ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[empoweoqwj]

in house hashing ~45TH/s
franchising ~15TH/s
sold ? 30 - 50 TH/s ?

Where are you getting the "sold" estimate from? Income? How much roughly has selling 30 - 50 TH/s raised?

[1714134240]

1714134240

[1714134240]

1714134240

[JimiQ84]

in house hashing ~45TH/s
franchising ~15TH/s
sold ? 30 - 50 TH/s ?

Where are you getting the "sold" estimate from? Income? How much roughly has selling 30 - 50 TH/s raised?

I am getting it mainly from one of the resellers - canaryInTheMine - he claims that he sold around 15TH/s. There are around 5 big resellers, so it's safe to estimate that 4 other sold together at least the same amount as the biggest one.

[freedomno1]

I'm an AM shareholder and I hope we briefly dip to 1.5 BTC before the Gen2 announcement because I'll be buying.

The mining landscape is changing rapidly but FC had a significant head start. I don't believe he is a clown. And although I wish he would communicate more I also believe actions speak louder than words. Combined with his business ethics I feel comfortable riding things out with AM until at least the next halving.

The only thing I worry about is how competitive AM can be with 55nm hardware over the long run (9-12 months) when everybody else has moved to 28nm.

On the positive side, all the new hardware producers (Cointerra, Hashfast, etc.) seem to focus on bigger chips (400GH/s+). I think the USB stick mining space is actually very significant so I'm happy that AM should be able to keep emphasizing on that with Gen2 as well.

To offshoot the bitcoin network just reached 1 petahash so assuming growth projection and estimated hash coming online according to Friedcat's timelines it does get interesting.

Q: How much hashing power does Bitfountain plan to deploy within this year?
Friedcat: 800-1000T within this year.

http://siliconangle.com/blog/2013/09/18/bitcoin-weekly-2013-september-18-bigpoint-games-to-accept-bitcoin-network-exceeds-1-petahash-a-second-armory-technologies-raises-600k/

In other words probably 25-30% of network by the time the hardware comes online might be doable but I digress we will need to wait.

[data]

What you don't consider when trading off selling versus self-deployment is the overhead and time it takes to get a datacenter at this energy density up.

Also, our hashrate rather dropping then rising could mean the near-future deployment of gen2 hardware, although this is only scheduled for november and a sell-off now would not make sense.

[velacreations]

Also, our hashrate rather dropping then rising could mean the near-future deployment of gen2 hardware, although this is only scheduled for november and a sell-off now would not make sense.

it makes sense if you consider that he doesn't mine with the hardware before selling it.  So, if he mines for 2 months with the hardware, then what?  Who buys Gen1 hardware in a Gen2 world? 

Why not just sell it right now and get the money in hand?

[Aedius]

Last 30 hour hashrate reading is at 58.23 and the 20 hour is at 73.90. Perhaps some new hardware is being deployed?

[candoo]

Last 30 hour hashrate reading is at 58.23 and the 20 hour is at 73.90. Perhaps some new hardware is being deployed?

Why do we keep repeating this... Its called variance

[lophie]

Last 30 hour hashrate reading is at 58.23 and the 20 hour is at 73.90. Perhaps some new hardware is being deployed?

Why do we keep repeating this... Its called variance

it is because the swings are too sharp against variance. That is why most of us here are speculating about events happening in the farm.

[ThickAsThieves]

Last 30 hour hashrate reading is at 58.23 and the 20 hour is at 73.90. Perhaps some new hardware is being deployed?

Why do we keep repeating this... Its called variance

it is because the swings are too sharp against variance. That is why most of us here are speculating about events happening in the farm.

Candoo is right, variance really can be this "sharp".

[candoo]

Yes this is variance. You can verifiy it after 3 days...

The whole network suffers from bad luck  sometimes. We could have 1400.093 Thash/s right now or 886.093 Thash/s... Its just variance

[philipma1957]

Last 30 hour hashrate reading is at 58.23 and the 20 hour is at 73.90. Perhaps some new hardware is being deployed?

Why do we keep repeating this... Its called variance

it is because the swings are too sharp against variance. That is why most of us here are speculating about events happening in the farm.

Candoo is right, variance really can be this "sharp".

 huge swings are possible once you are less then 10% of the total pool 1 block in 1 day  is not that uncalled for.

6 blocks in 1 hour is the 'norm'  for the entire pool or about 144 blocks a day.  If you are 10 percent of the pool 14 blocks is common place or your norm.

 But here is a simple way of doing your odds. if you are at 10% of the network.  vs 5% of the network
  
1 miss is .90                                                                                       .95
2 miss is .81                                                                                         .902
3 = .729                                                                                             .857
4 = .656                                                                                                        .814
5= .5905                                                                                                       .773
6 = .5314   so at 10% you are about 47/100 to do 1  block in the first hour                .735 at 5% your are about 25 -75 to do 1 block in the first hour
7 = .4783                                                                                                      .698
8 = .4304                                                                                                      .663
9 = .3874                                                                                                      .630
10 = .3486                                                                                                     .598
11 = .3138                                                                                                     .568
12 = .284 at 10%  your are about 72/100  to do 1 block by 2 hours                        .540  at 5% your are about 46 /100 to  do 1 block by 2 hours
13 = .254                                                                                                       .513
14 = .2287                                                                                                     .487
15 = .2058                                                                                                     .463
16 = .185                                                                                                       .439
17 = .1667                                                                                                      .417
18 = .1501  at 10 % you are about 85 /100 to do 1 block by 3 hours                        .396  at 5% you are about 60/100 to do 1 block by 3 hours


the point is at 3 hours 10 % of the network vs 5 % of the network  allows a big difference for more then 2x as some would think.

