[Chugalug] ButterFly ASIC Single arrived -- My review

Lynn Dixon boodaddy at gmail.com
Wed Sep 4 01:15:15 UTC 2013


Phil,
did you use any of the roi calculators?
Heres the results of one I ran based on your numbers:
http://mining.thegenesisblock.com/a/bf84201e80

hope that helps.
On Sep 3, 2013 7:11 PM, "Phil Sieg" <phil.sieg at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok so based on feedback here I bought a "mini" USB ASIC rig:
>
> 9 USB ASIC miners @ $30 = $270
> 1 ANKER USB 3.0 10 port hub $64 (Thanks Eric Wolf, I rather thought they
> would need a good hub)
> 1 USB articulating fan to cool the 9 miners $7
>
> So $341 for 3GH/S delivered. That's 2.3 bitcoins, which I HOPE I can mine
> in a couple of months.
>
> I will get set up and after a week or two calculate whether I was smart,
> or a fool. If the payback is in line, I will just keep ordering these in
> blocks of 9 and daisy-chain them.
>
> As long as they pay for themselves and net out, then it's just more blinky
> lights to sooth me...
>
> Phil Sieg
> President
> SeniorTech LLC / snapfōn®
> www.snapfon.com
> phil.sieg at seniortechllc.com
>
> Phone: 423.535.9968
> Fax: 423.265.9820
> Mobile: 423.331.0725
>
> *"The computer is the most remarkable tool that we've ever come up
> with. It's the equivalent of a bicycle for our minds."
>
> *
> *Steve Jobs, 1955-2011*
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 3, 2013, at 3:51 PM, Eric Wolf <ebwolf at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dan,
>
> In a nutshell, you are correct. The economics of mining doesn't make
> sense. But that's the fundamental lesson of economics over the past couple
> decades. People don't behave rationally. I like the little USB miners
> because they make blinky lights and appear to generate something of value.
> It's a hobby.
>
> Last year, if you could leverage cheaper electricity with the ability to
> run lots of high end video cards, you could have an edge. I started down
> this route but was working form home and didn't want the fan noise in my
> environment. That was a mistake because it caused me to miss the bubble
> when the first generation  ASICs hit. I also cashed in my BTC at $7 because
> I didn't believe there would be a bubble (even though someone on the list,
> I forget who, accurately predicted it).
>
> Now, mining has largely become a matter of getting your hands on the
> newest miners early enough to generate a profit (barring another bubble).
> There are very few technical barriers to mining other than cash. Right now,
> that requires a minimum $5K investment and may not deliver returns any time
> soon (if at all). That is, barring another bubble.
>
> I probably should sell my USB miners and buy some Raspberry PIs and
> Arduinos. But that'd make too much sense!
>
> -Eric
>
> -=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=-
> Eric B. Wolf                           720-334-7734
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Lynn Dixon <boodaddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dan, exactly.  Maybe I did a poor job of explaining it.  After 2000
>> blocks the network evaluates the time it took to hash those blocks.  If it
>> generated more than the targeted 6 blocks per hour, then the hash
>> difficulty is increased as an efford to make it 'harder" for the network as
>> a whole to "guess" the hash. Currently the reward for finding a block is 25
>> BTC.  This reward decreases with time.  The larger the difficulty, the
>> longer it will take a machine to guess the hash.
>> The blocks per hour rate never changes, the network will adjust
>> difficulty to always maintain 6 blocks per hour.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Dan Lyke <danlyke at flutterby.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Lynn Dixon <boodaddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > The supply of bitcoins is controlled by the network to maintain 6
>>> blocks
>>> > per hour.
>>>
>>> I think I understand blocks vs coins differently. The block supply is
>>> moderated by the network to handle latency issues, so that processors
>>> aren't working on the same problem over and over again, but the coin
>>> supply is moderated by mathematics.
>>>
>>> When block latency is adjusted, what's being changed is how much
>>> computation information is transmitted in a block, not how many hashes
>>> per hour the machines are evaluating.
>>>
>>> ie: Hook a gazillion machines up suddenly and even though your
>>> blocks-per-hour rate gets adjusted down, the number of hashes
>>> evaluated goes way way up.
>>>
>>> Of course having those gazillion machines then becomes a liability,
>>> because if the block rate is limited to 6 per hour, there's a much
>>> higher chance you're repeating calculations done by other machines...
>>>
>>> Dan
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Chugalug mailing list
>>> Chugalug at chugalug.org
>>> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chugalug mailing list
>> Chugalug at chugalug.org
>> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Chugalug mailing list
> Chugalug at chugalug.org
> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chugalug mailing list
> Chugalug at chugalug.org
> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://chugalug.org/pipermail/chugalug/attachments/20130903/3fb691cd/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Chugalug mailing list