4402
|
Bitcoin / Legal / Re: What, specifically, does "engaged as a business" mean?
|
on: September 17, 2013, 03:35:01 PM
|
'm not a business, nor do I intend to become one. It was more of an academic question for something that I've written and is being questioned by an editor. My statement, effectively, is that FinCEN left ambiguity for Bitcoin (and analogous e-currencies) by not defining "engaged as a business." Essentially, where would we draw the line for small and/or infrequent transfers, and where might that trend go toward. Your editor is wrong in that there IS no exact definition. As Mr. Santori pointed out above that is 100% intentional to allow one to become "not a business" as a technicality by structuring operations to avoid meeting the threshold. However FINCEN does carve out a specific exception in the regulations in 31 CFR §1010.100 ( Limitation. For the purposes of this section, the term “money services business” shall not include: (i) A bank or foreign bank; (ii) A person registered with, and functionally regulated or examined by, the SEC or the CFTC, or a foreign financial agency that engages in financial activities that, if conducted in the United States, would require the foreign financial agency to be registered with the SEC or CFTC; or (iii) A natural person who engages in an activity identified in paragraphs (ff)(1) through (ff)(5) of this section on an infrequent basis and not for gain or profit.So it is limited only to natural persons (i.e. not legal entities like partnerships, corporations, etc). It also uses the vague term "infrequent basis". I have no cite but IIRC there was a ruling on "infrequent" (not related to Bitcoin specifically) in which a person engaging in regulated activity 6 times a year was found to be infrequent. Remember there is never going to be a hard fast standard. It will be based on the conditions around the event.
|
|
|
4403
|
Economy / Securities / Re: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It
|
on: September 17, 2013, 02:56:41 PM
|
IBM is actually producing 22nm on their process for the next POWER series which available for order next year. TSMC and GloFo won't have 22nm until 2015 or 2016.
Well that is why I said only Intel is producing. It was to highlight that Intel is "special" and gets to play by their own rules (and that has annihilated AMD margins). I know you know that but a noob might see an Intel 14nm announcement and assume that means there will be 14nm SHA-2 ASICs "soon". As for TSMC and 20nm it is always hard to say with the secrecy and NDA but it is looking like TSMC will have some 20nm capacity in 2014. http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/display/20130806234800_TSMC_Slightly_Reschedules_Volume_Production_Using_20nm_Process_Technology_to_Early_2014.htmlEverything is estimates and should be taken with a grain of salt but the estimates are moving sooner not later. If the rumors are true though GF is struggling with 20nm. However as we know having x nm capacity doesn't mean it is cost effective. Nobody is going to buy 20nm Bitcoin ASICs if they cost 3x as much just because they are 20nm. So it likely will be a "while" (2017 or later) before that becomes economical even if it is possible earlier. The need for "double exposure" at 22nm/20nm is going to create a serious cost wall even once the marignal cost of production is significantly lower than 28nm. It will be a high risk venture to because by the every ASIC company will be pushing 28nm product out the door with next day shipping. Nobody is going to accept 3-6 month preorders and the huge NRE costs means a company making the jump to 22nm/20nm will need to roll out massive volume to ammortize the NRE and still remain competitive. This time it will be the company not customers taking the risk.
|
|
|
4404
|
Economy / Securities / Re: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It
|
on: September 17, 2013, 02:45:26 PM
|
DeathAndTaxes, what do the figures in parenthesis signify? I often see process nodes described like this, eg. 65/55nm. Why two figures and not one?
