We may correct to $600 in Jan.
I think that's not impossible, unfortunately. The block size problem has grown in the last months. It's pretty "normal" now to have tens of thousands unconfirmed transactions. A large portion may be spam, but I think we are slowly reaching the limit. Segwit still isn't implemented. This discussion will prevent BTC from reaching a new ATH (a 100% increase would be $1400-1600). The problem is that most Bitcoin users will experience the issue (when doing a transaction with a too small fee) and it's probable that they then will lose interest. Besides the topic of the discussion here, but it looks like we are reaching a conundrum. ASIC-based POW turned out to be unsustainable long term because of mining monopolization. People are blocking technical progress based on their immediate interests (higher fees) China (miners) want one thing, West (nodes and Core)-another. I think core should make the last attempt at reconciliation, and if it is not possible, employ something new. Bitcoin price would suffer, but then China will have their pie and eat it too. |
|
|
|
I offer you 200$ and you can ship it to Valkir with all the other stuff.
Thanks
Herb
EDIT: which model is it exactly ? Red and Black one ?
$200 for card plus label via valkir for everything and then you guys split? If so, it's fine, although I am not clear when it will all happen, including payment? Jan 4? card is this one: https://us.msi.com/Graphics-card/Radeon-RX-480-GAMING-X-4G |
|
|
|
|
Deal is pending for everything sans MSI RX 480 4gb.
Until that deal is consummated (or not),
I will accept only offers for MSI RX 480 4gb, New (wrapped) in the box, $210, shipped to continental US
|
|
|
|
|
We may correct to $600 in Jan.
|
|
|
|
A fun fact:
lowly Antminer S1 (178GH/s) was making 0.08 BTC/day in March 2014, about what 100th of miners (7-8 S9) are making right now.
Price of btc is roughly the same. Bottom line: we are making peanuts for our outsize effort, and it is a fact.
And the S1 didn't cost $18K+ USD. March 4th 2014 was 684 price Dec 16th 2016 price is 788 Btc was about to drop and drop and drop By May of 2014 btc was 385. But the question is do we get a strong btc rally this means s9 is decent. Or does btc drop to 480 this means the s9 is really bad. well, 684/788=0.86; to me it IS roughly the same (within 15%), considering that much more importantly, you have to bring in machines that cost at least 20 times more (S1 was something like $800 then) and consume 24 times more electricity. Come on, you know that it is basically a shitty deal that we got now. Can it get better? Sure, in $$ terms. |
|
|
|
|
A fun fact:
lowly Antminer S1 (178GH/s) was making 0.08 BTC/day in March 2014, about what 100th of miners (7-8 S9) are making right now.
Price of btc is roughly the same. Bottom line: we are making peanuts for our outsize effort, and it is a fact.
|
|
|
|
Is there a cpu on it ?
Oh and will you ship to Canada ?
are cpu's more expensive in canada? I can add NIB G3258 for $55 extra. I don't mind shipping to Canada as long as you pay the shipping label and i will subtract $30, so $400 plus you pay the label ($455 with G3258 before label) from zip 77025 EDIT: some miscalculation-bundle without GPU, but with added CPU=$260+label (or $275 shipped to US). |
|
|
|
One more time...I've got three S7s at Labrador that are still profitable; I've got one A6 and one A721 here at home that, with free power, are also obviously profitable. By my calcs, even an A6 at Labrador would be profitable (not enriching, but profitable). IMHO.
recheck your ##, please. If there was 73% luck last mo, you are probably close to breakeven on S7 later than B8 even with 65CAD/kw long term plan. I checked. it is around USD 70 for a mo in revenue and about the same in expenses. |
|
|
|
For sale, a combo deal (a nice Christmas present  ): $430, in btc, shipped to continental US Included: MSI RX 480 4gb NIB H97 anniversary motherboard (LGA 1150) with the total of 6 PCIe slots (one 16X, five 1X) 275 Gb Crucial SSD NIB 8gb Ballistix RAM DDR3-1600 NIB I would consider separating the card for $210 shipped from the rest (mobo, ssd, memory: $220 shipped). The stuff is 3/4 NIB, but if you want escrow, you can pay for it with Ognasty. |
|
|
|
...the only explanation remains that to english (or french?) speaking people Punin and Putin spellings are very much indistiguishable just as letters l/r are to japanese, who do not have a letter that is pronounced like "L", but i digress |
|
|
|
I soon have access to Free power, so I'm REALLY waiting on those pods to pop up  Small room so can't use anything noisy, If I could get an R4 I would of done so lol will pod become a scourge of school closets  ? |
|
|
|
Not critical, but I would edit the canadian group buy text a little for now as there is no final word on non-BF chip pods as far as I know. There is 2 thread. 1 for the 2pac. (the one above) and 1 for the BF gear. pod is currently mentioned as 1385 in green letters |
|
|
|
I have had 3 bad boards from 7 s9's, 1 board out of 2 r4's. Very disappointing quality as of late from Bitmain
Still no word from Bitmain warranty in Denver on the board they have of mine and they arent responding to new repair tickets. Crappy quality control and even worse customer service
strange, they replied to me within 24hr, typically. did you check your service junk mail folder? In addition, some providers don't even show what they consider junk mail, which could make these emails invisible, so you have to go in and MANUALLY assign bitmainwarranty.com as a trusted domain. |
|
|
|
years ago I stopped mining at bitminter as they did back to back 99 cdf's and 7 of 10 90% cdf's.
