Bitcoin Forum
March 19, 2024, 07:44:11 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 [247] 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 ... 800 »
4921  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s on: August 21, 2013, 03:14:27 AM
Simon, regardless of what you think is doable, you are taking unnecessarily high risks to develop such a high-TDP chip. It would have made a helluva lot more sense to go with, say, 4 chips of 63W each. The die would be 1/4th the size. 1/4th the cost too since you would have 4x more chips per wafer. A little more PCB space would be used (big freaking deal). But this would have taken away a lot of the risk of cooling a single hot chip.

The energy density (W/mm2) would still be the same.  1/4th the wattage over 1/4th the area.  They had decided to go water cooling for efficient heat transfer.  That would mean more complex asembly, more components, and higher cost.  Not sure how that is going to improve ROI%.

There is a reason that Intel puts 4 cores on a single socket chip rather than having consumer grade boards run 4 sockets with single core processors.

Quote
I see this as a very poor strategic decision made by Hashfast. (And Cointerra, and KnCMiner). Only BFL seems that they will get it right, since their 350W Monarch card will split the workload across 10-30 chips.

BFL get it right?  The PCIE card form factor is very tough.  BFL will need to cool 350W using a single blower fan in a very compact space.  This is a task that even AMD got wrong ... twice (6990 & 7990) resulting in 6 month delays on those cards.    If you said Avalon, AsicMiner, or BitFury (easily cooled boards with multiple chips over large surface area) you might have had a point.  I don't think "right" is the proper word (it is a design choice) but you may have had a point.  BFL?  You showed your true colors there.
4922  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s on: August 21, 2013, 03:03:37 AM
If it 90% efficient then to supply 277W @ 12VDC requires 308W @ 120VAC.

Talking about serious PSU, here. The kind that cost more than HF chips. Grin

?
4923  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s on: August 21, 2013, 02:49:58 AM
1) https://hashfast.com/shop/babyjet/ states 350W power draw (+/- 20%), but the chip only consumes 250W?  100W for cooling/misc?

Not sure why this is still a question (goes beyoond just HF).  Remember even excluding water cooling pumps, fans, and controller boards there are a lot of efficiency loss between between the wall and the chip.  The chips doesn't run on 12V they run at ~1VDC (exact voltage will depend on ASIC design) and no ATX PSU supplies 1VDC so ANY ASIC will need to convert the 12VDC to ~1VDC used by the chip and that usually means at least a 10% loss right there.  Of course most people don't have 12VDC outlets so you need to convert the wattage at the wall to the 12VDC uses by the ASIC board and that is another 10% loss (depends on PSU rating and load).

So a hypothetical chip (any chip) which uses 250W @ ~1VDC will require at least ~277W @ 12VDC not 250W. ~27W is lost as heat not at the chip die but at the DC to DC PSU.  Now for the ATX PSU to supply 277W @ 12VDC will require 308W @ 120VAC and another 31W will be lost at the ATX PSU.  Add in 20W for pump and radiator fans plus a 10 to 20W safety margin and ~350W system wattage with 250W chip wattage makes perfect sense.  Once again this isn't unique to just HF, it applies to all electronic devices.

Case in point.
Avalon chip wattage: 1.86W @ 1.15 (282 MH/s nominal)
Avalon total chip wattage 1.86W x 212 chips = 394W
Avalon wattage at the wall: 620W
Total system wattage is >57% more than chip wattage.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Avalon#Power
http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/02/avalon-miner-power-usage.html

4924  Other / Meta / Re: A bitcoin ponzi scheme scam ADVERTISED on bitcointalk.org ?? WHY??? on: August 21, 2013, 02:38:51 AM
Why do people use the term ponzi scheme for everything?

It may be fraud, it may be highly likely "investors" will lose everything but it certainly isn't a ponzi scheme.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme "A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to its investors from their own money or the money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from profit earned by the individual or organization running the operation."

