Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 12:04:14 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: would you be interested in an next generation ASIC trade up program for your ModMiner Quad?
YES
NO

Pages: « 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 [70] 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 »
  Print  
Author Topic: High Efficiency FPGA & ASIC Bitcoin Mining Devices https://BTCFPGA.com  (Read 200637 times)
Shadow383
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 04:16:06 PM
 #1381

I did not decline the bet.  We'll see if Tom has enough confidence in his hardware to make the bet.  My guess is he'll chicken out and take the excuse of "You won't stay out of my thread" to back out of the bet.  But maybe he'll surprise me.
You are wrong! The bet was not about bASIC power requirement, ONLY about BFL's claim. Don't mix things...
I agree. Take the damn bet for 1000BTC about whether BFL can deliver their claimed efficiency. If you're so confident, then it should be easy money for you! However, you're antagonizing him with all this nit-picking of dictionary terminology, which is just going to screw you (by not getting the 1000BTC bet).

He's calling you out on your claims. Take the bet, and prove him wrong. Then, if you want to nitpick about his terms and "competitiveness", make a separate bet in another thread.
^This. So much this.

Tom doesn't want to provide a specific power figure on the possibility that it'll be wrong. Surely after claiming that the FPGA single would draw 20W, BFL understands that simulation figures have a habit of getting revised one way or another?
We know the thing can be powered by Molex, so surely that gives you some idea.

Besides, you're really going to turn down what should be an easy twelve grand because Tom won't pull some wattage numbers out of thin air?
1480809854
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480809854

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480809854
Reply with quote  #2

1480809854
Report to moderator
1480809854
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480809854

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480809854
Reply with quote  #2

1480809854
Report to moderator
1480809854
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480809854

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480809854
Reply with quote  #2

1480809854
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480809854
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480809854

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480809854
Reply with quote  #2

1480809854
Report to moderator
1480809854
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480809854

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480809854
Reply with quote  #2

1480809854
Report to moderator
Isokivi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


Items flashing here available at btctrinkets.com


View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 04:17:11 PM
 #1382

Haha, I knew Tom did not have the confidence in his product to back up the bet!  Thanks for confirming it, Tom!


Seriously... I hope atleast your eployer realizes that you are hurting their reputation with this. Consider me a potential customer who's (once again) shocked and appalled by the way BFL appears to be conducting buisness.

Bitcoin trinkets now on my online store: btc trinkets.com <- Bitcoin Tiepins, cufflinks, lapel pins, keychains, card holders and challenge coins.
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 04:23:06 PM
 #1383

I did not decline the bet.  We'll see if Tom has enough confidence in his hardware to make the bet.  My guess is he'll chicken out and take the excuse of "You won't stay out of my thread" to back out of the bet.  But maybe he'll surprise me.
You are wrong! The bet was not about bASIC power requirement, ONLY about BFL's claim. Don't mix things...
I agree. Take the damn bet for 1000BTC about whether BFL can deliver their claimed efficiency. If you're so confident, then it should be easy money for you! However, you're antagonizing him with all this nit-picking of dictionary terminology, which is just going to screw you (by not getting the 1000BTC bet).

He's calling you out on your claims. Take the bet, and prove him wrong. Then, if you want to nitpick about his terms and "competitiveness", make a separate bet in another thread.
^This. So much this.

Tom doesn't want to provide a specific power figure on the possibility that it'll be wrong. Surely after claiming that the FPGA single would draw 20W, BFL understands that simulation figures have a habit of getting revised one way or another?
We know the thing can be powered by Molex, so surely that gives you some idea.

Besides, you're really going to turn down what should be an easy twelve grand because Tom won't pull some wattage numbers out of thin air?

I'm not asking him to give wattage numbers or a power estimate, I am asking him to define competitive.  What the hell, are you completely incapable of reading?  

Again, here's the bet I'm willing to make:

1.  BFL products will ship with a power usage at 1.1w per GH or less.
2. Tom defines "competitive."
3. Tom does not require that I stay out of his thread as a condition of the bet.

That's it.  Tom has already declined because he knows if he defines competitive one of two things happen:

A) People realize his definition of "competitive" and their definition are grossly different.
B) He has to admit that his power usage is not going to be competitive.

That's really the only reason he is declining the bet at this point, because it forces him into a position of admitting something he doesn't want to admit yet, because his precious pre-orders will dry up like a bone in a desert.

If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
miter_myles
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 04:24:33 PM
 #1384

Umm.. you already declined, so just stfu, kthx!

BTC - 1D7g5395bs7idApTx1KTXrfDW7JUgzx6Z5
LTC - LVFukQnCWUimBxZuXKqTVKy1L2Jb8kZasL
creativex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 04:32:51 PM
 #1385

We're gonna need some troll repellent over here...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=130982.msg1401799#msg1401799 - [BTC-TC]bASIC-MINING
http://forum.litecoin.net/index.php/topic,886.0.html - [LTC-GLOBAL]LTC-DMF
http://forum.litecoin.net/index.php/topic,817.msg3279.html#msg3279 - [CRYPTOSTOCKS]AGLTC

BTC: 1Hfp99tugY4H5FYEoM3hj4JDLzShzZ9ifB

You have zero chance of changing others and only a slim chance at changing yourself. Be the change you want to see and others may follow.
cedivad
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 04:34:19 PM
 #1386

Who would be interested in a crow-founded bet against Inaba?

My anger against what is wrong in the Bitcoin community is productive:
Bitcointa.lk - Replace "Bitcointalk.org" with "Bitcointa.lk" in this url to see how this page looks like on a proper forum (Announcement Thread)
Hashfast.org - Wiki for screwed customers
AmDD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 826



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 04:46:18 PM
 #1387

I did not decline the bet.  We'll see if Tom has enough confidence in his hardware to make the bet.  My guess is he'll chicken out and take the excuse of "You won't stay out of my thread" to back out of the bet.  But maybe he'll surprise me.
You are wrong! The bet was not about bASIC power requirement, ONLY about BFL's claim. Don't mix things...
I agree. Take the damn bet for 1000BTC about whether BFL can deliver their claimed efficiency. If you're so confident, then it should be easy money for you! However, you're antagonizing him with all this nit-picking of dictionary terminology, which is just going to screw you (by not getting the 1000BTC bet).

He's calling you out on your claims. Take the bet, and prove him wrong. Then, if you want to nitpick about his terms and "competitiveness", make a separate bet in another thread.
^This. So much this.

Tom doesn't want to provide a specific power figure on the possibility that it'll be wrong. Surely after claiming that the FPGA single would draw 20W, BFL understands that simulation figures have a habit of getting revised one way or another?
We know the thing can be powered by Molex, so surely that gives you some idea.

Besides, you're really going to turn down what should be an easy twelve grand because Tom won't pull some wattage numbers out of thin air?

I'm not asking him to give wattage numbers or a power estimate, I am asking him to define competitive.  What the hell, are you completely incapable of reading? 

Again, here's the bet I'm willing to make:

1.  BFL products will ship with a power usage at 1.1w per GH or less.
2. Tom defines "competitive."
3. Tom does not require that I stay out of his thread as a condition of the bet.

That's it.  Tom has already declined because he knows if he defines competitive one of two things happen:

A) People realize his definition of "competitive" and their definition are grossly different.
B) He has to admit that his power usage is not going to be competitive.

That's really the only reason he is declining the bet at this point, because it forces him into a position of admitting something he doesn't want to admit yet, because his precious pre-orders will dry up like a bone in a desert.



Just incase you are incapable of reading here is the bet Tom is willing to make...

Quote
1) When BFL's line of ASIC's hit the wild they must not consume more than 1.1 watt of electricity per 1Gh/s of Bitcoin mining speed, and according to everything you are telling us 1.1 watts per 1Gh/s is the most electricity they will use.

2) You will no longer post in my thread, if you post in my thread again you automatically lose the bet.

Its simple, 2 things... but you cant handle it.

