Topic: Is Avalon mining with customer hardware? Answer is here. - page 5. (Read 44401 times)

Quote from: slythytove on June 19, 2013, 04:44:59 PM

The reward should trade places with difficulty so only a set number of coins are produced in the given period.

That's what's currently happening. The difficulty is no about difficulty, it's a ratio of the hashrate and block discovery time (difficulty = hashrate/(2⁴⁸ - 65535)), it ensures you only get x number of coins every 10 mins, re-evaluated every 2016 blocks.

You missed my point - I understand how the difficulty currently works - but if you swapped the 2 around instead of difficulty changing the reward does - end result same number of coins produced but you would still be able to mine solo.

The difficulty is causing the centralisation of the network nothing else.

HOw would you go about block halves? And getting to an end number?

I don't know to be honest - but I do know the difficulty is causing the centralisation of the network and this is the issue.

Centralisation is ... single places mining large hash rates ...
Difficulty is an effect not a cause.

Man you have got that so backwards - why would I join a mining pool if the difficulty was only 1000? The only reason people join mining pools is because they know with the difficulty as high as it is - they may NEVER solve a block solo mining.

The difficulty is the cause of the mining pools and centralization

rovchris

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Twenty-something? I'm flattered, really. Not all software is tested like financial trading systems. From your statements about deployments you've maybe never used puppet or chef -- are you a Windows guy?

I've been on the receiving-end of plenty of unacceptable business practices, most of it extortion by estate agents. Inflation has annoyed me for years, watching the prices march up faster than wages were rising. Negative equity left one family member up the creek and that was upsetting at the time. Hearing about share prices for huge companies double and crash overnight, affecting millions of people's lives, always for the negative, makes me furious.

I'm happy to wait for my chips if there's a chance some of these things could be fixed in the long-term. You invested in four young guys doing something experimental and potentially world-changing. Also, CISCO have awful business practices. You have to pay a huge tithing every year to move up the greasy pole and miss it just one time because you're too busy to do the exam and you're right back down at the bottom. Ain't nobody got time for that!

LOL yes I am a windows guy

I apologise if I seemed demeaning but you are so tolerant

Business does not care about age - you are either professional or not - there is no middle ground.

These guys have not done anything world changing they are just riding off the back of a world changing idea - decentralised currency. They have take two existing technologies and put them in one box. That is all they have done.

The fact is this - the manner in which this technology is being rolled out is causing the real damage. The smaller mining pools are now taking forever to get any kind of payout from because of the massive increase in difficulty due to the chosen few with asics, so they will end up closing down as miners move to somewhere where they can get a payout once a week. The network then becomes more centralised. As the difficulty keeps rapidly increasing mining pools may end up merging to get regular payouts.

The profits being made by people with ASICs at the moment are astronomical so they will reinvest further strengthening their position making it impossible for the little guys to get involved because by the time they are readily available you will need to order 20 units just to keep your head above the water.

The reason this did not happen when people started mining with GPU's is because anyone could buy them next day - this is not the case with ASIC's. I have the money but can I go onto avalon's site and buy one. NO is the answer to that.

Everything about it stinks - it is honestly destroying the entire point of Bitcoins. How can it be called a decentralised currency when it will be a few mining pools and ASICminer.

I am sorry but these guys are damaging bitcoin to satisfy their own personal greed.

itod

legendary

Activity: 1974

Merit: 1077

Honey badger just does not care

Quote from: koob on June 19, 2013, 05:05:30 PM

http://www.asicminercharts.com/

Is there any logical explanation why would ASICMINER reduce it's hashing power so drastically?

Bitcoinorama

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

Yo, looks like you can all chill: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2524247

Matthew N. Wright

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet

Quote from: kano on June 19, 2013, 05:00:48 PM

Quote from: rovchris on June 19, 2013, 02:56:02 PM

Quote from: Schrankwand on June 19, 2013, 02:54:12 PM

Quote from: kano on June 19, 2013, 04:56:02 PM

The reward should trade places with difficulty so only a set number of coins are produced in the given period.

