bad news for bASIC - not shipping til mid Jan at best

[creativex]

The chances that all four companies currently nearing the end of their product development cycles are scamming is effectively zero. ASICs are coming to bitcoin mining the only question is how soon and how efficient. Some early adopters of ASIC mining hardware will surely be rewarded with a very low ROI. For instance if I had my 2xbASIC01 units that cost a total of $2168 right this very minute they'd mine enough btc to pay for themselves in EIGHT DAYS...including power cost.

[1714642336]

1714642336

[1714642336]

1714642336

[1714642336]

1714642336

[gmaxwell]

Setting up a private testing network is trivial.

You start two copies, in two datadir, of bitcoin in testnet mode on separate ports and -connect them to each other.
Lets say the directories are /home/me/node1 and /home/me/node2

The configurations are, /home/me/node1/bitcoin.conf:

Code:

rpcuser=node1
rpcpassword=ewiorweiprowi
port=2111
rpcport=3111
connect=127.0.0.1:2112
testnet=1
irc=0

and /home/me/node2/bitcoin.conf:

Code:

rpcuser=node2
rpcpassword=ewiorweiprowi
port=2112
rpcport=3112
connect=127.0.0.1:2111
testnet=1
irc=0

You'll need one to have the testnet blockchain first. So start one without the connect and irc=0 config options first... as it won't mine until it has one peer and has reached the last checkpoint (block 500 for testnet)

start  bitcoin with  bitcoind -datadir=/home/me/node1   and bitcoind -datadir=/home/me/node2

Then just point a GBT miner (like BFGminer) to 127.0.0.1:3111 user:node1 password:ewiorweiprowi  or start a stratum proxy pointed to the same place and you'll be mining.

Not only that, Bitcoin testnet is a public testing network (though the above puts you on an isolated private fork, because you're using connect and you're on a non-standard port. But to be doubly sure, you may want to explicitly firewall off inbound to 3111/3112 if thats not already blocked)— I'd strongly recommend vendors test on the public testnet. Testing on a public network (but not _the_ public network) would create a slightly more realistic test (long pools from remotely created blocks) and also increase your customer's confidence that your products are real.

If you run public testnet you don't need to run two nodes, and don't need to connect= them, one node is adequate as you'll get remote peers.

e.g. the config would be, /home/me/node1/bitcoin.conf:

Code:

rpcuser=node1
rpcpassword=ewiorweiprowi
port=2111
rpcport=3111
testnet=1

If any of the ASIC product manufacturers needs help with a testing setup please feel free to drop me a line, and I'd be glad to help you get one setup. Likewise, if any ASIC purchasers with more than a couple units needs help setting up solo mining or p2pool once the products ship, I'll be glad to help out.

[MeSarah]

People are asking for refunds from Tom because they see an inferior product compared to the competition. With Tom's ASIC offering you find a product that has a higher than average fire hazard and a product that has to be redesigned to meet stated hashing specs without burning up ASIC chips.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6r2uvnRjQQ

[creativex]

At least Tom's product HAS an ASIC chip. BFL's still doesn't two months after they were supposed to ship.

[loshia]

The chances that all four companies currently nearing the end of their product development cycles are scamming is effectively zero. ASICs are coming to bitcoin mining the only question is how soon and how efficient. Some early adopters of ASIC mining hardware will surely be rewarded with a very low ROI. For instance if I had my 2xbASIC01 units that cost a total of $2168 right this very minute they'd mine enough btc to pay for themselves in EIGHT DAYS...including power cost.

+1
Refunds are going just because of that if they are not the first ones ROI can be years though...
I have my favorite ASIC vendor and i am aware of the fact that my ASIC will not be one of the first ones. Unless he becomes first which will be good surprise for me. But that is me. No one is willing to have ROI in years eventually. And no one cares about power or actual hash rate, the only thing that maters for most is to be the first ones mining with it

[cedivad]

At least Tom's product HAS an ASIC chip.

How do you know that?

As of now my money would be on Avalon.

[squeept]

At least Tom's product HAS an ASIC chip.

This assumption is based on an ambiguous statement, and an assumption that the supposed "working prototype" is using the chip they're going to have in the actual device. When asked directly in concrete terms, the question is always ignored.

I don't read all of the bASIC threads/news/updates/forums, so if I've missed something, please gently inform me.

[abeaulieu]

At least Tom's product HAS an ASIC chip. BFL's still doesn't two months after they were supposed to ship.

lawl. The only pictures of "ASICs" I have seen, working or otherwise, are from BFL. Please point us to where Tom shows an ASIC...

