Bitcoin Forum
November 26, 2022, 07:41:39 PM *
News: Reminder: do not keep your money in online accounts
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  

Warning: Moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Watch out for Ponzi schemes. Do not invest more than you can afford to lose.

Pages: « 1 ... 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 [523] 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 ... 1348 »
  Print  
Author Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It  (Read 3914546 times)
binaryFate
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1001


Still wild and free


View Profile
July 25, 2013, 03:58:38 PM
 #10441

Train will remain alive and well until the next official hardware announcement... then we'll all be bitching about not buyiing enough shares under BTC6.

Agreed, we've had several stops on this train ride already:

0.5 BTC/share
0.7 BTC/share
1.2 BTC/share
2.5 BTC/share
4.5 BTC/share

Double digits will happen in 2013.

I agree with you.

Monero's privacy and therefore fungibility are MUCH stronger than Bitcoin's. 
This makes Monero a better candidate to deserve the term "digital cash".
"I'm sure that in 20 years there will either be very large transaction volume or no volume." -- Satoshi
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1669491699
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1669491699

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1669491699
Reply with quote  #2

1669491699
Report to moderator
1669491699
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1669491699

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1669491699
Reply with quote  #2

1669491699
Report to moderator
1669491699
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1669491699

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1669491699
Reply with quote  #2

1669491699
Report to moderator
romerun
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078
Merit: 1001


Bitcoin is new, makes sense to hodl.


View Profile
July 25, 2013, 04:08:22 PM
 #10442

I think AM already can already be bigger than btcguild, but doing that does not look good for decentalization sake of btc (or even heating up competition), so they are trying to sell hardware at the price that the expected return is pretty close to mining it themselves. But there are competitors out there looking to undercut AM price, like those rogue Avalon chips, or 22mn KNC (if it turns out as promised why don't they just mine them, too f*king generous to be true). The crispy fc "franchise" thing is probably designed to look more attractive customers than hardware sale.

It's like they are sneakily maintaining virtual 30%+ hashrate, by combining solo mining + other means.
HorseRider
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120
Merit: 1001


View Profile
July 25, 2013, 04:42:20 PM
 #10443

either way "deploy/sell" must include anything you can do with the hashpower.

+1

16SvwJtQET7mkHZFFbJpgPaDA1Pxtmbm5P
BBazaar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 34
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 25, 2013, 05:26:03 PM
 #10444

Can't hate on ASIC Miner for being the pioneer.  Competition will prevent them from reaching 51%.  Hopefully it won't be an issue anyways.  But at some point, there will be more profitable ventures for the company beyond simply mining and competition will continue to erode their hashrate share. 
kares
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 10
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 25, 2013, 06:00:46 PM
 #10445

I had trouble understanding the timeline form friedcat's post on page 532:

Project Timeline

August-September: Deploy/sell all hashpower arriving in July and early August.
September-November: Deploy/sell the hashpower ordered at early July.
November-December: Experimental products of 2nd-gen chips and modular large-scale deployment solutions.

What does that timeline refer to? Hardware leasing/franchising, or the actual hardware sales?Can anyone please enlighten? Verb combination Deploy/sell confuses me in particular.

Well, as I understand it, "deploy" means mass deployment (either themselves or by franchise) and "sell" means retail sales.  Or maybe franchise falls under "sell", but either way "deploy/sell" must include anything you can do with the hashpower.

Yea, that much I figured, but I'd much rather buy my own stuff than lease it tbh, and friedcat's post was too ambiguous to that end. I guess we'll just have to wait. 
freedomno1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722
Merit: 1070


Learning the troll avoidance button :)


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2013, 08:40:41 PM
 #10446

For those running to the safety of AM direct shares - I see this as largely unnecessary. In the worst case scenario, in the event that BTCTC is met with a cease and desist or other enforcement action, Friedcat has an updated listing of all of our share allocations, sent twice a day. https://btct.co/faq

I'm not saying there wouldn't be negative ramifications if BTCTC were targeted - surely liquidity and share price would be affected. However, those of us with AM PT shares are not SOL in that case.

*Full disclosure - I own both direct and PT shares and I am not planning on changing my allocations anytime in the near future.

This is a good point.

Yes, Friedcat is emailed a full shareholder list (includes email and btc address) several times a day.  If the servers ever got pulled, he has everything he needs to pull the shares back in-house to direct shares.

