I feel like a war-torn vet in a room full of new recruits.
I've been in cryptos since 2011. I know some have been here longer. Respect to you all. tl;dr "I've seen some shit." The company I originally bought my bitcoins from (for $10, biting my nails at a Walmart customer service counter), BitInstant, was shut down and it's founder was jailed. I bought mining hardware through Butterfly Labs. I didn't receive my miners till it was too late, and I was never able to recoup my cost. The company was shut down and they reached a settlement with the FTC. I managed to get my remaining coins out of Mt Gox shortly before it too went belly-up, its founder charged with embezzlement. I perused the Silk Road before it was shut down and Ross Ulbricht was imprisoned. (I never bought drugs; only found the site to be to be an incredible experiment in freedom.) Although I did not participate, I was there when Bitfinex was hacked, and when ether forked from DAO. And on, and on, and on... I've seen bubbles come and go. I've seen diarrhea-inducing volatility. I've abandoned all sense of price normalcy. I was literally there watching my screen when the BearWhale was slain. I've hodled. I know what it means to be "gentlemen." I know the difference between a Satoshi and a Dorian. I've seen Bitcoin die a hundred times. I've seen the Bitcoin community grow toxic over scaling. I've seen censorship, division, and alienation. I've seen some cryptos rise to be worthy contenders to Bitcoin's dominance, and I've seen others turn to dust. I've also made life-changing profits. These growing pains aren't going to cease any time soon. You don't survive as an early adopter in this space unless you stay on your toes and take the appropriate precautions. I can't stress this enough. The truth is, it's fucking stressful. I spend hours and hours researching and worrying about what I should do. Just last night I dreamt our house burned down and I lost everything. Not just that, but "loose lips sink ships" so to speak. Sometimes I think I should just shut up about it all. But I ain't done riding this wave. It's moon or bust. And I'm proud to be a part of the cryptocurrency community.
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.
Breaking! KnCMiner Refund Queue is COMPLETELY FAKE! These guys engaging in, without doubt, criminal activity. Please do not ignore this!
As most of you know, I have been keeping the community updated with the latest KnCMiner.com under handed practices and tricks. If you need to catch up read the following posts: Post A - Lies to keep customers from refund, only to backtrack on the promise Post B - Censoring customers who are pointing out that the units they are getting for used Post C - Sends out old used and broken units to customers Post D - Scamming Customers out of 2 for 1 and Plan B Most recently was how they screwed hundred and thousands of their customers out of Plan B and/or their 2 for 1 Neptune. Over the course of the last few months I have created many contacts within the community and received messages from others who have also been victims of KnCMiner. In the last 24 hours, I received a message from someone that works for KnCMiner, informing me that the claim of processing refunds taking so long because of the number of request, is completely false! The tipster provided me with evidence to prove that he works for them, and as promised, I can not jeopardize his job by revealing anything about his identity, but I can tell you that there was absolutely no doubt he works for them The tipster indicated to me that an executive decision was made to stop processing refunds, because Bitcoins had reached a low value, and handing out refunds would be too costly. As a result of this, the company started to claim that was there was a long queue for processing refunds and as a result, refunds will take much longer. They are intentionally hold back refunds, waiting for BTC to go up, before they start processing them. These guys are Criminals. The tipster told me I will find all the evidence I need online and through the forms; he told me just look at the chart of BTC Value and when Refund orders stop being processed. Here is what I found for evidence: Take a look at the when the price of BTC Drops to a long time low: BTC Chart You will notice that BTC takes a dive the start of April. Now Take a look at just a few the customers, who to this day still haven't received a refund. What you will notice, few if any refunds get processed after the BTC Crash:
"All refunds will be refunded in dollars and you can refund up to shipment".
Here is the evidence KnCMiner deleted and tried to hide: Evidence Link Everyone was under the impression and rightfully so, that you could cancel your order, as long as they had not shipped your order yet. However, that was another underhanded trick by KnCMiner. KnCMiner is refusing all Refunds, even orders whose status is Paid, and are no where near being shipped. Thirdly A lot of people, did not cancel their orders because of the two incentives KnCMiner offered. It was only After they had started their Processing and shipping phase, did they state that you can only pick one or the other. Here is evidence that customers were mislead:
Final version 1.3.0 of the core software was released bringing all the enhancements reported last month to the rest of the community. The groundwork for SPV (simplified payment verification) is complete, another reduction of fees is being deployed, and performance stepped up once again with a 50% reduction in startup time, 20% increased sync speed and more than 3x faster peer delivery of block headers (a key update for SPV). Decrediton's integrations of SPV and Politeia are open for testing by experienced users. Read the full release notes and get the downloads on GitHub. As always, don't forget to verify signatures. dcrd: completed several steps towards multipeer downloads, improved introduction to the software in the main README, continued porting cleanups and refactoring from upstream btcd. Currently in review are initial release of smart fee estimator and a change to UTXO set semantics. The latter is a large and important change that provides simpler handling, and resolves various issues with the previous approach. A lot of testing and careful review is needed so help is welcome. Educational series for new Decred developers by @matheusd added two episodes: 02 Simnet Setup shows how to automate simnet management with tmux and 03 Miner Reward Invalidation explains block validity rules. Finally, a pull request template with a list of checks was added to help guide the contributors to dcrd. dcrwallet: bugfixes and RPC improvements to support desktop and mobile wallets. Developers are welcome to comment on this idea to derive stakepool keys from the HD wallet seed. This would eliminate the need to backup and restore redeem scripts, thus greatly improving wallet UX. (missed in July issue) Decrediton: bugfixes, refactoring to make the sync process more robust, new loading animations, design polishing. Politeia: multiple improvements to the CLI client (security conscious users with more funds at risk might prefer CLI) and security hardening. A feature to deprecate or timeout proposals was identified as necessary for initial release and the work started. A privacy enhancement to not leak metadata of ticket holders was merged. Android: update from @collins: "Second test release for dcrandroid is out. Major bugs have been fixed since last test. Latest code from SPV sync has been integrated. Once again, bug reports are welcome and issues can be opened on GitHub". Ask in #dev room for the APK to join testing. A new security page was added that allows one to validate addresses and to