[creativex]

At least Tom's product HAS an ASIC chip. BFL's still doesn't two months after they were supposed to ship.

lawl. The only pictures of "ASICs" I have seen, working or otherwise, are from BFL. Please point us to where Tom shows an ASIC...

Yeah I saw those pics. Not sure what we were seeing as they themselves acknowledge they do not have working chips. I can open up an old VCR and snap off a pic if you want a picture of a PC board. What good is a pic of a non-functional board?

[creativex]

At least Tom's product HAS an ASIC chip.

How do you know that?

As of now my money would be on Avalon.

Because he said so.

Mine too, read above where I said as much. I'm just not thrilled with some of their design choices. Besides they're not yet under the shipping deadline microscope.

[Bogart]

At least Tom's product HAS an ASIC chip.

This assumption is based on an ambiguous statement, and an assumption that the supposed "working prototype" is using the chip they're going to have in the actual device. When asked directly in concrete terms, the question is always ignored.

I don't read all of the bASIC threads/news/updates/forums, so if I've missed something, please gently inform me.

I'm guessing they don't actually have the final production chips in-hand.  If they did, surely they would be telling everyone, no?

I understand they had a working prototype based on 2 chips that hashed at 14Ghps each.  Then at some point the prototype quit working.  They imply that it died of overheating.

Source: https://www.btcfpga.com/forum/index.php?topic=104.msg818#msg818

[creativex]

Why? Why should they be telling everyone? 1st batch pre-orders are closed and 2nd batch pre-orders are open. I see no reason to tip off the competition. Just put products in boxes and ship them. The market will then decide who gets future orders.

Their current specs require only 4.5Gh/s/chip so I think knowing the chips burn up at over 3x that is a pro, not a con. 14Gh/s * 16 = 224Gh/s and the bASIC01 spec is only 72. Touting a chip failure at 14Gh/s as though it's a bad thing is a mistake IMO.

[abeaulieu]

insert additional bASIC fanboy comment here

</ trolling>

[creativex]

A fanboy is defined by someone that favors the most cost effective, biggest bang for the buck product?

That'd be me then. I also like Honda/Acura btw.

$14.847/Gh makes the competition look silly overpriced.

[SgtSpike]

No one will recognize that they are mining until...
- An unsatisfied employee squawks
- A visitor happens to notice
- Suspicious activity is recognized at a pool or particular IP address
- Something else happens (other unknown risk of being discovered)

Now couple that risk with the fact that they wouldn't be able to mine the whole 3500 BTC.  They might be able to mine a few hundred BTC and not be noticed for at least a little while. But what is a few hundred BTC a day?  $3,800?  Over a year, they make less than $1.5M?  Sure, not pennies, but far less than what they have generated in sales thus far, and they're looking at the long-term plan too.  You think they're going to risk tens of millions in future sales (if Bitcoin continues to be successful) for a measly $1.4M in a year?  I just don't see it as a viable business plan, much less an attractive alternative compared to maintaining a solid reputation and continuing sales.

Anonymous mining is not a problem. As for the rest you're right (An unsatisfied employee squawks, A visitor happens to notice). If the sale is more profitable than mining , what is the point to buy ASIC .  If they will have more profit from sale than from mining its means that mining is unprofitable! If people will buy  ASIC for $ 10 million they count on fast ROI (10million $), If a company sold $ 10 million worth ASIC, earns ~ $ 5 million. Who earns more, the people or ASIC company? If a company have already ASIC technology and access to very low-cost chips (all for free, with money customers), have reached  goal and no longer need customers in the future. They already have or will have from mining the funds for the second-generation ASIC and will earn more from mining. It is not possible to make more money by selling money-producing machine (assuming that these machines have a fast and reliable ROI) than using these machines . Someone always has to lose to another may gain, "Money Does not Come from Nothing" !!!

They can do two things at once, sell and mining (additional profit). Is it just a rumor that the BFL / Inaba has big FPGA mine ?

No, I agree with you - more money cannot be made than can be made in mining.  But, BFL is looking at the long term.  They hope Bitcoin is successful.  If the Bitcoin price raises from $13 to $26, they can sell twice as many ASICs.  If it goes to $1000, they can sell hundreds of millions of dollars worth.  Now, you might say that if they mine, they would also see the same increases in profit based on price, which is true, but the price isn't going to go up if one entity controls a large amount of hashpower either - no one would trust the large entity to not acquire 51% and stage an attack.

