Search content
Sort by
Showing 18 of 18 results by CobaltBlueD
On the efficiency aspect it is nothing compared to the prior difficulty increases.
A GPU is something like 300 J/GH. The "worst" ASIC is ~8 J/GH so you are talking almost a 40,000% improvement. Various different smaller process node designs dropped from the 8 J/GH to 5 J/GH to ~0.8 J/GH (Bitfury - reference clock)).
On paper we have the rest of the 28nm players showing ~0.8 J/GH and KNC estimating ~0.7 J/GH. Seeing a trend. Overnight we went from 300 J/GH to 8 J/GH and then over the next six months saw that fall by a factor of 10 to ~0.8 J/GH. That "might" go down to a staggering 0.7 J/GH by next Spring.
Who is going to buy all that hashrate increases. $3 per GH works out to $3M per PH. So to double the network again in a month would "only" require $15M in sales. Ok no problem there. To double it again would require another $30M in sales the following month, $60M the next month, $120M the monh after that, a quarter billion the month after that ...
Will difficulty keep going up? Oh HELL YEAH! Is it possible from either a cashflow or energy standpoint to double continually every month for years? No.
A GPU is something like 300 J/GH. The "worst" ASIC is ~8 J/GH so you are talking almost a 40,000% improvement. Various different smaller process node designs dropped from the 8 J/GH to 5 J/GH to ~0.8 J/GH (Bitfury - reference clock)).
On paper we have the rest of the 28nm players showing ~0.8 J/GH and KNC estimating ~0.7 J/GH. Seeing a trend. Overnight we went from 300 J/GH to 8 J/GH and then over the next six months saw that fall by a factor of 10 to ~0.8 J/GH. That "might" go down to a staggering 0.7 J/GH by next Spring.
Quote
My point is that the hashrate will continue going up exponentially for an unexpectedly long amount of time.
Who is going to buy all that hashrate increases. $3 per GH works out to $3M per PH. So to double the network again in a month would "only" require $15M in sales. Ok no problem there. To double it again would require another $30M in sales the following month, $60M the next month, $120M the monh after that, a quarter billion the month after that ...
Will difficulty keep going up? Oh HELL YEAH! Is it possible from either a cashflow or energy standpoint to double continually every month for years? No.
No argument the rate of increase is unsustainable. Of course, $/GHs and J/GH will decrease. I haven't run the numbers but going back to CPU/GPU days it's pretty obvious that constant investment will still result in significant increase in difficulty. Mining ROI is painful.
It seems to me there are additional benefits to be had with 'virgin' coin. Were you to do this, it would be completely untraceable. A paper wallet you had never touched. Random 'clean' coins sent to it. Handy in case of emergency, eh?
It is interesting how you buy & sell from cex.io. They keep all the bitcoin and control all the Gh. You have to 'withdrawl' BTC. One interesting quirk, you can setup your workers to autopayout in 0.1BTC increments based on a 'shareholder' concept.
I agree. Very well worth investigating.
I agree. Very well worth investigating.
It would be impossible to do this as its anonymous when creating a bitcoin client. The only way of doing this would be to have a built in survey in all clients and that would be impossible.
Demographics would be impossible but a run through the block chain would reveal all wallets and the amount in them. That would give you a wallet distribution. I'm not sure the value since it will just make me feel poor.
If you are d/l the blockchain from scratch it can take quite a while. I don't, however, think you are actually downloading the chain. If you have zero connections, that's a problem.
Is port 8333 is open?
Is port 8333 is open?
Re: Apparently you can buy hashes at 0.18 BTC/GH from cex.io (behind ghash.io)
It was fun while the prices was low...but I'm over it now... waiting for something reasonable to get back in =)
And yet your signature still touts it.
Re: Stop saying Bitcoin is good for money transfer. It isn't.
I would phrase it slightly differently. Bitcoin isn't good for exchanging fiat across geopolitical boundaries. I'm ok with that. Smooth movement in and out of fiat is a double edged sword.
