BFL ASIC Shipment Plan - page 4. | Bitcointalksearch.org

PulsedMedia

sr. member

Activity: 402

Merit: 250

I just hope when they start shipping there wouldn't be continuously an inherent 6-8 week wait for getting it delivered ...

Personally i think they need try to schedule shipments so that international and national customers get at approximately the same time, and make sure that no single order gets at once too much, say FIRST batch of shipment is limited to 2 per for the first say, 500 customers, then 1 per next 500 customers. Then start shipping in FIFO manner.
That way as large group of people as possible gets at least something early on AND no one can get like 4TH worth while no one else gets nothing.

Or if they have enough products to be shipped, then from get go FIFO manner, but the largest orders ship in 2 shipments, second one with 3 business day delay.

Knowing BFL tho, they will have very limited number at beginning, and if i order today a SC it will be February before shipment if they are right on schedule Sad

They need to seriously ramp up the production, if i knew a Single would ship tomorrow if ordered today, i would not hesitate to order RIGHT NOW at least 4 of them.

squall1066

copper member

Activity: 2310

Merit: 1032

I'm between thoughts, Firstly, The firs come first served is just basic business rules, you cant expect to build reputation by "throwing the dice" on orders, but at the same time BFL also claim to try not to give monopoly to some people whilst the hash rate is low (yes it is low compared to whats comeing) So I understand trying to randomise it a bit, But I dont really agree for trade in's a priority, To put it bluntly, Those people allready have some hashing power and can wait their place in line.

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: gmaxwell on August 21, 2012, 11:37:27 PM

Luke is talking about block withholding. We know how to fix it for centralized pools in an incompatible way— as luke points out, though not for fully decentralized pools.

You must have missed my decentralized-compatible fix on the dev ML a few months ago :p

gmaxwell

staff

Activity: 4172

Merit: 8419

Quote from: Luke-Jr on August 21, 2012, 10:39:30 PM

Reality:

Exactly.

Quote

There is a long-known vulnerability to mining pools (including decentralized and peer-to-peer ones); it is possible to fix it by making a backward-incompatible change to the block rules, but even this is not considered sufficient to justify the break.

Luke is talking about block withholding. We know how to fix it for centralized pools in an incompatible way— as luke points out, though not for fully decentralized pools.

Quote

That includes either SHA256 being broken, or someone obtaining and monopolizing a substantial amount of the network hashpower.[/li][/list]

Even most SHA256 "breaks" would not necessitate or justify a POW change (though might require the replacement of SHA256 _everywhere else_ in the protocol). E.g. the existent breaks for MD5 wouldn't make us move away from an MD5 POW if we were using it for that.

As Luke says, there could be reasons to justify altering the POW, but they're not things that would come quietly or subtly. E.g. things like an active monopolizing super-majority attacker on the current POW. Breaking everything is justified when the alternative is everything being even more broken, but not otherwise.

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: hamdi on August 21, 2012, 09:18:52 PM

the hash-method-change will be before BFL ships the ordered units. some called it "bitcoin 2"

LOL

Reality:

Breaking compatibility with old Bitcoin clients is considered by us developers to be a Bad Idea by default, without significant justification.
There is a long-known vulnerability to mining pools (including decentralized and peer-to-peer ones); it is possible to fix it by making a backward-incompatible change to the block rules, but even this is not considered sufficient to justify the break.
That being said, we have a lot of planned improvements for the day we finally do need to break compatibility.
The closest thing to "Bitcoin 2" is a branch specifically for these planned improvements to be implemented and tested; I have one, but it is accepted to be at least 2 years away (at any given time) from being used live on Bitcoin "mainnet", and there are literally zero actual improvements made in it because we're all preoccupied with present-day improvements that can be done without breaking compatibility. There are plenty of those to keep us busy for a long time.
These improvements include keeping the proof-of-work compatible. That is, using the same SHA256 of 80 bytes, with nonce being in the last 12.
The developers cannot single-handedly make a compatibility-breaking change. This decision inevitably lies with the economic majority who decide whether to accept the changes or not.
It is reasonably expected that the final hashing algorithm used as proof-of-work will not change unless it is threatened. That includes either SHA256 being broken, or someone obtaining and monopolizing a substantial amount of the network hashpower.
By selling ASICs at consumer prices, Butterfly Labs is helping to take Bitcoin to the next level of security: no longer can anyone just make ASICs to monopolize the network at will, because all the "good guys" will already be using ASICs themselves.
There are currently zero legitimate grounds to justify even wanting ASICs broken.

