BFL Labs just like Get-rich-quick-schemes

[smoothie]

But this all goes back to who makes more money........the miners or the guy selling you mining supplies.

Yeah, going with that, a company might make more money digging for gold with the 5 shovels they themselves would need to mine than they would from selling just the 5 shovels. But if instead they don't mine and just sell thousands of shovels to all the miners out there, then they will likely make more than they could have by digging for themselves with 5 shovels. Analogous point for BFL.

Point #1: No one digs for gold (serious miners) with a shovel now days.

Point #2: Manual labor and running software can't be compared. One is physical and one is more virtual/electrical/automated.

Hardly a good analogy..lol

An analogy is just that - an analogy. It doesnt matter if miners ACTUALLY use shovels now. It's the logic.

And the manual labor/software here is perfectly warranted too. Again, its the logic.

The cost/development of shovels from Miner Company is analogous to the cost/development of ASIC from BFL.
The selling of shovels is analogous to the selling of ASIC devices.
The chance of actually finding gold and selling it is analogous to the difficulty rate/block chain of bitcoin mining.

the logic, not the actual practicality is what matters 

Whatever floats your boat man lol

I dont swing that way bro...lol

[1714948350]

1714948350

[1714948350]

1714948350

[1714948350]

1714948350

[1714948350]

1714948350

[1714948350]

1714948350

[ChanceCoats123]

But this all goes back to who makes more money........the miners or the guy selling you mining supplies.

Yeah, going with that, a company might make more money digging for gold with the 5 shovels they themselves would need to mine than they would from selling just the 5 shovels. But if instead they don't mine and just sell thousands of shovels to all the miners out there, then they will likely make more than they could have by digging for themselves with 5 shovels. Analogous point for BFL.

Point #1: No one digs for gold (serious miners) with a shovel now days.

Point #2: Manual labor and running software can't be compared. One is physical and one is more virtual/electrical/automated.

Hardly a good analogy..lol

An analogy is just that - an analogy. It doesnt matter if miners ACTUALLY use shovels now. It's the logic.

And the manual labor/software here is perfectly warranted too. Again, its the logic.

The cost/development of shovels from Miner Company is analogous to the cost/development of ASIC from BFL.
The selling of shovels is analogous to the selling of ASIC devices.
The chance of actually finding gold and selling it is analogous to the difficulty rate/block chain of bitcoin mining.

the logic, not the actual practicality is what matters  

Whatever floats your boat man lol

I dont swing that way bro...lol

I'm sorry to further de-rail this thread by adding another post about this topic, but seriously... Smoothie, are you fucking serious? His analogy fits the situation perfectly regardless of the fact that gold miners no longer use shovels. And FFS, did you call him out on using the word analogy because it has a root word of anal? You used the word too, you idiot.

We pardon the interruption. Your regularly scheduled programing will now resume.

[smoothie]

But this all goes back to who makes more money........the miners or the guy selling you mining supplies.

Yeah, going with that, a company might make more money digging for gold with the 5 shovels they themselves would need to mine than they would from selling just the 5 shovels. But if instead they don't mine and just sell thousands of shovels to all the miners out there, then they will likely make more than they could have by digging for themselves with 5 shovels. Analogous point for BFL.

Point #1: No one digs for gold (serious miners) with a shovel now days.

Point #2: Manual labor and running software can't be compared. One is physical and one is more virtual/electrical/automated.

Hardly a good analogy..lol

An analogy is just that - an analogy. It doesnt matter if miners ACTUALLY use shovels now. It's the logic.

And the manual labor/software here is perfectly warranted too. Again, its the logic.

The cost/development of shovels from Miner Company is analogous to the cost/development of ASIC from BFL.
The selling of shovels is analogous to the selling of ASIC devices.
The chance of actually finding gold and selling it is analogous to the difficulty rate/block chain of bitcoin mining.

the logic, not the actual practicality is what matters  

Whatever floats your boat man lol

I dont swing that way bro...lol

I'm sorry to further de-rail this thread by adding another post about this topic, but seriously... Smoothie, are you fucking serious? His analogy fits the situation perfectly regardless of the fact that gold miners no longer use shovels. And FFS, did you call him out on using the word analogy because it has a root word of anal? You used the word too, you idiot.

We pardon the interruption. Your regularly scheduled programing will now resume.

Just laugh bro...chill I was only joking...

Some people on this forum are so uptight. 

