Hope you will go gown more
how it can go down?
people got used to difficulty chart already. many would like to invest zcash mining on that basis.
Bitmain stopped selling equihash miners while zec network hashrate never exceeded 2.15Ghs. No asic sold to the public… yet hashrate hits 3 Ghs.
Ofcourse diff will go up as soon as bitmain opens it’s doors. In such conditions ofcourse ZEC price on the market will fall under the pressure of “unknown” miners.
Coin from progressive and popular in the western world went for the Chinese money, slowly evolving into 100% Chinese coin.
Traded in China. Mined in China. Used in China.
First 4 pools all from China and that 4 are 79.2% off Zcash hashrate …other countries are now mostly irrelevant…off course there are probably lot who use chines pools for their ASIC but are not from China but China pools are in total domination.
I would say this increasing difficulty is strange. Some people claimed hashrate follows the price and with Bitcoin they are right. Bitcoin difficulty is dropping since the drop from 6500
While with Zcash, there is significant hashrate rise even tho the price has dropped quite a lot in past month.
I believe the answer is simple, and it relates to the question of, “Why would an ASIC manufacturer sell their devices rather than just secretly mining with them and keeping the mining rewards?”
The answer is that they can do both and maximize their profits. For example, say it costs Innosilicon $1000 to manufacture the A9 (an overestimate in my opinion). If they started out with 50% of the network hashrate back in June, they would be receiving half of the mining rewards. But then they started selling units for $5000 each, or 5x their manufacturing cost. Using that revenue, they can afford to build 4 times as many A9’s as they sold and immediately start mining for themselves again. The result is that they actually increased their share of the overall network hashrate (67%) despite selling their initial batch of ASICS and keeping a 1/5 of sales to cover expenses.
yep. we the sheep strengthen the wolf by buying his grain.
It’s rising probably because the next batch of ASIC’s were already ordered before the price went down. I don’t think they will produce further batches unless the price goes back up.
They’ll produce more batches as long as people are buying them, as it can only serve to increase their share of the network hashrate should they wish to maintain it (i.e. Sell one unit for $2500, manufacture 2 more at a cost of $2000 to maintain their current share of mining rewards and pocket $500). Anytime we see a pump in the ZEC price, it’s likely accompanied by a renewed interest in Equihash ASICs. The only thing that would stop Inno or Bitmain from producing new batches would be a complete lack of demand.
There is no reason why they wouldn’t produce and sell further batches as long as their is demand for these.
Just because for many of us it isn’t any more profitable due our electricity prices it doesn’t mean they facilities and guys/girls with 2-5 cents don’t have equihash asic demand…
I wonder if the zcash company really has any control at all over the network anymore. There are rumblings of a PoW change, but what power do they even have to enforce it? If 80% @dzonikg of hashpower is concentrated in the hands of a few chinese mining firms, they will chain split just as monero did. If all the users are chinese users, they may just choose to go with the “old network”. This isn’t anything new or unexpected, but I think many may have a false sense that the zcash company controls the zcash network at all. They dont, the miners do. zcash co only controls themselves. If they put out software that the network rejects, its effectively pointless. The network is now owned by the mining interests.
Not so sure… a fork wouldn’t survive without the skills/research zcashco provides, it would stagnate & wither without their support.
Not entirely. If they keep publishing open source, it wouldn’t be much of a stretch to keep incorporating whatever they do.
Like Bitcoin, the developers of the underlying protocol only have the power to publish forks, not enforce their acceptance, so this isn’t a new phenomenon or specific to Zcash. The important fact is that users control the network, not devs or even miners. There happens to be a large intersection between miners and users with Zcash, however the end users ultimately determine which fork is being used, not miners.
This is certainly possible, especially if the majority of Zcash users are also ASIC miners.
Miners can’t ignore a fork if the majority of end users accept it. For example, exchanges will cater to the fork that has the most interest from traders, so miners cannot force exchanges to accept the old chain. Ultimately end user demand (i.e. the community at large) decides which fork is the real Zcash.
The only contentious fork I could see happening relates to ASIC resistance, and that relates to the composition of end users. Are the majority of Zcash users also ASIC miners? Or are there still more users who are GPU miners/non-miners ? This is a critical question, because the community will probably not accept a fork that bricks their hardware from mining the coin in question. I don’t think I would ever support a fork that completely removes Equihash ASICs for reasons of self interest.
If you’ve read the blossom suggested update, it plans to gradually decrease % of mining rewards from ASICS to GPU miners. It will probably start with 20% to GPU miners, then to 40% GPU miners 40% ASICS (20% dev fund). I dont think they will ever brick ASICS off the network.
The founders reward 10%, most of the proposals discuss ramping gpus up because it’s less of a drastic effect on the hashrate when the new consensus algorithm begins
Its called harmony mining
Bitcoin hashrate goes down, ZCash hashrate goes up.
It’s obvious that number of Bitcoin mining ASICz are more than ZCash mining ASICz.
despite this Bitcoin hashrate goes down, Bitcoin difficulty goes down,
ZCash hashrate goes up, ZCash difficulty changes from 36 to 50 every day.
Isn’t it strange?
The users control what coins they use, they have no control over the network. If the miners do not accept the new fork and continue to mine the old one, you now have 2 ZECs, the users have no control over this.
They can choose to use the new code fork, but you are still left with 2 forks even tho the users never wanted it AKA no control. Sure the old fork might die off at some point, but the damage has already been done, a fork always hurts the price in the long run.
Miners CAN and have ignored forks in the past. You dont need a majority of users to accept it, why do you think we have so many forked shit coins right now? BCH did not have the majority when it forked, and look at what it turned into and the mess it has caused.
If 80% or more of the ASIC miners do not accept the fork and keep running the old code, you now have a forked shitcoin and there is nothing the end user can do about it. I would say miners are the ones that have the most control over a network, not the devs or users.
The devs can spend as many years as they want working on stuff, if the miners dont accept it, its useless.
The users can spend money on the legit fork all they want, but that does not make the fake one go away.
If the miners dont choose to update, you now have a fork even if the devs or users didnt want it.
New network hashrate record: 3.3772 GH/s, mostly increasing more … Not that it matters at all, just sharing …
it does not matter at all… right
maybe you will find some correlation between new miner and zec being sold?
why ZEC price keeps going down today?
maybe it has something to do with huuuuge unknown miner who took like 30% of the network today?
P.s. i can’t see this happening in big GPU network.