Our blog has a longer post on the subject, but the ultimate answer is that GPU mining is very insecure. For the vast majority of GPU mined coins out there (including Sia), it is the case that there are multiple, if not many, individuals who operate enough GPUs to execute a 51% attack against the coin all by themselves. There are some very large Ethereum GPU farms out there, and they are a threat to all small GPU-mined coins. (our market cap is a factor of 50 smaller than Ethereum - we are a small coin). And it's not just Ethereum farms to be afraid of, there are massive GPU farms dedicated to machine learning as well, and other big-data related use cases. All of those are potential sources for a 51% attack. Even worse, if the price of the coin tanks following such an attack, the attacker has nothing to lose, because the core purpose of their hardware is unrelated to Sia, and unaffected by a change in price. Though it sounds terrible and unintuitive, a single centralized entity running ASICs would be a much more secure situation than this. Because with a single central ASIC entity, you get two huge advantages:
There's only 1 entity capable of performing a 51% attack. This is much better than having multiple entities that are each individually capable of performing a 51% attack.
If the price of the coin falls, the entity that has all of the hardware loses a lot of money. That hardware isn't good for anything besides Sia mining, so that entity is quite invested in propping up the siacoin price.
We chose ASICs over GPUs because even the worst case scenario is more secure and better for the coin than the situation with GPU mining. But we also did not want a single entity owning and operating all of the ASICs. That's when we realized, if we were ASIC manufacturers ourselves, we could guarantee that at least one entity is selling chips to the larger community. The unfortunate fact is that either way, there is going to be a small number of chip manufacturers who have the power to sell chips to the community. Even so, this is a better situation than what you get with GPU mining. We are making ASICs so that we can guarantee the first batch of ASICs will make it to the Sia community. Without that, we have no idea if the first batch of ASICs will be sold to the public or hoarded by some greedy investors who were able to pay the full price of manufacturing up-front.
Why are you doing the presale so early?
We, put simply, don't have enough cash even to do the early development of the chips. We need financing to pay for chip development. Traditionally, we would find some private investors, have them front some millions, and in return promise them a very good deal on some hardware. The private investors would get the first stab at buying ASICs, they'd get a huge chunk, and they'd get them at an exclusive deal for taking on the risk early. We actually had private investors come forward offering this to us, with enough money to fund the full development and manufacture of the first batch of chips - this isn't a hypothetical, it's a real offer that the Sia team received. This didn't seem fair to us. When we finally did get to the point where the miners were ready to be sold to the community, we would have to offer the community a worse deal. Less risky, but ultimately it would mean that the community was excluded from the opportunity of participating early, and the result is a huge chunk of the chips going to some private investors. Such a situation is still better than GPU mining, but it didn't seem like the best that we could do. We felt that we could do better by opening the early presale to everyone.
Why not accept credit cards?
Payment processors are not friendly to Bitcoin products. We contacted Stripe and were told point-blank that they would not process payments for cryptocurrency miners. We appreciate everyone who pointed us towards Stripe as a bitcoin-friendly company, but they gave us a direct no. Paypal has a long history of freezing merchant accounts with little warning, and when they do so they freeze your existing money in addition to freezing incoming payments - we would be unable to pay our bills if Paypal did this to us, and it would unquestionably cause delays. Visa and MasterCard are not much better in terms of track record. Losing access to our accounts would unquestionably cause delays. ASIC hardware is already well known to suffer from serious delays, and we need to limit our exposure to delays. We are in an industry that is unfortunately fraught with fraud. With revenue-generated devices such as miners, criminals are much more likely to try to target these devices as a way to cash in on stolen credit cards, stolen identities, hacked bank accounts, etc. The fraud rates are staggering, and as a result most payment processors outright refuse to deal with it. We are aware that Bitmain is partnered with Paypal, though we don't know the details behind how that came to be.
Why not accept Siacoin?
This was a harder decision. We could quite easily choose to accept siacoin, however we fear that Siacoin is not ready to handle such a massive presale. The market cap and daily volume of Bitcoin is a factor of 100 times as large as the Siacoin market cap and volume. Moving millions or tens of millions of dollars through Bitcoin is not likely to make much of a dent. Siacoin on the other hand, a sudden sell order for millions of dollars would likely tank the price. That not only means the ecosystem is unhappy with us, it also means that we might only be able to sell $2499 of siacoin for $2200. A lot of people have accused us of not having confidence in our own coin. Unfortunately, this is true. Even at a $500 million market cap, Sia is not ready to handle a presale of this size. It's a pragmatic decision based on the fact that we don't want to dump our own coin. We know that people will be selling siacoin to buy the miners anyway, but we still feel that this situation is much better than us accepting siacoin directly. This decision was a disappointment for us as well. We would love to accept siacoin, and if we weren't talking about processing millions of dollars in a single day, we absolutely would be accepting siacoin. And, as Sia continues growing up, the concerns above will become less and less.
What about this 5% gains/losses stuff?
Our intention was never to play fishy financial games with our users, and honestly this isn't even something that crossed our minds as a potential problem point. I think a big part of the issue was that people did not realize we will be converting to US dollars as fast as possible - we will be doing the conversion in minutes or hours as long as we can keep up with the order volume. The rationale is very simple. If the price plummets before we are able to convert the Bitcoin, we won't have enough money to create the hardware. We really don't expect this to matter, because we don't expect the price to swing by more than $100 (which is what would be required) in the few hours that we're going to be sitting on the BTC. If it does, we'll need more coins or we can't produce the hardware - our costs are in dollars, which means we need to end up with the right amount of dollars in our account at the end of the day. The original stance on not returning gains was also very simple. There's no transparency into when we sell the coins. If we sell the coins within 60 minutes of receiving them, and then 4 hours later there's a huge surge in the price, we will almost certainly have users emailing us and posting about how we owe them a refund. We won't have that refund, because we'll have sold the coins before the price rise. There's not much we can do to provide transparency into this either. And we're likely to get requests for refunds even if it takes 3 months for Bitcoin to rise by 5%. This promise of returning gains that we've put forward is going to be a massive headache, because we're not expecting to have any gains, even if the price goes up by that much we'll have likely converted to USD faster than that. Our whole goal is to convert to USD as fast as possible. We're sorry that we have to go through this headache at all. If we could get set up with a processor like Stripe, we could accept both Bitcoin and USD and let them deal with the conversion process, slippage risk, and all the other headache associated with using multiple currencies.
Why shipping a full 12 months away?