sign/verify messages, similar to Decrediton's Security Center. Work on translations is beginning. Overall the app is quite stable and accepting more testers. Next milestone is getting the test app on the app store. iOS: the app started accepting testers last week. @macsleven: "the test version of Decred Wallet for iOS is available, we have a link for installing the app but the builds currently require your UDID. Contact either @macsleven or @raedah with your UDID if you would like to help test.". Nearest goal is to make the app crash free. Both mobile apps received new design themes. dcrdata: v3.0 was released for mainnet! Highlights: charts, "merged debits" view, agendas page, Insight API support, side chain tracking, Go 1.11 support with module builds, numerous backend improvements. Full release notes here. This release featured 9 contributors and development lead @chappjc noted: "This collaboration with @raedahgroup on our own block explorer and web API for @decredproject has been super productive.". Up next is supporting dynamic page widths site wide and deploying new visual blocks home page. Trezor: proof of concept implementation for Trezor Model T firmware is in the works (previous work was for Model One). Ticket splitting: updated to use Go modules and added simnet support, several fixes. docs: beginner's guide overhaul, multiple fixes and cleanups. decred.org: added 3rd party wallets, removed inactive PoW pools and removed web wallet. @Richard-Red is building a curated list of Decred-related GitHub repositories. Welcome to new people contributing for the first time: @klebe, @s_ben, @victorguedes, and PrimeDominus! Dev activity stats for September: 219 active PRs, 197 commits, 28.7k added and 18.8k deleted lines spread across 6 repositories. Contributions came from 4-10 developers per repository. (chart)
Hashrate: started and ended the month around 75 PH/s, hitting a low of 60.5 and a new high of 110 PH/s. BeePool is again the leader with their share varying between 23-54%, followed by F2Pool 13-30%, Coinmine 4-6% and Luxor 3-5%. As in previous months, there were multiple spikes of unidentified hashrate. Staking: 30-day average ticket price is 98 DCR (+2.4). The price varied between 95.7 and 101.9 DCR. Locked DCR amount was 3.86-3.96 million DCR, or 45.7-46.5% of the supply. Nodes: there are 201 public listening nodes and 325 normal nodes per dcred.eu. Version distribution: 5% are v1.4.0(pre) dev builds (+3%), 30% on v1.3.0 (+25%), 42% on v1.2.0 (-20%), 15% on v1.1.2 (-7%), 6% on v1.1.0. More than 76% of nodes run v1.2.0 and higher and therefore support client filters. Data as of Oct 1.
Obelisk posted two updates on their mailing list. 70% of Batch 1 units are shipped, an extensive user guide is available, Obelisk Scanner application was released that allows one to automatically update firmware. First firmware update was released and bumped SC1 hashrate by 10-20%, added new pools and fixed multiple bugs. Next update will focus on DCR1. It is worth a special mention that the firmware source code is now open! Let us hope more manufacturers will follow this example. A few details about Whatsminer surfaced this month. The manufacturer is MicroBT, also known as Bitwei and commonly misspelled as Bitewei. Pangolinminer is a reseller, and the model name is Whatsminer D1. Bitmain has finally entered Decred ASIC space with their Antminer DR3. Hash rate is 7.8 TH/s while pulling 1410 W, at the price of $673. These specs mean it has the best GH/W and GH/USD of currently sold miners until the Whatsminer or others come out, although its GH/USD of 11.6 already competes with Whatsminer's 10.5. Discussed on Reddit and bitcointalk, unboxing video here.
@matheusd started tests on testnet several months ago. I contacted him so we could integrate with the pool in June this year. We set up the machine in July and bought the first split ticket on mainnet, using the decredbrasil pool, on July 19. It was voted on July 30. After this first vote on mainnet, we opened the tests to selected users (with more technical background) on the pool. In August we opened the tests to everyone, and would call people who want to join to the #ticket_splitting channel, or to our own Slack (in Portuguese, so mostly Brazilian users). We have 28 split tickets already voted, and 16 are live. So little more than 40 split tickets total were bought on decredbrasil pool. (@girino in #pos-voting)
KuCoin exchange listed DCBTC and DCETH pairs. To celebrate their anniversary they had a 99% trading fees discount on DCR pairs for 2 weeks. Three more wallets integrated Decred in September:
Atomic desktop wallet added Decred in version 0.1.31. The team answered many questions on Reddit.
AnyBit wallet added Decred. It features built-in price and news tracking. Notably, the source code is open for their Android and iOS wallets.
Coboadded Decred support into their Android and iOS wallets.
ChangeNow announced Decred addition to their Android app that allows accountless swaps between 150+ assets. Coinbase launched informational asset pages for top 50 coins by market cap, including Decred. First the pages started showing in the Coinbase app for a small group of testers, and later the web price dashboard went live.
The birth of a Brazilian girl was registered on the Decred blockchain using OriginalMy, a blockchain proof of authenticity services provider. Read the full story in Portuguese and in English.
Advertising report for September is ready. Next month the graphics for all the ads will be changing.
Marketing might seem quiet right now, but a ton is actually going on behind the scenes to put the right foundation in place for the future. Discovery data are being analyzed to generate a positioning strategy, as well as a messaging hierarchy that can guide how to talk about Decred. This will all be agreed upon via consensus of the community in the work channels, and materials will be distributed. Next, work is being done to identify the right PR partner to help with media relations, media training, and coordination at events. While all of this is coming up to speed, we believe the website needs a refresher reflecting the soon to be agreed upon messaging, plus a more intuitive architecture to make it easier to navigate. (@Dustorf)
Raedah Group went on the streets of Portland, USA with a pretty blue tent. (photos)
Meetup at Binzantin Cafe in Taipei, Taiwan. @morphymore: "There were 20-ish attendees, and about half of them have joined the Chinese FB group. Most of them don't hear about Decred before, but have expressed the interest in learning more about it after the event. Overall, it's a good exposure for Decred in the Taiwan community.". A report with photos was posted on Facebook, more photos are here and here.
@joshuam made a Decred Jacket appearance at Singapore Grand Prix. (photos)
NewTech PDX meetup in Portland, USA. Raedah Group presented Decred and reported "lots of new converts". (photos)
North Shore Bitcoin & Blockchain in Glenview, USA. @dustorf gave a five minute overview of Decred and noted: "There were only about 25 people, but about 1/3 of them were aware of Decred prior. (...) Our simple presence and explanation of the project moved opinion from 'another shitcoin they sold after mining' to 'an interesting and viable project worthy of further investigation'.". (photos: 12)
Bitcoin Meetup CDMX in Mexico City on Oct 6. @elian will be talking about Decred at the oldest Bitcoin meetup in Mexico.
SF Blockchain Week in San Francisco, USA on Oct 9. @lukebp will discuss DPoS vs PoS on a panel 9:30a-10:15a at the Titans of Tech Stage, Hilton Union Square.
Decred Meetup in Casablanca, Morocco on Oct 27. @butterfly will host the event and talk about Decred in French.
