ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[RoadStress]

Bitcoin hashrate today: 250 Ph and flat
https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate?showDataPoints=false&timespan=&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&scale=0&address=

BitFury: 100 MW with .2 J/Gh = 500 Ph

If BitFury wants to roll out 500Ph and control less than 51% they need to:
 - 1) either have the network reach 1 Eh, therefore they need someone else to add another 250Ph
 - 2) either start selling and shipping their hardware / chips, in which case the 100MW argument becomes irrelevant.

Let's go with 1), 250 Ph / 1 Eh = 25% of the network

Who is going to sell / own those 250 Ph?
Seems in line with AM's plan.

Let me see if I got this right. Are you stating that in order for BitFury to roll out 500PH they need AM to sell/deploy 250PH? Is this correct?

[Puppet]

Bitcoin hashrate today: 250 Ph and flat
https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate?showDataPoints=false&timespan=&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&scale=0&address=

BitFury: 100 MW with .2 J/Gh = 500 Ph

If BitFury wants to roll out 500Ph and control less than 51% they need to:
 - 1) either have the network reach 1 Eh, therefore they need someone else to add another 250Ph
 - 2) either start selling and shipping their hardware / chips, in which case the 100MW argument becomes irrelevant.

Let's go with 1), 250 Ph / 1 Eh = 25% of the network

Who is going to sell / own those 250 Ph?
Seems in line with AM's plan.

You're absolutely bonkers trying to spin this as somehow being a positive for AM.  Its right up there with the dude saying having 3x worse power efficiency is a good thing because it allows you to serve different markets.

A few hints for you: BF has no incentive to maintain less than 51% of the network. Aside from selling actual hardware they also resell and host a significant portion of their hashrate to partners like cryptx and DigitalBTC. No one cares if >51% of the network runs on hardware produced by the same vendor. 

Moreover, BF doesnt have to fill its DC's to capacity. They will add hashrate for as long it makes financial sense, regardless of their % of the network. If it no longer makes financial sense for BF to add more, despite having access to hardware at cost, access to extremely cheap hosting and electricity (check out their datacenter design and electricity prices in georgia republic) and despite probably having (by far) the most power efficient hardware, then who do you think will buy or deploy AM gear?

Of course, bitfury still has to make good on its promises, it may fail to deliver, or you may hope on it being a bluff, but based on their trackrecord, I wouldnt bet a satoshi on that.

[jimmothy]

Bitcoin hashrate today: 250 Ph and flat
https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate?showDataPoints=false&timespan=&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&scale=0&address=

BitFury: 100 MW with .2 J/Gh = 500 Ph

If BitFury wants to roll out 500Ph and control less than 51% they need to:
 - 1) either have the network reach 1 Eh, therefore they need someone else to add another 250Ph
 - 2) either start selling and shipping their hardware / chips, in which case the 100MW argument becomes irrelevant.

Let's go with 1), 250 Ph / 1 Eh = 25% of the network

Who is going to sell / own those 250 Ph?
Seems in line with AM's plan.

You're absolutely bonkers trying to spin this as somehow being a positive for AM.  Its right up there with the dude saying having 3x worse power efficiency is a good thing because it allows you to serve different markets.

A few hints for you: BF has no incentive to maintain less than 51% of the network. Aside from selling actual hardware they also resell and host a significant portion of their hashrate to partners like cryptx and DigitalBTC. No one cares if >51% of the network runs on hardware produced by the same vendor. 

Moreover, BF doesnt have to fill its DC's to capacity. They will add hashrate for as long it makes financial sense, regardless of their % of the network. If it no longer makes financial sense for BF to add more, despite having access to hardware at cost, access to extremely cheap hosting and electricity (check out their datacenter design and electricity prices in georgia republic) and despite probably having (by far) the most power efficient hardware, then who do you think will buy or deploy AM gear?

Of course, bitfury still has to make good on its promises, it may fail to deliver, or you may hope on it being a bluff, but based on their trackrecord, I wouldnt bet a satoshi on that.

You mean Bitfurys track record of failed 40nm, 28nm, and 20nm ASICs? I would bet a few satoshis on them missing their target again.

Don't forget that when Bitfury says 0.2 w/gh they mean underclocked to the best possible efficiency. They will most likely fill the DC with ~0.5 w/gh hardware until it makes sense to underclock.

