► ► ►HashFast Endorsement

[crumbs]

Not that HashFast isn't a joke, though.

hey Ytter.  i see you're very interested in the Reseller Program. according to Crumbs you going to double down on your KNC investment?

Cypherdoc, how about an answer?  Whaddaya suppose that lulzy chip rendering is supposed to be, any guesses?

[1715291034]

1715291034

[1715291034]

1715291034

[1715291034]

1715291034

[jspielberg]

Cypherdoc, any comment on this?  Are we to believe...
https://hashfast.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/chipset01.png

inspired by:http://pcper.com/images/reviews/276/Intel%20Core%202%20Duo%20T7400%20-%20CPU.jpg

What kind of retarded post is this anyways?  Guess there's a reason your ignore button is already piss yellow after a mere two months.

So much for the conspiracy theory that Crumbs worked for Cointerra (yeah someone came up with that since he wasn't trolling them as hard - although they seem more professional then HashFast)

I think he was trying to imply that the HashFast GN image was just a picture of an Intel CPU or something. Obviously every high-end BGA chip looks like that, here's a 7990 without a heatsink: http://images.bit-tech.net/content_images/2013/04/amd-radeon-hd-7990-6gb-review/7990-8b.jpg.  Same thing except an extra metal plate (I guess to help with cooling).

Nice for crumbs to prove his IC ignorance so obviously in one post.

Not that HashFast isn't a joke, though.

It's not a photo, you goof -- it's a rendering.  Ignore the photoshop exif trash.  Please tell me you're not blind, too
Edit:  The matte marble texture is a neat touch.

Crumbs -

They have publicly stated that they haven't taped out yet (this week or next week I think was mentioned).  Where the heck would they get an actual asic picture?  From the future? 
I think it is starting to feel like you are getting desperate/trying a bit too hard.

There are plenty of legitimate reasons to question purchasing HashFast, but using stock images aren't among them. 
Are you going to claim that they should be shunned because their baby jet image isn't photo realistic... Let me help you out. "IT IS A DRAWING"... or maybe you were confused and live the cartoon world and it looked real to you.

Frankly, I think they would be stupid to be committing to a case when they don't their chip characterized yet.  That would be like BFL with their warehouse of Minirig cases that are unusable.

The only legitimate reason of consequence that I see is that they are going to miss their delivery target. Lets face facts.  End of October seems so unlikely as to be near impossible.  That being said, they have a hard cap on the back end (Jan. 1) and obviously... you either believe they will provide full BTC refunds or not.  If you don't believe their word that they will refund, then you believe they are liars and you can't believe anything they say.  In which case... just say "I believe they are liars, and will never be satisfied until I see a working product and maybe not even then."

I would like to see more detail and possibly a road map with deadlines for the production of the chips and miners.  They said that they would provide weekly updates on the production process.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  I have speculatively ordered a Baby-jet and will be reading these updates.  If they seem to be executing according to plan, I may double down on my order.  If things seem to be going off the rails... well then I am hoping they slip until January and see what the options are... obviously the worst case scenario is a delivery on Dec. 31st which I am optimistically projecting a return of 28BTC (which is pretty crap for an investment of 60BTC).  I am willing to take the chance.

[crumbs]

Cypherdoc, any comment on this?  Are we to believe...
https://hashfast.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/chipset01.png

inspired by:http://pcper.com/images/reviews/276/Intel%20Core%202%20Duo%20T7400%20-%20CPU.jpg

What kind of retarded post is this anyways?  Guess there's a reason your ignore button is already piss yellow after a mere two months.

So much for the conspiracy theory that Crumbs worked for Cointerra (yeah someone came up with that since he wasn't trolling them as hard - although they seem more professional then HashFast)

I think he was trying to imply that the HashFast GN image was just a picture of an Intel CPU or something. Obviously every high-end BGA chip looks like that, here's a 7990 without a heatsink: http://images.bit-tech.net/content_images/2013/04/amd-radeon-hd-7990-6gb-review/7990-8b.jpg.  Same thing except an extra metal plate (I guess to help with cooling).

