ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[SebastianJu]

Absolutely, I was just replying over there too.    Summary is looking great.  Very nice!

Thanks! The waiving is now noted too. I had read that paragraph before but didnt think that the PT is so young. So i thought that the 90 days are over long time. Looks like the fees start from june the first. So one month to go without fees for the dividends.

[1715187853]

1715187853

[1715187853]

1715187853

[1715187853]

1715187853

[psylence]

If you guys would like some more public exposure visit the share buying guide on reddit and upvote it if you like

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1d69mp/how_to_buy_asicminer_shares_furuknaps_cryptocoin/

[BitHub]

http://asicminer.co - stay upto date.

[Franktank]

http://asicminer.co - stay upto date.

Is this official or no?

[kano]

http://asicminer.co - stay upto date.

Is this official or no?

Can someone with more than 1000 posts or part of asicminer verify if it is, and if isn't get a mod to delete all these posts (mine included)

[JaredR26]

http://asicminer.co - stay upto date.

I'm sure this is not official.  That said, it is a great resource to aggregate this monster thread.

[Franktank]

I do have confirmation from friedcat that it NOT official, it does serve a purpose of providing some info.

I'm sure that when there is an official one up, friedcat will announce it at the appropriate time.

[BlackLilac Jordan]

It was nice to see the hash rate on BTC guild push 8,000 GH/s... but now it's down below 6,900. Has anyone heard any word about moving part of the hash power to a different pool? Hopefully they are not having additional problems deploying.

[BlackLilac Jordan]

It was nice to see the hash rate on BTC guild push 8,000 GH/s... but now it's down below 6,900. Has anyone heard any word about moving part of the hash power to a different pool? Hopefully they are not having additional problems deploying.

False alarm it seems, back up to ~7.8 TH.

[eleuthria]

It was nice to see the hash rate on BTC guild push 8,000 GH/s... but now it's down below 6,900. Has anyone heard any word about moving part of the hash power to a different pool? Hopefully they are not having additional problems deploying.

False alarm it seems, back up to ~7.8 TH.

Sorry about that.  Back when BTC Guild started getting DDoS'd about 2 months ago, I gave many users a private server they could access to mine from during the attacks.  The server was hosted outside of the main datacenter, and as a result was not hit when the other servers were.  Many users were moved to another server after the first round of attacks, still private and "protected" (due to anonymity), but not at the same location.  ASICMINER was still mining on the original protected/private server.

This week I have moved all servers back into either colocation or Amazon EC2, to get away from servers with such open security systems (no 2-factor auth, poor/no IP whitelisting, too much control available through the management panels, etc.).  As a result, ASICMINER had to shift their Stratum proxies to a new IP, and it caused a temporary dip in the hash rate.  However, the result of the move is ASICMINER is now hashing on a colocated server in a very stable and reliable datacenter, one that will likely never be moved as long as BTC Guild is in business.

[StevenPine]

Hey eleuthria,

Thanks for all the work you do!
Question about BTCGuild, have you and friedcat spoken about ensuring you don't tip over 50%? Do you know if he is going to move some of the hash rate over to other pools?

It was nice to see the hash rate on BTC guild push 8,000 GH/s... but now it's down below 6,900. Has anyone heard any word about moving part of the hash power to a different pool? Hopefully they are not having additional problems deploying.

False alarm it seems, back up to ~7.8 TH.

Sorry about that.  Back when BTC Guild started getting DDoS'd about 2 months ago, I gave many users a private server they could access to mine from during the attacks.  The server was hosted outside of the main datacenter, and as a result was not hit when the other servers were.  Many users were moved to another server after the first round of attacks, still private and "protected" (due to anonymity), but not at the same location.  ASICMINER was still mining on the original protected/private server.

This week I have moved all servers back into either colocation or Amazon EC2, to get away from servers with such open security systems (no 2-factor auth, poor/no IP whitelisting, too much control available through the management panels, etc.).  As a result, ASICMINER had to shift their Stratum proxies to a new IP, and it caused a temporary dip in the hash rate.  However, the result of the move is ASICMINER is now hashing on a colocated server in a very stable and reliable datacenter, one that will likely never be moved as long as BTC Guild is in business.

[Digigami]

Hey eleuthria,

Thanks for all the work you do!
Question about BTCGuild, have you and friedcat spoken about ensuring you don't tip over 50%? Do you know if he is going to move some of the hash rate over to other pools?

Spreading ASICMINER's hashpower has been discussed to death. friedcat has also addressed the concern several times in this thread. His responses lead me to be comfortable knowing he understands our concerns and shares them, and ASICMINER has several options available to make sure it does not become an issue to worry over.

I'm not going to repost it all in context, but a few relevant portions of friedcat's posts:

The future of difficulty or our portion is unclear to us. If we are really lucky enough to be able to take a large percentage for a long time, we are the last ones who would like to see panics. Decentralization could be achieved by scattering some of our future computation power to consumers, or letting many different pools with different interests control them and use them for good.

Note - one option mentioned here in a fairly old update is already ongoing, the selling of consumer devices to help distrubute the hashpower.

It's possible and will definitely do it. Also in the next days if without special circumstances/announcements, new hashpower will be added to the four existing accounts. And in further future if we solo, switch to new pools, or add new accounts of ours, we will not make them anonymous but make them seen by anyone, the same as the four existing accounts.

