Canaan's new ASIC is a Pipe Dream, not an Ethereum Threat
So, yesterday Kristy-Leigh Minehan posted on Twitter that a company named Canaan announced an ASIC that is capable of 0.68W/Mhs That's 2200Mh/s running at 1500w https://twitter.com/OhGodAGirl/status/1176938519866089473 Here is a list of how it compares to other ASICs and GPUs. https://blog.miningstore.com/blog/ethereum-mining-hardware-for-2019 She used this tweet to promote the need for ProgPoW Today, I am attempting to explain that Canaan is not a threat to centralize Ethereum mining with their ASICs. First, I cannot find any information regarding Canaan announcing an Ethereum ASIC other than Kristy's twitter post There is only one article written about it and it uses Kristy's twitter post as their source. https://cryptoslate.com/ethereum-asic-dominates-gpu-performance/ Nothing on Canaan's website talks about this miner Nor does Canaan's twitter account mention anything like this. If we look closely at Kristy's twitter picture, you can see the Canaan Ethereum miner will be called the V10. I cannot find any info anywhere on this miner. You would think that if Canaan is unveiling a new product, they would be talking about it more to spread awareness and raise hype, but they aren't. I mean, they made a big to-do when they announced the A10 bitcoin miner in March, so why are they posting nothing about the V10 ethereum miner. https://twitter.com/canaanio/status/1111513725733724160 And a google search will show many many more articles written about the bitcoin A10 after its announcement. I'm not saying the announcement isn't real, just that I find it odd that the company isn't talking about it themselves. Canaan did respond to a tweet from “cryptoState”, the writer's of the article based on Kristy's tweet. Canaan replied that the v10 is not an official worldwide Canaan product. https://twitter.com/canaanio/status/1177088253431668736 and further in the cryptostate article, Canaan says “It is a little hard to explain, but those are not products designed and built by Canaan engineering. They are products sold by the domestic sales team and are not an official worldwide Canaan product,” I do not know what that means exactly. If it means it's not an official Canaan product, or that it won't be available worldwide, or what. But this is the first clue to me that it isn't anything to worry about. If it's not an official Canaan product, then it doesn't seem like it will have support from Canaan to bring it to market. It won't be marketed by Canaan, use it's supply chain, it's business resources and contacts, use it's support system, or be built by Canaan. Next, yes 0.68W/Mhs is more efficient than GPUs, but that isn't all that matters when miners choose the devices to use. What matters also is how much the machine costs. If the V10 is price too high, then it's not something to worry about. Without a price, Kristy can't claim in good faith that the V10 is something Ethereum needs to worry about and a reason ProgPoW needs to be adopted. I'm not sure how to price the thing, myself, but at current ETH prices and hashrate, it would make $2200 in 4 months. I think generally ASIC mfgs price their machines to break even in 3-4 months. So that would be the machine will cost around $2200. BUT, that's only if ONE machine is running on the network. The more machines on the network, the less profitable they are. If we look at the Avalon A1066, it's november batch costs $1390, and has a break-even time of 464 months at current bitcoin prices. So it seems to me the Canaan V10 will be quite a bit more expensive than $2200. Which doesn't make it feasible for that many people to buy. Next, there was no product on display at the New Era Mining Summit, where this product was announced. Only some graphics of numbers they claim. Nor can I find any technical documentation talking about how they plan to achieve the advertised hashrate I tweeted Kristy telling her that this seems, at best, like just an idea to me, to help them raise money and that it takes more than an idea to bring an ASIC to market. https://twitter.com/AltcoinXP/status/1177290387205054464 Kristy then blocked me on Twitter and told me to stop spreading misinformation. https://imgur.com/lWEAWbd So, now let's talk about the article I replied to her with, claiming that Canaan doesn't have enough funding for this. Granted, I said this without doing as much research as I could've, but let's see if what I said holds true. Here is the article I linked in the tweet. https://www.coindesk.com/avalon-bitcoin-miner-maker-canaan-is-plotting-another-ipo-attempt Notice the date this article was published. March 27th 2019. Notice that Avalon announce their Bitcoin A10 miner the next day. https://twitter.com/canaanio/status/1111513725733724160 Perhaps to help attract funding from new investors, which the Coindesk article says they haven't been able to bring on any new investors in a long time. I'm not going to cite the whole article here, read it for yourself, but it generally explains that Canaan is unable to attract new funding. Also, Xianfu Lui, a 17.2% shareholder in Canaan left the company in February, so I doubt he invested money into Canaan. https://www.coindesk.com/co-founder-quits-avalon-mining-chip-maker-canaan-over-differences Here are some more Coindesk articles speaking about Canaan trying to raise money. https://www.coindesk.com/huobi-plans-backdoor-ipo-attempt-in-hong-kong-document-suggests “After mining giant Bitmain’s IPO attempt in Hong Kong was allowed to expire, apparently due to reluctance from HKEX, it’s reportedly now planning to list in