Nice for crumbs to prove his IC ignorance so obviously in one post.

Not that HashFast isn't a joke, though.

It's not a photo, you goof -- it's a rendering.  Ignore the photoshop exif trash.  Please tell me you're not blind, too
Edit:  The matte marble texture is a neat touch.

Crumbs -

They have publicly stated that they haven't taped out yet (this week or next week I think was mentioned).  Where the heck would they get an actual asic picture?  From the future? 
I think it is starting to feel like you are getting desperate/trying a bit too hard.

As i mentioned before, it's no trouble at all.  I have no idea where they would get an ASIC, but i do have a vague idea what a rendering of nonexistent chip is doing on the site.  Further, knowing what the chip is, it's *really* unlikely that the finished product would have that type of package. 

There are plenty of legitimate reasons to question purchasing HashFast, but using stock images aren't among them. 
Are you going to claim that they should be shunned because their baby jet image isn't photo realistic... Let me help you out. "IT IS A DRAWING"... or maybe you were confused and live the cartoon world and it looked real to you.

Frankly, I think they would be stupid to be committing to a case when they don't their chip characterized yet.  That would be like BFL with their warehouse of Minirig cases that are unusable.

See: Ken, ActiveMining.  Boxes and boxes of 4u rack cases in an otherwise empty warehouse.  The cases are empty.  The Virtual Mining site has pictures of those cases, and generic renderings of boards.  Everyone's eating it up -- his folk think it proves shit's real.  People love pics.  Learn from Ken.

The only legitimate reason of consequence that I see is that they are going to miss their delivery target. Lets face facts.  End of October seems so unlikely as to be near impossible.  That being said, they have a hard cap on the back end (Jan. 1) and obviously... you either believe they will provide full BTC refunds or not.  If you don't believe their word that they will refund, then you believe they are liars and you can't believe anything they say.  In which case... just say "I believe they are liars, and will never be satisfied until I see a working product and maybe not even then."

Of course i know that they can't deliver.  But there is a huge field of gray between flat-out lying & being able to deliver on time or ability to refund.  I know with 99% certainty that their notion of the actual mechanics of refunding is as vague as yours, or worse.  If bitcoin prices go up, *IT WILL BE A DISASTER*.  They simply will be *forced to run* if all of their Is weren't dotted & all their Ts weren't crossed.  What feasible out will they have if they're behind the 8-ball?  Where will the bitcoin come from?  How many times must the folks on this forum be taken for a ride to stop making the same mistakes?  BFL set out *with the best of intentions*, and still there's bitching & moaning.  Now Avalon has joined those ranks.  What makes HashFast different, and i mean in a *positive* way?  It's pointless to say "stop and think what you are doing, your greed is making you spend the very bitcoins you've mined so you can buy more gear so you can mine more so you can buy more gear."  It's pointless to point out that *in the best case scenario, the ASIC companies are the only ones reaping the rewards*.  Wake up.

I would like to see more detail and possibly a road map with deadlines for the production of the chips and miners.  They said that they would provide weekly updates on the production process.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  I have speculatively ordered a Baby-jet and will be reading these updates.  If they seem to be executing according to plan, I may double down on my order.  If things seem to be going off the rails... well then I am hoping they slip until January and see what the options are... obviously the worst case scenario is a delivery on Dec. 31st which I am optimistically projecting a return of 28BTC (which is pretty crap for an investment of 60BTC).  I am willing to take the chance.

That's not the worst case scenario.  The worst case scenario is you get *0*.  Goose egg.  But hey, prove me wrong.  If they deliver before December, i'll eat my words & never post here again.  Under any account.  Word.  But by "deliver," i mean deliver at least 1/2 of the "BabyJet" orders.  Want to match?

[Ytterbium]

Not that HashFast isn't a joke, though.

hey Ytter.  i see you're very interested in the Reseller Program. according to Crumbs you going to double down on your KNC investment?

