[ANN][KARM] Karma / ₭ / X11

[Delaforetnoire]

Saw a news piece on Scrypt Asics today - 8MH/s for $350 on a single pci express card pulling 40 watts coming as soon as July. If we put aside POS from the discussion we should at least talk about switching to a more Asic resistant alg - It might buy us a year but its better than getting hammered and dumped to hell.

If we can really find in July a 8MH/S asic card for $350, why the hell we would be afraid of asics?
I will buy two of these as soon as they are available.

It is just the next eco-friendly step for miners.

[Alphi]

Saw a news piece on Scrypt Asics today - 8MH/s for $350 on a single pci express card pulling 40 watts coming as soon as July. If we put aside POS from the discussion we should at least talk about switching to a more Asic resistant alg - It might buy us a year but its better than getting hammered and dumped to hell.

If we can really find in July a 8MH/S asic card for $350, why the hell we would be afraid of asics?
I will buy two of these as soon as they are available.

It is just the next eco-friendly step for miners.

most people who do mining have GPUs... when more Scrypt ASICS flood the market then they would have to either sell their GPUs or move to other coins.. that's why they are afraid.
my own personal opinion is that mining is a mugs game.. you will always be running from ASIC until you embrace them because as each new type of PoW system becomes popular the ASIC design companies are already working on chip designs for them so its only a matter of time before ASICs come out for any algorithm.


I have 3 gpu mining rigs and I doubt I will get my ROI on them because virtually no GPU mineable coins are profitable at the moment and the electricity costs are astronomical.

[cryptowho]

retweet this.

https://twitter.com/yurimir12/status/467590870909612032

[Alphi]

retweet this.

https://twitter.com/yurimir12/status/467590870909612032

not bad... I could see a Rally Driving team wearing that one or a gamer team....

[Delaforetnoire]

Retwetted    The whole world sees my back hairs !

[ranlo]

Saw a news piece on Scrypt Asics today - 8MH/s for $350 on a single pci express card pulling 40 watts coming as soon as July. If we put aside POS from the discussion we should at least talk about switching to a more Asic resistant alg - It might buy us a year but its better than getting hammered and dumped to hell.

If we can really find in July a 8MH/S asic card for $350, why the hell we would be afraid of asics?
I will buy two of these as soon as they are available.

It is just the next eco-friendly step for miners.

most people who do mining have GPUs... when more Scrypt ASICS flood the market then they would have to either sell their GPUs or move to other coins.. that's why they are afraid.
my own personal opinion is that mining is a mugs game.. you will always be running from ASIC until you embrace them because as each new type of PoW system becomes popular the ASIC design companies are already working on chip designs for them so its only a matter of time before ASICs come out for any algorithm.


I have 3 gpu mining rigs and I doubt I will get my ROI on them because virtually no GPU mineable coins are profitable at the moment and the electricity costs are astronomical.

But even when you embrace ASICs, you are constantly buying more.

Today you swap from your GPU to 20 MH/s to get some coins
Next month you have to ditch the 20 MH/s to get 150 MH/s
The next month you ditch the 150 MH/s to get 450 MH/s

The cycle never ends and you are constantly having to invest in faster hardware just to keep earning the same coins you did in the past. At some point you're spending more on hardware purchases than you're getting back.

[ptman]

Saw a news piece on Scrypt Asics today - 8MH/s for $350 on a single pci express card pulling 40 watts coming as soon as July. If we put aside POS from the discussion we should at least talk about switching to a more Asic resistant alg - It might buy us a year but its better than getting hammered and dumped to hell.

If we can really find in July a 8MH/S asic card for $350, why the hell we would be afraid of asics?
I will buy two of these as soon as they are available.

It is just the next eco-friendly step for miners.

most people who do mining have GPUs... when more Scrypt ASICS flood the market then they would have to either sell their GPUs or move to other coins.. that's why they are afraid.
my own personal opinion is that mining is a mugs game.. you will always be running from ASIC until you embrace them because as each new type of PoW system becomes popular the ASIC design companies are already working on chip designs for them so its only a matter of time before ASICs come out for any algorithm.


I have 3 gpu mining rigs and I doubt I will get my ROI on them because virtually no GPU mineable coins are profitable at the moment and the electricity costs are astronomical.

But even when you embrace ASICs, you are constantly buying more.

