We won’t be silencing people here. Other forum users have a right to respond to your comments.
4 Likes
yes, yes, you won’t be doing a lot things, that should be done.
just have sold all my zec, it was hard at this price, but i did it.
moving all my rigs to other coin.
bye bye, won’t disturb you anymore.
2 Likes
No one from you pro ASIC want to comment my post.
In one day when price off zcash is falling someone put online equivalent off 200 000 1080TI (or 200 million dollars in money if it was GPU) which is more then NVIDIA has ever produced.
So who is that? And in same day dropped price off Z9 to half .
1 Like
I commented it allready yesterday, and actually the day bevor as well as i watch every day the ZEC miningpool hashrate distribution, so i will just write it again after you seem to missed it:
- i noticed, and shared the info, that an unknown miningpool is shifting the % of the known pools strongly.
While it was yesterday about 80 MH/s it’s for the last 24 hours allready 108 MH/s
resource: 24h chart at https://explorer.zcha.in/statistics/miners#
There are some plausible explainations for it:
-
A new Asic player is in the game. Baikal? Innosilicon? or the announced ASICminer Equihash 40K went online? I gave it the highest % chance as July was announced for shipping. So there is no way they can make it without “testing”… Due the announced fact i give it the most likely and possible option.
-
Antpool by Bitmain.
a.) The previous Antpool we followed over the last weeks had 25 MH/s, but is now down to 2 MH/s. Seems these are indeed the units they shipped in beginning (could be an explaination why their pool went down with hashrate). There is a 2nd unknown bigger pool online since some days with 17 MH/s which could be the new open Antpool. Would fit the hashrate that went down, was shipped and goes now online again one by one…
As said, this pool has only 17 MH/s the last 24 hours and most likely has the shipped units in it.
b.) Bitmain released for “testing” the Maxi version. Would make as well sense, after they announced such thing will come, it’s only a matter of time until we see it online. For me that’s the 2nd plausible option. Very possible.
c.) Bitmain delivered a bigger customer, for such scenario it would explain the delay btw. first 77 units and the next units that will be shipped just in 14 days. Possible.
Nicehash/Genesis/Miningrigrentals/
While i thought until yesterday it could be a new cloud eventually and considered it as an option i don’t think it can hold anymore with over 100 MH/s. There is still the possibility it’s shifted hashrate, but i consider that by over 100 MH/s now highly unlikely.
If i had to bet on what we know and have, my bet would go to the ASICminer Equihash 40K by Asicminer…
However, i don’t think another explaination, other than the above view mentioned, could be the reason.
1 Like
-
With ASICs, you need to rent a warehouse because they are so loud and because they emit toxins. Needing a warehouse is a much higher barrier to entry than building a GPU rig.
-
Many people have powerful GPUs already in their computers for gaming. They can start GPU mining within minutes and with no additional financial risk.
-
ASIC mining almost always offers a worse return than GPU mining, which is yet another barrier to entry.
So I think your argument that ASICs open up mining to more people is completely false. They do the exact opposite.
4 Likes
With ASICs, you need to rent a warehouse because they are so loud and because they emit toxins. Needing a warehouse is a much higher barrier to entry than building a GPU rig.
Multi-gpu rigs emit the same toxins.
Many people have powerful GPUs already in their computers for gaming. They can start GPU mining within minutes and with no additional financial risk.
This is a problem because people aren’t committed to securing the network. ASICs force people to make a choice about which network they want to support. GPUs take zero risk and for Zcash that means the chance of the network security fluctuating highly - as we’ve already seen with migrant GPU miners. The mass switching from coin to coin, whichever is most profitable, is the largest problem with GPU mining. Low profit GPU coins are at a high risk of 51% attacks.
ASIC mining almost always offers a worse return than GPU mining, which is yet another barrier to entry.
This idea is completely false. I’ve done both and I can say that it has nothing to do with ASIC vs GPU, it has to do with the future viability and exchange rate of the coin being mined.