And this is exactly what this advertisement is about. He doesn't promise to invest them in some new and exciting project, he just promises to give back 3x more. This is a textbook example of a ponzi scheme.

I am baffled that the administration even seriously considers that this might not be a scam. Can you name even one case in all human history, where 200% interest was promised for loans and it was NOT a scam?

You (the forum's administration) are shooting yourselves in the leg here. Advertising scams and even arguing "well maybe it's not a scam" seriously hurts your credibility, and in the long run you lose a lot more than you gained from what the scammer payed for the advert.

A ponzi scheme pays early investors with later investors deposits.  He isn't paying anyone for 3 years.  In three years he will either pay (highly unlikely) or simply disapear with ALL the funds.  There is no ponzi.  Not all fraud is a ponzi scheme.

4925  Economy / Securities / Re: [HAVELOCK] Crypto Currency (CFIG) Official Thread on: August 21, 2013, 12:37:40 AM
Since all funds flowing to and from their financial services company are through KYC/AML accounts then that should satisfy FinCEN. If a large amount is transferred then FinCEN will know who transferred it and who to come after. How are the 1% in America able to offshore 32 trillion dollars by placing it in international bank accounts? Obviously Americans must be allowed to have an international bank account.

The BSA has no provision for "we followed some of the regs so we are ok and don't have to follow the rest".  An entity is  either compliant or not compliant.  MSB registering with FinCEN is one requirement for compliance.  This has nothing to do with foreign bank accounts.   It has to do with money transmission.  If an entity (CFIG) accepts funds from one person (client) and at the persons direction transfer those funds to another "person" (exchange account) it is money transmission.   It seems clear they intend to violate the BSA and do so intentionally.  Investors should be aware of that risk, the risk of seizure of company (investor) assets.  For a company who's stated goal is to be compliant and above board it is disappointing that they will not either be above board or compliant. 
4926  Economy / Securities / Re: [HAVELOCK] Crypto Currency (CFIG) Official Thread on: August 20, 2013, 10:31:12 PM
They are trying to say this: If you are a bank you don't need to register as an MSB because you are an MSB and more. You have the licensing (under BSA) necessary to do these transactions and will be doing KYC/AML implicitly.

However they are NOT a bank, the BSA specifies what is a bank (including a foreign bank).  Being licensed by a foreign bank doesn't make one a bank.  I would be more comfortable if they had any legal counsel with expertise in US KYC/AML willing to vouch for their claims which so far appear to be bogus.  They will be offering money transmission to Americans without registering to FinCEN or being licensed by the states.  That is a recipe for disaster.


When they can't even explain it properly it is worrisome.  Like in the post above CFIG keeps trying to make the claim that because funds only go from one account to another one at the same bank it isn't money transmission.  By that "logic" PayPal isn't a money transmitter either.  This isn't to say they aren't licensed and 100% legit in Panama but if you accept funds form US customers then you have to play by FinCEN (and the states) rules.  They seem to think they don't.
4927  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: Process-invariant hardware metric: hash-meters per second (η-factor) on: August 20, 2013, 09:39:16 PM
It is only announced but here is some details on Hashfast chip
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=270384.msg2975145#msg2975145
4928  Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: The ceiling of difficulty with 28nm technology on: August 20, 2013, 09:33:48 PM
In this system you want to be under the cap because you are not forced to buy a contract.  I understand just it doesn't apply to hosting.  I wouldn't have interpretable power contracts for a data-center.  The power rate does go down even more if your under the power contract but the discount is not attractive enough to compel me to operate under those terms.  If you're are running a super heavy power load business that can handle small cut-backs, I can see that being a good thing. 

Companies choose to operate on the interruptable schedule in exchange for lower rates. 

There is always a contract involved.  Your choice is interruptable schedule for a lower rate OR non-interruptable schedule for a higher rate.
Why would you pay more for power on Bitcoin mining then you have to?

Of course this is mostly academic it would take a very long Bitcoin operation to even be given the choice.

