Guys , i am trying to wrap my head around this one :
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/primeasic-80-ghashsec-asic-miner-scam-148832
if its legit we need more Hashing Power online soon.
Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1245. (Read 3917543 times)
Avalon ASICs now out in the wild in full force.... Top hasher on Ozcoin now 2Th+.... or is that also ASICMiner.... one can dream 
Youre right of course. There are other possibilities and with the infos we have now only guessing remains. I hope friedcat can bring some light into this. He already said that he wanted to give infos more often so now its only 3 days left to next thursday. A good time to break the one week at thursday only rule...
let's hope for more info from friedcat so that these fears can be dissolved
Its not that i claim to throw manpower onto it regardless what the problem is. But without knowing what the bottleneck is i has to guess its something related to electric handwork. The software runs and is mining like we see, so it has to be physical work. And i dont think that its a so very special task that no worker form outside can do it.
No, it does not "[have] to be physical work".Here's two other possibilities.
1) For whatever reason, the software or firmware just isn't cutting it. E.g., one or more sets of hardware keeps dropping offline or getting 'hung'.
2) The chips / boards are failing nearly as fast as they are being deployed. Resulting in only about half or less of the first batch remaining operational.
Either of those hypothesis can explain why we're now seeing between 4 and 5th per hour rather than the 12 expected by now. In case one, they just can't keep them all cranking. In the second case, the magic smoke just keeps escaping.
I am not advancing either of these ideas as probable. However, with what we know, either is just as plausible as your contention of what "has to be".
-- edit
Just went to take a look at current status. Now at "4,221.70 GH/s". Down from the about 5 TH/s we were at for a while. That is more than just mining variance. Clearly shows that not all the hashing power stays up once deployed.
Youre right of course. There are other possibilities and with the infos we have now only guessing remains. I hope friedcat can bring some light into this. He already said that he wanted to give infos more often so now its only 3 days left to next thursday. A good time to break the one week at thursday only rule...
Sounds fishy, I will wait until someone sees one before I get worried.
Seems like they only have the one prototype. But yeah we need to watch it.
Or they have an Avalon and/or some GPUs and are trying to parlay them into a few hundred K. Time will tell.
Sounds fishy, I will wait until someone sees one before I get worried.
Seems like they only have the one prototype. But yeah we need to watch it.
(or it's just a mining contract ...)
Sounds fishy, I will wait until someone sees one before I get worried.
Game on? Competition from Hungary?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1579440
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1579440
Its not that i claim to throw manpower onto it regardless what the problem is. But without knowing what the bottleneck is i has to guess its something related to electric handwork. The software runs and is mining like we see, so it has to be physical work. And i dont think that its a so very special task that no worker form outside can do it.
No, it does not "[have] to be physical work".Here's two other possibilities.
1) For whatever reason, the software or firmware just isn't cutting it. E.g., one or more sets of hardware keeps dropping offline or getting 'hung'.
2) The chips / boards are failing nearly as fast as they are being deployed. Resulting in only about half or less of the first batch remaining operational.
Either of those hypothesis can explain why we're now seeing between 4 and 5th per hour rather than the 12 expected by now. In case one, they just can't keep them all cranking. In the second case, the magic smoke just keeps escaping.
I am not advancing either of these ideas as probable. However, with what we know, either is just as plausible as your contention of what "has to be".
-- edit
Just went to take a look at current status. Now at "4,221.70 GH/s". Down from the about 5 TH/s we were at for a while. That is more than just mining variance. Clearly shows that not all the hashing power stays up once deployed.
Do either of them have the shares backing them confirmed by friedcat yet?
Soon, 5000 of my shares will be transferred to the Bitfunder PT's official account, but as the manager of the asset is asleep at the moment, I cannot do that yet. Right now, I am prohibited from withdrawing my coins from Bitfunder (Ukyo can confirm) until I transfer the shares.
As for the one on BTCTC, I can only comment that it's covered by calls, not shares at the moment.
INAU's account has indeed been locked down until Friedcat confirms the actual transfer.
And yes, his identity and account was fully verified.
He was already confirmed by the dividend test:
http://blockchain.info/tx-index/57258028/21ae1a92ff3e288fd97b26a5d2cee8e820419f5c5f08160f7b99a30e9195e001
1MDypx was sent .00010081
So when its physical work then please get some professional workers, maybe 10 or 20 and let them help.
Yep.We've all seen management demand that baby be produced in one month instead of nine.
"Just add more workers, I don't care what you're claiming the bottleneck is."
Its not that i claim to throw manpower onto it regardless what the problem is. But without knowing what the bottleneck is i has to guess its something related to electric handwork. The software runs and is mining like we see, so it has to be physical work. And i dont think that its a so very special task that no worker form outside can do it.
Do either of them have the shares backing them confirmed by friedcat yet?
Soon, 5000 of my shares will be transferred to the Bitfunder PT's official account, but as the manager of the asset is asleep at the moment, I cannot do that yet. Right now, I am prohibited from withdrawing my coins from Bitfunder (Ukyo can confirm) until I transfer the shares.