2 Likes
Good analysis. Thank you
1 Like
Z9 Miner does not require warehouse because noise is only equal to an airconditioner. ASIC miner er most commited to network because they cannot leave the algo unlike GPU’s.
10 units of Z9 @ 65 dB osimulatenous make 75 db. Which is equal to 1 Antminer S9 noise. Very nice
asic miner switch coins same as gpu miners . you can see them in nicehash same as gpu .
actually you see some asic supporters brag about how many coins they can mine using same asic to support their idea that asics are good and versatile and the best thing since curly fries as if its a plus in their argument, contradicting this very argument about “loyalty” that they keep putting forward again and again .
as for the 51% attack part, I believe that was covered intensively before and its proven that asics are exactly same as GPU in that regards and zcash itself is an example of having double the hash power of dash. an attacker is more likely to attack dash spending half of the resources he needs to attack zcash. given the fact that zcash is 2 years old only compared to 4 years old more expensive Dash. and no need to mention how many asic minable coins that can be attacked with less than the price of a happy meal.
as for the security the reality it is in the community only ! its never in the hardware . ending up with a handful of guys controlling 90% of the hashing power is a joke . and bitcoin itself is an example of that . I dont want to go into their forks and the secret hong kong meetings or the segwit or the Georgian oligarch who owns 15% of bitcoin hash power and his threats to the devs …etc.
i believe that " loyality " is a terrible argument to be braught forward every once in a while .
3 Likes
This is the worst misconception repeated over and over again in this thread. People just vote for the particular coin with the hash rate they can afford on the average. What you want to have in a stage of adoption is not the absolute value of the hashing power, it is the amount of “voters”. ASICS (and the huge GPU farms in some extent) is the equivalent of giving some “choosen ones” the power to multiply their votes.
3 Likes
Zcash is the only Equihash coin, that is secure from 51% attack as well as Dash is the only X11 coin, that is secure from 51% attack. Things don’t change with moving to ASICs. If Zcash doesn’t resist, it’s security will stay the same as well as the unsecurity of other non-resistant coins. However, the coin distribution will become more unfair and less effective. Right now distribution also works like a marketing for Zcash, afterwards Zcash will be the advertisment of Bitmain and it’s Z9. Low entry costs are important for any coins, that are not Bitcoin.
3 Likes
I believe in the future people will be astonished to see that the coins which are being mined by fewer people will lose its value quickly .I believe some shocking crashes will be witnessed in the future.
I am asking my self hypothetical question , what if I and other 2 guys control all the hashing power of btc .
I imagine the rest of the world one day will tell us to shove that hashing power up our a***. we dont need you any more . why should we need you . its only you who produce it and why we are suppose to get it from you ?! isn’t there any other alternative that will do your job better ? ofcorse there are ! .
more over not a single institution invested yet in it ! we won’t lose anything if your value is zero !
I my self have absolutely no need for btc at the moment . I guess more people will realize that eventually. at the moment zcash does everything btc does and better !
I like zcash, the community, the distribution, the privacy, the deflationary, many people have it,mint it, intrested in it, talk about the technology, use it.
if that is lost . then I am afraid the future will be another pump and dump ***coin. that is mined by few , you can’t monitor it , or trust its trusted setup, and good luck trying to convince people that the miners are not double spending in the z addresses and minting 100 million untraceable coins.
centralization is a huge gamble, specially for zcash. its consequences are severe in the future .
ether is strong for a huge reason . and thinking its not so bad for zcash to be like bitcoin is the utmost naivety.
Excellent post, solid and logical arguments.
I have argued for ASIC’s resistance in the short term, as ASIC resistance in the long term is ultimately futile, for all the reasons boxalex and others point out. The best that could ever be achieved in ASIC resistance is a stalemate where the performance of the ASIC is only marginally better than a GPU. But this would require significant resources and would ultimately detract from other features and utility of a coin.
