ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1051.

SmiGueL

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 252

Quote from: SebastianJu on May 26, 2013, 12:44:10 PM

The spikes are really coming from luck because of found blocks?

Well,
-The calculated hashrate from solomining can bounce a lot because it is indeed calculated by the blocks found in the last 48 hours..
-The hashrate on BTCGuild is pretty steady.
-The hashrate on Bitminter is going from 6 TH/s to 2 TH/S and back 2 times in the last 5 days.
That really hasn't anything to do with found blocks but it is the actual hashrate..
So that makes it pretty plausible that also the solomining hashrate went down during that period

Friedcat wrote they are troubleshooting these days and that could cause the peaks and drops..

Please check the last chart on www.asicminercharts.com, and zoom to 5 days _{(upper left: 5d)}
There you can clearly see the BitMinter speed drop and the calculated solomining speed drop, and the effect of that on the total hashrate.

organofcorti

donator

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1007

Poor impulse control.

Quote from: runeks on May 26, 2013, 12:37:49 PM

Quote from: SebastianJu on May 25, 2013, 01:50:00 PM

Quote from: Lohoris on May 25, 2013, 01:38:22 PM

Quote from: SebastianJu on May 25, 2013, 01:24:40 PM

A >50% attack doesnt make sense in case one wants to earn money. It might be only useful to destroy bitcoin. One could claim that friedcat never would do this but it wouldnt matter when people freak out in fear.

+1

and that's why it is much better to stay in a safe zone of no more than 30%.

Im not sure that this is needed. When i see this chart: http://blockchain.info/de/charts/hash-rate it looks the variance in the whole network isnt very high. 99825 to 76744. Thats 100% to 76.88%. In this case, if AM would have under 38.372 TH the network would still be safe because it dropped only to 76.744 TH. We are still way beyond that. 38,372TH for a total 99.825TH of the net would mean 38.44% would be safe.

But i think friedcat could even go higher near 50% when there is a script running to prevent 50%. A damage would only be done when someone shows that AM had over 50%. A theoretical >50% doesnt matter. If it would matter BFL, Avalon or Asicminer would have been a threat all the time because they theoretically have the power to kill bitcoin. But theoretically doesnt matter much.

Of course this raises the risk of AM being hacked to kill bitcoins... and so on... isnt really that easy...

I think you're missing something. The network hash rate doesn't "vary". It doesn't go up and down like that chart says. It's fairly constant (probably), growing slowly.

The chart you're seeing is an estimation of the network hash rate based on blocks found. This is what makes it vary, the fact that we're deducing hash rate from "number of hashes found below difficulty per unit of time".

You can't have a script running that makes sure ASICMiner doesn't have more than 50% of the total network hash rate at any point in time, because you don't know what total network hash rate is at some point in time. It can only be deduced, in retrospect, at a certainty that increases with the length of the period over which we average.

I think what SebastianJu was saying is that, in retrospect, you could calculate upper and lower confidence interval bound for the previous n hours of ASICMiner solomining, except he's gone about it the wrong way.

It's a good idea - the confidence intervals start to reduce as the percentage of the network increases. Based on the past week's solomining, I get an average hashrate of 5482Ghps and a 95% confidence interval of 4265 Ghps to 6489 Ghps. Of course you have to wait a week to get that accuracy. If you want to wait less time, the 95% confidence interval widens significantly.

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

Quote from: runeks on May 26, 2013, 12:37:49 PM

I think you're missing something. The network hash rate doesn't "vary". It doesn't go up and down like that chart says. It's fairly constant (probably), growing slowly.

The chart you're seeing is an estimation of the network hash rate based on blocks found. This is what makes it vary, the fact that we're deducing hash rate from "number of hashes found below difficulty per unit of time".

You can't have a script running that makes sure ASICMiner doesn't have more than 50% of the total network hash rate at any point in time, because you don't know what total network hash rate is at some point in time. It can only be deduced, in retrospect, at a certainty that increases with the length of the period over which we average.

The spikes are really coming from luck because of found blocks? Interesting if true... till now i was under the impression that it spikes because of lowering or rising hashspeed... but it makes sense to calculate the speed from found blocks because thats the nearest you can get to hashrate. But i really thought the luck doesnt have such a variance over time. I mean the chart seems to show that it calculates only 3 times a day. I thought the average over such timeframe should prevent good enough to have spikes of 30%... but i didnt think it through really, youre right...

runeks

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1008

Quote from: SebastianJu on May 25, 2013, 01:50:00 PM

Quote from: Lohoris on May 25, 2013, 01:38:22 PM

Quote from: SebastianJu on May 25, 2013, 01:24:40 PM

A >50% attack doesnt make sense in case one wants to earn money. It might be only useful to destroy bitcoin. One could claim that friedcat never would do this but it wouldnt matter when people freak out in fear.

+1

and that's why it is much better to stay in a safe zone of no more than 30%.

Im not sure that this is needed. When i see this chart: http://blockchain.info/de/charts/hash-rate it looks the variance in the whole network isnt very high. 99825 to 76744. Thats 100% to 76.88%. In this case, if AM would have under 38.372 TH the network would still be safe because it dropped only to 76.744 TH. We are still way beyond that. 38,372TH for a total 99.825TH of the net would mean 38.44% would be safe.

