 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
|
CoinCraft Rig status updates
Posted on March 16, 2014 by Giorgio Massarotto in Coincraft series, News
Revision 3 of the prototype hashing units for the CoinCraft Rig is now hashing at the expected speed. Production to be started in very short times.
After two past major revision of the rig hashing unit, revision 3 was completely re-engineered in order to address the engineering challenged posed by the very high mining density and the 24V power distribution system. The newest prototype board, to be seen below, is now successfully working at the expected speed. We are speeding up the production as much as possible in order to reduce the delays and shoot a video of a fully populated CoinCraft Rig unit as soon as possible.
Further updates will be posted once available, we are currently expecting the first rigs to be shipped in about 2-3 weeks from now.
|
|
|
|
Another issue with the 25% boost to hash rate - BA doesn't seem to realise that it's not really a fix, it's obviously just covering their arses because if it was 25% additional hardware it might actually be worth it because then the GB will still have the resale option at the end of the life of the miner (for BTC mining anyway).
25% additional mining with their 'hosting' doesn't really cover a thing, as... oh wait that's right, a month after they were due that 25% will be worthless, (based on the fact that difficulty rises have slowed) and by the time they're received we'll probably be down to 50% or less BTC output.
From my point of view, it is the potential drop in the price of X-3 that can give us the biggest boost. It appears that their policy is that we get a speed boost commensurate with any price drop. So if these were going for $6000 at the time of preorder and they are selling $2000 at the time they actually ship, then we get 3 times the original hash rate and perhaps another 25% on top of that. That's my understanding. Can someone from DZMZ please confirm? PLEASE? |
|
|
|
That's just an order number - I don't think they're selling thousands of Bitmines of which ours happens to be #2298 in the queue. |
|
|
|
Just wondering why people use btc instead of litecoin/dogecoin/etc?
Network effect - the larger the user base, the greater the value to each user in the user base. |
|
|
|
Guys, I am really confused who made the bitcoin... Some say its satoshi others say that no one knows who created it.... What are your views on it?? BTCBTCBTC
I believe there is one of two possibilities: (1) Extraterrestrials or (2) Time travelers brought it from the future - therefore, it was never actually created. |
|
|
|
Are refunds given in BTC or in $ (I mean the paid amount in BTC/$)?
I believe it's the amount of BTC you paid ... not the current BTC equiv of the USD equiv at the time you paid. M That's correct. DZ (the individual, not DZMC the coop) has confirmed this. |
|
|
|
So many complainers. Guys just submit your request give it a few weeks. I don't see how nagging helps anything.
All indications would show they are honestly trying to get things done and not rip you off. You guys act like there about to rob you. Stop stressing.
Personally if I was them I would never host a group buy again, because its too much work dealing with you guys with little to gain. I would just leave you all to the low level unknown scammers to sell you your group buys.
Or maybe DZ should just screen who they sell the group buys too so they can minimize the drama.
THANK YOU. I couldn't agree more. I wish we could separate this thread into two: one thread for whining and one thread for us to discuss news and updates from BA. |
|
|
|
Quick question on refunds. Are you refunding the $ value or BTC transmitted value?
I asked the same thing earlier in the thread and DZ replied that they refund the BTC amount that was originally transmitted minus 1.5% |
|
|
|
Ok, gotta preface this with the caveat that I am not a programmer. To some extent, I was back in the early 80's, but that's ancient history. The longest prog I ever wrote would not fill the comment section of a modern source.
That being said, the blockchain's data is a data set. How it's stored is important, but not as important as the data themselves. It is my layman's understanding that it should be possible to import all the extant data into an entirely new blockchain structure, if that was the intent. As an analogy, you can take an Excel spreadsheet and import it into a Lotus or OpenOffice spreadsheet, and all that changes is the formatting, even though the underlying code is incompatible.
But frankly, the blockchain is probably the most robust part of bitcoin, or any alt based off of it. In all of the attacks, glitches, assaults, and general fuckups that have occurred in the five years of Bitcoin, the blockchain has emerged unscathed. It's the programs that interact with it that have had problems. Even then, from what I've seen, most have been minor. Even this thing that Gox is using as their latest excuse appears to be something exploitable, if you have the resources, but not extreme. Frankly, Gox has been spreading confusion and delay as their standard operating procedure for the two years I've been involved in Bitcoin, so I don't even know how much credence to put in this. Bitstamp and BTC-e both thought it worthy of investigation, but were only paused for a short while. Gox has been having "technical difficulties" with withdrawals for as long as I've been a member here (a little less than a year), and I seem to recall them doing this kind of shit back before that too.
