If you get your ASIC early would you Solo or Pool mine?

[RyanRed]

As the title says. But how much gigahash would you believe is needed to effectively solo mine if its even feasible? 50+ 100+?
I can't help but think Solo mining might be the way to go at first. Just looking for peoples opinions is all

[Cablez]

Considering that the ASICs are going to be shipped in bulk you probably have only one difficulty change before it becomes less profitable. It also depends on when during the 2016 blocks the deliveries show up as well.
The only reason to solo would be to get one of the early 25BTC blocks but the competition will be fierce.

Personally I would just go with a pool that has stratum.

[Morblias]

Solo mining may also be too risky and you may miss your window. Say you start solo mining the 1st week ASICs hit but are unlucky and do not find many/any blocks. Then more people start to get them and difficulty skyrockets. I guess it all depends if you want to take that risk or not, because on the other hand you may be lucky and hit the jackpot before difficulty skyrockets. I personally am sticking to pool mining with stratum because every time I go to Las Vegas I lose all my money 

[bcpokey]

Solo mining may also be too risky and you may miss your window. Say you start solo mining the 1st week ASICs hit but are unlucky and do not find many/any blocks. Then more people start to get them and difficulty skyrockets. I guess it all depends if you want to take that risk or not, because on the other hand you may be lucky and hit the jackpot before difficulty skyrockets. I personally am sticking to pool mining with stratum because every time I go to Las Vegas I lose all my money 

Also depends on how many ASICs you receive. 60Ghash is a lot of power, but still relatively weak compared to the network. If you picked up 1.5THash, then you're suddenly in a diff boat.

[Kuusou]

I think it makes way more sense to just stick to a pool. There is no way you get your equipment early enough to risk going solo. And even if you did I still think it's a better bet to stick with a pool you are comfortable with.

[bobitza]

I think Pool mining makes more sense the more hash power you have because you take out luck out of the equation. Example: if you have half of the hashing power of the network, you'll almost get half of the bitcoins generated if you mine using pools (minus the ones going to the "lucky solo miners"). If solo mining, and with a bad luck, you can get 0 bitcoins ... So, feeling lucky ... punk?

[bcpokey]

I think Pool mining makes more sense the more hash power you have because you take out luck out of the equation. Example: if you have half of the hashing power of the network, you'll almost get half of the bitcoins generated if you mine using pools (minus the ones going to the "lucky solo miners"). If solo mining, and with a bad luck, you can get 0 bitcoins ... So, feeling lucky ... punk?

That makes absolutely no sense

[AmDD]

I think Pool mining makes more sense the more hash power you have because you take out luck out of the equation. Example: if you have half of the hashing power of the network, you'll almost get half of the bitcoins generated if you mine using pools (minus the ones going to the "lucky solo miners"). If solo mining, and with a bad luck, you can get 0 bitcoins ... So, feeling lucky ... punk?

That makes absolutely no sense

It does make sense. In a pool you are 'almost' guaranteed coins which is why people mine on them. With solo mining there is no guarantee, ever. its all luck. Granted, with half the network hashrate at your disposal your luck would be much better, but its still luck.

[bcpokey]

I think Pool mining makes more sense the more hash power you have because you take out luck out of the equation. Example: if you have half of the hashing power of the network, you'll almost get half of the bitcoins generated if you mine using pools (minus the ones going to the "lucky solo miners"). If solo mining, and with a bad luck, you can get 0 bitcoins ... So, feeling lucky ... punk?

That makes absolutely no sense

It does make sense. In a pool you are 'almost' guaranteed coins which is why people mine on them. With solo mining there is no guarantee, ever. its all luck. Granted, with half the network hashrate at your disposal your luck would be much better, but its still luck.

Tell me by what method it is you (and bobitza) believe that Pools grant coins to people? Even a PPS pool relies on finding blocks to fund the coins which they disperse to their users. The more hashing power you have, the less sense it makes to mine on a pool, as the point of a pool is solely to reduce variance (by the very property of increasing proportional hash rate!), at the cost of fees and sharing the rewards for blocks found with others in the pool.

If you had the hypothetical 50% of the network hashing power, not only does mining on a pool grant whatever pool you are on > 51% power, which is bad, but unless the pool already contributes significant (another appreciable chunk of total network hashing) power on top of your own, you are essentially still mining solo except that you are paying pool fees, and distributing part of the reward that you are almost guaranteed to be finding, to others for no appreciable reason.

I don't think people really understand mining sometimes.

[AmDD]

I think Pool mining makes more sense the more hash power you have because you take out luck out of the equation. Example: if you have half of the hashing power of the network, you'll almost get half of the bitcoins generated if you mine using pools (minus the ones going to the "lucky solo miners"). If solo mining, and with a bad luck, you can get 0 bitcoins ... So, feeling lucky ... punk?

That makes absolutely no sense

It does make sense. In a pool you are 'almost' guaranteed coins which is why people mine on them. With solo mining there is no guarantee, ever. its all luck. Granted, with half the network hashrate at your disposal your luck would be much better, but its still luck.

