|
Of course, Gox barely moves.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm calling extra low to make sure the price goes below my buy-in range and doesn't stop short....
I am expecting a sell-off to $200.
Please repeat this price over and over.
|
|
|
|
Gox price is no way to judge what is happening... it is either being levitated or the result of ongoing withdraw issues. |
|
|
|
|
How are these guys who are so apt to technology and internet not effectively hiding what they are doing?
|
|
|
|
...They cannot release miners with the same hashing rate increase that they previously did. KNC is already at 20nm. Therefore they are going to release batches that don't have the same percentage of increase from the previous generation at similar batch numbers. IOW, their next batches after Q2 are going to add comparable hash rate as the batches they deliver in Q2.
You're ignoring the fact that Bitcoin ASICs are at this point a cottage industry. The thing about making chips is it scales real nice. People here focus on ActM's ability to rinse & repeat, but they forget that all of the other ASIC makers have the same ability in spades. I'm not ignoring anything. That is exactly what I am talking about. You are not going to see hash rate doubling every month. You will see that begin to happen this year. |
|
|
|
Where is all that hashrate coming from? For example, KNC is only bringing 10 PH or less in the next 6 months. The industry can't keep up the current trend, its getting too difficult.
CoinTerra is aiming for shipping this quarter, HashFast is now shipping, BlackArrow is shipping Q2 and I know there are more already announced on top of new entrants. If you anticipate an increase in the value of Bitcoin, then you should anticipate an increase in companies wanting to enter the mining industry. But those companies have no detailed plans after Q2. And it is unlikely that their next generation miners will be much more efficient than the ones they are getting ready to release. Yes, there is enough hashing power to double the hashrate through Q2, but to see it double every month through this year is very unlikely. We won't see 36 PH until Cointerra and KNC complete delivery of their latest batch. How do you know what they have planned for Q2? You mean they haven't announced that they're going to continue operations ergo they're going to pack up shop and go away? It may not be a 100% increase each month, but I wouldn't expect much less. Even @ ~60% increase/mo we'll see over 100PH by the end of Q2. I'm not trying to rain on any parades here, guys, but this is happening. They cannot release miners with the same hashing rate increase that they previously did. KNC is already at 20nm. Therefore they are going to release batches that don't have the same percentage of increase from the previous generation at similar batch numbers. IOW, their next batches after Q2 are going to add comparable hash rate as the batches they deliver in Q2. |
|
|
|
Yes, I agree. Which plays nicely into my claim that "The top will be reached when it's unprofitable for the best ASIC manufacturers to sell their ASICs."
I never said there was going to be a top, just that the growth rate will decline to look more like the situation prior to the introduction of ASICs. |
|
|
|
Where is all that hashrate coming from? For example, KNC is only bringing 10 PH or less in the next 6 months. The industry can't keep up the current trend, its getting too difficult.
New players. Bigger foundry orders. As i understand it, there's money in bitcoin ASICs. There is money, but there are technological and productive limits. There is no way to sustain the current hashing growth rate. We're nowhere close to production limits. Bitcoin ASICs are currently an insignificant percentage of total silicon produced. ASICs compete with other industries and the current round of miners are being delivered in fixed batches of only 5000 or so units. There are no plans at this time to produce more of these current generation miners. No one is claiming that bitcoin asics make up a significant part of the silicon production at this time. Sure, s-curve is real, but nothing suggests that we're anywhere close to the top. The top will be reached when it's unprofitable for the best ASIC manufacturers to sell their ASICs. It is not just about profitability. It has to do with market saturation and limited gains in successive generation capabilities. |
|
|
|
Where is all that hashrate coming from? For example, KNC is only bringing 10 PH or less in the next 6 months. The industry can't keep up the current trend, its getting too difficult.
CoinTerra is aiming for shipping this quarter, HashFast is now shipping, BlackArrow is shipping Q2 and I know there are more already announced on top of new entrants. If you anticipate an increase in the value of Bitcoin, then you should anticipate an increase in companies wanting to enter the mining industry. But those companies have no detailed plans after Q2. And it is unlikely that their next generation miners will be much more efficient than the ones they are getting ready to release. Yes, there is enough hashing power to double the hashrate through Q2, but to see it double every month through this year is very unlikely. We won't see 36 PH until Cointerra and KNC complete delivery of their latest batch. |
|
|
|
Where is all that hashrate coming from? For example, KNC is only bringing 10 PH or less in the next 6 months. The industry can't keep up the current trend, its getting too difficult.
New players. Bigger foundry orders. As i understand it, there's money in bitcoin ASICs. There is money, but there are technological and productive limits. There is no way to sustain the current hashing growth rate. |
|
|
|
Adjustments have been more like every 10.5 days.
If the hashrate was flatlining the adjustment would be exactly 2 weeks.
If the hashrate is increasing the block time falls and the adjustments are more often than two weeks because 2016 blocks are solved in less than 10 minutes per block.
Correct me if I'm wrong
By my back of the envelope calculations ActM will be entering the mining scene after the total network hashrate has passed 100PH, potentially by a lot. We are currently entering February around 18PH ( http://thegenesisblock.com/mining/) with somewhere between 78% and 88% adjustments per month. We'll aim high and say 90% adjustments, per month. Actually, let's just say we'll see 100% adjustments from here on through Q2, it's not like that's unreasonable. 18*2 = 36PH @ end of March 36*2 = 72PH @ end of April - Start of Q2 72*2 = 144PH @ end of May 144*2= 288PH@ end of June - End of Q2 Where is all that hashrate coming from? For example, KNC is only bringing 10 PH or less in the next 6 months. The industry can't keep up the current trend, its getting too difficult. |
|
|
|
The good thing is that it looks like difficulty should be "leveling-off" by the end of this year.
The difficulty will level off when it becomes unprofitable for the best ASIC manufacturers to sell chips. This won't change as long as basic economic laws hold. Rising tide floats all boats yadda yadda yadda. No. Can't argue with that logic. Other manufacturers, bored by profits, will stop making, selling, and mining their ASICs. Leaving the market wide open for Ken & his awesome 55nm chippery  The parabolic rise was due to the transition from GPUs/FPGAs to ASICs. As difficulty increases, each addition of hashrate becomes a smaller and smaller percentage to the total. I am not saying that the difficulty will stop increasing, just that the rate of increase will be lower. Thus, the planning of manufacture and profitability will become more predictable. Gains in hashrate are diminishing with each die shrink and it will be that the best way to sell miners is through lowering costs through scaled-up production and not faster chips. |
|
|
|
The good thing is that it looks like difficulty should be "leveling-off" by the end of this year.
The difficulty will level off when it becomes unprofitable for the best ASIC manufacturers to sell chips. This won't change as long as basic economic laws hold. Rising tide floats all boats yadda yadda yadda. No. |
|
|
|
How long after CT setup will the accrued dividends be payed out? And how much is it per share at the moment?
Currently publicly known balance is roughly 55 BTC, or 0.0000055 per share. These have been accruing since the last week of October. Current rate is less than 5BTC a month to be split between 10M shares, or less than 0.0000005 per share per month. We're not that many retargets away from making less than a Satoshi per week, per share. I had better return from Labcoin...  So did I. I figured we would have had a turn-on of at least 24TH/s by now if the project ended up being successful. At this point, February looks like a wash for launch and March launch turns into a mining failure unless Intellihash is a time machine that is able to hash at a difficulty several months in the past. The good thing is that it looks like difficulty should be "leveling-off" by the end of this year. |
|
|
|
|
The feds need to give Gox its money back
|
|
|
|
Bloody 'el, calm your jets!
I have re-read the last couple of pages and agree I was mistaken to assume that Vigil was having a go. He was saying what he believed to be factual and if I'd not missed the crucial coma in his sentence perhaps I wouldn't have jumped to the wrong conclusion. My judgement was clouded by Vigil's recent turn from pro-ActM to calling it a scam and having cheap digs at such things like the volume on CT after Vigils theory that we were already mining was shown to be wrong.
I apologise sincerely for making this rash judgement, for the unfortunate language I used and for upsetting anyone who I may have offended.
Your turn..
How is citing CT's volume a cheap dig? Also, my theory was never actually shown to be wrong. People just claimed it was wrong. We don't have enough information to prove anything. Its still a possibility in my book, regardless, until the owner of that operation steps forward and says otherwise. Did I ever acknowledge that it was incorrect? |
|
|
|
Do you all think that prevalent use of a protocol such as colored coins could make each bitcoin even more rare and thus drive up price beyond the theoretical future valuations we have predicted?
No this goes against the fungibility (one unit or piece must be perceived as equivalent to any other), the biggest risk to bitcoin ever. New developments in bitcoin like stealth addresses and coinjoin will remove this threat. What? Colored coins create different assets from bitcoins. Meaning that a bitcoin can be representative of property - thus it won't be used as a currency, but held. Theoretically, this would make the monetary bitcoins more rare. Has nothing to do with eliminating fungibility. Thinking more on that valuations of $80,000,000 we were tossing around the other day. |
|
|
|
|
Do you all think that prevalent use of a protocol such as colored coins could make each bitcoin even more rare and thus drive up price beyond the theoretical future valuations we have predicted?
|
|
|
|
|
Did the IRS or whatever return Gox's money yet? Didn't they seize accounts?
|
|
|
|
Perhaps it wouldn't make great sense these days to start a mining company with the sole intention of developing 55nm hardware given the time to market versus and the ever increasing difficulty factor, but surely it makes sense in ActM's situation as we managed to secure a team who will develop the full custom 28nm chip and additionally provide a stop gap solution with the 55nm. I think it is grossly unfair to speak like that Vigil and it reflects badly on you as an individual who can't seem to get over your anger. What a cheap dig that was.
Maybe if Ken could back up decisions with a little clarity then we wouldn't be wondering if it was a smart move or not - i.e. he could very easily release the figures that you seem to be so sure he has run... If Ken is smart, then the boards and controllers for the 55nm chips will be the same as for the 28nm chips, then there is some worth in the 55nm chips, if only to pop the ActM cherry and debug the codes, boards, deployment plans etc... That would make sense. I am just wondering how our chips, which will be coming in the two month time-frame, are going to somehow be significantly more cost-effective than BitMain and Bitfurry chips. The Antminers are already selling at a price that cannot ROI, if they could reduce the price a bit more, they would. How many more chips per order are going to be required in two+ months to sell a machine that ROIs and how much more expensive will that make each machine? That is kinda what I am getting at. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
