Bitcoin Forum
October 23, 2017, 08:29:16 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  

Warning: Moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Watch out for Ponzi schemes. Do not invest more than you can afford to lose.

Pages: « 1 ... 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 [278] 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 ... 914 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining)  (Read 1042255 times)
physalis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 03:10:43 PM
 #5541

Pretty sure you've made a big mistake in daily BTC outcome of both 6T and 44T. Should be around 27 and 198 respectively.

Would you mind showing your work? I'd like to see where I went wrong, if I did-

Current net hash rate is around 800T, and there's 3600 BTC a day. 4T is 0.5% of the total hash rate, thus 3600 * 0.005 = 18. So 6T is 27.


There is way more than 3600 BTC a day, because we don't have a confirmation time of 10 minutes.
And that will continue for the foreseeable future, as long as we have an increasing difficulty.
All the mining calculators and calculations like your's don't factor that in, so they are always underestimating.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1508747356
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508747356

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508747356
Reply with quote  #2

1508747356
Report to moderator
1508747356
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508747356

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508747356
Reply with quote  #2

1508747356
Report to moderator
1508747356
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508747356

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508747356
Reply with quote  #2

1508747356
Report to moderator
Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile WWW
September 06, 2013, 03:16:30 PM
 #5542

Pretty sure you've made a big mistake in daily BTC outcome of both 6T and 44T. Should be around 27 and 198 respectively.

Would you mind showing your work? I'd like to see where I went wrong, if I did-

Current net hash rate is around 800T, and there's 3600 BTC a day. 4T is 0.5% of the total hash rate, thus 3600 * 0.005 = 18. So 6T is 27.


There is way more than 3600 BTC a day, because we don't have a confirmation time of 10 minutes.
And that will continue for the foreseeable future, as long as we have an increasing difficulty.
All the mining calculators and calculations like your's don't factor that in, so they are always underestimating.

That's actually not that relevant, since you only "benefit" from increasing difficulty if you can keep up with it.  So you while it's true coins are generated more quickly then they should be, it's also true that it means you, personally, make less money then you would if it was static.

physalis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 03:49:04 PM
 #5543

That's actually not that relevant, since you only "benefit" from increasing difficulty if you can keep up with it.  So you while it's true coins are generated more quickly then they should be, it's also true that it means you, personally, make less money then you would if it was static.

Agreed, if we're talking about a fix hashrate.
But people in this context often calculate like "If you have x.x% share of the network, you'll make X BTC per month".
If you're just taking "25BTC/10min total for the network", that is wrong and your calculated profit will be too low.
foxykah
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 03:51:40 PM
 #5544

I made a little calculation, which excludes difficulty, and calculates the minimum div/share at a given LC hash rate, and a given total network hashrate, And I need confirmation on the validity of this. So:

Difficulty is the "tool" of the network to adjust the speed of block generation. This upward hashrate trend forces difficulty to rise in order to slow down block generation from 7min/block to 10min/block. This rougly means that whatever may come, block generation won't be slower than 10 min/block (@ this current upward total hashrate trend). Therefore we can calculate the lowest div/share of LC if we know: the hashrate of LC, and the total hashrate.
The simplified, diff-excluded formula is this:

Total LC mining profit = LC hashrate/Total Hashrate * 144 (a day is 1440 min long, so 144 blocks a day) * 30 (number of days of the month) * 25 (block reward excluding transaction fees)

And dividing this by 10million comes the div/share/month.
This formula does not care about the fact, that the LC hashrate/total hashrate ratio does not necessarily equal with the LC mined blocks/ total mined blocks ratio, but as far as I know it is pessimistic enough to let us exclude that fact too.

So the concept is: Block generation is fixed 10 mins (which is the longest possible generation time in an upward hashrate trend), and the LC mined blocks/ total mined blocks ratio equals with the LC hashrate / total hashrate ratio.


What do you think? Is this formula a valid way to calculate the worst div possible @ a given LC and total hashrate?