Before we set out to make Sia miners, we did a study of companies who had previously sold and pre-sold Bitcoin miners. This included talking to both Avalon and Butterfly Labs, and talking to professionals and advisors who have shipped hardware successfully in other industries. The core piece of advice we got was pretty consistent: expect delays. Expect lots of delays, and expect them to come from the most absurd setbacks. (Example: one of the people we talked to had to delay their product because there was a global shortage of power supplies, and they had to wait in line behind billion dollar companies to get some). Our projections indicate that if all goes well, we should be able to ship the miners in 6-8 months. Nothing we are doing is new. Plenty of companies have gone through the process of developing a chip, manufacturing it, putting it in a box, and then shipping it to users. There is almost no innovation risk here. Sia's PoW algorithm is deliberately very ASIC friendly, even more than Bitcoin. We have advisors who have gone through this process before, and the types of challenges facing us are well known. 6-8 months is reasonable, except that every single person we've talked to has told us that unexpected delays is a guarantee, and that by nature of being unexpected, there's not really any way to prevent them by planning around them. Delays are just inherent to shipping hardware. So we chose to set our target at 12 months. We will ship the miners as soon as they are ready. If we are a few months ahead of schedule, and have somehow managed to avoid the foretold delays, we will ship them months ahead of schedule. But we want our users to have a realistic understanding of the expected delays. We've baked a generous amount of time for setbacks into our shipping date. We'll almost certainly need at least some of it.
Making chips is very expensive. We have to sell thousands of units to cover the cost of the chips. A nontrivial percentage of the price is going to go towards chassis, shipping, power supply, control board, fans, etc. Those costs are relatively the same even if we put in fewer chips, which means the total percentage of our budget going towards chips drops significantly. If we cut the price in half, we'll have to sell roughly three times as many units to break even on the cost of the chips. If we cut the price in half again, we'd need to sell a completely unreasonable number of units to break even on the cost of the chips. It's unfortunate, but the fixed costs of chip manufacture means that we really need vast majority of the price of the unit to be spent on chips, otherwise we simply won't be able to sell enough units. There is a second reason as well. As stated in the section above, the industry is plagued by delays an unexpected expenses. We need a healthy budget to plan around potential setbacks, because we've been guaranteed that there will be multiple significant setbacks by those who have gone through this process before. If we bring down the price of the unit, we will also be reducing the amount of wiggle room we have for disaster if suddenly we have to replace parts, re-do designs, or otherwise perform expensive adjustments to our plans.
Are you guys qualified to be working on hardware?
Zach is a mechanical engineer, I've been in the Bitcoin space since before ASICs started shipping, and we have advisors who have successfully shipped hardware before. The team that is designing the chips for the miner has designed chips and shipped chips for Bitcoin miners previously - they are familiar with the whole process, and have done it before. The people in charge of designing the PCB board and other aspects of the miner are also all experienced with their respective tasks. We will be facilitating frequent and strong communications between everyone working on the various components of the miner. The ultimate answer is that the Sia development team is not qualified to be making this type of hardware. However, the Sia development team is not the team working on the hardware. Most of the heavy lifting is being performed by teams with lots of experience in this industry, including experience that is directly related to cryptocurrency miners. What we are doing is not new. Dozens of cryptocurrency miners have been created and shipped in the past, and we are not starting from day zero. We have many advantages over the previous rounds of pre-sale cryptocurrency miners, but the biggest is that it's no longer the wild west of hardware design. There is a standard, and there are tried-and-true methods for making reliable cryptocurrency miners. We get to fall back on the mistakes and successes of the many miners that have been built previously, and we will be leaning heavily on teams and people that have direct experience in this field as opposed to doing everything ourselves.
Does this mean that Sia is getting less attention from the developers?
Sia right now has four full time employees. Myself, Zach, Luke, and Johnathan. Zach was hired in June 2017, less than one month ago. He is not a programmer. Luke and Johnathan will continue with the same responsibilities that they've always had. They helped out a little bit in setting up the website, and in setting up a secure database to process orders + payment information, however the majority of their time has been focused on Sia even as we set up this presale. Going forward, they will be almost entirely uninvolved in Obelisk. I have had to allocate about 25% of my time to Obelisk. Slightly more this week, due to the PR meltdown we had from the initial announcement. But most of my time is still going towards Sia. Most people know I work over 100 hours per week (some weeks will eclipse 120), and that a quarter of my time is not a small amount. Zach is closer to 50% Sia, 50% Obelisk at this point. We're expecting that to tone down once the presale is over - much of this time has been spent with banks, with lawyers, with payment processors, and we won't have to do that beyond the initial setup phase. Zach and myself will still be having weekly conversations with every part of the Obelisk supply chain, including the chip designers, chip manufacturers, control board designers, the miner assembly teams, and the fulfillment centers, so even after the presale there will be effort going towards Obelisk. But nobody on the Sia team is doing chip design, nobody is doing control board design, most of the really heavy work is being done by experienced teams and suppliers that we've found and already spent weeks vetting and verifying. We incorporated Obelisk as a separate company precisely so that Obelisk would eventually have a completely separate team. And finally, as Obelisk is wholly owned by Nebulous, a successful hardware company does mean revenue and income for the Sia team. Cryptocurrency mining tends to be low margin, so tens of millions in revenue for Obelisk does not necessarily millions in funding for the Sia team. But it is something, and it will give us more time to get the storage platform to the next levels of maturity.
I know that a lot of you are concerned about the miner presale that we are conducting. I hope that this post has helped to alleviate those concerns. I hope it makes sense why we are doing a public presale, instead of seeking private investment until we have a full prototype. I hope this post has clarified our decisions around payment methods, and around our price point. I hope you feel more confident that this is something we will be able to pull off. And finally, I hope I've reassured you guys that Sia is still our primary focus, and that we haven't suddenly pivoted into being a hardware company. We are ultimately doing this to provide better security to the Sia network. GPU mined coins are frighteningly insecure, and Sia is now large enough where there is serious money on the line. We are doing this to gain security, and also to ensure as much decentralization as possible when it comes to chip manufacture. We are typically viewed as one of the most reputable teams in cryptocurrency, and I know it's why a lot of you are here. We hope that the Sia ASIC that we are going to be manufacturing and selling strengthens this reputation, but ultimately we will not find out until the miners are actually being shipped. We continue to be excited about this new product. We truly do feel that ASICs are the right direction for Sia, and we also feel that we are doing the right thing by bringing the opportunity to own a Sia ASIC to the broader Sia community. We are sorry for the fallout from our sloppy original announcement, and we hope that we have since made up for it. Finally, we hope that you are interested in buying a miner. Even if we only sell a small batch, ASICs are going to utterly dominate the hashrate of Sia going forward. This is an egalitarian sale where everyone has equal opportunity to buy a miner - there's no cap, and we will ensure that small buyers are not shut out by larger buyers in any way.