the U.S. Another miner manufacturer, Canaan Creative, is also reported to have already confidentially filed in the U.S. after a failed HKEX attempt. “ https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-miner-maker-canaan-confidentially-files-for-ipo-in-us-report https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-miner-canaans-ipo-likely-delayed-after-hong-kong-filing-expires “The Reuters report, citing anonymous sources, further said the HKEX and financial regulators in Hong Kong have raised questions over Canaan’s business model, given the volatile nature of cryptocurrencies. As such, the news agency said the IPO might not go ahead this year, since there have been no updates from a listing hearing with the HKEX. “ So seems to be Caanan is having a hard time finding funding for their endeavors. Pretty much every single article on Coindesk about them is about them trying to get funding and failing at it. So do they have enough money to bring the V10 to market AND bring enough V10s to be a problem? They would need to produce 45,000 units to get 50% of the Ethereum mining power. Current network is 197TH/s https://bitinfocharts.com/ethereum/ Currently Bitmain is estimated to have produced less than 20,000 units since the Antminer E3's announcement in April 2018. https://www.reddit.com/ethereum/comments/d8fuvj/an_argument_against_progpow_a_day_part_1/f1axc2c/ https://www.coindesk.com/bitmain-confirms-release-first-ever-ethereum-asic-miners Bitmain being a much larger company than Canaan, it seems unlikely they will produce 45,000 units quick enough to become a problem. Anyway, For those of you that don't know, Canaan manages the Avalon bitcoin ASICs and have done so since 2014. Canaan is fulling in charge of Avalon. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Avalon Maybe I should've said that sooner, I don't know. I'm just typing as I come up with stuff. But we can look at Avalon's bitcoin past to determine what the future ethereum miner supply might look like. Keep in mind though, this was also during a time when they were well-funded. I'm not sure what their bank account looks like now, but they have been in the red every year since their existance, so I have to assume they have less money now than when they were releasing bitcoin miners Avalon announce the A10 March 2019, and started shipping pre-orders in October 2019. If the V10 follows suit, we won't see a V10 in the hands of miners until April 2020 https://www.coindesk.com/demand-for-new-bitcoin-miners-is-again-outstripping-supply Ok, I'm done. That's all I put together and why I don't believe the Canaan ASIC that was announced is a concern warranting the immediate adoption of ProgPoW Thanks for reading.
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.
Powerful New Ethereum Miner Reaches Final Stage Before Mass Production
https://preview.redd.it/ao78avnae4m31.png?width=860&format=png&auto=webp&s=11f62e6227dc7d93e9a6c2c3874782fcd4892b59 News by Coindesk: Wolfie Zhao After a nine-month delay and $3.8 million of investment, an upstart manufacturer is ready to produce its first batch of powerful new machines for mining cryptocurrencies ethereum and ethereum classic. Linzhi, based in Shenzen, China, said Wednesday it had ordered 37 wafers from Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, the main parts that will allow it to build about 200 application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) miners. These sample units will test whether the machines can mine as efficiently as they are designed to do using ethash, the proof-of-work algorithm used on ethereum and ethereum classic. The testing units, if successful, would mark a major step toward mass production as Linzhi sets out to compete with makers of general-purpose computing chips, such as NIVIDA, as well as mining gear specialists Bitmain and InnoSilicon, which both make ASIC miners for the ethash algorithm. Roughly five million ether (ETH), the native cryptocurrency on the ethereum network, is being mined every year, which, at its current price, is worth more than $800 million. Even for ethereum classic, which maintains the original ethereum ledger from before a hard fork in 2016, about nine million native ETC gets mined every year, worth more than $60 million.
Linzhi was founded in February 2018 by Chen Min, a former chip design head at Canaan Creative, maker of the Avalon bitcoin miner. Chen told CoinDesk the new company was completely self-funded with about $4 million as starting capital. It announced the plan to produce ethash ASIC miners in September 2018 with an ambition to beat the efficiency of most existing equipment. Chen’s target specification for Linzhi’s ethash ASIC miner is set at 1400 mega hashes per second (MH/s) with an electricity consumption level of one kilowatt-hour. To put those figures in perspective, NVIDIA’s GTX TitanV 8 card is now one of the most profitable piece of equipment on the ethash algorithm, able to compute 656 MH/s at an energy consumption level of 2.1 kWh, according to mining pool f2pool’s miner profitability index, With ETH’s current price ($180) and network difficulty, as well as an electricity cost of $0.04 per kWh, each GTX TitanV 8 would bring home a daily profit of $7.35. Similarly, if one uses the same GTX TitanV 8 card to mine ETC, which has both a lower price and a lower mining difficulty than ETH, the daily profit would still be around $6.70. The total computing power racing on ethereum and ethereum classic to compete for block rewards and to secure the two networks is around 160 and 13 tera hashes per second (TH/s), respectively.
