 Got my units yesterday! Hashing around 10% above advertised spec too. 6 units pulling 21.5 amps on 240v. Happy customer  |
|
|
|
Just to clarify I haven't got mine yet, 6 boxes have shipped and are currently in customs, and have been for the past 3 days with a "clearance event" holding things up.
I had to reach out to DHL and provide my tax ID before customs released them. Have you called them yet? It's been sorted now. Delivery should be soon. Good to hear. I got my first Halong units yesterday -- They're all hashing about 10% above advertised spec with a bit less power pull than advertised too |
|
|
|
With all due respect, I was not asking you how risky you believe it is to operate a DragonMint. Silicon is not the only material inside of the DragonMint and its PSU. Other risk factors exist, such as extremely high voltage. Yet the central question from my previous post remains, which you did not answer. Should it be possible in a court of law to hold Halong Mining accountable, if someone has a valid claim against it? Should Halong be held accountable if it negligently released a defective product that posed an unacceptable risk of danger? Of course it should. Every business should be held to account if it acts with negligence or if someone has a valid claim against it. I am not saying that Halong Mining has done any of these things (although the Innosilicon board looks staggeringly similar to that of the DM, see https://i.imgur.com/RgI9Eoy.jpg), but I have a real problem with the public's not having the information needed to sue and recover from someone if valid claims arise. Do you share this concern? If you do, then please realize that to hold a business operator accountable, we have to know, at a minimum, where we can deliver a copy of the lawsuit. That is why businesses are required to have a registered agent who can receive service of process from a court. Using extremely high voltage is not an activity anyone should take lightly, even if you consider silicon safe. Even low wattage smartphones have been known to burn dangerously due to defective components. The DragonMint operates at 1500 watts, has no FCC certification that I have been able to verify (despite Halong's claim that it exists), and it is the first ever product from a new hardware manufacturer with no track record that insists on operating with total anonymity and impunity. The mining industry is still young enough and its hardware rare enough that regulators still don't fully understand them. Governments are just starting to wrap their minds around the need for economic regulation of cryptocurrencies. The G20 leaders announced last month that cryptocurrency is on their radar. South Korea weeks ago banned anonymous cryptocurrency accounts. Regulation on the hardware side is just starting to happen too. The U.S. FCC in February sent a cease and desist letter to a home miner in Brooklyn, New York due to a Bitmain Antminer that the FCC believed disrupted a cell phone network. The disruption was so serious that T-Mobile, a U.S. corporation, spent thousands of dollars investigating the source of the interference and finally triangulated the interference to one man's Brooklyn apartment. If someone in New York or anywhere else can't place a phone call to emergency medical services, for example, because a Bitmain miner is disrupting their cell phone signal, can't we all agree that is an example of a legitimate safety concern? If we learn that Bitmain miners disrupt mobile phone communications to a dangerous degree, and if that disruption is due to a design defect or gross negligence by Bitmain, can't we all agree that Bitmain should assume responsibility for its actions? If, hypothetically, Bitmain were to try to skirt responsibility, can't we all agree that a court of proper jurisdiction should force Bitmain to assume responsibility? The same should happen to Halong Mining (or any other entity) if for some reason Halong is ever found to have acted with negligence or some other valid claim against it exists. Collaboration, unity, improved consumer experience, improved performance.... These goals are wonderful. I share them with you. But please realize that "improved consumer experience" requires the possibility that a manufacturer can be held accountable for valid legal claims against it. It doesn't matter who the business is. You don't get to operate with impunity in business under any circumstances. As for the contact at the URL you provided, the contact information shown on that page is for Little Dragon Technology LLC -- and notes nothing about Halong Mining. I found no evidence that an association exists between these two entities other than Halong Mining says it is a licensor of the patent purportedly owned by Little Dragon Technology. Halong wrote on its blog, "After Little Dragon Technology LLC acquired the patent from the original inventors, we negotiated a license to use AsicBoost in our miners on the understanding that AsicBoost would be opened up to everyone to use, under some form of defensive patent license, in the hopes it can help protect decentralization of Bitcoin mining. " (See: https://halongmining.com/blog/.) I checked the Statement of Information on file with the California Secretary of State for the entity Little Dragon Technology LLC, and the filing does not note any association between Little Dragon Technology LLC and Halong Mining. To that extent, I am inclined to believe that Little Dragon Technology LLC is simply a shell company with no legal connection to Halong Mining, and that Halong Mining is using the AsicBoost license just as anyone else is authorized to do. The key point is that one cannot successfully sue Little Dragon Technology LLC for valid legal claims against Halong Mining. I personally trust the company enough to where if they say they're certified, that's good enough for me. I've had enough experience in the mining industry to make a judgement call on that without vetting further company details. I understand your desire to vet those aspects, everyone has a criteria they look for. Halong has fulfilled mine. I would much rather Halong focus on making and delivering hardware, as they continue to do. I'm sure they wouldn't risk importing tens of millions worth of hardware if it wasn't legitimate. As for the miner in NY, that is far more likely to be a fluke than commonplace in the industry. It'll be an interesting case to follow, I'm not sure if the gentleman responded to FCC's questions yet. |
|
|
|
Just to clarify I haven't got mine yet, 6 boxes have shipped and are currently in customs, and have been for the past 3 days with a "clearance event" holding things up.
