 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
Please refer to tx
3fcc1d5f1e33c3004e2d57853e3312696b2c39f40cd82104175cf192bccc4d2a
BTC went in to my account, I sold BTC, then BTC sent to Coinbase owned address.
Transaction listing shows no record that the BTC were sold. It's been 7 days and I've been expecting this to clear my bank.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Trying this again.
Bidding starts at 15 BTC.
Auction ends 2013-09-20 23:59 GMT/UTC. Antisniping rule: more than 1 bid from party in last 30 min will be invalidated.
Buyer pays escrow fee (John K preferred). 0.072 BTC per unit shipping. Extra (a lot) for 1 business day delivery.
Seller provides no warranty. Any DOA issue to be taken up with BFL directly. Buyer agrees to release escrow upon receipt of units.
|
|
|
|
|
I gave Coinbase a few days to respond to my concern. Nothing - so here.
To Coinbase
a616959e46b0cb66eb8b0d2bd5ab9f4b87a28ffdd430a29f90d41b0767242a29
After 24 hours of 0 conf - From deposit address to Coinbase owned address
3386c6a7fa2d58a6b62db22319fecb820bf4d04a0f775558ac915ec1343b7a7f
In the end, the TX's were confirmed - BTC went in - it went out, balance credited, then debited. No BTC.
The deposit TX byte size was huge, 7 kB ish. The fee was low, makes sense that conf stalled.
Lovely.
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone have probability for confirmation times for tx's with lower than average fee - let's say 33% of standard fee?
I'm wondering if it will take a week for some tx's to be picked up in a block.
|
|
|
|
|
Thaaaaaaanks BFL.
*grumbles*
|
|
|
|
|
Update: Lowered min. bid. Additional information.
Update: Buy 3 or more and receive the EVGA PSU provided by BFL.
7 60 GH SC Singles. Auction ends 2013-09-13 23:59:00 GMT/UTC. Anti-sniping rule - more than 1 bid in the last 30 minutes of auction will be invalidated.
Shipped from US. Escrow to buyer. John K preferred for escrow.
Units tested to be operational. Buyer agrees to handle any DOA unit with BFL directly and to release escrow upon receipt of unit(s).
Auctions going for 27 btc per. Minimum bid: 23 btc.
Will update thread with highest qty/bids.
USPS Priority Express and insurance available for additional cost.
High Bids
invalid bids
[Below min. bid] bobsag3 - 1@22 btc
[No response] alwayzgame - 1@28 btc
[No response] asic-k - 1@28 btc
|
|
|
|
|
BFL selling packaged chips for $75 retail. Credits allow purchase of chips at $50 per.
$0.04 cents on the dollar is just too low. I'm willing to take offers, but 4 cents is just.... no good reason why I should bother selling.
Of course, if no one wants to buy BFL chips since BFL is sketchy - *shrugs*
The credits are in the form of transferable vouchers.
Vouchers are in lots of 32 chip credits. Minimum purchase - 1 Lot = 32 chip credits.
BFL states that minimum chip purchase voucher or otherwise is 100 chips. If you plan to buy chips from BFL - 100 chips will be the minimum order size
Discount will apply if all lots, 7x32, are purchased outright.
I believe the only way to validate a voucher is to attempt to make a purchase with one - so I've heard.
So, you'll just have to take my word or wait a long time in escrow until BFL lumbers around to address voucher orders.
PM me.
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to see a feature where forum users of a certain designation, such as the recently designation of "expert", be allowed to mark a topic post that:
1. Is in the experts direct realm of expertise.
2. The post is full of FUD, or low information, which ultimately misleads any other low information forum users.
Finally
3. This expert have a specific mod power to mark the topic post (not the entire thread) as WTFRUTA or some other appropriate designation.
The results would have the topic post in question have a bold red border, and a red "X" with dimensions of 100% of the post width and a height of about 20px.