Texas Bitcoin Conference Austin, USA on Oct 27-28. @BAB: "The great thing about this is that it will also be a Decred Summit. We will have half of the conference dedicated to Decred topics, updates, etc."
Websummit in Lisbon, Portugal on Nov 5-8. @moo31337 will be on a panel discussing "2018: A Rollercoaster Year for Cryptocurrencies"
We'll begin shortly reviewing conferences and events planned for the first half of 2019. Highlights are sure to include The North American Bitcoin Conference in Miami (Jan 16-18) and Consensus in NYC (May 14-16). If you have suggestions of events or conferences Decred should attend, please share them in #event_planning. In 2019, we would like to expand our presence in Europe, Asia, and South America, and we're looking for community members to help identify and staff those events. (@Dustorf)
August issue of Decred Journal was translated to Russian. Many thanks to @DZ! Rency cryptocurrency ratings published a report on Decred and incorporated a lot of feedback from the community on Reddit. September issue of Chinese CCID ratings was published (snapshot), Decred is still at the bottom. Videos:
The underbelly of blockchain Governance - fiat licensing and our code with Marco Peerboom and Chris DeRose (youtube, tweet, decred, missed in August issue) Insightful dialogue about men's underwear, licenses, subtleties of GPL, BSD wars, tiling window managers and much more.
Introduction to Decred (Korean, youtube) @Killawhale collected a lot of feedback from the community and produced this video to spread the word in Korea.
Perspectives on Governance from Nathan Wilcox, Jonathan Zeppettini, Vitalik Buterin (z.cash)
Decred - an example of governance (Portuguese, youtube)
Decred, the crypto that wants to compete with Bitcoin (French, youtube)
Exodus.io Live with Marco from Decred! (youtube) Marco joins Exodus.io to discuss what makes DCR an asset that will stand the test of time.
Building Decred With Systems Development Lead Marco Peereboom - Governance, Politeia, Lightning (youtube) Topics: early days, Politeia, the structure of Decred, dcrtime, Lightning Network, attracting users and developers, future plans (DEX, Schnorr signatures, privacy, DAEs).
Decentralized autonomous funding of blockchain projects by @Richard-Red (medium, discussion on decred and dashpay)
The trouble with infrastructure, "thin" protocols in particular, is that someone has to build them at a cost. e.g. LN takes a ton of work, doesn't necessarily generate value itself, but it magnifies the value of BTC or whatever coin that uses it. I see the DEX in a similar light - whoever creates it is not going to make a bunch of money from it, but it will magnify the value of the underlying asset(s) that end up having a deep order book on the DEX. (@jy-p in #dex)
Twitter: why decentralized governance and funding are necessary for network survival and the power of controlling the narrative; learning about governance more broadly by watching its evolution in cryptocurrency space, importance of community consensus and communications infrastructure. Reddit: yet another strong pitch by @solar; question about buyer protections; dcrtime internals; a proposal to sponsor hoodies in the University of Cape Town; Lightning Network support for altcoins. Chats: skills to operate a stakepool; voting details: 2 of 3 votes can approve a block, what votes really approve are regular tx, etc; scriptless script atomic swaps using Schnorr adaptor signatures; dev dashboard, choosing work, people do best when working on what interests them most; opportunities for governments and enterprise for anchoring legal data to blockchain; terminology: DAO vs DAE; human-friendly payments, sharing xpub vs payment protocols; funding btcsuite development; Politeia vote types: approval vote, sentiment vote and a defund vote, also linking proposals and financial statements; algo trading and programming languages (yes, on #trading!); alternative implementation, C/C++/Go/Rust; HFTs, algo trading, fake volume and slippage; offline wallets, usb/write-only media/optical scanners vs auditing traffic between dcrd and dcrwallet; Proof of Activity did not inspire Decred but spurred Decred to get moving, Wikipedia page hurdles; how stakeholders could veto blocks; how many votes are needed to approve a proposal; why Decrediton uses Electron; CVE-2018-17144 and over-dependence on single Bitcoin implementation, btcsuite, fuzz testing; tracking proposal progress after voting and funding; why the wallet does not store the seed at all; power connectors, electricity, wiring and fire safety; reasonable spendings from project fund; ways to measure sync progress better than block height; using Politeia without email address; concurrency in Go, locks vs channels. #support is not often mentioned, but it must be noted that every day on this channel people get high quality support. (@bee: To my surprise, even those poor souls running Windows 10. My greatest respect to the support team!)
In September DCR was trading in the range of USD 34-45 / BTC 0.0054-0.0063. On Sep 6, DCR revisited the bottom of USD 34 / BTC 0.0054 when BTC quickly dropped from USD 7,300 to 6,400. On Sep 14, a small price rise coincided with both the start of KuCoin trading and hashrate spike to 104 PH/s. Looking at coinmarketcap charts, the trading volume is a bit lower than in July and August. As of Oct 4, Decred is #18 by the number of daily transactions with 3,200 tx, and #9 by the USD value of daily issuance with $230k. (source: onchainfx) Interesting observation by @ImacallyouJawdy: while we sit at 2018 price lows the amount locked in tickets is testing 2018 high.
ASIC for Lyra2REv2 was spotted on the web. Vertcoin team is preparing a new PoW algorithm. This would be the 3rd fork after two previous forks to change the algorithm in 2014 and 2015. A report titled The Positive Externalities of Bitcoin Mining discusses the benefits of PoW mining that are often overlooked by the critics of its energy use. A Brief Study of Cryptonetwork Forks by Alex Evans of Placeholder studies the behavior of users, developers and miners after the fork, and makes the cases that it is hard for child chains to attract users and developers from their parent chains. New research on private atomic swaps: the paper "Anonymous Atomic Swaps Using Homomorphic Hashing" attempts to break the public link between two transactions. (bitcointalk, decred) On Sep 18 Poloniex announced delisting of 8 more assets. That day they took a 12-80% dive showing their dependence on this one exchange. Circle introduced USDC markets on Poloniex: "USDC is a fully collateralized US dollar stablecoin using the ERC-20 standard that provides detailed financial and operational transparency, operates within the regulated framework of US money transmission laws, and is reinforced by established banking partners and auditors.". Coinbase announced new asset listing process and is accepting submissions on their listing portal. (decred) The New York State Office of the Attorney General posted a study of 13 exchanges that contains many insights. A critical vulnerability was discovered and fixed in Bitcoin Core. Few days later a full disclosure was posted revealing the severity of the bug. In a bitcointalk thread btcd was called 'amateur' despite not being vulnerable, and some Core developers voiced their concerns about multiple implementations. The Bitcoin Unlimited developer who found the bug shared his perspective in a blog post. Decred's vision so far is that more full node implementations is a strength, just like for any Internet protocol.
