A bitcoin miner in every hand

[JorgeStolfi]

Considering their partnership with Qualcomm

We do not know the terms of that partnership.  21.co may use Qualcomm parts and/or expertise, rather than the other way around.  Doesn't Qualcomm have a project for self-configuring public wifi routers?  That may require some automatic micropayment system, so their interest in 21.co may be about that, rather than mining per se.

[jimmothy]

Phone chargers sell for ~$2 on Aliexpress so I'd guess they are made for ~$1. No sane company is going to add ~$20 worth of components and an $8 chip.

How can they possibly remain competitive while paying double the $/gh and double the $/kwh?

This sort of reminds me of when utorrent decided to include a hidden CPU miner in their software so they could earn dollars per day while costing their users thousands of dollars in electricity.

[brontosaurus]

Do they think all the companies that pioneered mining chips are a bunch of idiots?

Do y'all think Andreessen/Horowitz, Intel and Qualcomm are a bunch of idiots ?

They central question here is what do they know that we don't.

At this point, I haven't heard any arguments that dissuade me from believing that 21's plans will enable widespread adoption of bitcoin. Whether that adoption results in BTC price improvement remains an open question.

No, I think they (Andreesen/Horowitz) are greedy predators who don't give a shit about helping good tech companies get established.

What they do know is that the public are suckers and will fall for a hyped up tech project in a future IPO.

Anyone with a decent amount of technical knowledge and a basic grasp of maths can see right through this crap. As for Intel, they most certainly haven't pinned their colours to this mast, have they?

[s1gs3gv]

snip

Your concerns seem to rest on an assessment of the economics of mining and an implicit assertion that it is only by stealing power and/or creating inconvenience for the customer that 'micro' mining could be profitable.

Until we can actually assess the adoption of micro mining, the effect of this adoption on the network and bitcoin valuation, and understand what kind of added value 21 inc can provide to the consumer I don't think this question can be settled.

After all, why would anyone pay more for a dedicated miner than it could actually mine during its useful lifetime ? ~LOL~

[JorgeStolfi]

Your concerns seem to rest on an assessment of the economics of mining and an implicit assertion that it is only by stealing power and/or creating inconvenience for the customer that 'micro' mining could be profitable.

The claim that the intent is to steal power from the consumers is not mine; it is being made by several people in the forums.  I still haven't seen confirmed basic data about the chip: power consumption and hashes/sec.

Someone on reddit who seems familiar with chip design claims that the 21.co chip is 500 mm^2 in area (~22 x 22 mm), which means it cannot be integrated in CPUs etc.

[sidehack]

After all, why would anyone pay more for a dedicated miner than it could actually mine during its useful lifetime ? ~LOL~

Even the "optimism" and "entertainment" factors are negated when you have automated and probably unconfigurable hardware ("boring") that pays you only a quarter of its meager earnings ("depressing").

[crazyates]

I've thought this for a while now. However, I focused on devices that are constantly plugged in, and connected to the internet (obv). Any sort of firewall/router/switch/AP could have a 10W chip in them, and no one would ever know. Well, some people would find out, but most consumers wouldn't know the difference.

[Biodom]

I still think that most of us here are focusing on a less relevant thing (using your own electricity).
Right now bitcoin is mired in 100K transactions a day, which is a miniscule number.
If properly implemented, can 21 inc approach dramatically increase bitcoin market and reach many millions?
I think that it can, and the alternative of 4 hardware makers mining, then dumping coin is nothing but a disaster as we have seen in the last 15-18 mo.

In fact, if 21 inc is already in possession of a significant % of bitcoin (and they might be since they were mining the last two years), and once millions of devices are distributed, they can run a promo whereas they distribute, say, 1-5% (or even more) of their stash in one go, like a super-faucet, giving few million people $1-5 in btc, thereby endowing a large market. With a proper ad campaign it would be an impressive feat.

[alh]

Any thoughts on how long it will take to see which "vision" is the closest to reality? Will it take longer than 18 months to know if the VC guys were "super brilliant" or just "suckered in"? I can't believe it will take even 24 months to know.

[JorgeStolfi]

I still think that most of us here are focusing on a less relevant thing (using your own electricity).
Right now bitcoin is mired in 100K transactions a day, which is a miniscule number.
If properly implemented, can 21 inc approach dramatically increase bitcoin market and reach many millions?
I think that it can, and the alternative of 4 hardware makers mining, then dumping coin is nothing but a disaster as we have seen in the last 15-18 mo.

However, if those transactions will use freshly mined bitcoins, they will not generate any new demand on the market.  Eventually, those mined bitcoins will find the way to the markets, just as if tehy had been mined in bulk.  So those chips will not change the supply or demand.