Today you swap from your GPU to 20 MH/s to get some coins
Next month you have to ditch the 20 MH/s to get 150 MH/s
The next month you ditch the 150 MH/s to get 450 MH/s

The cycle never ends and you are constantly having to invest in faster hardware just to keep earning the same coins you did in the past. At some point you're spending more on hardware purchases than you're getting back.

You are right.

I have two high end AMD cards, and I'm already planning to sell them.

Does someone want to buy two Sapphire 290 Tri-X for 800 euros?
They are also EXCELLENT gaming cards!

I did not even mine that much with them, and I keep the temperatures in check.

[Alphi]

But even when you embrace ASICs, you are constantly buying more.

Today you swap from your GPU to 20 MH/s to get some coins
Next month you have to ditch the 20 MH/s to get 150 MH/s
The next month you ditch the 150 MH/s to get 450 MH/s

The cycle never ends and you are constantly having to invest in faster hardware just to keep earning the same coins you did in the past. At some point you're spending more on hardware purchases than you're getting back.

yeah but far lower power consumption means you can run ASICs for a lot longer before your money runs out from paying the bills.. you're really just trading the Versatility of the GPU for the Longevity of the ASIC.

with the GPU, if a new coin comes out you can mine it straight away... with an ASIC your pretty much limited on what coins you can mine.

I have a BFL 30GH thats been mining for about 6 months... its still going and I did get my money back and then some at least.. its mining Maza coins now but it really only brings in a few dollars a day nowdays and costs a bit less than that to run.

whether you mine ASICs, GPUs or trade or just work to get coins, there are pluses and huge pitfalls with each strategy... so I try to do a little of each just in case one of them hits the bigtime.

litecoin was unprofitable to mine with GPUs for about 6 months before it exploded... would it have been a good idea to buy litecoins or mine them before the price exploded, even though it was unprofitable at the time?.... absolutely... will that ever happen again? who knows... chances are that if bitcoin explodes again then it will take many coins with it... all we can do is wait and see... and build cryptocoin communities and infrastructure in the meantime..

I've learnt a lot of over these past few years and one thing I am sure of is that the knowledge I have gained is priceless. So even if you lose some money.. you really aren't losing at all because you are miles ahead of most of the rest of the world....

[ranlo]

But even when you embrace ASICs, you are constantly buying more.

Today you swap from your GPU to 20 MH/s to get some coins
Next month you have to ditch the 20 MH/s to get 150 MH/s
The next month you ditch the 150 MH/s to get 450 MH/s

The cycle never ends and you are constantly having to invest in faster hardware just to keep earning the same coins you did in the past. At some point you're spending more on hardware purchases than you're getting back.

yeah but far lower power consumption means you can run ASICs for a lot longer before your money runs out from paying the bills.. you're really just trading the Versatility of the GPU for the Longevity of the ASIC.

with the GPU, if a new coin comes out you can mine it straight away... with an ASIC your pretty much limited on what coins you can mine.

I have a BFL 30GH thats been mining for about 6 months... its still going and I did get my money back and then some at least.. its mining Maza coins now but it really only brings in a few dollars a day nowdays and costs a bit less than that to run.

whether you mine ASICs, GPUs or trade or just work to get coins, there are pluses and huge pitfalls with each strategy... so I try to do a little of each just in case one of them hits the bigtime.

litecoin was unprofitable to mine with GPUs for about 6 months before it exploded... would it have been a good idea to buy litecoins or mine them before the price exploded, even though it was unprofitable at the time?.... absolutely... will that ever happen again? who knows... chances are that if bitcoin explodes again then it will take many coins with it... all we can do is wait and see... and build cryptocoin communities and infrastructure in the meantime..

I've learnt a lot of over these past few years and one thing I am sure of is that the knowledge I have gained is priceless. So even if you lose some money.. you really aren't losing at all because you are miles ahead of most of the rest of the world....

I guess really it's two ways of looking at it. You can look at it as being that this progression is worthless or a great thing. I think it's worthless because:

If there are 10 miners and each has 5 GH/s, burning $1 a day (including hardware, electric, wear and tear, etc.), the network is 50 GH/s.
If we bring up ASICs now everyone has 100 GH/s, burning $1.50 a day (including all), the network has 1000 GH/s.

But what has been accomplished? Everyone gets the same number of coins and the network is NOT any more secure than it was prior, since each person has the same relative hash rate.

