Community Miner Design Discussion

[ZedZedNova]

... a solution to "no access to chips, no access to specifications and parts".

I like how that sounds.

Well it's something that's just come up in the last few days

Blockchain karma. This is the blockchain's way of compensating you for the grief last week with your transactions during the big spike...

- zed

[RadekG]

I'm not sure how much I can talk about, and nothing's official yet, but I may have been given a solution to "no access to chips, no access to specifications and parts".

What happened to KnC Solar's, Spodoolies RockerBox, Cointerra, BFL and other shutted down companies chips? What about SFARDS? Their know how is really good start point for starting new chips. I personally belive that even 55nm chips heavily undervolted (0.3V) can run extremely efficient with modified design. Balanced speed and power draw with full custom design (no FPGA cells) may lead to really good efficiency with low manufacturing costs.

Please reveal us more information about your solution , I think everyone here is holding breath and refreshing this page more often than BTC price page

Radek
 

[leowonderful]

When sidehack says stuff like this, you know it's good. I used to regularly track this thread, but as it became the same stuff every week, I stopped. Looks like I'll be keeping up with this thread, and if any more information comes up, or even pricing (if ever)  I'll be the first one to hop on I would much rather support a community miner than one made by a bigger company. Seeing people do this is great!

[aliashraf]

When sidehack says stuff like this, you know it's good.

thumbs up  

[sidehack]

What happened to KnC Solar's, Spodoolies RockerBox, Cointerra, BFL and other shutted down companies chips? What about SFARDS?

Everything you just named is a high-power single-die BGA (three strikes you're out), and most of those companies shutted down because they were evil and crappy.

Their know how is really good start point for starting new chips. 

Another good start point is several millions of dollars.


The best advice I can give anyone listening to anything I say is, don't trust anything to actually work out unless it's something that doesn't rely on anyone else but me. Even then, I don't always come through, but I've come to assume that anything I look foward to, which relies on someone else doing his job in a timely manner, will probably fail miserably. I'm working to get away from having to take in anchor customers to help pay for initial batches of new projects because, for every three anchors, one (I'll be honest, it's usually CrazyGuy) will pay up front and on time, one will pay a month late and one will completely flake out. This is a self-perpetuating cycle of crappiness. Point is, anyways, since the current "thing" is me being a tagalong in someone else's enterprise, I can really hope everything works out but there are way too many variables which are other people far away. So, only basic "this might happen" for now, and more actual real news later. Couple weeks, maybe a month. It's exciting, and I sincerely hope what I've been asked to help with goes through with their plans because their plans are totally good and not crappy for everyone ever... but we'll see.

If I do get to build something, it probably won't exactly fit the "open community miner" model completely, in that the software probably won't be completely generic and repurposable and such. But it should still be good, and it will definitely be open-sourced so folks can mess with it, and the hardware had darn well better be solid and affordable.

[toptek]

What happened to KnC Solar's, Spodoolies RockerBox, Cointerra, BFL and other shutted down companies chips? What about SFARDS?

Everything you just named is a high-power single-die BGA (three strikes you're out), and most of those companies shutted down because they were evil and crappy.

Their know how is really good start point for starting new chips.  

Another good start point is several millions of dollars.


The best advice I can give anyone listening to anything I say is, don't trust anything to actually work out unless it's something that doesn't rely on anyone else but me. Even then, I don't always come through, but I've come to assume that anything I look foward to, which relies on someone else doing his job in a timely manner, will probably fail miserably. I'm working to get away from having to take in anchor customers to help pay for initial batches of new projects because, for every three anchors, one (I'll be honest, it's usually CrazyGuy) will pay up front and on time, one will pay a month late and one will completely flake out. This is a self-perpetuating cycle of crappiness. Point is, anyways, since the current "thing" is me being a tagalong in someone else's enterprise, I can really hope everything works out but there are way too many variables which are other people far away. So, only basic "this might happen" for now, and more actual real news later. Couple weeks, maybe a month. It's exciting, and I sincerely hope what I've been asked to help with goes through with their plans because their plans are totally good and not crappy for everyone ever... but we'll see.

If I do get to build something, it probably won't exactly fit the "open community miner" model completely, in that the software probably won't be completely generic and repurposable and such. But it should still be good, and it will definitely be open-sourced so folks can mess with it, and the hardware had darn well better be solid and affordable.

I hope until then i guess I'll keep running my Alchemist 5 boards trying to get one looked at, I  donated one, dropped one and fuck it up it up beyond repair by beyond it needs a new PCB replaced . and my lowie s5 and Avalon 4.1 and s3 from time to time i let the s3 run solo on ckpools solo and eth mine and keep GPU mining  i'm buying two of the new AMD cards out on the first of July that i can count on. I'm looking to buy two S7 there in what i call a fair price range now I refuse to buy the S9 it's a mortal thing with me, i could have bought a S7 when it was as high but didn't and don't give a rats ass about the halving . i honestly believe it won't be bad just 12 + coins less and if it is SO what, it won't stop me .

