The same.   Ordering the same ones I used to replace my S7 to replace my S9's  (only one has failed so far for S9's).

Open to offers, I researched these prices based on ebay and I reduced them from there.   I deleted the latest reply because it wasn't very helpful and the person had bad trust rating.    To that person, I hear what you are saying and this is my response.   

Cheers,
D

CLOSED

Agree with both of you.   Think about a BFL-lead mining market (yuck).    I am pretty happy about where we are now and its really promising that GPU mining has taken off again with a few legitimate coins that have pros and cons to sit alongside Bitcoin.

I have a ASUS TF700T with OEM keyboard that has a built in battery to power and a USB port for storage or a MOUSE (yes Android has full mouse support).

I have a couple pallets of working mining cards if you are interested.   I will be making a mega post soon, just finishing my inventory and pricing.    If you have a large buyer, it would make it easier.

I think Antminer won out and at this point, people should be thankful they are still committed to making sure miners are available on a retail basis for the public.    If another company won out, likely that would not be the case at this point in mining.

This is likely.  This may be a stunt to redirect and give Bitcoin a public face.   

http://in.reuters.com/article/us-australia-bitcoin-idINKCN0XW1BT

""But, as the events of this week unfolded and I prepared to publish the proof of access to the earliest keys, I broke. I do not have the courage. I cannot."

After coming under pressure to provide more credible evidence that he was bitcoin's creator, Wright had published a post on Monday that said he would post "independently verifiable documents and evidence" that would back up his claims. The post could no longer be found on the blog site. "


--------------------------------------------

I don't know who Satoshi Nakamoto is but I don't not believe it is Dr. Wright.  Two pieces of proof I will accept, Contact Thermos and unlock your account on BitcoinTalk or move 0.00000001BTC from the blocks we know only Satoshi mined and publish the results.    Without either of those, the burden of proof has not been met in my opinion. 

I am going to ponder these numbers and update if I can find something to add to really see if this was a good investment.  I run a DC so I can pipe in on hosting costs at that level. 

No confirmation the SP50 is in production.  They may sell at that price, I am selling one SP31 unit for $500.00 plus shipping.

-D

Great little gag.  Well done.

I think think there isn't any good answer SebastianJu.  I don't see how you can prevent centralization through the use of code.   This has to be assumed a natural progression when the majority of hardware is ASIC.   Then you have a profit incentive and open competition.  Don't think there is anyway to avoid it.   Is it desirable to be centralized, from the merchants perspective, to a certain point it is so they know transactions will be processed in a timely manner.  If if you changed the algo from SHA-256, you would only buy you some time before people would make ASIC.  This must if been intended and known to be unavoidable as an outcome.

-D

Hopeful think but I admire your optimism.  Bitcoin ASIC mining is a zero-sum game.  That means you need a heavy incentive for people to invest the amount of capital in R&D to keep pushing improvements.  At these levels we are talking high-mid in the millions minimum and that doesn't count for production once you have a good chip.  If you are going to make that investment, you are going to want guarantees of a ROI or at at least ROC (Return of Capital).   If what you say is true about it being bad for the little guys, how many generations of hardware releases do you think will stick in there?  At a point, you can't rely on those dollars.  That comes to my other predictions is that mining is going fully private for the most part with some retail going out the door but likely only to big players.  That is where the incentive is going.   

Once we went ASIC, this was an inevitable path.  With GPUs and FPGAs, you at least had secondary uses for the hardware so you resell it once it was not profitable for you, with ASIC hardware, this is it and because people will sit by and wait for dips to turn it back on, the difficult is never fully allowed to correct for a meaningful enough time to let people make reasoned long-term investments. 

Last point is the power usage is becoming to a point where it is really moving out of the home and commercial office into data-centers and industrial spaces setup for this application.  I hope the halving will give us some market discipline that will help future miners. 

Thoughts?

Most of the coins are likely being sold to pay for mining expenses at these levels unless there is evidence that most miners are real speculators and they are off-setting their expenses so they can take a mine & hold strategy?

This sums up the points I have made in other posts perfectly.  The biggest flaw in Bitcoin is powering a trust & confidence network by human greed.  Eventually left to it's own devices, it will consume itself with self-interest.  This is because their are many different views on the right course of action so we have no consensus.  We have no real stewardship when it comes comes to proper action.   

With that said, I really don't have a better answer then keep doing this until the network fully centralizes or use the "nuclear option" to force change.  Take S1 and S3 (no offense to the OP) but they really have no place on the network at this difficulty, but in his defense, he purchases them and have every right to mine with them for his own speculative purposes.

The only thing we can hope for is for the network to shake out more hobby miners until the majority is mining by professional miners and they are being very deliberate in the deployment of new mining hardware with some reasoning behind new capacity.  But in the end it comes to my final thesis.   The network will be run by the ASIC chip manufacturers in the end for the most part and each purchase is just fueling that outcome.  You can see this evidence by the fact all the Chip Makers run their own mining operation privately with or without retail sales to the public at large.

I agree, he played with fire and got burned.  Let it serve as a notice to use your talents to do more creative things than make a platform for trading illegal drugs while trashing the name of Bitcoin with your dealings and playing mafia with your hits.  Lock em up and throw away the key. 

That comparison is laughable at best.  No comparison, DRP got what he deserved.  We have an appeal process if he felt he got a raw real but I am quite sure he will be rotting in jail.  Hiring hitman on people and the such, you deserve to be kept from society.  We don't need trash like that.  Also it give Bitcoin a bad name and we don't need that with all the other negative press.  Good riddance.

Bitcoin is a fixed supply currency so you logic is a little off.  The person would make much more just mining themselves because they would only need to support their own operation, not others.  There is not point to this discussion because you point counter basic human nature for the most part, people are self-interested and to moderate amounts that is a good thing and is why we see so much progress in the world. 

What you want to talk about is utopias that don't exist.  You could in fact design a chip that is better than anyone else and sell it to the public but I figure once you started looking what it will take, you may understand better the points being presented.  Proof positive is the fact that all chip makers have their own mining operation and mine more than they sell. 

Regulation, that have been gunning for those types of service since eGold.

eGold:
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/04/bitcoiners-remember-what-happened-to.html