Every word you type here does two things. It shows how much of a douche you really are and puts another strike against BFL. I never spole a bad word about them and I was not around for the issues in the past but after the way you act around here I will never buy from them! You may remember this quote...

Quote
BFL is the clear technical leader in the FPGA and upcoming ASIC mining space.  As a direct result, the company has grown very quickly over the past year.  Unfortunately, its customer service, which was initially very good, did not scale fast enough, which caused customer relations and transparency to suffer. BFL is eager to improve and one of my top responsibilities in this new position is to focus on that specific issue.  I am, have always been and will always be committed to good customer service and transparency when it comes to bitcoin in general and the daily operations of related activities.  This is where I will be focusing much of my initial attention, specifically to take the pressure off of everyone involved so that they can focus on the other important factors, such as getting the hardware delivered on time!

Might I just say you are one hell of an employee! I hope you get a raise for all you have done, infact is it possible for your boss to see this thread? has he/she been watching?

BTC tip jar: 18EKpbrcXxbpzAZv3T58ccGcVis7W7JR9w
LTC tip jar: Lgp8ERykAgx6Q8NdMqpi5vnVoUMD2hYn2a
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 04:51:30 PM
 #1388

and you guys thought i was off topic  Roll Eyes
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 04:57:09 PM
 #1389

The ball is in Toms court at this point.  If he doesn't even have the confidence in his hardware to define "competitive" then there's not really that much more to be said.  The fact that he's unwilling to back his own words with his actions speaks volumes as to his integrity.

I'm putting up 1000 BTC against BFL hardware @ 1.1w / GH against your "competitive" definition.  That's it.  Simple.  Define "competitive" and you can win $12,000. 


If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
Starlightbreaker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190


★Nitrogensports.eu★


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 04:58:08 PM
 #1390

I did not decline the bet.  We'll see if Tom has enough confidence in his hardware to make the bet.  My guess is he'll chicken out and take the excuse of "You won't stay out of my thread" to back out of the bet.  But maybe he'll surprise me.
You are wrong! The bet was not about bASIC power requirement, ONLY about BFL's claim. Don't mix things...
I agree. Take the damn bet for 1000BTC about whether BFL can deliver their claimed efficiency. If you're so confident, then it should be easy money for you! However, you're antagonizing him with all this nit-picking of dictionary terminology, which is just going to screw you (by not getting the 1000BTC bet).

He's calling you out on your claims. Take the bet, and prove him wrong. Then, if you want to nitpick about his terms and "competitiveness", make a separate bet in another thread.
^This. So much this.

Tom doesn't want to provide a specific power figure on the possibility that it'll be wrong. Surely after claiming that the FPGA single would draw 20W, BFL understands that simulation figures have a habit of getting revised one way or another?
We know the thing can be powered by Molex, so surely that gives you some idea.

Besides, you're really going to turn down what should be an easy twelve grand because Tom won't pull some wattage numbers out of thin air?

I'm not asking him to give wattage numbers or a power estimate, I am asking him to define competitive.  What the hell, are you completely incapable of reading?  

Again, here's the bet I'm willing to make:

1.  BFL products will ship with a power usage at 1.1w per GH or less.
2. Tom defines "competitive."
3. Tom does not require that I stay out of his thread as a condition of the bet.

That's it.  Tom has already declined because he knows if he defines competitive one of two things happen:

A) People realize his definition of "competitive" and their definition are grossly different.
B) He has to admit that his power usage is not going to be competitive.

That's really the only reason he is declining the bet at this point, because it forces him into a position of admitting something he doesn't want to admit yet, because his precious pre-orders will dry up like a bone in a desert.


