📈 NastyFans: The Bitcoin Enthusiast Fan Club (est. 2012) - page 126.

shadallion

full member

Activity: 304

Merit: 102

Quote from: miscreanity on November 25, 2013, 08:09:10 PM

Quote from: kuzetsa on November 24, 2013, 06:58:00 AM

No, I think you misunderstood.

Yes, my mistake on that.

Can someone explain in plain English why the dividends (sorry - donatations) seem to be so terribly low? Bitcoin is up 900% and I got about $1 in dividends for my 15 seats.

Am I expecting too much?

miscreanity

legendary

Activity: 1316

Merit: 1005

Quote from: kuzetsa on November 24, 2013, 06:58:00 AM

No, I think you misunderstood.

Yes, my mistake on that.

kuzetsa

sr. member

Activity: 369

Merit: 250

Quote from: miscreanity on November 22, 2013, 07:24:41 PM

Jan 20th target for ASICMINER 3rd-gen hardware: 0.2w/Gh

No, I think you misunderstood.

This is from the thread you linked for reference:

Quote from: jimmothy on November 22, 2013, 07:50:35 PM

Quote from: KS on November 22, 2013, 07:46:29 PM

Quote from: jimmothy on November 22, 2013, 07:39:36 PM

Quote from: KS on November 22, 2013, 07:22:49 PM

Tape Out signals the end of the _design phase_. NOT the same as _manufacturing_ (fabricating/"fabbing"). When you have *all* the requisites for fabbing, you still need to book a run. A rocket run can be as little as 45 days when a regular run is 10-26 weeks.

So no, Tape Out in January doesn't mean "chips in 3 weeks".

edit: and when the chips are done in silicon, you need to cut them up and put them in a package etc. Please lurk MOAR.

We get it. Nobody misunderstood that FC's estimation was not for completed 28nm chips. What we do know is 28nm chips are being developed and this is great news. Just because you can point out every step of the manufacturing process does not take away from the fact that 28nm chips are coming. So you can stop saying that they wont have working 28nm hardware by January because we know this already.

Please re-read the post chains. You seem to have missed the point entirely (which was to underline the fact that Tape Out does not equate "chips now" or "in three weeks"). Whatever else you infer was neither uttered nor implied.

And 28nm is not coming next. Next is 40nm.

I was under the assumption that 40nm was gen2 and 28nm was gen3. Either way next gen chips are coming. Not now. Not january 20th. But they are coming.

Side note: Has anyone figured out how much more efficient next gen are supposed to be? If gen1 were 4.2W/gh and gen3 is 0.2W/gh that would make it around 20 times more efficient.

miscreanity

legendary

Activity: 1316

Merit: 1005

Jan 20th target for ASICMINER 3rd-gen hardware: 0.2w/Gh

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: nonnakip on November 22, 2013, 06:18:03 PM

Quote from: smooth on November 22, 2013, 05:37:54 PM

We're already at the point where reliably spending the distributions involves prohibitive transaction fees. For someone with one seat the latest distribution is 0.00018967. The standard transaction fee is 0.0001 per KB and pulling the output of a transaction into a new one takes about 1/4 a KB. So spending the distributions will cost roughly 12%.

I disagree with this logic and I see this as the reason why dust is considered so evil. It is not. The main problem is bitcoin clients do not handle dust correctly. This is why I modify my bitcoind to handle dust without problems. I have communicated these changes to Bitcoin devs.

Your solution only works when the dust coins are a small part of the value, but you have some bigger coins to spend. If someone is getting their coins by receiving small distributions from Nasty Fans, modest-hashrate pool payouts, etc. their entire wallet will be "dust"

Also, I'm not sure if this is a solution long term. There is an actual cost per KB to miners of including transactions (that is vaguely close to the current fees). Your suggestion increases their actual (average) cost per KB, so fees in that case would probably go up.

Another suggestion. Offer the option to take (small) distributions in a lower-value altcoin.

nonnakip

hero member

Activity: 633

Merit: 591

Quote from: smooth on November 22, 2013, 05:37:54 PM

We're already at the point where reliably spending the distributions involves prohibitive transaction fees. For someone with one seat the latest distribution is 0.00018967. The standard transaction fee is 0.0001 per KB and pulling the output of a transaction into a new one takes about 1/4 a KB. So spending the distributions will cost roughly 12%.