Good things come to those who wait.
Rival
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 03:53:25 PM
 #5545

I made a little calculation, which excludes difficulty, and calculates the minimum div/share at a given LC hash rate, and a given total network hashrate, And I need confirmation on the validity of this. So:

Difficulty is the "tool" of the network to adjust the speed of block generation. This upward hashrate trend forces difficulty to rise in order to slow down block generation from 7min/block to 10min/block. This rougly means that whatever may come, block generation won't be slower than 10 min/block (@ this current upward total hashrate trend). Therefore we can calculate the lowest div/share of LC if we know: the hashrate of LC, and the total hashrate.
The simplified, diff-excluded formula is this:

Total LC mining profit = LC hashrate/Total Hashrate * 144 (a day is 1440 min long, so 144 blocks a day) * 30 (number of days of the month) * 25 (block reward excluding transaction fees)

And dividing this by 10million comes the div/share/month.
This formula does not care about the fact, that the LC hashrate/total hashrate ratio does not necessarily equal with the LC mined blocks/ total mined blocks ratio, but as far as I know it is pessimistic enough to let us exclude that fact too.

So the concept is: Block generation is fixed 10 mins (which is the longest possible generation time in an upward hashrate trend), and the LC mined blocks/ total mined blocks ratio equals with the LC hashrate / total hashrate ratio.


What do you think? Is this formula a valid way to calculate the worst div possible @ a given LC and total hashrate?

Expenses are not included and are non-trivial.
foxykah
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 03:56:31 PM
 #5546

I made a little calculation, which excludes difficulty, and calculates the minimum div/share at a given LC hash rate, and a given total network hashrate, And I need confirmation on the validity of this. So:

Difficulty is the "tool" of the network to adjust the speed of block generation. This upward hashrate trend forces difficulty to rise in order to slow down block generation from 7min/block to 10min/block. This rougly means that whatever may come, block generation won't be slower than 10 min/block (@ this current upward total hashrate trend). Therefore we can calculate the lowest div/share of LC if we know: the hashrate of LC, and the total hashrate.
The simplified, diff-excluded formula is this:

Total LC mining profit = LC hashrate/Total Hashrate * 144 (a day is 1440 min long, so 144 blocks a day) * 30 (number of days of the month) * 25 (block reward excluding transaction fees)

And dividing this by 10million comes the div/share/month.
This formula does not care about the fact, that the LC hashrate/total hashrate ratio does not necessarily equal with the LC mined blocks/ total mined blocks ratio, but as far as I know it is pessimistic enough to let us exclude that fact too.

So the concept is: Block generation is fixed 10 mins (which is the longest possible generation time in an upward hashrate trend), and the LC mined blocks/ total mined blocks ratio equals with the LC hashrate / total hashrate ratio.


What do you think? Is this formula a valid way to calculate the worst div possible @ a given LC and total hashrate?

Expenses are not included and are non-trivial.


Well, f*ck...I forgot that part. Do I need to multiply the whole div/share part with 0.8?

EDIT: According to the stockholder agreement, 70-80% of the above-calculated total profit will be paid out in divs monthly, so a multiplication with 0.7 is good for calculating worst divs.

Good things come to those who wait.
Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile WWW
September 06, 2013, 04:03:48 PM
 #5547

That's actually not that relevant, since you only "benefit" from increasing difficulty if you can keep up with it.  So you while it's true coins are generated more quickly then they should be, it's also true that it means you, personally, make less money then you would if it was static.

Agreed, if we're talking about a fix hashrate.
But people in this context often calculate like "If you have x.x% share of the network, you'll make X BTC per month".
If you're just taking "25BTC/10min total for the network", that is wrong and your calculated profit will be too low.

Yeah, but the problem is if you try to model difficulty, you need to model it both ways - both the reduction in block time, as well as the exponentially increasing amount you have to spend on hardware per unit of time to keep up with that.  At some point, the network growth will have to slow down as production becomes saturated. At that point, you actually do get the 3600btc/x amount.

So, makes the most sense to model it that way.

N_S
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 04:11:28 PM
 #5548

Slightly off-topic, but is this thread showing up as grayed-out on the Securities page?
Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile WWW
September 06, 2013, 04:12:28 PM
 #5549

Slightly off-topic, but is this thread showing up as grayed-out on the Securities page?

Not for me.

N_S
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 04:18:41 PM
 #5550

Slightly off-topic, but is this thread showing up as grayed-out on the Securities page?

Not for me.