About This Issue
This is the 6th issue of Decred Journal. It is mirrored on GitHub, Medium and Reddit. Past issues are available here. Most information from third parties is relayed directly from source after a minimal sanity check. The authors of Decred Journal have no ability to verify all claims. Please beware of scams and do your own research. Feedback is appreciated: please comment on Reddit, GitHub or #writers_room on Matrix or Slack. Contributions are also welcome: some areas are adding content, pre-release review or translations to other languages. Credits (Slack names, alphabetical order): bee, Dustorf, jz, Haon, oregonisaac, raedah and Richard-Red.
Here is a conspiracy theory for the amusement of those who believe in the theory that skeptics are conspiring to make up conspiracy theories: There have been a few reviews of DragonMInt, the Halong mining rigs (and mysterious bitcoin.org co-owner Cobra has apologized for his earlier skepticism). However, the company still ticks several red boxes in the scam test:
Owners and CEOs are anonymous. (And mysterious BTCDrak seems to be involved);
The company has no legal address
They only accept payment in bitcoins
The units do not comply with consumer regulations
The first independent reviews say that the units are only 5% more energy-efficient (in hashes per joule) than similar Bitmain rigs; even though they are said to use 10nm chips rather than 16 nm, and to use ASICboost while Bitmain's don't. Pricewise they don't seem to be better either. Right? So the conspiracy theory is: The DragonMint is a "prepaid miner" scam. To better fool the butters, the authors built a few miners with chips "mined" from Bitmain rigs and repackaged in slightly different boards and box, with a bit of overclocking and overvoltage, and shipped them to selected customers for review. And, as the cherry on the icing of the theory, Halong is no Asian company, but the same Butterfly Labs gang. ;-)
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"
FUCKING SCUM ASS PIECES OF SHIT KnCMiner.com tried to swindle customers out of their Free Neptune with a very dirty trick. Forget the law, these fuckers need a serving of raw street justice.
Guys a week ago, I told you I came across a tip letting us know that the Free Second Neptune might be a scam. It was partly right. Take a look at this POST warning about second neptune and the fake Hash While you wait. Here is a histroy of these pieces of shit fucking people over, left and right Post A Post B Post C A few people messaged me stating that this morning KnCMiner sent out an email with the following content to all of their customers:
Dear Customer, As you are a Neptune customer, you are entitled to take up our Plan B offer to “Hash While You >Wait”, or to convert your Neptune order to a KnC Titan. To activate your account please click the following URL/Link where you can choose your option >and setup your KnCCloud account. Your hashing will begin on Monday the 23rd of June from 9am UTC, provided you’ve made that >choice on the Neptune Order Options. To ensure you receive all the power you've paid for, please ensure that your account is up to date >with your wallet address to receive your Plan B mined Bitcoins. Hashing will stop as soon as your unit ships out from our factory. If you have any questions please contact: [email protected] Thanks KnC Miner Team
Here was their original statement about Hash While you wait
Hash while you wait. First it’s important to note that we don’t expect to be late at all everything is on track. It’s just always good to have a backup plan. Second our mega-data centre in the north of Sweden is nearing completion so we can give out some more details. All customers of Neptune’s will be able to use completely free of charge our data centre to hash for them at 3TH either on our pool or a pool of their choice while they wait for their product to be shipped. The first customers (batch 1) are expected to be hashing in our data centre in early June and the last customer will hash in our data centre around the last week of June. All the customers will be able to hash in that data centre for as long as we are late in shipping your Neptune product, this service will be provided on a best effort basis. We have a 24/7 operations teams in place with multiple redundant internet and power connections and we will aim to have as close to 0 down time as possible.
Neptune Two For One Program It has come to our attention that not everyone has been fully informed on our Neptune Two For One program so we'd like to include information on that topic in this newsletter too: We understand that the math's involved in ASIC product deployment has to make financial sense in an ever-increasing hash rate race. In order to increase value for KnC customers we are adding one extra Neptune miner to each pre-ordered Neptune in batch one and batch two. These bonus machines will be sourced from our batch three production run which is scheduled to ship in August. If you're a pre-order Neptune batch one or two customer you don't need to take any extra action to receive these additional miners and we are covering all shipping costs as well. You’ll receive info on when and how those bonus miners will be delivered well before the shipment date.
Link to the about statement However, after all that, today, in their ToS, they had sneaked in a condition that if a customer accepted their offer of "free" Hash While You Wait, you would give up your free Neptune, and any future request for compensation. Moreover, the ToS state that the service might never even go online or if it does, no guarantee it work properly. Large number of customers unknowingly agreed to these condition and as a result, lost their 2 for 1 compensation. This was exactly what KnCMiner wanted to happen Here are links showing customers catching on to it, and calling KnCMiner out on them:
After their shitty trick was out of their box, they changed the page to state that Free Hash While you wait would cost you your Second Neptune. These mother fuckers are just scum bags, waiting to fuck over as many Joes as possible. Guys, you need to get this type of information out there, not only to the Bitcoin Community, but others as well, like Litecoin, Dogecoin. etc. Please, for the love of justice, do not let these things go unheard.
The $22,484.00 Butterfly Labs Mini Rig bitcoin miner is a huge, broken, unstable piece of shit.
(This was a rather controversial article posted on Buttcoin.org and became quite popular, even moving to the top of /bitcoin. It's since been mysteriously edited on the site [maybe by g-g-g-ghosts!] so it's being reposted here for posterity's sake. Some numbers may be off by now, but it was all accurate at the time of posting.) Butterfly Labs has a long and horrible history with their mining rigs. They started taking pre-orders over a year ago, with a ship time sometime in late July. After numerous delays in production, shipping problems and general incompetence, the only thing they’ve managed to get out the door are some of their tiniest miners, the Jalapenos. And those mainly ended up in the hands of reviewers and blogs in order to keep pumping the Butterfly Labs hype train and securing millions of dollars of pre-orders still in limbo.Lucky BFL forums user Luke-JR however scored a sweet Mini Rig from Butterfly Labs (it’s just a coincidence he’s a driver developer for them I’m sure). This rig was originally promised to produce 1500 GH/s hashing power at 1500 watts for $30,000, but has since seen it’s hashing power slashed to a third of what was promised and it’s power consumption increased 75%, now just offer 500 GH/s at 2400 watts. They’ve promised to make good on pre-order buy sending out 3 rigs to match the initial hashing rate, so now it’s only 1500 GH/s at 6900 watts, a reduction in GH/Watt by a factor of 5. So what does $22,484 buy you? Take a look!
