[Archive] BFL trolling museum

[imsaguy]

Posted in another thread.

Timeline will be available as soon as we start taking preorders. And I must say that it will come out at least 3 months earlier
than what most people have estimated. Hope that helps.


Regards,
BF Labs Inc.

Which thread?  A quote with no real attribution means nothing.

[1714004417]

1714004417

[rjk]

Posted in another thread.

Timeline will be available as soon as we start taking preorders. And I must say that it will come out at least 3 months earlier
than what most people have estimated. Hope that helps.


Regards,
BF Labs Inc.

Which thread?  A quote with no real attribution means nothing.

They started trolling the Enterpoint thread.

[imsaguy]

Posted in another thread.

Timeline will be available as soon as we start taking preorders. And I must say that it will come out at least 3 months earlier
than what most people have estimated. Hope that helps.


Regards,
BF Labs Inc.

Which thread?  A quote with no real attribution means nothing.

They started trolling the Enterpoint thread.

Link or it didn't happen.

[ice_chill]

Makes you wonder why they even bother watching Enterpoint thread ? feel a strong competitor ?

[rjk]

Link or it didn't happen.

I'm not your personal slave.

[MXRider]

Stick this up to your lazy ass

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=78239.msg971874#msg971874

[gyverlb]

As I posted else where, the trade in program has not been announced. What if it is a case of send back your singles, and you are now in the queue, along with anyone one else who has purchased. This means that you are back in the position of Wang x months for the new hardware without any old / current hardware mining.

This means that people who have singles already could spend months more waiting. I very much doubt that bfl would put previous purchasers In front of new money into the company.

Phil

And they could send these singles coming back to people still waiting for them today, total win for BFL. The question is : did they plan this from the beginning ?

Is this a joke? ASICs exists for what, 30? 40? years. Of course if everyone is using only GPU and FPGA, someone WILL make an ASIC. It doesn't take a genius to guess that. "Planning that"? Welcome in the computing world, it's 50+ years old, making a specific hardware wich is faster than generic things like fpga or gpu is nothing new lol

Cool down. You didn't understand me : what I'm wondering if they based their business model on their ability to sell the same unit to several customers.

[imsaguy]

Stick this up to your lazy ass

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=78239.msg971874#msg971874

You took the time to quote, but stripped the url.  Don't be calling me lazy when you don't know how to properly cite your sources.

[MXRider]

Stick this up to your lazy ass

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=78239.msg971874#msg971874

You took the time to quote, but stripped the url.  Don't be calling me lazy when you don't know how to properly cite your sources.

You were told it's from Enterpoint thread and still you were asking for a link --> LAZY!!!! I stripped all the trollfaces and other extra stuff and just posted the important part.

[seriouscoin]

Stick this up to your lazy ass

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=78239.msg971874#msg971874

You took the time to quote, but stripped the url.  Don't be calling me lazy when you don't know how to properly cite your sources.

Suck his dick if you want him to do something for you.

Spoiled little bitch

[copumpkin]

Stick this up to your lazy ass

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=78239.msg971874#msg971874

You took the time to quote, but stripped the url.  Don't be calling me lazy when you don't know how to properly cite your sources.

Suck his dick if you want him to do something for you.

Spoiled little bitch

Man, everyone is so pleasant on these forums. This place is bustling with professionalism, and I can see great business ventures emerging out of all the tight relationships forged on these very pages.

[crazyates]

BACK ON TOPIC...

So 3 months less than what "most people have estimated"... I've seen estimates for 12 months from now, or that we won't see them till 2013 (6 months from now). Even going with the later one, that puts their product to be released in Sept, 3 months from now.

[punningclan]

More and faster BFL, please:

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9228180/U.S._regains_supercomputing_crown_bests_China_Japan
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303822204577470532859210296.html

[DiabloD3]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=88363

For those wondering where the posts on the Enterpoint thread went.

[SgtSpike]

Oh boy, I'm just beginning to truly realize what a mess an algorithm change will be...

Even assuming a best case scenario - people don't have TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS in ASICs to pay off yet - bitstreams and miners need to be changed and it will take MONTHS, it's going to be slow, the new fork (with the better algorithm) will generate mostly worthless coins for the moment (since very few are involved in it) so people will insist on staying on the old fork, with the vulnerability, arguments will arise not to mention the severe confidence hit Bitcoin will take. A lot of people will dump their coins when they hear Bitcoin is vulnerable to the very core and their money's security depends on using a fork that very few miners support. Not to mention that every merchant and service provider using Bitcoin will have to change their entire infrastructure... Holy shit, it's a nightmare. And that's the BEST case scenario...

The WORST case scenario is that ASICs have a good chunk of the hashing power. In that case that entire chunk is there to stay. Since ASICs can't be updated and the miners have lots of money invested in them, they would lose all of their investments if they would support the new fork. So they won't support it. Therefore the new fork will be reserved to a few percent of the hashing power and the old fork will carry on with the vulnerability. So the change would come at a dead slow pace and it could be enough to make Bitcoin dead in the water.

Either way, a hashing algorithm change is extremely likely to be disastrous for Bitcoin. The entire infrastructure would need updating, specialized hardware would need to be thrown out rendering tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars lost. The dead slow updating and people insisting on keeping a vulnerable fork could be the final nail in the coffin.