Sorry first portion got chopped off. I fixed it. The ones in parenthesis are called half nodes. In the early days there was just one standardized sets of process nodes. Each one was linearly 70% of the prior node. Remember chips are two dimensional so if you cut the length of a gate by 30% then you will cut the area by (0.7^2) by roughly half. So each process node roughly doubles the number of transistors per square mm. However the time between major node jumps is at least two years and later that has been slowing down. For products which need faster improvement cycles (namely GPU) fabs began offering half node equipment. Also it is sometimes possible for a fab to be upgraded to the half node improvement extending the ecnonomical lifespan of the chip. Today the use of the term "half nodes" is kinda dated because many designs (like GPUs) simply upgrade only on the half node (i.e. 40nm, 28nm, 20nm). For all intents and purposes they are just another standardized fabrication size. As for ASICMiner vs Avalon 110nm is a different process node than 130nm. For a given design, in theory it will result in smaller transistors, higher clock speed, and more chips per wafer. However the improvements aren't as significant as a full node jump. If ASICMiner used 110nm instead of 130nm everything else being the same we would expect them to have ~40% higher wafer density (130nm/110nm)^2. Still Avalon vs ASICMiner brings up a good point. It shows that DESIGN matters a lot. Despite the 40% "disadvantage" ASICMiner is more than competitive with Avalon. Nothing indicates they have higher cost, energy consumption, or lower hashing density. Bitfury (55nm) chips beating KNC (28nm) is another example. So process node matters but it is only half the equation. Of course given the NRE costs nobody is going to make a half node jump. Makes much more sense for ASICMiner to jump down 1 or more full process nodes.
|
|
|
4405
|
Economy / Securities / Re: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It
|
on: September 17, 2013, 02:27:52 PM
|
OK, let's say 22 nm.
22 nm is only available to Intel, and they don't take outside orders. 23 nm? Are you trolling? 23nm fabrication doesn't exist. Available process nodes (full process size with half size in parentheses). 130nm (110nm) 90nm (80nm) 65nm (55nm) 45nm (40nm) 32nm (28nm) 22nm (20nm) * * Nobody is making processors @ 22nm except Intel (not even AMD or NVidia). A couple of memory companies are using 22nm but memory is magnitudes simpler than a microprocessor. TSMC will begin early (i.e. insanely out the butt expensive) production of 20nm in Feb 2014. Generally it takes around 3 years before a new process node becomes cheaper than the prior node. The only reason why cost effective 28nm Bitcoin are possible is because it is "old" tech, 28nm became available in volume production over two years ago, with early production in 2010. Following that 3 year timeline it would put 22nm/20nm not acheiving cost parity compared 28nm until ~2017. So 28nm is as good as it gets for the near future. That doesn't mean we won't see improved 28nm designs but I would be willing to wager we won't see a sub 28nm Bitcoin chip (actually hashing in customer's hands) until 2017 and honestly I think it will be later than that.
|
|
|
4407
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com
|
on: September 16, 2013, 05:52:52 AM
|
Did the specs change recently on the Saturn or Jupiter? I could have sworn I was getting 400 GH/s but my Jupiter says it is a 200. Has it always been a 200?
Also from KNC's website in the product description it says won't ship until mid November. I thought these were suppose to ship in September unless that means if you order now.
Over 400 pages to read here and now they have their own forum gets crazy. That's exactly what BFL did. Instead of coming here they opened up their own forum. Similar minds think alike?
Jupiter = Minimum of 400 Gh/s Saturn = Minumum of 200 Gh/s If you purchase a new one today, it won't ship until November. If you purchased prior to last week it will ship before the middle of October. You can take your order number from your My Orders page and paste it into the order tracking search box on the main page to see when your miner is going to ship. Please don't ever compare KNC to BFL again. You are only making yourself look uninformed and reactionary. I'm a little confused. I pre-paid back in June and paid $3,975 for the miner which I think was rated for 400Gh/s. Now when I look at their site their Saturn is 200Gh/s and is $2,995. Should I expect a refund in price difference or something here? I could have sworn I was getting 400Gh/s for almost paying $4,000. Wow you would think you would pay a little more attention to an order you spent nearly 4k on, I was mistaken about the Gh/s, but not the $800 difference in price. There was really no advantage of me ordering early. Someone that orders now can get a delivery in November and already be ahead of me because of that $800 in their pocket. Being in the bitcoin arena just keeps teaches me lessons every day. At least I'll never pre-order anything again. Hey, maybe I should cancel one of my miners, order another one for less $800? I think I read refunds were available before shipping starts....and apparently that hasn't happened yet. You can cancel and re-order for nov delivery at the nov price. You can have your rig cheap, you can have your rig early but you can't have your rig cheap and early.
|
|
|
4409
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How do Chargebacks work?
|
on: September 14, 2013, 03:14:19 AM
|
Amazing if you think about it. I suppose this is why credit card fee's are so much.
