ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[CMMPro]

Fuck off with Labcoin news....we all can read the same "news" in their forum if we wanted to.
"Competitor news" is an excuse to OT shill their shares over here.

[freedomno1]

Fuck off with Labcoin news....we all can read the same "news" in their forum if we wanted to.
"Competitor news" is an excuse to OT shill their shares over here.

If competition has some actual proof they are doing something AM investors may want to know
But I digress
(he-he see you went off to the labcoin thread right after whistle someone read and applied it lol)

[CMMPro]

Fuck off with Labcoin news....we all can read the same "news" in their forum if we wanted to.
"Competitor news" is an excuse to OT shill their shares over here.

If competition has some actual proof they are doing something AM investors may want to know
But I digress
(he-he see you went off to the labcoin thread right after whistle someone read and applied it lol)

Yeah I went off to the Labcoin thread...you know, the place where Labcoin news BELONGS.

It isn't some secret thread only you have access to...we don't need people to relay off topic into this thread and clutter it up more.

[Rebelution]

Fuck off with Labcoin news....we all can read the same "news" in their forum if we wanted to.
"Competitor news" is an excuse to OT shill their shares over here.

If competition has some actual proof they are doing something AM investors may want to know
But I digress
(he-he see you went off to the labcoin thread right after whistle someone read and applied it lol)

Yeah I went off to the Labcoin thread...you know, the place where Labcoin news BELONGS.

It isn't some secret thread only you have access to...we don't need people to relay off topic into this thread and clutter it up more.

Thanks for posting freedomno1.  I think such milestones at competitors are definitely worth posting here.  It definitely has a great effect on AM's share price and valuation.  Personally to me, this still does not prove that they are legit.  They could have just used some of the IPO funds to buy some blades.  If they really had chips, I don't see why they would have such difficulty snapping a few pictures.  But I will leave that discussion for Labcoin.  Thanks for posting!

[SOSLOVE868]

How long till someone claims friedcat tanked the value of AM so he could buyback some of his shares, then release alllll the hasing power and come back to being on top with massive profits....

This what I am thought too... I think the AM's is undervalue right now!

[Whtwabbit]

Maybe he's just giving the Blade buyers a break?

[wickedgoodtrader]

I'm new to the thread. I was invested in AM in the past and made a nice profit but sold when I saw their network % dropping. I've kept my eye on them. What is the reason they hold such a small % of the network? Shouldn't they be keeping at least 20%. I thought they had the capabilities to do this and if they do, why don't they do it?

[Rannasha]

I'm new to the thread. I was invested in AM in the past and made a nice profit but sold when I saw their network % dropping. I've kept my eye on them. What is the reason they hold such a small % of the network? Shouldn't they be keeping at least 20%. I thought they had the capabilities to do this and if they do, why don't they do it?

AM was very quick to the ASIC-armsrace, but by now there is quite a bit of competition from other companies. Additionally, AM seems to be busy with getting their 2nd generation out (though there haven't been many updates on this recently). Finally, mining has become less profitable thanks to the difficulty explosion. If mining is not as profitable anymore, it might be better to just sell the hardware rather than mine with it yourself.

[velacreations]

it's very simple - they don't sell used hardware.  So, if they have Gen1 hardware being assembled and/or on hand, it makes financial sense to sell it from now until Gen2 comes out.  

If they deploy hardware instead of selling it, then in 2 months (or less), they have tons of hardware they can't sell and has not made the same amount of profit as if they sold it now.

So, until they start filling the farm with Gen2, they are going to sell any Gen1 hardware they can to maximize profit.

[Mabsark]

Does anyone know how much has been kept back from dividends so far to pay for the next gen chips?

[velacreations]

Does anyone know how much has been kept back from dividends so far to pay for the next gen chips?

not sure, but some estimates last week were around 10K btc

[Mabsark]

Does anyone know how much has been kept back from dividends so far to pay for the next gen chips?

not sure, but some estimates last week were around 10K btc

If we assume that dividends would be 0.02 BTC without anything being kept back, then subtract the actual dividends paid, we can get an estimate for the amount held back for each week. The total for the past 5 dividends being 0.03806709 BTC per share. If we assume that 50% of the dividends were held back, the total is 0.06193291.