[Puppet]

Keep dreaming Jimmy. Bitfury already manages 0.62J/GH at the wall on 55nm with their very first design. And it can do 0.5J/GH when underclocked. There never was a failed 40, 28 let alone 20nm BF design.

[cs54]

In my view the pulse of AM these days is the good old AM mining address:

https://blockchain.info/address/1HtUGfbDcMzTeHWx2Dbgnhc6kYnj1Hp24i

While I don't know where those bits are going, at least someone is sweeping them on a somewhat regular basis, so I guess that's comforting?

[jimmothy]

Keep dreaming Jimmy. Bitfury already manages 0.62J/GH at the wall on 55nm with their very first design. And it can do 0.5J/GH when underclocked. There never was a failed 40, 28 let alone 20nm BF design.

How do you know there wasn't a failed 40,28 and 20nm design? Do you have better insider knowledge than the CEO of SPtech who is in bed with Bitfury?

Their first chip is a perfect example of how they will overclock it until they need to underclock.

I'm willing to bet they still haven't underclocked their gen1 hardware because it doesn't make sense financially with their ultra cheap electricity rates.

[jjdub7]

https://blockchain.info/address/3KBUuGko4H5ke7EVsq9B7PLK1c5Askdd7y

Who else thinks they've got the gen1 hardware on as a decoy lolol

[bobboooiie]

https://blockchain.info/address/3KBUuGko4H5ke7EVsq9B7PLK1c5Askdd7y

Who else thinks they've got the gen1 hardware on as a decoy lolol

the same amount was just dumped on huobi...

[Puppet]

How do you know there wasn't a failed 40,28 and 20nm design? Do you have better insider knowledge than the CEO of SPtech who is in bed with Bitfury?

You're asking me to prove a negative now? Show me where Bitfury announced a 40 or 20nm design, specs and timetable and then blew it.
Out of passing curiosity, feel free to point out where the CEO of a competitor made that claim, but I dont even see how thats relevant.

Their first chip is a perfect example of how they will overclock it until they need to underclock.

I'm willing to bet they still haven't underclocked their gen1 hardware because it doesn't make sense financially with their ultra cheap electricity rates.

FFS, a few months ago you never even heard of Ohms Law or a shmoo plot. You're gonna argue this with me now ?
What a clown you are. BTW, how's  your petamine investment doing?

[jimmothy]

Show me where Bitfury announced a 40 or 20nm design, specs and timetable and then blew it.

Surely you can imagine how it might be beneficial to not disclose how many designs you've scrapped to the public/potential investors right?

Out of passing curiosity, feel free to point out where the CEO of a competitor made that claim, but I dont even see how thats relevant.

List of recent failures:
- Still didn't TO their custom UMC 40nm effort (AFAIK, unconfirmed)
- Scrapped big 28nm ASIC on Thermals. They got burnt from big ASICs and keeping the small ASICs design approach.
- Scrapped 20nm custom ASIC effort. "Too complicated and takes too much time". Straight from the horse mouth.
- Starting again a fully custom 28nm ASIC

BTW, how's  your petamine investment doing?

I've never put a single satoshi in the petamine scam.

[Puppet]

Surely you can imagine how it might be beneficial to not disclose how many designs you've scrapped to the public/potential investors right?

Dude, I said I wouldnt bet a satoshi against BF making good on their promises. Even *if* they blew 3 designs that they never disclosed and for which not shred of evidence exists (and common sense would tell you its impossible), it wouldnt matter, because they didnt disclose it. They did disclose they will have a 28nm design out by the end of this year and that it will do 0.2J/GH. What evidence or trackrecord is there to suggest they wont achieve that or damn close to it ?

[hdbuck]

Surely you can imagine how it might be beneficial to not disclose how many designs you've scrapped to the public/potential investors right?

Dude, I said I wouldnt bet a satoshi against BF making good on their promises. Even *if* they blew 3 designs that they never disclosed and for which not shred of evidence exists (and common sense would tell you its impossible), it wouldnt matter, because they didnt disclose it. They did disclose they will have a 28nm design out by the end of this year and that it will do 0.2J/GH. What evidence or trackrecord is there to suggest they wont achieve that or damn close to it ?

If there is one thing i've learn regarding ASIC manufacturers.. Is that they never spot on their target.
There is always a difference between the announcement and actually delivering said specs, whether with spondo, bitmain, BF, and AM..
You guys should chillax. Party is just getting started.