Minirig is here! Today, my Minirig arrived. http://i.imgur.com/Yp0WPvE.jpg FedEx apparently dropped it somewhere along the way, and the weakest part of the case, the thin metal part around the back of the PSU, broke. http://i.imgur.com/lFcOHxP.jpg I’m not sure how sturdy the back side was supposed to be, but its two pieces aren’t quite together either. http://i.imgur.com/AVttcOt.jpg The power supplies (EVGA 1500W) also created havoc interfering with the neutral on the power line. This disrupted X10 communication significantly enough that the pool overflowed because the system controlling it was unable to turn off the pump. Workaround: This PSU supports 240V, so we rewired the outlet. 240V does not use neutral, so now all should be okay. Edit: 240V workaround is only partial. Still having problems But the good news is, it all seems to be working for the most part. Next up, installing it in the window so the heat goes outside
A twenty two thousand dollar box of electronics that is broken out of the box, that required the guy to do a sketchy electrical workaround to get partially working, that he is going to install in a window… and he’s happy about it? In case you didn’t notice it, the delivered unit is different than the picture on the website. They had to install 2 power supplies instead of 1 and had to modify the case to fit. Also, if you didn’t notice, the LCD/Phone thingy in the front has been replaced by … a piece of cardboard spray painted black. Wonderful. You could maybe chalk this up to a careless Fedex postman, but when you’re shipping something that costs as much as a mid-sized sedan, how bought putting a little more effort into packing? Dell and HP can ship bigger and heavier servers across the world without this kind of problem. The unit had to hit its huge power draw increase by putting dual EVGA consumer grade power supplies in the unit. We’re talking almost a 75 amp load (6*1500/120), disregarding power factor. He could very well overload the circuit panel and trip the main breaker for the house. Let’s take a look inside this guy. This is from an earlier version of the Minirig (note the single power supply) This is apparently from an earlier FPGA but it will give you a good glimpse at what kind of craftsmanship you can expect from a computer that is half the average household income in the United States. Consumer grade PSU and cheap USB hubs glued to the inside case. Electrical tape and random velcro glued to the insides A closer look at the USB hubs. Plugs are hot glued to stay secured. Electrical tape everywhere, splices and voided hardware are the theme. You can view the entire album here. Despite all that, this thing can still mine bitcoins and it should be profitable. Keep in ind that many people jumped in on the preorders a year ago when bitcoins were still hovering around $6.50 per. Meaning customers paid 1562 bitcoins for that particular piece of shit, which at today’s value is $156,200. Aston martin money. How long will it take them to make their money back (as apposed to just hanging on to them)? If the difficulty didn’t change, they would make 37 bitcoins a day and recoup the initial investment in 124 days. Difficulty is jumping pretty much 20% every 12 days or so, so in the next week before adjustment, they’ll make 259, the next 12 days 369, the next 12 days 312, then 256, then 213, etc. So by day 127, they’ll be halfway to breaking even, but by day 151 they’ll be making less than 5 bitcoins a day, and even if difficulty stopped rising at that point(which it won’t), it would take another 435 days for a total of 586 days to break even. If difficulty kept rising at the same pace, by day 200 they’d be making 2.4 bitcoins per day, and it would take 1024 days to break even with no difficulty increase. Assuming 25 cents per kw/h, and $100 a bitcoin, it would cost 0.43 of a bitcoin per day in electricity which means the unit would no longer be profitable on a power usage basis by day 307, at which point it will have produced 2620 bitcoins. Bear in mind this is only for the first few units, and that’s running 24/7 pumping out around 24,000 BTU, so yes, medical bills from heat stroke will be on top of that. But Alas, the chips don’t run nearly as well as they’re supposed to, frequently running too hot and giving multiple hardware failures. Coindesk noted in one of the first ever runs of the Minirig by hosting provide gigavps that it was running much too hot and erroring out.
At the time of posting, gigavps warned that the unit would be repeatedly shut down while ckolivas, who was assisting, modified the machine’s software to optimise performance. After some tweaking, the device was said to have been left to run continuously for two hours, and was shown to have an average hash rate of 478.1 GH/s. As you can see in the table below, ASIC number four (of a total of eight hashing chips) ran significantly hotter (86 degrees) and consequently gave the highest hardware (HW) error rate. http://i.imgur.com/q3iGrnb.jpg
So, what happens if you just decide you don’t want this, you don’t want to wait over a year to get a $22,000 broken piece of shit? Nothing, because BFL won’t let you cancel your preorder because they’re now “shipping”, i.e. they sent out one unit to their own company shill. http://i.imgur.com/0p3Up03.jpg Which is of course illegal regardless of what Butterfly Labs may say. So in summary: Don’t buy anything from Butterfly Labs … ever.
The 21.co "computer" certainly deserves a place in the VC world, along with the other products consisting of wild promises and inane use cases. For the price of 4 Raspberry Pi computer kits, you get the following:
A Raspberry Pi. You can do a lot with this. One thing you can't do, however, is reliably run a Bitcoin node: the single gigabyte of RAM gets crowded with the bitcoin memory pool (normally up to 100 megabytes, or more when a "stress test" is taking place).
A 128 GB micro-SD card. Used to store the block chain, which is about 32 gigabytes in size right now, and growing at about 144 megabytes per day. Unfortunately, the copy of the block chain 21 Inc. includes is obsolete the second they ship the product, so you have to wait a few hours for the block chain to synchronize. This uses those valuable limited write cycles you have on your SD card.
(If you have a remote desire to develop applications that use bitcoin, stop here. Go through that list and buy just those items above. You don't need anything else. If you're looking for comedy, or if you're a sucker with too much money, read on...)
Is that all I get for my money?
Those products alone don't allow you to make Bitcoin applications, apparently. You need these things, too:
An ASIC chip and a giant fan. Bitcoin mining hardware has a propensity for running hot, so you need a fan. Unfortunately, the Raspberry Pi can't power those two items. The Pi uses a standard 5 volt mini-USB connector for power, and draws at most 2 amps. The fan alone uses three times the maximum current that the Raspberry Pi can handle. Also, a tiny fan like this emits lots of noise, so you may want to include some earplugs in your Amazon.com shopping cart. Free up another outlet for you to use, because there are two power supplies!
