Topic: [HAVELOCK] PETAMINE - 1,150 TH/S HASH RATE (1GH/S per Unit) - page 154. (Read 565837 times)

Yea I'd happily do some stuff too. If we could get a rough list of what should be delivered for the next few months ill draw up some accurate projections with multiple scenarios, the sort of detailed projections that cover all of the factors in high detail

Not at all. If the bot tries to sell shares, The price 'stays down' as you call it. However when an bot tries to buy an share, exactly the opposite effect occurs.

It is only possible to affect the price if different algorithms are used for buying and selling, which a scalping bot does not do. If i create an bot that sells at the current market price and buys when the price drops a certain amount of points below the average, then you have an bot that pushes the price down. Of course it is trivially possible to do the same thing in reverse and push the price up.


For anyone thinking to create such a bot now, it is not that hard to prove that such behavior is suboptimal for the bot owner.

when we hit 1% of network or more we can celebrate with a press release and post it to reddit, maybe even get legit news hits.

If Peta doesn't write a press release for their website, I will write an unofficial one and post to mine - I might do that even if they do the official one.

Cryptsy is presently able to sell 10GHs mining contracts for 0.185 BTC each.
Compared to that Petamine shares are undervalued even at the present hash rate.
I think the present price is mostly due to the few people who actually know about
this operation even in the crypto world.

Darkstone2, I'm aware of what scalping bots are, run them on various exchanges for last 9months, they have limited effiency as far as i saw, sometimes very small windows and their intended purpose is not to keep the price down whatsoever, they'd operate regardless of the price of this asset and have no vested interest in it being lower or higher;  however this is an (un)intended result of this bot in particular and if you'd tried to sell and buy back shares here you will notice this

If we continue this 100TH a week progress, a month later we would be around 1% of total network.
By that time, div would probably be around 0.0014. Can't wait!

I'd be very surprised if now we have our own production CryptX hasn't agreed with bitmine to swap the rigs for chips. It's a win win for both companies.

1) Bitmine can use the units they where going to send to us to clear up their customer backlog, which is killing their business. Plus, they have no problems supplying chips. This would be a massive win for them.
2)CryptX doesn't have to rely on bitmine to produce their units as we can now produce ours. This is a massive win for us.

The only reason we had unit orders was because it was going to take a couple of months before we could design snd produce our own PCBs, and Since CryptX went to see bitmine a few weeks ago, I don't think we have actually had any units from them. Everything points to the above.

I think from now onwards we are done with bitmines units and now just using them for chips.

/speculation


And nah. This seems crazy. considering how many units we've received last week and this week, everything points to a max capacity of 100 of our own units a week. And I think we've had our batch for this week. If I'm wrong, il be really happy, but it just seems kinda excessive. I'm over the moon with 100TH a week though.

I'm not sure why you should thank him. Scalping bots do various things, but 'keeping the price down' is definitely not one of them.

I think that the term "to play with" fits with the general idea people seem to have with bots quite well. Because if you had a lot of shares, it would be stupid to use those to 'keep the price down'. The only way to do that is by selling them under the market price. Which would be exactly opposite of what the the scalping strategy is supposed to do.

Additional, as somebody that has actual experience with this, scalping with naive algorithms is generally not profitable unless there is extreme volatility, such as when NEOBEE went first live and i increased my holdings from 0.2 BTC to 0.5 BTC in a few days (a good bunch of this can be attributed to the price rise itself). There exists more sophisticated algorithms that work in more general conditions but those require you to make good predictions of market volatility which is quite hard to without a degree in statistics.

Cryptx,

Would it be possible to get a picture of the data center?  400+TH has got to be an impressive looking setup.

All that hard work, it's time for you to show it off!

here is my div prediction, first time im taking my high ball estimate

0.0007975188

Personally I hope yes, but I would say no this time.
Custom board should bring us total 250TH/s and that's all. Evan Peta deploys all custom board before Friday, we shall see around 450TH/s there. There's no way to be 500 TH/s this week. Unless Bitmine delivers those rigs to us this week but that is impossible from now to see.
So I'd vote NO. Sadly, but that's true.

At this week, we should take an additional level to our betting game:

Will we hit 500TH/s before Friday - YES/NO?

I would say YES!  

