ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[velacreations]

Because I don't believe in a glitch that would last several days and halve the hash rate as we have seen. I believe that some important work was done there. The time also fits perfectly a much needed extension to catch up with increasing difficulty, and with the arrival of the new blades in the last 2 weeks. So I just think (and hope!) that AM extended its hash rate. It's not because we got use to 60TH/s that they will never change that!  

Well, you know, last week, we saw the exact same thing.  The hash rate went from 11-12% down to 4-6% for a few days, and then went back up to where we were before (or slightly higher) to 60 TH/s (even though the 6 hour rate said over 100 TH/s at one time).

FC came out and said they had a variety of problems, but they were addressing them.  Right after that, we see another hash rate dip down to 3-4%.

Why would you assume it is different this time?  I hope AM increases its hash rate, too, but I think it's a mistake to assume it has increased before it actually has.  That just creates disappointment based on false estimates.

[1714978079]

1714978079

[1714978079]

1714978079

[1714978079]

1714978079

[1714978079]

1714978079

[supert]

I eased off because I was starting to annoy rather than inform. Everyone had heard my arguments already.

Just un-ignored.

[binaryFate]

Why would you assume it is different this time?

Because an extension is needed to catch up with the diff. We know it will come, as time passes, the likelihood that they deploy it increases.

I hope AM increases its hash rate, too, but I think it's a mistake to assume it has increased before it actually has.  That just creates disappointment based on false estimates.

Might be a mistake, but again, these are just assumptions.
Not sure about the disappointment, we're grown adults, nobody should based their investment decisions on few forum posts. (Writing this, I try to convince myself too, lol)

[runeks]

vela, I bet we'll see the 24h average being over 80TH/s during the next 48h.

How much are you willing to bet?

Also, guys, there is a speculation thread.


Anyway, we're very likely to have a low dividend again.

Based on data here:
http://www.asicminercharts.com/live/
I would bet 1BTC that we will see (at least once) the 24h-average equal or above 80TH/s, during the next 48h. Anybody takes it?

I'll take your bet.

But first I'd need to know how SmiGueL calculates the hashrate on that site.

I know how I do it on my site, and it's really simple: (2³² * <difficulty>) / (3600*24 / <AM_blocks_per_24h>)

Which currently is: (2³² * 65,750,060.1) / (3600*24 / 14) = 4.575834502×10¹³ = 45.76 TH/s

If we use the data from my site you're on! And of course my data is verifiable: If you can find more blocks than I claim, that have the "Mined By ASICMiner" signature in the coinbase you know I'm leaving some blocks out.

[binaryFate]

vela, I bet we'll see the 24h average being over 80TH/s during the next 48h.

How much are you willing to bet?

Also, guys, there is a speculation thread.


Anyway, we're very likely to have a low dividend again.

Based on data here:
http://www.asicminercharts.com/live/
I would bet 1BTC that we will see (at least once) the 24h-average equal or above 80TH/s, during the next 48h. Anybody takes it?

I'll take your bet.

But first I'd need to know how SmiGueL calculates the hashrate on that site.

I know how I do it on my site, and it's really simple: (2³² * <difficulty>) / (3600*24 / <AM_blocks_per_24h>)

Which currently is: (2³² * 65,750,060.1) / (3600*24 / 14) = 4.575834502×10¹³ = 45.76 TH/s

If we use the data from my site you're on! And of course my data is verifiable: If you can find more blocks than I claim, that have the "Mined By ASICMiner" signature in the coinbase you know I'm leaving some blocks out.

runeks: ok deal!

[SmiGueL]

But first I'd need to know how SmiGueL calculates the hashrate on that site.

I know how I do it on my site, and it's really simple: (2³² * <difficulty>) / (3600*24 / <AM_blocks_per_24h>)

Which currently is: (2³² * 65,750,060.1) / (3600*24 / 14) = 4.575834502×10¹³ = 45.76 TH/s

If we use the data from my site you're on! And of course my data is verifiable: If you can find more blocks than I claim, that have the "Mined By ASICMiner" signature in the coinbase you know I'm leaving some blocks out.

45.76TH/s it is. (and was)



I'm pretty sure the calculation is the same.