Moreover, those additional millions of transactions will involve very small amounts and minimal fees.  One big dark cloud in the bitcoin horizon is the question of how the network will be supported once the block rewards become insufficient.  The hope was that commercial transactions would increase to the point that (a) the price would increase exponentially, thus preserving the dollar value of the block rewards, and/or (b) the transaction fees would become significant and compensate for the reduction of the block rewards.  Those millions of micropayments and tiny miner payouts from the 21.co chips will not help either (a) or (b).

In fact, if 21 inc is already in possession of a significant % of bitcoin (and they might be since they were mining the last two years),.

They must have mined a lot of bitcoins; but have they kept them, or have they sold them already?  They must have sold some of them to pay their bills.  If they kept the rest as bitcoins, they must be in very bad financial shape, like other entities that did so (such as the Bitcoin Foundation).

[RoadStress]

Considering their partnership with Qualcomm

We do not know the terms of that partnership.  21.co may use Qualcomm parts and/or expertise, rather than the other way around.  Doesn't Qualcomm have a project for self-configuring public wifi routers?  That may require some automatic micropayment system, so their interest in 21.co may be about that, rather than mining per se.

Who said that Qualcomm is interested in the mining? This is not only about the mining. And yes, in order to integrate and use the micropayment system Qualcomm will put hashing cores into their chips and will try to get people used with the micropayment system so they can use it.

Phone chargers sell for ~$2 on Aliexpress so I'd guess they are made for ~$1. No sane company is going to add ~$20 worth of components and an $8 chip.

How can they possibly remain competitive while paying double the $/gh and double the $/kwh?

This sort of reminds me of when utorrent decided to include a hidden CPU miner in their software so they could earn dollars per day while costing their users thousands of dollars in electricity.

You are way off the track. Their plan is to use 35$ chips for USB charging hubs which are more expensive than regular phone chargers. The 8$ chip will be used in routers, gaming consoles etc. They will remain competitive by using the approach of many consumers paying the price who will not care about the double $/gh or the double $/kwh because the amounts are very small for them. We are talking about a few dollars, not about thousands.

The difference from utorrent is that the consumers will know while those idiots put it hidden.

The claim that the intent is to steal power from the consumers is not mine; it is being made by several people in the forums.  I still haven't seen confirmed basic data about the chip: power consumption and hashes/sec.

Someone on reddit who seems familiar with chip design claims that the 21.co chip is 500 mm^2 in area (~22 x 22 mm), which means it cannot be integrated in CPUs etc.

If several people claim one thing it doesn't automatically makes it correct! I find that claim to be very stupid. They will not steal the power. The consumers will know about this and it will be done with their consent while they will receive something back. It's like saying that Facebook is stealing our privacy. Yeah right, but we tolerate it and we like it. So that's why I think that this is a stupid claim. There are far more important things to worry about than this stupid steal of power of the stupid ROI from the mining.

I've thought this for a while now. However, I focused on devices that are constantly plugged in, and connected to the internet (obv). Any sort of firewall/router/switch/AP could have a 10W chip in them, and no one would ever know. Well, some people would find out, but most consumers wouldn't know the difference.

They will know! It's very easy to monitor the traffic and to see what is going on especially if we are talking about routers. I say it will be done with consent.

They must have mined a lot of bitcoins; but have they kept them, or have they sold them already?  They must have sold some of them to pay their bills.  If they kept the rest as bitcoins, they must be in very bad financial shape, like other entities that did so (such as the Bitcoin Foundation).

When you get investments "far north" of 116M$ I am sure that you don't need to sell bitcoins to pay for the power. Especially if your plan is to boost bitcoin. 

[Biodom]

^^^^nicely put, and I am very much in agreement.

[jimmothy]

Considering their partnership with Qualcomm

We do not know the terms of that partnership.  21.co may use Qualcomm parts and/or expertise, rather than the other way around.  Doesn't Qualcomm have a project for self-configuring public wifi routers?  That may require some automatic micropayment system, so their interest in 21.co may be about that, rather than mining per se.

Who said that Qualcomm is interested in the mining? This is not only about the mining. And yes, in order to integrate and use the micropayment system Qualcomm will put hashing cores into their chips and will try to get people used with the micropayment system so they can use it.

Qualcomm will never do this unless they want to destroy their name brand in the name of a retarded experiment where their users can earn fractions of a penny over the lifetime of their several hundred dollar devices.

Phone chargers sell for ~$2 on Aliexpress so I'd guess they are made for ~$1. No sane company is going to add ~$20 worth of components and an $8 chip.

How can they possibly remain competitive while paying double the $/gh and double the $/kwh?

This sort of reminds me of when utorrent decided to include a hidden CPU miner in their software so they could earn dollars per day while costing their users thousands of dollars in electricity.

