I guess the stresstesting is over.... full deployment can begin.... 1.5TH now on BTCGuild....
Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1265. (Read 3917029 times)
February 15, 2013, 02:52:01 PM
February 15, 2013, 02:46:32 PM
Friedcat, since you have working hardware could you give a number for what your efficiency is for a rack? Preferably including AC/DC conversion and the power drawn by those large fans. How close were you on the 4.2J/GH for the chips?
February 15, 2013, 02:36:06 PM
As we stated in earlier updates, the chips for next expansion (6-fold one, >50TH/s) are ordered and being produced in the fab already.
Part of what shareholders (myself included) purchased was the possibility to be able to trade in a certain number of shares to go towards the purchase of consumer equipment prior to the expansion to >= 50TH self-mining but I can no longer find this mentioned. Could you please clarify the history of this? Was the option removed due to changing circumstances? Was there a vote held to determine this? I was under the impression that only shareholders would have first-dibs on the hardware before the general unwashed masses..
This was never agreed. Some people asked for it but that's as far as it ever got.
February 15, 2013, 02:20:52 PM
As we stated in earlier updates, the chips for next expansion (6-fold one, >50TH/s) are ordered and being produced in the fab already.
Part of what shareholders (myself included) purchased was the possibility to be able to trade in a certain number of shares to go towards the purchase of consumer equipment prior to the expansion to >= 50TH self-mining but I can no longer find this mentioned. Could you please clarify the history of this? Was the option removed due to changing circumstances? Was there a vote held to determine this? I was under the impression that only shareholders would have first-dibs on the hardware before the general unwashed masses..
February 15, 2013, 12:29:35 PM
Looks like the stress test is ending, hashrate has dropped to 1.871 TH/s as of right now
19 blocks wasn't a bad effort for a first test run.
Up to 27 now! But the rate is hovering around 2,133.16 GH/s.
February 15, 2013, 11:17:42 AM
why not p2pool, isn't that pretty decentralized? asicminer could really bring them into the light!
ASICMINER would become more than 95% of p2pool, which means almost no reduction in variance for a significant overhead. Going solo is better in every way. Someone mentioned that pools are more resistant to DDOS than solo mining but I doubt that there is a good supporting argument for that either.
However, I presume friedcat thinks we will most likely be below a few percent for the most of our operation and that's why he will develop the infrastructure with pools in mind. In that case, we could use one p2pool instance among other pools.
Yes, but it would also prevent friedcat from becoming a threat in a 51% situation since he does not control the output. p2pool has made monolithic pools obsolete, and I don't understand why anyone would be silly enough to ever use anything but p2pool.
p2pool shares have to be generated as valid. If friedcat would leave p2pool and mine blocks that harm Bitcoin, we'd just change the hash algo out from under him thus rendering the entire farm useless.
February 15, 2013, 10:52:43 AM
why not p2pool, isn't that pretty decentralized? asicminer could really bring them into the light!
ASICMINER would become more than 95% of p2pool, which means almost no reduction in variance for a significant overhead. Going solo is better in every way. Someone mentioned that pools are more resistant to DDOS than solo mining but I doubt that there is a good supporting argument for that either.
However, I presume friedcat thinks we will most likely be below a few percent for the most of our operation and that's why he will develop the infrastructure with pools in mind. In that case, we could use one p2pool instance among other pools.
Yes, but it would also prevent friedcat from becoming a threat in a 51% situation since he does not control the output. p2pool has made monolithic pools obsolete, and I don't understand why anyone would be silly enough to ever use anything but p2pool.
February 15, 2013, 10:52:38 AM
why not p2pool, isn't that pretty decentralized? asicminer could really bring them into the light!
ASICMINER would become more than 95% of p2pool, which means almost no reduction in variance for a significant overhead. Going solo is better in every way. Someone mentioned that pools are more resistant to DDOS than solo mining but I doubt that there is a good supporting argument for that either.
However, I presume friedcat thinks we will most likely be below a few percent for the most of our operation and that's why he will develop the infrastructure with pools in mind. In that case, we could use one p2pool instance among other pools.
Yes, but it would also prevent friedcat from becoming a threat in a 51% situation since he does not control the output. p2pool has made monolithic pools obsolete, and I don't understand why anyone would be silly enough to ever use anything but p2pool.
It wouldn't stop anything. At any time friedcat could take the machines off p2pool and do a 51% attack. The only way it "stops" it is if he doesn't intend to do it - which is why all the talk of which pool to use is pointless. He has the machines - if they're over 50% he can try to double-spend. No amount of pointing them at different pools removes that capability.
The thing preventing him 51% attacking (if ASICMINER ever got to 51% - which isn't all that likely as it requires both Avalon AND BFL to miss shipping) - is that it doesn't make economic sense to do it: the loss in value of all future mined BTC would far outweigh whatever double-spend benefit he got short-term.
So forget all the wasted effort talking about pools and just mine wherever makes the most profit - with the sole caveat of never pointing enough power at a single pool that the pool operator gets anywhere near the point of having 50% of network power. Presumably friedcat trusts HIMSELF not to do an attack - so any significant granting of power to pools can only increase risk not reduce it.