ITT, we have a living example for the term "thundercunt"


           █████████████████     ████████
          █████████████████     ████████
         █████████████████     ████████
        █████████████████     ████████
       ████████              ████████
      ████████              ████████
     ████████     ███████  ████████     ████████
    ████████     █████████████████     ████████
   ████████     █████████████████     ████████
  ████████     █████████████████     ████████
 ████████     █████████████████     ████████
████████     ████████  ███████     ████████
            ████████              ████████
           ████████              ████████
          ████████     █████████████████
         ████████     █████████████████
        ████████     █████████████████
       ████████     █████████████████
▄▄
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██     
██
██
▬▬ THE LARGEST & MOST TRUSTED ▬▬
      BITCOIN SPORTSBOOK     
   ▄▄
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██     
██
██
             ▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▄
     ▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀        ▀▄▄▄▄           
▄▀▀▀▀                 █   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄
█                    ▀▄          █
 █   ▀▌     ██▄        █          █               
 ▀▄        ▐████▄       █        █
  █        ███████▄     ▀▄       █
   █      ▐████▄█████████████████████▄
   ▀▄     ███████▀                  ▀██
    █      ▀█████    ▄▄        ▄▄    ██
     █       ▀███   ████      ████   ██
     ▀▄        ██    ▀▀        ▀▀    ██
      █        ██        ▄██▄        ██
       █       ██        ▀██▀        ██
       ▀▄      ██    ▄▄        ▄▄    ██
        █      ██   ████      ████   ██
         █▄▄▄▄▀██    ▀▀        ▀▀    ██
               ██▄                  ▄██
                ▀████████████████████▀




  CASINO  ●  DICE  ●  POKER   
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
   24 hour Customer Support   

▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
crazyates
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 04:59:35 PM
 #1391

I'm putting up 1000 BTC against BFL hardware @ 1.1w / GH against your "competitive" definition.
That was not the original deal. If you had stuck to the original deal, you could have had Tom's 1000BTC. Instead, you argued and turned it about him instead of about BFL, and now you'll never see those coins.

Tips? 1crazy8pMqgwJ7tX7ZPZmyPwFbc6xZKM9
Previous Trade History - Sale Thread
sturle
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1418

http://bitmynt.no


View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 05:03:30 PM
 #1392

I'm putting up 1000 BTC against BFL hardware @ 1.1w / GH against your "competitive" definition.  That's it.  Simple.  Define "competitive" and you can win $12,000. 
Why this obsession with wattage per Ghash/s?  It is of no importance whatsoever, as long as they play roughly in the same league.  This whole discussion is pointless.  There are two important factors that determine profitability, assuming both are reasonably stable.  Price per Ghash/s and delivery date.

Sjå http://bitmynt.no for veksling av bitcoin mot norske kroner.  Trygt, billig, raskt og enkelt sidan 2010.
I buy with EUR and other currencies at a fair market price when you want to sell.  See http://bitmynt.no/eurprice.pl
I support the roadmap.  If a majority of miners ever try to forcefully take control of Bitcoin through a hard fork without 100% consensus, I will immediately split out and dump all my forkcoins, and buy more real Bitcoin.
cedivad
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 05:10:15 PM
 #1393

I'm putting up 1000 BTC against BFL hardware @ 1.1w / GH against your "competitive" definition.  That's it.  Simple.  Define "competitive" and you can win $12,000. 
Why this obsession with wattage per Ghash/s?  It is of no importance whatsoever, as long as they play roughly in the same league.  This whole discussion is pointless.  There are two important factors that determine profitability, assuming both are reasonably stable.  Price per Ghash/s and delivery date.
Shhh!!!
It's a secret!

My anger against what is wrong in the Bitcoin community is productive:
Bitcointa.lk - Replace "Bitcointalk.org" with "Bitcointa.lk" in this url to see how this page looks like on a proper forum (Announcement Thread)
Hashfast.org - Wiki for screwed customers
mezzomix
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1596


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 05:15:11 PM
 #1394

Tom, I think Josh will never agree to your bet and that alone is a clear statement about the status of the BFL ASIC products for me. Sometimes he reminds me to MNW. Just ignore him, stay away from BFL threads/comparisons and concentrate on your bASIC product.

Back to bASIC - do you think your estimated ship date for the bASICs is still valid?
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2086



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 05:26:52 PM
 #1395

Power usage is *everything* when it comes to ASIC.  If you think it's not, you have no grasp on the economics of mining.
Please explain your economics of mining.  By my calculations power usage at this order of magnitude is pretty much irrelevant compared to price.