I had to reach out to DHL and provide my tax ID before customs released them. Have you called them yet? |
|
|
|
With all due respect, I was not asking you how risky you believe it is to operate a DragonMint. Silicon is not the only material inside of the DragonMint and its PSU. Other risk factors exist, such as extremely high voltage. Yet the central question from my previous post remains, which you did not answer. Should it be possible in a court of law to hold Halong Mining accountable, if someone has a valid claim against it? Should Halong be held accountable if it negligently released a defective product that posed an unacceptable risk of danger? Of course it should. Every business should be held to account if it acts with negligence or if someone has a valid claim against it. I am not saying that Halong Mining has done any of these things (although the Innosilicon board looks staggeringly similar to that of the DM, see https://i.imgur.com/RgI9Eoy.jpg), but I have a real problem with the public's not having the information needed to sue and recover from someone if valid claims arise. Do you share this concern? If you do, then please realize that to hold a business operator accountable, we have to know, at a minimum, where we can deliver a copy of the lawsuit. That is why businesses are required to have a registered agent who can receive service of process from a court. Using extremely high voltage is not an activity anyone should take lightly, even if you consider silicon safe. Even low wattage smartphones have been known to burn dangerously due to defective components. The DragonMint operates at 1500 watts, has no FCC certification that I have been able to verify (despite Halong's claim that it exists), and it is a new product from a new hardware manufacturer that insists on operating with total anonymity and impunity. The mining industry is still young enough and its hardware rare enough that regulators still don't fully understand them. Governments are just starting to wrap their minds around the need for economic regulation of cryptocurrencies. The G20 leaders announced last month that cryptocurrency is on their radar. South Korea weeks ago banned anonymous cryptocurrency accounts. Regulation on the hardware side is just starting to happen too. The U.S. FCC in February sent a cease and desist letter to a home miner in Brooklyn, New York due to a Bitmain Antminer that the FCC believed disrupted a cell phone network. The disruption was so serious that T-Mobile, a U.S. corporation, spent thousands of dollars investigating the source of the interference and finally triangulated the interference to one man's Brooklyn apartment. If someone in New York or anywhere else can't place a phone call to emergency medical services, for example, because a Bitmain miner is disrupting their cell phone signal, can't we all agree that is an example of a legitimate safety concern? If we learn that Bitmain miners disrupt mobile phone communications to a dangerous degree, and if that disruption is due to a design defect or gross negligence by Bitmain, can't we all agree that Bitmain should assume responsibility for its actions? If, hypothetically, Bitmain were to try to skirt responsibility, can't we all agree that a court of proper jurisdiction should force Bitmain to assume responsibility? The same should happen to Halong Mining (or any other entity) if for some reason Halong is ever found to have acted with negligence or some other valid claim against it exists. Collaboration, unity, improved consumer experience, improved performance.... These goals are wonderful. I share them with you. But please realize that "improved consumer experience" requires the possibility that a manufacturer can be held accountable for valid legal claims against it. It doesn't matter who the business is. You don't get to operate with impunity in business under any circumstances. As for the contact at the URL you provided, the contact information shown on that page is for Little Dragon Technology LLC -- and notes nothing about Halong Mining. I found no evidence that an association exists between these two entities other than Halong Mining says it is a licensor of the patent purportedly owned by Little Dragon Technology. Halong wrote on its blog, "After Little Dragon Technology LLC acquired the patent from the original inventors, we negotiated a license to use AsicBoost in our miners on the understanding that AsicBoost would be opened up to everyone to use, under some form of defensive patent license, in the hopes it can help protect decentralization of Bitcoin mining. " (See: https://halongmining.com/blog/.) I checked the Statement of Information on file with the California Secretary of State for the entity Little Dragon Technology LLC, and the filing does not note any association between Little Dragon Technology LLC and Halong Mining. To that extent, I am inclined to believe that Little Dragon Technology LLC is simply a shell company with no legal connection to Halong Mining, and that Halong Mining is using the AsicBoost license just as anyone else is authorized to do. The key point is that one cannot successfully sue Little Dragon Technology