Well, I wouldn't know since I have him on ignore. All I said was that I would be happy if KnC sent me a free jupiter since I said nice things about them.  I'd be more then happy to accept a free HashFast, although it wouldn't change my opinion.

At this point I'm not even sure a November KnC is a good deal or not, just that it would be a better deal then an HF BabyJet. Depends on the price.

They have publicly stated that they haven't taped out yet (this week or next week I think was mentioned).  Where the heck would they get an actual asic picture?  From the future? 
I think it is starting to feel like you are getting desperate/trying a bit too hard.

Dude he is a troll.  He's spouting total nonsense.

[jspielberg]

That's not the worst case scenario.  The worst case scenario is you get *0*.  Goose egg.  But hey, prove me wrong.  If they deliver before December, i'll eat my words & never post here again.  Under any account.  Word.  But by "deliver," i mean deliver at least 1/2 of the "BabyJet" orders.  Want to match?

Thanks for the warning.  I actually enjoy your posts... they are usually witty and entertaining... kind of like a food critic panning a restaurant... so I wouldn't hold you to it.  I accept that I am on a mining treadmill, but right now for me... this is "house money" so I don't mind blowing a few bad hands.

[cypherdoc]

Not that HashFast isn't a joke, though.

hey Ytter.  i see you're very interested in the Reseller Program. according to Crumbs you going to double down on your KNC investment?

Well, I wouldn't know since I have him on ignore. All I said was that I would be happy if KnC sent me a free jupiter since I said nice things about them.  I'd be more then happy to accept a free HashFast, although it wouldn't change my opinion.

At this point I'm not even sure a November KnC is a good deal or not, just that it would be a better deal then an HF BabyJet. Depends on the price.

They have publicly stated that they haven't taped out yet (this week or next week I think was mentioned).  Where the heck would they get an actual asic picture?  From the future?  
I think it is starting to feel like you are getting desperate/trying a bit too hard.

Dude he is a troll.  He's spouting total nonsense.

cypher:  "no, no.  you only receive a free HashFast if you say nice things about them."

Ytter:  "hmmm"

[AussieHash]

They have publicly stated that they haven't taped out yet (this week or next week I think was mentioned). 
.....
Lets face facts.  End of October seems so unlikely as to be near impossible.  That being said, they have a hard cap on the back end (Jan. 1) and obviously... you either believe they will provide full BTC refunds or not. 
.....
obviously the worst case scenario is a delivery on Dec. 31st which I am optimistically projecting a return of 28BTC (which is pretty crap for an investment of 60BTC).  I am willing to take the chance.

I think that with 1st November shipping, your hopes of 28BTC profit would be optimistic.  Although the last 3 difficulty changes have been approx 120% every 11.5 days.
Looking at the hashing curve this current period, it is dramatically sloping upwards
http://dot-bit.org/tools/nextDifficulty.php
suggests a 160% next increase based on the last 10 blocks, and 145% increase over the past 120 blocks.

[jspielberg]

They have publicly stated that they haven't taped out yet (this week or next week I think was mentioned).
.....
Lets face facts.  End of October seems so unlikely as to be near impossible.  That being said, they have a hard cap on the back end (Jan. 1) and obviously... you either believe they will provide full BTC refunds or not.
.....
obviously the worst case scenario is a delivery on Dec. 31st which I am optimistically projecting a return of 28BTC (which is pretty crap for an investment of 60BTC).  I am willing to take the chance.

I think that with 1st November shipping, your hopes of 28BTC profit would be optimistic.  Although the last 3 difficulty changes have been approx 120% every 11.5 days.
Looking at the hashing curve this current period, it is dramatically sloping upwards
http://dot-bit.org/tools/nextDifficulty.php
suggests a 160% next increase based on the last 10 blocks, and 145% increase over the past 120 blocks.

Sorry if I wasn't clear... That was not 28 btc profit..that was 28 btc total... I.e. a 32btc loss.