I am not certain, but I suspect this is unique to BTCTC.  BitFunder has a good approach with publishing the addresses publicly if you turn it on, (if you haven't, do it now.) but does not include emails in that so Friedcat would not have a way to contact users directly.  Havelock and 796 I have no idea what is setup.  (Anyone know?)



Got that back not sure If I asked the right question haha
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=135035.msg2802839#msg2802839
Luckybit
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 25, 2013, 08:51:22 PM
 #10447

I had trouble understanding the timeline form friedcat's post on page 532:

Project Timeline

August-September: Deploy/sell all hashpower arriving in July and early August.
September-November: Deploy/sell the hashpower ordered at early July.
November-December: Experimental products of 2nd-gen chips and modular large-scale deployment solutions.

What does that timeline refer to? Hardware leasing/franchising, or the actual hardware sales?Can anyone please enlighten? Verb combination Deploy/sell confuses me in particular.


I think Franchising is the Video Arcade Machine model. Arcade machines were often rented out in a similar manner.
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002


View Profile
July 25, 2013, 10:27:51 PM
 #10448

ASICMiner products probably exceed 30% of the hashrate share already. But you have to realize this:

ASICMiner valuation = (ASICMiner hashrate share + ASICMiner customer hashrate share) * mining share of bitcoin valuation * bitcoin valuation

I highly doubt all mining makes up 30% of Bitcoin's industry, let alone a part of mining.

I highly doubt money supply = GDP.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
dree12
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 1073



View Profile
July 25, 2013, 10:31:12 PM
 #10449

ASICMiner products probably exceed 30% of the hashrate share already. But you have to realize this:

ASICMiner valuation = (ASICMiner hashrate share + ASICMiner customer hashrate share) * mining share of bitcoin valuation * bitcoin valuation

I highly doubt all mining makes up 30% of Bitcoin's industry, let alone a part of mining.

I highly doubt money supply = GDP.

They have different units, so I fail to see how they can even be compared.

What I'm comparing is money supply to stock supply. If ASICMiner is valued at greater than all BTC combined is valued, then it follows that ASICMiner must have revenues separate from Bitcoin. This is not true, so ASICMiner stock will be capped.
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002


View Profile
July 25, 2013, 10:40:09 PM
 #10450

ASICMiner products probably exceed 30% of the hashrate share already. But you have to realize this:

ASICMiner valuation = (ASICMiner hashrate share + ASICMiner customer hashrate share) * mining share of bitcoin valuation * bitcoin valuation

I highly doubt all mining makes up 30% of Bitcoin's industry, let alone a part of mining.

I highly doubt money supply = GDP.

They have different units, so I fail to see how they can even be compared.


You were the one that compared it to "Bitcoin's industry".

Quote
What I'm comparing is money supply to stock supply. If ASICMiner is valued at greater than all BTC combined is valued, then it follows that ASICMiner must have revenues separate from Bitcoin. This is not true, so ASICMiner stock will be capped.

No, it doesn't follow.  Both incorporate future expectations into their valuation, so it's not so simple as you imply.  They also have vastly different velocities (turnover of shares/coins).

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
chriswilmer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2013, 10:48:28 PM
 #10451

Thought experiment:

ASICMiner is valued at 30 million bitcoins and you decide you want to buy the whole company (all of the shares). The board agrees to this and all shareholders are forced to sell their shares at the corresponding price.
(30 million bitcoins divided by 400,000 shares).

How do you actually pay for this since it is impossible to have 30 million bitcoins?

You would need to pay in installments. Perhaps you had 5 million bitcoins in your possession already, and based off of ASICMiner's revenue (which would obviously need to be a lot for such an incredible valuation), you would pay off an additional 5 million bitcoins every 6 months or so, possibly with interest.

At least, that is one way that I could see this working.
dree12
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 1073



View Profile
July 25, 2013, 10:54:43 PM
 #10452

ASICMiner products probably exceed 30% of the hashrate share already. But you have to realize this:

ASICMiner valuation = (ASICMiner hashrate share + ASICMiner customer hashrate share) * mining share of bitcoin valuation * bitcoin valuation

I highly doubt all mining makes up 30% of Bitcoin's industry, let alone a part of mining.

I highly doubt money supply = GDP.

They have different units, so I fail to see how they can even be compared.