That's what's currently happening. The difficulty is no about difficulty, it's a ratio of the hashrate and block discovery time (difficulty = hashrate/(2⁴⁸ - 65535)), it ensures you only get x number of coins every 10 mins, re-evaluated every 2016 blocks.

You missed my point - I understand how the difficulty currently works - but if you swapped the 2 around instead of difficulty changing the reward does - end result same number of coins produced but you would still be able to mine solo.

The difficulty is causing the centralisation of the network nothing else.

HOw would you go about block halves? And getting to an end number?

I don't know to be honest - but I do know the difficulty is causing the centralisation of the network and this is the issue.

Centralisation is ... single places mining large hash rates ...
Difficulty is an effect not a cause.

I'm sorry, but comments like these seem so defeatist. Are you up for changing bitcoin if we find something that makes it more "fair" and decentralized (invulnerable to a rich group controlling all mining)?

koob

full member

Activity: 204

Merit: 100

Meanwhile, many Avalon customers got their shipping notices ... and the bitcoin network dropped over the last couple of days ...

http://www.asicminercharts.com/

WinTame2012

sr. member

Activity: 315

Merit: 250

Official sponsor of Microsoft Corp.

Quote from: kano on June 19, 2013, 04:56:02 PM

Meanwhile, many Avalon customers got their shipping notices ... and the bitcoin network dropped over the last couple of days ...

I've shut down my GPU farm Undecided

kano

legendary

Activity: 4634

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: rovchris on June 19, 2013, 02:56:02 PM

Quote from: Schrankwand on June 19, 2013, 02:54:12 PM

Quote from: rovchris on June 18, 2013, 09:35:05 PM

The reward should trade places with difficulty so only a set number of coins are produced in the given period.

That's what's currently happening. The difficulty is no about difficulty, it's a ratio of the hashrate and block discovery time (difficulty = hashrate/(2⁴⁸ - 65535)), it ensures you only get x number of coins every 10 mins, re-evaluated every 2016 blocks.

You missed my point - I understand how the difficulty currently works - but if you swapped the 2 around instead of difficulty changing the reward does - end result same number of coins produced but you would still be able to mine solo.

The difficulty is causing the centralisation of the network nothing else.

HOw would you go about block halves? And getting to an end number?

I don't know to be honest - but I do know the difficulty is causing the centralisation of the network and this is the issue.

Centralisation is ... single places mining large hash rates ...
Difficulty is an effect not a cause.

kano

legendary

Activity: 4634

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Meanwhile, many Avalon customers got their shipping notices ... and the bitcoin network dropped over the last couple of days ...

slythytove

newbie

Activity: 12

Merit: 0

Quote from: slythytove on June 18, 2013, 08:54:27 PM

Quote from: rovchris on June 18, 2013, 08:09:08 PM

Quote from: slythytove on June 18, 2013, 07:49:50 PM

Aimed vaguely at a reply I can't find right now:

I know the difficulty is increasing but if they run it for a day and you run it for the rest of its/your life, is it such a biggie? Maybe your break-even gets pushed back a day or two because of that. It's gonna get pushed way further out when all the rest get delivered.

And regarding the various manufacturers collaborating on deliver times, how do you know they haven't?

FD: I have 20 chips on the way. If I get one block reward before the next halving I'll be happy. Maybe it'll find another one one day if I'm still running it and the stars align. If I do I'll probably need it!

It is a biggie to be honest - because they did not pay for them at the end of the day and technically it could be considered theft as it is your property. I have never know any company ever that test their customers products in a live situation - Do Cisco run the switches you have paid for in their Data Centres generating revenue for themselves before handing them over to you under the guise of testing? No of course they do not because they are a respectable organisation.

Unless every test is identical using the same data sets - it can not really be classed as quality controlled test can it? How would you know when you look at the results if there were discrepancies between devices if they had all used different input data - all the output data would be different and no one would be the wiser.

Anyone that has ever undertaken any software testing will tell you this.

They are just blatantly using your fully paid for device to make themselves a quick bit of cash on the side.

So not only have you provided them an interest free loan at no risk to themselves to develop the device they are then delaying shipping under the pretence of testing - when mining especially now with the rapid increases in difficulty is extremely time sensitive and every hour you do not have it - is money you can never make due to the limited number of blocks.