Far, far too many low information opinion formulated posts here.
|
|
|
|
Via newsletter. Final confirmation is required
Please be advised that due to the adjustments described above, we need your confirmation prior to release of your order into the final build queue and on to final delivery. It may also be a good time to review your purchase altogether relative to the bitcoin market as this is the last opportunity to do so. If your order is not confirmed, it will be canceled and your money will be refunded. Sounds like a cashflow problem. Last minute refunds after capital investment might sink their ship. Interesting. |
|
|
|
|
I rarely create new threads with little substance, but I had to mention this.
When countering the 'energy usage' argument with someone that does not know about the specifics of Bitcoin I attempted to describe the importance of PoW.
I said one of the major premise of Bitcoin is that PoW provides a relatively predictable way to defend against a majority group or entity that would take control of Bitcoin.
I did a mental double take on the associations of that statement. And that was:
Representative Democracy. The grand bargain.
Does Bitcoin share in the spirit of the fundamentals in which the US was created? (this is not a libertarian plug. Just an observation)
Maybe this is the start of a bona fide money revolution? Bitcoin spangled banner, anyone?
|
|
|
|
|
Phase-change cooling leveraging low boiling point, dielectric fluids has something that has always piqued my interest.
Of course, the design challenges of a) housing b) fluid conservation, reclamation, and compression/condensation and c) minimizing design complexity and fluid usage for cost reduction are not trivial.
I'll be blunt. BFL's prototype power usage has me concerned. To a point where I might make a cloud chamber leveraging phase change and a heat exchanger.
Cooling studies based in CPU have pointed out that a FCBGA package, used by the BFL ASIC, while it radiates heat away from the board better, still the chip itself acts as a heat sink for the remainder of board components. Whatever is going on with BFL's board components, if BFL is making true statements, is causing some serious heat and that heat will follow the path of least resistance. If the chips are the path of least resistance - no bueno.
So, to entirely abandon hopes that BFL's design would properly manage thermal loads of all components on their board I have begun to design a DIY cloud chamber.
To restate, the goals are:
1. DIY
2. Simple - no chip blocks - semi-immersion method.
3. Safe - no caustic or flammable fluids
4. Modest Novec, dielectric fluid, usage (it's expensive. $700 / Liter)
5. Energy efficient. Gas-liquid to air heat exchanger.
The most non trivial part to this is to ensure that the chamber is utterly air tight. The proposition of using Novec means that special precautions for maintenance access, and design of the maintenance hatch, could be tricky.
Anyone interested in keeping an eye on this?
|
|
|
|
|
So, now that we've run in to an embarrassing overlooked, preconfigured scalability factor can the devs begin to take the whole idea of scalability, not just DB level operations, but in grander terms of tx volume / velocity a bit more seriously?
This is trollish, but I'm pretty serious.
|
|
|
|
|
Trying to find a spot on the forum for this that wont get dumped by a mod.
Speculation is divination. It's error prone and subject to changing market/technology conditions. Investing in a private mining operation, where they have access to technology at cost, seems to be a good idea.
ASICMiner has the initiative. They've started hashing first (in quantity). Good news from the perspective of a potential investor. Currently, ASICMiner is obviously in a very profitable position. Over the next couple of months the hashing landscape will likely be stabilized (relatively) as the Big 3 mfg's roll out their ASIC equipment.
Now, consider that there are auctions going on for ASICMiner shares going as high as .35 BTC. In some cases, much higher for small amounts of shares.
Is .35 BTC / share a good deal? Hmmm. Looking at my numbers only if ASICMiner takes aggressive action.
Here are samples from my data at points relevant to achieving ROI. The major assumptions, among others, backing these numbers being.
1. At approx. mid March aggregate network capacity will have an upper bound daily growth of 4.5 TH. Growth is adjusted based on the rate of difficulty adjustments. This is done in order to satisfy the condition where ASIC consumers achieve, what has been considered in the past, an acceptable ROI term.
