Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1293. (Read 3917531 times)

So you admit you are just making shit up?

Mining profitability will follow the same trend as before - down. Faster the rigs and network, faster it will happen.



Red is mining, green is selling hardware.
This is just 2 lines for illustration. No scientifically accurate data is used.

Not necessarily true:

It wouldnt be economical for 1 person to house and power 10 mln ASICs, yet it would make perfect sense for 10 mln individuals to house and power 1 ASIC each.

Hence selling instead of self mining would make perfect sense at some point in time.

If I remember correctly that's where the 50TH self mine cut off point comes from. Exactly these reasons.

At that point in time the production costs of 1 ASIC are probably next to nothing since the Mask costs have been recouped, so why not sell as many as you can for next to nothing plus a little bit :-)

The flaw in this contorted plan which you so contortedly expound upon is that the simple offer to sell rigs in that context amounts to a declaration that they aren't worth buying.

I refered to the business plan, right. It stated that asicminers business is to first mine with the hardware as long as its bringing the best income and later start to selling Asics. I guess the time when selling Asics is a better practice then simply mining wont come so fast but it will come. Question is how far this is in the future.

I think the claims to sell fast, sell to shareholders and so on shouldnt be followed. Asicminer would be stupid to sell the Asic-Cashcows for low money while they could make a fortune selfmining. It would be unfair to the rest of shareholders too that didnt get an Asic. So no, i think selling shouldnt come fast. The question is when it will come (competition and so on) and when preorders, a buying website and so on will be available. If its planned in some months, maybe because it can be seen that the competition will grow to an amount where the win for selling an Asicdevice will be higher than mining a year or whatever then it has to be thought about marketing. Making people eager to want one, prebuy, inform them about the power of the asics (at the moment the infos would be rare of course). But this would only mean more sells later. And when you can advertise for nearly no cost at your target audience its something to consider.

Of course... when the time, when mining with asics isnt so much worth than selling it comes in years only then you wouldnt need to consider. But selling asics was part of the plan from the start so it will come most probably.

Meh, people don't see past the obvious

Funny, I've re-read the quote numerous times, but I've failed to find a single instance of "if".

With #3, from what friedcat has said in this thread, this is what seems to be going on: the chips are now out of the fab, are being packaged and tested, and soon as thats done they will be shipped to friedcat or another company to be inserted onto boards (he hasn't said whos manning the solder gun on this yet, or if he did, I missed it). He hasn't said whos manufacturing the boards (this should be easier to do than with FPGAs, btw) or if they're done yet or not.

The packaging, shipping to next location to be board mounted and have the assembled product QCed, and then being shipped to wherever friedcat has chosen to set these up for mining, can all be done concurrently depending on how the companies handle it.

Also, from what I understand, soon as mining has produced enough money for a second and possibly third run of ASICs, thats going to happen too.

I think that somewhat answers your question.

An encouraging update! It means the chips at least passed the QC at the fab, and that slicing+packaging+testing is already under way. I'm hungry for more info, please return soon and fill in more blanks:
1) Recovered the ~5000 BTC from GLBSE yet? (I would like to just stop worrying about it...)
2) Did the fab really process 12 layers in 7 days, or was it simply information delay?? [Dec 05: "There are 12 layers left", Dec 12: "we are now in QC"]
3) What is the reason for deploying the second half of the chips later than the first? [Genuine question, I'm simply not smart enough that the reasons are obvious to me!]

I think I can say on behalf of all (at least many/most) stakeholders: Thanks, congrats, and keep up the great work!

It's funny how people on one side or another of an argument can be so completely blind to the opposing premise.


I wince when I hear statements like, 'the only logical answer ...,' without any substantive rebuttal of specific argument.

Yes, I am aware. Many ifs in there.

BTCest of luck. :3

Yet in their business plan they state:

Well, asicminer is not taking preorders, because it wants to be a mining company, not a mining gear supplier. So it's split itself up into shares representing the equity. Except it's not listed anywhere, nobody can buy or sell it.