The software can be tested on the test network on one machine once the unit tests and integration tests (such as they may be in this case) are done. Software Developer here

I would imagine that more likely reasons for the burn-in of some or all is to test for heat issues. I see no reason to prefer the test network in this case so why no generate coins? If Yifu wanted to mine so badly he could leave a few in a corner for a month rather than mess about rotating them. I mean, if there's one thing he probably doesn't need any more of it's Bitcoins.

There may be other forces at play as well. There's no standing still in the ASIC space and Yifu will now have a better idea of the details of his next generation chip. If securing that ambition may need funds and those funds can be made from burning in machines then that would be in the interest of the community in the long-term.

CISCO wouldn't have any reason to do something similar and don't even let you read their documentation, never mind support a group-buy of their prize components and release full specs for anyone to build their own. Does Barracuda install backdoors in your security gear? Does Sony distribute rootkits? Reputation takes time and Avalon are only just shipping their first full-scale product.

So I'm happy to cut them some slack for now, especially until I see an order of magnitude jump in hash-rate. I'm sorry you're so angry about it, if you've got a lot on the line it must be stressful.

I am also a software developer with over 15 years commercial experience in financial trading systems and I have never seen a QA test run made with different sets of data - ever.

You can not just test the firmware / software on one device - the entire point of the test is to ensure the software has been correctly deployed to each machine. When software is deployed to a cluster do you only test one node or do you test them all - how would you know all files copied correctly and the configuration is correct?

"Cisco would not have reason to do anything similar" - If Cisco has no reason to do it nor do Avalon, Cisco fully test each device before it leaves to the customer - how else do you gain a reputation as good as theirs? There is more documentation on any Cisco device than there will ever be on any Avalon device as Cisco have an entire department that is dedicated to this.

The burn in excuse is not going to cut it there are numerous ways this could be achieved without creating such an uproar on this forum - It was a very bad decision on their part.

"Reputation takes time" and a great way to get a bad reputation is using your customers equipment to make money.

If he does not need any more BTC why do all this damage by testing on the live network which would then add to the difficulty increase further reducing the amount of money his customers can make. Given there are only a set number of Bitcoins you can NEVER make up that loss.

Honestly it is so unprofessional the mind boggles. The lack of public relations inside Avalon is not encouraging in any shape or form.

I have a feeling you guys are on the younger side early 20's maybe hence the reason you are happy to turn a blind eye, I have been around the block a few times and can categorically tell you it is not acceptable.

I am not angry I am just highlighting unacceptable business practises.

Twenty-something? I'm flattered, really. Not all software is tested like financial trading systems. From your statements about deployments you've maybe never used puppet or chef -- are you a Windows guy?

I've been on the receiving-end of plenty of unacceptable business practices, most of it extortion by estate agents. Inflation has annoyed me for years, watching the prices march up faster than wages were rising. Negative equity left one family member up the creek and that was upsetting at the time. Hearing about share prices for huge companies double and crash overnight, affecting millions of people's lives, always for the negative, makes me furious.

I'm happy to wait for my chips if there's a chance some of these things could be fixed in the long-term. You invested in four young guys doing something experimental and potentially world-changing. Also, CISCO have awful business practices. You have to pay a huge tithing every year to move up the greasy pole and miss it just one time because you're too busy to do the exam and you're right back down at the bottom. Ain't nobody got time for that!

rovchris

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: Schrankwand on June 19, 2013, 02:54:12 PM

The reward should trade places with difficulty so only a set number of coins are produced in the given period.

That's what's currently happening. The difficulty is no about difficulty, it's a ratio of the hashrate and block discovery time (difficulty = hashrate/(2⁴⁸ - 65535)), it ensures you only get x number of coins every 10 mins, re-evaluated every 2016 blocks.

You missed my point - I understand how the difficulty currently works - but if you swapped the 2 around instead of difficulty changing the reward does - end result same number of coins produced but you would still be able to mine solo.

The difficulty is causing the centralisation of the network nothing else.

HOw would you go about block halves? And getting to an end number?