2. USD/BTC rate remain in the current range. Continues to influence ASIC adoption positively.
3. ASICMiner builds and maintains a mining capacity of approx. 27% of the total network capacity.
Totals below are running totals.
Headings
(a) - Total Network Capacity TH
(b) - ASICMiner Capacity TH
(c) - ASICMiner Gross BTC
(d) - ASICMiner Overhead USD (Elec/Rent with both scaling linear to capacity)
(e) - ASICMiner Net USD
(f) - ASICMiner Retained Earnings (Board approved percentage of Net retained for re-investment - Friedcat mentions a min. of 20%)
(g) - ASICMiner Dividend
(h) - ASICMiner Dividend per share BTC and USD (1/400000 *The 1/200000 temporary privilege is fulfilled in the first record.)
(i) - ROI % @ .35 BTC or ~8 USD per share
d-g in Millions USD
Date (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i)
2013.03.11 37 12 32400 0.003 M 0.74 M 0.15 M 0.59 M 0.13 (2.95) 37%
2013.07.05 401 114 163850 0.070 M 3.30 M 0.66 M 2.64 M 0.35 (8.08) 101%
2013.09.01 600 157 220420 0.138 M 4.38 M 0.88 M 3.50 M 0.44 (10.23) 128%
2013.12.26 907 244 327517 0.333 M 6.37 M 1.27 M 5.10 M 0.62 (14.23) 178%
So, a 5 month ROI isn't bad, right? Well, this performance is only seen with ASICMiner having 27% share of total capacity. Will BTC remain in the 20's?
Will both of these key determinants be realized? Doubtful.
Overvalued? Discuss?
|
|
|
|
Re: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=130386.msg1395048#msg1395048So, I interpret the announcement from Yohan at Enterpoint to mean that they intend to self mine bitcoin. They are pinging the community's possible interest in investing in to their operation. Of course, once they bring on investors it would no longer be a purely private self mining operation. Enterpoint claims to have highly sensitive proprietary technology, competitive with ASIC (but not ASIC), that completely precludes the option of selling boards to consumers. This would be to avoid any reverse engineering risk. It's unclear how large of an operation Enterpoint would have by self-mining without any outside investment. Enterpoint states they would grow their public self-mining operation to meet outside investment levels. How do you feel about this? Do you believe companies, e.g. ASICMiner, Enterpoint, pose any kind of threat by self mining? What is Enterpoint's motivation to seek out 'loan note' or offer equity shares to the community? With Enterpoint possibly going public with the mining operation who holds the most risk? What is Enterpoint's margin in good times and in cases where competing technologies become favorable. Is community investment a hedge? |
|
|
|
From BFL_Josh at the BFL forum I don't really want to say anything negative about the bASIC at this point... Tom is already apparently in a really bad spot and there is no sense pouring gas on that fire. We haven't decided specifically which way we want to make things even up with competitors products yet, but we have a lot of options and we will match competitors products that actually ship. We will not leave BFL customers behind the curve when it comes to hardware. I'd say there's a good chance we will be shipping before bASIC at this point. Should BFL's customers take this to mean BFL will reserve any competitive action until competitor products are on the market? If so, where would this leave BFL customers who have already taken delivery if BFL does ship first and 72GH/s products are on the market shortly thereafter? IMO, at best, this is a conservative move. At worst, it's a disingenuous ploy to deny competitive pressure. |
|
|
|
|
Who thinks BFL's competitors are due to wither away if they don't quickly go with a 65 or 45nm process?
500 TH+ competitors will have already started to experience sharply declining sales due to 10+ mo ROI.
Difficulty could reach these levels in a year.
Is investing with a BFL competitor more risky without having a roadmap/plan/stated intentions from the competitor? Will vendor paranoia persist leaving the community/customers in the dark regarding future technology plans?
|
|
|
|
|
Unconfirmed tx going on for about 10 hours now issued from blockchain.info wallet.
There's a tx fee included. Is there such an element of chance that no miners have picked up this tx? If so, lame.
|
|
|
|
|