Quote
I understand just it doesn't apply to hosting.
A datacenters will CHOOSE to pay MORE for power in return not having an interrupt provision.
A aluminum smelter (or Bitcoin farm) will CHOOSE to pay LESS for power in return for having an interrupt provision.

4929  Economy / Securities / Re: [HAVELOCK] Crypto Currency (CFIG) Official Thread on: August 20, 2013, 09:17:11 PM
Quote
Hi DeathAndTaxes,

We believe you are confusing two issues when it comes to FinCen. An MSB is a business like Western Union or Money Gram.

No a MSB is what the regulations say an MSB is.  You are accepting funds from a customer and transferring them to an exchange for a profit.  That is a money transmitter.  It is the very definition of money transmission.

Quote
(5) Money transmitter —(i) In general. (A) A person that provides money transmission services. The term “money transmission services” means the acceptance of currency, funds, or other value that substitutes for currency from one person and the transmission of currency, funds, or other value that substitutes for currency to another location or person by any means. “Any means” includes, but is not limited to, through a financial agency or institution; a Federal Reserve Bank or other facility of one or more Federal Reserve Banks, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, or both; an electronic funds transfer network; or an informal value transfer system; or

(B) Any other person engaged in the transfer of funds.

Are you saying accepting USD from a client and transferring those USD at the direction of the client to an exchange is NOT money transmission?  This is pretty cut and dry.  The regulatory status of Bitcoin may be vague but USD to USD transactions are not.  Then again i am just some guy so let me ask it another way.  Do you have any statement by legal counsel or FinCEN (via administrative ruling) that the activity is not regulated as a MSB?



4930  Other / Meta / Re: A bitcoin ponzi scheme scam ADVERTISED on bitcointalk.org ?? WHY??? on: August 20, 2013, 09:00:00 PM
Why do people use the term ponzi scheme for everything?

It may be fraud, it may be highly likely "investors" will lose everything but it certainly isn't a ponzi scheme.

Someone not paying back a loan isn't a ponzi scheme it is a default.
Someone taking out a loan with the intent to not repay it isn't a ponzi scheme it is fraud.

I think some people think the definition of a ponzi scheme is

Quote
ponzi scheme: (n) something bad involving money where someone loses
4931  Economy / Securities / Re: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It on: August 20, 2013, 08:57:27 PM
that's one theory.  another theory is that a significant portion of AM's hash is being rented out.  They peaked around 50 TH/s or so, and are currently around 30 TH/s.

Why would they be renting capacity for less than expected value? 
Why would someone pay more than the expected value of the capacity?

Because it would be more expensive for AM to deploy the capacity themselves than for another party that has access to cheaper power, space and deployment personnel.  Keep in mind that 50TH is FIVE THOUSAND blades.  That's not something easy to deploy, power and maintain.  Also these blades consume 350 kW of power (and dissipate as much heat), which is also quite a big deal to feed and cool.

The 50TH/s has ALREADY been operating.  Unless Friedcat had them hooked up to a giant battery which just ran out of juice I find it hard to believe they suddenly lack the power they did for the last couple months and need 20TH/s of the 50TH/s worth of hardware to a third party has has power.  Now that explanation might make sense if the hashrate didn't rise ABOVE 50TH/s and instead Friedcat announced the next 50TH/s was rented out for some % of the net revenue but that isn't what is being discussed.

4932  Economy / Securities / Re: [HAVELOCK] Crypto Currency (CFIG) Official Thread on: August 20, 2013, 08:47:34 PM
If they intend to register with FinCEN how to they intend to deal with potentially expensive state licensing?
If they don't intend to register with FinCEN because they are not accepting US based clients then why isn't that explained?
If they don't intend to register with FinCEN or exclude US customers, what is the rational and what are the potential risks?