The entire system is pushed by greed and racing to be faster than anyone else.

[ptman]

I guess really it's two ways of looking at it. You can look at it as being that this progression is worthless or a great thing. I think it's worthless because:

If there are 10 miners and each has 5 GH/s, burning $1 a day (including hardware, electric, wear and tear, etc.), the network is 50 GH/s.
If we bring up ASICs now everyone has 100 GH/s, burning $1.50 a day (including all), the network has 1000 GH/s.

But what has been accomplished? Everyone gets the same number of coins and the network is NOT any more secure than it was prior, since each person has the same relative hash rate.

The entire system is pushed by greed and racing to be faster than anyone else.

You are right.

The only time you can have an advantage over other miners is when you have the state of the art mining hardware.
After most of the people has access to the same hardware the network security is exactly the same.

The only way of making a network security is to spread the total hashrate, either by making an effort to mine small pools or solo-mine.

[Alphi]

I guess really it's two ways of looking at it. You can look at it as being that this progression is worthless or a great thing. I think it's worthless because:

If there are 10 miners and each has 5 GH/s, burning $1 a day (including hardware, electric, wear and tear, etc.), the network is 50 GH/s.
If we bring up ASICs now everyone has 100 GH/s, burning $1.50 a day (including all), the network has 1000 GH/s.

But what has been accomplished? Everyone gets the same number of coins and the network is NOT any more secure than it was prior, since each person has the same relative hash rate.

The entire system is pushed by greed and racing to be faster than anyone else.

it may seem like the security is the same but in reality it isn't. the more money people invest in hashing power is what makes it more secure. in the second case its going to cost a shitload more money to get to 51% than the first example..

just look at bitcoin... its 100% ASIC now... with maybe 300-500 million dollars invested in mining hardware... so in order to get 51% of the bitcoin network you need 300-500 million dollars. compare that to when Bitcoin was being GPU mined at a much lower hash rate a year ago.. you could have probably taken over 51% control of the network with less than 100 million dollars worth of GPUs.

so even if everyone is getting peanuts now the network is more secure... the real problem with Security now is not the centralization of mining power into large data centers.. it actually is people greedily moving onto the same pools giving the pools way too much hashing power...

take maxcoin for example... because everyone is so greedy... about 79% of the hashing power is controlled by one pool... whoever controls the pool has control of the network and can double spend as much as they like until many people leave the pool.

The only way of making a network security is to spread the total hashrate, either by making an effort to mine small pools or solo-mine.

couldn't agree more. pools +  human ignorance and greed are a problem..

[ranlo]

I guess really it's two ways of looking at it. You can look at it as being that this progression is worthless or a great thing. I think it's worthless because:

If there are 10 miners and each has 5 GH/s, burning $1 a day (including hardware, electric, wear and tear, etc.), the network is 50 GH/s.
If we bring up ASICs now everyone has 100 GH/s, burning $1.50 a day (including all), the network has 1000 GH/s.

But what has been accomplished? Everyone gets the same number of coins and the network is NOT any more secure than it was prior, since each person has the same relative hash rate.

The entire system is pushed by greed and racing to be faster than anyone else.

it may seem like the security is the same but in reality it isn't. the more money people invest in hashing power is what makes it more secure. in the second case its going to cost a shitload more money to get to 51% than the first example..

just look at bitcoin... its 100% ASIC now... with maybe 300-500 million dollars invested in mining hardware... so in order to get 51% of the bitcoin network you need 300-500 million dollars. compare that to when Bitcoin was being GPU mined at a much lower hash rate a year ago.. you could have probably taken over 51% control of the network with less than 100 million dollars worth of GPUs.

so even if everyone is getting peanuts now the network is more secure... the real problem with Security now is not the centralization of mining power into large data centers.. it actually is people greedily moving onto the same pools giving the pools way too much hashing power...

take maxcoin for example... because everyone is so greedy... about 79% of the hashing power is controlled by one pool... whoever controls the pool has control of the network and can double spend as much as they like until people leave the pool.

I get where you're coming from, but think about it like this. If ASICs were never created and 7950's were the fastest hashing hardware, it would be cheaper and would still provide the same benefit. ASICs are cheaper than GPUs by far. It's getting (over time) to where the fastest hashing hardware is cheaper than what we use today, which is why constant upgrades are needed (and ends up adding on its own hardware costs over time). If we had no ASICs, people would be buying 7950's, yes, but it would be more of a linear progression instead of this massive spike.