[empoweoqwj]

Yes this is variance. You can verifiy it after 3 days...

The whole network suffers from bad luck  sometimes. We could have 1400.093 Thash/s right now or 886.093 Thash/s... Its just variance

You mean you can verify its not variance only after 3 days?

That's just a figure plucked from the ether. All you can say is the longer the higher hashing rate appears to continue, the less likely it is due to variance. You can't put a specific time limit on it. This is luck we are talking about, as we keep saying.

[kano]

Yes this is variance. You can verifiy it after 3 days...

The whole network suffers from bad luck  sometimes. We could have 1400.093 Thash/s right now or 886.093 Thash/s... Its just variance

You mean you can verify its not variance only after 3 days?

That's just a figure plucked from the ether. All you can say is the longer the higher hashing rate appears to continue, the less likely it is due to variance. You can't put a specific time limit on it. This is luck we are talking about, as we keep saying.

No.

There is a reason why the difficulty adjustment is (14 days) ... 2016 blocks ...

[empoweoqwj]

Yes this is variance. You can verifiy it after 3 days...

The whole network suffers from bad luck  sometimes. We could have 1400.093 Thash/s right now or 886.093 Thash/s... Its just variance

You mean you can verify its not variance only after 3 days?

That's just a figure plucked from the ether. All you can say is the longer the higher hashing rate appears to continue, the less likely it is due to variance. You can't put a specific time limit on it. This is luck we are talking about, as we keep saying.

No.

There is a reason why the difficulty adjustment is (14 days) ... 2016 blocks ...

Sorry, lost me, the guy said "you can verify after 3 days" and you say "There is a reason why the difficulty adjustment is (14 days) ... 2016 blocks ..." - how are the two connected?

[Rannasha]

Yes this is variance. You can verifiy it after 3 days...

The whole network suffers from bad luck  sometimes. We could have 1400.093 Thash/s right now or 886.093 Thash/s... Its just variance

You mean you can verify its not variance only after 3 days?

That's just a figure plucked from the ether. All you can say is the longer the higher hashing rate appears to continue, the less likely it is due to variance. You can't put a specific time limit on it. This is luck we are talking about, as we keep saying.

No.

There is a reason why the difficulty adjustment is (14 days) ... 2016 blocks ...

Sorry, lost me, the guy said "you can verify after 3 days" and you say "There is a reason why the difficulty adjustment is (14 days) ... 2016 blocks ..." - how are the two connected?

The reason the difficulty adjustment is every 14 days (approximately) is that you need a period of that length (or longer) to reduce potential variance to reasonable levels. Adjusting the difficulty every day would cause large swings in both directions.

So if you already need 14 days to get a reasonable average of the network hashrate, you'll need more than that to properly reduce variance for a part of the network (in this case, ASICMiner), which brings us back to the main point that any hashrate estimate over a period of 3 days or less is completely meaningless due to the random nature of block-solving. Even longer periods, like 1 week or 2 weeks are susceptible enough to variance that it can be hard to draw any conclusions from those data.

[Lohoris]

I shudder to think of the electricity wasted otherwise.

I'm quite concerned about scaling too, but apparently most people aren't.

Can you copy paste what you wrote there here? It seems to be a private forum.

Sure!

I can copy what I wrote, but I can't copy other people's answers, though.

The most compelling argument in defence of the resources spent for the proof-of-work is that the current legacy systems (banks + credit cards + paypals + etc.) are already eating up tons of resources, and likely mining bitcoins is going to eat much less than that.

While this appears to be fine, I've just noticed it doesn't really work: the legacy systems scale in a more or less proportional way to the transaction volume, i.e. if transaction volume doesn't increase, they do not need to scale up.

Bitcoin's proof-of-work, instead, will apparently go up indefinitely, because either miners will move to countries where electricity and sysadmins are cheaper, or they will find ways to produce more powerful chips. Problem here isn't only the consumed electricity, but the wasted hardware: old chips will be useless and will become just pollution.

Honestly I can't see how can this not go horribly wrong. We'd better think very hard about this now that we are still in early stage, rather than waiting for it to become a huge problem later.

[kano]

Now where did I see a comparison that said that one major bank central office used probably more electricity than all the bitcoin mining in the world ...

[neilol]

Now where did I see a comparison that said that one major bank central office used probably more electricity than all the bitcoin mining in the world ...

That can't be true, I would be surprised

[lophie]

Banks love to print papers and send letters, that's a lot of energy consumption.

We are so arrogant to make our own currency that is created at a limited amount within a range of time and in the process use electricity.

We should let them print infinite money with infinity paper and electricity cost. That is better for the economy and the environment  .

We can't be thinking better it is not like we have brains to think with, right Satoshi?

[kano]

Now where did I see a comparison that said that one major bank central office used probably more electricity than all the bitcoin mining in the world ...

That can't be true, I would be surprised

OK lets try a wild estimate

I use less than 1KW to do well over 100GH/s
So lets go with 1KW for 100GH/s
That's a way over-estimate for some of the high hashing devices and a way under-estimate for any of the old devices anyone is silly enough to keep mining with

The bitcoin network is ~1PH/s
So that's like 10,000KW

That seem too high for a big bank's main data centre head office?
If it is then say how about 10 of them? Certainly not too high for 10 of them.

All guesses, but certainly makes that argument above seem far from certain.