It's difficult to justify developing a $400 computer that can't do much. So, to entice some customers, 21 Inc. included demos that try really hard to make customers feel inspired. Here are just a few things that 21 Inc. claims were totally impossible before their product existed:
Web proxies, but with bitcoin! Gone are the days where you would pay a small fee (normally, no more than $9 per month) to access a wide array of private proxies. Now you can build your own service where you charge customers 1 cent per request to use a single public proxy. If that doesn't seem absurd yet, consider the following: loading this page probably used 60 requests for images, fonts, and various code to make the page work.
Online SMS gateways, but with bitcoin! Don't pay your phone company fifteen cents to send a single short message, and definitely don't pay a monthly fee to send unlimited messages! Be your own phone company and lure people into using your gateway. Granted, developers can use the same third-party messaging API for free, but that isn't the bitcoin way. Also, you may want to make sure you're legally a company and not an individual, just in case people want to use your message service for sending death threats to those who defame Satoshi and a few three-letter agencies charge you as being responsible.
I have been accused by your Lead Mod HighBeamHater, to be making up stuff. He decided to come over to /bitcoin and act like he was in touch with the state of affairs concerning KnCMiner. His callousness, showed he was indifferent to the victims of criminals over at KnCMiner, who lost large sums of money. Calling them, "Sour grapes." I have come to you, to make my case, and after I do, you can decide who is right and who is wrong. A few things to clear up right away. First off -Batch 0 Neptunes where $10,000 USD -Batch 1 Neptunes where $13,000 USD Secondly -The No Refund Policy was quietly implemented, prior to this, their refund policy was, I quote:
"All refunds will be refunded in dollars and you can refund up to shipment".
Here is the evidence KnCMiner deleted and tried to hide: Evidence Link Everyone was under the impression and rightfully so, that you could cancel your order, as long as they had not shipped your order yet. However, that was another underhanded trick by KnCMiner. KnCMiner is refusing all Refunds, even orders whose status is Paid, and are no where near being shipped. Thirdly A lot of people, did not cancel their orders because of the two incentives KnCMiner offered. It was only After they had started their Processing and shipping phase, did they state that you can only pick one or the other. Here is evidence that customers were mislead:
I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place, but even as a PSA, I think this post will serve its purpose. I used to have miners running at GAW, and after 4 months they gave me the choice to "upgrade" to their latest scam "hashlets" or to get a payout of 0,5x Bitcoins. I agreed to this sum, and when I went back and looked at the ticket, they changed the sum to 0,21 BTC and paid this sum out. This is not to mention that the original contract claimed that they would host my miner for 12 months free of charge, and that they would ship my miner for free after this period. I'm pretty sure this is first class fraud - Are there other people out there who ran into issues with this company? If so, share your story here or PM me, I live in Europe but if there are more people out there that have been fucked over, maybe there is some action we can take. I for one am submitting complaints at pretty much every Internet Fraud organisation I can find. How and why did the FBI get involved with Butterfly labs? How can I make GAW Miners appear on their radar? cheers!
Thank you in advance for your time. On December 2nd, 2013, I placed a pre-order for a product that was expected to ship in February-March, based on my order date and time. This information was placed on the website as a caution to buyers. I was OK with this though and placed the pre-order. The company posted on its forum that (from March 3rd or 5th 2014) it won't even begin shipping the product for another 5 weeks. Putting it in early April. I'm 3+ months in queue on the list for shipment as orders began around October, possibly sooner. I have contacted the company about getting a refund, as have many other people on the forum. But the only response given is, they will give us a 50% coupon off of another device, only to be placed at the end of the queue, for the additional device. This product is an ASIC miner, its sole purpose is for mining Bitcoins. When I purchased it, expecting a Feb-Mar delivery, the ROI was still practical. Now it's not. and the offer they are providing doesn't equal what an on time shipment would have been worth. I get that people might not take this post serious, but it is. This was a $2818.00 investment for a product that serves one purpose, and is now useless. The company is denying refunds for its lack of meeting its proposed deadlines and is not providing a comparable offer, if it were to ship at its original time. On the site, the company did state that all sales are final, but they also stated that if I ordered at that time, to expect my product in February or March. Do I have any legal grounds with this? All i want is a refund. Edit: Butterfly Labs is located in Leawood, KS. I am located in Florida.
PSA; Anticipated ROI on Butterfly Labs Mining Equipment
I ordered a Butterfly Labs Jalapeno on 4/7 and received delivery of that device on 10/30. It has now been mining its little heart out for two weeks, and I am now able to predict with unwarranted confidence how long it will take to pay itself off. In April at the time I was ordering, Bitcoin was trading at about $130, making my $279 investment (not including tax and shipping) the equivalent of about 2 bitcoins, give or take. In two weeks I have mined 0.2BTC! And yet not all is roses. In the same period my average daily mining return has dropped from 0.024BTC to 0.0072BTC. This is the unfortunate side effect of increased mining difficulty. If mining continues to grow at the current rate then the time required to mine my next 0.2BTC will double to 4 weeks, putting me at December 13th of this year. But calculating all of these returns was taxing my poor brain, so I put these assumptions into a spreadsheet, and have now modeled how long it will take to pay off my miner. With a degree of confidence I do not feel, I can state that I will almost certainly have earned 2.0BTC by January 17 of 2053, or shortly before my 90th birthday, and although this neglects any accounting for the power required to operate the miner including such trifles would make the returns negative so much sooner that I've chosen to ignore them. I am elated, who could have predicted how valuable this investment would prove. On a side note, does anyone want to buy a miner or two? I have two more on order with a purchase date of 6/6; you can skip more than five months in line and get payback before 10/22/2641, guaranteed. Oops, I forgot to account for reductions in the mining rewards. Well, back to the drawing board.