Just under 5

I'm math challenged so sorry for the question: at 400th. how many gh/share? 

Found this thread on p2pool. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/a-guide-for-mining-efficiently-on-p2pool-includes-fud-repellent-and-faq-153232

I think this covers it. From that thread.

What matters for good P2Pool results: low latencies

On average a miner on a classic pool needs to react to a new coinbase every 10 minutes. Every 10 minutes a miner on any pool can submit a share based on a block that isn't the last one anymore. This is wasted effort: it doesn't help generate the next block in the chain and the pool suffers from this. Most pools reject such work and ignore it when they compute miners' rewards.

Miners are often separated from their pools by long-distance networks with tens or hundreds of milliseconds of latency. This means that every 10 minutes a miner on a normal pool is wasting its efforts for at least tens or hundreds of milliseconds. This is why there are rejects even on properly tuned classic setups: for 10ms of latency between miner and pool on average you should expect 0.01/(60*10) = 0.0016%:

Latency   Expected rejects
10ms   0.0016%
100ms   0.016%
1s   0.16%

Conclusion: on a traditional pool, relatively high latencies aren't such a big deal.

On P2Pool, the tracking of the proof of work is implemented by a sharechain which mirrors several properties of the Bitcoin blockchain:

    A share is a proof of work with a given difficulty
    A share uses the previous share in its input to make a sharechain like blocks do to build the blockchain
    It builds on a block template given by a Bitcoin node: a share hitting the Bitcoin difficulty can become a block too
    It's difficulty is dynamically adjusted to maintain a fixed average rate of share generation (one every 30 seconds)


The last point means that having a low latency is more important for a P2Pool miner than a miner on a traditional pool. Pay attention to the fact that a share being submitted too late to enter the sharechain can still produce a block so it's not wasted work (high reject rates are not a problem for global income on P2Pool unlike rejects on traditional pools). This said as the rejected share isn't in the sharechain it won't count as a proof of work for the purpose of distributing the pool's income.

It seems we're gonna hit 400 TH/s.

How does p2pool pay more than gh.io?

While i do support decentralisation of pools, at the moment consistent payouts seem more important, this might change in the future though.

My approach is only, if there are no significant advantages, why change it. I am all for better, newer implementations of any software available, if there is significant value derived from it.

However, changing stuff around doesn´t seem to be too high on the priority list right now.

You don't strike me as an IT guy/gal.
The way I would do it in this setup is have a piece of software redirecting all the traffic from the hardware, that way you only need to change the pool info on one machine. Rather than manually edit each machine.
For those like myself that have been playing with tech since word processors, commodore 64s and apple IIs were the norm, its not as difficult as you believe it to be.

As for the don't fix whats not broken. There are a multitude of reasons for peta to eventually go solo/p2pool.
The largest one is decentralization of the network. Currently ghash is around 25% of the network, however they are still growing.
P2pool over the longterm pays out better than standard pools plus supporting it also supports the decentralization.

While in theory everything will always work nicely, with every bit of software you add, a new problem might come that you weren´t aware of yet.
Therefore the saying "never change a running system" has some truth to it, also, if it isn´t broke, why fix it?

I know that this isn´t quantum physics to build (and or install) the proposed system of miner management etc. but with scale new problems arise, and as we already have a working system, unless the new one offers significant advantages, why change it?

I think cryptx should focus on new, competetively priced good quality hardware first.
Afterwards i hope they get a good nights sleep and have a chance to rest.

If at some point they feel like putting in extra manhours, they can always come up with new (or existing) ideas for more efficient management.

You are aware there is already software to do everything you are saying is a big hassle? How do you think the largest mines do it?
cgminer has an api option that you can use to monitor your workers, you use external software to do so and you will know exactly what and where went wrong.

Don't get me wrong, I am not demanding we change to p2pool or any other solo operation at the moment.
I am simply arguing against your "its really difficult and not worth the effort" argument. In fact for those of us that are tech inclined, its a lot easier than you are aware of.

As for price speculation? Why does it matter? The dividends will be what they will be, all that matters is that we are running as efficient an operation as possible. When the mine is operating at its potential and they are producing hardware as inexpensively as possible, the share price will even out and the market will decide what its worth. There will always be times of volatility, we have bots trying to scalp the price and then you will have people who have to liquidate ASAP for whatever reason.