Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining) - page 640. (Read 1079974 times)

Can someone remind me what LC's plan is in terms of hashing power? I can't find it anymore. What I know is:

1) 3-4 TH/s in September 2013 using the 130nm chips
2) 200-300 TH/s by December 2013 using the 65nm chips

But I also seem to remember that between #1 and #2 there was something. What was the goal in TH/s for the 130nm chips for Oct/Nov?

Actually transferring more BTC's to btct. I'm sure you guys cannot hold for 6 days. Let me put some bid walls. Wait for me before the dumps. Thanks.

In case you haven't heard yet, LC plan on having 200-300 TH/s worth of 65 nm chips this year.

Thanks,  I need to read up more obviously... 

"f there is any truth in my assertion the question, I suppose, is for how long can LC maintain enough of the global hashing rate to justify it's existence, if at all?"

They are also developing new chip sizes

Everything written below is on page 3 of this thread and makes for interesting reading.

I understand it to mean that Labcoin have chosen to use older technology because they can get it to market quicker and take advantage of the lower difficulty in terms of mining.

That makes sense but I've got a niggle.  Surely this is a short term strategy and an admitance that the intention is to take as much bitcoin as possible in as short a space of time until the 'next gen' miners take over.

If there is any truth in my assertion the question, I suppose, is for how long can LC maintain enough of the global hashing rate to justify it's existence, if at all?

And what is this about 'locked shares' - Are they saying, "we won't sell our shares, but we are allowed to sell 25% of them"?

Perhaps the 'locked share' issue ties in nicely with the perceived short term smash & grab ideology.

I am trying to do my 'due diligence'  before deciding to buy or not.  Right now, I feel I'd need some pretty good answers to my points as well as a clearer line of communication with the folks up top before thinking about jumping in.

Daytrade now.. When clock ends, go for long term
When clock ends they start hashing..

Is this a good long term investment or is it just for short term profit, suitable for flippers and day traders?

I am not skilled enough to day trade so I would need a good long term prospect if I am to sell up my ActM shares.

What is the clock all about?  Isn't that asking for a big fail??

how about 24 hours timezone buffer..
how about 24 hours mining before dividend can be calculated

Labcoin should really schedule when they're going to do these things.  Earnings reports and calls on wallstreet are scheduled in advance for a reason.

10th September @ what time and in which time zone??

There is really no point for having a clock here as all it will do is create anxiety for no benefit.

It was the 10th that clock is wrong

I tend to agree. Can only judge them on their previous actions.

No and if there was Labcoin would miss it anyway.

Was there actually an announcement that narrowed it right down to the second? The time on the countdown will be something like 4am in China.

It's possible.  I think I'd better deposit some more btc in order to snap up those cheap shares

My prediction is the clock runs out... everyone panics.. the swede buys up cheap shares.. then comes out with news.

 

Almost Comming close now!

Timer removed. End time: 2013-09-12+18:00:00UTC

And just to note: While I did give a basic prediction - that both ActM and Labcoin are way undervalued (which stuartuk should actually like) - if you read closely you can see that I was not giving specific price guidance.

Rather I was explaining the mathematical formula you would use if you had p.d.f (as in, probability density function, not a portable document format file) for various possible future hashrates (both for labcoin and the overall network)

I specifically said I was giving a simplified example, with a very simple PDF (only three possibilities, a total scam or failure with 0% of the network, and two non-scam possibility where they get either 1 or 5% of the network, and if they are valued the same way ASICMiner is)

The thing to understand is that I was giving the math. Anyone can take that math and plug in their own estimates for the likelihood of various possible network percentages and their likelihood of it being a scam.

And here's the thing about math.  Math is universal, it's the same for everyone.  Math is not an opinion and it's either wrong or right. I gave multiple examples, including ones where the stock is actually over-valued, as well as examples where the expected prices is exactly what it currently is. (Because, unlike SHA-256, these are not one-way functions, and you can reverse them )

If the math is wrong, then anyone should be able to point out the error and it will be obvious to all. Including me.  Just point out the error.

If you disagree with the estimates I've entered, that's totally fine. As I said at no point did I say that I was sure those values were right, those are just simple examples. And I gave examples for what I thought were reasonable good and bad scenarios, as well as examples where the price was overvalued, or valued exactly correctly.

I wasn't trying to say my oppinoin was correct, or where the stock was headed, I was simply trying to illustrate how people could figure it out on their own, using simple grade-school arithmetic (using a discretized versions of formulas that would involve multiple integrals over topological surfaces in vector spaces in the 'full' continuous versions )

I don't have a problem if people don't trust my estimates -- because they're not even estimates. They're just examples of formulas that anyone can use on their own with their own assumptions to see what the price should be.

If people want to ignore that because of my views about "chartological voodoo" they are certainly free to do so.

And anyway, I think both Labcoin and ActM are undervalued so I don't really see why ActM fanboys would even have a problem with it...


First of all, whenever I place an order, I place for 0.0001 less then whatever order is about the same size as mine.  I don't pay too much attention to orders in the 10, 20 shares.  We're talking about $1 or $2 there. At that point, who cares?

Second of all, there are definitely bots in play.  I've noticed you can get a bot to push up it's price until it reaches a threshold where it will just pull it's order. I think the way they work is that the owner will enter a 'maximum' price they're willing to pay, and the bot will adjust the price until it hits that max price, so that they can buy for as low as possible.

In some cases I'll push a bot's price up to it's max, then fill it's order, just to fuck with the owner

I've thought about writing a bot-fucking-with bot but as I said, the volume on these markets is so low there's just not much point in putting in the effort - you just won't make much money.

In my case, the bids are mostly too small for me to bother worrying about. If someone is going to buy or sell enough for me to have my order filled, they'll eat through the bot's bid fairly quickly.

(And if you think this is unfair - remember it's not poker.  In the "real world" probably the vast majority of trades are executed by "High-frequency trading" or "Blackbox" systems - basically bots coded by the banks, and collocated right next at the exchanges in order to execute trades as quickly as possible)