When people start switching of S4's & S5's cause power & diff are to high to make a profit we are in a little trouble (Not really - but anyway)
Unless someone makes something more efficient than current market offerings of 0.4 to 0.5w we should start seeing miners start switching off making the diff go backwards..
Its not gong to happen overnight but if ur a fan of
https://bitcoinwisdom.com/
&
https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/difficulty
U'll notice that the diff has never been over 50b or about 350,000,000 gh
This seems to be the cut off point for current mining hardware...
Hey Smit237 whats happening with the S4 firmware.... Are we going to be able to get it to run at 0.4w when underclocked??
Topic: How quickly do we really mine 1, or 6 blocks? (Read 2389 times)
Everything looks fine till this part:
If miners start to unplug hardware and the block finding rate falls then some of this pressure will also reduce because fewer coins will be being mined each day.
There's only 1 scenario where block finding will fall, (correct me if im wrong)
High hashrate -> lots of miners disconnect -> waiting for the difficulty adjustment -> blocks stop being found as fast -> difficulty adjusted -> blocks are more likely to be found with the current hashrate.
Thus this is going to give a 10 minute average per block as we want, this means that the hasrate upward or downward does not matter in the long rune because the difficulty adjustment will settle in to have a steady rate of blocks being found per 10 minutes.
If miners start to unplug hardware and the block finding rate falls then some of this pressure will also reduce because fewer coins will be being mined each day.
There's only 1 scenario where block finding will fall, (correct me if im wrong)
High hashrate -> lots of miners disconnect -> waiting for the difficulty adjustment -> blocks stop being found as fast -> difficulty adjusted -> blocks are more likely to be found with the current hashrate.
Thus this is going to give a 10 minute average per block as we want, this means that the hasrate upward or downward does not matter in the long rune because the difficulty adjustment will settle in to have a steady rate of blocks being found per 10 minutes.
Miners will typically not all shut down at the same time so this will be somewhat gradual, probably over a number of difficulty windows. It's true that the difficulty retargeting will try to get things back to 10 minutes but if the hash rate is higher at the start of the difficulty period and steadily reduces then the retargeting algorithm will leave the difficulty too high still and we'll still see longer pauses between blocks.
Right now is that the network is still slowly expanding so we've not really seen any of these effects come into play.
along with the reduced number of bitcoin that in mine, is still profitable if bitcoin mine own?
I intend to mine bitcoin but I still hesitate because given the amount of bitcoin can be reduced.
approximately how much longer bitcoin discharged in mine and whether the impact on the price of bitcoin? getting even or vice versa?
I intend to mine bitcoin but I still hesitate because given the amount of bitcoin can be reduced.
approximately how much longer bitcoin discharged in mine and whether the impact on the price of bitcoin? getting even or vice versa?
Nice but there is a typo:
Final Thoughts
The Bitcoin design is suprisingly well adjusted for a network in which hash rates are expanding. Given that technologies continually improve then that's probably the right bias as a normal schedule of replacing older, less power efficient, hardware with newer, more power efficient models will tend to see global hash rates increase.
On the surface it looks like it works much less well when we see steady constraction of the global hash rate, but such contractions are much less likely. In general miners will remove their least power effiicient hardware from the network rather than their most efficient, so if the BTC price reduces the impact on the hash rate is significantly dampened.
There is another interesting aspect to the reduced block finding rate. One of the theories about the recent decline in the BTC price is that a lot of the downward pressure comes from miners selling newly-mined coins. If miners start to unplug hardware and the block finding rate falls then some of this pressure will also reduce because fewer coins will be being mined each day. Whether this actually happens or not may be an interesting indicator of what might happen when the block reward halves in 2016.
Final Thoughts
The Bitcoin design is suprisingly well adjusted for a network in which hash rates are expanding. Given that technologies continually improve then that's probably the right bias as a normal schedule of replacing older, less power efficient, hardware with newer, more power efficient models will tend to see global hash rates increase.
On the surface it looks like it works much less well when we see steady constraction of the global hash rate, but such contractions are much less likely. In general miners will remove their least power effiicient hardware from the network rather than their most efficient, so if the BTC price reduces the impact on the hash rate is significantly dampened.
There is another interesting aspect to the reduced block finding rate. One of the theories about the recent decline in the BTC price is that a lot of the downward pressure comes from miners selling newly-mined coins. If miners start to unplug hardware and the block finding rate falls then some of this pressure will also reduce because fewer coins will be being mined each day. Whether this actually happens or not may be an interesting indicator of what might happen when the block reward halves in 2016.
