Quote from: KS on May 01, 2014, 09:38:29 PM

Quote from: Jutarul on May 01, 2014, 07:52:06 PM

Quote from: KS on April 30, 2014, 08:28:16 PM

...
Which "part" of mining do you view as being in "steady state"? ... I think it's really not in steady state, but I'm curious to know why you think so.

It's kind of an off-topic discussion - I recommend to open a dedicated thread if you're interested in debating this.

I think it fits nicely with the AM mining operation but we don't have to start a diatribe. Just stating "it's in a steady-state" isn't really satisfying though Wink

Ok - the original comment was referring to the implied connection between electricity prices and mining feasibility. This is too simplistic. This assumes that there are no infrastructural barriers between the construction site and deployment site for bitcoin hardware. However, I postulate that new hardware "migrates" from easily accessible deployment sites to energy efficient ones. As such, hardware lives along a gradient with a drift towards sites with cheap electricity, where the forces pushing are bitcoin price developments and advances in bitcoin mining IT, to name two. (Thus the analogy to steady state systems). While bitcoin price is a somewhat reversible process, bitcoin mining IT is not.

What this likely means for mining equipment providers is that in the intermediate term the ability to migrate and maintain beats efficiency. That's why developments by Allied Control are so interesting which focus on ease of deployment.