Protip: If you would like to keep Bitcoin mining decentralized, don't invest in mining companies.
I have to agree with Lambchop here. Lambchop is saying that people shouldn't invest in AM. Do you really agree with that or did you just not understand what he was saying? I agree that if you want mining to be fully decentralized you shouldn't, however I think that if their hashrate is 10% or less there is no real risk. So its a mixture. Lambchop is basically saying that ASIC miners should not exist, regardless of whether they're used by individuals in a P2Pool or by a corporation solo-mining with 40% on the network hash rate. |
|
|
|
Protip: If you would like to keep Bitcoin mining decentralized, don't invest in mining companies.
I have to agree with Lambchop here. Lambchop is saying that people shouldn't invest in AM. Do you really agree with that or did you just not understand what he was saying? |
|
|
|
|
If anyone is familiar with P2Pool, could then give an overview of the pros and cons?
|
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes released a nice comparison/calculation today at which percentage of the total hash rate it is starting to make sense to solo-mine: It all comes down to how much time you are willing to accept between paydays and how much variance. Remember bitcoin mining is a poisson distribution ( http://stattrek.com/online-calculator/poisson.aspx ). Lets assume you are not willing to go one difficulty period without finding a block. If you have 1/2016th (0.05%) of the network you should find on average 1 block per difficulty period. Expected = 1 block Probability of 0 blocks = 36.7% Probability of 1 bock = 26.4% Probability of 2+ blocks = 36.7% You have a ~1 in 3 chance of doubling (or more) your return but also a ~1 in 3 chance of earning nothing. That is probably more risk than most miners are willing to take. If you have 2/2016th of the network (~0.1%) you should find on average 2 blocks per difficulty period. Expected = 2 blocks Probability of 0 blocks = 13.5% Probability of 1 block = 27.1% Probability of 2+ blocks = 59.4% Looking better but lets look at 5 times as much hashrate, 10/2016th of the network (0.25%). If you have 10/2016th of the network (~0.5%) you should find on average 10 blocks per difficulty period. Probability of 0 blocks = ~0% (1 in 22,026) Probability of 1 to 5 blocks = 6.7% Probability of 6 to 9 blocks = 39.1% Probability of 10+ blocks = 54.2% So less than a 7% chance of earning less than half of expected. How about a nice even 1% of the network. If you have 20/2016th of the network (~1%) you should find on average 20 blocks per difficulty period. Probability of <6 blocks = ~0% (1 in 13,906) Probability of 7 to 13 blocks = 6.6% Probability of 14 to 19 blocks = 45.9% Probability of 20+ blocks = 52.9% Now we are looking good. Only 7% chance of earning less than 70% of expected. Of course your risk tolerance will vary but the same distribution can be done at any percentage of the network. As the difficulty growth goes down you may not necessarily care about how many blocks in each difficulty period but rather how many blocks per month since the powerbill is due each month. There are ~4,320 blocks per month which means the probability of extremely bad or good luck over that longer period of time decreases (quite a bit). The problem with calculations like that is that they assume static conditions, which is not the case for mining. For example, you could start a difficulty round with 1% of the network hash rate and end the round with 0.1%, in which case, the probability of mining 20 blocks would be far less than 52.9% and would be close to 0%. This is what we saw as AM's gen 1 mine was winding down and is why the dividends stopped. |
|
|
|
|
When AM's percentage of the network hashrate fell to near 0, solo-mining was pretty much a waste of time resulting in no dividends. So how would you prefer AM's mine to operate?
|
|
|
|
I see that you are really trying, but failing badly to bash SP-Tech. They don't build mega farms for their selfish mining like Bitfury. What are we talking about here?
I was commenting on the risks of pre-orders. You'd think that after every company has burnt their pre-order customers that people would stop purchasing in such a manner. Clearly some people have more money than sense though and are eager to give these companies free loans. |
|
|
|
You should take note that Bitfury uses customer funds to build mega farms and screw their customers ROI.
What difference do you think that actually makes? Whether they mine with their own systems or sell them to customers, the same amount of hashing power is still being added to the network so customers ROI will be the exact same. no they asked for a lot of preorder money then claimed it could not pass customs out of russia. they refunded all of us and mined the gear. without our free loan so to speak they never would have had the gear. everyone of us got a refund but no extra money So you decide to go with another pre-order and get burnt again?  I guess some people never learn. |
|
|
|
You should take note that Bitfury uses customer funds to build mega farms and screw their customers ROI.
What difference do you think that actually makes? Whether they mine with their own systems or sell them to customers, the same amount of hashing power is still being added to the network so customers ROI will be the exact same. |
|
|
|
I wonder how much they are deploying at a time.
BitFury rhythm is about 10-20MW every two months. The 25% three jumps ago was their 20MW Georgian DC. Do you know for a fact it was them or are you guessing? AM have also been deploying their own gen 3 mine and plan to recapture their average hash rate from 2013. Update
1. Due to the relatively lower interest from individual miners as well as OEM producers, the self mining has re-started from middle of July. We had gain access of cheap electricity and high power capacity. We hope to regain the average hashrate percentage similar to 2013 with this generation of chips.
2. The price rockminer gets is not the sales price. It's the premium of franchising. We gain the part of profits after the devices begin to generate revenue like the franchising of devices. The sales price of chips stay a relatively high margin because our option of building our own devices and sell/deploy is always wide open.