Ive found out in life you can't really trust any one when it comes to money that includes family.

[sidehack]

I did some math last week which put a 620mV/550MHz S7 (3.7TH/800W) bought for $300 at pretty much the same breakeven time as one S9, and you could buy seven of them for the same money.

I'm definitely going to try and find time in the near future to get back around to TypeZero prelim design work, so on the off-chance that I do get access to new chips I'll already have a good framework in place.

[chiguireitor]

...

Another good start point is several millions of dollars.

...

-removed for privacy-

[leowonderful]

...

Another good start point is several millions of dollars.

...

You heard it guys! buy boatloads of 1200w PSU boards from the guy to fund the Community Miner.... Like a gazillion of them. (Have 3 of them powering 6 S5 and they chug along rather nicely, pretty solid PSU and board).

Now speaking seriously, unless we get an angel investor and someone with the know-how of ASIC development on board, dreaming about a community ASIC is just that, a dream.

You've noticed, haven't you? All the community miners on this forum that have ever been made (for the most part, 99% sure correct me if I'm wrong) have been made from existing ASICs. We could get some guy that knows ASICs, all right, we just don't have the funding as of now for any projects, and even if they successfully made the ASIC, I doubt it would be cheap. They'd have to have a pretty high price to even roi themselves.

[irritant]

where is friedcat when you need him?

[sidehack]

Did we ever get an answer to that question? I know the going theories that he was dead in a hole, or hiding out on a private island.

[aliashraf]

...

Another good start point is several millions of dollars.

...

You heard it guys! buy boatloads of 1200w PSU boards from the guy to fund the Community Miner.... Like a gazillion of them. (Have 3 of them powering 6 S5 and they chug along rather nicely, pretty solid PSU and board).

Now speaking seriously, unless we get an angel investor and someone with the know-how of ASIC development on board, dreaming about a community ASIC is just that, a dream.

You've noticed, haven't you? All the community miners on this forum that have ever been made (for the most part, 99% sure correct me if I'm wrong) have been made from existing ASICs. We could get some guy that knows ASICs, all right, we just don't have the funding as of now for any projects, and even if they successfully made the ASIC, I doubt it would be cheap. They'd have to have a pretty high price to even roi themselves.

As far as this 'money problem' matters, I have a solution but before putting it forward, there is one thing I have to mention:

A problem is not a solid, hard entity stood by itself, A problem is  a perception of a situation made by us and labeled "A Problem".

Now being more (just a little more) specific:
In sidehack's community miner project case, the situation is not just a regenerated copy of the old story about poor genius  people with promising ideas, seeking an angel. more complicated, far more complicated, ...

First: we have Bitcoin with a total of 10 billion dollars of market-cap which is absolutely in danger because it is inherently designed to be a peer to peer decentralized network of computers with (almost) a normal distribution of hashing power. The ASIC attack to Blockchain protocol in last few years has put it in danger, and remember we are talking about 10 billion dollars worth of assets in danger.

Second: One should notice that it is not just about assets and money, it is about a dream and an enthusiastic community of believers. Right or wrong there are thousands and millions of people who care about the technology behind Bitcoin (like you and me), let's speak frankly about myself: I think if there exists a small window to freedom for humanity in contemporary history, it is definitively opened by Blockchain, and I'm not alone.

Third: Blockchain is about connecting people. money transfer transactions is just  sample (an important one though), it can be and is used for more complicated problems, cooperation being one of them.

And finally my solution: I think it is absolutely possible to raise money for a community miner project supervised by sidehack following this procedure:

1- We can implement a cooperative DAO like protocol on top of Blockchain in few weeks, not necessarily a full automatic , autonomous, trust-less, ...
Utopia like what Ethereum people were trying to implement and failed. At least for the start, there should be no reluctance of 'mixing' things up, using some human specific and non-mathematical objects like, hope, trust, help, swearing to god, good faith, etc.

2- We can establish first sample of such a semi-autonomous organization using our protocol with , say, 100-200 crazy people like me (and you?) , I call it NOAH project (thunder is coming )


3- at first, NOAH  recruits sidehack as its CTO or whatever, he redefines the project in a more economic way with more practical business targets, NOAH finances the project.

4- meanwhile, NOAH studies and selects regions and countries (like mine ) with good opportunities both in terms of electricity costs and availability of dedicated people for cooperation and investment, forms joint ventures with them, technically and financially supports them to use refurbished and retired miners (being reasonably cheap thus having good ROI if cheap electricity is available too)

5- NOAH waits and prays for its first fully custom designed community miner to blow the 800 lbs gorilla.