Since the announcement of its plan, Linzhi has spent almost all of its initial capital on research and development of the chip design, the operations of its dozen-person team, and the order of the first batch of wafers, to bet the sample testing units will deliver the intended mining power. Linzhi previously said it was aiming to order the first batch of wafers around December in order to have samples ready in April and mass production in June. Speaking of the delay, the company said:
“We underestimated the complexity of the chip and how long it would take to grow the team and make the company functional. We are cautiously optimistic that we can just move forward the rest of the schedule, which would mean 12/2019 for sample machines and 02/2020 for mass production.”
One possible risk for the business is that the ethereum community has previously voted to activate the so-called ProgPow algorithm in order to remove the edge maintained by large miners that can afford expensive, specialized chips, although the timing for that switch is not yet decided. (Eventually, ethereum developers want to transition from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake, which would eliminate mining altogether.) When asked if Linzhi has any Plan B if the switch happens, Chen said the company is, in fact, more active in the ETC community, adding:
“Our plan A is to focus on ETC mining. So if ETH will still be an option, that’s something good to have. In the ethereum community, the ProgPow plan still has some uncertainty. For the time being, we don’t see it as a market that we will obtain, so I don’t really care that much.”
In an arguably counterintuitive move, Chen said the company plans to adopt what it calls a “reverse discount” strategy when it starts to take in pre-orders if sample units prove to be successful. That would mean the more you buy, the more you are likely going to pay. The reason is to discourage any single entity from buying too many machines and thus concentrating power over the network. While Linzhi has not yet decided on final pricing for each unit to be sold at pre-orders, it says the goal is to achieve a payback period of four months for individual miners with a relatively small number of orders. “This is our efforts and contribution to the idea of decentralization,” Chen said, concluding:
“Our sales will go to developers and community first, with a focus on geographical distribution, and potentially with a malus [reverse discount] for large orders. This means that small orders by individuals would be priced to hit the 4 month [return of investment] and larger orders would pay more.”
I rarely see this talked about if at all. Most ASICS since the time of ASICMINER have been produced in some capacity by TSMC. Ignoring NRE costs, which ironically isn't very high in comparison to chip production, most connected Chinese miners can get chips directly from fabrication. When Avalon started shipping orders, they also shipped wholesale chips at 10,000 a Batch. Each Avalon chip at the time would generate about 0.4 BTC a month. The procurement cost was about 9 bucks per chip. Given it would cost you about 10-15 bucks to rig a single chip into a miner you were looking at a net ROI of about 20-21 bucks per month with increasing difficulty. More details can be seen here. Now it costs about $8-$10 per gigahash retail, which given the difficulty increase, and the fact the impact of NRE costs should be going down (given this expense is less impactful to revenue with the more chips you sell as it's a fixed cost), anyone buying a retail miner is getting fleeced. I have seen less and less direct chip buys, to the point I'm convinced Bitcoin ASIC production has been cartelized. The Chinese chip producers will effectively push smaller miners out of the market by over pricing hardware sales to the public, while giving their buddies the "at-cost" price. The demise of KNC miner is due to miner cartelization.
TL:DR: Don't bother mining if you want to get rich yo. You're way too late to the party. Welcome to the exciting and often stressful world of bitcoin! You are wondering what looks like a once in a lifetime opportunity to get rich quick. Of course you guys probably heard about this "mining" process but what is this? Simply put, a bitcoin mining machine that performs complicated calculations and when deemed correct by the network, receives a block which contains 25 bitcoins (XBT). This is how bitcoins are generated. So your brain instantly thinks, "Holy shit, how can I get on this gold rush?" Before you proceed further, I would like to explain the concept of mining further. Bitcoin is limited 21m in circulation. It is coded to release a certain number of blocks at a certain time frame, ie: this year the network will release close to 500,000 bitcoins. What this means is that the more people (or specifically the amount of mining power) mine, the less each person gets. The network tries to keep to this time frame through the process of difficulty adjustments which makes the calculations harder and this happens every 2 weeks. So every 2 weeks, you get less bitcoins with the same hash rate (mining power) based on what the difficulty changes are. Recently, the changes have been pretty staggering, jumping 226% in 2 months. You can see the difficulty changes here. Now, why are these changes so large? A bit of a simple history. Bitcoin's algorithm runs on SHA-256. This algorithm can be solved using many hardware, from CPU to GPU and dedicated hardware (Application Specific Integrated Circuits). When bitcoin first started, mining on CPU was a trivial process, you can pretty much earn 50 XBT (the block size then) every few hours between Q1 and Q2 of 2010. In late 2010, due to the difficulty increase that is reducing the effectiveness of CPU mining, people started to harness GPU mining. Only AMD GPU's architecture design are better optimized for bitcoin mining so this is what the