Note: Since the traffic on this sub is fairly low, I'm not going to focus on this constantly. Will check back in regularly, so my answers will be a bit delayed, sorry! There are certain confidential pieces of data related to IRE that I won't share, but generally I can be pretty open. Since most people will have no idea who I am, I'm sharing a bio below. Don't feel compelled to read it if you don't wish! I'm Matt Mihály, and I've been professionally building MUDs and MMORPGs for 20 years. I discovered MUDs for myself in 1991 while at Cornell University (for political science). I remember being in a computer lab full of NeXT computers and seeing your standard neckbeardy guy staring intently at text scrolling by on a screen. I asked a friend what he was doing, and the friend said it was a game. My friend showed me how to connect to a MUD, and while I don't remember what MUD it was, I distinctly remember that there was a parrot in the room, and it flew out of the room to the south. I typed 'south' and I moved south, and there was the parrot! Mind blown. It sounds so basic and silly now, but I really was blown away that I could just use the internet (which I only used for email and usenet previously) to play these games that other people were playing and interact with them in real life. I started Iron Realms in 1995 by learning to code while building what became Achaea, which was released to the public in a laughably broken state in September, 1997. Since then we've released Aetolia (2001), Imperian (2003), Lusternia (2004), and Midkemia Online (late 2009), which is our only game based on licensed intellectual property. Insofar as I'm known at all in the games industry, it's for pioneering the free-to-play, virtual goods model on Achaea (it was subsequently used by Korean game companies before catching on in the West, but I'm fairly sure they came up with it separately - I seriously doubt an at-the-time-small American text MUD was on their radar). In 2000, I got to be "Senior Consultant to the Secretary-General" of a UN-sponsored conference - the World Summit of Young Entrepreneurs. We built a custom MUD for it to allow participants from low-tech parts of the world who couldn't afford to travel to NYC to be involved. In 2003, I co-edited Dr. Richard Bartle's (co-inventor of MUDs) book "Designing Virtual Worlds", and soon thereafter I started running annual roundtables on the virtual goods business model at the Game Developer's Conference (the biggest game dev conference in the world, as compared to a publisher focused event like E3 or Chinajoy or whatnot) with Daniel James - one of the cofounders of the MUD Avalon, though he long ago washed his hands of it and was running Three Rings, maker of Puzzle Pirates and eventually sold to Sega. They were really popular and it was always funny (and satisfying, frankly) to me that devs from the biggest online games in the world were there listening to a guy who runs MUDs. We stopped doing those in 2015 though, as it had become a little too repetitive for us. I also founded/ran Sparkplay Media, a company I spun off from Iron Realms in 2007, raised about $8m for, and built platform tech for 3d streaming MMOs, and then built Earth Eternal - a 3d MMORPG - on top of it. Mistakes were made though, and investor interest in MMOs cratered when it became clear that WoW was an extreme outlier and other MMOs wouldn't do nearly as well in the Western market. It was impossible for us to raise more money and we weren't even close to profitable yet, so we sold the whole lot to an Asian subsidiary of Time-Warner in 2010 (I had spent a lot of time in Japan, Korea, and China talking to companies about licensing our game and/or tech platform). I took a couple years off, got married to my long-time girlfriend, and generally recovered from what had been a very stressful few years where I didn't do much other than work. Right after getting back from our honeymoon in 2012, I dove back into Iron Realms and have been happily devoting most of my time to it ever since, barring a short stint as COO of a Bitcoin company in 2014. MUDs are my roots, and I've found I'm just happiest when working on them. It's sad that the audience for MUDs isn't what it once was, but we work hard day in and day out, full-time plus, to keep our MUDs not just alive, but thriving, and we've never been better at it than we are now. My biggest headache currently is our inability to find repeatable, scalable ways to attract some volume of new players. Anyone who runs a MUD in 2016 understands this headache all-too-well I'd imagine. On a personal level, I've got three adorable little rescue mutts - Nixon, Chairman Mao, and the just-recently adopted Frank Sinatra. I love traveling, a number of outdoor activities (skiing, surfing, mountain biking, scuba diving), I'm into photography (www.flickr.com/photos/mattmihaly), and obviously I play games. I also discovered Burning Man and went for the first time right after selling Sparkplay in 2010, and have been going annually/am somewhat obsessed since then. I run Burn.Life as a hobby site, for instance. Anyway, sorry for the wall of text, but...you know...text. I loves it. AMA!
Given this is the largest set of answers we've had from Josh in a while, and it's quite hard to parse the Shoutbox archive - here it is in its full glory: (edits for formatting) BFL_Josh: Well guys, I had planned on updating everyone with a video of a board hashing here in KC tonight, but I haven't been able to get that together yet, so I'm probably going to have to push it off until tomorrow. We are targeting a start of shipment next week, but I'm not quite ready to commit to that at the moment, given our past estimates. It's imminent, though. Lab_Rat: It hashes???? BFL_Josh: Yes, it hashes BFL_Josh: I just don't have the firmware here in KC yet. enkidu99: nice josh. does this mean you're able to get the next batch of wafers inbound as well? BFL_Josh: I have to check on specifically where they are in the process, I've been primarily focused on the current batch. Chip Geek: We need a few in the hands of customers before April 1 for the bitbet wager... BFL_Josh: I know Chip Geek, I'm going to try to ship out a unit ,at least one, before APril first if it's at all possible. BFL_Josh: Imma pull an Avalon all the way, it's a proven method! Brian Harris: since the existing batch has been pushed back does that mean the subsequent batches will be moved forward? BFL_Josh: Yes Barrett: will there be any increase in the hash/rate as an bonus... BFL_Josh: Probably not Chip Geek: Still within the +/- 10% of the advertised spec though right? BFL_Josh: I'm not sure. We may miss our power targets, that's been part of hte hold up... we think there's a problem with the power consumption and we're trying to figure out where it's having an issue. However, in the interests of time, we are going to be shipping what we have and going back and fixing while we are shipping, just so people can have their units. People are welcome to wait for the revised boards that should help out with the power issue if they want to delay their shipments... (heh, riiiight). BFL_Josh: The power is still far less than any other unit, so it's not like it's something crazy or anything, but it's not 1w/GH and we're trying to locate the source of the power drain. It may require a revision of the substrate and/or the PCB. BFL_Josh: Haha it's WAYYY less than 620 watts even at it's worst. BFL_Josh: What's causing even more consternation is the fact that the wafer we burned for tests runs at far less power than a second wafer we mounted on the BGA package... so it may be a wafer by wafer thing, and sicne we only have two datapoints, it's hard to nail down the issue. We're rolling the other 4 wafers off the line shortly (they may be done already I think) - and that wil at least give us an idea of the power consumption between wafers with 6 data points. Buck’O: if we don't care about the power suck can we just go ahead and get ours ahead of those who do care? :) BFL_Josh: Yes enkidu99: josh would you consider swapping these units for "power optimized units" if we took them as is for now, at a later date (even for some fee)? BFL_Josh: I don't know for sure, but probably. Bogart: You guys didn;t already begin packaging the rest of the wafers? BFL_Josh: the rest of the 6 wafers, we have been holding off on the last 5 layers for the rest of the chips to be sure we don't need to make a tweak in the metal layer due to the power issue. I think we've pretty much settled that hte power issue is NOT in the chip, but somewhere in the substrate or PCB (or if it were in the chip, it's not something that's easily and quickly fixed). MrTeal: LOL... ANy chance you can ship out the first 5 units before the 1st, just for fun? BFL_Josh: I'm going to try, not guarantees though. I would love to see that bet won, believe me. Brian Harris: If you're just riffing about dates, to get orders through the middle of februrary filled, is it going to be like a 1 month gap from the initial batch? BFL_Josh: it'll probably be more like two weeks. Barrett: WILL the single still go 60gh// but with more power and heat..???? BFL_Josh: Depends on the power draw, it may be that the power draw is too high for the board and we need to scale the hashrate back. If that's the case, we'll send multiple units to cover the hashrate difference for orders. Lyke: Do all the devices have the power issues or just specific ones? BFL_Josh: All devices, Lyke... they all use the same board and substrate. 