Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1150. (Read 3917543 times)
With 8.7TH at current 10076292 difficulty, that's an average of 121.6 blocks/week (3040 BTC). There is really no need for anything more elaborate than solo mining. Any new element is always a possible point of failure in a system.
As I said - go read the p2pool thread ... sigh.
The reason why Josh has sent a Jalapeno to forrestv is coz even a 5GH/s device makes p2pool use up 100% CPU and cause immense problems when it is talking to the other p2pools.
It's also most likely directly related to the issue with Avalons.
Edit: and you even posted (after it) on the page that has the discussion ... I take it reading the posts in the p2pool thread is too boring?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1970271
The reason why Josh has sent a Jalapeno to forrestv is coz even a 5GH/s device makes p2pool use up 100% CPU and cause immense problems when it is talking to the other p2pools.
It's also most likely directly related to the issue with Avalons.
Edit: and you even posted (after it) on the page that has the discussion ... I take it reading the posts in the p2pool thread is too boring?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1970271
No, I've read it. ckolivas doesn't report his node efficiency, so his post doesn't exhibit any problem until he reports it. If you still don't understand that stales on p2pool are not a problem if you have around 100% efficiency, there's not much I can do to explain it further...
They won't do p2pool.
They only need to point one 10GH/s board at it and they'll see the current problems with p2pool.
Then imagine 8TH/s ...
Read the p2pool thread for more details.
They only need to point one 10GH/s board at it and they'll see the current problems with p2pool.
Then imagine 8TH/s ...
Read the p2pool thread for more details.
Still spreading FUD around? I've used p2pool with more than 10GH/s for months and didn't have any problem with it. Unless ASICMINER tests p2pool (probably using a stratum proxy) there's no way to know if it will or won't work well with their hardware.
The reason why Josh has sent a Jalapeno to forrestv is coz even a 5GH/s device makes p2pool use up 100% CPU and cause immense problems when it is talking to the other p2pools.
It's also most likely directly related to the issue with Avalons.
Edit: and you even posted (after it) on the page that has the discussion ... I take it reading the posts in the p2pool thread is too boring?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1970271
That's not due to the hashrate. It's latency caused by the design of the hardware. ASICMINER gear (being different) may not have that problem. p2pool can pretty obviously handle lots more than 5Gh/s.
Maybe the thing to do is to ask someone who has won an ASICMINER blade auction and see how it worked for them on p2pool.
They won't do p2pool.
They only need to point one 10GH/s board at it and they'll see the current problems with p2pool.
Then imagine 8TH/s ...
Read the p2pool thread for more details.
They only need to point one 10GH/s board at it and they'll see the current problems with p2pool.
Then imagine 8TH/s ...
Read the p2pool thread for more details.
Still spreading FUD around? I've used p2pool with more than 10GH/s for months and didn't have any problem with it. Unless ASICMINER tests p2pool (probably using a stratum proxy) there's no way to know if it will or won't work well with their hardware.
The reason why Josh has sent a Jalapeno to forrestv is coz even a 5GH/s device makes p2pool use up 100% CPU and cause immense problems when it is talking to the other p2pools.
It's also most likely directly related to the issue with Avalons.
Edit: and you even posted (after it) on the page that has the discussion ... I take it reading the posts in the p2pool thread is too boring?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1970271
Maybe solo mined blocks have address tags like they do in blockchaininfo so shareholders can monitor. Or is that a bad idea?
did't Friedcat mentioned that in his post?...We plan to do it with writing information to the coinbase transaction to let everyone check.
Maybe solo mined blocks have address tags like they do in blockchaininfo so shareholders can monitor. Or is that a bad idea?
Over time this may be the large problem. ASICMINER may become rouge itself.
I see little difference between central bank and dozen mining companies. Especially if half of them will be in one country.
you can see how hard is to get and maintain at least 10%. and when you have problems to climb to 15% when whole network has 80TH/s, it will not get easier "over time" when whole network will have few hundreds TH/s. and now it is probably mostly about deploying, but "over time" it will be also about maintain, debugging and replacing units.I see little difference between central bank and dozen mining companies. Especially if half of them will be in one country.
and if you think that "over time" it will be easier to AM, because the team will have know how in anything, that means Avalon and other will have also know how about what they do. and they need to get know how just about assembling and selling, but AM needs know how about assembling, getting power, making efficient internal network... It is not like multiple n-times what we do and the result will be n-times bigger.
you can see, that it is not so easy for example on this:
... If we get the 60TH/s online (conservative) in late April, ...
and even IF AM could get any close to 50%, why would somebody be afraid of AM if their intends are clear and public? (I know why, just trying to point to something) There can be already some evil 51% miner hidden in the the network, but nobody is panicking because nobody can see that in charts. so please do not panic about AM.I hope that nobody will take my citation of Friedcat as I'm complaining about AM. Just getting sick about 51%, if the shares are under or over valuated. Guys, please, try to move all the speculations to other place. just trying to find Friedcat post (throught his last posts) about the 10% took me a while. By my opinion, this thread should be about updates, trading possibilities, and company plans and the only acceptable speculation here was about where and how fast is AM mining.
btw: I probably never wrote, but:
Friedcat and others around, thank you very much for AM. Have good luck (and enough kW and space) in the future.
They won't do p2pool.