You are way off the track. Their plan is to use 35$ chips for USB charging hubs which are more expensive than regular phone chargers. The 8$ chip will be used in routers, gaming consoles etc. They will remain competitive by using the approach of many consumers paying the price who will not care about the double $/gh or the double $/kwh because the amounts are very small for them. We are talking about a few dollars, not about thousands.

That's not how I understand it. According to the slides here: http://imgur.com/a/q9cbL it looks like the $35 includes a: $10 controller, $5 wifi connector, $5 hardware wallet, $5 case, $2 charger, $8 chip. (numbers obviously made up but you get the point) It doesn't say the $35 is a single chip unlike the $8.

The $/gh is not important for the customer, but 21 inc. If 21 inc can breaks even with double the $/gh, then their competitors have doubled their money by that point. (assuming they have equivalent chips)

The w/gh is important to 21 inc but only if their plan is not to steal electricity from ignorant users. If they intend on giving their users at least enough btc to cover electricity costs then they are essentially just paying residential rates for electricity while their competitors are paying industrial rates.

I think Jtoomim is right when he said this isn't their real business plan. This is just their plan to suck in the VC money from people who can't/won't do the math so they can produce Intel 14nm chips to put in a massive 20MW datacenter.

[jimmothy]

In fact, if 21 inc is already in possession of a significant % of bitcoin (and they might be since they were mining the last two years), and once millions of devices are distributed, they can run a promo whereas they distribute, say, 1-5% (or even more) of their stash in one go, like a super-faucet, giving few million people $1-5 in btc, thereby endowing a large market. With a proper ad campaign it would be an impressive feat.

This plan to increase btc adoption through mass advertising/giveaways sounds a lot like something Josh Garza would come up with.

Here's my idea to increase adoption: what about creating services/features for bitcoin that people actually want to use?

[Biodom]

In fact, if 21 inc is already in possession of a significant % of bitcoin (and they might be since they were mining the last two years), and once millions of devices are distributed, they can run a promo whereas they distribute, say, 1-5% (or even more) of their stash in one go, like a super-faucet, giving few million people $1-5 in btc, thereby endowing a large market. With a proper ad campaign it would be an impressive feat.

This plan to increase btc adoption through mass advertising/giveaways sounds a lot like something Josh Garza would come up with.

Here's my idea to increase adoption: what about creating services/features for bitcoin that people actually want to use?

what people? 10K miners?
internet: create new services, but people can use "old" money(credit cards)
Bitcoin: create new services, but people can only use "new" money (bitcoin). solution: give most people a direct opportunity to get bitcoin

[Kyle1836]

In fact, if 21 inc is already in possession of a significant % of bitcoin (and they might be since they were mining the last two years), and once millions of devices are distributed, they can run a promo whereas they distribute, say, 1-5% (or even more) of their stash in one go, like a super-faucet, giving few million people $1-5 in btc, thereby endowing a large market. With a proper ad campaign it would be an impressive feat.

This plan to increase btc adoption through mass advertising/giveaways sounds a lot like something Josh Garza would come up with.

Here's my idea to increase adoption: what about creating services/features for bitcoin that people actually want to use?

what people? 10K miners?
internet: create new services, but people can use "old" money(credit cards)
Bitcoin: create new services, but people can only use "new" money 9bitcoin). solution: give most people a direct opportunity to get bitcoin

What's wrong with USD? Why can't we have both Bitcoin AND USD?

[Biodom]

Considering their partnership with Qualcomm

We do not know the terms of that partnership.  21.co may use Qualcomm parts and/or expertise, rather than the other way around.  Doesn't Qualcomm have a project for self-configuring public wifi routers?  That may require some automatic micropayment system, so their interest in 21.co may be about that, rather than mining per se.

Who said that Qualcomm is interested in the mining? This is not only about the mining. And yes, in order to integrate and use the micropayment system Qualcomm will put hashing cores into their chips and will try to get people used with the micropayment system so they can use it.

Qualcomm will never do this unless they want to destroy their name brand in the name of a retarded experiment where their users can earn fractions of a penny over the lifetime of their several hundred dollar devices.

Phone chargers sell for ~$2 on Aliexpress so I'd guess they are made for ~$1. No sane company is going to add ~$20 worth of components and an $8 chip.

How can they possibly remain competitive while paying double the $/gh and double the $/kwh?

This sort of reminds me of when utorrent decided to include a hidden CPU miner in their software so they could earn dollars per day while costing their users thousands of dollars in electricity.

You are way off the track. Their plan is to use 35$ chips for USB charging hubs which are more expensive than regular phone chargers. The 8$ chip will be used in routers, gaming consoles etc. They will remain competitive by using the approach of many consumers paying the price who will not care about the double $/gh or the double $/kwh because the amounts are very small for them. We are talking about a few dollars, not about thousands.