[Ytterbium]

I think that with 1st November shipping, your hopes of 28BTC profit would be optimistic.  Although the last 3 difficulty changes have been approx 120% every 11.5 days.
Looking at the hashing curve this current period, it is dramatically sloping upwards
http://dot-bit.org/tools/nextDifficulty.php
suggests a 160% next increase based on the last 10 blocks, and 145% increase over the past 120 blocks.

Like I said, hashrate growth can't be modeled with a simple exponential equation with a constant exponent A) That's not realistic in the future and B) there isn't anything that would cause that kind of curve at work.

In reality we're looking at the superimposition of basically sigmoid-like curves as ASIC makers dump product in batches as fast as they can. So for example, When Avalon gets it's chips shipped, you'll see a huge growth for a couple days as more and more units come online.

You'll also see Labcoin and BTCGarden bring their chips online, along with ActiveMining, they'll of course do that as fast as they can.

If you look at it as an exponential function, right now the 'exponent' is also increasing. At some point it'll start decreasing.

And of course there are feedback effects as well, people look at the hashrate to decide whether or not to invest, and if it's growing too fast they won't.

Modeling this as a simple exponential function is just not realistic at this point.

Sorry if I wasn't clear... That was not 28 btc profit..that was 28 btc total... I.e. a 32btc loss.

I don't understand - you're just going to give them $3,200 of free money? Why?

[jspielberg]

Because that would be the worst case, well other than them running away with the money and folding as crumbs was suggesting.  I see that latter option possible with any company including Avalon.   

I see that an extremely low probability... And the higher probability negative scenario that I may not break even if they ship at the end of December.  While not ideal, I am not investing more than I feel comfortable risking that it could pay off..

[Ytterbium]

Because that would be the worst case, well other than them running away with the money and folding as crumbs was suggesting.  I see that latter option possible with any company including Avalon.   

I see that an extremely low probability... And the higher probability negative scenario that I may not break even if they ship at the end of December.  While not ideal, I am not investing more than I feel comfortable risking that it could pay off..

On the off chance of what? Every other company completely failing?

[jspielberg]

On the off chance of what? Every other company completely failing?

That they succeed in early November or fail to January. 

I guess you are advocating sitting on the sidelines until March?  Probably a more prudent strategy... But I have been minerless since around March and not really wanting to go a whole year.  Itchy trigger finger I guess. 

[Ytterbium]

On the off chance of what? Every other company completely failing?

That they succeed in early November or fail to January. 

I guess you are advocating sitting on the sidelines until March?  Probably a more prudent strategy... But I have been minerless since around March and not really wanting to go a whole year.  Itchy trigger finger I guess. 

Eh, I invested in some Labcoin stock, and I think I might try some BTCGarden as well - those companies will be able to mint their own chips at $2/Gh.

Obviously there's the trust issue, there wouldn't be much recourse if they run off with your chips and bitcoin, or embezzle money.  But at least that way you're an actual investor, getting an ROI based on how well the company does overall, as opposed to being an "investomer" who can end up losing all your money while the company makes tons of it

That's the biggest problem, IMO - with a typical investment if the company does well you do well, and you lose all your money it's because the company as a whole failed, and the principles didn't make much either.

On the other hand, with a pre-order you have a situation where the company can "fail" to deliver their units on time, or oversell them or whatever, and all their customers lose all their money, but the company keeps everything.

Now obviously these virtual stock exchanges have the same, or higher risk of being a straight up scam where they run off with your money, or cheat their shareholders.

But at least the incentive structure is correct.

[jspielberg]

Fair enough. I agree that the big mining company models make the most sense.  The company will work for its own survival and if making their own chips, strategically they can control there future and not be held hostage by a third party asic producer.

No arguments there. My problem is that it leans to centralization which I philosophically dislike.   I am a bit of a lone wolf miner and prefer to solo mine and enjoy the sysadmin challenges it poses.  Though you are right, the smart money is on the mining companies that can roll their own chips.  I may be anachronism at this point, still driving the solo mining truck while everyone else is piling into the mega farm trains.