community used. Immediate improvements of more than 10x was not uncommon. In time of course, GPUs reached their limit and people started to build dedicated. In the same vein as the CPU to GPU transition, similar performance increase was common. These ASICs can only perform SHA-256 calculation so they can be highly optimized. Their performance mainly depends on the die size of the chips exactly like CPU chips. In general, think of bitcoin mining's technological advancement no different to mining gold. Gold panning (CPUs) vs pickaxes (GPUs) vs machinery (ASICs) and we are still in the ASIC mining race. ASIC mining started with ASICMiner and Avalon being first to the market, both producing 130nm and 110nm chips. The technology are antiquated in comparison to CPUs and GPUs which are now 22nm with 14nm slated for Q1 next year by Intel but they are cheap to manufacture and with performance gains similar to the CPU to GPU transition, they were highly successful and popular for early adopters. At that point in time since there were less competing manufacturers and the low batch runs of their products, miners became really rich due to the slow increase in difficulty. The good days came to an end mid August with an unprecedented 35% increase in difficulty. This is due to existing manufacturers selling more hardware and many other players coming onto the market with better hardware (smaller die). Since die shrinking knowledge and manufacturing process are well known along with a large technological gap (110nm vs 22nm), you get an arms race. Current ASIC makers are closing in on our technological limit and until everyone catches up, the difficulty jumps will be high because it is just too easy to get a performance increase. Most newer products run at 28nm and most chips are not well optimized, so it will be around another 6 to 9 months before we see hit a hard plateau with 22nm or 14nm chips. The estimated time frame is because manufacturing chips at 22nm or 14nm is a more difficult and expensive task. In the meantime most manufacturers will probably settle at 28nm and we will reach a soft plateau in about 3 months. Now, you might ask these questions and should have them answered and if you have not thought about them at all, then you probably should not touch bitcoin until you understand cause you are highly unprepared and probably lose lots of money.
I read that you can mine with a CPU/GPU, should I do so?
No. If you have to ask, please do not touch bitcoin yet. You will spend more on electricity cost than mining any substantial bitcoin. Seriously. At all. A 7990 would produce a pitiful 0.02879 XBT (USD $14 @ $500/XBT exchange rate) for the next 30 days starting 23 Nov 2013 at 35% difficulty increase. And if you think you can mine on your laptop either on a CPU or GPU, you are probably going to melt it before you even get 0.01 XBT.
I get free electricity and I have existing hardware, should I still mine?
Probably not because you probably forgot that GPUs and CPUs produce a ton of heat and noise. You can try but I see no point earning < $20 bucks per month.
Should I buy an ASIC machine?
No, because your machine will probably not mine as much as buying bitcoins. This situation is called the opportunity cost. While you can still make money if XBT rise in value, it is a fallacy.
IE: if you start mining on 1 Dec 2013, a KnC Jupiter running at 450Gh/sec (KnC lies as not all chips run at 550Gh/sec) will yield you a total revenue of 9.5189 XBT with a profit of 0.7859 XBT in profit by 30th Jan 2014 at a constant difficulty increase of 35%. The opportunity cost is: 8.5910 XBT @ USD $580/XBT with USD $5,000 which is the cost of a KnC Jupiter. This is the best you can earn and it's a bloody optimistic assumption because:
You are assuming your pre-order will arrive on time. (I do not think any first batch pre-order from any manufacturer has arrived on time).
All pre-orders are sold out for 1 Dec.
You are assuming your chips will run at 450Gh/sec minimum but many miners here will tell you their chips have been under performing.
Electricity cost have not been taken into account.
Shipping cost and time has not been taking into account.
Import Tax or VAT has not been taken into account.
Risk of downtime due to DOA or warranties has not been taken into account.
You are assuming the difficulty increase will be a constant 35% which is very unlikely because Cointerra with a team that has worked on some of the world’s highest performance CPUs, GPUs and chipsets for NVIDIA, Intel, Samsung, Qualcomm and Nortel has pre-sold an absurd amount of hash rate. Difficulty increase of 45% or more (which we have seen when a small player, KnC shipped their 1st batch) will be repeated commonly. This is only 1 company, imagine what the rest will come out with. I have failed repeatedly and so have many in estimating future hashrate. You wont be able to do better.
Even if you earn some profit, it will be < 15% and will probably be not worth your risk or your trouble. I can buy and hold XBT with no risk of losing them.
The only circumstances where you will earn money is when XBT exchange rates is so high that it makes the opportunity cost pales in comparison. Unfortunately this is not the case. If XBT stabilized at 900/XBT today (20 Nov 2013) then we might have a good case. The risk is just generally not worth it. Unless you have at least a hundred thousand and can make a contract with a manufacturer for a lower cost, do not bother. Just wait until the arms race is over then you can start mining.
I understand I probably won't earn any money, I just want to do this for fun/hobby...
Okay, go buy an AsicMiner USB Block Erupter. They are cheap and pretty fun to have.
I want something with more omph and still do not mind losing money
Sure, just read the answer below on who NOT to go for. You are doing bitcoin a service by securing the network and you have our (the users') gratitude.
Who are the manufacturers?