But to verify it afterwards: If more than 24 blocks have been found in a timeframe of 24h, then the average hashrate is > 80 TH/s.
_{*With current difficulty, which I'm pretty sure of that it won't change in the next 48h.}

[deltanine]

I think this - 1N8oFn2BgF5Rxysf5xDdgsAVmZ2cvzCKQo - is first franchise address

EDIT: although it looks like hardware selling address, but then I don't understand why proceeds go to main mining address

This may be a nexus address for franchisee coin.  I see payments incoming from several different addresses.

It's been up since 6/30 so the time frame seems about right.

[runeks]

vela, I bet we'll see the 24h average being over 80TH/s during the next 48h.

How much are you willing to bet?

Also, guys, there is a speculation thread.


Anyway, we're very likely to have a low dividend again.

Based on data here:
http://www.asicminercharts.com/live/
I would bet 1BTC that we will see (at least once) the 24h-average equal or above 80TH/s, during the next 48h. Anybody takes it?

I'll take your bet.

But first I'd need to know how SmiGueL calculates the hashrate on that site.

I know how I do it on my site, and it's really simple: (2³² * <difficulty>) / (3600*24 / <AM_blocks_per_24h>)

Which currently is: (2³² * 65,750,060.1) / (3600*24 / 14) = 4.575834502×10¹³ = 45.76 TH/s

If we use the data from my site you're on! And of course my data is verifiable: If you can find more blocks than I claim, that have the "Mined By ASICMiner" signature in the coinbase you know I'm leaving some blocks out.

runeks: ok deal!

Cool! So the bet ends 17:00 (3:00 PM) Wednesday, August 28 (48 hours and two minutes from now).

[data]

The market moves around so quickly, it is not even funny anymore. Just because of some small change in a mostly luck-based graph...

 I just regret getting back in a tad above 3 last week with an old outstanding buy order. Would have bought with all free cash otherwise at 2.4-2.6... Well, I expect the prices to rise even more once normal (not kept-back) dividends are paid again

[Zubilica]

The market moves around so quickly, it is not even funny anymore. Just because of some small change in a mostly luck-based graph...

 I just regret getting back in a tad above 3 last week with an old outstanding buy order. Would have bought with all free cash otherwise at 2.4-2.6... Well, I expect the prices to rise even more once normal (not kept-back) dividends are paid again

you still can till 3.6-3.9 is still cheap shares

[SebastianJu]

I think you forgot that friedcat is taking part of the div for further deployment like he stated.

vela, I bet we'll see the 24h average being over 80TH/s during the next 48h.

How much are you willing to bet?

Also, guys, there is a speculation thread.


Anyway, we're very likely to have a low dividend again.

Based on data here:
http://www.asicminercharts.com/live/
I would bet 1BTC that we will see (at least once) the 24h-average equal or above 80TH/s, during the next 48h. Anybody takes it?

I'll take your bet.

But first I'd need to know how SmiGueL calculates the hashrate on that site.

I know how I do it on my site, and it's really simple: (2³² * <difficulty>) / (3600*24 / <AM_blocks_per_24h>)

Which currently is: (2³² * 65,750,060.1) / (3600*24 / 14) = 4.575834502×10¹³ = 45.76 TH/s

If we use the data from my site you're on! And of course my data is verifiable: If you can find more blocks than I claim, that have the "Mined By ASICMiner" signature in the coinbase you know I'm leaving some blocks out.

runeks: ok deal!

[velacreations]

hash rate falling!*  



* it's not, don't freak out, this is just to show how fickle that 6-12 hour estimate is.

[DeathAndTaxes]

I think the term is "reversion to the mean".  

Honestly not sure why the author chose these timeframes because they do nothing but add confusion.  A 30 day, 7 day, and 1 day graph would be more useful. Maybe add in a "since last dividend" and "since start of mining" column.

ASICMiner's historical hashrate (all blocks over all time since the start of mining) has only averaged ~30 TH/s.  This lifetime average has flatlined (growth slowed to a crawl) over the last couple weeks.  Not sure why but, you only get paid on what is actually mined.

[velacreations]

I think the term is "reversion to the mean".  