I disagree with this logic and I see this as the reason why dust is considered so evil. It is not. The main problem is bitcoin clients do not handle dust correctly. This is why I modify my bitcoind to handle dust without problems. I have communicated these changes to Bitcoin devs.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: CumpsD on November 22, 2013, 05:50:58 PM

Quote from: smooth on November 22, 2013, 05:37:54 PM

We're already at the point where reliably spending the distributions involves prohibitive transaction fees. For someone with one seat the latest distribution is 0.00018967. The standard transaction fee is 0.0001 per KB and pulling the output of a transaction into a new one takes about 1/4 a KB. So spending the distributions will cost roughly 12%. Of course you can gamble on not including a fee and hope your transaction goes through, but that's not really a solution.

Something needs to be done, maybe just include a check box for people to voluntarily put their seats into probation status?

Doesnt the tx fee lower when it ages?

Essentially no.

A transaction will be processed without fee (given sufficient block space, but that's becoming an issue) if it is "high priority" (and some other conditions, see link below). That requires a 1 BTC transaction that is only a day old or some equivalent combination of size and age. A transaction of 0.00018967 would need to be over 5000 days old to make it. Even then a combination of enough of these (~40) would fail because that would be >10000 bytes.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees

CumpsD

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Quote from: smooth on November 22, 2013, 05:37:54 PM

We're already at the point where reliably spending the distributions involves prohibitive transaction fees. For someone with one seat the latest distribution is 0.00018967. The standard transaction fee is 0.0001 per KB and pulling the output of a transaction into a new one takes about 1/4 a KB. So spending the distributions will cost roughly 12%. Of course you can gamble on not including a fee and hope your transaction goes through, but that's not really a solution.

Something needs to be done, maybe just include a check box for people to voluntarily put their seats into probation status?

Doesnt the tx fee lower when it ages?

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

We're already at the point where reliably spending the distributions involves prohibitive transaction fees. For someone with one seat the latest distribution is 0.00018967. The standard transaction fee is 0.0001 per KB and pulling the output of a transaction into a new one takes about 1/4 a KB. So spending the distributions will cost roughly 12%. Of course you can gamble on not including a fee and hope your transaction goes through, but that's not really a solution.

Something needs to be done, maybe just include a check box for people to voluntarily put their seats into probation status?

nonnakip

hero member

Activity: 633

Merit: 591

Distribution 270968 is complete. nastyfans says thanks for the many donations!

nonnakip

hero member

Activity: 633

Merit: 591

1 poll closed

[member opinion] take over 2 TH/s TerraMiner for 30 BTC
no: 458 (6.3%)
yes: 6770 (93.7%)
abstain: 17772
RESULT: NASTY MINING TAKES OVER 2 TH/S TERRAMINER FOR 30 BTC

nonnakip

hero member

Activity: 633

Merit: 591

Many great feedback!

Quote from: smooth on November 21, 2013, 05:49:54 AM

How about any unpaid distributions (just fully credited, but not yet paid, NOT partial weeks) associated with a seat are added to the sale price.

I would do it different. I would add existing donations to seller payment.

I really like the idea of piggy-backing donations on payments to sellers. This is a clever way of avoiding tx fees. If auction volume was high enough this could eliminate distributions completely. But right now I do not feel comfortable mixing auction transactions and donation distribution transactions.

Quote from: OgNasty on November 21, 2013, 03:05:52 AM

I'd rather see a system in place where the user could set a minimum payout threshold.

My problem with this idea is credited, but no yet paid, donations at seat sales.

Right now the distribution system is very simple. One time each week it uses policy formula to calculate seat price and creates transaction to send donations to seat owners.

Maybe I change it to a system that queues payments at any time and the queue is flushed one time per week. Then I think we could implement many interesting features to reduce tx fees and allow payment flexibility.

pyra-proxy

hero member

Activity: 490

Merit: 500

Quote from: nonnakip on November 21, 2013, 02:54:25 AM

Quote from: smooth on November 20, 2013, 08:31:58 PM

Maybe let people set their own payment schedule? There is already a mechanism to hold the donations for probation accounts. That could be extended to all accounts.

I like this idea. But it must be limited to choice. Maybe 1-week/2-week/4-week/8-week. Batch payments must happen to save tx fees.

Also realize that donation distributions do not care about auction. Who has the seat on the distribution gets all donations for that seat. If you use 8-week donation distribution and sell a seat 1 day before distribution all 8 week donations go to new owner. I will not implement logic so 7.2359 weeks donations go to old owner and 0.7641 weeks donations go to new owner. Such a feature introduces many complexity and corner cases. As example a seat changing owners many times within 1 week or old owners no longer members.

How about in addition to the 1 - 8 week options, have a pay out with next available distribution option, this should help alleviate the 8 week donations going to seat purchaser problem....?