February 15, 2013, 10:46:03 AM
why not p2pool, isn't that pretty decentralized? asicminer could really bring them into the light!
ASICMINER would become more than 95% of p2pool, which means almost no reduction in variance for a significant overhead. Going solo is better in every way. Someone mentioned that pools are more resistant to DDOS than solo mining but I doubt that there is a good supporting argument for that either.
However, I presume friedcat thinks we will most likely be below a few percent for the most of our operation and that's why he will develop the infrastructure with pools in mind. In that case, we could use one p2pool instance among other pools.
Yes, but it would also prevent friedcat from becoming a threat in a 51% situation since he does not control the output. p2pool has made monolithic pools obsolete, and I don't understand why anyone would be silly enough to ever use anything but p2pool.
February 15, 2013, 07:03:31 AM
Im surprised no one has setup a passthrough yet. I know there is a trading platform coming but in the meantime a pure passthrough might be the way to go.
Do their rules allow it? They seem pretty intent on doing everything possible to keep it as a legitimate investment and avoid the kinds of cluster-fucks we've seen in the past due to sketchy intermediaries. You can almost guarantee that if they allow anyone and everyone to operate a pass-through, someone will eventually scam people who invest in the pass-throughs.
You can't really disallow a passthrough. How would you do it?
February 15, 2013, 07:00:53 AM
Thanks. I dont like the thought that the money isnt paid back and friedcat, who isnt guilty for this has to pay. Its a big amount of real money.
Yea, I agree with you, but it was friedcat's decision (nobody has pushed him into it), so we can only thank him for being so generous 
February 15, 2013, 06:56:44 AM
Maybe i missed it but i wonder if nefario paid the btc from glbse back already. Is that done or will asicminer have to compensate a loss there?
It was already said. Nefario is still holding 1688.188 BTC that used to belong to ASICMINER, but friedcat has put his own money to cover this missing amount.When nefario pays back, this will go to reimburse friedcat.
In other words: nefario did not pay back, but ASICMINER's funds are all there, after friedcat covered the frozen funds from his own pocket.
Thanks. I dont like the thought that the money isnt paid back and friedcat, who isnt guilty for this has to pay. Its a big amount of real money. And it looks like nefario stopped everything some weeks ago. So its not likely that the money will be paid back. Ill try to email nefario, maybe he gets back and says a word about it. I mean its $45232.97 judging from the average price at mtgox... i dont see why it shouldnt be paid back.
February 15, 2013, 06:42:43 AM
Maybe i missed it but i wonder if nefario paid the btc from glbse back already. Is that done or will asicminer have to compensate a loss there?
It was already said. Nefario is still holding 1688.188 BTC that used to belong to ASICMINER, but friedcat has put his own money to cover this missing amount.When nefario pays back, this will go to reimburse friedcat.
In other words: nefario did not pay back, but ASICMINER's funds are all there, after friedcat covered the frozen funds from his own pocket.
February 15, 2013, 06:34:30 AM
Sample boards to the community: this is at the 2nd order of our priority list following deploying. Once we have enough time it will be done immediately.
Why that? And who will get this sample and the bitcoins created with it? I dont see a reason why someone should get a sample because we already can see that the asics work. So what should this be good for? Its another thing when avalon does this. They have a completely other business model.
Maybe i missed it but i wonder if nefario paid the btc from glbse back already. Is that done or will asicminer have to compensate a loss there?
February 15, 2013, 05:22:20 AM
why not p2pool, isn't that pretty decentralized? asicminer could really bring them into the light!
ASICMINER would become more than 95% of p2pool, which means almost no reduction in variance for a significant overhead. Going solo is better in every way. Someone mentioned that pools are more resistant to DDOS than solo mining but I doubt that there is a good supporting argument for that either.
However, I presume friedcat thinks we will most likely be below a few percent for the most of our operation and that's why he will develop the infrastructure with pools in mind. In that case, we could use one p2pool instance among other pools.
February 15, 2013, 04:21:20 AM
Congratulations on being part of bitcoin history!
February 15, 2013, 03:55:32 AM
Congratulations on this initial deployment, it all sounds good to me.
February 15, 2013, 03:41:43 AM
why not p2pool, isn't that pretty decentralized? asicminer could really bring them into the light!
February 15, 2013, 01:47:08 AM
Edit0: Apparently I always had a "rogue" zero that was invisible (mobile Firefox bug I guess) and have been calculating 15th/s instead of 1.5th/s. Sorry.
Heh. It's still pretty impressive. If they can get the whole 12 TH online before BFL ASICs hit the network, they will be looking at about USD 50k per day.
February 15, 2013, 01:16:37 AM
I roughly estimate the debt to 100k USD, and roughly estimate the stress test mined coins to value around 150k USD.
How did you arrive at that figure?
Those numbers are very rough and are only meant as a question meaning "isn't our debt paid?"
Edit1: As for your edit.http://allchains.info/calc.html Roughly avg 1500gh/s x 3 days (now that I think of it its only 2 days though, but its still not a tenth..)
Edit0: Apparently I always had a "rogue" zero that was invisible (mobile Firefox bug I guess) and have been calculating 15th/s instead of 1.5th/s. Sorry.
Jump to: