[LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining)

[physalis]

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.

[1715019000]

1715019000

[1715019000]

1715019000

[1715019000]

1715019000

[1715019000]

1715019000

[1715019000]

1715019000

[foxykah]

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?

[Rival]

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]

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.

[Ytterbium]

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]

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

[Ytterbium]

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

Not for me.

[N_S]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[N_S]

Yep, that was it! I accidentally hit ignore on a Swede post while I was browsing the forum on my phone.

Alright back to the meaningful discussions! lol

[Bitcycle]

I think all the large dumps may be coming from one person.