I can see why the community'd start forgetting about them at this point, as what exact sense does it make to have them figure in places like the wiki? What potential buyers? There's no way to buy anything from them even if you wanted to. They aren't selling rigs, their shares can't be sold, what buyers? Buying what?


Which ties into the point above. Gmaxwell is an ass, sure, but I don't see much merit in Diablo's theory that Lukedash is "a BFL shill".


From what I understand, mining in a pool is different from mining solo in that the pool operator, and not the pool miner, controls the mining. So mining in a pool would be akin to going "here, community, is some hashing power, use it as you think fit," whereas mining solo would be "we reserve the right to attack the network any way we see fit, deliberately or accidentally".

The merit of going with some pools is that their ops have so far shown themselves credible. For an example: hashpower is 12TH today, slush gets 6TH, Luke gets 4TH Graet gets 2TH (I left some pools out please don't get insulted, it's just a simple example!). Tomorrow, this company adds 24TH to that pool, of which 12 to slush, 8 to Luke, 4 to Graet. It's true that all the pools grew by 200%, but because ALL grew by 200% their relative proportions are still the same, 50%, 33%, 17%.

So maybe in the end the best strategy would be to do a neutral split, mine proportionally in all the pools, equal to their current market share. Speaking of PR moves, THIS would have been the smart PR move to make. Unfortunately the aspiring mining company not only lacks the strategic competence to list itself on the right exchange, it also lacks the strategic competence to properly handle its market communications. Obviously all these are remediable flaws, provided they have more sense than BFL and start working on remedial rather than waste effort in denial.

Thanks for keeping us up to date

Good luck !!!

It could also be used to prevent transactions, rendering the network useless.

I think it's mostly the reduced trust in PoW that's what makes devs and investors wary, not the possibility of an attack itself.


+1

I don't get why everyones getting so hyped up about a 51% attack.

All the 51% attack does is allow extremely limited double spending attacks (and only double spending from the point of view of non-bitcoin transactions, ie, a currency exchange or a physical inventory-based vendor). The attacker cannot forge fake transactions.

51% doesn't mean what most people think it means. If the network rate is 25TH, then the attacker must have OVER 25TH to perform the attack. With the current batch of chips that friedcat ordered, he won't have enough to even come close.

What we really need to be worried about, as a community, is why the other ASIC vendors allowed ASICMINER to become >51%. If BFL and Avalon and bASIC all ship what they said they'd ship, ASICMINER would be less than a quarter of the new network.

Update

This is a quick update. Please expect more details soon.

1. Our wafers are already in the slicing and packaging service. Whether we could beat everyone else in early delivering, or we have to revise and redo the wafers, will be known within the next two weeks.

2. All shareholders who have ambiguous Bitcoin addresses will receive the confirmation mails within this week.

3. We will make ASICMINER re-hosted after the confirmations, as well as the platform decided. It will not be later
than our first deploying and the first payment to shareholders.

Exactly. That's why you need to both physically and socially split the mining power. I was originally talking about making and selling mining farms, I don't know how pools are relevant.

I mentioned PR because even though you may split the hardware into different & disconnected locations and let them be run by different people, there is still some concern as long as it's under the same corporate roof. However, it still mitigates most probable attacks, and is therefore more defensible from a PR standpoint. I myself would like them to be run by different interest groups entirely.

I disagree; it isn't clear at all. A quick read through the OP and it looks like they are selling shares for a self-mining company.


Potential buyers for what? What/Where's the product? Where's the website advertising the product?


It is true that they aren't shipping, but BFL and Avalon both have websites that make what they intend to sell very clear. Some will have pre-ordered, while others are waiting for stock to become available so they can buy it. People know about the product and they want the product.

ASICMINER has a thread about selling shares. Any information about a potential of selling a product is buried.


This. If ASICMINER is serious about selling a product, they need to look serious. You can't "maybe" sell a product, it has to be a clear and direct goal of the company.

I hope ASICMINER considers this to be constructive criticism; ASIC vendor competition is important.