However, this does not change the fact that ASIC’s as task specific hardware, can be regulated, while general purpose compute power cannot. There are very few places in the world where you cannot buy a PC or GPU due to regulations. This simply is not true for application specific hardware and will likely never be true. This ugly fact does not dictate that we never accept ASIC’s. Just that they should be accepted carefully, with a well thought out plan to address this fundamental issue.
As boxalex points out, only a few algo’s currently have multiple ASIC vendors and active competition. So in my mind we should not be arguing for or against ASIC’s, but asking how Zcash gets to where Bitcoin is today with the lowest risk possible?
IMO, ASIC’s are inevitable so we can either plan for it, or can keep arguing about it and let it happen on its own.
1 Like
Do you have any evidence of GPUs emitting toxins? There is evidence of ASICs doing so, but not GPUs. It makes sense, since GPUs are designed for home use, while ASICs are designed to be kept far away from humans. Nvidia and AMD also answer to regulatory standards. The same cannot be said of Bitmain.
Miners do not need to be committed to a certain coin. They are only committed to making money. This is an absurd justification for ASICs.
Look at the numbers I’ve presented or check out WhatToMine or similar sites. ASICs across the board are inferior investments compared to GPUs. This is deliberate. The ASIC manufacturers are also competing with their customers for mining profits. There is no way the customers can win in such an arrangement.
As an example, the Antminer D3, which came out less than a year ago, is already unprofitable for the vast majority of the world’s population. The L3 is rapidly approaching zero profitability. The first Decred ASICs, which came out around Janauary, are already paperweights. The first Siacoin ASIC, which also came out in January, is now making 22 cents per day with a power consumption of 1400 watts.
A 6 GPU rig that costs $2000 last year is still making $8 a day at a power consumption of roughly 1000w and with a high resale value.
ASIC mining is a terrible investment, expect for a few people who get in one the first batch. After the first batch, only Bitmain can profitably mine these coins.
6 Likes
First, I haven’t seen this anywhere, so I can’t say it’s true. Second, the ability to switch coins is much more limited with ASICs. GPUs still give miners less skin in the game when profits drop.
ending up with a handful of guys controlling 90% of the hashing power is a joke
This hasn’t shown to be true. Actually the opposite, because more non-technical miners can get involved, thus increasing coin distribution and decentralized mining. People with more funds will always be able to buy more GPUs, more ASICs - both are available to consumers big and small. This is one of those, “be fearful” arguments that doesn’t hold any weight.
ASICs across the board are inferior investments compared to GPUs
Mining profitability is based on difficulty and the exchange rate of a coin. You don’t instantly switch to an ASIC and make less if your percentage of hashpower stays the same. If you can’t keep up, then you will make less, but that’s a risk-based decision that each miner has to make.
1 Like
What I’ve found on this thread overall is a great deal of confirmation bias.
Confirmation bias - also called confirmatory bias or myside bias, is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one’s preexisting beliefs or hypotheses. It is a type of cognitive bias and a systematic error of inductive reasoning. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. Confirmation bias is a variation of the more general tendency of apophenia.
1 Like
Totally agree on that one. The best example was yesterday the “since when and how much” asic hashrate on the network “discussion”.
100 people claim that asics have been on the net since new year, some claims even further. Most claimed all the time in this 3.150 posts thread all way down that asics drove all the time difficulty up, have 100+ MHs on it for months, whatever not. No problem at all, but when i take and use their very own claim (i did it with intention) than a sudden everybody claims it’s not true, no proof, whatever, lol.
This said i totally agree with you… it’s actually more than obvious!
Exactly! If ASICs are already on the network then the difficulty won’t increase much more than it already has. If they aren’t then Bitmain is playing fair and not pre-mining. 
1 Like
I have a Foobot and 29 GPU’s and it measures only 125 on the volatile hydrocarbons scale which is the top of great. I do have 2 good air filters with charcoal though so it could be higher without filtered air. I can update when I get my minis.
1 Like