I do not think of it as a negative thing...
here:
It will be more like this:
Difficulty increase -> miners need more GHs -> more demand in GHs -> prices go up in CEX
Not this:
Difficulty increase -> miners panic-selling -> selling GHs CHEAP -> prices go down in CEX
here:
It will be more like this:
Difficulty increase -> miners need more GHs -> more demand in GHs -> prices go up in CEX
Not this:
Difficulty increase -> miners panic-selling -> selling GHs CHEAP -> prices go down in CEX
Let's be realistic. Obviously, the increased difficulty and the introduction of maintenance fees means the overall value per GH has been dramatically reduced. If you will pay twice as much for half the return, I have a bridge to sell you. In reality, the value of the GH should naturally diminish over time however, it also pays a dividend. With that you can make and informed decision. I see 0.1194/GH/s at the second. I don't think I'm buying into that today. If it got near 0.08 I'm sure you would have a large volume of buying. I believe the bots have some control over cex.io at the moment and artificially inflate the numbers. At that point, you are just day trading. That's a whole different game but destabilizes the exchange.
IMHO
Hello, I took a look at this: http://emu10k1.sourceforge.net/as10k1-manual/emu_over.html and was interested if there is anyone that has or did heared of someone mine using his sound card or using a miner that uses other kind of chips instead BFL,Avalon asics etc
I mean even if their MH/s rate is low because of their low clocks they are so cheap so maybe they have better MH/$ rate and if their compined into racks of lots of them together then they sound like a good investment.. needless to talk about their imediate availability
I mean even if their MH/s rate is low because of their low clocks they are so cheap so maybe they have better MH/$ rate and if their compined into racks of lots of them together then they sound like a good investment.. needless to talk about their imediate availability
Umm. I'll go with, ASICs will be far cheaper and more energy efficient at low speed. Low-end ASIC chips should be flooding the market. The USB Miner is already down to 0.12BTC or less. Do you just have piles of chips related to sound cards in your closet?
It takes a good heatsink to really push the bitfury chip, so....
How goes the battle? Making progress on producing the stick?
How goes the battle? Making progress on producing the stick?
I love the idea of the donating via BTC. Assuming you are worried about the write-off, I see two issues. BTC is more anonymous than the government would prefer. Demonstrating you donated BTC has some inherent difficulties (at least with the US IRS). The other item, I'm not sure how many flags I want to flag for the IRS. Being audited is no fun. Trying to explain BTC to the auditor would be quite a chore.
You have a couple interesting items in there. I'm tired so I'm going to ramble. Just my two cents. This sort of crosses into my IRL job.
The "prepaid" card loaded with BTC is a very feasible idea. It would take some custom code given how normal CC transactions have so many prebuilt tools. Perfectly do-able.
If you want to have success in brick-and-mortar though, I believe the real key is having an arbiter willing to provide insurance for the retailer against:
1. Volatility against fiat conversion rates
2. The risk of accepting BTC without a large number of confirmations. (Can't leave the customer standing at a counter)
Other Barriers:
1. PayPal has some big pushes to get further into retail. They aren't fans of BTC. They have leverage on retailers.
2. BTC complicates an already messy space because of it's undetermined legal situation. If you were a Fortune retailer, are you going into the space wondering how the feds will react?
3. Obviously Visa and MC don't like this
4. People are distracted trying to catch up with other new forms of payment. Mobile wallets, PayPal in stores, Square... blah blah blah
Interesting trend:
Amazon is trying to get same day delivery by distributing their inventory into regional DCs. Obviously, Walmart is trying to creep into the Amazon space. Ebay is trying to squeeze between those by partnering with retailers who already have brick-and-mortar networks and use them as inventory. They are simultaneously competing as an alternative form of payment.
Maybe I should sleep.
The "prepaid" card loaded with BTC is a very feasible idea. It would take some custom code given how normal CC transactions have so many prebuilt tools. Perfectly do-able.
If you want to have success in brick-and-mortar though, I believe the real key is having an arbiter willing to provide insurance for the retailer against:
1. Volatility against fiat conversion rates
2. The risk of accepting BTC without a large number of confirmations. (Can't leave the customer standing at a counter)
Other Barriers:
1. PayPal has some big pushes to get further into retail. They aren't fans of BTC. They have leverage on retailers.
2. BTC complicates an already messy space because of it's undetermined legal situation. If you were a Fortune retailer, are you going into the space wondering how the feds will react?
3. Obviously Visa and MC don't like this
4. People are distracted trying to catch up with other new forms of payment. Mobile wallets, PayPal in stores, Square... blah blah blah
Interesting trend:
Amazon is trying to get same day delivery by distributing their inventory into regional DCs. Obviously, Walmart is trying to creep into the Amazon space. Ebay is trying to squeeze between those by partnering with retailers who already have brick-and-mortar networks and use them as inventory. They are simultaneously competing as an alternative form of payment.
Maybe I should sleep.
