It's actually a bit over 3 billion difficulty, for a 60GH 300W single anyway. I suppose jallys are pretty close to that in W/GH/s as well.

Sadly that doesn't change the fact that they'll be essentially paperweights (or heaters) at 1B or so.

Yes on both counts. And right, I suppose they might be somewhat less efficient at full speeds.

Good list.

Bitfury is somewhat better than that though, I measured +116W for adding a 150GH/s Bitfury unit to my rig. Gold-rated 1300W PSU at 440W@230V total now so I'd assume about 90% efficiency. Anyway, <0.8J/GH at the wall for Bitfury. Another guy had similar results.

I did, yeah. Anduck's pic will probably suffice? My setup is ugly for now.

I was the second order (#218), and now happily hashing away

Went for the install before instructions were available, and powered one H-board when it was oriented the wrong way Luckily only one of the 16 chips was burned and it's hashing fine now. H-board components should be facing the raspberry. Gotta be careful with this stuff.

Ordered 6 starter kits, got 8 to hit the promised hashrate as they're slightly underperforming. Getting ~150-157GH, I think. It varies a bit and I don't have a good reading from pool yet.

Power usage is 120W at the wall, which comes to just 0.8J/GH. Very nice. No noise either obviously as it's passively cooled, which is great if you're going to be mining somewhere where that matters. Compact design is a plus too.

A crappy (sorry!) pic of a starter kit:


Edit: 2 of the boards are slow. Not sure what's the matter with those, they seem to lose speed over time, with some chips going offline. Perhaps the software needs a bit more polishing

Well, I've revised my original position. What dooglus did was basically donate 1300BTC to investors, since if the whale had won and tried to withdraw again he surely would have noticed something is amiss and debited 1300BTC from him, and all would have been fine. The only other option for the whale was to lose, which is what happened obviously. So I'll be paying my part back, it is his money after all. Hopefully some other investors do the same.

Regardless...


...I support this anyway. Just because the situation is a bit grim now, it doesn't mean it will be in a week or two. The site isn't that much down any more, it just needs a day or two (32,4k BTC wagered) to reach upside again, if we have normal luck. Of course we may get raped by whales again, but such is the nature of the game. Eventually even the whales will lose.

Just make the higher comission an option, and you could have the 1.3k back pretty quickly at this rate.

So, what are todays prices?

Pirate did too. Maybe he's afraid of someone finding him out or something. It's BS, and his fault regardless even if it wasn't.

Sorry for your loss too. But instead of a straight up donation, add the option for investors to increase your commission to 10-20% or whatever. It might take some time, but should get you the money back eventually if the site runs smoothly and no more bad things happen.

In the negative at the moment and don't feel like donating, but I would have no problem with an increased comission on profits.

I think this warrants more consideration. It would go a long way if you could prove that the site is fair for investors too.

How about having 5 or so servers, but you don't get to decide whether to use their seed or not. By default, all of them would be used, which would be most of the time really. But in case one goes down, halt the game for a bit and have a status indicator on the site show that a server is down. Game could then continue, or someone could wait for all servers to be online again if they so wish. Stop the game completely if less than 3 servers are online or so. The servers should also have some independent way to verify whether they're running or not, such as a webpage. These additional servers would be run by big investors or some other relatively trustworthy party, and perhaps you could fund them from your profits, would probably not be a lot. Some of them could also be hosted on different providers, to prevent a VPS service employee or a hacker to gain access to all of them.

Would such a solution work? It would add some complexity and maintenance costs, but the added investor confidence would be well worth it in my opinion.

I would certainly be tempted. Note that a steeply increasing difficulty can have the same result though.

Now, miner manufacturers might start refusing refunds like BFL is doing now. Although I'm not sure how legal this is, probably wouldn't work in the EU at least? Also, people getting refunds and buying BTC could stop the slump and make the price increase again, just like the current downtrend is probably partially caused by ASIC sales, where BTC is converted into fiat, which the companies need to build the units.

I would probably do it if price approached $30 and manufacturers would grant the refund. I wouldn't feel bad for not adding hashrate to the network; there's plenty coming and I could pocket the difference, waiting for better btc values / more reasonable asic prices and try mining again then.

They switched packaging facilities afaik. Maybe one is from the new one?

200TH only? That's not that much, around the same as BFL has chips queued for. But as they aren't the only players, I think 100M difficulty will be easily broken by October.

That's cause FPGAs weren't really better. Their only point was lower power consumption, which was a big deal when BTC value was at the bottom and profit margins were small. Now that they've improved, FPGAs aren't that lucrative anymore. They were always more or as expensive as GPUs.

ASICs, on the other hand, improve over GPUs on all fronts. You get far more GH/s per BTC than you do with any other option, and power usage is greatly improved again. So yes, ASICs will kill bitcoin-mining GPUs definitely, but non-SHA256 cryptocurrencies will likely remain an option.

What was your order date? 23th?

Although you could have gotten lucky in the "1/3 randomly to first month orders" quota too.


About 10-20 I'd guess to customers.

They're mostly shipping 0 per day, but did ship a few on saturday and maybe more on monday. Usually 0, because they don't have chips ready, and are getting more rarely and in small batches.

Well.. happy to be wrong of course

Up a few percent now for bitcoin. Litecoin is going down because so is it's value, it's less profitable to mine than bitcoin currently.

I think it'll rise faster than 18% for some time starting soon, but then settle down below that, so that Summer/Autumn will have higher difficulties but 2014 Spring could have lower ones than what's in that table. But as said, it's just guesses...


Close, but it's actually 1/1.18 ~ 0.85 or 15% less than 2 weeks. 100% increase would be 50% less, or 1 week etc.

Not really, no. Sure it'll make bitcoin more secure against govt ASIC attacks, but that won't really translate to more demand, as it's a pretty unlikely scenario anyway. So no, price won't go up just because difficulty will.

100M difficulty is "only" 720TH/s. I might be off by a month or two, but we'll get there fast with Bitfury, BFL, Avalon chips shipping and asicminer expanding.