crazyates

legendary

Activity: 952

Merit: 1000

Quote from: hamdi on August 21, 2012, 09:18:52 PM

the hash-method-change will be before BFL ships the ordered units. some called it "bitcoin 2"

Please link? I srsly doubt it. Unless he's talking of a hard-fork that no one will ever adopt.

hamdi

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 500

the hash-method-change will be before BFL ships the ordered units. some called it "bitcoin 2"

cablepair

hero member

Activity: 896

Merit: 1000

Buy this account on March-2019. New Owner here!!

Quote from: crazyates on August 21, 2012, 01:41:32 PM

Quote from: boonies4u on August 21, 2012, 01:37:56 PM

Quote from: hamdi on August 21, 2012, 01:32:59 PM

you won´t need that BFL stuff... the hashing algo will change so that all sha-256 speacialized hardware is useless!

When? Do you have any proof?

No he doesn't. That's been the anti-asic camp's battle cry for a while now. The protocol can change, but if there was ever a security vulnerability found in SHA-256, specialized ASICs could become useless.

well he's right that could happen

however not all ASICS are created equal, I can't speak for the hardware that BFL is releasing but I can tell you that there will be sASIC based Mining hardware released eventually and with a structured ASIC you can reprogram them just like a FPGA. If BFL really does ship in October it wont be before them but it should be available by the end of the year.

crazyates

legendary

Activity: 952

Merit: 1000

Quote from: boonies4u on August 21, 2012, 01:37:56 PM

Quote from: hamdi on August 21, 2012, 01:32:59 PM

you won´t need that BFL stuff... the hashing algo will change so that all sha-256 speacialized hardware is useless!

When? Do you have any proof?

No he doesn't. That's been the anti-asic camp's battle cry for a while now. The protocol can change, but if there was ever a security vulnerability found in SHA-256, specialized ASICs could become useless.

boonies4u

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Quote from: hamdi on August 21, 2012, 01:32:59 PM

you won´t need that BFL stuff... the hashing algo will change so that all sha-256 speacialized hardware is useless!

When? Do you have any proof?

crazyates

legendary

Activity: 952

Merit: 1000

Quote from: hamdi on August 21, 2012, 01:32:59 PM

you won´t need that BFL stuff... the hashing algo will change so that all sha-256 speacialized hardware is useless!

^^^ will be making 0.05BTC/day in about 6 months. Tongue

hamdi

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 500

you won´t need that BFL stuff... the hashing algo will change so that all sha-256 speacialized hardware is useless!

cablepair

hero member

Activity: 896

Merit: 1000

Buy this account on March-2019. New Owner here!!

Its ok, no problem.

crazyates

legendary

Activity: 952

Merit: 1000

Quote from: cablepair on August 21, 2012, 01:26:42 PM

Quote from: crazyates on August 20, 2012, 08:54:22 PM

1) The 1/3 - 1/3 - 1/3 plan only affects the initial batch of shipments. After that, it will be a FCFS order.

2) I can't believe you had the balls to create this thread, as you are a competing vendor of BTC mining equipment! You're openly questioning a competitors business practices! And a competitor that has promised a better product than yours, on top of that.

I am a customer of BFL, why would I not care about this?

I have 10 BFL singles that I purchased before I ever started BTCFPGA, why would I not convert them to SC singles? It would be foolish not to, don't you think?

I am not questioning their business practices here I think its a very legitimate thing to want a clear answer on this, the release of these mining units could effect Bitcoin in very dramatic ways and Bitcoin is something I have invested the last two years of my life into. To me this is serious business, not some kind of bullshit attempt to make them look bad.

and Yes I have balls thanks.

Apologies, as I did not realize you were also a customer.

cablepair

hero member

Activity: 896

Merit: 1000

Buy this account on March-2019. New Owner here!!