0x3d: So how overclockable will these devices be then? BFL_Josh: Well, that's a good question 0x3d: if we have to scale the hashrate back due to power, the chips themselves may end up more overclockable, but I honestly don't know at this point. Steve Honaker: @Josh if shipping could start next week when is our advance notice to send in our FPGA's? BFL_Josh: Steve: I should know more on that tomorrow [29 Mar] SgtSpike: What's the current power usage? BFL_Josh: We are trying to nail it down. We have some boards at 1.76w, some at 2.5 and some at 4 and one at 6 <- although I think the ones at 4 and 6 have either a broken power regulator and/or a bad power brick, because they power brick is only 120w and it's drawing like 195 watts which is ridiculous. When I get hte firmware here in KC, I'll be running it off of an ATX PSU to eliminate the power brick as the culprit. So you see, this is why the power issue is causing some difficulties. BFL_Josh: Yes, I'm aware that Bitcointalk trolls will have a field day with everything I've just said. Heh. Even a broken power regulator and a bad power brick is still better than an Avalon, but in all honesty, at this point with bitcoin prices at 90 bucks a coin, I'm thinking no one is going to care at hte moment they just want to hash. Which is why we'll be shipping and then improving as we go. b1nary1sfun: well that's all we can ask for....but how many will ship, still the 1/3 plan? BFL_Josh: Yeah, probably... although the 1/3 plan is just dumb in this current climate, but ti's what we've committed to. Bogart: The cooling and the power supply stuff and the traces and everything else will need to handle the extra power. BFL_Josh: If the cooling becomes an issue, like I said, we'd scale it back and ship multiple units. polrpaul: summarize the update for us, please BFL_Josh: Dude seriously, chill out. I'm giving you what I can as far as information goes right now. We are not hashing with anyones units and we will ship as soon as we have product. smracer: So you will get 2 30Gh machines for each 60? BFL_Josh: If need be, yes. X: josh honestly when did you think we will start seeing some units leave the factory? BFL_Josh: I'm really thinking next week, but I will not commit to that until I have some more information. polrpaul: is hte test rig sorted? BFL_Josh: Yes, the test rig is sorted. smith88: I hope you guys get the bug ironed out and do not have to ship multiples. You'll get it; a year from now everybody will look back and see history in the making. BFL_Josh: We will ship whatever we have to to get people hashing at their expected GH. Lab_Rat: well then worst case scenario for a single would be 360W??? BFL_Josh: No, worst case is 195w, but the power systems on the board aren't rated to handle that really I don't think, so we'd back off the hashrate before we'd let it get that high. Lab_Rat: ok thank you. they can handle up to what 120W? BFL_Josh: Yeah I think 120w is a nice comfortable number. It can probably got a bit higher than that, but 195w is probably not where we want to be. onryo: Wont a x4 unit blow the power unit? BFL_Josh: Yeah, so we'd have to back off the hashrate on a per unit basis if that were the case. BFL_Josh: We'd do like 2x 30GH/s singles in stead of 1 60 GH/s one BFL_Josh: We will ship the purchased hashrate regardless of what it ends up costing us. MrTeal: @BFL_Josh, do the LIttle Singles have all of the power supply circuitry populated, and could they run at 30GH/s even if the Big Single can't run at 60GH/s? BFL_Josh: Yes HTL2001: I think he means, if you ordered a big single they might do 2x little singles since the power limit is per board, not per chip BFL_Josh: [HTL2001 is] correct SysRun: Asking again, what are the remaining steps? BFL_Josh: Just mounting, assembly and shipping. smracer: So people that ordered a minirig will get 2 minirigs at half the hashrate? BFL_Josh: yes Crystallas: Are you able to share how many orders are currently committed? BFL_Josh: No, sorry. kaega: Did you say and estimate on the production line output? 100/day? etc? BFL_Josh: I estimate around 400 a day on average in the beginning just to clear back orders. X: josh do we have any idea of if we will reach sept or aus orders in this batch BFL_Josh: In the first 5 wafers? No, I doubt it. jjiimm64: Josh, will the paired down units still have all the chips in them? BFL_Josh: Yes they will kaega: thanks for the reply. How long to get caught up (estimated)? By June? I placed additional order 3 weeks ago or so. BFL_Josh: I should have a better idea on that in the next few days. Barrett Griner IV: Will BFL work through Easter weekend.....to get units out... BFL_Josh: Yes, if need be onryo:if you guys could make a rig in the 10k USD range a lot more people might be intested.... BFL_Josh: I agree 100%. I have been floating that for awhile, but we've been so focused on otehr thigns, we haven't gotten down that road yet. oldbushie: so... 300 whats a day? boards? chips? shipments? BFL_Josh: 400 completed units a day Barrett Griner IV: So at this point the 8 Chip single will now be 2x 4 chip singles....will that continue....or til the bug is fixed... Ivan Frimmel: BUG? BFL_Josh: There is no bug BFL_Josh: Sorry I don't have the video guys, I really wanted to float that tonight. Lyke: would have been great to see video - Guess we'll see tomorrow? BFL_Josh: Yeah, tomorrow should be good I hope! SysRun: Josh, every time you use the word 'should' you are now required to put a bitcent in the 'should' jar. BFL_Josh: Not a bad idea
BFL lied to customers, I may as well share how they flat out lied to us as well
might as well post these emails since shit's hitting the fan
Hi [killhamster], Thanks for your patience. It looks like the site issues are mostly fixed. My name is Jeff Scott and I bought Buttcoin.org because I believe there is space for an Onion type parody site in the Bitcoin world. But let me be clear - I like Bitcoin. I believe in it. I also know many of the companies who operate in Bitcoin. Some of the owners of these companies are friends of mine. And thankfully, many of them have a sense of humor and understand parody. In order for Buttcoin.org to survive, it needs to generate revenue. In order to generate revenue, you need to attract advertising from the people who are making money in Bitcoin. My job is to sell this "parody" business model to them and convince them that we can do our parody in a way that will make fun of them and Bitcoin but won't hurt their businesses. If we can walk that fine line, we can generate revenue and still remain cutting edge and humorous. While I don't necessarily agree with whitewashing bad news, I think stories can be told in a way to take digs at companies and products without harming their reputation too much. The article about Butterfly Labs at the top of your popular stories is a good example. Do you know how much money Butterfly Labs has made in this industry? It's quite a bit. And they advertise a lot. That customer alone would pay for our expense (and more) per month. But they would never advertise with us in the current state. The bottom line is this - Buttcoin.org will not be forum troll bait any more. Bitcoin is bigger than Bitcointalk and Reddit. We're in new territory. If we want to capture revenue, we need to build this site into something new. We have to change the way we write stories. One of the first things we need to do is clean up some of these older articles. The Butterfly Labs article is an example because it's a top story. I took a stab at making the post positive for now until we can figure out our "new voice." I need to start attracting advertisers. I would like you to rewrite the Butterfly Labs stories so they are not forum troll slams, but parody. Here's an example of a headline that would take a dig at the company and Bitcoin but maybe give them a little boost. Current headline: The Butterfly Labs Mini-rig is a huge broken unstable piece of shit. (it has been proven that while you might not get rich with one, the product is not that bad) Possible new headline: Butterfly Labs Mini-rigs Mine Detroit Out Of Bankruptcy. "The Detriot city council finally took delivery of 2 Mini-rigs from Butterfly Labs..." This is just an example I thought off the top of my head. It takes a dig at Bitcoin, the fact that the Mini-rig will not make anyone rich, but at the same time doesn't offend a possible advertiser. So, this is the direction I want to go. There is a place and budget for a writer who can help make this happen. If you think it's you, please let me know and we can work on moving forward. If you cannot accept this new direction, we will have to part ways right now. Thanks
A second, clarifying email
I don't necessarily want to tone down the site. I just want advertisers. I understand your feelings about Butterfly Labs. I know the industry quite well. Avalon had issues, KnC had boards explode in the wild and I don't see any articles nailing them for shipping less than perfect products. Every single hardware manufacturer has missed their target dates for delivery. It's not just BFL. BFL did just ship out 45,000 bitcoin miners which is a pretty big task for a company that started 2 years ago and I know they are replacing units that are not functioning. But this is not the point. They pay another site (I know the owner) $1000 a month to run banners. I can make a deal with them overnight. This doesn't mean I am tying myself to them. It means I am taking their money. I'm not sure how much [FCKGW] was paying you to write, but I think he mentioned a % of revenue and adsense couldn't be making that much. Let's make fun of Bitcoin and Bitcoin Mining, but try to stay brand neutral. Let me know if you're interested.
after we caught them saying the BFL minirig is a big sexy mining machine
The BFL stuff is temporary. I want to rewrite them later. If you want to change the author on them for now that's fine. I'll do that. I'm working on a deal for ad space with them. It's an olive branch. Sorry slammed today. Will answer the rest soon. Thanks
after these it was mostly me saying "hey the site is down check it out" and him saying "OK"
Tera Hash Rate is going to explode. What happens afterwards?
Bought myself a 5GH/s BFL miner. Not expecting to see it until June. Numbers like this make me fear even wanting to connect that device to my PC when I get it... Will it even be worth mining without a Mini Rig SC or Avalon at that point? " In the next few months, Bitcoin network hashpower will only continue to increase. Avalon’s three shipments altogether will make up a total of 1500 units, or over 75 TH/s, and ASICMiner is planning 50 TH/s by the end of April, and 200 TH/s soon after. By the end of the year, ASICMiner’s friedcat writes on Bitcointalk, ASICMiner’s total hashpower may be as high as 1000 TH/s, and friedcat even adds that “some may say that 1,000TH/s at the end of this year is too conservative.” " Link to article hosting this quote: http://bitcoinmagazine.com/bitcoin-developer-receives-first-butterfly-labs-asic/
Indian Blockchain and Crypto Startups Are Moving to Regulatory Friendly Countri
India’s blockchain ecosystem — which includes developers, services providers, and other cryptocurrency-related companies — are increasingly moving to countries with more friendly jurisdictions like Singapore, Switzerland, Japan, and, in particular, Estonia. https://preview.redd.it/nkwa53r2ztw01.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=b41c3107285efb4865a751658ad3a70bf8d201d9 Crypto Startups Moving Away From India The migration has been triggered by various moves made by the Indian government over the past several months, which have dampened enthusiasm for the country amongst many in the space. Some are comparing the move to the ‘brain drain’ in the dotcom boom that saw the transplant of topnotch tech professionals to countries with better opportunities. “We are having talented people and companies from the blockchain space move out of India. There are enough countries out there who realize the importance and want to take a lead in the blockchain ecosystem,” said Joel John, an analyst at U.K.-based Outlier Ventures who spoke with Factor Daily. Estonia in particular seems to be a favorite among those migrating from India thanks to its crypto and tech-friendly regulatory environment. It easy to register and set up businesses in the country, initial coin offerings (ICOs) and cryptocurrency investments are not heavily regulated, and the country’s blockchain-friendly regime supports mass adoption of the technology. “We had decided to go the ICO way and for that, the current Indian regulatory setup makes it difficult,” says Abhinav Arora, chief marketing officer at Enkidu, a decentralized collaboration platform being built in Bengaluru. Its parent company Avalon Labs is registered in Singapore. Enkidu is looking to register in Estonia. “We also thought of Japan but that did not make financial sense to us because of the [taxation] cost involved in liquidating our Ether holdings. We even briefly considered Cayman as an option but Estonia was best suited for our projects especially with the ICO plan.” Estonia’s E-Residency Program Estonia has in fact been attempting to draw crypto and tech-related startups from across the globe for several years now. In 2014 it launched its e-residency program, which made it easy to register a company in the country. On top of that, Estonian representatives have been holding sessions in India to attract entrepreneurs there, with a goal of registering 200 Indian startups in the near future. Another Indian company looking to Estonia is Indium, an Ethereum-based blockchain network with a focus on utility apps and public goods, founded by Nilesh Trivedi, a blockchain developer from Bengaluru. “Crypto and blockchain are only one of the reasons for registering in Estonia. Being registered there will also allow me to offer other services and conduct business in the EU. Also the tax regime there is good,” says Trivedi. “To apply for e-residency, I had to give them a scanned copy of my passport, photograph, and very basic details. Now, one month later, my ID has arrived at the embassy,” he says. Not only is the process user-friendly, but the government also has service providers that can help officially set up a business, open a bank account, and even keep a company’s books. The residency ‘will just cost me 100 Euros for three years and I can renew it again after that,’ Trivedi says. Source
What do you do when all those you interact with in your business are suddenly made out of your bounds? You search desperately for a place where transactions with your ecosystem are permitted. That is precisely what actors in India’s blockchain ecosystem — developers, services providers, and other companies — are doing by moving bag and baggage to crypto-friendly destinations or at least seriously considering the option. The migration has been triggered by various moves of the Indian government to ring-fence all things cryptocurrency in the country as a result of which fledgling blockchain players here are looking for more friendly places. Some even compare it to the brain drain in the dotcom boom that lead to a virtual exodus of topnotch tech professionals to countries with better opportunities. “We are having talented people and companies from the blockchain space move out of India. There are enough countries out there who realise the importance and want to take a lead in the blockchain ecosystem,” says Joel John, an analyst at UK-based Outlier Ventures. https://preview.redd.it/h7glgwkzemw01.jpg?width=1920&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=21ef8ec427ec6a89c99e8d48204d16fa8b95656c This comes on top of a trend where startups and companies from India anyway find jurisdictions such as Singapore and Ireland attractive for tax, startup funding, and other reasons. “Companies moving abroad is not a new trend but the regulatory complexities faced by blockchain companies have accelerated it,” says John. “They can easily fly down to a Malta, Singapore or a Cayman Island, set up the company and start working