What indicate 490k chips ? The five 3000Btc orders aren't factors of 782btc.
The sending address(es) sent 15614 BTC which is exactly 20x the cost of one batch + domestic shipping (780.7 BTC). |
|
|
|
I'm not hurting anyone. Or am I? abrasive & uncivil (which you are) is not the same as hurting (which you are not). |
|
|
|
bitbully, MtGox is not "vulnerable to different forms of web application attacks". Stop spreading FUD. People may say this, but they don't know what they are talking about. I am a security professional and let me tell you that while MtGox used to be vulnerable to flaws like CSRF and XSS (back in 2010 / early 2011), it is not the same website anymore. It is today considered well-secured and well-designed: HTTPS, 2-factor auth, etc. To my knowledge there has been no known CSRF or XSS flaw in the last year or so. Although, as a security professional, I know that all big enough websites are bound to have flaws here and there, but again MtGox appears to be well-secured. Don't say that it is known to be "vulnerable to different forms of web application attacks". As you said yourself, you were instead compromised by a local trojan: Dark Comet. No amount of web security features (other than 2-factor auth) can protect you from a local trojan running with all local privileges. You failed to use 2-factor auth and that is "how you got robbed of 34 BTC". You are right that MtGox should advertise 2-factor auth / Yubikey more, but no amount of explaining security to users is going to convince all of them to buy a Yubikey. MtGox even tried to offer free Yubikeys but some users still did not take the offer! |
|
|
|
I was wondering when/if someone would analyze the blockchain for payments  I still say wallet total does not mean jack shit for the amount of chips bought. All speculation, could be any number of reasons for the BT to be in there. Only avalon knows.
1. Almost all payments (with the exception of less than 800 BTC total) are exact multiples of the cost of one batch of chips (780.7 or 782.1 BTC: different shipping costs for different parts of the world). 2. I know the people behind some of these orders. So yes, prepare for at least 530k chips or 150 Thash/s to hit the network soon. What else did you expect? This Avalon OEM chip sale is by far the largest and cheapest ASIC investment option available in the immediate future. |
|
|
|
|
Yep, ~165 Mhash/J at the wall. Assuming the power adapter is 80% efficient this is ~210 Mhash/J at 12V.
It seems that Micon will win our small bet (80 BTC), whereas I will win our big bet (200 BTC).
Also, we don't know if the reviewer's single was one with the old, or redesigned (more efficient) power circuitry.
|
|
|
|
C'mon people, it will make BTCs back. At most in a year, but 6-7 months seems more precise timeframe.
Difficulty won't rise exponentialy forever. In a year it can be at 300M, which will make AM still profitable (energy-wise).
Difficulty does not have to rise exponentially forever. It just has to rise 35% month-over-month, for merely 12 months, and the buyers will never make their money back: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178275.msg1889860#msg1889860For the record, 35% per month for 12 months would bring the network to ~2000 Thash/s total, which half of it is already being built or planned by various entities (100TH-Mine, BFL, ASICMINER, OEM Avalon Chip Customers, etc). |
|
|
|
I do not think his assumption is that bad. Just back into what the HR would be. He does not HR above 150,000GH until August. So, if you have 60 now plus over 40 each for avalon batch II and III you are already at 140, plus friedcat puts you ABOVE his estimate for august. And I do not think it will take until august for friedcat to roll out 10TH plus avalon will have their 80TH out there probably by start of July.
Exactly. It is likely the month-to-month will be actually higher than 35% in the immediate future, and then lower than 35% the rest of 2013 and early 2014. |
|
|
|
Your first mistake: assuming 35% month-to-month rise.
Why the fuck would difficulty rise 35% every month? Does ASIC hardware manufacturers magically increase production by 35% every month?
Merely taking into account the known hashrate that is about to hit the network in the next 6-12 months adds up to 250-1000 Thash/s. If added progressively over time, it is mathematically equivalent to a continuous 35% month-over-month growth for the next 4 (no BFL) to 10 (BFL included) months. And add up the unknown hashrate from unknown miners or future vendors, and it is not hard to imagine this 35% growth could last 12 months. After 12 months, my numbers assume the growth would stop, so I don't even have to invoke indefinite exponential growth to come to my conclusion. Let's put it this way: if you don't plan for a 35% increase month-over-month over a short period of time of 12 months... well let's just say you are in for a serious surprise ! I invite you to see http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-ever.png showing the CPU to GPU transition alone was able to sustain +115% month-over-month exponential growth for 18 months. So really, +35% for 12 months is totally realistic especially given the BTC exchange rate that is likely to shoot up. |
|
|
|
Your first mistake: assuming 35% month-to-month rise.
Why the fuck would difficulty rise 35% every month? Does ASIC hardware manufacturers magically increase production by 35% every month?