[johnyj]

Some thing I wonder:

ASICs said to use 1/4 of the power and provide 10 times performance than same size FPGA

Now a FPGA miner using 80W to generate 800MH/s
Same size of ASIC will use only 20W, while generate 8GH/s, devide by 2, still use 10W to generate 4GH/s. I don't understand how come a USB port can power 10W equipment?

[gat3way]

1) Make incredible claims about your future product promise 1 to 1 trade ins on your currently sold product
2) Point all your PR tools to talking favorably about your future product and minimizing your previous failure to meet pre-release numbers
3) Take peoples $ for future orders, this combined with money not spent due to uncertainty reduces your competitors sales and thus available funds to develop their future products
4) Some profit
5) Plow some of that money into developing something that at least might, perhaps come close to your seat of the pants PR numbers
6)
7) More profit

What about the following:

1) Make incredible claims about your future product promise 1 to 1 trade ins on your currently sold product
2) Point all your PR tools to talking favorably about your future product and minimizing your previous failure to meet pre-release numbers
3) Take peoples BTC for future orders, this combined with money not spent due to uncertainty reduces your competitors sales and thus available funds to develop their future products
4) Some profit
5) Do not plow any of that money into developing something that at least might, perhaps come close to your seat of the pants PR numbers
6) Declare bankruptcy
7) Return the money to everyone that paid by wire transfer. Fuck up all the greedy idiots stupid enough to preorder in BTC.
Still some profit
9) Move to some nice sunny place and enjoy.

[aqrulesms]

Some thing I wonder:

ASICs said to use 1/4 of the power and provide 10 times performance than same size FPGA

Now a FPGA miner using 80W to generate 800MH/s
Same size of ASIC will use only 20W, while generate 8GH/s, devide by 2, still use 10W to generate 4GH/s. I don't understand how come a USB port can power 10W equipment?

Yep, they can't

BFL is overexagerating, AGAIN. I'd rather wait for some reputable ASIC companies instead of BFL.

[ChanceCoats123]

About the power usage stats and such, remember that the FPGA single was also supposed to push 1000mhash+ @ only 20 watts.

[Dargo]

Some thing I wonder:

ASICs said to use 1/4 of the power and provide 10 times performance than same size FPGA

Now a FPGA miner using 80W to generate 800MH/s
Same size of ASIC will use only 20W, while generate 8GH/s, devide by 2, still use 10W to generate 4GH/s. I don't understand how come a USB port can power 10W equipment?

Yep, they can't

BFL is overexagerating, AGAIN. I'd rather wait for some reputable ASIC companies instead of BFL.

So maybe the Jalapenos will need a power cord rather than just running off of USB. And maybe they will do 3 Gh instead of 3.5. Not a big deal IMO.

[ElectricMucus]

Some thing I wonder:

ASICs said to use 1/4 of the power and provide 10 times performance than same size FPGA

Now a FPGA miner using 80W to generate 800MH/s
Same size of ASIC will use only 20W, while generate 8GH/s, devide by 2, still use 10W to generate 4GH/s. I don't understand how come a USB port can power 10W equipment?

Yep, they can't

BFL is overexagerating, AGAIN. I'd rather wait for some reputable ASIC companies instead of BFL.

So maybe the Jalapenos will need a power cord rather than just running off of USB. And maybe they will do 3 Gh instead of 3.5. Not a big deal IMO.

But what if that power chord draws in 50W of power?
And what if they do 2 GH instead? What about 1.6 GH?

Right not this big of a deal  

[OmegaNemesis28]

Some thing I wonder:

ASICs said to use 1/4 of the power and provide 10 times performance than same size FPGA

Now a FPGA miner using 80W to generate 800MH/s
Same size of ASIC will use only 20W, while generate 8GH/s, devide by 2, still use 10W to generate 4GH/s. I don't understand how come a USB port can power 10W equipment?

Yep, they can't

BFL is overexagerating, AGAIN. I'd rather wait for some reputable ASIC companies instead of BFL.

So maybe the Jalapenos will need a power cord rather than just running off of USB. And maybe they will do 3 Gh instead of 3.5. Not a big deal IMO.

But what if that power chord draws in 50W of power?
And what if they do 2 GH instead? What about 1.6 GH?

Right not this big of a deal  

For $160, and the device does 2Gh/s or even 1.6Gh/s - not a big deal at all!
That smokes anything you can buy still.

I don't expect the 40Gh/s Single to do 40Gh/s at all. If it does 20Gh/s it still worthwhile.