Dear DeathAndTaxes (Relevant username for a relevant question),

We will serve U.S based customers. Crypto Financial is not located within the U.S so it is not subject to State by State Jurisdiction of those states. All funds that any of our customers will transfer to us or receive by us will be transferred via your Bank institution directly to us, or via an intermediary partner Bank that we work within your country.

We are not an MSB or require a different Money Transmitter License. We will however comply with all BSA (Bank Secrecy Act) Requirements, which is also controlled by FinCen. Any Financial Services provider regardless of their location worldwide comply with the countless U.S Government entities when dealing with U.S Citizens or U.S based corporations.  That is why it is getting harder and harder for U.S Citizens to open Bank accounts in foreign Banks, the paperwork and related cost just lowers the incentive. Which I believe is the ultimate goal of the U.S, not to have foreign Banks provide services to U.S customers.


Thank you,

Crypto Financial

Well glad you put that out there in black and white.  Investors can judge the merit of those arguments themselves.

Quote
On July 21, 2011, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) published in the Federal Register a final rule on definitions and other regulations relating to money services businesses (Final Rule).1 The Final Rule amended the definition of "money services business" at 31 CFR 1010.100(ff). An entity may now qualify as a money services business (MSB) under the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) regulations based on its activities within the United States, even if none of its agents, agencies, branches or offices are physically located in the United States. The Final Rule arose in part from the recognition that the Internet and other technological advances make it increasingly possible for persons to offer MSB services in the United States from foreign locations.2 FinCEN seeks to ensure that the BSA rules apply to all persons engaging in covered activities within the United States, regardless of the person's physical location.

http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/guidance/html/FIN-2012-A001.html

It seems confusing to say you will comply with the requirements of the BSA and won't register as a MSB as registration is one the requirements.  Huh

However for the sake of the argument lets say you are right (quote from FinCEN notwithstanding) and foreign entities aren't subject to US federal and state regulations even when offering products & services to US residents then .... why would foreign exchanges need your service?  If you aren't subject to the definition of MSB then they aren't either so they might as well accept funds directly from customers and cut out the expensive middle man (CFIG).

I have to say I am disappointed, I was at least hoping for some clever legal "loophole".
4933  Bitcoin / Hardware / Re: CoinTerra Unveils a 2TH/s ASIC Bitcoin Miner : TerraMiner IV on: August 20, 2013, 08:33:13 PM
I just don't get not accepting BTC.  That just seems insane.  They have to be the only ASIC/FPGA company yet that doesn't accept BTC.
To a CFO, or such investors as there might be, it make total sense to not accept BTC.  Every day's orders, a different sales price.  The extreme volatility.  The lack of liquidity and low cost cost exchange.  We all know the issues.

And, I'd hazard a guess: every single component of the product has to be paid in USD. 

So I can see a CFO saying, were the product already produced, "Okay, accept them.  I'll see what I can do in terms of risk management."  But to do so at t=0, with USD payments having to be made at t in {1...120}.  Not really insane at all.

Your entire statement can be refuted with one word.

Bitpay

This.  Company can price in USD, customer pays in BTC and company receives USD in bank account the next day.  This isn't theoretical multiple ASIC manufacturers have done this to date.
4934  Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: The ceiling of difficulty with 28nm technology on: August 20, 2013, 08:28:48 PM
Yep, there is an aluminum smelter in the area.   Thanks for the info, I did read through some of the power contract information and some of the items you mention are listed. 

Now imagine you were building a massive hashing farm.  Would you be willing to trade (hypothetically) up to 1% annual outage for 30% lower power rate?  Like the aluminum smelter it doesn't matter if you are producing Bitcoins in any given second just how much you can produce in a year and at what cost.

I would love a contract like that on a smaller scale but power companies generally only make contracts like that with the largest of users because if they need to cut 1% of demand it is 1% of demand not necessarily 1% of customers.  If they need to shed 1MW of demand it is easier to disconnect (under contract) one 1 MW customer then it is to disconnect one hundred 10KW customers.