That's not how I understand it. According to the slides here: http://imgur.com/a/q9cbL it looks like the $35 includes a: $10 controller, $5 wifi connector, $5 hardware wallet, $5 case, $2 charger, $8 chip. (numbers obviously made up but you get the point) It doesn't say the $35 is a single chip unlike the $8.

The $/gh is not important for the customer, but 21 inc. If 21 inc can breaks even with double the $/gh, then their competitors have doubled their money by that point. (assuming they have equivalent chips)

The w/gh is important to 21 inc but only if their plan is not to steal electricity from ignorant users. If they intend on giving their users at least enough btc to cover electricity costs then they are essentially just paying residential rates for electricity while their competitors are paying industrial rates.

I think Jtoomim is right when he said this isn't their real business plan. This is just their plan to suck in the VC money from people who can't/won't do the math so they can produce Intel 14nm chips to put in a massive 20MW datacenter.

sorry, but it does not compute because if they accumulated all that bitcoin, but there is NO market (sellers with no buyers) and bitcoin is at $20, then they just lost all of their investment.

[Biodom]

In fact, if 21 inc is already in possession of a significant % of bitcoin (and they might be since they were mining the last two years), and once millions of devices are distributed, they can run a promo whereas they distribute, say, 1-5% (or even more) of their stash in one go, like a super-faucet, giving few million people $1-5 in btc, thereby endowing a large market. With a proper ad campaign it would be an impressive feat.

This plan to increase btc adoption through mass advertising/giveaways sounds a lot like something Josh Garza would come up with.

Here's my idea to increase adoption: what about creating services/features for bitcoin that people actually want to use?

what people? 10K miners?
internet: create new services, but people can use "old" money(credit cards)
Bitcoin: create new services, but people can only use "new" money 9bitcoin). solution: give most people a direct opportunity to get bitcoin

What's wrong with USD? Why can't we have both Bitcoin AND USD?

1. you cannot transmit actual dollar over the internet.
2. you can program bitcoin, but not a dollar

you can use USD to much of other things, of course, hence there are many tens if not hundred of trillions worth of $$ and only $3 bil worth of bitcoin.

[Kyle1836]

In fact, if 21 inc is already in possession of a significant % of bitcoin (and they might be since they were mining the last two years), and once millions of devices are distributed, they can run a promo whereas they distribute, say, 1-5% (or even more) of their stash in one go, like a super-faucet, giving few million people $1-5 in btc, thereby endowing a large market. With a proper ad campaign it would be an impressive feat.

This plan to increase btc adoption through mass advertising/giveaways sounds a lot like something Josh Garza would come up with.

Here's my idea to increase adoption: what about creating services/features for bitcoin that people actually want to use?

what people? 10K miners?
internet: create new services, but people can use "old" money(credit cards)
Bitcoin: create new services, but people can only use "new" money 9bitcoin). solution: give most people a direct opportunity to get bitcoin

What's wrong with USD? Why can't we have both Bitcoin AND USD?

1. you cannot transmit actual dollar over the internet.
2. you can program bitcoin, but not a dollar

you can use USD to much of other things, of course, hence there are many tens if not hundred of trillions worth of $$ and only $3 bil worth of bitcoin.

So your goal is to have Bitcoin take over a currency that existed since the beginning of time? I don't necessarily disagree with what you said, but maybe you'd like to rethink what you said. We have a long time before our main currency is digital.

[Biodom]

In fact, if 21 inc is already in possession of a significant % of bitcoin (and they might be since they were mining the last two years), and once millions of devices are distributed, they can run a promo whereas they distribute, say, 1-5% (or even more) of their stash in one go, like a super-faucet, giving few million people $1-5 in btc, thereby endowing a large market. With a proper ad campaign it would be an impressive feat.

This plan to increase btc adoption through mass advertising/giveaways sounds a lot like something Josh Garza would come up with.

Here's my idea to increase adoption: what about creating services/features for bitcoin that people actually want to use?

what people? 10K miners?
internet: create new services, but people can use "old" money(credit cards)
Bitcoin: create new services, but people can only use "new" money 9bitcoin). solution: give most people a direct opportunity to get bitcoin

What's wrong with USD? Why can't we have both Bitcoin AND USD?

1. you cannot transmit actual dollar over the internet.
2. you can program bitcoin, but not a dollar

you can use USD to much of other things, of course, hence there are many tens if not hundred of trillions worth of $$ and only $3 bil worth of bitcoin.

So your goal is to have Bitcoin take over a currency that existed since the beginning of time? I don't necessarily disagree with what you said, but maybe you'd like to rethink what you said. We have a long time before our main currency is digital.

read my post below to see what Reid Hoffman, CEO of LinkedIn, a company that might have helped you to get a job, or will help to get a job in the future, said:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1067631.0
direct link
http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/archive/2015/06/features/bitcoin-reid-hoffman/viewall