As for the one on BTCTC, I can only comment that it's covered by calls, not shares at the moment.
edit: G4rv3D9Pd7azG+mw8hC5P+v+MJNVjzuDiHaaeYbjfh1UNvVxQ6AZXqWMMYzoLNgycOqbcE9wTEQF5YG+ESiHBq0=
"ineededausername owns this address" -- 1MDypxCYTtaCp56Lqfc7BxuDFNsRFK9h5E -- received 10081 satoshis in the dividend payment test
Ditto for https://btct.co/security/ASICMINER-PT
https://bitfunder.com/asset/G.ASICMINER-PT
asicminer shares being sold on a passthrough, in case anyone feels like buying any on bitfunder
asicminer shares being sold on a passthrough, in case anyone feels like buying any on bitfunder
So when its physical work then please get some professional workers, maybe 10 or 20 and let them help.
Yep.We've all seen management demand that baby be produced in one month instead of nine.
"Just add more workers, I don't care what you're claiming the bottleneck is."
I doubt it is as simple as putting the asics on a pcb and starting it, but something does seem to stall them from deploying...
5TH so far seems to be the max. I surely hope the drops in hashrate we see are not asics dying... btw ddid we ever heqr if the 2nd batch of the 1st wafers had been bumped already....if not, that might be the holdup in deploying....a lack of asics
5TH so far seems to be the max. I surely hope the drops in hashrate we see are not asics dying... btw ddid we ever heqr if the 2nd batch of the 1st wafers had been bumped already....if not, that might be the holdup in deploying....a lack of asics
I think friedcat would have said a word if so many asics are dying. So i think they only have 7TH/s worth in asics lying there not hashing. And i think friedcat wrote some weeks ago that the second batch will be delivered faster than though and in the last month already. So maybe the second batch is already there but the speed is the problem that prevents that this batch can go online.
But i really would like to know what the stall is. Friedcat already wrote they have to change some connectors or so. But even then... how much time can this eat? A quarter hour? For one person? I dont get what the timeeater is. But it has to be physical work. Because the software works. We can see it. So when its physical work then please get some professional workers, maybe 10 or 20 and let them help. Or is there a reason that cant be done? Please friedcat can you go into detail here?
People are now bidding .65 for shares of a 95%-dividend passthrough on btctc... amazing.
Non-selling Asicminer Shareholder not affected.
People are now bidding .65 for shares of a 95%-dividend passthrough on btctc... amazing.
Inhouse by us and our partners/employees/temps:
Cabling for the power supply (double to triple digit kW needs special modification of the cable system), Wiring solution, Heat dissipation solution, Subrack and rack assembly, Network and firmware/software solution, System managing.
Cabling for the power supply (double to triple digit kW needs special modification of the cable system), Wiring solution, Heat dissipation solution, Subrack and rack assembly, Network and firmware/software solution, System managing.
So these are the points that takes some time. The hashrate is going up and down so probably you are taking one of the pcbs with asics out of the rack or take it away from mining often. What i wonder is why that is done. I mean they seem to mine already. So do you take it out to make them hash some percent more only? If thats the case wouldnt it be better to make a quick and maybe not perfect work to put all the pcbs into the rack first, let them mine altogether at a not perfect hashrate and THEN try to optimize it?
I mean when i think about you have all the asics, pcbs and so on and all the manpower... it looks to me like you only have to put the asics on the pcb, put it in the rack, start this pcb to mine and all goes well. That doesnt sound as so much work like you seem to do. Especially with the manpower you have. So what exactly is the workstep that is slowing down everything? That all depends on?
I doubt it is as simple as putting the asics on a pcb and starting it, but something does seem to stall them from deploying...
5TH so far seems to be the max. I surely hope the drops in hashrate we see are not asics dying... btw ddid we ever heqr if the 2nd batch of the 1st wafers had been bumped already....if not, that might be the holdup in deploying....a lack of asics
All of the first batch is here now, as far as I can tell. The process for putting asics up is a bit complicated and comes in spurts, as they set up entire racks before putting the entire thing online. I have a feeling we will grow to around 6 TH/s at least soon.
Inhouse by us and our partners/employees/temps:
Cabling for the power supply (double to triple digit kW needs special modification of the cable system), Wiring solution, Heat dissipation solution, Subrack and rack assembly, Network and firmware/software solution, System managing.
Cabling for the power supply (double to triple digit kW needs special modification of the cable system), Wiring solution, Heat dissipation solution, Subrack and rack assembly, Network and firmware/software solution, System managing.
So these are the points that takes some time. The hashrate is going up and down so probably you are taking one of the pcbs with asics out of the rack or take it away from mining often. What i wonder is why that is done. I mean they seem to mine already. So do you take it out to make them hash some percent more only? If thats the case wouldnt it be better to make a quick and maybe not perfect work to put all the pcbs into the rack first, let them mine altogether at a not perfect hashrate and THEN try to optimize it?
I mean when i think about you have all the asics, pcbs and so on and all the manpower... it looks to me like you only have to put the asics on the pcb, put it in the rack, start this pcb to mine and all goes well. That doesnt sound as so much work like you seem to do. Especially with the manpower you have. So what exactly is the workstep that is slowing down everything? That all depends on?
I doubt it is as simple as putting the asics on a pcb and starting it, but something does seem to stall them from deploying...
5TH so far seems to be the max. I surely hope the drops in hashrate we see are not asics dying... btw ddid we ever heqr if the 2nd batch of the 1st wafers had been bumped already....if not, that might be the holdup in deploying....a lack of asics
Jump to: