Well, the public would know if anyone was hashing with ASICs. And if the public knows that a single entity has that much power over Bitcoin mining, the public will drop Bitcoin like a rock. When the public drops Bitcoin like a rock, no one wants to buy Bitcoins. When no one wants to buy Bitcoins, Bitcoins become worthless. When Bitcoins become worthless, mining for Bitcoins also becomes worthless. When mining for Bitcoins becomes worthless, suddenly, those millions sunk into ASIC creation are a loss instead of an investment.
TL:DR; It'd be a horrible idea for any ASIC manufacturer to even attempt such a feat.
Thank you, this is a valid arguement. I suppose its a case of if mining with ASICs can be disguised or not.
The only way it can be disguised is by not garnishing much of the hashrate. Say, 10% or less. 10% of 3600 BTC/day is 360 BTC/day. 360/BTC day is 10,800 BTC/month. 10,800 BTC/month is $145k/month, or $1.7M/year.
BUT, when you take into account the costs of creating the ASICs (likely in the range of several million dollars), the cost of producing them, the cost of running/maintaining them, and the opportunity cost of NOT selling them, you're in the red by quite a lot, even after several years.
BFL has sold up to 150TH/s worth of preorders. Even at the worst price (for them) of selling them in the 1 TH/s form, that's still $4.5M worth of preorders.
Anyone who makes the argument that a company would risk bankruptcy, a ruined reputation, and fraud charges/jailtime over $1.7M a year (less expenses) instead of running a legitimate business grossing $4.5M a year is just not thinking things through.