Everything looks fine till this part:
If miners start to unplug hardware and the block finding rate falls then some of this pressure will also reduce because fewer coins will be being mined each day.
There's only 1 scenario where block finding will fall, (correct me if im wrong)
High hashrate -> lots of miners disconnect -> waiting for the difficulty adjustment -> blocks stop being found as fast -> difficulty adjusted -> blocks are more likely to be found with the current hashrate.
Thus this is going to give a 10 minute average per block as we want, this means that the hasrate upward or downward does not matter in the long rune because the difficulty adjustment will settle in to have a steady rate of blocks being found per 10 minutes.
Nice but there is a typo:
Final Thoughts
The Bitcoin design is suprisingly well adjusted for a network in which hash rates are expanding. Given that technologies continually improve then that's probably the right bias as a normal schedule of replacing older, less power efficient, hardware with newer, more power efficient models will tend to see global hash rates increase.
On the surface it looks like it works much less well when we see steady constraction of the global hash rate, but such contractions are much less likely. In general miners will remove their least power effiicient hardware from the network rather than their most efficient, so if the BTC price reduces the impact on the hash rate is significantly dampened.
There is another interesting aspect to the reduced block finding rate. One of the theories about the recent decline in the BTC price is that a lot of the downward pressure comes from miners selling newly-mined coins. If miners start to unplug hardware and the block finding rate falls then some of this pressure will also reduce because fewer coins will be being mined each day. Whether this actually happens or not may be an interesting indicator of what might happen when the block reward halves in 2016.
Final Thoughts
The Bitcoin design is suprisingly well adjusted for a network in which hash rates are expanding. Given that technologies continually improve then that's probably the right bias as a normal schedule of replacing older, less power efficient, hardware with newer, more power efficient models will tend to see global hash rates increase.
On the surface it looks like it works much less well when we see steady constraction of the global hash rate, but such contractions are much less likely. In general miners will remove their least power effiicient hardware from the network rather than their most efficient, so if the BTC price reduces the impact on the hash rate is significantly dampened.
There is another interesting aspect to the reduced block finding rate. One of the theories about the recent decline in the BTC price is that a lot of the downward pressure comes from miners selling newly-mined coins. If miners start to unplug hardware and the block finding rate falls then some of this pressure will also reduce because fewer coins will be being mined each day. Whether this actually happens or not may be an interesting indicator of what might happen when the block reward halves in 2016.
Thanks! Now fixed
Nice but there is a typo:
Final Thoughts
The Bitcoin design is suprisingly well adjusted for a network in which hash rates are expanding. Given that technologies continually improve then that's probably the right bias as a normal schedule of replacing older, less power efficient, hardware with newer, more power efficient models will tend to see global hash rates increase.
On the surface it looks like it works much less well when we see steady constraction of the global hash rate, but such contractions are much less likely. In general miners will remove their least power effiicient hardware from the network rather than their most efficient, so if the BTC price reduces the impact on the hash rate is significantly dampened.
There is another interesting aspect to the reduced block finding rate. One of the theories about the recent decline in the BTC price is that a lot of the downward pressure comes from miners selling newly-mined coins. If miners start to unplug hardware and the block finding rate falls then some of this pressure will also reduce because fewer coins will be being mined each day. Whether this actually happens or not may be an interesting indicator of what might happen when the block reward halves in 2016.
Final Thoughts
The Bitcoin design is suprisingly well adjusted for a network in which hash rates are expanding. Given that technologies continually improve then that's probably the right bias as a normal schedule of replacing older, less power efficient, hardware with newer, more power efficient models will tend to see global hash rates increase.
On the surface it looks like it works much less well when we see steady constraction of the global hash rate, but such contractions are much less likely. In general miners will remove their least power effiicient hardware from the network rather than their most efficient, so if the BTC price reduces the impact on the hash rate is significantly dampened.
There is another interesting aspect to the reduced block finding rate. One of the theories about the recent decline in the BTC price is that a lot of the downward pressure comes from miners selling newly-mined coins. If miners start to unplug hardware and the block finding rate falls then some of this pressure will also reduce because fewer coins will be being mined each day. Whether this actually happens or not may be an interesting indicator of what might happen when the block reward halves in 2016.
Continuing my theme of looking at mining-related statistics, I decided to look at the probabilities associated with finding a single block, or the 6 blocks used by many SPV clients, when the network is expanding or contracting.
The details (along with the usual link to the simulator code) are at: http://hashingit.com/analysis/41-waiting-for-blocks
The details (along with the usual link to the simulator code) are at: http://hashingit.com/analysis/41-waiting-for-blocks
Jump to: