ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[moribana]

Wow, 4 people that think they know statistics because they know what a distribution is and can google simple statistics concepts.  But really you aren’t thinking critically enough.

1.  Why do you guys think that AM’s rate of finding blocks is poission distributed?  It is definitely not a poisson process, but I admit that that fact does not preclude its results from being poission distributed.  That being said, due to the variance in AM's hash rate that friedcat has admitted, we know that it is not poisson distributed.

2. Many of you are missing a crucial point.  The difference between the expected value for a GIVEN 6 hour period is a VERY DIFFERENT question from the probability that 0 blocks will be found in ANY ONE 6 hour period.  Allow me to illustrate with an example, and I think even you condescending / smug posters will understand.  The probability of flipping a coin 3 times and getting heads each time is VERY DIFFERENT from flipping a coin 50 times a getting a string of 3 heads in a row.  I really hope you guys see why...  Now, I know thinking is difficult but please try.  Now think for an example how this concept applies to this situation.  Do you see now?

You guys are really my major problem with the bitcoin community in general.  At first it seems like a community full of really intelligent people.  But the more time you spend, you realize its actually full of condescending people that are pseudo-intellectuals.

You guys think that because you have tons of posts that you are intelligent.  But really that is not the case at all.  Just because you took intro to stats you think that you know probabilities well, but you guys are misapplying the concepts.  On top of that you act like egotistical dbags to people that are trying to help you see the error in your ways.  Really concerns me about this community, and bitcoins' longevity...  Especially you members with a ton of posts and activity.  People assume that you guys are intelligent and know things--couldn't you at least take a little bit of responsibility?

Sorry for ranting, but it really is saddening  

I think that the logic is this. If you assume that AM and the total network both run at a constant hash rate and things are random then the number of blocks found by AM has Poisson distribution. Then if AM finds on average B blocks in time T then the probability of finding zero blocks in any time interval T is exp(-B). If for time T no block is found and exp(-B) is a very small number then it is very unlikely that AM is running at the expected constant hash rate that was used for the calculation and one starts to worry.

Edit: I just saw that you already answered this.
And one question. If someone is hashing at a constant rate and the network rate is constant would you expect the blocks found in a given time interval to have Poisson distribution? If not I would be curious why. I haven't checked numbers but looking at btcguild statistics it seems that there is some correlation in the success rate data which would mean that the distribution is not Poisson.

[1713530458]

1713530458

[1713530458]

1713530458

[1713530458]

1713530458

[1713530458]

1713530458

[1713530458]

1713530458

[1713530458]

1713530458

[abramelin582]

I understood franchising the same way you did, including the fact that it allows to expand the AM network hash rate without threatening the network.
I think for the franchisee, it allows to mine without supporting the risk of not breaking-even. AM will ensure that somehow.

Where I don't follow you that much, is about the free USBs. Technically, I don't see a way to ensure that mining hardware are going to share revenue with AM.
I think AM only franchise with people that they trust, and that have collateral (shares, btc?) to ensure they are not going to run away with the hardware and keep all revenues for themselves. And I don't believe this type or relationship can scale to thousands of people around the globe easily. If there would be a technical way to make something as spread as you describe feasible, it would be truly awesome.

     Well i dont know much about designing chips or programming software but couldn't they just make chips that only worked with a ASICMINER mining program that they wrote. That way the miner program could dedicate 95% of the hash work to one pool that paid out to ASICMINER and the other 5% would go to the person running it.

[binaryFate]

I understood franchising the same way you did, including the fact that it allows to expand the AM network hash rate without threatening the network.
I think for the franchisee, it allows to mine without supporting the risk of not breaking-even. AM will ensure that somehow.

Where I don't follow you that much, is about the free USBs. Technically, I don't see a way to ensure that mining hardware are going to share revenue with AM.
I think AM only franchise with people that they trust, and that have collateral (shares, btc?) to ensure they are not going to run away with the hardware and keep all revenues for themselves. And I don't believe this type or relationship can scale to thousands of people around the globe easily. If there would be a technical way to make something as spread as you describe feasible, it would be truly awesome.

     Well i dont know much about designing chips or programming software but couldn't they just make chips that only worked with a ASICMINER mining program that they wrote. That way the miner program could dedicate 95% of the hash work to one pool that paid out to ASICMINER and the other 5% would go to the person running it.

Softwares, even compiled, can be modified.

[binaryFate]

Well i dont know much about designing chips or programming software but couldn't they just make chips that only worked with a ASICMINER mining program that they wrote. That way the miner program could dedicate 95% of the hash work to one pool that paid out to ASICMINER and the other 5% would go to the person running it.

Softwares, even compiled, can be modified.