[ptman]

it may seem like the security is the same but in reality it isn't. the more money people invest in hashing power is what makes it more secure. in the second case its going to cost a shitload more money to get to 51% than the first example..

Not really, as each generation of ASICs goes mainstream the prices go down drastically.
So getting 200 GH/s sha256 mining power is MUCH cheaper than 200 GH/s was 6 months ago.

just look at bitcoin... its 100% ASIC now... with maybe 300-500 million dollars invested in mining hardware... so in order to get 51% of the bitcoin network you need 300-500 million dollars. compare that to when Bitcoin was being GPU mined at a much lower hash rate a year ago.. you could have probably taken over 51% control of the network with less than 100 million dollars worth of GPUs.

To do a 51% attack you, as a miner connected to a pool, would not need to do anything.
If has more than 51% of the total hashing speed of the network (or if the pool makes an evil alliance with other big pools), the network is compromised.

So even if everyone is getting peanuts now the network is more secure... the real problem with Security now is not the centralization of mining power into large data centers.. it actually is people greedily moving onto the same pools giving the pools way too much hashing power...

take maxcoin for example... because everyone is so greedy... about 79% of the hashing power is controlled by one pool... whoever controls the pool has control of the network and can double spend as much as they like until people leave the pool.

Yes. That is the problem that causes forks. Greed.

[Alphi]

I get where you're coming from, but think about it like this. If ASICs were never created and 7950's were the fastest hashing hardware, it would be cheaper and would still provide the same benefit. ASICs are cheaper than GPUs by far. It's getting (over time) to where the fastest hashing hardware is cheaper than what we use today, which is why constant upgrades are needed (and ends up adding on its own hardware costs over time). If we had no ASICs, people would be buying 7950's, yes, but it would be more of a linear progression instead of this massive spike.

that's the efficiency of the market .. nobody can control that.. people will always find a cheaper way of doing things so they can make more profit for a time until the next guy comes along.

are you old enough to remember a time before GPUs?

back then yeah the CPU could do all that 3D math and you could run 3D games like wolfenstein and Doom without any need for special extra hardware.
but then someone figured out a better way to do it and the GPU was born...

sure we could have been just fine with Doom, Descent and Wolfenstein level graphics...
but wow look how far we have come with GPUs... Near cinema quality HD graphics that we used to see only in movies right there on our computer screens.......

how far we have come in the last 20 years is amazing..

we are only year 5 of the bitcoin revolution... just imagine how amazing the world will be in 15 years?

after all GPUs are just Graphics ASICs.

its progress my dear watson.. and nobody can stop it...

[Alphi]

Not really, as each generation of ASICs goes mainstream the prices go down drastically.
So getting 200 GH/s sha256 mining power is MUCH cheaper than 200 GH/s was 6 months ago.

what do you mean not really? even if the price of individual units goes down they don't drop faster than the overall hash rate is rising .. so yes it does cost more $$$ to get 51% of the hash rate over time.
this is the market finding equilibrium...

Hash rate goes up.... coins income goes down... ASIC prices come down to make them more profitable... more units get sold.. hash rate goes up..... the cost to get 51% of the network goes up...

just look at the hash rate graph of bitcoin... its parabolic

http://bitcoin.sipa.be/

unless you have an unlimited money supply you will forever be chasing 51% if you wanted to control the bitcoin network with raw hashing power.

the problem with smaller coins is that they are competing for hash with each other.... a coin with more hash rate than another coin using the same algo could easily divert its hash rate to "raid" the other network... that's what happened to TRC a few times....  the funny thing is though.. people still trade TRC and it still has some value even after it was attacked several times...
just goes to show that 51% attack is not the biggest problem faced by most coins in the long run (nor are ASICS)...
death by obscurity is what will be the fate of most coins going forward.