I don't know to be honest - but I do know the difficulty is causing the centralisation of the network and this is the issue.

Schrankwand

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

The reward should trade places with difficulty so only a set number of coins are produced in the given period.

That's what's currently happening. The difficulty is no about difficulty, it's a ratio of the hashrate and block discovery time (difficulty = hashrate/(2⁴⁸ - 65535)), it ensures you only get x number of coins every 10 mins, re-evaluated every 2016 blocks.

You missed my point - I understand how the difficulty currently works - but if you swapped the 2 around instead of difficulty changing the reward does - end result same number of coins produced but you would still be able to mine solo.

The difficulty is causing the centralisation of the network nothing else.

HOw would you go about block halves? And getting to an end number?

rovchris

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: Hippie Tech on June 19, 2013, 11:52:15 AM

The reward should trade places with difficulty so only a set number of coins are produced in the given period.

That's what's currently happening. The difficulty is no about difficulty, it's a ratio of the hashrate and block discovery time (difficulty = hashrate/(2⁴⁸ - 65535)), it ensures you only get x number of coins every 10 mins, re-evaluated every 2016 blocks.

You missed my point - I understand how the difficulty currently works - but if you swapped the 2 around instead of difficulty changing the reward does - end result same number of coins produced but you would still be able to mine solo.

The difficulty is causing the centralisation of the network nothing else.

rovchris

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: rovchris on June 19, 2013, 10:00:48 AM

Quote from: Hippie Tech on June 19, 2013, 09:56:26 AM

Can you spell 500 Ghash ?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=237710.0;topicseen

Are these some of the fpgas the miners were conned into trading away ?

Yes I can Five Hundred Gigahashes. Not really sure what point you are making.

How is the mining going at BTCMine? Enjoying your 10 day stint for 0.1 bitcoins?

umm.. BFL rigs = network hashrate flux

WTF does the pool I'm at have to do with this ? Get a better calculator and stop trying to distract others from the matters at hand.

Regardless my 1.4 ghash earns, I was having a freaking blast, even during this dry spell, thanks to having the peace of mind knowing that ITS AN HONEST 10 DAYS PAY. I say 'was' because these revelations have made the plot to centralize Bitcoin and rip off the miners, BLATANTLEY CLEAR.

For you or ANYONE to justify any company's burnin policy, implies of a conflict of interest. THEY MINED BTC WITH THE MINER'S PRE PAID PROPERTY. THEY, WHO EVER THEY ARE MUST BE HELD TO ACCOUNT.

As a show of solidarity to all those who have be taken advantage of, I'll will be taking the rest of my 2.2 ghash offline, when the current round is completed.

WE ARE THE 75% !! Soon to be 99%. :/

Well you felt the need to act like a tool with your comment of can I spell - you get treated like one.

And to further the matter you have just made yourself look like rather idiotic. You obviously have not read any of my posts as I was the one ARGUING that using customers equipment to mine is unacceptable.

Man don't just steam roller in mouthing off like a cretin without reading the thread. Only one outcome you look dumb.

As someone else pointed out the fluctuation was due to ASICMiner nothing to do with a couple of 500ghs BFL units - as the change was huge but unsurprisingly you did not bother to check that either.

Also using the same username across multiple sites is not clever either as you can be easily identified.

Hippie Tech

legendary

Activity: 1624

Merit: 1001

All cryptos are FIAT digital currency. Do not use.

Quote from: Loredo on June 19, 2013, 10:06:09 AM

Quote from: rovchris on June 19, 2013, 09:36:37 AM

It just shows though they have far to much influence on something that was supposed to be decentralised.

It also indicates why the stepwise linearity of difficulty is a far less important metric when massive swings in network capacity can and do happen, and how the centralized operations can and will game that.

For example, right after a diff. reset, a big operator can bring a chunk of capacity online and jump BpH up to around 8 or more. In fact,the marginal small unit isn't going to contribute in that enhanced bounty, only the centralized power is mathematically positioned to extract that "bonus."

Gaming abounds. With regard to this network drop, though, something happened somewhere, I don't think there's any question, and that goes right to the point you made.

Terracoin and others have been on that ride for weeks and likely months.

KS

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250