Honestly not sure why the author chose these timeframes because they do nothing but add confusion.  A 30 day, 7 day, and 1 day graph would be more useful. Maybe add in a "since last dividend" and "since start of mining".

ASICMiner historial hashrate average (all blocks over all time since the start of mining) has only averaged ~30 TH/s.  This lifetime average has flatlined over the last couple weeks.  You only get paid on what is actually mined.

+1
EXACTLY

guys, the 6 hour and 12 hour estimates are almost worthless, just ignore them.  They will get your hopes up and/or become your worst nightmares if you let them.

36 hour is better, 48 is even better than that.

[VeeMiner]

I think the term is "reversion to the mean".  

Honestly not sure why the author chose these timeframes because they do nothing but add confusion.  A 30 day, 7 day, and 1 day graph would be more useful. Maybe add in a "since last dividend" and "since start of mining".

ASICMiner historial hashrate average (all blocks over all time since the start of mining) has only averaged ~30 TH/s.  This lifetime average has flatlined over the last couple weeks.  You only get paid on what is actually mined.

+1
EXACTLY

guys, the 6 hour and 12 hour estimates are almost worthless, just ignore them.  They will get your hopes up and/or become your worst nightmares if you let them.

36 hour is better, 48 is even better than that.

yeah, I think that Smiguel should just change the counters to 12, 24, 48 and 72(96) hours. We would have less headbangers ITT

[ThickAsThieves]

I think the term is "reversion to the mean".  

Honestly not sure why the author chose these timeframes because they do nothing but add confusion.  A 30 day, 7 day, and 1 day graph would be more useful. Maybe add in a "since last dividend" and "since start of mining".

ASICMiner historial hashrate average (all blocks over all time since the start of mining) has only averaged ~30 TH/s.  This lifetime average has flatlined over the last couple weeks.  You only get paid on what is actually mined.

+1
EXACTLY

guys, the 6 hour and 12 hour estimates are almost worthless, just ignore them.  They will get your hopes up and/or become your worst nightmares if you let them.

36 hour is better, 48 is even better than that.

Correct, you need to look at 3+ days really, to get a good sense.

[Rival]

I think the term is "reversion to the mean".  

Honestly not sure why the author chose these timeframes because they do nothing but add confusion.  A 30 day, 7 day, and 1 day graph would be more useful. Maybe add in a "since last dividend" and "since start of mining".

ASICMiner historial hashrate average (all blocks over all time since the start of mining) has only averaged ~30 TH/s.  This lifetime average has flatlined over the last couple weeks.  You only get paid on what is actually mined.

+1
EXACTLY

guys, the 6 hour and 12 hour estimates are almost worthless, just ignore them.  They will get your hopes up and/or become your worst nightmares if you let them.

36 hour is better, 48 is even better than that.

Correct, you need to look at 3+ days really, to get a good sense.

Unless it drops to zero for 6 hours. There is actually useful and actionable information to be gleaned in such events.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Unless it drops to zero for 6 hours. There is actually useful and actionable information to be gleaned in such events.

To "noob proof" it maybe just 1 day hashrate and provide the time since last block.  I am too lazy to do the math but given that Bitcoin is a poisson distribution one can provide a 95% confidence interval as a sanity check "WARNING time since last block exceeds 95% confidence interval for 50 TH/s".

[SmiGueL]

yeah, I think that Smiguel should just change the counters to 12, 24, 48 and 72(96) hours. We would have less headbangers ITT

3D and 7D averages can be found here in the upper chart www.asicminercharts.com

[runeks]

I think the term is "reversion to the mean".  

Honestly not sure why the author chose these timeframes because they do nothing but add confusion.  A 30 day, 7 day, and 1 day graph would be more useful. Maybe add in a "since last dividend" and "since start of mining" column.

ASICMiner's historical hashrate (all blocks over all time since the start of mining) has only averaged ~30 TH/s.  This lifetime average has flatlined (growth slowed to a crawl) over the last couple weeks.  Not sure why but, you only get paid on what is actually mined.

An all-time average will always slow to a crawl. The longer the period is the less of an impact newly found blocks will have. I included it in my chart in the beginning, when there wasn't enough data for a 7-day average, I'm thinking of removing it now because it isn't very useful.