on their product. You rather lead a technology wave than play catch up.” The product, he added, may still be developed in India even if the company is registered abroad. The path for ICO projects There are a few blockchain destinations that are attracting the Indians — each with its own pluses and minuses. Singapore, Estonia, the UK, Switzerland, and Japan are some names that come up in blockchain communities but among them, Estonia seems to be the favourite thanks to the crypto- and tech-friendly regulatory environment there and the ease of doing business. Ask Abhinav Arora, chief marketing officer at Enkidu, a decentralised collaboration platform being built in Bengaluru. Its parent company Avalon Labs is a Singapore-registered entity. “We had decided to go the ICO way and for that, the current Indian regulatory setup makes it difficult,” says Arora. Enkidu is looking to register itself in Estonia. “We also thought of Japan but that did not make financial sense to us because of the (taxation) cost involved in liquidating our Ether holdings. We even briefly considered Cayman as an option but Estonia was best suited for our projects especially with the ICO plan.” ICO, short for initial coin offer, can be thought of as an IPO with minimal regulation and frictionless crowdfunding. A company doing an ICO usually raises money by selling its crypto tokens in exchange for cryptocurrency: BTC or ETH in most cases. But unlike an IPO, an ICO may not entitle the holder to shares or a stake in the issuing company. Instead, the value of the token issued during the ICO increases based on how well the company is doing. “The money from the ICO is for us to fund the development of our product but how do you fund product development when we cannot liquidate the Ether (in India) we raised through the ICO. That was the problem we faced in India,” says Arora. Estonia top Estonia launched its e-residency programme in December 2014 making it easy to register a company. Its representatives have been holding sessions in India to attract entrepreneurs there with a goal of 200 registered Indian startups. In the rush to Estonia are blockchain companies from India. One among them is Indium, an Ethereum-compatible blockchain network with a focus on utility apps and public goods, founded by Nilesh Trivedi, a blockchain developer from Bengaluru. “Crypto and blockchain are only one of the reasons for registering in Estonia. Being registered there will also allow me to offer other services and conduct business in the EU. Also the tax regime there is good,” says Trivedi, who is completing his e-residency process. “I would also ideally like to diversify from India given the way things are moving here in regard to cryptocurrency and the blockchain space. It’s too uncertain,” he says. What also attracted him, Trivedi says, was that travel to Estonia to get his company registered was optional and the taxation regime was favourable. “To apply for e-residency, I had to give them a scanned copy of my passport, photograph, and very basic details. Now, one month later, my ID has arrived at the embassy,” he says. While collecting the ID, a biometric verification will be done. There are service providers to help set up a company, open a bank account, and even keep books. The residency “will just cost me 100 Euros for three years and I can renew it again after that,” says Trivedi. Source
Avalonic Labs - Official Update - 4/7/2014 [x-post from /r/bitstore]
I would first like to apologize for saying that we would release the wallet early. At this current moment in time only a few members of the press and a select few Bitcoin companies have access to the wallet and the store. We are having our security audited by outside professionals and we are also working on adding Blockchain support in addition to Coinbase for our wallet. Please bear with us and ask any questions you might have here. My partner and I will be attending Inside Bitcoin in New York this week and we will be available to show working demos of the store and wallet! We will also be making an appearance in Toronto not to long afterwards! Thank you for your patience, we are only holding back to guarantee that we are extremely secure for launch. We are honest guys who really want to make a difference in the world by making it a little bit more open. We understand that we must earn your trust and that many of you were burnt once or twice before. I will not feed you bullshit responses and I am not here to take your money. It has brought Tyler and I absolute joy to see your reaction and we cannot wait to show you what all else we have in store for you! You didn't think we would reveal everything on the first day did you ;) I will be checking in here while at Inside Bitcoin to answer any questions you may have and if you are at the conference let me know. We can meet up and I'll give you a demo in person. Also many of you have asked about where you should donate, so we provided a Bitcoin address at (www.avalonic.com). While you are there please sign up for early access to the store and wallet! I will try my very best to answer your questions as quickly as possible, if your question is urgent please tweet me at @andrewtdesantis Andrew DeSantis - Founder, Avalonic Labs
So you're sick of just mining on your GPU, and not a fan of the electric bill after a month of mining? There has to be a better option out there than your loud GPU in your gaming computer. There is! Shortly after GPUs became popular for bitcoin mining, enterprising folks started looking at other things they can re-purpose to mine bitcoins more efficiently. Around mid-year 2011, the first devices sprang up that are called FPGAs or Field Programmable Gate Arrays. These are nothing new to the hobbyist community, they've been around for a while for crackers and other security-conscious folks looking at ways to defeat cryptographic locks. Hey! I know something that uses cryptographic calculations to secure its network! BITCOINS! Yep, so some miners developed their own boards and slapped some FPGA chips on them (most commonly the Spartan-6), and wrote specific firmware and "bitstreams" to more efficiently calculate bitcoin hashes. The first generations were sort of slow, but still they had better efficiency than a GPU. Some of the latest generation included the Icarus boards, Cairnsmore, x6500, and ModMiner Quad. In early 2012(i think my timeline is right), Butterfly Labs(BFL) was selling their own FPGA miner that hashed at 800 Mhash/s using 80 watts and only cost US$600 amazing! These grew very popular, but people could see that FPGAs still weren't the most efficient way to hash their shares. BFL then announced that they would be designing their own chips that would be orders of magnitude faster than anything ever seen. These would be the ASICs (or Application Specific Integrated Circuit)everyone is raving about. ASICs are--as the name implies--specifically designed for one thing, and one thing only. Bitcoins. This is all it can do, and can't really be repurposed like an FPGA to other applications. Who wouldn't want a US$150 "Jalapeno" that hashes at 3.5 GIGAhashes/s using only power from a USB port?? Crazy! So summer 2012, BFL says they will ship before Christmas. Various things happen and we now still don't have any confirmed ship dates from BFL. A few other companies have sprouted up, ASICminer which I believe is developing their own chips to mine themselves, but in a responsible way as to not threaten the network with a sudden influx of hashing. bASIC was a fiasco that was developed by the creator of the ModMiner Quad(which is actually a fantastic miner, I own one, and love it.) where he took many preorders, promised lots of people amazing ASIC performance, but in early 2013 the stress of the whole endeavour got to him and he gave up, refunded money(I think it's still being refunded now, or maybe it's been cleared up already.) Avalon is the only company we know has ASIC mining hardware in the wild. It is not certain exactly how many are out there, but they have been confirmed by independent sources. The Avalon units are expensive(75 BTC) and have been in limited production runs (or batches) of a few hundred units that were pre-sold out very quickly. All of this info is gleaned from the Custom Hardware forum over at bitcointalk.org over the past year or so I've been involved in bitcoin. I may have some facts wrong, but this is the gist of the situation and hopefully gives you an insight on the state of the hardware war against bitcoin Thanks for reading!