Interestingly, I put a few erupters on a 10.7 mac mini with MacMiner. Slow rates. Spent an absurd amount of time. Found that the Mac USB libraries involved in cgminer were the problem. It took some digging.
When I did a clean install of bfgminer, I had to install the Silicon driver. It cleaned up my little USB driver mess probably by simply cutting them out of the equation. Now it's rock solid. Something to consider. Picked up more than 20% on the units/min. I did use bfgminer 3.3.4 withnn -G -S erupter:all
I've noticed my new mac air with 10.8.4 doesn't have openCL but they are saying it is in 10.9. We shall see.
When I did a clean install of bfgminer, I had to install the Silicon driver. It cleaned up my little USB driver mess probably by simply cutting them out of the equation. Now it's rock solid. Something to consider. Picked up more than 20% on the units/min. I did use bfgminer 3.3.4 withnn -G -S erupter:all
I've noticed my new mac air with 10.8.4 doesn't have openCL but they are saying it is in 10.9. We shall see.
Re: BFGMiner 3.1.4: modular ASIC/FPGA, GBT, Strtm, RPC, Lnx/OpnWrt/PPA/W64, BFLSC
I installed Bfgminer 3.1.4 and everything was running fine.
I was tinkering around trying to build bitcoin-qt from source and changed a few things, now I get a bus error: 10 when I try to run Bfgminer 3.1.4 @ command prompt (terminal) in Mac OS X 10.8.4
How do I fix it? I tried restarting, reinstalling and NOTHING seems to work... I am stuck using Mac Miner for now...
I was tinkering around trying to build bitcoin-qt from source and changed a few things, now I get a bus error: 10 when I try to run Bfgminer 3.1.4 @ command prompt (terminal) in Mac OS X 10.8.4
How do I fix it? I tried restarting, reinstalling and NOTHING seems to work... I am stuck using Mac Miner for now...
Seems to be an issue with Bfgminer, ran it once on a separate system (10.7 instead of 10.
and after shutting it down and restarting it, I get the same bus error and NOTHNG seems to fix it... What gives?
Did you by chance unplug and replug an erupter?
Have a look at your config file. /Users/*yours*/.bfgminer/bfgminer.conf . It is hidden so you may need to use Shift-Command-G from Finder to get there. There are some 'odd' configs in there such as kernel location that came from the repository during the brew pull/compile. Delete/rename the conf file and restart BFGMiner. Once I did that, all was right with the world. I recreated the problem and solution on 10.7 and 10.8. I hope it helps.
do the usb ports have enough power? Are you using a usb powered hub and how many erupters are you talking about. If they do not get enough power they might not work like they should.
No hub. Directly into MB. Power to USB appears fine. 2 Eruptors although one still shows the problem.
I'll preface this
1. I'm stuck in the newbie section. Yea.
2. I don't have this problem on other machines but I'm solving for this particular machine because it is already on 24/7
I take a couple of USB Eruptors, stick them on a windows machine or a Mac, cgminer shows ~330Mh/s each. BTCGuild shows the cumulative correctly. I put them in the back of a Mac Mini, cgminer still reports ~330Mh/s per stick but BTCGuild is only showing ~370Mh/s in aggregate.
I'm assuming a USB undervoltage would show on cgminer as a reduced Mh/s within cgminer.
Aside from that, it's cgminer 3.3.2 on both the Macs I have tried. No GPU mining. Difficulty of 1. Nothing fancy in the configuration. Sticks are not on hubs, all direct to MB. No network differences. Happens right out of the gate before they get hot. No noticable difference in rejection or HW fail rate. Why would the 330Mh/s per stick not be reaching the pool?
Thanks in advance.
1. I'm stuck in the newbie section. Yea.
2. I don't have this problem on other machines but I'm solving for this particular machine because it is already on 24/7
I take a couple of USB Eruptors, stick them on a windows machine or a Mac, cgminer shows ~330Mh/s each. BTCGuild shows the cumulative correctly. I put them in the back of a Mac Mini, cgminer still reports ~330Mh/s per stick but BTCGuild is only showing ~370Mh/s in aggregate.
I'm assuming a USB undervoltage would show on cgminer as a reduced Mh/s within cgminer.
Aside from that, it's cgminer 3.3.2 on both the Macs I have tried. No GPU mining. Difficulty of 1. Nothing fancy in the configuration. Sticks are not on hubs, all direct to MB. No network differences. Happens right out of the gate before they get hot. No noticable difference in rejection or HW fail rate. Why would the 330Mh/s per stick not be reaching the pool?
Thanks in advance.