Merely taking into account the known hashrate that is about to hit the network in the next 6-12 months adds up to 250-1000 Thash/s. If added progressively over time, it is mathematically equivalent to a continuous 35% month-over-month growth for the next 4 (no BFL) to 10 (BFL included) months. And add up the unknown hashrate from unknown miners or future vendors, and it is not hard to imagine this 35% growth could last 12 months. After 12 months, my numbers assume the growth would stop, so I don't even have to invoke indefinite exponential growth to come to my conclusion. Let's put it this way: if you don't plan for a 35% increase month-over-month over a short period of time of 12 months... well let's just say you are in for a serious surprise ! I invite you to see http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-ever.png showing the CPU to GPU transition alone was able to sustain +115% month-over-month exponential growth for 18 months. So really, +35% for 12 months is totally realistic especially given the BTC exchange rate that is likely to shoot up. |
|
|
|
I want a One Terra hash rig made up of Avalon chips... that would be sexy!  One Thash/s isn't cool. You know what's cool? |
|
|
|
I have clicked through on it and almost ALL the people in your signature DO BELIEVE in asics and you have linked to them making what have turned out to be EXACTLY correct predictions about the feasibility of certain liar's claims.
We are getting off-topic. Let's not derail this thread. PM me or open a new thread if you want to discuss. |
|
|
|
|
kokojie: by the time the blades have shipped, cleared customs, and are online, difficulty will probably be 10M. From then, assuming a 35% month-to-month difficulty increase (which is conservative IMHO - it has increased 100% month-over-month in the last 2 months), and assuming it stops increasing after month 12 (which is unrealistic), and assuming free electricity (also unrealistic), the math gives:
Month 0 (10.0M diff): mined 16.45 BTC, total = 16.45 BTC
Month 1 (13.5M diff): mined 12.18 BTC, total = 28.63 BTC
Month 2 (18.2M diff): mined 9.02 BTC, total = 37.66 BTC
Month 3 (24.6M diff): mined 6.68 BTC, total = 44.34 BTC
Month 4 (33.2M diff): mined 4.95 BTC, total = 49.29 BTC
Month 5 (44.8M diff): mined 3.67 BTC, total = 52.96 BTC
Month 6 (60.5M diff): mined 2.72 BTC, total = 55.68 BTC
Month 7 (81.7M diff): mined 2.01 BTC, total = 57.69 BTC
Month 8 (110.3M diff): mined 1.49 BTC, total = 59.18 BTC
Month 9 (148.9M diff): mined 1.10 BTC, total = 60.28 BTC
Month 10 (201.1M diff): mined 0.82 BTC, total = 61.10 BTC
Month 11 (271.4M diff): mined 0.61 BTC, total = 61.71 BTC
Month 12 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 62.16 BTC
Month 13 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 62.61 BTC
Month 14 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 63.05 BTC
Month 15 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 63.50 BTC
Month 16 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 63.95 BTC
Month 17 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 64.40 BTC
Month 18 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 64.85 BTC
Month 19 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 65.30 BTC
Month 20 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 65.75 BTC
Month 21 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 66.20 BTC
Month 22 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 66.65 BTC
Month 23 (366.4M diff): mined 0.45 BTC, total = 67.09 BTC
...so buyers will not even mine the 75+ BTC they paid for. Consider also that my math is generous as it assumes the same difficulty throughout each month (when it will in fact increase every 2016 blocks). And consider that two years from now, there will be even power efficient ASICs, more intense mining competition, etc.
|
|
|
|
They'll break even in roughly 4-5 month, I don't think difficulty will go up by much, since BFL can't deliver shit until August the earliest.
Ludicrous. They will break even in 4-5 months only if the difficulty stays constant for the next 4-5 months! Suffice it to say, it is not going to stay constant... Even discounting BFL, there are many other entities that will increase the hashrate: - ASICMINER self-mining (12 Thash/s of blades manufactured, 50 Thash/s to be presumably deployed in the next month, and 200 Thash/s even later) - ASICMINER future hardware sales (these 0.1 Thash/s of blades were just the beginning... like I said above, they manufactured 12 Thash/s of them so far and will build many more) - Avalon ASIC batch #2 (40 Thash/s minimum) - Avalon ASIC batch #3 (40 Thash/s minimum) - Avalon OEM chip sales (anywhere from 10-100 Thash/s) - 100th project (103 Thash/s of shares sold) If you do the math, a month-to-month hashrate increase of 35% is sufficient to guarantee that the people who bought these blades will basically never make their coins back. They bought them (I hope) to selflessly support the network, and for historical reasons. |
|
|
|
5.3 GH/s @ 36 watts + 20 watts for laptop = 10.6 watts/ghps
68 GH/s @ 620 watts = 9.1 watts/ghps
Efficiency: Avalon
That is an unfair comparison. Drive the Single with a 5-10W mini-computer board similar to the TP-LINK in Avalon (instead of a 20W laptop), and the BFL solution becomes more efficient than Avalon. |
|
|
|
So Kepler does have a bit rotate instruction. Finally, Nvidia! Does it have the equivalent of AMD's bfi_int for another speedup? It does not seem so. |
|
|
|
So, for about 2 BTC, you can get 2.82 Gh/s, delivered in mid July, or 1.41 BTC per Gh/s.
No. That's 1.41 Gh/s per BTC or 0.709 BTC per Gh/s. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