I wish you luck, though I think you won't need it.  I hope you wish me the same.

[HeRetiK]

Fair enough. I agree that the big mining company models make the most sense. The company will work for its own survival and if making their own chips, strategically they can control there future and not be held hostage by a third party asic producer.

No arguments there. My problem is that it leans to centralization which I philosophically dislike. I am a bit of a lone wolf miner and prefer to solo mine and enjoy the sysadmin challenges it poses.  Though you are right, the smart money is on the mining companies that can roll their own chips.  I may be anachronism at this point, still driving the solo mining truck while everyone else is piling into the mega farm trains.

I wish you luck, though I think you won't need it.  I hope you wish me the same.

It's kinda sad, really, that the next step after solo and pool mining seems to be huge cooperations. Here's hoping that the mining world won't get monopolized.

And to you, kind sir, i have to say:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRoLgBE9AOs&t=0m44s

[DumbFruit]

There is nothing wrong with monopolies if entry into the market isn't stopped coercively and they only got their monopoly status by out-competing their competitors.

What's wrong with a monopoly if it's providing the service you ask for at the more efficient price?

"Freedom of Entry" is the most important thing in any market, not decentralization.

http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=384

[cypherdoc]

There is nothing wrong with monopolies if entry into the market isn't stopped coercively and they only got their monopoly status by out-competing their competitors.

What's wrong with a monopoly if it's providing the service you ask for at the more efficient price?

"Freedom of Entry" is the most important thing in any market, not decentralization.

http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=384

sounds good in principle but what if you're a bank who has access to free money who decides to setup a mine? 

which, btw, is another good reason why asic rig makers should only accept BTC.

[HeRetiK]

There is nothing wrong with monopolies if entry into the market isn't stopped coercively and they only got their monopoly status by out-competing their competitors.

What's wrong with a monopoly if it's providing the service you ask for at the more efficient price?

"Freedom of Entry" is the most important thing in any market, not decentralization.

http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=384

That is assuming the entity becoming a monopoly being and staying a good actor.

I'm sorry to get philosophical here, but decentralization is the key aspect of Bitcoin. It was developed to get currency out of the hands of monopolistic entities (ie. goverment / central banks) and into the hand of a decentralized network of people. Shedding Bitcoin of decentralization kills its purpose. In case of focused hardware power it will kill Bitcoin quite literally, actually.

Luckily we're still far way from that. Let's not ruin this beautiful experiment in digital currencies.

[HeRetiK]

sounds good in principle but what if you're a bank who has access to free money who decides to setup a mine? 

which, btw, is another good reason why asic rig makers should only accept BTC.

I don't think ASIC rig makers should only accept BTC. To keep the network healthy and Bitcoin growing, you need easier access for new people to join the fun.

If you're big money and want to start a big mine you don't have to go the ASIC rig maker route anyway. You can very well just fund your own development and production.

[DumbFruit]

That is assuming the entity becoming a monopoly being and staying a good actor.

No, it isn't at all assuming that. Freedom of entry means that if a monopolist acts dishonestly, a competitor can unseat him.

A government monopoly is an entirely different animal from a free market monopoly. Government monopolies hold their position through the use of coercion. Free market monopolies (Which never have 100% market share) hold their position by outcompeting anyone that tries to take their market share.

The old fallacy that you might bring up is that a monopolist can push their prices to the floor in order to undermine their competitor, but by definition this action must hurt the monopolist more than the competitor because the monopolist has a much greater market share.

An action that a competitor can take against this is to simply  buy the product the monopolist sells low, wait for the monopolist to raise prices again, and then sell.

Suffice it to say that this is a deep subject, and the ghosts and gouls that surround the concept of "monopoly" are mostly just that; ancient and pernicious myths and legends. With one exception! Government enforced monopolies are a bad thing.

I encourage you to study monopolies at the Mises institute. Here's a fresh video from Thomas DiLorenzo, it's like destiny, or something!*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSVR9xJ-1Vc

*Edit: Fresh from last year haha.