ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[arklan]

Link for hashrate?

it should be user 67117 (i think) on btc guild.

[Franktank]

Link for hashrate?

it should be user 67117 (i think) on btc guild.

There are two ways of determining hash rates for AM:

1) via BTC Guild (user 67117): https://www.btcguild.com/index.php?page=rankings

2) thru a maintained GDoc: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkPdXsQFT-vIdHRVUjQ5Ql9BQWR6OENLMkhyUktUblE#gid=0

NOTE: These methods only work IF they are deploying to the current, known users. As friedcat mentioned the possibility of deploying to different mining pools to prevent the 51% issue, shareholders may not know if deployment has begun until friedcat says it himself.

[SmiGueL]

There are two ways of determining hash rates for AM:

1) via BTC Guild (user 67117): https://www.btcguild.com/index.php?page=rankings

2) thru a maintained GDoc: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkPdXsQFT-vIdHRVUjQ5Ql9BQWR6OENLMkhyUktUblE#gid=0

NOTE: These methods only work IF they are deploying to the current, known users. As friedcat mentioned the possibility of deploying to different mining pools to prevent the 51% issue, shareholders may not know if deployment has begun until friedcat says it himself.

Until now I've calculated the hashrate by adding the miners from BTCGuild and Ozco.in together in the docs document.

Click on it for a more detailed version.



The hashrate percentage of ASICMINER is viewable in the next graph:

[Fabrizio89]

I hope they start using other pools asap.

[Rodyland]

I hope they start using other pools asap.

If we don't start getting more hashing power online soon, it won't matter which pool we use.

[DutchBrat]

I hope they start using other pools asap.

If we don't start getting more hashing power online soon, it won't matter which pool we use.

Friedcat said the earliest date for new deployment was the week of Apr 22nd

So I guess we could expect smtg this week, but it is not set in stone

[Franktank]

Friedcat said the earliest date for new deployment was the week of Apr 22nd

So I guess we could expect smtg this week, but it is not set in stone

Friedcat also has to keep in mind of the first auction winners. There are folks that just shelled out 75 BTC for 10 GH/s, it wouldn't exactly be fair if ASICMiner doubled the network hash rate before they got their blades (insult to injury). I'm sure this will be addressed in this week's update.

[SebastianJu]

Friedcat said the earliest date for new deployment was the week of Apr 22nd

So I guess we could expect smtg this week, but it is not set in stone

Friedcat also has to keep in mind of the first auction winners. There are folks that just shelled out 75 BTC for 10 GH/s, it wouldn't exactly be fair if ASICMiner doubled the network hash rate before they got their blades (insult to injury). I'm sure this will be addressed in this week's update.

Youre serious? Stop earning money so that others can earn?

[Franktank]

Friedcat also has to keep in mind of the first auction winners. There are folks that just shelled out 75 BTC for 10 GH/s, it wouldn't exactly be fair if ASICMiner doubled the network hash rate before they got their blades (insult to injury). I'm sure this will be addressed in this week's update.

Youre serious? Stop earning money so that others can earn?

Uh no, I didn't do the best job of explaining my thought process. Being a shareholder myself, I am not saying stop earning money but there is some balance. If people see that AM auctions off their first blades and then they just unload TH/s, the next set of blades being auctioned will have significantly less profits because people know ROI will take much, much longer.

If this is going to be a nonissue, then disregard my previous posts.

[DutchBrat]

Friedcat also has to keep in mind of the first auction winners. There are folks that just shelled out 75 BTC for 10 GH/s, it wouldn't exactly be fair if ASICMiner doubled the network hash rate before they got their blades (insult to injury). I'm sure this will be addressed in this week's update.

Youre serious? Stop earning money so that others can earn?

Uh no, I didn't do the best job of explaining my thought process. Being a shareholder myself, I am not saying stop earning money but there is some balance. If people see that AM auctions off their first blades and then they just unload TH/s, the next set of blades being auction will have significantly less profits because people know ROI will take much, much longer.