Quote from: crazyates on August 20, 2012, 08:54:22 PM

1) The 1/3 - 1/3 - 1/3 plan only affects the initial batch of shipments. After that, it will be a FCFS order.

2) I can't believe you had the balls to create this thread, as you are a competing vendor of BTC mining equipment! You're openly questioning a competitors business practices! And a competitor that has promised a better product than yours, on top of that.

I am a customer of BFL, why would I not care about this?

I have 10 BFL singles that I purchased before I ever started BTCFPGA, why would I not convert them to SC singles? It would be foolish not to, don't you think?

I am not questioning their business practices here I think its a very legitimate thing to want a clear answer on this, the release of these mining units could effect Bitcoin in very dramatic ways and Bitcoin is something I have invested the last two years of my life into. To me this is serious business, not some kind of bullshit attempt to make them look bad.

and Yes I have balls thanks.

bitcoindaddy

hero member

Activity: 481

Merit: 500

Quote from: davidspitzer on August 21, 2012, 11:49:23 AM

Here is my proposed shipping plan:

Each person gets six Jalapeno’s, except for the Person on the BFL’s right, who gets seven. The second person gets an additional SC, except on Tuesdays, in which case they get a "half-SC. The third Mini-Rig is a "shralk" and is grounds for disqualification. With two Orders, one wants an SC and a Jalepeno, except at night, when one wants a Mini-Rig and Raspberry Pi.

If the buyer orders 3 SC’s and a Jalapeno, the buyer would get another unit, except when it's dark, in which case he'd have to give it back. The top order is a "royal Miner," but the odds of getting one are "astronomical" and truthfully I have never computed them.

Paying with Paypal is called a "kronk" and means that shipment will happen after the last full moon following the summer solstice during even numbered years.

Great Star-Trek reference.

BFL

full member

Activity: 217

Merit: 100

Quote from: davidspitzer on August 21, 2012, 11:49:23 AM

Here is my proposed shipping plan:

Each person gets six Jalapeno’s, except for the Person on the BFL’s right, who gets seven. The second person gets an additional SC, except on Tuesdays, in which case they get a "half-SC. The third Mini-Rig is a "shralk" and is grounds for disqualification. With two Orders, one wants an SC and a Jalepeno, except at night, when one wants a Mini-Rig and Raspberry Pi.

If the buyer orders 3 SC’s and a Jalapeno, the buyer would get another unit, except when it's dark, in which case he'd have to give it back. The top order is a "royal Miner," but the odds of getting one are "astronomical" and truthfully I have never computed them.

Paying with Paypal is called a "kronk" and means that shipment will happen after the last full moon following the summer solstice during even numbered years.

(10 points for Mr Spitzer)

davidspitzer

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Here is my proposed shipping plan:

Each person gets six Jalapeno’s, except for the Person on the BFL’s right, who gets seven. The second person gets an additional SC, except on Tuesdays, in which case they get a "half-SC. The third Mini-Rig is a "shralk" and is grounds for disqualification. With two Orders, one wants an SC and a Jalepeno, except at night, when one wants a Mini-Rig and Raspberry Pi.

If the buyer orders 3 SC’s and a Jalapeno, the buyer would get another unit, except when it's dark, in which case he'd have to give it back. The top order is a "royal Miner," but the odds of getting one are "astronomical" and truthfully I have never computed them.

Paying with Paypal is called a "kronk" and means that shipment will happen after the last full moon following the summer solstice during even numbered years.

crazyates

legendary

Activity: 952

Merit: 1000

1) The 1/3 - 1/3 - 1/3 plan only affects the initial batch of shipments. After that, it will be a FCFS order.

2) I can't believe you had the balls to create this thread, as you are a competing vendor of BTC mining equipment! You're openly questioning a competitors business practices! And a competitor that has promised a better product than yours, on top of that.

freeAgent

sr. member

Activity: 240

Merit: 250

I voted for FIFO. If BFL thinks that they won't be able to meet all preorders in October, then they should adjust the ship date on new orders coming in. It isn't fair to people if they preorder expecting delivery in October, delivery begins in October, and they don't receive their order until, say, January.

Topic: BFL ASIC Shipment Plan - page 4. (Read 13800 times)