[Puppet]

If there is one thing i've learn regarding ASIC manufacturers.. Is that they never spot on their target.
There is always a difference between the announcement and actually delivering said specs, whether with spondo, bitmain, BF, and AM..

When taking (pre)orders, you can generally bet against vendor claims for rather obvious reasons. Bitfury however is one of the few exceptions so far, delivering their asics pretty much on target (what was it, one day late?) and on spec (also in a different league than the competition, outclassing 28nm competitors with a 55nm design).

More importantly, note that BF is not pre selling anything atm that Im aware off. They got their money from VCs and only released this information long after securing the funding. They have very little incentive to lie or even exaggerate.  If it where a bluff intended to scare competition, it would be too late to have a meaningful impact.

[jdany]

And stop being so fucking mean to each other.
I'm trying to wake up and enjoy my coffee.
You're making me anxious.

[RoadStress]

You mean Bitfurys track record of failed 40nm, 28nm, and 20nm ASICs? I would bet a few satoshis on them missing their target again.

Don't forget that when Bitfury says 0.2 w/gh they mean underclocked to the best possible efficiency. They will most likely fill the DC with ~0.5 w/gh hardware until it makes sense to underclock.

Keep dreaming Jimmy. Bitfury already manages 0.62J/GH at the wall on 55nm with their very first design. And it can do 0.5J/GH when underclocked. There never was a failed 40, 28 let alone 20nm BF design.

There were some failed chip projects, but that still leave BitFury the strong arm in mining jimmothy, but even with those failed projects they are still on top. AM had 2 failed chips too and now they have vanished.

All I see is BitFury doing stuff while AM is doing nothing. I see BitFury here http://organofcorti.blogspot.co.il/2014/10/october-19th-2014-weekly-bitcoin.html and I see it here http://vimeo.com/104009961

Where is AM in the mining scene comparing to BitFury?

If there is one thing i've learn regarding ASIC manufacturers.. Is that they never spot on their target.
There is always a difference between the announcement and actually delivering said specs, whether with spondo, bitmain, BF, and AM..
You guys should chillax. Party is just getting started.

BitFury was on time. Maybe not for customers, but for him the chips were on time.

[stompysteve]

https://blockchain.info/address/3KBUuGko4H5ke7EVsq9B7PLK1c5Askdd7y

Who else thinks they've got the gen1 hardware on as a decoy lolol

the same amount was just dumped on huobi...

Speculation thread but def difectly AM activity

[Chalkbot]

https://blockchain.info/address/3KBUuGko4H5ke7EVsq9B7PLK1c5Askdd7y

Who else thinks they've got the gen1 hardware on as a decoy lolol

the same amount was just dumped on huobi...

Speculation thread but def difectly AM activity

What makes you say this? Was ownership of this address already established somewhere?

[sngwinner]

Are the small payments to that address from franchisees? They seem to be regular contributions and if those were franchisee revenues that would be disappointing to say the least.

[mrlupin]

If there is one thing i've learn regarding ASIC manufacturers.. Is that they never spot on their target.
There is always a difference between the announcement and actually delivering said specs, whether with spondo, bitmain, BF, and AM..

When taking (pre)orders, you can generally bet against vendor claims for rather obvious reasons. Bitfury however is one of the few exceptions so far, delivering their asics pretty much on target (what was it, one day late?) and on spec (also in a different league than the competition, outclassing 28nm competitors with a 55nm design).

More importantly, note that BF is not pre selling anything atm that Im aware off. They got their money from VCs and only released this information long after securing the funding. They have very little incentive to lie or even exaggerate.  If it where a bluff intended to scare competition, it would be too late to have a meaningful impact.

Puppet, would love to discuss further, your point of view around financial incentives has merit, but it's hard for me to take what you write seriously when it is mixed with emotions, anger or disrespect - it is simply distracting.

As for 51% of mining my point is that it cannot come from the BitFury DC, no one wants the bitcoin network to have a single point of failure, logical (pool) or physical (actual DC). Even if you do not believe in that argument, please assume for a second that it's true, then where would you think the rest of the mining power would come from?

[FUR11]

Are the small payments to that address from franchisees? They seem to be regular contributions and if those were franchisee revenues that would be disappointing to say the least.

Well I guess they could, indeed, be payments from franchisees. But this doesn't mean jack at the moment. FC may just take that income and use it to order a ton of gen 4. Mining with gen 3 just doesn't do the trick anymore. With BTC prices at current levels, the best way most likely is deploying gen 4 as big and as fast as possible.