in USD, they will use this to build 2nd batch and keep all BTC as profit and don't need to dump them right away.
|
|
|
|
Oh, and where I say "hash of a transaction" in the above, replace that with "hash of the signed part of the transaction + sigs with sig representation standardized to defeat the malleability problem"
Also, no need to call it a coin mixing or swapping system really, just call it fast off-chain payments with immediate settlement. If transactions have arbitrary inputs and outputs, and the blinding system works with arbitrary coin values, that's exactly what it is. For instance you could run satoshidice on this system and avoid the blockchain bloat completely.
I think there is a better way to issue fidelity bond without the need to pay fee to an unknown miner. We can have list of 20 trustworthy organization like wikipedia, btc foundation, WWF, International Red Cross, Linux foundation etc. To purchase fidelity bond, one has to donate to at least 5 organizations on the list in the amount and in the same transaction. For example, by donating 1BTC to each of the 5 organizations, you will have 5 unit of fidelity bonds. Therefore, you don't need to worry about being scammed by someone holding the private keys for these organizations, because it is very unlikely that many organizations will cooperate to scam. |
|
|
|
Avalon发给Jeff的货已经被收到了，研发已经确定成功了。主要的风险只在于量产和发货时间了。发货时间的风险也不可小觑。
還有一點, 是品質控制問題, 畢竟挖礦是長期的投資, 如果用一兩個月就掛掉, 第一批還有利潤, 但第二批就很危險了. 看他們的樣子, 不能期望會有售後服務. 而且如果他們真的有好東西, 根本不用擺出這麼惡劣的態度, 我看還是有點古怪. 另外, Avalon收了US400000的預付款就能成功研發了, 而BFL收的預付款可能有Avalon的數倍, 成功機會只會更大. 第二批ASIC的重點已不在速度, 而是功耗, 那怕BFL的功耗只是Avalon的一半, 長遠也會是勝負的關鍵 |
|
|
|
他們既然說了自己有可能是騙子, 那最後跑路了也不算是騙了 其實無論條款有沒有變更, 根本都不應參與第二批. 大家都明白, 在中國被騙, 從法律途徑的申索希望是不大的. 特別是那些老外, 他們更沒有辦法. 我只覺得奇怪, 他們竟會如此坦白地說自己沒錢, 又說自己可能是騙子, 白痴的才會向他們買吧 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