[sidehack]

I'm sorry, but you lost me. Somewhere between "Blockchain is about connecting people. money transfer transactions is just  sample" and "We can implement a cooperative DAO like protocol on top of Blockchain". I always thought the Bitcoin blockchain was about money transfer transactions alone, and trying to shoehorn something else on top of it (like 21's microtransaction-based services stuff they were touting last year) is a waste of time, space and energy. Or are you suggesting to start over with a new blockchain-based thing that ends up in some sort of competition with Bitcoin?

[aliashraf]

I'm sorry, but you lost me. Somewhere between "Blockchain is about connecting people. money transfer transactions is just  sample" and "We can implement a cooperative DAO like protocol on top of Blockchain". I always thought the Bitcoin blockchain was about money transfer transactions alone, and trying to shoehorn something else on top of it (like 21's microtransaction-based services stuff they were touting last year) is a waste of time, space and energy. Or are you suggesting to start over with a new blockchain-based thing that ends up in some sort of competition with Bitcoin?

glad to have your attention

I mean the real Bitcoin Blockchain and right now we have colored coins protocol built on top of Bitcoin and handles things other than money transfer and it happens to be my most relevant sample of the approach needed to establish an 'institute' I am thinking to name it as SADO (Semi-Autonumous Distributed Organisation) and I'm serious. Let's introduce SADO:

1- It is not DAO. It does not have any interest in Turing complete machines being in charge of everything.

2- It is not an idealistic trust-less 'mathematical provable' alternative of the way human beings cooperate and decide.

3- It is about promises people make based on their reputation and respect.

not an appropriate topic for my proposal and I'm not ready (theoretically) for this job at the moment but the main point is obvious and clear: Ethereum guys made an attempt to achieve something and failed, two things is to be fixed: 1- The target 2- The approach.

For the target: We do not need to play DAO game at all, in real life a hypothetical game mathematically defined to overcome chaotic nature of human society is mostly a useless teenager hobby more than any thing else (hello Vitalik). We should just try to make it more fair and transparent it is the way adults have to deal with the limitations and make a difference. Organisations and companies can not  be redefined so radical to eliminate people and their weaknesses and chaotic nature and it was pointless if it was even possible, it is not a use case at all!

For the approach: Forget about Turing complete autonomous pieces of code, keep it practical, some logical operators plus some data acquisition protocols suffices to manage almost 99% of the real world smart contracts (being redefined and interpreted in a humble way as semi-smart contracts now)

SADO is going to be a semi-smart contract being developed on top of the Bitcoin Blockchain to form a semi-autonomus distributed otganisation composed of people who try to use and enhance their existing level of trust in each other (their social capital) in a more disciplined and transparent way.

Colored Coins are the key to the details.

[sidehack]

Okay, let me be more explicit. I am fundamentally opposed to overlaying projects on top of the Bitcoin blockchain that have nothing to do with the transfer of currency from one entity to another in exchange for goods or services. I would not desire to be an officer in an organization, nor would I desire to support an organization, seeking to usurp Bitcoin resources for other purposes. I don't know what DAO is and I don't care about smart contracts or whatever Ethereum is doing and this is literally the first time I've ever seen the phrase "colored coins protocol".

But you're welcome to provide details about just what the heck you're talking about, if you want to try and convince me otherwise.

[gt_addict]

Can we not donate (cash) via www.patreon.com to fund the miner? Each individual's donation would be seen as a prepayment for a miner which would be deducted from the sale price with a fixed portion (a sum to be decided) going to you sidehack for your time and effort to make the miners.

[aliashraf]

Okay, let me be more explicit. I am fundamentally opposed to overlaying projects on top of the Bitcoin blockchain that have nothing to do with the transfer of currency from one entity to another in exchange for goods or services. I would not desire to be an officer in an organization, nor would I desire to support an organization, seeking to usurp Bitcoin resources for other purposes. I don't know what DAO is and I don't care about smart contracts or whatever Ethereum is doing and this is literally the first time I've ever seen the phrase "colored coins protocol".

But you're welcome to provide details about just what the heck you're talking about, if you want to try and convince me otherwise.

Well, Bitcoin and Blockchain are far more than just a money transfer and publishing technology, you may or may not like it but people are trying to expand the use case, to generalize it and there is no choice other than these two:

1- you can initiate a new chain, modified and generalized probably for smart contracts. In this scenario you have the possibility to compete with the Bitcoin Blockchain and simulate its service simply because cryptocurrency is a sub-concept an instance of the more general concept of a social contract.