Or even simpler: fake the ASICMINER pool. The software think it's mining for AM but it's actually mining for you.

Yeah, there will always be some ways to trick the system... That is why franchising works only within a "continued" relationship, with trust and/or collaterals involved.

[velacreations]

The hash rate has not increased in several weeks.  AM is selling the hardware, not mining with it.  Why?  because it is more profitable to sell the hardware.

They're developing new hardware. No reason to add more old hardware. My guess is that they will deploy it while selling the older one (which actually might be profitable for buyers, as it could be sold at a low price without causing a loss to AM - they paid for themselves already).

Meanwhile, they are missing out on a lot of mining revenue.  We're now going on several weeks that the hash rate is stagnant (or dropping) and the network % is dropping.  We're talking thousands of btc of lost revenue in the last month.

To make that up, they're gonna have to sell a lot of hardware, and they need to do it sooner rather than later.

Are the new blades out yet?  Are they hashing and/or for sale?

Developing new hardware is great, but taking advantage of the CURRENT opportunities is important, too.

[abramelin582]

Well i dont know much about designing chips or programming software but couldn't they just make chips that only worked with a ASICMINER mining program that they wrote. That way the miner program could dedicate 95% of the hash work to one pool that paid out to ASICMINER and the other 5% would go to the person running it.

Softwares, even compiled, can be modified.

Or even simpler: fake the ASICMINER pool. The software think it's mining for AM but it's actually mining for you.

    So then my dream for ASICMINER can't come true   Thank sucks. There's no way to develop a chip that would share it's hash power with the operator and ASICMINER? If someone could figure out away to do this it would not only be good for the producer of them but it would be great for the network as a whole.
     Anyway thanks for the critique guys guess i gotta put more thought into it, i just don't get how else you franchise mining? How do you think he plans on keeping his franchisees honest and paying him for running the hardware?  

[binaryFate]

Well i dont know much about designing chips or programming software but couldn't they just make chips that only worked with a ASICMINER mining program that they wrote. That way the miner program could dedicate 95% of the hash work to one pool that paid out to ASICMINER and the other 5% would go to the person running it.

Softwares, even compiled, can be modified.

Or even simpler: fake the ASICMINER pool. The software think it's mining for AM but it's actually mining for you.

    So then my dream for ASICMINER can't come true   Thank sucks. There's no way to develop a chip that would share it's hash power with the operator and ASICMINER? If someone could figure out away to do this it would not only be good for the producer of them but it would be great for the network as a whole.
     Anyway thanks for the critique guys guess i gotta put more thought into it, i just don't get how else you franchise mining? How do you think he plans on keeping his franchisees honest and paying him for running the hardware?  

You check how much blocks franchisee find, and whether it fits expectations. Or you set up a private pool and you do the same check but with shares. That is one of the reason I believe why it is done in China: it is much easier with people you know, that you see irl.

[DeathAndTaxes]

    So then my dream for ASICMINER can't come true   Thank sucks. There's no way to develop a chip that would share it's hash power with the operator and ASICMINER? If someone could figure out away to do this it would not only be good for the producer of them but it would be great for the network as a whole.
     Anyway thanks for the critique guys guess i gotta put more thought into it, i just don't get how else you franchise mining? How do you think he plans on keeping his franchisees honest and paying him for running the hardware?  

You are essentially talking about hardware level DRM.  Can it be done?  Sure.  However currently ASICs are relatively "stupid".  They have no idea what they are doing and that is a great thing.  You use "smart" and insanely cheap microprocessor to do the high level thinking and you connect them to banks of ASICs which are glorified calculators.  Yeah they are amazingly cool in terms of efficiency and speed but they are brain dead stupid.  They have no "concept" of what mining is.  They take a binary blob, double hash it and compare it to another binary blob to see if it is smaller.  All the "smarts" are in the miner software running on a cheap off the shelf microprocessor.

Moving all the mining logic into the ASIC would be very expensive for essentially no gain.  It could be done but the high level mining logic isn't a bottleneck so you aren't going to make it faster, and you certainly aren't going to do it cheaper then mass produced microprocessors running  open source code.  Still you would be able to "lock" the chip down ... until someone figures out a way to hack it and shares it with everyone on the internet who in mass disable the "mining tax".  All DRM to date has been broken, someone would figure out a way to break this too.   I mean people spend collectively millions of hours hacking video game consoles so they can play pirated games for cheap.  This is a box which makes money and hacking it would allow you to make MORE money.   If people are willing to devote so much time to hacking hardware to play cheap video games, how much time do you think they would devote to hacking hardware which makes free money?

[Rival]

With the price of shares of AM so closely tied to the btc/fiat rate, it is becoming difficult to calculate the correct ROI, and to determine if it is in fact positive.

At $90 per bitcoin, AM shares averaged around 4.5 each. 4.5 * 90 = $405.

At $120 per bitcoin, AM shares averaged around 3.3 each. 3.3 * 120 = $396.

At $130 per bitcoin, AM shares average around 2.9 each. 2.9 * 130 = $377.

Today:

At $140 per bitcoin, AM shares average around 2.5 each. 2.5 * 140 = $350.


This apparent loss of fiat purchasing power as the price of btc increases may be replaced by the dividends. They are only a few dollars at best per week, but  there are multiple dividends per price period so the accumulation of dividends might offset most of it. Of course, there are other factors such as other IPO, breaking news, FUD, etc. But a clear pattern is establishing itself. Could it be possible that, just like buying an asic (in most cases anymore), you are better off just sitting on your BTC than you are in investing? Help me out here and show me what I am missing.

[Jutarul]

Yeah, there will always be some ways to trick the system... That is why franchising works only within a "continued" relationship, with trust and/or collaterals involved.

And a "continued" relationship is actually desirable over a technical solution, which may be circumvented and cut ASICMINER off from the revenue stream.

One of the added values of the franchise business model is that it creates a culture of a sustained customer relationship, with a clear division of labor. The miner benefits from the reduced cost of scaling and reduced risk exposure to hardware depreciation. The supplier (ASICMINER) benefits from improvements in the cost structure of the mining facility, since competition will lead to franchisees competing for the deployed hash power by offering higher PPS (pay-per-share percentage = rental fees), causing inefficient miners to exit the market while keeping the revenue high.

The ability to push hash power into the market depends on the hardware production cost per PPS. That is where hardware suppliers will compete. The ability to run profitable depends on the upkeep costs per PPS. That is where miners need to compete. Hardware efficiency will be priced in by discounting the PPS correctly (inefficient hardware should trade at lower PPS). These principles of course are already at work right now, but the rather high hardware depreciation risk makes it hard to determine the expected profit from running mining equipment to a point where it effectively becomes a gamble. The franchise should allow both business partners to have less windfall and a more consistent revenue stream.

The first generation of ASIC miners are getting burned heavily. Other companies already have read the signs and are offering some form of income guarantee program (see, e.g. HASHFAST and their MPP). However, long term I suspect that only business models will succeed which have a guaranteed income stream for the miner at negligible risks. At least this should hold true if the majority of the miners are economical.

[Aedius]

With the price of shares of AM so closely tied to the btc/fiat rate, it is becoming difficult to calculate the correct ROI, and to determine if it is in fact positive.

At $90 per bitcoin, AM shares averaged around 4.5 each. 4.5 * 90 = $405.

At $120 per bitcoin, AM shares averaged around 3.3 each. 3.3 * 120 = $396.

At $130 per bitcoin, AM shares average around 2.9 each. 2.9 * 130 = $377.

Today:

At $140 per bitcoin, AM shares average around 2.5 each. 2.5 * 140 = $350.


This apparent loss of fiat purchasing power as the price of btc increases may be replaced by the dividends. They are only a few dollars at best per week, but  there are multiple dividends per price period so the accumulation of dividends might offset most of it. Of course, there are other factors such as other IPO, breaking news, FUD, etc. But a clear pattern is establishing itself. Could it be possible that, just like buying an asic (in most cases anymore), you are better off just sitting on your BTC than you are in investing? Help me out here and show me what I am missing.

Correlation does not equal causation. All else equal, investing in a BTC mining company is more of a leveraged bet on the price of BTC increasing rather than a hedge as some have described it. AMs share price has fallen due to a few different factors, including: competition appears to be increasing, total network hash rate has increased while AMs hashrate has stayed relatively flat, dividends have fallen slightly, and AM has taken some money out of dividends to fund future hardware.

IMO, AMs share price is VERY undervalued at current levels, Friedcat is one of the only mining operators who has consistently delivered if not over-delivered on his promises to the Bitcoin community and shareholders. AM has been consistently selling out of hardware exceptionally fast and will soon have next gen chips for mining and for sale, not to mention the new franchising business model which will allow AM to effectively have a greater percentage of the network than what would normally be possible for a typical mining operation.

Going to keep accumulating shares at these levels; enjoying the ~48% yield at current prices while the share price continues it's volatile course.

[ThickAsThieves]

Meanwhile, they are missing out on a lot of mining revenue.  We're now going on several weeks that the hash rate is stagnant (or dropping) and the network % is dropping.  We're talking thousands of btc of lost revenue in the last month.

Maybe they sold all the hardware instead of adding it to the farm. Maybe some hardware went to franchises. Maybe AM knows what they are doing.

Or, maybe the forums know better than AM?