If this is going to be a nonissue, then disregard my previous posts.

I would say it is a non-issue.... there were 10 blades sold.... unless the next batch for sale is 50 TH the only correct way to go is to try and get online a.s.a.p.

[Franktank]

Friedcat also has to keep in mind of the first auction winners. There are folks that just shelled out 75 BTC for 10 GH/s, it wouldn't exactly be fair if ASICMiner doubled the network hash rate before they got their blades (insult to injury). I'm sure this will be addressed in this week's update.

Youre serious? Stop earning money so that others can earn?

Uh no, I didn't do the best job of explaining my thought process. Being a shareholder myself, I am not saying stop earning money but there is some balance. If people see that AM auctions off their first blades and then they just unload TH/s, the next set of blades being auction will have significantly less profits because people know ROI will take much, much longer.

If this is going to be a nonissue, then disregard my previous posts.

I would say it is a non-issue.... there were 10 blades sold.... unless the next batch for sale is 50 TH the only correct way to go is to try and get online a.s.a.p.

Agreed.

[nebulus]

I hope they start using other pools asap.

If we don't start getting more hashing power online soon, it won't matter which pool we use.

You are absolutely clueless about what's going on, aren't you?

[radiumsoup]

I think a good way to get the best of both worlds is to commit to attempt to maintain a set percentage of the global hashrate, and sell the excess. (Say, 20%... I'm not really a fan of the 10% idea, that seems pretty low given the very small number of ASIC players that are publicly known, and by the end of the year, ASICs will control over 90% of the hashrate, if not sooner.) That way, shareholders have a predictable income stream from hashing, and purchasers of devices would know that their devices aren't going to be undercut by AM in any unknown way... pricing of devices would be stabilized (good for purchasers, which should increase demand for devices with better known values of return versus the competition with unknown levels of self-mining), and the only real cause of an individual miner's profit rate decline would then be the global hashrate growth, same as it has been historically.

If the AM share of global hashrate approaches 25%, priority shifts to sales to get it down to 20% for the benefit of device sales... if it goes to 15%, it shifts more to mining. (20% is just a number in my head, I'm sure there's a statistical sweet spot that someone can calculate... perhaps it really is 10%, I dunno.)

[romerun]

avalon is going to flood the network with the diy chips in a distant. How should AM deal with this ?

[gigantic]

AsicMiner will soon, to be Always, will control the majority of the hash rate in the network constantly persistently, this is irresistible, and non-reversible situation
They got the technology, and they can always add more ASICs pretty much Easily.

[hammurabi]

AsicMiner will soon, to be Always, will control the majority of the hash rate in the network constantly persistently, this is irresistible, and non-reversible situation
They got the technology, and they can always add more ASICs pretty much Easily.

Resistance is futile.
--(c)borg

[furuknap]

If this is going to be a nonissue, then disregard my previous posts.

Disregarded :-)

There's no doubt in anyone'sl mind what's going on. I seriously hope none of the buyers expected AM or anyone else to just hold back until they got their money's worth back.

If they had no idea that AM was scheduled for deployment _and_ that their deployment to as much as possible is the actual reason why they could also sell off a chunk of TH, then I would just like to add that ignorance is usually very expensive when investing those kinds of sums.

.b

[SebastianJu]

I think a good way to get the best of both worlds is to commit to attempt to maintain a set percentage of the global hashrate, and sell the excess. (Say, 20%... I'm not really a fan of the 10% idea, that seems pretty low given the very small number of ASIC players that are publicly known, and by the end of the year, ASICs will control over 90% of the hashrate, if not sooner.) That way, shareholders have a predictable income stream from hashing, and purchasers of devices would know that their devices aren't going to be undercut by AM in any unknown way... pricing of devices would be stabilized (good for purchasers, which should increase demand for devices with better known values of return versus the competition with unknown levels of self-mining), and the only real cause of an individual miner's profit rate decline would then be the global hashrate growth, same as it has been historically.