[misterbigg]

I'm surprised no one has pointed this out yet (since I'm hardly an expert) BUT...

People wonder why BFL doesn't just mine instead of sell? The answer is simple. There is a very large up front development cost to producing the first Mini-Rig "SC". Some other thread estimated 10 million dollars to create the ASIC design.

There is tremendous business risk to investing $10m and then using it to mine, since the difficulty is sure to go up and BTC will go down significantly if the sudden appearance of a large amount of hashing resources "spooks" the network.

On the other hand, BFL business model of announcing powerful machines many months ahead of time and taking pre-orders is ideally suited to the large R&D cost of developing the rig. It is almost a self-fulfilling prophecy. Miners anticipating the future appearance of big hashing power have no choice but to either pre-order the devices or plan to exit the mining market.

If BFL can deliver as promised they are following the most logical course.

[rjk]

I'm surprised no one has pointed this out yet (since I'm hardly an expert) BUT...

People wonder why BFL doesn't just mine instead of sell? The answer is simple. There is a very large up front development cost to producing the first Mini-Rig "SC". Some other thread estimated 10 million dollars to create the ASIC design.

There is tremendous business risk to investing $10m and then using it to mine, since the difficulty is sure to go up and BTC will go down significantly if the sudden appearance of a large amount of hashing resources "spooks" the network.

On the other hand, BFL business model of announcing powerful machines many months ahead of time and taking pre-orders is ideally suited to the large R&D cost of developing the rig. It is almost a self-fulfilling prophecy. Miners anticipating the future appearance of big hashing power have no choice but to either pre-order the devices or plan to exit the mining market.

If BFL can deliver as promised they are following the most logical course.

Plenty of people have thought of that, read some other BFL threads (dozens available to choose from).

[ChanceCoats123]

I'm surprised no one has pointed this out yet (since I'm hardly an expert) BUT...

People wonder why BFL doesn't just mine instead of sell? The answer is simple. There is a very large up front development cost to producing the first Mini-Rig "SC". Some other thread estimated 10 million dollars to create the ASIC design.

There is tremendous business risk to investing $10m and then using it to mine, since the difficulty is sure to go up and BTC will go down significantly if the sudden appearance of a large amount of hashing resources "spooks" the network.

On the other hand, BFL business model of announcing powerful machines many months ahead of time and taking pre-orders is ideally suited to the large R&D cost of developing the rig. It is almost a self-fulfilling prophecy. Miners anticipating the future appearance of big hashing power have no choice but to either pre-order the devices or plan to exit the mining market.

If BFL can deliver as promised they are following the most logical course.

Exactly. It's almost like the anticipated rate doubling when the block reward halves. It will more than likely fulfill itself. People expecting the market to rise will buy more coins, which raises the market. LOL

[ElectricMucus]

except the volume is nowhere near 10mil USD.

[misterbigg]

except the volume is nowhere near 10mil USD.

$10m to fund the research and development for producing an ASIC system.

[ElectricMucus]

lol, yeah right. So in effect that anonymous investor is all supplying you with cheap asics.

dream on!

[Coinoisseur]

Older process ASIC wouldn't be $10 million, seems $500000 to $1 million would be enough to produce a 130nm - 65nm ASIC. It's a risky endeavor though because the costs can really add up if there are a lot of design revisions. Wondering now if we will see the first custom SHA256 chips as translations of FPGA designs, cost and performance would still be a head above straight FPGA.

[ElectricMucus]

Older process ASIC wouldn't be $10 million, seems $500000 to $1 million would be enough to produce a 130nm - 65nm ASIC.

nope.

btw 180nm is the state of the are for small volumes (Like a single 9 wafer run)
130nm is premium and anything beyond that strictly high volume.


Get over it... no matter how you want it you are not getting full customs, those will be fpga mask transfers like already discussed.

[rjk]

Older process ASIC wouldn't be $10 million, seems $500000 to $1 million would be enough to produce a 130nm - 65nm ASIC.

nope.

btw 180nm is the state of the are for small volumes (Like a single 9 wafer run)

Yes, but how complicated was the design, and did that cost figure include things such as the salaries of the designers and other costs besides just the mask+wafer NRE?

[Coinoisseur]

Given BFL's penchant for big promises, who's to say they haven't committed to a decent sized wafer buy to get a decent deal on the up front costs? Pre-order money + possible mysterious investor money could fund development and a deposit on the wafer order.

I agree though, best odds are a FPGA conversion funded by hype.