So many arguments here operate on the premise that AM somehow chose to do something stupid regarding any given topic, why?

[Keyser Soze]

So many arguments here operate on the premise that AM somehow chose to do something stupid regarding any given topic, why?

People are accustomed to others involved in bitcoin making poor decisions (or outright scam).

[gog1]

With the price of shares of AM so closely tied to the btc/fiat rate, it is becoming difficult to calculate the correct ROI, and to determine if it is in fact positive.

At $90 per bitcoin, AM shares averaged around 4.5 each. 4.5 * 90 = $405.

At $120 per bitcoin, AM shares averaged around 3.3 each. 3.3 * 120 = $396.

At $130 per bitcoin, AM shares average around 2.9 each. 2.9 * 130 = $377.

Today:

At $140 per bitcoin, AM shares average around 2.5 each. 2.5 * 140 = $350.


This apparent loss of fiat purchasing power as the price of btc increases may be replaced by the dividends. They are only a few dollars at best per week, but  there are multiple dividends per price period so the accumulation of dividends might offset most of it. Of course, there are other factors such as other IPO, breaking news, FUD, etc. But a clear pattern is establishing itself. Could it be possible that, just like buying an asic (in most cases anymore), you are better off just sitting on your BTC than you are in investing? Help me out here and show me what I am missing.

The bitcoin / AM share price correlation theory again - which I highly doubt.  I think share prices slump because of the low dividend and apparent low share of network hash power.  Even if bitcoin is $45, would you be willing to pay 4.5 BTC for a share that pays out only 0.012 BTC / week?  NO.  Let alone the 9 BTC price base on your theory.

[velacreations]

Meanwhile, they are missing out on a lot of mining revenue.  We're now going on several weeks that the hash rate is stagnant (or dropping) and the network % is dropping.  We're talking thousands of btc of lost revenue in the last month.

Maybe they sold all the hardware instead of adding it to the farm. Maybe some hardware went to franchises. Maybe AM knows what they are doing.

Or, maybe the forums know better than AM?

So many arguments here operate on the premise that AM somehow chose to do something stupid regarding any given topic, why?

well, we're making assumptions using very little information.  There could be a lot of scenarios where they can't physically add more hashrate to the farm.  Or maybe there was a major flaw in the design of the new blades that has prevented their release.

In the end, we don't know "why", we just know the result: no hashrate increase and no new blades.

FC is likely making the best choices given the information he has.  I don't doubt he knows what he is doing, but that doesn't change the fact that AM is missing major revenue.

[ThickAsThieves]

I don't doubt he knows what he is doing, but that doesn't change the fact that AM is missing major revenue.

By this logic there are quite a few people & businesses missing major revenue though.

[velacreations]

I don't doubt he knows what he is doing, but that doesn't change the fact that AM is missing major revenue.

By this logic there are quite a few people & businesses missing major revenue though.

well, that brings us back to the original thing of "why"  Why can't AM take advantage of the clear opportunities at its feet? 

As we've seen in the last 4 weeks, AM clearly can't increase hashing rate, for whatever reason, nor release new hardware that has been promised since July.

I find that a bit worrying, to be honest.  Whatever obstacles that are preventing AM from moving forward may be significant obstacles that won't be resolved anytime soon.  Without more info from FC, there is no way to tell for sure. 

Are these obstacles something AM can't overcome?

[OneBTCJay]

I think patience is the biggest obstacle that AM investors need to overcome. People act like putting together a 50 THs farm is nothing more than pre-ordering 100 baby-jets.

AM wouldn't be here if they didn't have their act together. FC has been planing expansion from the beginning and has been doing great.

The bears have been loud recently and have used this two weeks of lower hash-rate to get the lowest share price, but I don't think it will last long.

[Vycid]

I don't doubt he knows what he is doing, but that doesn't change the fact that AM is missing major revenue.

By this logic there are quite a few people & businesses missing major revenue though.

Those businesses usually see a share price correction,  as is necessary and appropriate.

The correction that has occurred so far is not sufficient.

[velacreations]

I think patience is the biggest obstacle that AM investors need to overcome. People act like putting together a 50 THs farm is nothing more than pre-ordering 100 baby-jets.

well, we had that done some time ago.  It seems like getting a 50 TH/s farm up isn't too much of an issue for FC and team, but keeping it at 50TH/s and expanding beyond that is a significant hurdle.

FC has been planing expansion from the beginning and has been doing great.

up until about a month or so ago, and expansion has completely stagnated. 

The bears have been loud recently and have used this two weeks of lower hash-rate to get the lowest share price, but I don't think it will last long.

based on what?  I don't see any signs of the mining operation improving, and hardware delivery has been stalled waiting on the new blades.