LLC for valid legal claims against Halong Mining. I can appreciate the concern to hold any manufacturer accountable, and if something were to arise, I'm quite certain there would be an effort to ensure accountability by defective and dangerous hardware delivered by said agents. This goes for any products out there. My first concern with any manufacturer certainly isn't who I can serve papers to in the scenario of said defect. I feel comfortable enough to purchase the units without digging into those what if legalities. I can also understand why Halong wants to be discrete on certain aspects, especially prior to their ASICBoost announcement. It's quite possible if all that information was so readily available months, Halong may have had a tougher time getting units out as advertised due to more covert factors by other players. As indicated in the prior post, there are already social media avenues, fake sites, among other tactics being used to attempt to mitigate legitimacy and damage Halong's reputation. As a business owner, I'd also take steps to safeguard my business and employees, so I understand Halong's approach. I'm way more concerned with them delivering units as advertised, which they've mostly fulfilled within the timeframes indicated. They've met my criteria to purchase from, and I've been overall pretty satisfied with my interactions with them. If they've indicated it's FCC certified, I have no reason to think otherwise. That's my personal stance, and I hope you find what you're looking for out of Halong. I should get 6 units from them today, which I'll post about here. The Bitmain case in NY in regards to the 700 band was related to the S5's modified in close proximity to a T-Mobile communications hub/tower from my understanding. It'll be an interesting subject to follow, I'm not sure if the guy got back to the FCC with details yet. More details here for those curious in the FCC report: https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2018/db0215/DOC-349258A1.pdf |
|
|
|
Powerful actors exist in many industries who want to mitigate the progress of competitors, but that doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to new market entrants who skirt longstanding international business norms that are designed: (1) to help provide consumer protection and safety, and (2) to help ensure fair dealing in the line of commerce among market participants.
As to safety, consider this analogy. If a new startup pharmaceutical company wanted to take on the big pharma players (who in many cases have monopolies on the treatment of certain conditions due to patent protection), would you risk your or your loved ones' lives and ingest pills from that company, even if you had no idea who they were, who their management was, where they are operating, whether they had a business license, and from where they were sourcing their chemicals? Even if the startup were well-intentioned, if they made an innocent mistake and released a drug that caused serious health problems or birth defects, shouldn't that company be held accountable if it acted negligently or improperly?
The DragonMint from Halong Mining is anlogous in certain respects. A purported "start-up" claims it wants to embark on grand plans to decentralize and take on the massive player, Bitmain. It operates totally anonymously. Even if Halong were well-intentioned, if they made an innocent mistake and released a product that burned down your house or mining operation --- or emitted fumes that caused serious health problems or birth defects, shouldn't Halong be held accountable if it acted negligently or improperly?
I appreciate that the worst experience you've had is seeing thousands of miners with KNC connectors with extremely high failure rates. What if Halong's miners end up having connectors with extremely high failure rates due to negligence during the manufacturing process or a flawed design? And since Halong is totally anonymous, we'd have no way to hold it accountable if Halong choose not to assume responsibility for them. Would you find that acceptable?
I understand your concern about health concerns and liability, however, if there were widespread issues in this industry with regards to safety, there would be much more stringent policies in place than your pharmaceutical company example. We are talking about silicon here. There is a degree of common sense people are responsible for, which would be far more likely to cause health risks. For example, you don't sleep in the hot isle at your facility. You don't pop 10x the recommended dosage. Had these units pulled more electricity per PCI connector similar to the KNC offerings, I would absolutely be concerned. However, that is not the case. Their hardware specs fall in line with general industry standards for the T1, and they've exceeded other specifications and delivery projections on other offerings. Hypothetically, if Bernie had engaged in theft of intellectual property from an ASIC hardware manufacturer, so long as you received your hardware from him and your Bitcoin account is growing, you're good with that? Don't you think Bernie's ASIC manufacturing company should be held to account?