lucky for me my btc has dropped to about ½ my mining so I can still stay alive here with my zec earnings (i know do not mention alt coins)
I HAVE 40TH here doing meh , but I will stay longer then Jan 1... I will be 60 years old on Jan 27th so I am going to stay here until then.
funny, i joined around that time this year and also want to see 1 year stats, then possibly depart if this luck continues. |
|
|
|
I will probably be doing an S5 board exchange thing where folks can cash in those PCBs for sticks or pods. Be a good way to make sure I stay in chips. The 2Pac run will probably be limited, but if sales of the pod are good I'll probably kepe making those. The 2Pac will be superseded by the BF16 stick anyway, but the old-chip pod will be a nice "bargain" pod versus the higher entry cost (and accordingly better specs) of the BF16 pod.
Maybe I am getting ahead of the storyline, but once chips are stripped from the S5 boards, could remaining S5 "carcasses" be used to mount BF chip based presumable boards later, or likely not? Thanks. |
|
|
|
I don't find it useless since they already instantiated two funds.
Lasting a long time=sustainable in my book. I don't know any other definition.
It is certainly not forever if this is what you are getting at. With that, I agree.
When I mentioned "a long time" it means 2 or 3 years. That is not sustainable that is a bubble forming and getting ready to pop when the right time comes. I also mentioned that this is the highest ever amount of margin trading in Bitcoin. How can that can be ever sustainable in your book? In reading your retort, In my book we are close in getting to a stage of mania in the trading cycle. We've already been in a sustainable uptrend for the latest 1.5 years. Not sure what you're talking about. That is the point exactly. What is sustainable? Sooner or later it will end because that is the natural cycle of the market. Maybe it could last up to 10 years but do you really believe it is all really "sustainable"? Nothing is sustainable. History has already showed us countless times that what goes up must come down. I do not know how you can deny that. semantic arguments but according to Merriam-Webster definition#3 for sustainable is: able to last or continue for a long timehttps://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sustainableIs few years a long time? To me, it is, but to OP it isn't... Ok so it is a long time for you. But the argument is "if it is sustainable?" If after a few years it comes crashing down again, would you be able to say then that it is sustainable? I am thinking about the big picture where you can cite the rise and fall of civilizations in the history of the world. That itself shows that nothing is sustainable. Aah..well, by that token the only thing so far that was found truly sustainable in your definition is the proton, where so far they could not detect a single decay event, suggesting that proton's half life is higher than 1.67X10^34 years, which is no less than 10^24 times longer than the age of the current universe (trilliontrillions of current universe ages). That is sustainable, indeed..so there is something... |
|
|
|
of course it would have; not on luck itself, but stdev of blocks per day, almost certainly.
organofcorti should correct if i am wrong.
A smaller pool should typically have more variation in the number of blocks mined per day than a larger pool.
to me, this ^^ sounds right.
Yes, you will get more blocks per day, but you will still get 600%+ blocks. Blocks per day is not the way to look at it, the way is average shares per block. The only thing having more hashrate will do is make the bad blocks go by quicker, which makes it feel better, but the reality is that there is no difference. We would all be getting less per block also, so the amount of BTC per day would be lower, so the number of blocks per day is not relevant. I remember seeing Antpoo going almost a full day with no blocks, I think it ended being a 1400% block Oh, no.... If 1400% is possible, then what, a week without blocks is possible? I hope we stop at about now or within 700% |
|
|
|
|
suffice it to say, all gear is working fine?
|
|
|
|
my 2c is that when kano had 45 Ph, having a good site might have moved him to 100 or above and it would have been less luck fluctuation.
There is no way to know if a change in hashrate would have any affect on luck. Yes, it would potentially give us more blocks per day, but that does not necessarily correlate to an increase in luck. of course it would have; not on luck itself, but stdev of blocks per day, almost certainly. organofcorti should correct if i am wrong. A smaller pool should typically have more variation in the number of blocks mined per day than a larger pool. to me, this ^^ sounds right. |
|
|
|
Interesting. I mine here because it's transparent, openly managed, and for all appearances over an extended period of time, honest. I don't give a rusty duck about a fancy GUI; I want to see hard numbers and open structure, and that's out front here and not buried. I'm reasonably confident that bad luck is simply that.
I've been doing this for several years. I came here last year. I'm not going anywhere.
Mine on.
I agree, a fancy GUI isn't important to me either, Although a bit more condensed homepage would be nice. I'm just passing on what some of my friends have said, which means others feel it to. Everyone who has done website design etc. Knows that info on a site isn't what pulls everyone in, look layout and feel are a big part, Even if it's irrelevant to the purpose. Bitminter's got a good website layout and they've lost most of their hash power over the last 2 months. my 2c is that when kano had 45 Ph, having a good site might have moved him to 100 or above and it would have been less luck fluctuation. It is less relevant now as only the 'hard core" remains. Regarding utility of flashy sites-i find slush's interface too buzy. On the home page there are few things that are truly relevant and most important is a oneliner hyperlink. Google had a single line box for years; it did not hurt them at all. I wonder if someone can built a mathematical model for this. My hypothesis would be that smaller sites can only survive for long with high or moderate luck. If they are small, bad luck period can basically fluctuate them out of existence as there is a possibility of a vicious loop. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