But i think friedcat could even go higher near 50% when there is a script running to prevent 50%. A damage would only be done when someone shows that AM had over 50%. A theoretical >50% doesnt matter. If it would matter BFL, Avalon or Asicminer would have been a threat all the time because they theoretically have the power to kill bitcoin. But theoretically doesnt matter much.

Of course this raises the risk of AM being hacked to kill bitcoins... and so on... isnt really that easy...

I think you're missing something. The network hash rate doesn't "vary". It doesn't go up and down like that chart says. It's fairly constant (probably), growing slowly.

The chart you're seeing is an estimation of the network hash rate based on blocks found. This is what makes it vary, the fact that we're deducing hash rate from "number of hashes found below difficulty per unit of time".

You can't have a script running that makes sure ASICMiner doesn't have more than 50% of the total network hash rate at any point in time, because you don't know what total network hash rate is at some point in time. It can only be deduced, in retrospect, at a certainty that increases with the length of the period over which we average.

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

Quote from: stslimited on May 26, 2013, 12:25:25 PM

block sizes are on average 25.25 BTC recently

Yes, transaction fee becomes more and more important... block halving doesnt look to dangerous anymore...

stslimited

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

block sizes are on average 25.25 BTC recently

philipma1957

legendary

Activity: 4354

Merit: 9201

'The right to privacy matters'

Quote from: BitAddict on May 26, 2013, 10:42:19 AM

Quote from: philipma1957 on May 26, 2013, 09:38:09 AM

Quote from: delaria on May 26, 2013, 09:10:36 AM

Quote from: GuiltySpark343 on May 26, 2013, 08:30:13 AM

Aggressively: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2159577
1000 shares x 0.03 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 120 btc/month

Conservatively: http://www.asicminer.co/figures.html
1000 shares x 0.007 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 28 btc/month

Thanks! the difference between the two scenarios is tied to share price or Bitcoin price ?

Neither the differences are tied to earnings per share. Earnings are from coins earned and mining gear sold. Then minus power cost expenses etc.

Pretend 100 shares earned 2 coins mining and 1 coin worth of gear was sold in a week. 3 coins came in divide by 100 you get .03 coins earn per share for that week.

So a 100% give back for that week would be .03 coins per share. Of course AM may hold back some of that to build more mining gear or to pay for power etc.

I think the best dividend ever was .036 or .037 per share.

I think the worst one was .0013 or .0014 per share .

I hope he's just throwing random numbers and not thiking about buying 1,000 shares without knowing how to do the maths LOL

I often wonder what people think or want when they ask simple general questions.

I wish I had 2400 to 2500 BTC to spend on AM stock.

ffssixtynine

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

1000 shares being around 2400 BTC at the moment - pricey buy.

The next few weeks' dividends is likely to be between 0.01-0.02, possibly higher dependant upon sales, but the share price could go up or down by a lot more than dividends is going to make you. In fact, you can be pretty sure it will. Pricing for the long term is very difficult because we don't really know how the competition will affect things in 2+ month's time.

BitAddict

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1001

Quote from: philipma1957 on May 26, 2013, 09:38:09 AM

Quote from: delaria on May 26, 2013, 09:10:36 AM

Quote from: GuiltySpark343 on May 26, 2013, 08:30:13 AM

Aggressively: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2159577
1000 shares x 0.03 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 120 btc/month

Conservatively: http://www.asicminer.co/figures.html
1000 shares x 0.007 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 28 btc/month

Thanks! the difference between the two scenarios is tied to share price or Bitcoin price ?

Neither the differences are tied to earnings per share. Earnings are from coins earned and mining gear sold. Then minus power cost expenses etc.

Pretend 100 shares earned 2 coins mining and 1 coin worth of gear was sold in a week. 3 coins came in divide by 100 you get .03 coins earn per share for that week.

So a 100% give back for that week would be .03 coins per share. Of course AM may hold back some of that to build more mining gear or to pay for power etc.

I think the best dividend ever was .036 or .037 per share.

I think the worst one was .0013 or .0014 per share .

I hope he's just throwing random numbers and not thiking about buying 1,000 shares without knowing how to do the maths LOL

philipma1957

legendary

Activity: 4354

Merit: 9201

'The right to privacy matters'

Quote from: delaria on May 26, 2013, 09:10:36 AM

Quote from: GuiltySpark343 on May 26, 2013, 08:30:13 AM

Aggressively: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2159577
1000 shares x 0.03 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 120 btc/month

Conservatively: http://www.asicminer.co/figures.html
1000 shares x 0.007 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 28 btc/month

Thanks! the difference between the two scenarios is tied to share price or Bitcoin price ?

Neither the differences are tied to earnings per share. Earnings are from coins earned and mining gear sold. Then minus power cost expenses etc.

Pretend 100 shares earned 2 coins mining and 1 coin worth of gear was sold in a week. 3 coins came in divide by 100 you get .03 coins earn per share for that week.