Not directly addressing the question, but indicates they are prepared to utilize other pools or solo.

I'm confident ASICMINER will seek to both maximize shareholders profits, while always keeping the security of the network well in mind also.

[ex-trader]

ASICMiner can also do a deal with a new company with separate management, control and security who could hire and run the ASICS above a certain level (40%? of network), but would be charged/funded by an economic deal that passed back all of the returns (less some fees/commisions) to ASICMiner.

It quite common in real-world deals to separate underlying ownership of the economic interest in a deal from the managament and control to remove direct influences. This is often seen in offshore companies and trust structures and is more commonly done for tax purposes.

[SaintFlow]

ASICMiner can also do a deal with a new company with separate management, control and security who could hire and run the ASICS above a certain level (40%? of network), but would be charged/funded by an economic deal that passed back all of the returns (less some fees/commisions) to ASICMiner.

It quite common in real-world deals to separate underlying ownership of the economic interest in a deal from the managament and control to remove direct influences. This is often seen in offshore companies and trust structures and is more commonly done for tax purposes.

While it sounds interesting in principle I wonder if this does not lead to a inflation of managers and managerial spending.

[Socket54]

The auction of these usbminers, where will this be taking place? Open to public i assume?

I am interested in 3-4 of them to test and possibly run on a pi and powered hub

Also do you guys plan to have a set retail sale of them anytime soon?

[furuknap]

With the price of AM shares rising over the previous few months, and with the added increase in USD price, a single AM share now trades for around US$170, which may be a high entry point for first-time investors.

Would it be an idea to do a stock split? A 1/4 stock split, for example, would decrease the barrier of entry and increase the liquidity of the shares. It would also make it easier for AM to get funding because it would decrease the risk for smaller investors (due to increased liquidity) and increase the number of potential investors.

If a stock split isn't an option, how would the community see a fund-style security that trades 1/10 AM shares? In other words, each share in the fund would represent 1/10 of an AM share, with right to 1/10 of the dividends, and no voting rights. I'll assume a trustworthy operator with publicly declared backing of the underlying shares and a reasonable fee.

The complication I see is the transfer between real shares and fund 'shares', so I would think it would be impossible to convert directly. A solution may be that the fund operator agrees to repurchase funds in batches of 10 to be pulled off the market and selling the underlying shares at market value.

.b

[lophie]

With the price of AM shares rising over the previous few months, and with the added increase in USD price, a single AM share now trades for around US$170, which may be a high entry point for first-time investors.

Would it be an idea to do a stock split? A 1/4 stock split, for example, would decrease the barrier of entry and increase the liquidity of the shares. It would also make it easier for AM to get funding because it would decrease the risk for smaller investors (due to increased liquidity) and increase the number of potential investors.

If a stock split isn't an option, how would the community see a fund-style security that trades 1/10 AM shares? In other words, each share in the fund would represent 1/10 of an AM share, with right to 1/10 of the dividends, and no voting rights. I'll assume a trustworthy operator with publicly declared backing of the underlying shares and a reasonable fee.

The complication I see is the transfer between real shares and fund 'shares', so I would think it would be impossible to convert directly. A solution may be that the fund operator agrees to repurchase funds in batches of 10 to be pulled off the market and selling the underlying shares at market value.

.b

I totally agree with a split 1/10, I was thinking of doing something similar but apparently trust variable here depends on how many posts I made so far  . Maybe another "trusted" member can do this.

[furuknap]

I totally agree with a split 1/10, I was thinking of doing something similar but apparently trust variable here depends on how many posts I made so far  . Maybe another "trusted" member can do this.

The trust issue can be resolved, either by convincing a trusted member to act as operator or by having the shares and dividends held and distributed by escrow.

I'm more interested in whether a split/fund idea will benefit in the way I think or will simply be a waste of time.

.b

[SebastianJu]

With the price of AM shares rising over the previous few months, and with the added increase in USD price, a single AM share now trades for around US$170, which may be a high entry point for first-time investors.

Would it be an idea to do a stock split? A 1/4 stock split, for example, would decrease the barrier of entry and increase the liquidity of the shares. It would also make it easier for AM to get funding because it would decrease the risk for smaller investors (due to increased liquidity) and increase the number of potential investors.

If a stock split isn't an option, how would the community see a fund-style security that trades 1/10 AM shares? In other words, each share in the fund would represent 1/10 of an AM share, with right to 1/10 of the dividends, and no voting rights. I'll assume a trustworthy operator with publicly declared backing of the underlying shares and a reasonable fee.

The complication I see is the transfer between real shares and fund 'shares', so I would think it would be impossible to convert directly. A solution may be that the fund operator agrees to repurchase funds in batches of 10 to be pulled off the market and selling the underlying shares at market value.

.b

I think thats an interesting idea. When its done it should be 1/10 or even 1/20 be to prepare for the future. It would help liquidity and better determine the price. I know that i always have BTC lying around on bitfunder that i cant invest because the shares are priced too high.
Unfortunately it would mean an amount of work for friedcat and team. Thats why i believe that this wont happen in the near future.

But i believe it could be done fully fine if one of the AM-PTs decide to split the shares now. Or even create a new PT. No allowance would be needed for this.

[ex-trader]

While it sounds interesting in principle I wonder if this does not lead to a inflation of managers and managerial spending.

But if the alternative is having to stop deployment, due to nearing 50%....?