If the AM share of global hashrate approaches 25%, priority shifts to sales to get it down to 20% for the benefit of device sales... if it goes to 15%, it shifts more to mining. (20% is just a number in my head, I'm sure there's a statistical sweet spot that someone can calculate... perhaps it really is 10%, I dunno.)

Why 25%? Why not 45% (To remain under 50% and the variance of networkhashrate around this). I think Asicminer now is in the best position of all producers. They can buy for low money many chips. Seeable from the lower dividends. Not much lost. They seems to have created a workflow that will lead to fast deployment. That means they can create new hashpower very fast. Probably faster than any other. Even Avalon with the selling of their Asicchips and the DIY-Miner wont be able to outbid this fast i believe.

So then, when reaching the 45% border, Asicminer could start to sell Miners. Maybe buy 1000TH, remain 750TH to hold the 45% and sell the rest in form of miners. Maybe more to take the customers from the other companies away (Mean, i know...) This way its possible to get the earnings of some months mining in a moment so that the real earnings are going above 50% without waking fear of the people about a >50% attack.

At the moment i dont see a company or concept that could beat Asicminer. At least from the infos available.
...
If only... the datacenter would be ready with proper power and network so that Asicminer could play out its power...

[bitfair]

Instead of throwing around percentages with little basis, I believe it is better to think in terms of net present value:

First step: make a forecast of difficulty.
Second step: make the choice: if (current price that a miner can be sold for) > (forecasted net present value of the mining profit from the miner), then SELL IT.

Of course, this relies on forecasting difficulty somewhat accurately. More importantly, if there are currently space/power limitations on deploying the miners, it is very likely that the choice of selling a large amount of miners immediately is the most profitable one.

With some more numbercrunching, one could also work with a probability distribution around the forecasted difficulty, and use portfolio theory to hit the risk/reward sweet spot.

I think a good way to get the best of both worlds is to commit to attempt to maintain a set percentage of the global hashrate, and sell the excess. (Say, 20%... I'm not really a fan of the 10% idea, that seems pretty low given the very small number of ASIC players that are publicly known, and by the end of the year, ASICs will control over 90% of the hashrate, if not sooner.) That way, shareholders have a predictable income stream from hashing, and purchasers of devices would know that their devices aren't going to be undercut by AM in any unknown way... pricing of devices would be stabilized (good for purchasers, which should increase demand for devices with better known values of return versus the competition with unknown levels of self-mining), and the only real cause of an individual miner's profit rate decline would then be the global hashrate growth, same as it has been historically.

If the AM share of global hashrate approaches 25%, priority shifts to sales to get it down to 20% for the benefit of device sales... if it goes to 15%, it shifts more to mining. (20% is just a number in my head, I'm sure there's a statistical sweet spot that someone can calculate... perhaps it really is 10%, I dunno.)

Why 25%? Why not 45% (To remain under 50% and the variance of networkhashrate around this). I think Asicminer now is in the best position of all producers. They can buy for low money many chips. Seeable from the lower dividends. Not much lost. They seems to have created a workflow that will lead to fast deployment. That means they can create new hashpower very fast. Probably faster than any other. Even Avalon with the selling of their Asicchips and the DIY-Miner wont be able to outbid this fast i believe.

So then, when reaching the 45% border, Asicminer could start to sell Miners. Maybe buy 1000TH, remain 750TH to hold the 45% and sell the rest in form of miners. Maybe more to take the customers from the other companies away (Mean, i know...) This way its possible to get the earnings of some months mining in a moment so that the real earnings are going above 50% without waking fear of the people about a >50% attack.

At the moment i dont see a company or concept that could beat Asicminer. At least from the infos available.
...
If only... the datacenter would be ready with proper power and network so that Asicminer could play out its power...

[Rodyland]

I hope they start using other pools asap.

If we don't start getting more hashing power online soon, it won't matter which pool we use.

You are absolutely clueless about what's going on, aren't you?

Obviously  .  How about instead of passing out insults you educate all of us?