3. We announce the sales of our own devices. We would arrange an offline meeting in Shenzhen first to share more information. We will post the English version of it on the meetup sub-board.
|
|
|
|
You are going nowhere with this and you know it. Pushing things like this is simply useless and actually is showing your true character.
Like what, consumer rights? I took no money for the products, only reservation fees so I'm not legally obligated to deal with any refund request.
If that's the case, then yeah it's not your responsibility, it's Spondoolies. I say that you stop with whatever you are trying to do. It's obvious that you are trying to bash me or SP-Tech with whatever you can. The fact that you don't even know how things went with my GB shows exactly this. At least with jimmothy I could reason, but you are giving me nothing and you are owning yourself. What are you talking about? As can clearly be seen in the text you quoted, I'm not bashing anyone. I did call you out for lying earlier on though and then you started bashing me by calling me an AM shill for saying that people are legally entitled to refunds. I then pointed out that I never said anything to promote AM here but you had been shilling in the AM thread. I also pointed out that refusing to give people refunds would damage your reputation and people would equate you with scammers. It's like you're not even aware of what you say, so yes, I will stop now. |
|
|
|
You are going nowhere with this and you know it. Pushing things like this is simply useless and actually is showing your true character.
Like what, consumer rights? I took no money for the products, only reservation fees so I'm not legally obligated to deal with any refund request.
If that's the case, then yeah it's not your responsibility, it's Spondoolies. |
|
|
|
Well you just proved my point by advertising AM gen4 chips  No, that was an example of what you have been doing. Regardless of you being a liar and a shill, you are the one who took money in exchange for a product that is significantly different than advertised and you are the one who is legally obligated to deal with any requested refunds. So, if someone asks you for a full refund, will you provide it as legally required? Look at Ken Slaughter, is that your future? Will you do a runner like Labcoin? Shall we start calling you BFLRoadStress now? Good luck trying to sell anything else in the future. |
|
|
|
I don't see you jumping to buy my miner off me when you say IM CRAZY to ask for a refund.
No, you're certainly not crazy and I'm pretty sure that they're legally obligated to give a full refund to anyone who requests one. When did jimmothy passed the AM shill torch to you? How is telling someone they have the right to a full refund shilling for AM? Have I said anything about how much of a failure these chips are and how AM's 28nm chip is going to blow them out of the water and all kinds of other nonsense like you have been doing in the AM thread? Do I have a link to AM1 in my signature? No, I haven't been doing any of that. I just corrected you on the lies you were telling and made a statement about consumer rights. If someone asks you for a full refund, you are legally obligated to give them one. It's as simple as that. |
|
|
|
I don't see you jumping to buy my miner off me when you say IM CRAZY to ask for a refund.
No, you're certainly not crazy and I'm pretty sure that they're legally obligated to give a full refund to anyone who requests one. |
|
|
|
I was quoting the full system power draw, but you are right. It's not a 300% miss, it's just a 100% miss (or it's 200%?)
You clearly stated gen 3 chips, not miners using gen 3 chips. It's 200% of the simulated spec which is an increase of 100%. |
|
|
|
Still better than an over 300% miss for AM gen3 chips.
Why do you always tell a complete pack of lies about AM? Declaration: Before physical chips are out and fully tested, all specs/dates/data are for reference only and subject to change.
Specification
Process node: 40nm
Package type: QFN64 8mmx8mm (with another option of QFN64 7mmx7mm possible)
I/O: Standard SPI protocol with clk, in, out and cs.
Rated Hashrate: 12.8GHash/s per chip, with a wide range of overclock/downclock options
Rated Voltage: 0.72V, recommended voltage range is 0.55V-1V
Power Consumption: 0.2J/GHash low voltage, 0.35J/GHash rated voltage
As you can clearly see AM didn't promise anything. Brief Answers to Shareholder Questions5) What is the status of gen 3.1 (shipping to customers, I think?)? How much does it help with energy usage -- do we have final chip performance numbers yet?
All shipped chips are gen 3.0 ones. What we had chosen for 3.1 helps with energy usage at 10% range and has some performance degrades. The final chip performance number is about 0.7W/G at 0.78V and 320MHz. Below that voltage we have less power draw and less speed. 0.35 J/Gh * 300% = 1.05 J/Gh. If you can't tell the truth or do basic maths, why should anyone trust you? |
|
|
|
Havelock seems silent, again. I guess people are waiting for the Salon FC promised. I'm also curious to see whether there'll be a rebound back to 0.2 BTC...
It passed that price hours ago. You're looking at a cached version. |
|
|
|
That means the price of BE200 chip is only 1.34$.
AM is selling BE200 at cost. Or Rockminer will join AM's franchising farm?
If this were correct, then we are making $1.14 per chip. FC said per chip cost was <$0.20... ...per Gh/s. That was based on simulations and doesn't actually tell us how much the chips cost though. The actual cost of chips has not been made available to us. |
|
|
|
I feel bad for lophie, I like that guy dispite his sell off. Now he is going to have to buy back in for a loss in a thin market.
You shouldn't feel sorry for him. He sold off a large number of shares then spread a bit of FUD in order to try and make more people sell off so he could buy back in at a lower price. His gamble and his FUD failed. People should learn from his mistake so they don't repeat it themselves and they should stop listening to people who can't backup their claims. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