You were the one that compared it to "Bitcoin's industry".
I mean "industry" as in "tourist industry". Making up 50% of industry does not mean making up 50% of GDP.

Quote
What I'm comparing is money supply to stock supply. If ASICMiner is valued at greater than all BTC combined is valued, then it follows that ASICMiner must have revenues separate from Bitcoin. This is not true, so ASICMiner stock will be capped.

No, it doesn't follow.  Both incorporate future expectations into their valuation, so it's not so simple as you imply.  They also have vastly different velocities (turnover of shares/coins).


Why would the future value of ASICMiner exceed that of Bitcoin? Unless ASICMiner is expected to make forays into mining diamonds, this doesn't make much sense.
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002


View Profile
July 25, 2013, 11:15:25 PM
 #10453

ASICMiner products probably exceed 30% of the hashrate share already. But you have to realize this:

ASICMiner valuation = (ASICMiner hashrate share + ASICMiner customer hashrate share) * mining share of bitcoin valuation * bitcoin valuation

I highly doubt all mining makes up 30% of Bitcoin's industry, let alone a part of mining.

I highly doubt money supply = GDP.

They have different units, so I fail to see how they can even be compared.


You were the one that compared it to "Bitcoin's industry".
I mean "industry" as in "tourist industry". Making up 50% of industry does not mean making up 50% of GDP.

Quote
What I'm comparing is money supply to stock supply. If ASICMiner is valued at greater than all BTC combined is valued, then it follows that ASICMiner must have revenues separate from Bitcoin. This is not true, so ASICMiner stock will be capped.

No, it doesn't follow.  Both incorporate future expectations into their valuation, so it's not so simple as you imply.  They also have vastly different velocities (turnover of shares/coins).


Why would the future value of ASICMiner exceed that of Bitcoin? Unless ASICMiner is expected to make forays into mining diamonds, this doesn't make much sense.

Do you really think everybody who buys mining hardware will turn a profit in bitcoin terms?

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
🏰 TradeFortress 🏰
Bitcoin Veteran
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302
Merit: 1042

👻


View Profile
July 25, 2013, 11:24:53 PM
 #10454

ASICMINER could develop hardware to mine alt coins (eg Litecoin) in the future, which would cost more resources but it is theoretically possible for ASICMINER to exceed the valuation of Bitcoin.
freedomno1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722
Merit: 1070


Learning the troll avoidance button :)


View Profile WWW
July 25, 2013, 11:28:34 PM
 #10455

ASICMINER could develop hardware to mine alt coins (eg Litecoin) in the future, which would cost more resources but it is theoretically possible for ASICMINER to exceed the valuation of Bitcoin.

Agree a company is dynamic not static and developing into the alt-coin market would work
However I recall friedcat saying that any such risk would not be the burden of AM investors but would be spun off into a new entity instead of added to the AM portfolio.

Edit in: Thinking about it we do review this a lot edited in after Transaction Fees Smiley
tehelsper
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 68
Merit: 10



View Profile
July 25, 2013, 11:33:16 PM
 #10456

AM market cap and the total number of bitcoins aren't as related as everyone seems to assume. The market determines the market cap based on what people are willing to pay for it to gain a certain return.

Lets say after all 21 million bitcoins are generated, TX fees have somehow reached 25 BTC per block and AM holds 30% of the total hashrate. Each year, a single AM share would pay out .9985 BTC in dividends. If the market was willing to get a 1% return on AM, it cost 98.55 BTC per share and and the total market cap would be nearly 40 million BTC. I know this unreasonable, but I think it shows the market determines the market cap and there is no 21 million BTC hard limit.

A better example may be 20% of the total hash rate, 10 BTC per block, and an accepted dividend yield of 5%. AM market cap would be about 2.1 million BTC. So, if there were 10 companies the size of AsicMiner at that time, then no one could buy all 10 companies at once because the combined market caps would be over 21 million.

I've created a spreadsheet here that people can play with. It has two knobs for turning (AM hash rate, and Tx fees per block)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApG_UykyjHF0dEU2b1B5ZVZTeW5OY3NLTGRYTW9xM3c&usp=sharing

Edit: Before people start screaming, I know some of these situations are VERY unrealistic. They are just meant to point out an example.
BitAddict
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190
Merit: 1001



View Profile
July 26, 2013, 12:12:15 AM
 #10457

AM market cap and the total number of bitcoins aren't as related as everyone seems to assume. The market determines the market cap based on what people are willing to pay for it to gain a certain return.

