Topic: Whats causing the estimated Difficulty jump to 6B? (Read 2100 times)

Thanks for the clarification. Did some more research and you're right about the chart data. Was hoping there was more data available, but the network hash rate is mostly derived from the only metric that is public: Avg. time between blocks mined, which can vary quite a bit on a daily basis. 

They made enough s1 to push 20% of hashrate when it was 30+  Thats alot of antminer s1 lets say 6 to 7 ph. 33k to 38k machines. Batch 1 pre orders shipped  2nd batch this week about 3-5k machines for those two. alone.  And alot extra for the public launch. and building 3xtra ones on the side.

I believe they can ramp up design and manufacture faster than any other company to push out products.

Charts data on blockchain.info is based on number of blocks found, not on the hashrate of the hardware (or pools).
Very lucky period for some big(er) pool, or few of them, can influence charts very much.

I tracked Eligius for few days at end of March: with realtime hashrate reported on stats page Eligius should mine 22 blocks per day, and there were days with 27, 29, 30 blocks.

When such string of lucky days happens on some even bigger pool, we can see that wide fluctuation.

Green line on the chart at https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/difficulty doesn't have any wide fluctuations - that's charted hashrate based on 2016 blocks found - any wide fluctuaction averages out.

I don't think bitmain made that many units in the first two batches.... Would definitely be a surprise to me....

The 5 to 10 PH spike is probably the antminer s2  coming online and finalizing testing.  6000 to 10000 units would not surprise me.

The difficulty increase is a reaction to the network hash rate and since it computes looking back two weeks, it always lags. It is supposed to keep the average time between blocks around 10 minutes, but in all of 2013, it was around 8 minutes, so it is still lagging. When I ran the numbers, it was amazing to see a bi-weekly average of 34% growth for the network hash rate for 2013. 

The conventional wisdom is that at some point the "Law of big numbers" will take hold and we won't see the kind of growth in hash rate we saw in 2013.  I read another poster on another forum make this case and it was also put forward by Emmanuel (CEO of cloudhashing.com) at the https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkBu5_hZgWI Coinsummit conference in San Francisco last week. And the numbers seemed to be slowing down, but in the last 2 days the network hash rate has crossed 50 PetaHashes from a low of 37 PetaHashes which is mind-boggling.

Even though HighBitCoin is in the business of building 1+ PetaHash data center ready systems, it is difficult for us to explain a swing of 5-10 Peta Hashes in such time frame. With the exception of Bitfury which has gone dark, we know all the major ASIC mining hardware companies out there and roughly what the supply side of the equation looks like. 5 PetaHashes of network capacity is a huge data center with over 200 racks of systems and to see that kind of capacity switch on/off seems crazy.

A lot of what I did in my past life was analyze data and provide insights, so this aspect of the network hash rate troubles me. Leaving aside who is behind this increase, a few questions come to mind:

1. Do we trust the data (charts on blockchain.info and other places) and assume this wide fluctuation in network capacity is real?
2. Individual miners wouldn't act in concert to cause this massive increase/decrease in capacity. We are seeing a massive increase even though the price of bitcoin has dropped in the last few days, so I wonder whats behind sudden large increases in 48 hours as opposed to a gradual increase?
3. What is the incentive for even large scale miners to take their capacity offline especially when the price of bitcoin is not going down? (unless it is just before the timed increase of difficulty). There seems to be a weak correlation between hash rate and BTC price


Look forward to theories, speculation or ideas to help understand what's going on...

thanks for reading
Prakash
http://highbitcoin.com

Big time miners will have to keep mining to pay the bills or shutoff ASICs I believe so hash rate won't decrease that much I would imagine :p

If miners behaved in a sane manner, they would stop buying mining hardware until the price of BTC recovered and the hash rate would level out a bit from here since the price of BTC is in the toilet.

I have my doubts that miners will behave in a sane manner, however.

Looks like another 5000TH has been added over the last few days....crazy.

I think since all the ASICS are targeted for around this time delivery, they are "burning"/"premining"/ whatever you like to call it the ASICS. At least that's what I think.

One thing to note is that there are a few multi-million dollar installations coming online, some of which we know about, some of which we don't and probably never will.

Currently the 1th+ miners are being built and "tested" which means the majority of them are still in the manufacturer aka private hands. This is causing the huge hash rate increase and unfortunately does not help us 

Maybe you didnt see the warehouses that KNC has tens of thousands of machines.

BFL is shady.

Antminer farms with 6000-10000 machines.

AND all the other big players out there.  Bitfury, Cointerra, ASM

He's flooding several boards with this 'ruin' post.
Many tried to correct him, but the post remains same. Like some bot.

He's spouting his "22% per month" phrase in other threads too.  Obviously clueless, is my guess.

Pros, schmoes. Antminer S1's are still profitable, the beautiful little bastards.

Where did you get that 22% average increase per month?
Or, did you just mistype "per period" as "per month"?

A string of luck with many pools finding blocks fast can skew the short term stats.

Hahaha, yeah, thanks for that though.  And as someone who watches total hashrate I was just interested to see why the day before retarget and the day after was just an explosion of hashrate.  That gives me some idea as to what happened, but it doesn't look like any consumer side hashpower has been added, which sucks .  Cheers!

But history tells us otherwise. Difficulty can and will go down.