Credit card fees are high because it is a closed network and merchants have little negotiating power. Accept the rate or lose customers with credit cards. Credit card company loses nothing to card not present fraud. They take the money from the merchant AND charge the merchant $35 or more to cover their cost of determining the merchant can't prove they are honest.
|
|
|
4410
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How do Chargebacks work?
|
on: September 14, 2013, 03:10:26 AM
|
they say they didn't and you can't prove it
This scenario ^^ but I can prove it. Now, it will be a point where they won't bother doing a chargeback since it will be so obvious ( actually, the cardholder will see it themselves that is the case ) . I'm assuming it won't stop all chargebacks I was just curious. But I hear what you are saying D & T. Most likely you are wrong about proving it. Just about any proof you think you have a scammer has figured out a way around it. You don't have proof, you only think you do and thus will lose the chargeback.
|
|
|
4411
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How do Chargebacks work?
|
on: September 14, 2013, 03:06:31 AM
|
Ok one last time:
they say "I didn't receive it" and you can't prove they did.
OR
they say "I have no idea what this is I didn't buy it" and you can't prove otherwise.
Remember the person making the final decision is the card issuer. The cardholder NOT YOU is their customer. Unless your proof is absolutely air tight they are going to side with the customer.
Unless you intend to explain how you believe you can PROVE the cardholder made and received the purchase with specific details it is like asking "how can people get away with murder?" Kinda a useless question.
Simple version IF (notice the key word IF) you can prove the purchase was made by the cardholder AND the cardholder received the product then you will win the chargeback. Most likely you THINK you can prove it but you can't and thus will lose the chargeback.
|
|
|
4412
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How do Chargebacks work?
|
on: September 14, 2013, 03:03:25 AM
|
Yes, not speaking to ID fraud that is different more so "friendly fraud". I mean you are saying some will claim a chargeback on product x even though it will show they received the item?
Once again how EXACTLY will you show the CARDHOLDER not someone claiming to be the cardholder received something. Please be specific. If you just use vague terms like "show they received" well the answer is "you didn't convince the card issuer and they side the with cardholder".
|
|
|
4413
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: How do Chargebacks work?
|
on: September 14, 2013, 02:58:12 AM
|
can someone get away with saying they never got the product x ?
No, but they can get away with returning the product while claiming it is defective, and they can obviously prove they returned it. They get their money back and you get your product back, so everyone's even. Except for your bitcoins, of course, which you'll never see again. Oops. How about if the product isn't being shipped its a virtual product that has a proof they've gotten it all documented. What proof? Remember there is two types of fraud a) identity fraud where someone OTHER than the cardholder uses the car without the cardholders permission b) so called "friendly fraud" where the cardholder pretends that either scenario "a" occured or they never received the product. Please explain how you can prove: a) the person using the card is the cardholder b) the product was deliver to the cardholder
|
|
|
4414
|
Bitcoin / Legal / Re: What, specifically, does "engaged as a business" mean?
|
on: September 14, 2013, 02:54:30 AM
|
What's confusing? When I see engaged as a business that means you've registered to be an LLC or filed to become Incorporated or have registered for an FEIN [federal employer identification number] I'm pretty sure I answered this in a different thread and gave examples that (yes true it is my opinion and should not be taken as professional legal advice) constitute as being exempt from needing to register with fincen vs not being exempt. Careful you don't need to register anything to be a business. The most basic business is a sole proprietorship. You operating a business in your name as the sole owner. Generally speaking if you are operating an enterprise for profit (which doesn't necessarily mean making a profit lots of businesses lose money) then you are operating a business. To answer the OP there is no single exact definition and there never will be. The regulator is going to look at the whole body of evidence and make a determination. If you are operating a service/activity for profit (doesn't mean you actually show a profit) it is highly likely a regulator (or the IRS) will determine you are operating a business.