This is what I get:

wickedgoodtrader
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 218


View Profile
September 06, 2013, 04:21:23 PM
 #5551



Yeah, but the problem is if you try to model difficulty, you need to model it both ways - both the reduction in block time, as well as the exponentially increasing amount you have to spend on hardware per unit of time to keep up with that.  At some point, the network growth will have to slow down as production becomes saturated. At that point, you actually do get the 3600btc/x amount.

So, makes the most sense to model it that way.
[/quote]

I would say the saturation point is NOW. Do you people realize hashing as gone up almost 300% in just one month? The real money to be made in the asic boom is gone. Anybody investing in companies now expecting price increases relative to the way AM went is living in a dreamland.
physalis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 04:25:38 PM
 #5552

Slightly off-topic, but is this thread showing up as grayed-out on the Securities page?

Not for me.

This is what I get:



Doesn't look like that for me
jeffhuys
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 04:27:09 PM
 #5553

Slightly off-topic, but is this thread showing up as grayed-out on the Securities page?

Not for me.

This is what I get:



Doesn't look like that for me

Not here either.

Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile WWW
September 06, 2013, 04:29:26 PM
 #5554

Slightly off-topic, but is this thread showing up as grayed-out on the Securities page?

Not for me.

This is what I get:



*shrug* - looks fine to me.  Did you remove it from your watchlist or something?

Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile WWW
September 06, 2013, 04:32:03 PM
 #5555

I would say the saturation point is NOW. Do you people realize hashing as gone up almost 300% in just one month? The real money to be made in the asic boom is gone. Anybody investing in companies now expecting price increases relative to the way AM went is living in a dreamland.

We're not even close.  Maybe 10-15PH.  With four cointerra chips per board, you would only need 500 boards to get 1PH.  Easily doable.

Rival
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 04:36:58 PM
 #5556

I would say the saturation point is NOW. Do you people realize hashing as gone up almost 300% in just one month? The real money to be made in the asic boom is gone. Anybody investing in companies now expecting price increases relative to the way AM went is living in a dreamland.

We're not even close.  Maybe 10-15PH.  With four cointerra chips per board, you would only need 500 boards to get 1PH.  Easily doable.

You could do it with one board if you use unicorns and fairy dust.
Ytterbium
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile WWW
September 06, 2013, 04:44:28 PM
 #5557

I would say the saturation point is NOW. Do you people realize hashing as gone up almost 300% in just one month? The real money to be made in the asic boom is gone. Anybody investing in companies now expecting price increases relative to the way AM went is living in a dreamland.

We're not even close.  Maybe 10-15PH.  With four cointerra chips per board, you would only need 500 boards to get 1PH.  Easily doable.

You could do it with one board if you use unicorns and fairy dust.

You mean one board with 4 chips, or one board with 2,000 chips?

I'm not sure if understand why it would be difficult to do 4 chips on one board. 2,000 would obviously be more of a challenge. You would need to explore some... alternative... fabrication techniques.

twentyseventy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386


View Profile
September 06, 2013, 04:44:51 PM
 #5558

Slightly off-topic, but is this thread showing up as grayed-out on the Securities page?

Not for me.

This is what I get:



*shrug* - looks fine to me.  Did you remove it from your watchlist or something?

Have you ignored 'TheSwede75'?

All of MPOE-PR's topics show up like that to me, since I have him on Ignore
physalis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 04:45:08 PM
 #5559

I would say the saturation point is NOW. Do you people realize hashing as gone up almost 300% in just one month? The real money to be made in the asic boom is gone. Anybody investing in companies now expecting price increases relative to the way AM went is living in a dreamland.

We're not even close.  Maybe 10-15PH.  With four cointerra chips per board, you would only need 500 boards to get 1PH.  Easily doable.

You could do it with one board if you use unicorns and fairy dust.

Doing that would have a bad effect on $/GH though. That shit is expensive.
kokojie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
September 06, 2013, 04:46:19 PM
 #5560

Slightly off-topic, but is this thread showing up as grayed-out on the Securities page?

That's because "TheSwede75" is on your ignore list, he's also on mine.

btc: 15sFnThw58hiGHYXyUAasgfauifTEB1ZF6
Pages: « 1 ... 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 [278] 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 ... 914 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!