Hey guys, Not sure if you are aware, but Josh from BFL labs has advised units to begin shipping end of april. (Hopefully) https://forums.butterflylabs.com/announcements/692-bfl-asic-status-3.html There have been further annoucements and talk in the shoutbox regarding this.. information seems to be all over the place. so this is what I know so far: 18/04/13: At this stage they are in the final stage of testing and fine tuning the power consumption ( predictions showed it to be in the range of 1GH/J but its now looking closer to 170MH/J ) This will also likely improve over time but is still miles ahead of Avalon and GPU miners. Minirig is no longer available for purchase as they cannot fit it in the case that it was intended for so after the Single SC is finished they will look into the minirig again, But the minirig is composed of Single SC's that are running on a higher clock due to more optimised cooling. The chips are FINE. The delay is re-engeneering the power system on the boards to handle to extra consumption. IMHO I think they will start the shipping process on end of april, They will start with the Jalapeno's and work their way up. Still no ETA for minirig though.. You may have heard about the tour on reddit http://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1c3hyc/toured_butterflylabs_a_few_hours_ago/ This was confirmed by Josh but he also made a valid point, "Why would we pay staff to stand around watching" Once the shipping process begins they expect to ship 400 units per day. I would say the first week would be 200 units per day average while they sort out all the kinks. But I have high hopes. UPDATE: Photos of Mini-Rig: http://imgur.com/a/Uanjr#0 Please note these may be an older model, But give you a better idea of how a slightly larger PCB will affect the production.. If you have ordered from BFL Labs, Please fill in your details here so we can publicly track how many have been delivered etc. UPDATE 2: Found this on BFL website. BFL will make 400 units/day. 2,000 units/week. 8,000 units/month. That means: ->4 months = 32,000 units ->5 months = 40,000 units ->6 months = 48,000 units UPDATE 3: There are many photos and some misc information on BFL and the ASIC miners below. Forum registration is required for some photos. https://forums.butterflylabs.com/bfl-forum-miscellaneous/1099-orders-shipping-pictures-facility-when-my-stuff-here-why-delays-shipping.html UPDATE 4 (2/5): There is a BFL update email going out now, so check your inbox. Also, Josh has been posting stuff in the last 12 hours, so I'll be sending out some quotes shortly. BFL_Josh on order confirmation: I'd wait awhile before trying. It's not like we're going to cancle your order today. You got 10 days or so... BFL_Josh - Yeah Product server is dying. We are doing this so that we can be sure everyone understands that the power usage is more than we planned. We don't want to get into a situation where we ship something out that someone isn't expecting. BFL_Josh - Product server is overloaded. Wait awhile to confirm your orders. No orders are in imminent danger of being refunded without approval. Clicking accept does not change your place in the order queue. BFL_Sabina - When the website is back up, please log in to the website and proceed with the confirmation process there. Confirmation by email is not accepted. If you check the products page you will see the Single SC is much larger than originally intended and this confirms what I was saying earlier about the larger PCB. Will update when I hear further.. I would say they are staggering the emails as their website is overloaded and I don't have an email personally yet.. however this is all in the last 2 hours.. so we shall just have to wait and see... Check back here for more updates. I will update as soon as it is available. Find the information helpfull? Tips are appreciated :)
This is my understanding of the current state of BitMining, how far off am I? What would you recommend for a new miner with a bit of cash?
I'm newish to bitcoin and mining in general but this is what I've figured out so far, am i close?
CPU mining is basically not worthwhile anymore. Unless you have a ton of computers sitting around idle? Such as a system admin of a school who can run a miner on a large number of computers during non-school hours.
GPU mining is almost one foot out the door. If you have equipment already you might as well use it; but the days of going out and running 4+ GPUs are no longer worth it due to initial costs and power consumption?
FPGA - I haven't been able to dig up much of information, i found one vendor that said they suspended production due to declining demand. I've only seen a few people talk about using them, but it seems like not many people adopted this?
ASIC - this is the current top dog, but there is a very limited supply. Avalon's 3rd batch sold out in ~30min and they cost 75BTC, people have said Avalon isn't going to do a 4th batch.
Butterfly labs has been selling per-orders for ~5-6 months now, and none have shipped? Most people say this is a scam or will never come to market and people will get a refund at best. If they did ever materialize at the specifications stated they would be worth while because of the lower cost and power consumption compared to the Avalon.
If Butterfly labs does ship; or if Avalon does a 4th batch, and either option takes 2-3 months to ship and arrive at the door, would it be too late for new miners to jump on the ASIC bandwagon? I seems like mining is a race to get the newest equipment first and cashing out the initial investment early. Is this a good summary of the current state of bit mining, or am i completely off? I'm looking at getting into mining; however i feel like I'm so far behind the ASIC wagon that if i did get a ASIC system, it would take a long time to break even and "the next best thing" might be out by then? If it makes sense and will have a decent break even point (60-90days) I have about $1800 i can invest in mining from selling some stocks that have been stagnant for a few months. What would you guys suggest?