They only need to point one 10GH/s board at it and they'll see the current problems with p2pool.
Then imagine 8TH/s ...
Read the p2pool thread for more details.
They only need to point one 10GH/s board at it and they'll see the current problems with p2pool.
Then imagine 8TH/s ...
Read the p2pool thread for more details.
Still spreading FUD around? I've used p2pool with more than 10GH/s for months and didn't have any problem with it. Unless ASICMINER tests p2pool (probably using a stratum proxy) there's no way to know if it will or won't work well with their hardware.
Years of playing World of Warcraft [it kept me sane during college and a bit after] have just instilled the need to troll whenever I see 'rouge' 
.
.Well, I guess that those college years have killed your career working in or managing a chain of cosmetics stores, then :-)
.b
I can't resist responding...I'm so sorry friedcat for putting these here, but it's irresistable:
Well, I really meant the redish type of entity!
.b
Years of playing World of Warcraft [it kept me sane during college and a bit after] have just instilled the need to troll whenever I see 'rouge'
. I can't resist responding...I'm so sorry friedcat for putting these here, but it's irresistable:
Well, I really meant the redish type of entity!
.b
I can't resist responding...I'm so sorry friedcat for putting these here, but it's irresistable:
ASICMINER may become rouge itself.
thus making the network more resiliant to a rouge entity wishing to attack.
Rouge
Again I see little difference between one central regulator and 10 major players. It is not a peering network.
Heck I gues even 10 players won't last for long. It somehow always goes to two entities. Republicans vs democrats Intel vs amd iOS vs android Coca cola vs pepsi Paper or plastic Ok this is offtopic. I'm going to stop here. Over time this may be the large problem. ASICMINER may become rouge itself. I see little difference between central bank and dozen mining companies. Especially if half of them will be in one country. Over time, AM will not be able to hold 51% :-) .b
Over time this may be the large problem. ASICMINER may become rouge itself.
I see little difference between central bank and dozen mining companies. Especially if half of them will be in one country. Regarding ASICMINER, 10% of hashing power is a very high share for me. If we end up with few players that constitute 51% of hashing power, that would be a threat to stability of the system, thus reducing it's trustworthiness. I understand that having 10% rather than 1% is more profitable, but it may ultimately hurt the whole bitcoin ecosystem. Over time, this will be a minor problem as technology becomes more available and shared across a larger user base. In the short term, it can even be beneficial to the credibility that there are a few major players that increase the total hashrate by such an amount, thus making the network more resiliant to a rouge entity wishing to attack. Right now, we know there exists enough hashing power to take over Bitcoin; with AM, Avalon, BFL, 100TH, and others adding network power, that becomes less likely. .b
Regarding ASICMINER, 10% of hashing power is a very high share for me. If we end up with few players that constitute 51% of hashing power, that would be a threat to stability of the system, thus reducing it's trustworthiness.
I understand that having 10% rather than 1% is more profitable, but it may ultimately hurt the whole bitcoin ecosystem. But will it matter? You have the chance to earn more or less in a week, but mostly its an average. Because it is more or less you wont lose anything in the long run. Of course you can earn less in the first week and more in the next week when the difficulty raised but it can be the opposite way too, so i dont see that this is a big problem. It matters for someone. Consider your employer pays you either $200 or $300 this week depending on pure luck. Somebody would not take that risk(for ex. he has a loan to pay). Risk alleviating instruments cost real money. Wages are fixed because most persons give away their complete wage each month for fixed costs and so on. But the AM-Dividend cant be foreseen. At least i had to learn this when i tried to get a loan. It didnt happen and it was good this way because the dividends dropped down lower than i thought. So it wouldnt make much difference in this case i believe. Seems I was misunderstood. "Wages" was an example to illustrate my point that profit variance is a bad thing. It may be not "a big problem" but It may as well be depending on circumstances. Thus sometimes it is better to have lower but more reliable profit. That is purely accademical statement. All true statements, but if I had low monthly expenses and guaranteed employment for 20 years I would still take 'between $2500-$5k a month' over 'Always $3k' and just suck up the months when I make $2800. It's all about your capital requirements and long term profit margin. But will it matter? You have the chance to earn more or less in a week, but mostly its an average. Because it is more or less you wont lose anything in the long run. Of course you can earn less in the first week and more in the next week when the difficulty raised but it can be the opposite way too, so i dont see that this is a big problem. It matters for someone. Consider your employer pays you either $200 or $300 this week depending on pure luck. Somebody would not take that risk(for ex. he has a loan to pay). Risk alleviating instruments cost real money. Wages are fixed because most persons give away their complete wage each month for fixed costs and so on. But the AM-Dividend cant be foreseen. At least i had to learn this when i tried to get a loan. It didnt happen and it was good this way because the dividends dropped down lower than i thought. So it wouldnt make much difference in this case i believe. Seems I was misunderstood. "Wages" was an example to illustrate my point that profit variance is a bad thing. It may be not "a big problem" but It may as well be depending on circumstances. Thus sometimes it is better to have lower but more reliable profit. That is purely accademical statement. Why are we even discussing this? Pool with 5TH/s hashrate (and less) have minimal to no effect on AM's variance (when AM will have 15TH/s). Not talking about variance. Talking about increasing profits. Edit: I agree, variance will be a non issue if on a pool or not. Profits.... ^^^ Jump to:
|
