There's some pre-order sale threads over in Group Buys, and I'll be starting to bring in parts before long. PCBs and heatsinks should be in hand in about two weeks. Novak's on vacation and I'm tied up with assembly tasks for a huge PSU boards order so there probably won't be any dev work done on either hardware or code until next week. I think we're going to skip Amita design and go right into a simple multi-chip board with full software control of clock, voltage and fan. From there we can extend it to 18- and 30-chip designs.
Independent from what PlanetCrypto is working on, we've been thinking about building a 4U machine made for swappable boards and such. With BM1384 it'd put up 5TH, so next-gen chips would be even better. The plan was to make the layout fairly flexible, internal connections a generic USB bus, and publish the specs in case anyone else wanted to build boards for the same form-factor. Basically, an intention to define an open standard. Once I get back to hardware dev we'll see what happens.
To clarify: Gekkoscience is a standalone entity as is Planetcrypto. I can unequivocally say that any interaction between the proposed entity and PC will be contractual in nature as it has been between Gekkoscience and PC. We, as a company, may elect to contribute, gratis, resources/assets to any company or individual (time on one of our super computers, for instance, for chip simulation) at our discretion. PC will probably fund the proposed entity (subject to our share holder approval) through the share purchase vehicle as I will personally. Currently, I'm leaning towards a corporate organizational model that files for an IRS 503(c)(6) tax status which is commonly known as a Mutual Benefit Nonprofit Corporation. Briefly described here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual-benefit_nonprofit_corporationThis will make investing in the organization less attractive to "whales", i.e. individuals looking to make huge ROI's in the short term. But is, I think, more philosophically inline with what the Bitcoin mining community needs. To quote from the Wiki referene: "Mutual benefit corporations are formed for common gain purposes such as ..." "... promoting the social or economic welfare of member individuals or organizations (for example through trade groups, professional organizations or business districts)." In this instance the the proposed organization would be loosely defined as Bitcoin mining hardware manufacturers. Stated succinctly, The proposed Mutual Benefit Nonprofit Corporation will promote the social and economic welfare (common gain) of member individuals and organizations by getting to tapeout a state-of-the-art Bitcoin SHA-256 hashing chip. And yeah, PC will be interested in purchasing some of those 5TH machines as well. maybe a good idea would be to contact an accountant, as nonprofit would have to dispose of any possible profit that might accrue. As far as whales are concerned-the only "whales" I can think of possibly investing in a nonprofit venture like this might be exchanges or wallet providers (with or without some marketing endorsements). |
|
|
|
I think we're going to skip Amita design and go right into a simple multi-chip board with full software control of clock, voltage and fan. From there we can extend it to 18- and 30-chip designs.
Independent from what PlanetCrypto is working on, we've been thinking about building a 4U machine made for swappable boards and such. With BM1384 it'd put up 5TH, so next-gen chips would be even better. The plan was to make the layout fairly flexible, internal connections a generic USB bus, and publish the specs in case anyone else wanted to build boards for the same form-factor. Basically, an intention to define an open standard. Once I get back to hardware dev we'll see what happens.
Sounds awesome. |
|
|
|
If i need to be realistic, it would be around 1000$.
10.000$ voters look pretty delusional to me.
Check Bitcoin charts, bitcoin gains 100$ average. That makes 1000$ bet safe.
Don't mix your feelings in when it comes to investing real money.
agree wholeheartedly! Why is that realistic? How is that realistic? Because bitcoin is kind of close to $1000? Tell facebook in 2005 that having 100M+ users is unrealistic because they only had 5M at that time. It's just such a bad argument. You're confusing "metaphysically possible" with "realistic." It's metaphysically possible for to win a million dollars in a casino, starting with a a single buck. OTOH, banking on that happening is not what most consider yo be realistic. A famous example is the guy who sold his 10% Apple stake for $800 (plus $1500 later) in 1976, two weeks after Apple started. He thought that Apple was unlikely to succeed and needed the money. 10% is worth 65 bil now. |
|
|
|
|
By 2020:
1. Banks will realize that creating their own blockchains would be much more expensive vs just hopping on bitcoin (don't know v 1.0 or 2.0).
2. governments will realize that they can distribute money and collect taxes easier using bitcoin.