Without a doubt, Halong Mining warrants our legitimate concern and rigorous scrutiny. I've never claimed that anyone is "forcing" me to do anything. My purpose is conclusively illustrating that Halong Mining is engaging in highly questionable business practices, and prospective buyers should proceed with caution and realize that they have no reasonable recourse to hold this "company" accountable should the need arise. In addition, Halong has made claims about the DragonMint that we cannot verify, such as the existence of its supposed FCC certification. Red flags galore, people. Red flags.
I support collaboration and unity with any field, as long as it improves the consumer experience and performance. If a manufacturer was using a variation of Asicboost, there's nothing wrong with other manufacturers getting on that train. It's inevitable, especially with the high level of efficiency gains. In a competitive market, manufacturers often use advancements in the field to their own benefit. I'm going to guess if certain big players got wind at exactly what Halong was doing, they would have tried to disrupt them as much as they could. This includes supply chain, legal, and all sort of covert approaches, as I'm sure some have already tried. Look at the fake sites popping up that are using falsely using reputable people's accounts with capital i's in hopes to scam and do phishing. I for one understand the level of privacy Halong had, especially before the ASICBoost defensive patent announcement. As for accountability on that end, there's some contacts listed below with the patent announcement. https://www.asicboost.com/single-post/2018/03/01/offering-announcement-blockchain-defensive-patent-license/ |
|
|
|
Yes. And isn't great how efficiently information can be shared about highly questionable business practices?
No one is asking Halong to debate anything. We have simply asked Halong to share the most basic kind of information that legitimate businesses worldwide uniformly share about themselves. That would take them 5 minutes to post. (No exaggeration.) We really just need Halong to post: (1) its incorporation number, and (2) its FCC certificate number. Do you honestly find that an overly burdensome request? That could be a one sentence post
How is the lack of accountability by a business a "good thing"? Hypothetically, if a serious, dangerous design defect in the DragonMint exists, or if an innocent 3rd party can conclusively prove that Halong engaged in theft of its intellectual property, how exactly is that lack of accountability a good thing? We have no idea who Halong Mining is, no idea where they are, and no idea how to hail them into court should a valid case arise at some future point. That is not a good thing.
I've been buying ASICs since late 2012 and I find nothing unusual about Halong's approach, especially with the information that was revealed about overt ASICBoost. In my opinion, this moves towards equality, and unity in the sector. There are powerful actors in the field that will want to mitigate that progress as much as possible for selfish reasons, and for that very reason, I understand how discrete a company in the forefront will want to be. As for safety, the worst experience I've personally had with thousands of miners were KNC connectors, which at times had 300w through a single PCI, causing the worst failure rate of any units I've ever had. If Bernard Madoff had accepted half a dozen crypto payment methods directly, would you have found his business "commendable" too? If Bernie made ASIC hardware and actually delivered it as Halong continues to do, yes. I find it fairly divisive that Bitmain, for instance, accepts crypto payments in only BCH currently. I would find it commendable that any hardware manufacturer opens up payments to other cryptos, especially ones that they specifically sell miners for. As long as the units are being delivered as advertised, I see nothing wrong with Halong. So far, all the T1's have been within specifications. I expect the other offerings to follow suit, and will report back on my Blake miners when I receive them. As for anything, caveat emptor. If you are not confident in purchasing any gear, no one is forcing you to do so. Continue sleuthing if you feel there are legitimate concerns, everyone has a different set of qualifications they look for in that. Wait it out and check out some of the reviews and confirmations of delivery, and if you're feeling it, have at it. Having done my research and meeting Scott Offord in person, I've felt comfortable with my purchases, and I look forward to the future offerings that are in store. As always, I'm happy to share my experiences with this company with this community. |
|
|
|
so when does this thread get moved to "hardware"? Not sure if we can call this speculation anymore. Units shipped...check! People bitching about said units.....check!
Maybe they have to pay a "listing fee"  There's a good amount of units in the wild being confirmed! I should get my Blakes at the tail end of this week too. That isn't actually how business works.
Isn't it great to have the option of buying what you want? I'd rather Halong spend time into their business, hardware, and delivering than to debating every topic on the forums. This is a multi-billion dollar industry, and any disruption that happens such as what Halong is doing and continues to do is certain to rile feathers in this business sector. This is a good thing. Look at how much the S9's are being flooded out into the market. This most recently reminds me of Spoondolies and their offerings and Bitmain's general shadowing and flooding responses. While it may not be directly primary factor, it's definitely a contributing factor. Again, this is a good thing for consumers, and if Halong navigates through the waves correctly, they'll continue to gain market share. I for one am grateful that a company accessible and responsive through multiple avenues, it's something that is commendable. Have we ever seen a manufacturer that has delivered miners accept more than half a dozen crypto payment methods directly? |
|
|
|
What worries me are the alt miners. Their outrageous claims of efficiency (and therefore profitability) strike me as, at best, false claims, and at worst as a scam. If I were a betting man I would say that we'll never see a halong altcoin miner actually in the hands of an individual.