My strategy is to build a few separate locations to keep under the cap. 

I think you are still misunderstanding. You wouldn't want to be under the cap.  Would you be upset to have cheaper power? 
This is something companies contact for BECAUSE they want very cheap power rates.  Cheaper than the rates offered to customers under non-interruptable contracts.
4935  Economy / Securities / Re: [HAVELOCK] Crypto Currency (CFIG) Official Thread on: August 20, 2013, 07:36:43 PM
Have you (or is it your intent) to register with FinCEN as a Money Service Business?
If not do you intend to exclude US customers?

I thought [international] licensing was implicit in their relationship with a bank, no? If not this whole thing is a wash.

Well the prospectus and business plan doesn't indicate they plan to. Maybe they do but the omission just simply means another thing clients need to assume.

If they intend to register with FinCEN how to they intend to deal with potentially expensive state licensing?
If they don't intend to register with FinCEN because they are not accepting US based clients then why isn't that explained?
If they don't intend to register with FinCEN or exclude US customers, what is the rational and what are the potential risks?

Right now it is simply left open ended.

4936  Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: The ceiling of difficulty with 28nm technology on: August 20, 2013, 07:29:56 PM
Yep, there is an aluminum smelter in the area.   Thanks for the info, I did read through some of the power contract information and some of the items you mention are listed. 

Now imagine you were building a massive hashing farm.  Would you be willing to trade (hypothetically) up to 1% annual outage for 30% lower power rate?  Like the aluminum smelter it doesn't matter if you are producing Bitcoins in any given second just how much you can produce in a year and at what cost.

I would love a contract like that on a smaller scale but power companies generally only make contracts like that with the largest of users because if they need to cut 1% of demand it is 1% of demand not necessarily 1% of customers.  If they need to shed 1MW of demand it is easier to disconnect (under contract) one 1 MW customer then it is to disconnect one hundred 10KW customers.
4937  Economy / Securities / Re: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It on: August 20, 2013, 07:20:25 PM
that's one theory.  another theory is that a significant portion of AM's hash is being rented out.  They peaked around 50 TH/s or so, and are currently around 30 TH/s.

Why would they be renting capacity for less than expected value? 
Why would someone pay more than the expected value of the capacity?

The renter's expected value for the chips is likely not the same as friedcat's expected value for the same chips.

Is there 30Th/s worth of "greater fools" out there?
4938  Economy / Securities / Re: [HAVELOCK] Crypto Currency (CFIG) Official Thread on: August 20, 2013, 07:17:35 PM
Have you (or is it your intent) to register with FinCEN as a Money Service Business?
If not do you intend to exclude US customers?
4939  Bitcoin / Mining speculation / Re: The ceiling of difficulty with 28nm technology on: August 20, 2013, 07:16:22 PM
Yes, you are correct.  I should of been more clear.  My utility has an agreement so local customers get guaranteed access for local power consumption. 

I see the confusing, he was referring to an OPTIONAL contract not the power company just cutting people off.  There are likely customers in your area who do the same thing.  Just using some made up number (large power delivery if often more complex then a fixed kWh rate).  A big power user (think aluminum smelter) might be offered a guaranteed delivery rate of $0.05 per kWh OR they could agree to no more than 1% annual outage and get $0.035 per kWh.  The customer chooses (isn't forced) to accept a possibility of up to 1% downtime in return for a 30% reduction in electrical rates.  For a business like aluminum smelting where you production cost is mostly electricity this is a beneficial arrangement for BOTH the customer and the power company.




4940  Economy / Securities / Re: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It on: August 20, 2013, 07:11:22 PM
that's one theory.  another theory is that a significant portion of AM's hash is being rented out.  They peaked around 50 TH/s or so, and are currently around 30 TH/s.

Why would they be renting capacity for less than expected value? 
Why would someone pay more than the expected value of the capacity?
Pages: « 1 ... 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 [247] 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 ... 800 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!