If we go with the earlier figure, then 0.03806709 BTC/share * 400,000 shares = 15,226.836 BTC. Depending on the price the bitcoins were exchanged for, we get the following values for USD:

100 USD/BTC = 1,522,683.60 USD
110 USD/BTC = 1,674,951.96 USD
120 USD/BTC = 1,827,220.32 USD
130 USD/BTC = 1,979,488.68 USD
140 USD/BTC = 2,131,757.04 USD

If we assume only half of that has been held back, that's still 750,000 USD.

Does anyone know how much needs to be raised for the 2nd gen chips?

[SebastianJu]

Someone mentioned gen2 will only be assembled in decembre... is that true? I mean friedcat already ordered those chips months ago isnt it?

[velacreations]

Someone mentioned gen2 will only be assembled in decembre... is that true? I mean friedcat already ordered those chips months ago isnt it?

it was my understanding that they would be deployed Nov/Dec.  Assembly would have to happen sooner.

[velacreations]

Does anyone know how much needs to be raised for the 2nd gen chips?

I don't think it's been said, maybe a board member knows, but no one is saying.

[velacreations]

If we go with the earlier figure, then 0.03806709 BTC/share * 400,000 shares = 15,226.836 BTC.

there was a post last week that was watching an address that had 9K btc in it that was receiving funds from AM.  Right before the dividend, it had over 10K btc in it.  I don't know if that's the withholding (I kinda doubt it), but I believe that's where the 10K btc estimate came from.

[keeron]

That was me (I think)

Here is that address http://blockchain.info/address/1HgTJED7XEGy4vVwKa8kgefWqUB3VRX2mW

11k btc now :-)

If we go with the earlier figure, then 0.03806709 BTC/share * 400,000 shares = 15,226.836 BTC.

there was a post last week that was watching an address that had 9K btc in it that was receiving funds from AM.  Right before the dividend, it had over 10K btc in it.  I don't know if that's the withholding (I kinda doubt it), but I believe that's where the 10K btc estimate came from.

[Lohoris]

The argument that Bitcoin uses alot of energy is just a cheap shot that is easily refuted with comparison to the current systems. You don't even to go deep and comprehensive like the above just the ATM machines woeldwide and you are done.

Believe it or not some people bring that up when we are talking bitcoin and they feel like undermining the system, pun intended 

Not so a cheap shot.

The core of this argument is that the traditional systems scale with their use (i.e. the more transactions VISA has to process, the more it costs to them to process them), while Bitcoin isn't linear, it is unrelated to that (i.e. the cost of processing transactions isn't related to the amount of transactions processed, and it constantly increases).

That is, if mining increases more quickly than adoption, we've got a problem.

AND adoption is hard-capped by population, while mining has no cap, so we've got a problem anyway, in the long run.

[physalis]

That is, if mining increases more quickly than adoption, we've got a problem.

AND adoption is hard-capped by population, while mining has no cap, so we've got a problem anyway, in the long run.

Mining has a cap in that it is only done as long as it's profitable.
It doesn't just grow unlimited without bitcoin growing.
While you're right that it doesn't directly scale with the number of transactions, it scales with the price of bitcoin, which itself is related to adoption.
I'm confident that whatever level of adoption and bitcoin price we reach, mining energy usage will still be low enough compared to the use in traditional finance.

[Vycid]

That is, if mining increases more quickly than adoption, we've got a problem.

AND adoption is hard-capped by population, while mining has no cap, so we've got a problem anyway, in the long run.

Mining has a cap in that it is only done as long as it's profitable.
It doesn't just grow unlimited without bitcoin growing.
While you're right that it doesn't directly scale with the number of transactions, it scales with the price of bitcoin, which itself is related to adoption.
I'm confident that whatever level of adoption and bitcoin price we reach, mining energy usage will still be low enough compared to the use in traditional finance.

You seem to be implying that Bitcoin will not simply bring with it yet another "traditional finance" paradigm. The electricity use of traditional finance will just be compounded with the latest ecological disaster, Bitcoin mining.

It's my suspicion that, should we see widespread adoption of Bitcoin, nations will undertake Bitcoin mining projects defensively to keep any other nation from controlling the network. This arms race will not be limited by profit margins.

(I also suspect that the loss of the power to levy income tax may lead to the fall of the democratic state and the rise of the autocratic corporate nation-state, but that is another discussion.)

I hope that this financial arms race is conducted in a responsible fashion, like hydroelectric colocation projects. But realistically I suspect that is unlikely for many countries, like China, for whom the bottom line (and an edge in the global marketplace) is more important than preventing rampant pollution.