Bitcoin Forum
November 16, 2024, 01:06:57 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: A bitcoin miner in every hand  (Read 8171 times)
RoadStress
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1007


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 07:44:08 PM
 #161

Inefficient/expensive miner in everything = bad idea

Please share how do you imagine a decentralized network.

jimmothy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770
Merit: 509



View Profile
June 04, 2015, 09:35:35 PM
 #162

Inefficient/expensive miner in everything = bad idea

Please share how do you imagine a decentralized network.

The network seems pretty decentralized already. No single entity is anywhere near 51%.

To further decentralization, manufacturers could offer their customers decent rates without outrageous markups. When mining returns decline to non-astronomical levels it might make more sense to focus on sales than self-mining for manufacturers. That could create a situation where access to cheap electricity is more important than access to the cheapest hardware which would allow medium/large scale operations to thrive.

I don't see how gimmicks/schemes can further decentralization in any meaningful way. Especially not a scheme that automatically gives a single entity 75% of the hashrate of each device distributed. (assuming they at least give users control over their 25%)
alh
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1052


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 09:48:31 PM
 #163

If there was inverse "premium" applied to VERY large purchases, it might blunt the impact of large mines. For example:

Buy 1 miner, it costs X.
Buy 5-50 miners and each one costs .95X.
Buy 1000 miners and they each cost 1.2X

I don't think this could actually work, but it would discourage massive mining farms and/or purchases.

Just a random thought.
jimmothy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770
Merit: 509



View Profile
June 04, 2015, 09:54:59 PM
Last edit: June 05, 2015, 12:34:06 PM by jimmothy
 #164

If there was inverse "premium" applied to VERY large purchases, it might blunt the impact of large mines. For example:

Buy 1 miner, it costs X.
Buy 5-50 miners and each one costs .95X.
Buy 1000 miners and they each cost 1.2X

I don't think this could actually work, but it would discourage massive mining farms and/or purchases.

Just a random thought.

It should theoretically already work like that.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economies_of_scale

Edit: After thinking about it further, I really doubt any manufacturer has reached the point where increasing production would decrease the price per unit. Compared to the entire electronics industry, the materials required to produce bitcoin miners are pretty much negligible. (I estimate ~10k bitcoin miners produced per week)

Another thought, wouldn't your inverse premium idea just disincentivize decentralization? After all, the manufacturers are the main threat to decentralization, not the people with 1-10MW farms.
sidehack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3402
Merit: 1865

Curmudgeonly hardware guy


View Profile
June 04, 2015, 09:55:39 PM
 #165

I'd be okay with flat pricing no matter how many were purchased. That way you're neither specifically favoring nor specifically disfavoring anyone.

I also don't like the idea of pool-locked or 75/25 hardware, since as has been mentioned, it's dispersing a single-control farm rather than decentralizing the control of mining in general.

Cool, quiet and up to 1TH pod miner, on sale now!
Currently in development - 200+GH USB stick; 6TH volt-adjustable S1/3/5 upgrade kit
Server PSU interface boards and cables. USB and small-scale miners. Hardware hosting, advice and odd-jobs. Supporting the home miner community since 2013 - http://www.gekkoscience.com
mmeijeri
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 500

Martijn Meijering


View Profile
July 11, 2015, 08:57:47 PM
Last edit: July 11, 2015, 09:35:13 PM by mmeijeri
 #166

Clearly the point of owning a 21-enabled device is not to make money mining, as several others have already pointed out. The idea is that at a sufficiently low power draw people might not object to the miner being there, provided the device offers enough value for money in other departments. The trick is to find an application that is synergistic with Bitcoin mining.

How about this, a device that combines the following features:

- Full Bitcoin node like Bitnodes Hardware.
- Tor router like Portal to provide high anonymity with fewer possibilities for exploits than running Tor on your own computer. Mainly interesting for those who have political motivations or are doing naughty things, but also a noble-sounding pretext ("helping dissidents in Iran").
- I2P router that does something similar for bandwidth-intensive applications that do not need to leave the darknet, such as file sharing or naughty Streamium streams that could benefit from increased privacy for both sender and receiver. Potentially attractive to a much larger group of people.
- Meshnet router.
- Access point for selling bandwidth to strangers with phones with expensive data bundles using Bitcoin micropayments channels, as proposed by Mike Hearn.

There is synergy between several of these functions.

For example, if you want to sell bandwidth and want to avoid liability for what people are doing over your connection, Tor helps. Paid applications that rely on stealth Bitcoin micropayments would benefit from decentralisation and might be more willing to contribute financially, especially if it costs very little. People running such a node could still be seeking a profit, such as getting paid anonymously for hosting files. The mining costs could then be seen as an expense and overall the operation could still be profitable.

ROI is not a verb, the term you're looking for is 'to break even'.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!