You can check out the manufacturers and their products below along with a calculator here. If you still insist on buying, do not to go for BFL. Their track record is horrid and borderline scammish. KnC fucked up a lot with defective boards and chips. Personally, I think CoinTerra is the best choice. Alternatively, you can go on the secondary market to buy a delivered product. You can get a better deal there if you know how to do your "return on investment (ROI)" calculation. Personally, I will go for a 45%-50% difficulty increase for the next 3 months for my calculations and a 2% pool fee. However, most products on ebay are sold at a cost much higher than it should. bitcointalk.org is a cheaper place because everyone knows what are the true value is so you will find less options. If you are unclear or need assistance, please post a question.
Which pool should I use?
I actually do not use any of the pools recommended to the left because I think they lack features. My favourite is Bitminter (Variable fees based on features used; max 2%). It has all advanced features for a pool, very responsive and helpful owner on IRC. Variable fees is good for those who do not need a large feature set, even with all features turned on, it is still cheap. Eligius (0% fees) has high value for money but lacks features. It has anonymous mining which might be attractive to certain subset of people but not for others. Many other community member and I disagree highly with the opinions of the owner on the direction of bitcoin. I do use his pool for now but I do so only because I share my miners with a few partners and anonymous mining allows us to monitor the machines without using an account. Bitminter uses only OpenID which is problematic for me. BTC Guild (3% fees) is another big pool and is fully featured and does charge a premium for their fees. That said, they are the most stable of the lot. I do use them but do so only because my hoster uses them for monitoring. I try not to use them because a pool with a very large hash rate (they are the largest) presents a large vulnerability to bitcoin's network if compromised. All of them pay out transaction fees.
Reverse engineering of Avalon ASIC chip. Work in progress
Howdy Bitcoin community, I am an individual located in Europe, who owns several Avalon first batch devices. I'm well versed in the field of electronics and integrated circuit design/analysis. Currently I'm in the process of contacting http://chipworks.com to get an approximate price for the task of fully reverse engineer the inner integrated circuits of Avalon ASIC chip, in order to replicate it. Here's a picture of the board i intend to send to chipworks http://imgur.com/lsO5Mru. I'm just in the initial phase of preparing communication with them thus i don't have yet extimations as for the size of the investment. After reverse engineering is done and set of photomasks are extracted, a batch of test chips will be commissioned to a fab foundry, along with the photomasks . When test chips are delivered tests with will be conducted for several PCB board designs, based on the opensource specifications released by Avalon. I have a substantial amount of funds to invest myself but i'm looking for partnerships to find suitable business partners and build a serious business out of this. The final goal is to mass produce an Avalon chip clone for private use and bring up blade-like devices to the final tune of several hundred Terahashes, a longer term goal is to further apply features miniaturization and design optimizations, to bring up performances, and lower power draw to the current ASIC design. Is there interest in this, or am i the only crazy thinker who wants to go through this steps ? Cheers! and thanks in advance for your responses! EDIT Thanks for your awesome responses! Of course, since i mentioned i'm seeking for partnerships, i feel i need to add that all formal agreement about shares distributions shall be previously discussed, and accepted by the board of eventual investors . Of course, if there are any interested investors, there would be a proper escrow setup for funds collection, perhaps with a trusted forum member who will handle, for a fee, deposits from investors in FIAT/BTC, exchange BTC for FIAT when its needed to pay suppliers, and also handle suppliers payment under escrow. Full financial statements would be released reliably, making this a fully transparent venture. By the way right now, as its clear from my original post, i'm now seeking people with solid skills to build a team, not really focusing on investors right now. But i would appreciate some "chime-in".
Sometime mid next week (Jan 19-21) I should have ~$5,000-6,000 in PayPal. I am looking to buy 5 S1's direct from BitMain. I've got a few questions/concerns however. The biggest concern right now is being able to buy $5,000 of bitcoin, using PayPal. I'm 16, so withdrawing all that money to my student checking account is a no-go. My mom also doesn't want to give PayPal her tax ID, and credit card so she has unlimited withdrawing capabilities. I plan on asking around the Chicago Bitcoin Meetup if anyone there would be able to sell me that much Bitcoin, and for PayPal or something along those lines. After I get the bitcoins, and the S1's delivered, any advice on keeping them cool, and clean? They'll probably go in my basement, and I'm thinking about some kind of horizontal rack, and cooling system. I'd like to overclock them to 208 gh/s. One of my friends has built a LN2 creator before, and was talking to me about possibly doing this for all my BTC miners, so we could further overclock them, increasing profitability. I'd expect some kind of decent ROI with this setup, and yes current profiribility calculators will probably tell you I won't make much, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume Bitcoins will be at, or over $1,000 a pop by SeptembeOctober of 2014. I also plan on using Coinwarz and mine the most profitable coin each day, and sell via cryptsy. I'll also just save some bitcoins for the future. What kind of PSU's should I get for 5 of these bad-boys? Would 2 1050w PSU's and then another 700w one be alright? My friend, who bought an Avalon Asic Batch 2 last year for ~$1,500 made a great ROI, and he is doing the same exact thing I am with this project. Except that he might end up with 10 S1's, while I'll have 5 of them. If anyone has any advice for me, I'd love to hear it. I've been following Bitcoin very heavily sense I first herd about it in 2008 (It was only $2 a pop when I just went on #otc) but this will be my very first mining rig of my own. I've mined of my GPU/CPU using various coins, along with my usb asic, but this will be a large project/rig.