Edit: And/Or an enable seat sell immediately or after the next distribution option when putting seats up for sale

CumpsD

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

The main concern is to keep them batched to avoid tx costs. Whatever system is used.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: nonnakip on November 21, 2013, 02:54:25 AM

Quote from: smooth on November 20, 2013, 08:31:58 PM

Maybe let people set their own payment schedule? There is already a mechanism to hold the donations for probation accounts. That could be extended to all accounts.

I like this idea. But it must be limited to choice. Maybe 1-week/2-week/4-week/8-week. Batch payments must happen to save tx fees.

Also realize that donation distributions do not care about auction. Who has the seat on the distribution gets all donations for that seat. If you use 8-week donation distribution and sell a seat 1 day before distribution all 8 week donations go to new owner. I will not implement logic so 7.2359 weeks donations go to old owner and 0.7641 weeks donations go to new owner. Such a feature introduces many complexity and corner cases. As example a seat changing owners many times within 1 week or old owners no longer members.

How about any unpaid distributions (just fully credited, but not yet paid, NOT partial weeks) associated with a seat are added to the sale price.

Example, you accept an offer to sell a seat for 0.05 but the seat has 0.001 of unpaid distributions from previous weeks. You have to pay 0.501 to buy the seat. The new owner inherits the 0.001 accrual so the net price paid is 0.05.

Quote from: OgNasty on November 21, 2013, 03:05:52 AM

I'd rather see a system in place where the user could set a minimum payout threshold.

Yes that seems simpler.

OgNasty

donator

Activity: 4760

Merit: 4323

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: nonnakip on November 21, 2013, 02:54:25 AM

Quote from: smooth on November 20, 2013, 08:31:58 PM

Maybe let people set their own payment schedule? There is already a mechanism to hold the donations for probation accounts. That could be extended to all accounts.

I like this idea. But it must be limited to choice. Maybe 1-week/2-week/4-week/8-week. Batch payments must happen to save tx fees.

Also realize that donation distributions do not care about auction. Who has the seat on the distribution gets all donations for that seat. If you use 8-week donation distribution and sell a seat 1 day before distribution all 8 week donations go to new owner. I will not implement logic so 7.2359 weeks donations go to old owner and 0.7641 weeks donations go to new owner. Such a feature introduces many complexity and corner cases. As example a seat changing owners many times within 1 week or old owners no longer members.

I'd rather see a system in place where the user could set a minimum payout threshold.

nonnakip

hero member

Activity: 633

Merit: 591

Quote from: smooth on November 20, 2013, 08:31:58 PM

Maybe let people set their own payment schedule? There is already a mechanism to hold the donations for probation accounts. That could be extended to all accounts.

I like this idea. But it must be limited to choice. Maybe 1-week/2-week/4-week/8-week. Batch payments must happen to save tx fees.

Also realize that donation distributions do not care about auction. Who has the seat on the distribution gets all donations for that seat. If you use 8-week donation distribution and sell a seat 1 day before distribution all 8 week donations go to new owner. I will not implement logic so 7.2359 weeks donations go to old owner and 0.7641 weeks donations go to new owner. Such a feature introduces many complexity and corner cases. As example a seat changing owners many times within 1 week or old owners no longer members.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: kroneko on November 20, 2013, 08:29:11 PM

Quote from: plasticAiredale on November 20, 2013, 07:38:17 AM

If we switch to 50 or 75% won't that put the weekly seat distribution pretty close to the dust level (obviously depending on how many seats one owns)? If so maybe we should consider switching to a bi-weekly or more payout schedule.

Good point - if we move to a vote to raise the percentage and it's passed this should go up for a poll vote as well, if anything should save us some on the transaction fees.

Maybe let people set their own payment schedule? There is already a mechanism to hold the donations for probation accounts. That could be extended to all accounts.

kroneko

member

Activity: 140

Merit: 27

Quote from: plasticAiredale on November 20, 2013, 07:38:17 AM

If we switch to 50 or 75% won't that put the weekly seat distribution pretty close to the dust level (obviously depending on how many seats one owns)? If so maybe we should consider switching to a bi-weekly or more payout schedule.

Good point - if we move to a vote to raise the percentage and it's passed this should go up for a poll vote as well, if anything should save us some on the transaction fees.

Carnth

hero member

Activity: 634

Merit: 500

Quote from: nonnakip on November 20, 2013, 04:37:07 AM

This is only opinion poll.

I think a lot of people missed this. It is just an opinion pool. The results of this poll will not change anything. Although it will be a strong indicator of what Nasty Fans is likely to do.

Topic: 📈 NastyFans: The Bitcoin Enthusiast Fan Club (est. 2012) - page 126. (Read 959381 times)