|
21
|
Bitcoin / Group buys / Re: [Proposal] Mining Co-Op
|
on: November 11, 2015, 05:38:55 PM
|
all profitability numbers are bogus anyway with btc being $380 one day and $295 the next.
the only play here is for halving-associated btc expected jump.
So, you accumulate coins like there is no tomorrow, then sell some.
If no jump, then profits would be marginal, if any.
The problem is that you spend 1600 using BTC now with the risk of having less BTC when price doubles... The only play, IHMO, is hoping that difficulty slows down to 1 or 2% max per retarget, otherwise the risk of ending up with less BTC one year from now seems real. Did ROI calculators a year ago predict that the S5's would still be worth what they are today? They haven't really depreciated much at all in fairness. For quite a few generations now skeptics have doubted ROI, assuming that difficulty would drive hardware obsolescence. And yet, those who have bought hardware for the past 12 months have done considerably better than those who have bought coin. We have reached the point where you can factor equity into the purchase price of miners, unlike early generations of ASICs, and that is something that calculators do not include.
Don't forget that for a good half of 2015 difficulty moved very little, now it seems we're back at 4-5% increase each retarget. Anyway, if, as it seems, there is a lower electricity cost available now.. well, let's redo again all our calculations and predictions and see what they give. spiccioli |
|
|
|
|
22
|
Bitcoin / Group buys / Re: [Proposal] Mining Co-Op
|
on: November 11, 2015, 07:23:24 AM
|
I'd like to add that ideally we would prefer that one PSU power 2 miners only, not 2.5, for a load of ~2200 watts. We like to run everything below max capacity and everything in our electrical setup is overspec and loaded up to a maximum of 70 to 80% for safety reasons (not to mention long term reliability).
this is penny foolish and pound wise ie I like the idea Well, I have several PSUs of this kind powering some SP20s, each PSU has 3 powerfull fans which lower total efficiency if underutilized. At 2.5 Avalons each we should be at 2.5 - 2.6 kW per PSU so at around 90% utilization of the PSU. Just my 2c. spiccioli |
|
|
|
|
23
|
Bitcoin / Group buys / Re: [Proposal] Mining Co-Op
|
on: November 10, 2015, 05:11:50 PM
|
A 0.5% bulk discount on over 100 units.  I've been lurking for a while and this urges me to add my voice here  Avalon6 and BitMain's S7 are overpriced, too much, they're actually priced for 2-3c/kWh electricity. I mean, BitMain in China does not have access to such cheap electricity (I don't have any proof, just long reads here about cheapest electricity in China) so they have to be sure that nobody can earn more than themselves when selling an S7. BTW, they sell it on Hashnest as well, so Hashnest's price is a little lower since you're paying .10c/kWh there. What we should find, IMHO, is cheap electricity, like .05c or .04c and a bunch of second hand S5s or SP20s, which are overpriced as well (from the WTS offers I see here on bitcointalk), but not as much as a new S7 and should possibly ROI no further than April next year and be able to be marginally profitable (thanks to cheap electricity) beyond next halving. Spending 1600 USD/unit now to earn 98 USD 400 or more days from now... well, is not that thrilling as a proposition, not to mention that a single failing unit wipes out the earnings of 16 more units. spiccioli |
|
|
|
|
26
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / bitcoin 0.11 on openindiana
|
on: October 22, 2015, 06:09:55 PM
|
Hi, I've been able to build bitcoind on Solaris/OpenSolaris/OpenIndiana for the last couple of years with just minor changes and some googling; most of the times the lack of the "std::" namespace in front of each map<> was the problem. I'm not proficient in C++, so I have to say that I don't understand most of its source code Today I've tried to build branch 0.11 on latest OpenIndiana (Hipster.201510) with GCC 4.8.5 and I've just stumbled on my first problem with C++ In src/serialize.h I get CXX libbitcoinconsensus_la-ecwrapper.lo
In file included from ecwrapper.cpp:7:0:
serialize.h: In function 'unsigned int GetSerializeSize(int8_t, int, int)':
serialize.h:190:21: error: redefinition of 'unsigned int GetSerializeSize(int8_t, int, int)'
inline unsigned int GetSerializeSize(int8_t a, int, int=0) { return 1; }
^
serialize.h:189:21: error: 'unsigned int GetSerializeSize(char, int, int)' previously defined here
inline unsigned int GetSerializeSize(char a, int, int=0) { return 1; }
The same error on lines 201/202 and 213/214, so given the comment present on lines 201 and 213 (and the fact that int8_t and char should be the same here) I've just commented out those lines like this //inline unsigned int GetSerializeSize(char a, int, int=0) { return 1; }
inline unsigned int GetSerializeSize(int8_t a, int, int=0) { return 1; }
inline unsigned int GetSerializeSize(uint8_t a, int, int=0) { return 1; }
....
//template<typename Stream> inline void Serialize(Stream& s, char a, int, int=0) { ser_writedata8(s, a); } // TODO Get rid of bare char
template<typename Stream> inline void Serialize(Stream& s, int8_t a, int, int=0) { ser_writedata8(s, a); }
template<typename Stream> inline void Serialize(Stream& s, uint8_t a, int, int=0) { ser_writedata8(s, a); }
...
and I'm now able to go past this error. Question: is this something due to my GCC version or what? spiccioli |
|
|
|
|
29
|
Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [ANN] Sfards: SF100－the first 28nm Dual-Mode Miner gets into mass production
|
on: September 16, 2015, 05:08:08 PM
|
It's possible to RoI a S7 - if you get one early enough and you have cheap enough electric. Might even be possible in the US, if the diff rate increases flatten out sometime late this year back down from the recent 5% ballpark to 2-3%ish AND if you live in one of 3 counties in Washington State (2 if the diff rate does NOT flatten out this year).