Take a BFL Single, 60 Ghash/s, 60 W.  The miner costs 1299 USD and will use 1.44 kW/day.  14.4 cents a day at 0.10 USD/kWh.  You can run this miner 24/7 for almost 25 years before you have spent the same amount for power to run the device that you paid for the device itself!  There may even be better miners to buy at a lower price in 2037, making it obsolete before the owner has spent more on power to run it than on the device itself.  If the device is still working.  (How long is your warranty and what is the expected lifetime of a BFL Single, btw?)  Hardly anyone will ever pay more for the power to run the miner through it's lifetime than they did for the miner itself.

My simple math shows that power usage is almost irrelevant for an ASIC miner.  Price per Ghash produced throughout the miners lifetime will almost certainly always be dominated by the initial investment, not power consumption.  Price per Ghash/s is the important factor.

Is my math wrong?
No, just your assumptions on difficulty. I don't expect any of these 60 GH range ASIC products to make even $1000 in 2013 alone. By design, difficulty will always bring the cost-to-mine very close to power costs. When it catches up, power costs will be all that matters. Until then, delivery dates before it adjusts are the key importance.

MrTeal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 05:41:09 PM
 #1396

Power usage is *everything* when it comes to ASIC.  If you think it's not, you have no grasp on the economics of mining.
Please explain your economics of mining.  By my calculations power usage at this order of magnitude is pretty much irrelevant compared to price.

Take a BFL Single, 60 Ghash/s, 60 W.  The miner costs 1299 USD and will use 1.44 kW/day.  14.4 cents a day at 0.10 USD/kWh.  You can run this miner 24/7 for almost 25 years before you have spent the same amount for power to run the device that you paid for the device itself!  There may even be better miners to buy at a lower price in 2037, making it obsolete before the owner has spent more on power to run it than on the device itself.  If the device is still working.  (How long is your warranty and what is the expected lifetime of a BFL Single, btw?)  Hardly anyone will ever pay more for the power to run the miner through it's lifetime than they did for the miner itself.

My simple math shows that power usage is almost irrelevant for an ASIC miner.  Price per Ghash produced throughout the miners lifetime will almost certainly always be dominated by the initial investment, not power consumption.  Price per Ghash/s is the important factor.

Is my math wrong?
No, just your assumptions on difficulty. I don't expect any of these 60 GH range ASIC products to make even $1000 in 2013 alone. By design, difficulty will always bring the cost-to-mine very close to power costs. When it catches up, power costs will be all that matters. Until then, delivery dates before it adjusts are the key importance.

Only if there is enough capital in the system to purchase the equipment needed to get the hashrate that high. With GPUs, for something like a 6970 you might spend $200 on the card and at 150W and $.15/kWhr you would spend about $200/yr on power. For something like a BFL Single, your initial cost is $600 and you would spend $105 on power for a year. With an ASIC Single, your cost is $1300 and $79 on power for a year.

At $12/BTC and 25BTC/block, to get to the point where mining income is twice the power cost for a BFL Single would require 6.1PH/s. That's 4067 Minirigs worth of hashing power, or $122M worth of hardware. At current prices, that's about the value of all the remaining bitcoins left to be mined.
gmaxwell
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2016



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 05:48:40 PM
 #1397

No, just your assumptions on difficulty. I don't expect any of these 60 GH range ASIC products to make even $1000 in 2013 alone. By design, difficulty will always bring the cost-to-mine very close to power costs. When it catches up, power costs will be all that matters. Until then, delivery dates before it adjusts are the key importance.
Agreed.

The people who have the view that the power doesn't matter only have it because they have high profitability expectations.  The people saying that power is all that matters are expecting very long payoff horizons due to difficulty increases.  I think the latter view is safer and also more correct, especially if you're not counting on being very early in your deployment.