Now that I managed to scare myself shitless regarding the future, can somebody tell me I'm wrong and how can all this be easily mitigated?

Maybe starting the updating procedure a year or so in advance, before any vulnerability is discovered, giving time to everyone to update slowly and be prepared. The new fork could start as a test net of sorts and be reset when it's decided to start the fork proper.

Perhaps start with the obvious:  We don't need an algorithm change.

[DiabloD3]

Oh boy, I'm just beginning to truly realize what a mess an algorithm change will be...

Even assuming a best case scenario - people don't have TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS in ASICs to pay off yet - bitstreams and miners need to be changed and it will take MONTHS, it's going to be slow, the new fork (with the better algorithm) will generate mostly worthless coins for the moment (since very few are involved in it) so people will insist on staying on the old fork, with the vulnerability, arguments will arise not to mention the severe confidence hit Bitcoin will take. A lot of people will dump their coins when they hear Bitcoin is vulnerable to the very core and their money's security depends on using a fork that very few miners support. Not to mention that every merchant and service provider using Bitcoin will have to change their entire infrastructure... Holy shit, it's a nightmare. And that's the BEST case scenario...

The WORST case scenario is that ASICs have a good chunk of the hashing power. In that case that entire chunk is there to stay. Since ASICs can't be updated and the miners have lots of money invested in them, they would lose all of their investments if they would support the new fork. So they won't support it. Therefore the new fork will be reserved to a few percent of the hashing power and the old fork will carry on with the vulnerability. So the change would come at a dead slow pace and it could be enough to make Bitcoin dead in the water.

Either way, a hashing algorithm change is extremely likely to be disastrous for Bitcoin. The entire infrastructure would need updating, specialized hardware would need to be thrown out rendering tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars lost. The dead slow updating and people insisting on keeping a vulnerable fork could be the final nail in the coffin.

Now that I managed to scare myself shitless regarding the future, can somebody tell me I'm wrong and how can all this be easily mitigated?

Maybe starting the updating procedure a year or so in advance, before any vulnerability is discovered, giving time to everyone to update slowly and be prepared. The new fork could start as a test net of sorts and be reset when it's decided to start the fork proper.

Perhaps start with the obvious:  We don't need an algorithm change.

We don't need one YET. But such an eventuality is being planned for.

[ice_chill]

From what I understand, the difficulty adjusts based on network speed, and the whole point of difficulty is to stop a single node from having too much power over the network ?

Question: Will the ASIC still work once all coins have been generated ?

[SgtSpike]

Oh boy, I'm just beginning to truly realize what a mess an algorithm change will be...

Even assuming a best case scenario - people don't have TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS in ASICs to pay off yet - bitstreams and miners need to be changed and it will take MONTHS, it's going to be slow, the new fork (with the better algorithm) will generate mostly worthless coins for the moment (since very few are involved in it) so people will insist on staying on the old fork, with the vulnerability, arguments will arise not to mention the severe confidence hit Bitcoin will take. A lot of people will dump their coins when they hear Bitcoin is vulnerable to the very core and their money's security depends on using a fork that very few miners support. Not to mention that every merchant and service provider using Bitcoin will have to change their entire infrastructure... Holy shit, it's a nightmare. And that's the BEST case scenario...

The WORST case scenario is that ASICs have a good chunk of the hashing power. In that case that entire chunk is there to stay. Since ASICs can't be updated and the miners have lots of money invested in them, they would lose all of their investments if they would support the new fork. So they won't support it. Therefore the new fork will be reserved to a few percent of the hashing power and the old fork will carry on with the vulnerability. So the change would come at a dead slow pace and it could be enough to make Bitcoin dead in the water.

Either way, a hashing algorithm change is extremely likely to be disastrous for Bitcoin. The entire infrastructure would need updating, specialized hardware would need to be thrown out rendering tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars lost. The dead slow updating and people insisting on keeping a vulnerable fork could be the final nail in the coffin.

Now that I managed to scare myself shitless regarding the future, can somebody tell me I'm wrong and how can all this be easily mitigated?

Maybe starting the updating procedure a year or so in advance, before any vulnerability is discovered, giving time to everyone to update slowly and be prepared. The new fork could start as a test net of sorts and be reset when it's decided to start the fork proper.

Perhaps start with the obvious:  We don't need an algorithm change.

We don't need one YET. But such an eventuality is being planned for.

Well, ok, I can agree with that.  We'll eventually have to move from SHA256 to something else, maybe in 25, 50, 100 years.  And in that case, it should be a change that will be known well in advance (the bruteforcibility of SHA256 should always be easy to calculate).  If it is well known in advance, then manufacturers will have time to create new ASICs that pertain to the new algorithm, and, in all likelihood, difficulty wouldn't actually drop too catastrophically.

The only thing that would be truly catastrophic is if a flaw in SHA256 is suddenly revealed.

[imsaguy]

Question: Will the ASIC still work once all coins have been generated ?

Yes.

[SgtSpike]

Question: Will the ASIC still work once all coins have been generated ?

Yes.

And you won't be alive to see the day anyway, so why does it matter?