If there was a slot machine at a casino that promised "99% payout" and when it was audited it was determined it only paid 98%, and the casino had set it like that on purpose, would you consider that a scam? If you were led to believe a new business venture you were going into with a partner had a 20% chance of you making 10x your money, and an 80% chance of losing all your money, and your business partner had a 20% chance of losing all their money and an 80% chance of making 2.5x their money, and it turned out your business partner had knowingly reversed the odds, would you consider that a scam? I believe most people would generally consider all of these scenarios a scam. If a party offering an opportunity knowingly misrepresents the risk and/or reward, they are scamming you. So.. is butterfly labs a "scam"? Even if they ship ASICs in the next few days/weeks/months? I say: Absolutely. Since last June they have been offering this value proposition to potential customers: give us your money now, and within a relatively short time you will receive a device that will pay for itself in two months and continue generating immense returns. They been aggressively pushing (banner ads everywhere, the booth at CES) their investment opportunity (nobody buys an FPGA/ASIC for any reason other than to make money), and they market it as relatively low risk with a relatively high reward. In reality though, it's been a very HIGH risk investment (due to the opportunity cost of tying up your bitcoins for approaching one year), and low reward (due to them not being first to market and the zero-sum game mining is in general). But perhaps they acted in good faith, and simply bit off more than they could chew. I would say that's not very likely. Let's compare them to Avalon. Avalon took a limited number of pre-orders, just enough to get the funding necessary to get the first batch made. He did no real advertising and worked hard to get the machines actually made and started shipping before he accepted preorders for another, slightly larger batch. BFL on the other hand has poured a ton of the money they got from taking unlimited pre-orders into advertising, so that they could get even MORE pre-orders.. estimates are that they've now literally taken tens of thousands of them... tens of millions of dollars worth! When they finally do ship, and I believe they will eventually, those who ordered will find themselves with a machine that uses more electricity than promised, mines fewer coins than promised, started mining coins later than promised, and cost orders of magnitude (due to spending bitcoins when they were ~$10 vs ~$100) more than promised. Scam!
Bitcoin Mining Manufacturer Canaan Acquires Proof of Existence
This is an automatic summary, original reduced by 80%.
Hello /Bitcoin, My brother recently purchased a few things on the internet as pranks: extra-small condoms, a purple dildo, and this: Usb block erupter asic miner not butterfly labs bfl avalon knc miner cointerra What is this? Can someone tell me how to get rid of it? Thanks
I have a few questions regarding bitcoin mining, GPUs, and ASICs. (Reposted from /r/Bitcoin)
Okay, so like a lot of you probably did, I made it to this page about mining. The basic message I took from it is that CPUs << GPUs <<< ASICs. CPUs have been rendered obsolete, GPUs are the current go-to mining hardware, and ASICs are going to dominate the future. However, it's not as simple as it seems. I know a friend who has two top-of-the-line, overclocked AMD graphics cards, running about $450 each. He's made about $300 so far, about $15 per day after the crash. So, he's still very far in the red, with about the best GPU setup you can get. Supposedly, ASICs are orders of magnitude faster than GPUs and use less power; they're the long-term future of bitcoin mining. Google led me to Butterfly Lab's page, and the profitability calculations had me salivating. However, my research revealed that they've been delaying shipping for over half a year, and nobody has actually recieved one yet. If you ordered one now, you'd get it in several months (excluding the almost-certain delays to come). Avalon is another ASIC manufacturer, and they actually ship; however, the going rate for one of their ASICs is about 77 BTC, which is anywhere from $7000-$10000, and they're currently out of stock. On top of this, once ASICs hit the market, the total hashrate will skyrocket, as well as the mining difficulty, and profit will decrease dramatically for everyone involved. I was hoping to buy either a high-end GPU or a low-end ASIC (not spending more than a few hundred dollars) and make a couple hundred dollars of profit after a few months. But now it seems that ASICs are a myth (or hideously expensive), GPUs are very expensive, and all miners are soon going to start seeing diminishing returns. All things considered, it seems that the only way to make a profit mining is to already be mining now, because if you try to pick up some hardware and start now you're never going to make enough money to cover your initial expenses. Is that an accurate analysis or is there still hope for the future of mining? Unless somebody tells me I'm wrong, I'll either try actually buying some bitcoin and hoping for the market to recover or just follow Bitcoin's ups and downs as an outside observer. TL;DR: Was really interested in making a small-scale profit off of mining, did a fair amount of research on it, now my view is "why bother if you don't already have the hardware since you'll never break even." Confirm/deny?
Im Bitcointalk Forum wird über eine größere Avalon Chip Lieferung spekuliert. Falls dies den Tatsachen entspricht, und Butterfly Labs ihre Kunden weiter warten lässt, dann werden eine Menge Vorbesteller eine nicht unerhebliche Summe verlieren. Aber da Butterfly Labs Kunden sowieso hart im nehmen sind, mache ich mir keine Sorge um ihre ... Krater, a new bitcoin mining rig builder, is offering a clone of the Avalon ASIC mining rig. Krater says it has purchased 10,000 Avalon ASIC chips and plans to… Portrait of a Bitcoin miner: How one man made $192K in virtual currency. Bitcoin Posted on November 8, 2018 April 23, 2020 Jack Davidson. For all the attention that Bitcoin receives in the news, the most interesting peculiarity of ... Bitcoin: Keine Millionen-Kapitalspritze für ASIC-Hersteller Avalon Ein Bericht über das Inverstment von 200 Millionen US-Dollar in den auf Bitcoinmining-Hardware spezialisierten Hersteller ... Treffer zu Ihrer Suche nach Butterfly Labs,Avalon,Bitcoin-Mining bei c't Magazin Altogether, Avalon’s first batch is expected to contribute a total of 18 TH/s to the Bitcoin network – about eighty percent of the network’s entire hash power at the time of Avalon’s shipping. The network hash power is expected to ramp up slowly over the coming weeks, giving at least some Avalon customers a small window of opportunity to quickly earn back a significant portion of their ...
Avalon 6 Bitcoin Mining Hardware Setup - Duration: 8:05. Bitcoin Mining 98,081 views. 8:05. How to BitCoin mine using fast ASIC mining hardware - Duration: ... BitCoin For Beginners - POOLS ... Butterfly Labs Bitforce Single Power Usage - Duration: 1:53. Fef0x Recommended for you. 1:53. BTC wallet and mining walkthrough - Duration: 15:00. KatapultBTC ... This video shows overall make quality of CCBMC 110GH/s Avalon Bitcoin Miner and how quient it is running at full capacity. New video every Tuesday! Today we are taking a look at the Gekkoscience NewPac USB miner. We'll check all the hardware you need for setting it up, discuss so... How to setup Avalon 60gh Mini Rig - Duration: 22:54. Eyeboot 9,702 views. 22:54 . Butterfly Labs 5 GH/s ASIC Bitcoin Miner (Jalapeno) Review - Duration: 11:42. andrewesquivel 22,073 views. 11:42 ...