3. core dev will finally approve a rise in blocksize...I hope.
the future price of bitcoin, however, is unknowable for a few very simple reasons:
a. Why would current fiat/debt holders want to change to bitcoin when they are so comfortable in fiat? If they won't, we will grow slow, which might not be a bad thing.
b. In addition to that, if you have debts in fiat that is constantly declining in value while keep assets in presumably appreciating bitcoin, there will be an imbalance, so after a while the system has to be either at least 90-99% bitcoin/crypto or 90-99% fiat.
c. There is also a remote (1%) possibility of an ugly hybrid whereas devs will introduce inflation into bitcoin (over 21 mil)-it looks very unappealing right now, but once the issuance stops or comes to a little trickle, such opinions might gain hold.
|
|
|
|
|
what is the entity btc-multiplier.ch that keeps sending 0.001-0.003 BTC to accounts?
what is the purpose of such exercise?
|
|
|
|
When the new breed of Bitcoiner who got burned buying at the top and then tried to get rich with altcoins realizes how useless altcoins really are, a lot of money will come flooding back to Bitcoin. My guess is that the market landscape will look very different in another 12 months.
....that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself. |
|
|
|
Cool concept...I was about to post that imgur reference before I saw that there is already a thread. |
|
|
|
Poloniex has transaction ID (optional) prompt to send moneroj out.
1. Is it really necessary or public address is sufficient?
I am trying to compare Monero with bitcoin and it looks like that you cannot see what is in a particular wallet by just using the public address.
Is this correct?
Not needed for sending out from polo unless you are sending it to another site/wallet that requires a payment ID (for example to another exchange) 2. If #1 assumption is correct, apart from logging into the account (wallet), how one can ascertain how much moneroj the account has?
By using all transaction IDs if you have them recorded separately?
You can't tell the balance of an account without using a wallet (or client or whatever you want to call it). Even if you have the TXIDs or payment IDs and can find them on a chain explorer, you won't know how much is the actual payment and how much is change, nor which payments sent there have been spent. This is different from Bitcoin or other transparent blockchains where each address has a public "balance" 3. If I did not provide a transaction ID, just the recipient wallet address, where is transaction ID generated-on the sender site (Poloniex) or wallet side (for example, getmonero)?
TXID is generated by the sender (as a hash of the transaction constructed by the sender). Payment ID is just an arbitrary 64 character hex string and can be anything (specified by sender) but the two are unrelated. thanks, that was great. I mixed up transaction ID and payment ID (meant payment ID), but your answer is very clear. |
|
|
|
|
Poloniex has transaction ID (optional) prompt to send moneroj out.
1. Is it really necessary or public address is sufficient?
I am trying to compare Monero with bitcoin and it looks like that you cannot see what is in a particular wallet by just using the public address.
Is this correct?
2. If #1 assumption is correct, apart from logging into the account (wallet), how one can ascertain how much moneroj the account has?
By using all transaction IDs if you have them recorded separately?
3. If I did not provide a transaction ID, just the recipient wallet address, where is transaction ID generated-on the sender site (Poloniex) or wallet side (for example, getmonero)?
For Monero frequent users, these are probably naive questions, but I find differences from bitcoin sufficient enough to ask.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
This will be the closest for you to determine: https://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-bitcoin-addresses.html The number is between 1 and the Number of Addresses holding coins. Several addresses can be owned by one user so its practically impossible to determine how much a given person actually owns. Unless you know all their addresses. What this table shows is how poorly distributed bitcoin still is. To be expected given the Pareto principle. 1. it is super Pareto- 93% coins in 2.3% accounts. Realistically, it isprobably even less- 0.5-1% since people might use multiple accounts. 2. Excesses over Pareto (80/20) will smooth out over time, I believe. |
|
|
|
|
A bit of confusion...
In mymonero there is a prompt: Account>
Upon mousing over, there is an option "Review login key", but upon choosing this option there is nothing displayed, but a picture of two overlapping files.
Upon clicking on those nothing happens.
Is there a way to see it (the login key)? Without this you have to enter three keys to access the account.
is it even proper to use the login key to access the account?
|
|
|
|
After mining away perfectly for 8 months without needing so much as a restart, my SP-20 has now become unresponsive.  Anyone have any ideas? I literally haven't tried anything but a restart, as I just recently noticed it was not responding to attempts to access the GUI. Should I try a hard reset (is that even possible)? Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks! I had something similar happen with also 8 mo old SP20E. At first it looked dead with double blinks of the yellow light. I restarted the PSU and router, reconnected ethernet cable, checked PSU connections. Still the same (no hashing), but after ~5 min I was able to see it on myminer.io I connected to the gui then and simply restarted the cgminer and SP20 started working/hashing. Later I noticed that one ASIC was overheating (which was not the case with these settings before). Tried to switch voltage down a little-still overheating. I then simply switched that ASIC off in the advanced panel. Everything is back no normal (fingers crossed) and the miner is much more stable. I could have increased fan-but i have somewhat sensitive ears and cannot tolerate fan at 20 and above. Will probably test at 30-50 before selling (if ever) because I think that the eighths ASIC is OK, just needs more cooling. You can also check my post about this in unofficial thread, but it is pretty much the same in even less #of words. |
|
|
|
I am back this was my payment from f2pool https://blockchain.info/tx/a91d26dd8a16544f4a67ef94e1c6b11012cb791f6a8a1cba63b4b5d4d270dc95the pdf is 426 pages long. first 7 pages start at 63.0111 btc and end at 0.8195 btc these would be 85th and up ----------- about 140 people pages 8 to 26 are 0.8195 to 0.1977 btc these would be 85th down to 20th------------------------------- about 360 people the next 147 pages are 0.1977btc to 0.000505btc these are all the accounts under 20th--------------about 2700 people Too tired to break this down more tonight. I do more on it weds. thanks, it would be quite informative. |
|
|
|
In his presentations Antonopoulos said frequently that bitcoiners shouldn't worry about competition from altcoins because if an altcoin get some useful feature that gives its competitive advantage over bitcoin, bitcoin developers would just copy&paste this feature to the bitcoin code. It did make sense at the time.