|
|
|
4416
|
Economy / Computer hardware / [WTS] Multiple 1200W and 1250W used power supplies.
|
on: September 14, 2013, 02:33:29 AM
|
Need a new PSU for your ASIC mining rig(s). All prices in BTC only at Bitstamp last price at the time of payment. Available: 4x COOLER MASTER Silent Pro Gold 1200W - $150 ea plus actual USPS shipping 3x SeaSonic X-1250 1250W - $200 ea plus actual USPS shipping COOLER MASTER Silent Pro Gold Series 1200W (RSC00-80GAD3-US) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151109http://www.coolermaster-usa.com/product.php?product_id=2999&product_name=Silent%20Pro%20Gold%201200WSeaSonic X-1250 1250W http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151109http://www.seasonicusa.com/NEW_X-series_1050-1250.htmThey units were used for about 15 months as part of a watercooled GPU farm. I was saving them for potentially powering future ASIC rigs but I have found a larger alternate power source. I recently tested units under load with ATX power supply tester and they are all within voltage spec. Both brands are solid performers, even under high load. 80-Plus Gold means it is 89%+ efficiency (92%+ on 240V) even at 100% load. They both have 8 PCIe connectors and massive 12V single rail designs so they can pump out a huge amount of current for even the hungriest ASIC rigs. IMHO build quality on the Cooler Master units is decent but the SeaSonics are second to none which is why I discounted the CM more. I have all the original modular cables and cable bags. Do not have original boxes or manuals if that matters. It will be most economical to ship INSIDE USA because power supplies are heavy an bulky but they fit in a USPS larger (possibly medium need to test) box which is cheap. Will take some actual photos of the units tomorrow including hooked to voltage tester.
|
|
|
4417
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Mining (Altcoins) / Re: Swedish ASIC miner company kncminer.com
|
on: September 14, 2013, 02:07:28 AM
|
Would it surprise you if BFL changes the terms again? It reminds me of this scene: Lando: This was never part of our agreement. Darth Vader: *pointing his index finger at Lando* I have altered the deal pray I do not alter it any further.
There is on major difference between BFL chips and BFL rigs. BFL doesn't have all the money for the chips. It was only 50% upfront. If they ship too late it is possible customers will simply not pay. There is a point where for a customer it is better to accept a partial loss then pay more and lose triple. If the chips ship before the rigs what are the rig customers going to do? Not pay? Demand a refund?
|
|
|
4418
|
Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s
|
on: September 13, 2013, 08:51:41 PM
|
Will you consider selling just ASIC boards instead of complete systems?
They better consider it... otherwise the MPP as described is pretty much useless. Maybe I was unclear. I don't mean raw unpopulated boards or customers paying the difference between chips and complete board but rather selling a complete and operation ASIC board. Think Bitfury H-board vs Bitfury complete system.
|
|
|
4419
|
Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: Estimate of ASIC pre-orders (6,000 to 8,000 TH/s by end of 2013)
|
on: September 13, 2013, 07:38:30 PM
|
D&T mentioned Active Mining (AMC/VMC I don't care enough at the moment to remember which does what now a days) in the OP but used the hashing power of a single maximally upgraded unit.
Indeed, its the same company now, I totally missed that. It makes no sense to estimate their total output at 24TH though, considering thats the output of only a single of their top end machines. A very conservative guess would be at least 10x higher, and more likely 100x higher, though how much of that will happen in 2013 is probably anyone's guess. Yeah not sure where that came from likely me misinterpreting some earlier cite. I decided to move ActM, XCrowd, BTCGarden, and Labcoin to the "announced but unsure" category. I just have found it very difficult to get any real information on the companies. Some of them in my opinon, including ActMam, have circumstances which make me question if they will ever get to market. Still if someone can find more details (tape out, contracts, designs, chip volume) I would be happy to be corrected. To be perfectly honestly I haven't looked very close at AMC/VMC?, XCrowd, BTCGraden, or LabCoin. They all appear to be very opaque and I would be willing to bet at least one if not all four never make it to market in any reasonable volume.
|
|
|
|