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!
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?
Business Model bASIC-MINING was created to pool resources and to provide investors with an easily accessible path to ASIC mining hardware without a large upfront expenditure. This is not a mining bond with a fixed hashrate that offers a perpetually lower yield over time as difficulty increases. This is instead an opportunity to own a share of ASIC hardware, to have a voice in how that hardware is utilized, and to share in the rewards this hardware provides. 70% of all revenue generated by bASIC-MINING will be distributed to shareholders on a daily basis. To ensure that bASIC-MINING can continue to grow and remain competitive as the BTC network grows, 30% of mining revenue will be held in reserve to purchase new hardware. bASIC-MINING was supposed to utilize bASIC ASICs but that operation folded so they are now utilizing other ASICSs.
ROI: Based on the performance on BTC-TC, the performance are as follows: Dividend Yield Estimates (calculated using 2.78236/Share)
Est Annual %
Est Annual BTC
Latest News Recently received their Avalon Batch 2 ASICs. Share prices jumped froom 0.5 to 1.5BTC. Question: Is this share overpriced?
Future Plans I am not too sure what are the exact future plans. If anyone can fill me in, I will edit this component.
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!
Hypothetical: What happens if Avalon's chips all stopped working at once?
Apparently the Avalon ASIC company has recently sold over 500,000 individual 282MH/s chips ready to be fabricated into various miners. They just sold two more batches of 10,000 chips today. That's 141 Tera Hashes of mining power, or about 3 times the power of the entire Bitcoin network at the moment. Woohoo! Security for all! Now imagine this scenario... We're all chugging along mining bitcoins on our sweet new home-built ASICs. We quadruple the current difficulty. The network is more secure than ever and we couldn't be happier. Right then, somebody notices a chink in the armor. "[email protected]#! My DIY Avalon Board Isn't Responding!!!!!" reads the bitcointalk forum post. By nightfall, there are hundreds of similarly worded posts. Nobody knows what the problem is, and nobody will until a few more days of investigation. All we know is that blocks are taking longer and longer to mine, the value of Bitcoin is plummeting, and that we shouldn't have placed all of our eggs in one basket. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPLnYP9Oo8s
ActiveMiner, the crowdsourced restructuring of AMC(mining) and VMC(sales) just paid 0.00001830/share
Disclosure: I'm invested in ActiveMining... However, I consider myself a straight shooter, and am willing to field any questions people may have on this security. The day I purchased BTC was the day that I considered that money destroyed. Picture of VMC Headquarters Bitcointalk Forum Link BitFunder Price Link BTC-TC Price Link It's been a rough start, but I think that ActiveMining is on the right track now. Below is a list of things I have put together about what has been happening: Previously, investing in ActiveMining - rather AMC beforehand, would have been seen as too high of a risk for most. Right now... I'll let you make that decision. I'll start by giving you a pretty thorough rundown of what the hell has been going on the past year. A little about Kenneth Slaughter (CEO Owner):
He's been into Bitcoin since 2009 and has had a BTCTalk account since 2010. He decided to look back into bitcoin in early 2012 and saw that the price was $6.50. He then started putting resources from a contract IT Job into GPU mining equipment. He then took most of the bitcoins he mined in 2012-2013 and purchased 6 Batch 2 Avalon's in February 2013. Needing to pay back to the first investors, he released a small dividend under AMC from profits on G.ASICMINER-PT dividends and the sales of G.ASICMINER-PT shares. This is where the idea of VMC began. He reasoned that you could not count on other manufactures to deliver their products on time or to even continue producing their product. i.e. BFL, Avalon. So VMC was created to provide AMC with a stable supply of bitcoin mining machines.
The contract was originally written something like this:
40,000,000 shares of AMC issued until they make a total of .0005 in dividends per share. Up to 20,000,000 shares would be sold to investors, the rest would reclaim those dividends into a reinvestment fund to pay for future funding.
After the shares had made .0005 in dividends, 60,000,000 shares would be issued to a total on 100,000,000 shares. Those 60,000,000 shares represent Ownership profits (they would not have made anything on the venture up until this point)
AMC would be making its money from mining (100%) and sales of its own chip through VMC (10%)
crash, bang, boom Ken is an engineer and private businessman. In my opinion he had no experience with the dealings of managing a public company or being an underwriter. Having talked with Ken, I could say that he really wanted to get this company off the ground, but he made a few mistakes:
Moved blocks of IPO shares around to different prices
Became very defensive when confronted.
Contract disagreements with investors.
