Good question, heading out but want to think about it a bit more later. I think it may has to do with conditional probability, which ties into gambler's fallacy (unless I'm reading this too quickly). While it is far more likely to have 1 lucky round and 9 unlucky rounds than it is to have 10 unlucky rounds, if you are sitting at the tenth round it is equally probably to have a lucky or unlucky round regardless of what happened in the past. You can also approach this as a conditional probability problem when for isolated random events (P(A given B) = P(A)P(B)/P(B) when P(A) is not affected by event B)

Here is a worked out example showing that although it is far more likely to have a certain outcome in n-tries, the probabillity of an event occuring on the nth try is independent of the previous trials.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy#Explaining_why_the_probability_is_1.2F2_for_a_fair_coin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy#Explaining_why_the_probability_is_1.2F2_for_a_fair_coin

The past has no outcome on future results. So, right now the current block has a 50% chance of taking between 3.4 to 4 days to find, and 50% of taking more than 4 days to find. (Median and mean are not the same in exponential probability distributions). The problem with p2pool now is that the relative variance is 27% greater than it was before ASICS (from 14 blocks per week +/- 3.7 to 9 blocks a week +/-3, poisson distribution)

love it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy

I know it's bad luck and all, but there has been 5 blocks found in the past week (should have been 11-14).

This is another good link:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=9047.0

and here, but there is a 5% fee:
http://www.tricone-mining.com/

I have no connection to asicminer, but I just wanted to say congratulations. It's a big undertaking, it's great that it is paying off!

Is 2122's argument, "because it is inconvenient to my business practice I will violate the license agreement?" So if I out-license a patent to you for a fee, will you just stop paying me because it's better for you to not pay me than pay me?

You can take that position, but license violations open you up to lawsuit liability (cease and desist at a minimum, and damages at a maximum).

If you don't believe me, google Aaron Swartz...

Also, Avalon agreed to the terms of the GPL by using the software. No one forced them to use it. If they don't want to disclose code, then just write your own miner software (like BFL did with easyminer...)

If you want to use cgminer, then follow the terms of the license. The alternative is not use cgminer.

EDIT: I'm in small business hardware and software. I sometimes choose GPL and sometimes not, depending on my strategy. Avalon can do the same.

profit

Well, technically, there is no 30 days. If a customer requests code, and you do not provide it, you are immediately in violation. Technically you're supposed to stop distributing immediately and are liable to legal action if you continue. At this point two things can happen:

1) you "fix" it and start distributing source code. After 60 days of "good" behaviour, the violation evaporates and you have the full license to distribute again.
2) you don't fix it, and a cgminer dev tells you you are in violation. The cgminer dev does not need to receive the software, but only needs to have evidence that one of your customers was denied access to the source code. At this point you have 30 days to fix it, if you do you get your full license back automatically.
3) cgminer devs can just tell you that your license is terminated, due to the violation, and you must cease distributing the software in binary form.

(see section 8 of GPL)

GPL disputes are best handled politely and in good faith, not with the copyright holder going after the fork with guns blazing and the fork going into a legal turtle shell. So there is language regarding 30 days to "cure the violation," but you really shouldn't be using it like a clock.

Yeah, that's a GPL-v2 thing, not v3. Only those that actually receive the binary code can request it.

Did a business seriously start a public thread just to taunt the (volunteer) developer of their software platform? With friends like these, who needs enemies...

Summary of events:
1) Avalon wants miner software, decides cgminer is a good platform and decides to use it (OK)
2) cgminer's developer asks for hardware so he can properly include it in cgminer (OK)
3) Avalon declines the offer (OK) and finds someone else to code it (OK)
4) Avalon shipped devices with binary code (OK)
5) The cgminer developer requests source code via 6b of GPL-v3. (OK) [EDIT: kano might not have rights to request the code, only those that received the binaries may. If, however, someone emails kano the binary - he may then request the source from the intermediary who must request it from Avalon]
6) Avalon has 30 days to remedy the situation (section 8 GPL-v3, OK)
7) Avalon drags feet as to not give a competitive advantage to competitors (OK), cites "technical" reasons but it doesn't matter, they can just drag their feet.

Why taunt Kano? Fulfill the request (or be liable to legal action) and take care of customers - what's the point of this thread?

I feel weird saying this, but I agree with Jeff. Customers chose to bear risk, and they may be rewarded (or burnt) by that choice. However, you should make the argument that ASIC vendors misrepresented the risk by over-promising. The counter to that is that all vendors, accept BitcoinASIC, have either delivered products or are offering refunds to anyone at any time.

So in the end, the only argument you have is that ASIC vendors made things inconvenient for you (if you were someone that priced risk somewhere between the initial offering and the current state) or that BitcoinASIC took your money and ran.

"You all knew the market was big enough that enough people would be willing to take any option given them, greed blinds after all." - Something is in such demand people are willing to buy it at all costs, isn't that economics 101? Put it differently, given the choice of no pre-sale or pre-sale, the market overwhelming is calling for a presale (this is demonstrated by the fact that they still have orders even after the delay and the risk became evident).

scammer tag?

Why not just use the arduino itself? store in EEPROM:
http://arduino.cc/en/Reference/EEPROM

Or just put an SD card on to the Arduino:
https://www.sparkfun.com/products/9802

both of which are much cheaper than FPGA. The cheapest is to print out a physical address and send it to your piece of paper.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Paper_wallet

http://print.printcoins.com/ (source code is on the site if you don't trust it)

While I don't agree with the language, I agree with the argument. Value comes from what people are willing to trade for a real good. The reason why the exchanges exist at all is because people are willing to exchange real goods for bitcoins. They are also willing to exchange real goods for fiat. If at any time people no longer want to exchange goods for bitcoin or fiat, the exchange rate will skyrocket (or plummet). If no one wants to give you something for your bitcoins, they are worthless and the exchange rate will follow. [This excludes speculation, which can't be the basis for a stable economy]

It is optional, once you opted to publicly link the address to your bitcointalk screen name they are linked permanently. You made the choice, if you don't want to link them - don't post them together.

Same goes with facebook, twitter, etc. - if you don't want something going public, don't post it publicly.

I think that is Kano's point: it's OSS, Avalon is free to patch it and support it however they like. Of course if they do, they have to distribute source code as well.

However, if they want Kano to patch and support it, he wants hardware in return. I think that's fair, and they can say "no thank you" to the deal, it's their choice.

You're allowed to sell GPLed software as long as you follow the license (provide source code).

You bought 20 Jalapenos? Even if they were shipping today you should cancel your order, that's a waste of money

20x4.5 GH/s = 90 GH/s for 20x$149 = $2980


For $2598 you could have had 120GH/s if you purchased 2 singles...

It appears that the discussion is over (no refutation of counter-arguments or clarification of the central argument by the OP), and it is clear that the First Law of ASICs does not stand on any sound position.

Bonker, for future reference you can practice getting better at arguing a position by reading Paul Graham's essay:
http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html

What's in it for the manufacturers to delay? You say it's in their best economic interest, but why/how? Unless they are mining on their own with the hardware (which there is no evidence that they are), their only best interest is to sell as many for as much as possible. Delaying sales doesn't do anything for them, in fact it reduces the number of sales they can make.

1) If one of the ASIC manufacture sold devices a month earlier than everyone else they have a huge competitive advantage over their competitors, and that advantage has significant value. What do they gain by giving it up and delaying?

2) Some ASICs are not for sale, but for lease. They will mine on their own hardware and thus get it at cost. What benefit does that company have at delaying their own production and profit?