[ranlo]

I get where you're coming from, but think about it like this. If ASICs were never created and 7950's were the fastest hashing hardware, it would be cheaper and would still provide the same benefit. ASICs are cheaper than GPUs by far. It's getting (over time) to where the fastest hashing hardware is cheaper than what we use today, which is why constant upgrades are needed (and ends up adding on its own hardware costs over time). If we had no ASICs, people would be buying 7950's, yes, but it would be more of a linear progression instead of this massive spike.

that's the efficiency of the market .. nobody can control that.. people will always find a cheaper way of doing things so they can make more profit for a time until the next guy comes along.

are you old enough to remember a time before GPUs?

back then yeah the CPU could do all that 3D math and you could run 3D games like wolfenstein and Doom without any need for special extra hardware.
but then someone figured out a better way to do it and the GPU was born...

sure we could have been just fine with Doom, Descent and Wolfenstein level graphics...
but wow look how far we have come with GPUs... Near cinema quality HD graphics that we used to see only in movies right there on our computer screens.......

how far we have come in the last 20 years is amazing..

we are only year 5 of the bitcoin revolution... just imagine how amazing the world will be in 15 years?

after all GPUs are just Graphics ASICs.

its progress my dear watson.. and nobody can stop it...

True... maybe my problem is more because I don't want to keep playing the cat-and-mouse game for the next 30 years just to even take part. When BTC first started everyone was invited. Now it's a "buy new hardware every couple months or you're screwed" game.

[Alphi]

True... maybe my problem is more because I don't want to keep playing the cat-and-mouse game for the next 30 years just to even take part. When BTC first started everyone was invited. Now it's a "buy new hardware every couple months or you're screwed" game.

you can still do that with Scrypt-N and X11 coins...

but I agree.. when you're not making much money, its not fun at all...

just like real life miners..... some lucky bastards find a nugget... while everyone else is digging around in the dirt all day long looking for specs of dust  lol..

but hey.. at least I do have the best gaming rig in town and will do for quite some time lolz.

[yurimir]

Vote for karma, already 3rd place https://comkort.com/vote#KARM   

p.s.   "If you are a registered user, you can cast your vote up to 3 times/hour."

[mouseman]

We would need F-A-R more details to make an informed decision at this point. My knee jerk on this is "No". Followed up with an open ear as...as again, there would have to be much more discussion on how it would be implemented at its impact on Karmashare investors..as paramount info.

In other late breaking news - just sent another 90 million Karma to be exchanged for KarmaShares. That puts over 8.4 million coins exchanged. WOW. http://karmashares.com/explorer-v01

P.S. Feel free to throw me a bone and help out at http://xhash.net  
No fees - only donations. Whenever another pool goes down, I hurry over there..only to later leave. That's nonsense. Their deserving of my default pool.

Fellow Karmanians there is a POLL going on, make your voice heard.

http://karmashare.me/index.php?do=/poll/21/should-karmashares-llc-be-the-first-crypto-corp-to-offer-3rd-party-support-/

This is about the suggestion of dogeyo_to_tokyo in our subreddit http://www.reddit.com/r/Karmashares/comments/25zv9r/out_of_the_blue_paypal_rep_might_have_gave_some/.


Let us sort this out and if profitable, let us grab this.

The problem I have with this proposal is (if I understand it correctly) you want Karmashares LLC to back any Karma transaction involving paypal that doesn't work out...

in other words asking Karmashares to act as an insurer to guarantee transactions that do not involve Karmashares or its shareholders.
I don't see how that could be profitable unless they charge a hefty transaction fee pretty much the same way that credit card companies do.

I think in order to do this Karmashares would have to register as an MSB in 52 states (in the USA alone) which could cost millions of dollars.


if this is what your proposing then I have 3 problems with it.

1) it rewards the stupid... at the expense of the needy. money gets diverted away from "Doing good" projects to fund essentially transactions where people have not been acting responsibly and doing their own due diligence before transacting with each other.


2) it goes against the very core ethos of all crypto currencies.. and that is the user maintaining control and responsibility over their own money. The minute you introduce buyer and seller protections such as charge backs and escrow... you become no different from the Fiat system that already exists. Escrow is a good idea but it should not be controlled by a central authority (there are ways you can do this on the blockchain itself with multisig and time delayed transactions) but charge backs are just plain wrong. Why should a seller have to refund the money of the buyer claims he was ripped off without offering any proof? (this is how charge backs work atm)

3) Karmashares already has too many coins.. more than 10% of the entire supply. If they control too many (50%+ maybe even less than that) coins and all the coins get stolen then its game over for Karma. there are no second changes and no rising form the ashes.

the credit card system we have today was invented in the 1950s and it is broken.. please lets not replicate it....

[Delaforetnoire]

Vote for karma, already 3rd place https://comkort.com/vote#KARM

Yes vote ! I vote sometimes for almost more than 2 months hehe