There are others. The gist is, that everything that he could do wrong, he did. Forgivable? In my mind I thought so and still do. To each his own though. I felt that he really wanted his company to succeed. He would later prove this by making MAJOR concessions for shareholders.
After the price of AMC surged from .0005 then to .0008, back down to .0005, then back up to .0008 then to .0014, then to .004, then back to .0025, Ken valuated the company at a higher value than .0025 but decided that it was reasonable to place a second offering of 4 million shares at .0025 to pay for an NRE for AMC's own chip. 1 million shares were purchased, then things started falling apart, mostly, the unfair way the contract was written. Many believed that the contract was screwing the investor out of money by not giving more profits from sales (10% at the time) since investors fronted most of the money. There are more details and grievances left out but this is getting long. I can answer questions about that if you'd like. So, what happened? Ken got together with forum members and worked out a new contract:
ActiveMining owns AMC (mining) and VMC (sales)
25 million shares of ActiveMining TOTAL
The first 10 million shares will receive 100% of profits after costs until the total dividends payed has reached .0025 per share.
Afterwards, the remaining shares(15 million) (Ken and Co) start receiving dividends as well.
So, what plans does ActiveMining have and why is there 4 million shares for sale at .0025 on both exchanges?
They have 6 Batch 2 Avalons mining at 426.53 GH/sbtcguild
Within a month Klondikes will be arriving to add 300 GH/s to AMC's mining operation
AM has 20,000 Avalons chips on order. They have received the 60(30x2) samples and should be getting back their Avalon prototype board by July 23rdReceipt. These Avalon clones, sometime in August, will be hashing at a total rate of 5,640 GH/s
AM is under NDA with eASIC to produce a chip by 4th quarter 2013 that runs at 16 GH/s NDA 1NDA 2
AM needs ~$1 million to pay for the NRE of the chip's development. The faster those shares at .0025 get sold, the quicker the chip gets made. ActiveMining can then start printing them out at cost and selling them.
Storage - Springfield Underground is currently for sale. AM is looking into acquiring it to host all of AMC's mining needs when the need arises.
All in all, I think is has been a learning experience for Ken. Everyone seems appeased at the moment, good things are happening, and I hope this answers some of your questions. If you have any more, let me know and I'll try my best.
I am thinking about investing in a bitcoin ASIC miner and I have some questions about difficulty. I realize that the difficulty skyrockets once BFL and the third Avalon ASIC batch ships. The question is just how high exactly will it go. Is there a way to very roughly estimate how high it will be in August assuming all BFL products have sipped by then?
I doubt we will see the Price go up significantly again soon. Explanation inside.
What you see here is the result of varius sites (including reddit at some degree) running a PUMP AND DUMP spreading the idea that Cyprus going bankrupt is causing people to trust Bitcoin more than banks. And it fucking worked. The disinformation was so widespread that major news networks actually reported their story as being true. But now that we're in DUMP mode this is just going to go down, down, down... And once this goes under the original $47 plateau, people are going to sell even more, making this shit a DROPPING KNIFE (which it is already : lower highs and lower lows) Now if you look at another timescale (as linked above), you see WHY it has been done: they foresaw that the massive rally going on these past months is dying off and that shit is about to go pop Just look: The first yellow line is HYPE bubble going up. The second yellow line represents the fact that people aren't trusting bitcoin that much anymore, and that general interest is fading away. Strong sell signal before a fucking crater. What's even worst? The graph on the left: People only really cashed out into real money around September 2012, then not that much anymore. All the rest is speculative retards hoping to make a quick buck. VERY scary. I'm guessing the Bitcoin devs did this, as well as the early adopters. And you know what's even more scary? Part of the initial bubble is caused by people buying bitcoins to get Butterfly Labs and Avalon ASICS. Tough luck: Butterfly Labs shat themselves and failed to produce a working design, and Avalon only has so many units to sell. Batch #3 is due out before Tuesday. All the people who won't be able to get an Avalon and those who realize BFL are retarded are going to cash out as well. This is like a perfect fucking storm: there are so many reasons to sell right now that we’re about to enter FIRE SALE mode. Just look at the mt.gox order books: people are issuing bids well under $1/btc.