Lets say after all 21 million bitcoins are generated, TX fees have somehow reached 25 BTC per block and AM holds 30% of the total hashrate. Each year, a single AM share would pay out .9985 BTC in dividends. If the market was willing to get a 1% return on AM, it cost 98.55 BTC per share and and the total market cap would be nearly 40 million BTC. I know this unreasonable, but I think it shows the market determines the market cap and there is no 21 million BTC hard limit.

A better example may be 20% of the total hash rate, 10 BTC per block, and an accepted dividend yield of 5%. AM market cap would be about 2.1 million BTC. So, if there were 10 companies the size of AsicMiner at that time, then no one could buy all 10 companies at once because the combined market caps would be over 21 million.

I've created a spreadsheet here that people can play with. It has two knobs for turning (AM hash rate, and Tx fees per block)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApG_UykyjHF0dEU2b1B5ZVZTeW5OY3NLTGRYTW9xM3c&usp=sharing

Edit: Before people start screaming, I know some of these situations are VERY unrealistic. They are just meant to point out an example.

It is impossible that 10 companies have 20% of the total hasrate at the same time Tongue
So, second example is not good. But I get your point.
samson
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2094
Merit: 1067


View Profile
July 26, 2013, 12:18:58 AM
 #10458

I wonder if the Intel CPU SHA extensions will have any effect on ASIC mining ?

On chip SHA2 extensions in the Intel CPU : http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-sha-extensions

Could be big news
dree12
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 1073



View Profile
July 26, 2013, 12:19:51 AM
 #10459

ASICMiner products probably exceed 30% of the hashrate share already. But you have to realize this:

ASICMiner valuation = (ASICMiner hashrate share + ASICMiner customer hashrate share) * mining share of bitcoin valuation * bitcoin valuation

I highly doubt all mining makes up 30% of Bitcoin's industry, let alone a part of mining.

I highly doubt money supply = GDP.

They have different units, so I fail to see how they can even be compared.


You were the one that compared it to "Bitcoin's industry".
I mean "industry" as in "tourist industry". Making up 50% of industry does not mean making up 50% of GDP.

Quote
What I'm comparing is money supply to stock supply. If ASICMiner is valued at greater than all BTC combined is valued, then it follows that ASICMiner must have revenues separate from Bitcoin. This is not true, so ASICMiner stock will be capped.

No, it doesn't follow.  Both incorporate future expectations into their valuation, so it's not so simple as you imply.  They also have vastly different velocities (turnover of shares/coins).


Why would the future value of ASICMiner exceed that of Bitcoin? Unless ASICMiner is expected to make forays into mining diamonds, this doesn't make much sense.

Do you really think everybody who buys mining hardware will turn a profit in bitcoin terms?

Point taken. I still find double digits unlikely, but I retract my statement that it would be impossible.
stripykitteh
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!


View Profile
July 26, 2013, 01:42:09 AM
 #10460

I wonder if the Intel CPU SHA extensions will have any effect on ASIC mining ?

On chip SHA2 extensions in the Intel CPU : http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-sha-extensions

Could be big news

Could be. It's not clear from the whitepaper what specific architecture changes Intel are making to accommodate these instructions (i.e., it might be just a single hashing core).

Having said that I cannot believe that there aren't a few skunkworks ASIC chip designs floating around in Intel at the moment, given the number of chip designers they have.

 
                                . ██████████.
                              .████████████████.
                           .██████████████████████.
                        -█████████████████████████████
                     .██████████████████████████████████.
                  -█████████████████████████████████████████
               -███████████████████████████████████████████████
           .-█████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
        .████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
       .██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
       .██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
       ..████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████..
       .   .██████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
       .      .████████████████████████████████████████████████.

       .       .██████████████████████████████████████████████
       .    ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████
       .█████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
        .███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
           .█████████████████████████████████████████████████████
              .████████████████████████████████████████████████
                   ████████████████████████████████████████
                      ██████████████████████████████████
                          ██████████████████████████
                             ████████████████████
                               ████████████████
                                   █████████
.CryptoTalk.org.|.MAKE POSTS AND EARN BTC!.🏆
Pages: « 1 ... 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 [523] 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 ... 1348 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!