I ponded whether or not to mine bitcoin, then the ASICs were announced. Luckily, I didn't preorder Butterfly Labs, but that whole scenario made me a skeptic. I pondered whether or not to buy a Bitcoin ASIC (the first month the terraminer was on Preorder), and I let that slip by. I pondered whether or not to mine Litecoin, and that slip by. I'm still very skeptical about Litecoin ASIC shipping times so in the meantime, I decided I will buy one when they are available to ship, not for preorder. Till then, I decided to force myself into purchasing high performing cards and mining. I think about things WAY too much and often end up convincing myself not to do them. There's no going back, I'm tired of looking into the water and trying to see if it's warm or not— debating whether I should dip my feet in. I've jumped in 8 graphics cards deep. I've been looking at building guides for months, but after mark-ups and outdated builds, I'm reaching out to see what builds would be good for mining with these 8 cards. Any links or advice would be very much appreciated. SIDE NOTE: I have two GTX 690s I purchased for my incredibly powerful, yet amazingly irritating hackintosh, which I am now incredible frustrated and eventually will be turning in for a Mac Pro. I've been getting about 1150 KH/s with the two cards running CudaMiner on OS X or 530~560KHs Vert— Do you think it's worth it to keep the cards in my new build? Or sell them on eBay? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=291126412466 TL;DR part 1: Bought 2 XFX/6 Sapphire 290Xs for $2400, $300 each, and I would like to know what is the most efficient, cheapest mining rig to build around it. I have looked at many guides (not the software quite yet), I am open to using Linux as I hear that is the best and would preferably like to be able to control the units remotely. part 2: I also have access to two GTX 690s hashing at 1150kh/s scrypt, 530~560KHs scrypt-N— is it worth running these if I have access to free electricity? Or should I sell them on ebay?
I'm quite interested in Bitcoin mining, I've been researching it for a few months now and I've known of it for nearly a year now. I saw the bubble inflate and then burst, but I'm quite conservative with my money so I didn't get bitten by the bubble bursting and pulled out at $170, earning me a tidy profit. Anyway I've come across Butterfly Labs, they're selling an ASIC Miner running at 5GH/s for $247 + $88 shipping (shipping is expensive because I'm in the UK). I have the funds to purchase it, however I am curious as to whether it would be a wise investment? I realised that the Difficulty is just getting higher and higher and the BTC/USD price is prone to fluctuate, still, will I get a good return on my investment? Oh, and I used that bitcoin calculator everyone's been recommending and it worked out that I'd break even at 12 days and earn a net daily profit of ~$27. Of course, I know I'd be wise to get into a mining pool (Even I'm not that lucky). In fact I experimented with my laptop to see how the system works. I ran it on the Eclipse Mining Consortium and got an average Hash Rate of 0.46 MH/s (low, as was expected) earning me 0.000007BTC in 2 hours. Based on that I should be earning in excess of $40000/year (not accounting for electricity costs and assuming Difficulty & exchange rates stay constant) with a 5GH/s machine. Forgive me if I'm being pessimistic, but that sounds too good to be true. So should I take the plunge and buy the 5GH/s miner? Or is it not worth it?
Great news! Butterfly Labs is Shipping Monarch Bitcoin Miners Monarchs run at 700 GH/S with a power efficiency among the best in the industry at 0.70 W/GH. As a reward for our customers’ patience and loyalty, we are adjusting hashing power for existing orders in the queue to $1.97/GH (for 700 GH, effectively $1,379). Shortly before a customer’s order is ready to ship, they will receive details about their individual options. Those who have closely followed the Monarch development will notice that the 700 GH comes in above the 600 GH performance specification we originally mentioned, but below the 1TH/s level we are aiming to achieve based on the strength of the underlying ASIC chip. While we have achieved much higher speeds on test boards, our engineers are still working toward a board solution that will deliver higher speeds within the power consumption, and the temperature range required.
received my butterfly labs 5GH/s usb miner..... and thats when it started.
Well I received my Butterfly labs bitcoin miner today. Which was weird, delivery on a Saturday doesn't normally happen. Has been a looong wait, zero communication from the company. A couple of weeks ago I received an email from a shipping company advising my miner was being shipped and quoting a tracking number that turned out to be delivered months prior to placing the order. At least my email query back to the shipping company received a response "oh, sorry about the wrong tracking number", but no useful information such as a correct tracking number or advice on what date to expect delivery. Unpacked the box, no instructions, just a card referring to the butterfly labs forum pages. Attempting to download easyminer isn't working, repeated failures to download the file. (download starts but stops before the 54MB file is complete). Have to say, I've not been impressed by the customer service, would have been happy to pay an extra $5-$10 for some actual communication. I was close to telling my credit card supplier to reverse the charges. Will be running on my laptop (windows 7 home premium) initially, to check it works, then moving to my ubuntu server. any suggestions on how to get the easyminer download? (or should I start with the BFG miner?)
The people have spoken and the ban has been lifted. Talk of Butterflylabs is permitted. I still think it's a bad idea to buy one at this point...
After reading this post and feeling sorry for that hopeful bitcoin miner, I took it upon myself to ban all discussions of butterfly labs until the company was proven capable of shipping products. After some reflection on the situation I realized how wrong that demand was. Although I still think it a horrible idea to make a purchase from butterflylabs, I am not going to ban the discussion of it. Good luck out there!
Stability of the difficulty. A weakness you may not be aware of.
EDIT: Here's a TL;DR Sorry if I rambled on a bit there. I'll try to make my point a bit more concise here. TL;DR: If bitcoin starts to gain mainstream success, eventually a large percentage of the miners will be in it for the profit and not for the good of bitcoin. My fear is a crash in bitcoin's value after achieving general acceptance as a form of payment could cause a crash in hash rate from miners shutting down when the boss sees a drop in profitability. A crash in hash rate could possibly destroy bitcoin's usefulness as a form of exchange, driving the price down further, killing the currency. In my post I describe a possible solution to make scaling down difficulty to match a sudden drop in hash rate smother. If this interests you, then please read my post and share your thoughts. I feel like this is an obvious flaw in the protocol that was overlooked. Am I wrong? If so, please tell me because I'd like to have my worries eased. ASIC miners and the rapid increase in difficulty have created a new point of failure in the bitcoin network that was never that large of a problem before. No, I’m not talking about the increased centralisation of mining that you see so many people complaining about. I’m talking about the rising difficulty itself and the way the network scales the difficulty. It allows for smooth transitions in the upward direction, but a sharp decline in hash rate could kill bitcoin completely. The readjusting of the difficulty doesn’t really happen every two weeks, it’s really every 2,016 blocks which should be about two weeks in theory. If we were to lose a large chunk of the hash rate, lets say 66%, block discovery time will increase to 30 minutes per block. Maybe that’s not a huge deal, but it definitely impacts the convenience and usability of bitcoin as a means of exchange and would certainly impact the price negatively. Also, it’s possible that we would be stuck at this slow confirmation rate for 6 weeks in