Below is a copy of the newsletter I was just sent by ASX Project (http://asxproject.com/). That shifty ASIC mining company that popped up last week. Shifty for a lot of reasons, mainly the fact that many of its posts are predated and they haven't provided any actual evidence of their product. Having said that, there are a couple of reasons why I think they may be for real and just have really poor execution of their web presence. I'll expand my thoughts in the comments if need be, but here's the complete text for you to read first: First of all, we think that time is of the essence. Since BFL has announced to ship in the coming period, our time-to-market is very important. The faster we can start production, the sooner we will deliver, and establish a solid client base in the bitcoin community. This will ensure incoming orders that help us produce, assemble and ship systems at maximum capacity, which is 10-50 per day depending on the amount of modules inserted. Today, we had an appointment with our supplier, and we discussed the possibility to reduce the first batch-size. We concluded that it is financially possible to start production when 100 modules have been pre-ordered. Of course, this financial analysis includes the purchase of additional parts, assembly, testing and shipment of our products. We have currently sold a total of 53 modules. Some of our clients have been refunded due to their concerns regarding the legitimacy of our project. We assure you that we fully intent to deliver our systems and that our business model has been developed comprehensively. It is of course a major drawback that we have not shown any prototype and that it would help create more trust in the community if we would have. Unfortunately, we have not collected any footage of the previous testing. Today, the supplier's testing facility was unfortunately occupied. Thus, any footage is still to be released. We do not yet have our own testing area, though all the planning thereof is completed. Many of our customers state: "The best way to get the the project off the ground is delivering a working product into the community". The contributions and professional attitude of our clients are very much appreciated and acknowledged. We thank you for your help in thinking along with us. Due to the above, the trade-off between time to 'mass'-production and delivering our first product (or prototype) seems an important aspect in determining the future of the project. Although many people have urged us to deliver a prototype to them for review, we are confident that reducing the batch-size will enable us to quickly attain the required funds to start production as soon as possible. This way we could be able to deliver as soon as the end of May. We think that delaying our schedule by allocating the time needed to review a prototype system will diminish the major competitive advantages of our business. Our competitive advantages over Avalon and BFL are in our opinion the short time-to-market, (potentially) high volume production, low pricing, and high flexibility (in the case of a technology breakthrough). Therefore, we think that it is in both our interest as well as the community's to conduct the strategy of reducing the batch-size. We hope that you will help launch this project to reach its potential in becoming one of the major players in bitcoin mining hardware solutions. Regards, ASX Project
There goes a Litecoin "veteran" its worth the read specifically regarding ASICs.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=662058.0 "This is not the only case where the developers have done as they pleased, many voiced concerns about ASICs coming online and ruining the decentralized nature of the network, making people pay for hardware that will never ROI and sadly has little to no resale value, and suscept the Litecoin mining community to pre-ordering hardware they may never even see (or at least they likely will never see on time before the difficulty skyrockets like what happened with Bitcoin.) After a year and a half of investing in ASIC mining technology, running group buys, and hosting hardware, I can honestly say it is a fool’s game. The original batch 1 Avalons broke even and made a hefty profit, and almost every ASIC offering since then has fallen short of simply allowing their customers to break even. I will no longer support ASIC mining or the companies that make them, and when that sentiment is shared by a large group of people (I know I’m not alone,) it can be a very dangerous thing and lead to centralization of the network. I am worried for both Bitcoin and Litecoin in those regards… when a crypto currency becomes centralized, what is the point really? *Satoshi would not approve.*"
limit my search to r/Bitcoin. use the following search parameters to narrow your results: subreddit:subreddit find submissions in "subreddit" author:username find submissions by "username" site:example.com find submissions from "example.com" url:text search for "text" in url selftext:text search for "text" in self post contents self:yes (or self:no) include (or exclude) self posts nsfw:yes (or ... Amazon.com : AVALON ASIC 80GH/s Bitcoin Miner (Batch 2) : Other Products : Everything Else. Skip to main content. Try Prime All Go Search EN Hello, Sign in Account & Lists Sign in Account ... Cheap AVALON ASIC 80GH/s Bitcoin Miner (Batch 2),You can get more details about AVALON ASIC 80GH/s Bitcoin Miner (Batch 2):Shopping Guide on Alibaba.com Avalon has retracted its no-refunds policy after announcing delayed delivery of its ASIC chips, which are used for bitcoin mining. Die ersten Kunden haben ihre neuen Avalons erhalten, es scheint so als ob Avalon problemlos Chips verkaufen kann und nebenbei ihre Produkte fertigen und ausliefern. Langsam sollten sich die anderen Miner Hersteller Gedanken über ihre Lieferzeit machen, der Wettbewerb unter Bitcoin Miner wird immer wie härter je mehr Asics ihre Kunden erreichen.
MintForge.com Avalon ASIC Bitcoin Miner 230 GH/s makes $70/day
The setup of my Avalon Bitcoin Miner. Setup and in action. Demo of MintForge.com Avalon ASIC Bitcoin Miner 230 GH/s makes $70/day By Rezilient Company LLC Bitcoin Avalon ASIC: Batch #2 Unboxing - Duration: 5 minutes, 31 seconds. fpgaminer. 6 years ago; 52,872 views; A video of me un-boxing an Avalon ASIC, Batch #2 unit. I apologize in advance for ... New Video For Avalon ASIC Miner The Bitcoin Foundation tests the new Avalon ASIC server HashRate=68GH/s. USB Bitcoin Miner - The Power of 1000's Computers - Duration: 15:24. How Much? 298,404 views. 15:24. Futurebit Apollo Batch 2 ASIC Miner LTC Scrypt Crypto Mining at Home- Unboxing, Setup and ...