So then, if they mine, they could not feasibly acquire more than, say, 10% of the daily prize without everyone losing confidence in Bitcoin and the price plummeting to nothing.  If they sell the miners, their miners could make up 80% of the network.  So they would make more money by selling the miners, because they could acquire (indirectly through the sale of miners), say, 80% of the network profit instead of 10%.

Also, as Bitcoin matures and stabilizes, miners will be willing to outlay capital for longer and longer ROI periods.  So the current expected (based on preorders) 4 month ROI will stretch to 6 months, 8 months, a year, longer... that ROI stretching will stretch sales as well.

It is obvious that BFL is not interested in big risks, and there are many risks and unknowns with mining Bitcoins.  How would their investors feel if they destroyed their reputation for a mining spree that killed confidence in Bitcoin, and now they have worthless equipment to mine a worthless currency without any ability to pay back their investors?  This sort of risk is not in the plan - it just isn't reasonable for a company backed by venture capital to take such a risk.

BFL does NOT have an FPGA farm.  Inaba does, but it is separate from his employment, and he profits from it, not BFL.  Most of the miners he has in his 500GH/s are other people's miners that he stages on their behalf for a monthly fee.

[Frequency]

The chances that all four companies currently nearing the end of their product development cycles are scamming is effectively zero. ASICs are coming to bitcoin mining the only question is how soon and how efficient. Some early adopters of ASIC mining hardware will surely be rewarded with a very low ROI. For instance if I had my 2xbASIC01 units that cost a total of $2168 right this very minute they'd mine enough btc to pay for themselves in EIGHT DAYS...including power cost.

Yeah..but u must keep in mind that it is only words that they all four are "nearing their development cycles"..or can u provide real evidence? (bfl chips were dummies said by Josh him self so that makes all pics dummies) the rest is all just nice words to most objective people..keep in mind also the niche market they are in..  no big million$companie is backing them they have todo al there R&D there selfs. Asic will come but when...nobody nows yet..(hopefully before next halvingday)

I am not against the whole ASIC projects but in the normal world NOBODY would take there kind of marketing strategie..NOBODY..

[creativex]

I'm with you as far as BFL/Josh/Inaba's word goes. I wouldn't invest a thin dime based on what he or anyone else at BFL says(if there is anyone else at BFL) w/o solid evidence at this point...but that's just my opinion and my dime. I do however believe in ngzhang, Cablepair, and friedcat. If Tom wanted to really screw folks that pre-ordered his products he'd not have announced a two month delay that has understandably rattled many(myself included), he'd have announced a 2 week delay x4.

The when of ASIC mining gear is admittedly still up in the air, but the second reputable company's shipping deadline is approaching so the clock is ticking.

[Morblias]

I'm with you as far as BFL/Josh/Inaba's word goes. I wouldn't invest a thin dime based on what he or anyone else at BFL says(if there is anyone else at BFL) w/o solid evidence at this point...but that's just my opinion and my dime. I do however believe in ngzhang, Cablepair, and friedcat. If Tom wanted to really screw folks that pre-ordered his products he'd not have announced a two month delay that has understandably rattled many(myself included), he'd have announced a 2 week delay x4.

The when of ASIC mining gear is admittedly still up in the air, but the second reputable company's shipping deadline is approaching so the clock is ticking.

100% agreed. While it sucks the bASIC got delayed, I would much rather have it handled the way Tom did. Honestly I wouldn't have minded BFL's delays as much if in October they just said 'sorry, there is a delay. We will ship mid December' instead of October, I promise. End of October. Sorry delayed til first week Novemeber. Sorry delayed again mid November. End of November, I promise. Little delay again first week December, I promise. Ok ok this time I pinky swear promise, mid December.

[creativex]

Ja. That guy recently suggested BFL could still ship by the end of the year. When the COO of a company says that it carries weight. When the COO of a company says that and it's 99.9% likely to turn out to be more magic fairy dust it just adds to the credibility gap. I rather buy from the company that levels with me, particularly when the news sucks. 

[squeept]

While looking for concrete evidence on the bASIC forum, I just saw this gem from yesterday, which is spoken as a mini-announcement on progress:

"I received a couple of packets of information from the design team, including rudimentary diagrams and datasheets on stuff like heat sinks and BGA packages.
All kinds of stuff which I am sifting through as we speak - we will have some of the most requested information live as soon as possible."

Straight from the horse's mouth: they have NOTHING done.