Tell me by what method it is you (and bobitza) believe that Pools grant coins to people? Even a PPS pool relies on finding blocks to fund the coins which they disperse to their users. The more hashing power you have, the less sense it makes to mine on a pool, as the point of a pool is solely to reduce variance (by the very property of increasing proportional hash rate!), at the cost of fees and sharing the rewards for blocks found with others in the pool.

As a miner on a PPS pool, I could careless if the pool EVER finds a block. The pool operator has stated they will give me X for every share submitted. if they never find a block then they better be buying coins to pay me. Is this likely to happen? No, but thats not the point.

If you had the hypothetical 50% of the network hashing power, not only does mining on a pool grant whatever pool you are on > 51% power, which is bad, but unless the pool already contributes significant (another appreciable chunk of total network hashing) power on top of your own, you are essentially still mining solo except that you are paying pool fees, and distributing part of the reward that you are almost guaranteed to be finding, to others for no appreciable reason.

This is very true and I had not thought about it that way.

[bobitza]

As a miner on a PPS pool, I could careless if the pool EVER finds a block. The pool operator has stated they will give me X for every share submitted. if they never find a block then they better be buying coins to pay me. Is this likely to happen? No, but thats not the point.

^^^ This.

If you had the hypothetical 50% of the network hashing power, not only does mining on a pool grant whatever pool you are on > 51% power, which is bad, but unless the pool already contributes significant (another appreciable chunk of total network hashing) power on top of your own, you are essentially still mining solo except that you are paying pool fees, and distributing part of the reward that you are almost guaranteed to be finding, to others for no appreciable reason.

This is very true and I had not thought about it that way.

The 50% number was just an example, I could have used 10%, 1% or 0.001%.

[MysteryMiner]

Use this calculator http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/old_calculator.php input current difficulty and hashrate. It will need to be converted from giga and megahashes to in kilohashes per second.

[2GOOD]

Definitely POOL mining, probably slush not decided yet... but I'll not give it up on chance with this.

[bcpokey]

As a miner on a PPS pool, I could careless if the pool EVER finds a block. The pool operator has stated they will give me X for every share submitted. if they never find a block then they better be buying coins to pay me. Is this likely to happen? No, but thats not the point.

Well, it is somewhat the point, if the pool never found a block, you would quickly bankrupt the pool owner. If the pool owner lacks funds for payout, you would lose whatever mining time you dedicated before hopping. The more mining power you have on tap, the greater the loss to any time lacking payment, to return to the original point. That is however a subsidiary part of the discussion, I merely meant to point out that a pool is no more a guarantee of payment than solo mining, in that they require the luck of the coins to be able to payout as much as anyone else.

If you had the hypothetical 50% of the network hashing power, not only does mining on a pool grant whatever pool you are on > 51% power, which is bad, but unless the pool already contributes significant (another appreciable chunk of total network hashing) power on top of your own, you are essentially still mining solo except that you are paying pool fees, and distributing part of the reward that you are almost guaranteed to be finding, to others for no appreciable reason.

This is very true and I had not thought about it that way.

The 50% number was just an example, I could have used 10%, 1% or 0.001%.

The fact that you think 50% is the same as .001% is exactly why I said that it sounds like you do not understand mining.

Use this calculator http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/old_calculator.php input current difficulty and hashrate. It will need to be converted from giga and megahashes to in kilohashes per second.

+1 to this. I quite enjoyed this calculator, and it gives you a very good sense of how risky soloing will be based on your proportion of the network.

[-ck]

How is this thread different to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=120214.0 ?

[organofcorti]

How is this thread different to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=120214.0 ?

It doesn't have a poll on top? I dunno. I give up. How is this thread different to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=120214.0 ?

[bobitza]

The fact that you think 50% is the same as .001% is exactly why I said that it sounds like you do not understand mining.

The fact that you just like to pick on words/numbers and take them out of context makes you a troll.

[Joshwaa]

@con Same thread different title.. People do not know about Google search yet.

@bobitza  Thanks. My first morning laugh.

[bcpokey]

The fact that you think 50% is the same as .001% is exactly why I said that it sounds like you do not understand mining.

The fact that you just like to pick on words/numbers and take them out of context makes you a troll.

Don't be asinine. I have clear and useful discussions with everyone but you, but for some reason you're special enough for me to troll? Perhaps the simpler and more logical explanation is that I am correct and you do not have an understanding of things you are espousing an opinion on, and therefore bring no argument/fact/logic to the table, and thus there can be no discourse?  

[bobitza]

I also have normal discussions on a wide range of topics with the rest of the forum except you.

When your response is:

That makes absolutely no sense

... you sound condescending and trying to be a smart arse. Had you started with "In my opinion I think it's better to mine solo because a) b) c) ..." I wouldn't have considered you a troll. I mean look at your previous answer. Get the fvck down from your high horses. Show us you're just as good at argumenting "for" because you showed us you're pretty good at argumenting "against". That's easy.