I ordered some of the B29's within two minutes of them going active. While I was disappointed there was a delay (which I do wonder if Halong will make up for somehow -- maybe better specs?!), I did get my shipping number for that nearly 9 hours ago, and other people are reporting likewise, so it's going to be an interesting week here. I've gotta say, their payment method options are neat. You can pay in BTC, LTC, ETH, XMR, USDT, and a few other options. I've never seen a manufacturer take so many crypto methods, this is a good thing. |
|
|
|
Nope. The fact that u are near a manufacturer is more reason that u should not do the review as it may not be impartial. No one knows if u are an original account holder as your 2018 posts are all in this thread only. Your previous post before halong is in 2015 and u just happen to live nearby halong haha.
Apparently signing an old address I posted back in 2013 isn't good enough for Sandal Hat. People can make their own decisions based on the facts I provided There is nothing wrong with living close to a manufacturer representative. Anyone that lived in close proximity would take that opportunity to get to know the company as I have, including an in-person demo in January when the open invitation happened to everyone here. I'd do the same for any other company that was in proximity in one way or another in the mining field popped up here. With that said, I look forward to reviewing the unit, and the offer is on the table for anyone that wants to review it with me as I get it. The purpose here is confirm legitimacy, which I'm always happy to help with, regardless of manufacturer. As for pricing, I think the Dragons were a complete steal when BTC was at it's peak compared to the S9's, which were mostly out of stock or limited. Those that purchased the dragons at around the peak got a killer deal, congratulations. We can all agree the market is saturated with miners, and it's a contraction phase I've seen plenty of times. Bitmain is certainly flooding the market with cheap miners -- I bet when BCH reaches around 1500+, they'll pull or reprice most of their stock. I wonder if Halong will release a consistent price on the miners, I'd have loved to see the price stay around 2000, I think the hike to 2700 was excessive imo. |
|
|
|
You probably are in Halong's shoes, since you sound like Scott Offord, Halong's "helper" who also happens to be based in Milwaukee. I'll bet "zerobias" in this thread is Oleg, a Russian associated with this whole shady operation.
Really, how convenient for this guy to get the hardware for review, and not people like philipma1957 and HagssFIN?
Bunch of scammers selling likely stolen shit to the community that doesn't meet the specification, and fake miners, and preying on rightful concerns about mining centralization to pump their deception the entire way. I feel bad for people like -ck, Adam Back, and slush who got deceived by these guys and helped add legitimacy to them, the coming weeks are going to be... interesting for them.
I've never seen a level of angst from someone that's been around as long as you have against a manufacturer like you have. Did Halong or their prominent supporters do you wrong? You're saying you wouldn't meet a manufacturer representative if he was close to you? I encourage you to fly out here and review the unit with me as soon as I get it. Seriously. I promise the DHL guy that delivers it actually works for DHL and isn't fake. There is nothing wrong with advancements in the field - it is something that should be encouraged among all the manufacturers for a level of competition that is helpful to consumers and the industry at the end of the day. What you have been doing is incredibly divisive. I'll be flying out to MKE in May. I'd be interested in a quick visit seeing it. Might help to clarify, or maybe add more to the confusion!
Once I got my plans made I'll PM you. Might be a moot point by then, tho...
Glad to have you swing around and check it out. I'll be out in NY a week in early May, I can arrange for my secretary to show you if that's the time you plan on being in town By then the April units should be all out in the wild too! @Zand -- Nice to see units out in the wild! Can't wait to check mine out when I get it |
|
|
|
I dont buy that at all. This is freaking 2018. What is so difficult about shipping a machine over. It can be done in ONE DAY. There are only a few tweets about the machine's existence and no detailed reviews.
We have a foruner whose review claims that the machine is actually NOT as good as advertized. Some of the machine are abit better than S9 and some are worse.
No one wants a cherry picked review that shows good numbers. The fellow can probably drive to u and help u with the review. It is also suspicious that all your 2018 posts are in halong thread and your post before that was in 2015. No offense intended.
