Topic: Starting a new FPGA mining farm/contract! Cognitive Resurrected on[Havelock] - page 91. (Read 300616 times)

That's correct; I will updating shareholders as things progress. Luckily there is not a huge rush to move to another exchange, so we can take our time and do it right.

Best,
Garrett

From what I can tell, Garret is trying to move to a different exchange. We don't know which one for sure.
Until then, it's business as usual on btct.co

No divs paid yet?

can i ask what is happening to congnitive shares held on btct? i don't think i have noticed any updated posted

Was there any decision ever made with our BFL chip credits?  Is there anything we could do with those?

This is a fair point and completely valid criticism of my maths.  I used just one possible value for the network growth rate.  The reason why I am still ok with sinking money into the mining market is because I believe exponential growth is short-term, not long-term.  Whether the network grows 60% a month or 120% a month during the next 6 months, it must eventually level off.  My reasoning follows.

I don't think anyone will produce chips better than 28nm any time soon.  My understanding is the top-of-the-line CPUs are 14nm but to produce chips at that size costs billions of dollars of setup, and is very unlikely until the entire bitcoin economy exceeds a couple trillion dollars at least. (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiconductor_device_fabrication).  Similarly, 22nm only became practical for CPUs this year (according to that wiki page, though I kinda thought they had them in 2011 or 2012).  22nm is also very very expensive still.  For that reason, 28nm is probably the last die size we will see bitcoin asics in for some time.

Now don't get me wrong, there will still probably be "second gen 28nm" chips which are more optimized than the first gen (by spending more time optimizing the layout / gate logic / etc) but the gains are going to be bounded, and we aren't going to see "many orders of magnitude power improvements" like we have in the past.  When Hash per Watt stops growing exponentially, after a short lag, so will the network because people will turn off old hardware, and keep the new gen hardware, and hardware will take longer to pay for itself (but become less likely to be obsolete).  Your device makes 1btc per unit power which costs 1btc to buy.  btc increases in value 10%.  Your device is profitable.  You buy more devices, the diff increases, your device now only makes 0.7btc in the same amount of time, and costs 0.7btc to run - it isn't making profit anymore.  This is the "steady state" the network should eventually reach (probably not at break-even, but at a small profit, whatever profit the market is wiling to bear for running hardware).  Mining companies like COG will make the most profit because of their already-sunk-hardware costs, their economy of scale, and (related) lower power costs.

I would like to hear alternate opinions, especially with the reasoning behind them - I am a computer engineer but I do not have expertise in markets or financial stuffs.  But it seems to me like when network goes linear (or flat) and the steady state I have described above is achieved, the value of cog will be in the hardware they own (that is new enough to continue to turn a profit), and the steps Garr is taking now are going to secure that value.

http://mining.thegenesisblock.com/

I'm not sure what you mean by that?

Will it GenesisBlock?

I will have updates regarding all of this within the next few weeks. Thankfully, we have a good amount of time to figure things out before moving forward.

--Garrett

That is key. We are certainly moving in the right direction. And I hope this leads to many more expansions in the future, via both CoinTerra and others. There is honor involved here on CT's end of things. I am confident they will do the right thing.

So we just gave them a 10 month loan interest free?  I hope we got one heck of a deal.  On the surface it doesn't look like they have any reason to want to deliver on time.  I would have suggested that if they do not deliver by January 31st, they should include all (or most) lost mining profits we would have earned had we received the product by Jan 31st.  That would give us the upper hand.  
Their website states batch 1 units for delivery in December are going to amount to around 2000TH/s.  In January I'm sure they will deploy more units so our order looks like it represents a small fraction of total production.  
This move is positive, and I hope this will be the right move.

Thanks for the update Garret. When will you merge cog1 and cog2? Is there a bonus for current cogf2 holders compared to the upcoming 600 batch? Or will it be cancelled? Do you have an update  of the financial status report?

Terabyte, i would expect a few steeper diff increases. What will happen when 1 or 2 next gen chips become available.. knc, am, bfl.. Look at the steep rampup in the gpu era...

The entirety of the payment was made upfront.

What are the payment terms in the contract with Cointerra?

Hi,

All of these assets will move to the same exchange with the same transition process as Cognitive


Yes, that is certainly a risk we are taking by choosing them. If they choose to take that path, they will lose all reputability and certainly lose a majority of their customer base. I believe we will be getting our hardware in early January

Cheers,
Garrett

More things that are important Things that are more important: security, liquidity, reliability, financial competence, etc. Though the entire US-based thing isn't any good in any case, I'll grant you that.

To rehash some numbers I threw around earlier... The current projected difficulty change (in about 18 hours) is a 33.2% increase.  33.2% increase twice a month (roughly) yields 77% increase per month.  The difficulty will be about 150mil on October 1st.  Between then and Feb 1st, we have 4 months.  Since the diff changes slightly faster than twice a month let's actually call that 10 diff increases instead of 8, at 33.2% per increase.  The diff on Feb 1st is thus projected to be (150mil * (1.332**10)) => 2,637mil.

The equation I am using again is: ((diff_in_millions*1000*1000)*(2**32) / (28.0*1000*1000*1000*1000) / (60*60)) => X hours to find block, divide 24 by X to get blocks per day, mult by 25 to get BTC/day

Assuming 200*20 + 10240 shares => 14420 shares (as the extra 600 contracts have not been released yet, once they have they will roughly cut the numbers in half)

For the first 2 weeks of February, we can expect to make: 5.34 BTC/day => 0.00259 BTC per share each week
For the second 2 weeks of Februrary (diff 3513mil) we can expect to make : 4.008425 BTC/day  => 0.00195 BTC per share each week
For the first 2 weeks of March (diff 4678mil) we expect: 3.01BTC/day => 0.00146 BTC per share per week
For the second 2 weeks of March (diff 6232mil) we expect: 2.259BTC/day => 0.00110BTC per share per week

This means in the first 2 months after we receive the hardware (even if we get it on Jan 31st) we project 0.0208 BTC/share return.  If additional hashing power arrives in the next month or two on the order of 1048TH as Garr implied, cog can capture significant hash share before the craze dies down and people stop buying hardware (due to diminishing returns), If cog is over a petahash when the network growth flips from exponential to linear, it could be a great long-term investment, but even if it isn't it should sustain growth at least until then.

If there is a "full refund" I hope it's in the same currency you paid for it.

This is really good, the only problem I have with it is CoinTerra should have some repercussions for not meeting their obligations after 180 days other than a full refund.  Otherwise it's like a 6 month 0 percent loan.  Hopefully they'll be a class act and deliver as promised.