It is the way Ethereum people have decided to choose and I hate this for many reasons but first of all because I see it a kind of betrayal, honestly speaking, but I have more reasons, very strong reasons and this days with DAO failure, I have a strong evidence supporting my opposition to this approach.

2- You can make it simply as a high level protocol stacked on the existing Blockchain.

Analogically speaking, TCP/IP is one of the greatest inventions ever but you needed http and HTML to build WWW.

And I think there is no #3 way, say , doing nothing at all.

The term "Colored Coins" loosely describes a class of methods for representing and managing real world assets on top of the Bitcoin Blockchain

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Colored_Coins
I think 'a class of methods' is a protocol anyway.

And about you being an outlaw freelancer , no objections, there exist thousand ways to cooperate.

Our hypothetical organization will negotiate and resolves issues, no worry  

[aliashraf]

Can we not donate (cash) via www.patreon.com to fund the miner? Each individual's donation would be seen as a prepayment for a miner which would be deducted from the sale price with a fixed portion (a sum to be decided) going to you sidehack for your time and effort to make the miners.

No we can't. I mean we can but donation will not suffice and will not utilize and lead and motivate. As a donor you are not part of the movement you are just a fan, a supporter. I  have more incentives and I am more ambitious than a donor, aren't you?

[sidehack]

My record so far has been refusing to take in money for a product which does not exist. If someone wants to help fund development, with the full knowledge and understand that the product may never materialize and your money could be completely wasted, that's a bit different (and also something I've avoided thus far). But I have never, and likely will never, take in money pre-selling a product which I have not designed and successfully prototyped. If I've ever taken in money it's either been as a loan with repayment terms, or to buy materials to manufacture a batch of something already designed and tested and the investment was repaid in units of that thing once manufactured, according to the original terms of the sale.

And yes I understand that makes it hard for a broke guy to get anything done, but it also protects a customer base remarkably willing to put itself at risk of getting screwed by speculators from being screwed by me, accidentally or otherwise.

Also, the idea of using a blockchain for other things than the transfer of currency is not fundamentally bad. But I think leveraging an existing blockchain already filled to capacity with legitimate transactions, and designed specifically for processing legitimate transactions, for something other than processing legitimate transactions, is foolish. Repackaging something inherently not a bitcoin transfer to look like a bitcoin transfer so you can use the bitcoin blockchain for it seems kinda dumb. If you want to do something that isn't transferring bitcoins from one address to another, get your own blockchain.

[aliashraf]

My record so far has been refusing to take in money for a product which does not exist. If someone wants to help fund development, with the full knowledge and understand that the product may never materialize and your money could be completely wasted, that's a bit different (and also something I've avoided thus far). But I have never, and likely will never, take in money pre-selling a product which I have not designed and successfully prototyped. If I've ever taken in money it's either been as a loan with repayment terms, or to buy materials to manufacture a batch of something already designed and tested and the investment was repaid in units of that thing once manufactured, according to the original terms of the sale.

And yes I understand that makes it hard for a broke guy to get anything done, but it also protects a customer base remarkably willing to put itself at risk of getting screwed by speculators from being screwed by me, accidentally or otherwise.

I appreciate your concern about how to take money or not but look at you, years of honestly supporting the community miners and with a great potential to solve a very canonical point of crisis, preventing a dramatic failure of one of the most important innovations and most promising technologies to make people's life better, far better I mean ... look at you dude you have done your part now people should contribute in a disciplined fair and transparent way but they have to.

There is just ONE way: institution!
And there is just one institute appropriate and capable of taking the responsibility in this community in this very moment: a Semi-Autonomus Distributed Organisation. To be or not to be? It is the question!

Also, the idea of using a blockchain for other things than the transfer of currency is not fundamentally bad. But I think leveraging an existing blockchain already filled to capacity with legitimate transactions, and designed specifically for processing legitimate transactions, for something other than processing legitimate transactions, is foolish. Repackaging something inherently not a bitcoin transfer to look like a bitcoin transfer so you can use the bitcoin blockchain for it seems kinda dumb. If you want to do something that isn't transferring bitcoins from one address to another, get your own blockchain.

You are simply wrong

First of all Blockchain being exhausted is something to be fixed with or without stacking more use cases and debate about block size increase and/or Segwit and side chains will be settled in some compromise soon, it has to be.

Secondly, I see the Blockchain both as a technology and an installed base, too large to neglect and being betrayed.

Finally, If one may decide to make a hard fork and initiate a new chain, she should be able and have to publish a new currency as I mentioned earlier, a currency is a sub-category , an instance of a general class of concepts: contracts. It is not my way of doing things, I love fixing and improving rather than throwing things away and denying other people's work, I prefer to improve. And I love bitcoiners never, ever considering betrayal