Which I think results is another interesting bit to take away from the discussion:   BFL is apparently not expecting their customers purchases to pay for themselves for quite a long time.   This is fine by me, as it's also what I expect— and I mine for fun and to support Bitcoin, and not because I'm expecting to make a a lot of funds doing it... but if you were thinking otherwise you might want to carefully review your expectations.

Of course, at the moment— there is still the potential of getting ASIC based miners before they are widely deployed and the difficulty catches up, so thats a competitive factor thats hard to reason about.  Though you can probably count on it not happening for you if you're last on a long preorder backlog…
Epoch
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 917



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 06:16:32 PM
 #1398

No, just your assumptions on difficulty. I don't expect any of these 60 GH range ASIC products to make even $1000 in 2013 alone. By design, difficulty will always bring the cost-to-mine very close to power costs. When it catches up, power costs will be all that matters. Until then, delivery dates before it adjusts are the key importance.
Agreed.

The people who have the view that the power doesn't matter only have it because they have high profitability expectations.  The people saying that power is all that matters are expecting very long payoff horizons due to difficulty increases.  I think the latter view is safer and also more correct, especially if you're not counting on being very early in your deployment.

Which I think results is another interesting bit to take away from the discussion:   BFL is apparently not expecting their customers purchases to pay for themselves for quite a long time.   This is fine by me, as it's also what I expect— an I mine for fun and to support Bitcoin... but if you were thinking otherwise you might want to carefully review your expectations.

Although I generally try to take a conservative approach, in this particular case I would tend more towards the former idea: that power is not likely to play a significant role immediately (or more accurately, it is only PART of the equation). Rather, it is the ROI - Return On Investment - that matters. ROI takes into account both net income (from mining) and expenses (capital cost and running cost).

Consider this: I a purchased a mining device 6 months ago for $600 that generates $3/day and costs $0.25/day to operate. Assuming these numbers don't change over time, I can expect an ROI of about 220 days. Not bad.

Now consider a hypothetical device identical to the one above, except that it uses TWICE the power. Thus costing me $0.50/day to operate. Now instead of an ROI of 220 days I can expect an ROI of 240 days. A 10% increase. Is this significant? I would argue that it is not; there is little difference between 220 days and 240 days. Both are equally reasonable.

Let's take this further: if my running costs (electricity) ever became a SIGNIFICANT percentage of the mining income, I would stop mining altogether. I imagine many other miners would as well. For instance, back to my original device making $3/day and costing $0.25/day to operate : if difficulty went up so high to reduce my mining income to, say, $1/day, I would be unlikely to purchase another one. The ROI at that point would become too long (800 days) and it would not be worth buying such a device. Especially in an unstable and risky ecosystem as bitcoin.

So I don't believe that difficulty will ever rise to a level where running costs become a very significant percentage of the gross income; the ROI would simply become too long and many people would stop mining (or, perhaps more pragmatically, people would become increasingly unlikely to invest in new mining hardware, thus capping difficulty).

BTC: 1DJVUnLuPA2bERTkyeir8bKn1eSoRCrYvx
NMC: NFcfHSBBnq622pAr1Xoh9KtnBPA5CUn6id
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 06:20:31 PM
 #1399

Not too long ago Josh "Inaba" must have figured out that BFL was a losing venture, and secretly resigned.  He then went to Tom and said, hey, can I work for you?

Tom said, sure.  Here's your first task.  Go into my forum and troll away.  Make it look like you're attacking me, but in reality you're discrediting BFL and making bASIC look good.

Only thing that makes sense really.

M

MMinerMonitor author, monitor/auto/schedule reboots/alerts/remote/MobileMiner for Ants and Spondoolies! Latest (5.2). MPoolMonitor author, monitor stats/workers for most pools, global BTC stats (current/nxt diff/USD val/hashrate/calc)! Latest (v4.2) 
Buyer beware of Bitmain hardware and services.
chrcoe01
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 147


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 06:36:49 PM
 #1400

wow I haven't checked this thread in awhile, it's getting crazy!  Shocked

"You may delay, but time will not, and lost time is never found again." -Benjamin Franklin
Pages: « 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 [70] 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 »
  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!