Well, your simplified explanation is very helpful and actually makes perfect sense to me. Even though I won't pretend to even begin to understand the underlying technicalities, I feel better now knowing that someone that at least sounds far more knowledgeable than myself is not too concerned about the issue and has some reasoning behind not being concerned :-) |
|
|
|
Other than the transaction records
Thanks for your comments. In general, what you wrote makes me feel better about BTC, but the one issue that nags me is indeed the historical transaction records. I don't understand much about the technicalities of the blockchain, but my impression is that historical transaction records are basically like building blocks upon which all future transaction records depend. If that's the case, my worry is that if they change something fundamental about Bitcoin protocol, could it potentially create the necessity to go back and rewrite the entire history of transactions from the very beginning? Using a stupid analogy (but hopefully it serves its purpose), if the transaction history thus far has been build with bricks and then one day the advent of steel comes along, could it necessitate the tearing down of the entire brick structure and complete replacement with steel - which, by fundamental design of Bitcoin, be essentially impossible? |
|
|
|
Why is this important? If this new coin is sooo superior, exchange your Bitcoin holdings into this new coin and forget Bitcoin.
It's important because once such superior currency is introduced and becomes known, the selling pressure on Bitcoin will make it such that the Bitcoin holdings will become worthless faster than it can be exchanged for the new currency - unless one foresees the outcome way before others do (which is why I'd like to be involved in these sorts of discussions now). All upcoming bitcoin vulnerabilities or other unforeseen issues will be fixed as the bitcoin devs want to maintain their wealth.
If Bitcoin technology is such that it can be fixed over time (which goes back to my original question), then that's great - exactly what I wanted to hear. |
|
|
|
|
I'm just curious if Bitcoin has the capability to change and evolve in order to counter any vulnerabilities or other unforeseen issues that may arise, or if everything about the nature Bitcoin was set in stone at the time of original implementation and that it would be nearly impossible to go back and make any fundamental changes to how Bitcoin works.
One of my biggest concerns about Bitcoin is that there are superior (presumably) virtual currencies popping up all the time that purport that they overcome certain weaknesses of their predecessors. It appears that the only reason why Bitcoin continues to be the incumbent is because of its first-mover advantage and the apparent critical mass that's working in its favor.
But what would happen if a sufficiently superior currency is introduced - one whose superiority overcomes Bitcoin's critical mass advantage? Will that be the beginning of the end for Bitcoin, or was Bitcoin originally designed in such a way that it has the flexibility to actually evolve and perhaps incorporate into itself the any significant improvements brought upon by some new currency?
PS: I understand this is somewhat similar to another thread here entitled "Cryptographical Arms Race" but I think it's sufficiently different to deserve its own thread.
|
|
|
|
|
I want to make sure I fully understand BA's price protection policy before I make my decision about whether to request a refund.
Their X-3 order page says this:
"All pre-orders are guaranteed to be protected against any price decrease. If at any time, during the pre-order period, we drop the price under what you have already paid, you will be compensated by receiving more X-3 mining machines.
Example: If you have purchased an X-3 with 25% discount and we offer later 40% discount, your order will be recalculated at 40% discount and you will receive more X-3. Then, if we offer later only 10% discount you will still get order as if you've ordered at 40% discount."
I'd like know:
1) Is their so-called "pre-order period" defined as any time before the unit actually ships?
2) How much did DZMC pay BA per X-3 ordered?
3) Using a hypothetical example, if DZMC paid $6000 per unit at the time of original order and if BA is selling the units for, say, $3000 when they ship (presumably) in May, do we then get 80GHS per share instead of 40GHS per share? And if they're selling for $2000, then we get 120GHS per share, and so on?
It would seem to me at face value that their delay will inevitably force them to drop USD prices (unless price of BTC itself shoots up dramatically), and that would result in significantly greater hash power for us for the same original cost, thereby mitigating much of the damage caused by the delay. Is my understanding incorrect?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't intend to ever exchange my accumulated BTC for fiat, so BTC/fiat exchange rate is materially irrelevant to me. I'm holding BTC until the time comes when everything I need/want can be bought directly with BTC.
|
|
|
|
|
BOBSAG3:
If we request a refund, do we get back the original amount of BTC that we actually paid when we placed the order, or do we get $130 (or $110) worth of BTC at current BTC/USD rate?
It's a huge difference so please let me know.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
So when are we getting our Bitmine rigs? Any info.
The information on the website seems to indicate that they were originally slated for late Jan delivery but were delayed by about 3 weeks. To me, that would mean that they should be shipping by the end of February. I'm hoping that someone from DZ coop can confirm my understanding. |
|
|
|
|
It's funny how the so-called "market price" is going down but actual sellers that are willing to sell for those prices are few and far between.
|
|
|
|
|
It's likely that there are a lot of people on the sidelines waiting for a clear breakout (up or down) out of this $1000 area and once something causes that to happen (and that something could be some random big buyer or seller that happens to move the market since BTC market is still pretty illiquid), everyone will pile on to either take price to the next level ($2,000 for example) or sell BTC down to oblivion.
|
|
|
|
Just wanted to post a big THANKS to the OP for his clear and helpful instructions. I've gotten my newbie ghetto rig up and running in no time. And luckily, I picked up the blade about a week ago (for about $240) right before prices skyrocketed.
|
|
|
|
|