However, I suspect that those times have gone. The whole agony of block size limit change shows that bitcoin code and bitcoin development infrastructure have already hardened and solidified to the point where any change, even as trivial, as block size limit, becomes difficult on the border of impossible. From now on we can assume that bitcoin code cannot be changed in any substantial way. No non-trivial feature, however important or competitive, cannot be added/modified anymore. Which means, chances of an altcoin replacing bitcoin becomes much more real. Which is bad news for everybody who invested in bitcoin heavily (financially, career-wise etc).
It's not trolling, I'm really concerned and I'll be happy if you can prove me wrong.
No doubt re no changes. In addition: 1. NO "killer" apps (yet) 2. Endless blocksize debate. Sometimes it resembles the discussion on how many angels can dance on the needle's head. 3. A possibility that blockchains without tokens might be the next intermediate step before it will come back to a token-based non-bitcoin blockchain that would incorporate all learnings of the multitude of blockchains that many people would work on in the interim. 4. Lately, it is not really permission-less innovation-isn't it? I wish i could be smart enough to figure out what might win and hedge a little, but ethereum is too esoteric, and monero is too small to bet a lot. |
|
|
|
In my opinion, Ethereum will by it's own weight. It's too pretentious and ambitious of a project. Bitcoin's simplicity will win in the end, and it's scalability will deprecate Ethereum and other competitors.
not if bitcoin devs will endlessly argue about every little or large detail. Core bitcoin devs shouldn't be like Fed, a small group of people arbitrarily directing the policy. |
|
|
|
|
When something is widely expected in the financial markets, it is unlikely to occur.
Could be an antibubble before or bubble afterwards or beforehand.
If some serious fund wanted to push bitcoin upward, it would already be at 10K, no need to wait for halving.
Bitcoin issuance is ~1mil/day currently when AAPL and GOOGL traded $10-20bil worth in one day recently.
$1mil/day is nothing for even a medium size fund.
|
|
|
|
|
Correct me if i am wrong, but I thought that ethereum is basically fuel to run distributed applications that you want to built.
If I don't build apps-I don't think i would have any use for it, apart from speculation via ETC.
ETC is just a speculating vehicle since ether is not released yet.
There is a lot of noise about it, but a lot needs to be done before it can even remotely connect to an average Joe or Jane.
I wish it was just a new bitcoin feature.
A sidenote: what exactly bitcoin devs are doing apart from arguing about a blocksize?
We have yet to see something amazing and ready to use apart from endless wallets and exchanges.
|
|
|
|
|
+1.76 to +2.00 please
thanks
|
|
|
|
These machines have only been running for about 40 days in our farm, Just as I speculated, about long enough for manufacturer to ROI the machine. Nice business model, they basically get paid twice for each machine. Thank you for stating it publicly, now if only you'd price them to reflect their used nature! in 40 days S5 produces just ~$130 minus electricity (has to be at least $18.48 if the cost is 3c/kwh), so no more than $110 produced. It could pad the margins, though. |
|
|
|
|
I would arbitrarily define individual as anybody with less than 0.1PH (100TH)=~100 S5 or ~20 Sp30-35. If you have more-you are a real business.
My prediction is not more than 10-15%, but I could be wrong and would appreciate pointers to an accurate estimate.
How many SP30-35 were produced? I remember seeing $28mil revenue for Spond.
With an average price of probably ~$4000 over lifetime of sales, this would be ~7000 machines or ~30 PH. Maybe 1/3 are individuals or 10PH.
Phil was posting estimate of S5 sales somewhere, but I could not locate it.
Antpool has ~20% (~80PH), but it is not necessarily all S5. Maybe 1/3-1/2 are individuals=26-40 PH or ~20K-33K machines which looks like an overestimate, so perhaps these numbers are too high. If estimates are correct, then ~36-50 PH are individuals (9-13% of the total hash) without counting S3.
Opinions?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