this example. Perhaps it is an unlikely scenario that such a large amount of hash rate is lost within a short span, but think about it this way. Imagine a point in the future where ASIC miners account for over 98% of the hash rate. Maybe bitcoin is well on it’s way into mainstream acceptance in this future. There may be large corporations that own large mining farms. These corporations may be publicly traded companies with a responsibility to maximize profits for their shareholders. If the value of bitcoin were to crash, there’s a good chance that some of these corporations may shut down their mining operations because it no longer has a good ROI in the opinion of their CEO. Maybe the next reward halving is coming up soon, that could also cause miners to shut down. This would slow down transaction confirmations, impacting it’s usefulness as a means of exchange and driving the price down even lower, driving even more miners to shut down. This would continue exponentially until the only remaining hashing power is us, the early adopters, true believers, and ASIC manufacturers. We could very easily end up in a situation with hour long confirmation times or longer, and the next difficulty adjustment being months away. That would essentially completely kill off bitcoin. It’s not logical to assume there will never be a large drop in hash rate between now and 2140. It’s not possible to predict political events that far into the future. Maybe world war 3 happens and China decides to unplug their whole country from the outside internet. Maybe Butterfly Labs successfully ships out 1,000,000 terahash miners that run on sunshine dust and unicorn farts and they quickly become the defacto standard, and then it’s discovered that they are a fire hazard. Many people are killed, homes are lost, and people just start turning them off out of fear. You just don't know what will happen that far into the future. I have an idea about how the protocol could be modified to protect against this sort of scenario and allow for a sharp decrease in hash rate without losing its usefulness as a means of exchange. There should be an emergency mode that drastically cuts the difficulty rate. This emergency mode can be requested by any node in the network but will only occur if the network has consensus from the nodes. The request could be triggered by two possible events. The first trigger event should be if no blocks are discovered for a certain span of time, lets say an hour and a half. The second event should be if a certain number of consecutive blocks take over 25 minutes to discover. The reason for using 25 minutes as the trigger is because that would require a loss of 55% so in theory a single person couldn't trigger it without having over 50% and in that scenario we have worse problems than the falling hash rate. Once the event is triggered, the difficulty should be slashed by a factor of 10x and reduce the block reward to 0. If it’s impossible to have no reward blocks, then use a dust amount of bitcoin like a few Satoshies. If the event was triggered by 25 minute confirmation times then the new emergency block discovery time will be 2.5 minutes. This will have the immediate effect of speeding up transactions that have possibly been waiting awhile for confirmations. The rapid block time will have the secondary effect of quickly and more accurately calculating the new hash rate of the network. (More data points over a shorter spread of time.) The removal of the block reward serves to disincentivize miners with lots of hashing power from trying to trigger the event on purpose so they could make more bitcoins at a lower difficulty rate and also prevents the creation of large amount of bitcoins since it would be moving into an unknown block discovery rate. This emergency event should not last long because miners would just shut down even faster with no block reward. Lets say it only lasts 96 blocks. Assuming 2.5 minute confirmation times, 96 blocks would take 4 hours to mine but that number could vary depending on how much hash rate was lost. Lets put this in perspective. A sudden loss of 55% of the hash rate would result in a loss of 4 hours of block rewards. A loss of 90% would be 16 hours with no block rewards. After 96 blocks have been mined, the network can make an estimation on the new hash rate based on the speed those blocks took, and generate a new difficulty to resume normal 10 minute confirmation times and normal block rewards. However, such a short span of time may not be enough to generate an accurate difficulty for the network. The network should recalculate the difficulty again after 432 blocks (3 days), and then resume the normal 2 week schedule. Each time an emergency event is triggered, the next scheduled halving of the block reward should be moved back by 96 blocks. That way these events have no effect on the mathematical total of bitcoins that can possibly be mined by 2140. Even if these events are very unlikely and it’s possible that this scenario will never play out, it would be added security to the value of bitcoin to have fail safes in place in the event of huge losses in hash rate. It could only add to the strength of bitcoin. It gives it the robustness it needs to survive a crash in price in a world where the miners are mostly interested in profits and ROI, not the good of bitcoin. EDIT: Here's another TL;DR of my proposed solution Basicly the nodes can request an emergency drop in hash rate if it notices block confirmation times rise above 25 minutes. This would require a loss of 55% of the hash rate. If the nodes have consensus on this request then the difficulty gets slashed by a factor of 10 and the network will mine 96 blocks with no block reward. That will take 4 hours with a 55% hash rate loss and 16 hours at a 90% hash rate loss. After the 96 blocks are mined, the network will calculate the appropriate difficulty based on the discovery rate that those blocks were mined. Normal block confirmations and block rewards will then resume at that point. What makes it nice is it will only be triggered by extreme cases. Also, mining for 4 to 16 hours for the good of bitcoin is an easier pill to swallow than just keep mining indefinitely into a possibly dying system for the good of bitcoin.
Butterfly Labs has shipped its first Bitfofce SC 60 bitcoin miner, as reports a Butterfly Labs forum user Bitcoin and Butterfly Labs: What smelled like a rat apparently was. David Gewirtz tells the story of why he almost bought, but didn't and how the math worked in favor of the scammers. While it is possible we will begin shipping limited quantities by the end of the week of the 21st, it’s more likely we will begin shipping the following week, assuming no blocking issues arise. The miner comes in the form of a PCI card, and according to information on the Butterfly Labs website, hashes at 600 GH/s whilst consuming 350 watts of power. I think the Butterfly Labs 5GH/s miners are perfect for someone on a budget as they will provide the most bang for your buck, so to speak, as compared to what you would get from putting together a mining rig with GPU cards that could become obsolete soon after they start shipping ASIC’s. There is nobody out there in the industry that is putting that kind of power into a mining machine for ... Make Offer - Butterfly Labs Monarch BPU700C 725-850GH/s Miner USB or PCI-E Card SHA256 Butterfly Labs BFL Little Single BF0050G ASIC Bitcoin BTC SHA-256 Miner 60GH/s $35.00
This is an overview of how I mine Bitcoins using a mining device from Butterfly Labs, a Raspberry Pi to control it, and MinePeon software to mine and connect... Quick demo of the Butterfly Labs 5 GH/s miner. KnCMiner Jupiter - Bitcoin Miner 500GH/s+ 28nm ASIC chips - unboxing and setup 1080p - Duration: 4:18. Florian Uhlemann 131,038 views This short video clip demonstrates the sound levels of the Monarch bitcoin miner during testing within the test facility's anechoic chamber. The registered 5... And exclude shipping which will be added according to location on final payment. Effective Hash Rate 6 TH/s ASIC Bitcoin Miner MAT ASIC 20 x MAT 300 GH/s 28nm ASIC Controller Board MAT Board ... Check out my latest Raspberry Pi project using a Butterfly labs Jalapeno 5 Gh/s Bitcoin miner and a Raspberry Pi Model B running Raspbian. Buy a bitcoin mine...