While it may be possible, in theory, I see it as incredibly unlikely to ROI before next halving, at least for "normal" miners like me, if you have a peta-hash farm it is different. At 4c per kWh if difficulty grows more than 2% per retarget you won't; at 6c you need to be around 1% diff. increase per jump or you won't. A few more 5% jumps and you're out of luck. spiccioli |
|
|
|
|
30
|
Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: [ANN] Sfards: SF100－the first 28nm Dual-Mode Miner gets into mass production
|
on: September 15, 2015, 06:02:15 PM
|
I think they are only selling big order to large private farms right now they have the technology edge for the moment and they are exploiting it
Their chips are having huge yield issues, I doubt they have sold any apart from the couple they made from their sample chips. The whole "batch 1 sold out" is a marketing gimmick. Yeah hopefully they will fix their chips and mass produce them with a low failure rate and start pumping out miners and have the price drop. Not a matter of "fixing their chips". The 16/14nm chip process node itself is the problem for EVERYONE going to those sizes regardless of what the chips are used for. Intel, nVidia, Samsung et al ALL have the same poor yield issues because the manufacturing process is still far from stable. This simple fact is why Bitmain took the safer route to just optimize their 28nm chips vs rolling the dice on the smaller nodes. Give another year or so and yields for 16/14nm *should* get better. Of course researchers/devs at the chip foundries have been saying that for a couple years now... I would expect bitmain is looking at R/D on lower nm chips. They have lots of money and people. They choose to release another 28nm which was the most profitable for them at the moment. They likely will do it until a competitor forces them to move to a lower NM. But I think they have the best of both worlds. Sell 28nm and work on r/d on lower nm for later on.... win win for them. Exactly, and all those buying S7s (which will never ROI) are footing the bill  spiccioli |
|
|
|
|
31
|
Bitcoin / Group buys / Re: [lee group]1960$! the sales of first batch hosted antminer s7(psu included)
|
on: September 08, 2015, 04:49:46 PM
|
SCAMMER, look at user name DON'T SEND MONEY!! Update:GB now live
I got un-official news from a manager of bitmain today, the price of s7 they set for me should be no more than 1800$, the miner will be ship out on 28th Sep if everything is fine.
The price i need pay for s7 alone now is 1800$,
other fee：
1: shipment fee:18$
2: 1300w golden PSU: 78$
3: 3% fee to cover the possible risk,including broken miner and other disrupt during shipment : 64$
total:1960$
BTC : 8.032
So, if anyone who want to buy the first batch of s7, let me know, so i can buy it for you and i promise i will set up for you within 24 hours after the miner arrive in our farm
Host fee:
i will calculate host fee according to 0.1$ per kwh, if s7 can run on advertised power efficiency, 1210W, then host fee will be 1.21*24*0.1=2.904$ each miner each day
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S7 interest list:
No. Name amount Total due
1: philipma1957 1 8.032BTC
2: clgrissom3 4 32.128BTC
3: alienesb 2 16.064BTC
4： sjc40 1 8.032BTC
5: biffa 2 16.064BTC
6: rockyforever 1 8.032BTC
7: deydod 4 32.128BTC
Payment address as in sig : 1GRFXEZyyTAnSM35KG..............
PM me transaction I.D after payment
SCAMMER, look at user name DON'T SEND MONEY!!
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
Economy / Service Announcements / Re: Canadian Bitcoin Mining Hosting Solution ($75 CAD per 1 KwH/month)
|
on: September 03, 2015, 04:23:53 PM
|
http://www.canadabusiness.ca/eng/page/2651/"If you sell goods and services to international customers, you are not required to collect GST/HST or PST, provided they take delivery of the goods or services outside of Canada" http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/gm/b-090/b-090-e.html"A supply of intangible personal property or a service made in Canada, including supplies made by electronic means, may be relieved of tax under the export provisions of the Act that zero-rate certain supplies of intangible personal property and services made in Canada to a non-resident person." I will double check again with my friend and do some more research. Your first quote seems not to apply here, I don't take delivery outside of Canada of the electricity I'm using inside Canada when hosting there. If I'm hosting a server and not a miner, do I need to pay HST? The second one is less clear to me and probably needs to be checked with an accountant. Thanks a lot. spiccioli |
|
|
|
|
33
|
Economy / Service Announcements / Re: Canadian Bitcoin Mining Hosting Solution ($75 CAD per 1 KwH/month)
|
on: September 03, 2015, 02:19:12 PM
|
Hi allinvain, in your OP you say that Update: Hosting fee will be $75 CAD + tax per month (per 1kWH) (Only Canadian residents pay tax)
Now, I'm always looking around for a good hosting site and Canada seems to have attractive prices, but since I'm not a Canadian citizen I'm try to ascertain this thing about taxes and foreigners. I've read most of this: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/gp/rc4027/rc4027-13e.pdfwithout finding a clear exemption (btw, I'm not a lawyer nor an accountant) and I've also been told that there is no provision inside Canadian Law (Excise or Income tax) that exempts foreigners from paying VAT/HST. Do you have a direct reference to some law or whatever? I'd like not to find out one day that the Canadian Government is looking for me... Thanks. spiccioli |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