Quite honestly, if I was in Halong's shoes, I'd probably do the exact same thing. The March orders were the early believers and the ones that should deserve their units before anyone else. I certainly wouldn't ship test units to anyone before my very first customers that had paid me nearly half a year ago. Remember, everyone had the opportunity to see the unit in person -- which many people did, in January at multiple avenues. There is zero chance I would ship anyone else the units prior to my early believers. I think I've made my point clear and concise with my activity and have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that I am the original account holder. As indicated, if there was a manufacturer representative that lived close to you, I'm sure anyone here would do the same thing I have done. With regards to reviewing the unit, if anyone wants to fly/drive out to Milwaukee and visit my shop when I receive the unit, they are welcome to do so. I'm happy to host you and review the unit together with anyone that wishes to. Cobra, if you fly out, I'll even get a crow  |
|
|
|
How come they didnt send to philip? But they send to u first? No offense but all your post in 2018 has been at halong thread only and before that, it was a 2015 post.
Did they send it so you can make a thorough review here at the forum ?
I offered to take one to review and analyze it independently, they accepted. I look forward to checking out the unit, and plan on posting here about my experiences. Sandal, if you are keeping up with my posts, one of the primary Halong representatives here lives under half an hour from me and I had visited in early January to investigate the authenticity of these claims and was pretty delighted with what I found. Had he lived anywhere else, I would probably still be lurking. I think if the situation was the same, any of you would do likewise. It's a good opportunity to give back intelligence to the community with so much general angst and distrust of newcomers. As for Philip, I'm going to guess we're going to get the units at a similar time. It's a good thing they agreed to ship these out to more than one person. As mentioned before, I've got no skin in the game with Halong directly. I'm not being compensated, and I'm happy to send the unit back if they desire. I appreciate the trust I've built with the company. I'm just an oldschool miner that likes new toys I'm all ears for any ideas on the reviewing the unit if anyone wanted to test something unique. I had a few things in mind! |
|
|
|
Are they going to send you a free unit, like they are sending to Philip?
That's correct. I had a confirmation email already, it should come this week sometime. |
|
|
|
I've gotten in touch with Halong and they've agreed to send me a T1 sometime this week for review. I'll have more details and a review when the unit arrives and I get it check it out. As some of you may remember my previous post, I'm a fairly old school mining enthusiast that has ordered offerings from a good chunk of the well known mining manufacturers. I look forward to reviewing my experience with Halong |
|
|
|
|
The pricing certainly doesn't make sense right now for their SHA256 offerings. 2000 for the dragons were steal when BTC was 15k+, not so much at these current prices. Other algorithms they had were fine and are trendsetters in their respective markets.
It's good to see other people reporting their orders are being fulfilled and these are all being shipped out.
I'll see if they'll send me a retail T1 unit for analysis and comparison, I'll report back here with regards to that.
|
|
|
|
3. Regarding pools, undecided what we'll do regarding default pools. It may reduce support questions if we preconfigure initially. Right now focus is on shipping. Firmware defaults can be tweaked later. Open to suggestions on how to handle this. Miners in warehouse are configured for Slush at the moment.
Drak, do both. Have supporting pools provide you with a current list of mining targets that people can easily select and add their desired address, while still having the option of being able to self-direct as well. If pool operators want some of the market share, they'll come to you guys with a nice tidy list they'll want to keep updated. |
|
|
|
|
The default software will not allow you to even mine on non-AsicBoost pools. You'd have to modify it to do so (at the cost of efficiency and voiding the warranty probably)
Halong clarified that the speed would be no different, it'd be 16T regardless, it's just efficiency that takes a hit if the software was modified to a non-AB pool.
I'm wondering when the other manufacturers will hop on the overt AB bandwagon.
|
|
|
|
Also pools that support ASIC boost are essentially Bitcoin Cash pools right? From what I understand ASIC boost does not work on Bitcoin Core Seq Witness...
In a nutshell, there are two common approaches on AsicBoost. One is Covert, which Bitmain used, which is not compatible with Segwit. The other is overt, which is Segwit compatible. The early Cointerra machines were advertised with AsicBoost with Timo Hanke working for them. |
|
|
|
The overt Asicboost is advertised as 20%. What does that mean the miner is without ASICBoost? About 12.8TH. That's a bit worse than a S9. The current pricing of the Dragonmint 16T is still excessive compared to what is available from Bitmain. It's just not cost effective compared to an S9. That's pretty awesome though what they did with the patent. That explains why the miner was pointed to slush They're just not competitive at the latest 16T batches with pricing unfortunately. The early batches for 2k were relative steals though. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
