Yea, I'm @ 20 myself.  Originally planned on going with burnin but shipping chips to Germany and then getting them shipped back to the states sounded pricey, so I'm going with ryepdx for this group buy.  1 K16 + 4 K1s = happiness.

How do people have partial chips?  What am I missing here?

Actually, I just thought of a way to rate hashpower.  A rating could be a ratio of (Quality+Hash Power) / Time.  Wouldn't this give you an idea of what value you are getting from a company?  For example, if a product was labeled 20/1; that would be a Quality rating 10, Hash Power 10 (rated at launch of current version of product), Time: (1 out of a possible 10, derived by the value of floor( (Now() - BitcoinStartDate()) / BitcoinStartDate() ) * 10) floor(BitcoinStartDate() / (Now() - BitcoinStartDate()) ) * 10).  Then you could look at the value (say, 19/4 = a 4.75 out of a possible 20).  This would change with time, so BTC SMC would maintain a database of each product's rating that could be checked in real time for any product BTC SMC has ever rated.

I don't know, something like that.  


Edit; the Ratio (Now() - BitcoinStartDate()) / BitcoinStartDate() would get bigger over time.  It should have been StartDate / (Now() - BitcoinStartDate) which would get smaller over time. 

You make a good point (although pure bullshit was probably a little harsh).  Hashing power may be difficult to include in the rating.  But meeting UL expectations for hardware safety would be a good one, as well as what quality parts, how efficient it is (like power supplies).  These details aren't meant to be hashed out here; I'm just submitting my basic thought process that a company whose job is to monitor bitcoin mining hardware could be successful.  It could also monitor pools for network threat level or something.  I don't know the details, but it's apparent that the providers of infrastructure for mining are making a killing; so there should definitely be a market for assisting and protecting those investing in the companies who make the architecture.

Edit: Also, one argument I hear from government advocates is this "Who polices the companies and makes sure they aren't secretly fucking their customers because it's more profitable"?  My pro-free market response is that if there is demand, someone will figure out supply.

Agreed. 

Also, I think as these come to market, many GPUs will be retired, removing some of the hashrate from the network.  Kind of a trade up sort of thing.  I know that once I get these ASICs, my GPU rig is being sold off in parts.

I don't see why it's pointless.  At this point maybe since almost no one has shipped and those who have have shipped almost nothing, but as we progress, I'm assuming the market will mature and companies will set out to be more customer oriented and deliver on their promises in a more timely manner so as to make more profit long-term.  

Risk is part of the game of life.  Every action you take has a risk/reward analysis attached to it.  

Drive a car; risk getting killed in an accident, rewarded by quick transit to distant locations; reward/risk: high/moderately low
Drink water from your faucet; risk drinking tainted water, rewarded by slaked thirst; reward/risk: high/low
Skydive from an airplane; risk bouncing like a basketball and dying on impact, rewarded by intense feeling of freefall: reward/risk; very high/moderate
Pay a mining company lots of money to make an ASIC miner; risk losing all your money, rewarded by profits:  reward/risk: very very high/high

Up to you to determine risk, but some people value trusted advice and input to help determine the real risk.  Would you buy meat that's not FDA inspected?  Maybe, but many wouldn't.  JD Power and Associates makes big money with this exact business model.  UL same.  There is most definitely  a market for this stuff.

Still at work; will connect this evening.

Build it and I will come.

I fully believe that free markets are the long term best way to handle just about everything.  I think the most pressing requirement in the bitcoin world is an Underwriter's Laboratory for bitcoin mining hardware.  Some kind of stamp that gives you an idea of the hardware's capability and a separate stamp for the manufacturer.  For instance, the Butterfly Labs Jalepeno might get a A- in hashing power to electricity ratio, but the company would get a D- for poor customer service, extended delays and lack of transparency.  Avalon's rigs would get an A+ in hashing power to electricity ratio, but a C+ for missing deadlines and poor customer communication.

When consumers can review an investment and have a reputable source giving the investment a rating, it really adds valuable information to the consumer's choice.  And if these stamps really gain trust in the community, hardware companies would line up to get stamped. 


I'm not exactly sure whether this falls into a "buyer's consortium", but I think there is a real need for a company whose profits stem from protecting miners' interests and keeping hardware manufacturers honest.  Right now the big money is in making the hardware.  As this leg of the bitcoin economy matures, a watchdog company becomes more and more necessary.

I like the idea.  But it shouldn't be a "buyers association", it should be a "small miner's association" or a "small mining consortium".  Some kind of better business bureau would also be really cool.

I'd pay dues to be part of something that looks out for my interest as a fledgling miner.

It does.  Paying investors with new investor's capital.  This is not that, since they obtain capital by selling hardware and mining bitcoin. 

Buying an Erupter may be a poor investment choice, but that doesn't make this a ponzi scheme.  It just makes their product really expensive.

What numbers don't add up?  The top 1200 bidders all get at the lowest price.  93.11*1200=111,732.00

What am I missing?

I'm entitled to 20 / 10000.  That's .002 chips.  My vote is most likely irrelevent.  However, I'd vote BKKCoins atm.

Yea, I definitely plan to donate my first BTC1 received from mining to BKKCoins.

My calculations say you are entitled to 1.56 chips.  Right?

I think most of the major devs will get what they need. 

Now what's the lead time on the batch orders?

Right now maximum efficiency is buying ASIC chips. 

That's just the first IP to inform blockchain.info of the block; not the ip that found it.

Sample chips discussion imminent:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=210136.msg2416566#msg2416566