So a 100% give back for that week would be .03 coins per share. Of course AM may hold back some of that to build more mining gear or to pay for power etc.

I think the best dividend ever was .036 or .037 per share.

I think the worst one was .0013 or .0014 per share .

kano

legendary

Activity: 4634

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: Jutarul on May 26, 2013, 05:23:57 AM

...

Quote from: kano on May 26, 2013, 04:58:10 AM

Quote from: ning on May 26, 2013, 04:42:34 AM

...
What if friedcat distributes his hashing power into multiple mining pools? In that case, he can go over 50%.

No.
My guess is something would be done to bitcoin to block asicminer.
Would be the most reasonable step to take to avoid the risks.

Impractical. The disruption, due to changing the hashing algorithm, will damage the reputation and introduces severe uncertainties with respect to the security of the network.

Hmm not as impractical as you might think ...
But if someone controlled > 50% of the network, that fact would indeed
"damage the reputation and introduces severe uncertainties with respect to the security of the network."
You've got that one certainly back to front.

Lohoris

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Bitgoblin

Quote from: delaria on May 26, 2013, 09:10:36 AM

Quote from: GuiltySpark343 on May 26, 2013, 08:30:13 AM

Aggressively: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2159577
1000 shares x 0.03 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 120 btc/month

Conservatively: http://www.asicminer.co/figures.html
1000 shares x 0.007 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 28 btc/month

Thanks! the difference between the two scenarios is tied to share price or Bitcoin price ?

Don't you even bother to READ the post you are answering?

You don't deserve this, honestly.

delaria

member

Activity: 85

Merit: 10

Quote from: GuiltySpark343 on May 26, 2013, 08:30:13 AM

Aggressively: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2159577
1000 shares x 0.03 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 120 btc/month

Conservatively: http://www.asicminer.co/figures.html
1000 shares x 0.007 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 28 btc/month

Thanks! the difference between the two scenarios is tied to share price or Bitcoin price ?

GuiltySpark343

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Aggressively: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2159577
1000 shares x 0.03 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 120 btc/month

Conservatively: http://www.asicminer.co/figures.html
1000 shares x 0.007 btc/shares/week * 4 weeks/month = 28 btc/month

CMMPro

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

Maybe this is an added benefit of ASICMiner selling their hardware out to end users....more distributed solo mining.

As more ASIC's (hopefully) become available in the future I hope to see more strength through diversification.

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

Quote from: organofcorti on May 26, 2013, 12:17:59 AM

Quote from: tkone on May 26, 2013, 12:01:44 AM

even if asic had 70% of network, why in the world do you think they will double spend?
[ ... ]

The owner doesn't have to. Let me quote kano's source: http://xkcd.com/538/

If someone wants to hurt bitcoin, and someone else has control of a large portion of the hashrate, then the first someone just has to put pressure on the second someone.

I hope friedcat has thought about his own personal security and that of his family.

In theory bitcoin cant be safe ever. A government could force TMSC to print out ASIC'S en masse and destroy bitcoin with miners created with it. They could raid avalon and asicminer to crash bitcoin with the hashingpower, and im sure there are some pools that could be used too.
Even when there would be more companies or pools that are big it would only mean its a bit more difficult.

Of course... when one company has >50% theoretically and the company could be compromised through a hack it would be easier... but then again... maybe there are other companies or pools that can be hacked in the same time easily?

I mean there will be a risk all the time... one can only try to lower that risk.

In theory... if 70% maybe are in peoples hand and they all solo mine... it would be relatively save... but bitcoin mining tends to centralization. Or the potential of mining centralizes. Be it asic-companies holding ASIC' or pools. So the risk will stay there until for some reason way more go solomining...

delaria

member

Activity: 85

Merit: 10

Quote from: ThickAsThieves on May 26, 2013, 07:52:23 AM

Quote from: delaria on May 26, 2013, 07:29:52 AM

Can anyone estimate what would be the return, in bitcoin, of 1000 ASICMINER full shares for the next 30 days ?
Thanks

Roughly 100 bitcoins in dividends, +/-35btc.

Thanks for your answer. Could you elaborate more about the procedure used to come up with such results ?
Thanks again

ThickAsThieves

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Quote from: delaria on May 26, 2013, 07:29:52 AM

Can anyone estimate what would be the return, in bitcoin, of 1000 ASICMINER full shares for the next 30 days ?
Thanks

Roughly 100 bitcoins in dividends, +/-35btc.

bobboooiie

hero member

Activity: 656

Merit: 500

Quote from: delaria on May 26, 2013, 07:29:52 AM

Can anyone estimate what would be the return, in bitcoin, of 1000 ASICMINER full shares for the next 30 days ?
Thanks

If you really would be interested in 1000 shares wouldnt you make those calculations yourself ?

Skrapps

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Quote from: delaria on May 26, 2013, 07:29:52 AM

Can anyone estimate what would be the return, in bitcoin, of 1000 ASICMINER full shares for the next 30 days ?
Thanks

$838,000. Assuming bitcoin trades for $269. Also, I made up all the other numbers.

Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1051. (Read 3917543 times)