Simple & Accurate "2 Clicks" Bitcoin Mining Calculator ...
Bitcoin Mining Calculator CoinWarz
Quark is a decentralized digital monetary system. It facilitates sending Quarks to Friends, Family Members Online Payments free of charges and charge-backs. Military Grade Encryption. No Bank or Government Control. Quark coins are based on the original idea of Bitcoin but improved, more secure, faster transaction times and zero fees. With improvements to design and security. There is also a greater coin supply with higher block rewards for miners. Quark is fully Open Source.
An In-Depth Guide to: How do I Fix my Ledger Nano’s Stuck Ethereum Transaction?!?!?! (It’s Been Stuck for Weeks and NOTHING Traditional has Worked!!!!) As Well as: How Do I Choose My Nonce??? I’ve Tried MetaMask, MEW/MyEtherWallet, and Others, but Nothing is Working Correctly!!! I’m Dying by Stress!
So, if you were like me 1-2 months ago, you’ve probably already gone through 2,or 3, ...or 40 articles and guides that probably say something like: “YeP, eVeRy EtHeReUm UsEr WiLl EvEnTuAlLy HaVe ThE LoW-gAs ExPeRiEnCe, YoU’rE nOt AlOnE! DoN’t FrEaK OuT tHoUgH; ThErE iS a WaY tO fIx It!” Chances are, every time you read another useless article, you want to kill the nearest inanimate object, even though it was never alive in the first place. Nonetheless, you’re gonna kill it as much as it can be killed, holding nothing back; or, you’re just plotting to and slowly getting closer to executing the plan (and the object) every time you are insulted once again. However, if you have the ability to download software (MyCryptoWallet) on a PC, it should be safe to relax now. I think you’ve finally found some good news, because I am 99.99...% sure this will work for the issue that so many people are having at this time, around the end of the month of May, year 2020. More and more people are likely to be having this issue soon, since Ethereum's gas prices have been insanely high lately as well as having 300% price changes in a matter of minutes; Etherscan’s Gas tracker is nearly uselessly-inaccurate at this time. I've heard that there's a congestion attack; that was said a week ago, and it appears to be ongoing... (I can't think of any other suspect besides Justin Sun to blame it on... it must be incredibly expensive to overload the blockchain for this long... I may be wrong though...)
Let’s begin For myself, I was trying to send an ERC20 token when this dreadful issue attacked. Specifically, the token was either BSOV or GRT; I sent them 1 after the other and the first succeeded, and the second one took over a week. (They’re both great tokens in my opinion and deserve much more attention than they’ve been getting. BSOV is nearing its 1 year anniversary as I write this, and GRT is still in its 90 day community-development progress test, so of course I'm gonna take this opportunity to "shill" them; they are great tokens with great communities). I was able to finally fix it, after a week of mental agony (also the txn finally processed 1-2 hours before I found the solution, robbing me of the gratitude of fixing it myself... (╯‵□′)╯︵┻━┻ ...but now I guess I can hopefully save some of you the headaches that I endured... ) I’m providing the ability to do the same, in a step by step guide. Why did I go through all of this trouble? I'd fault the fact that I have ADHD and autism, which in my case can multiply each other’s intensity and cause me to “hyper-focus” on things, much much more than most with the same qualities, intentionally or not. Adderall is supposed to give me a bit of control over it, but except for in a very-generalized way, it’s still 90% up to chance and my default-capabilities to allow me control over my attention with self-willpower. But also Karma and Moons pls... ʘ‿ʘ
In MyCrypto, (I'm using the Windows 10 app, version 1.7.10) you will open to a screen that says "How would you like to access your wallet?". Choose Ledger, of course. (Unless your here for some non-ledger issue? Idk why you would be but ok.)
On the next screen (having your nano already plugged in, unlocked, and opened into the Ethereum app) click "Connect to Ledger Wallet"
A screen overlay should appear, titled: "Select an Address". Here is where it may get confusing for some users. Refer to "AAA" below to know how to find your account. (Geez, sorry lol that was a huge amount of info for a reddit reply; I might've over-elaborated a little bit too much. but hey it's valuable information nonetheless!)
After escaping the "AAA" section, you'll have accessed your account with MyCrypto. Awesome! To find your ERC20 tokens, (slight evil-laughter is heard from an unidentifiable origin somewhere in the back of your mind) go to "AAB".
(You may have decided to find the token(s) on your own, rather than daring to submit to my help again; if so, you may pity those who chose the other path... ~~(￣▽￣)~~) Now, once you've added your token, you should revert your attention to the account's transfer fill-out form!
I'll combine the steps you probably understood on your own, already. Put in the address that your stuck transaction is still trying to send currency to. If an ERC20 token is involved, use the drop-down menu to change "ETH" to the token in trouble. Input your amount into the box labeled... wait for it... "Amount". Click on "+Advanced".
Refer to Etherscan.com for the data you will need. Find the page for your "transaction(txn) hash/address" from the transaction history on the wallet/Ethereum-manager you used to send from. If that is unavailable, put your public address that your txn was sent from into the search tool and go to its info page; you should be able to find the pending txn there. Look to open the "more details" option to find the transaction's "Nonce" number.
Put the nonce in the "Nonce" box on MyCrypto; you will contest the pending txn with a new txn that offers larger gas fees, by using the same nonce. If (but most likely "When") the new transaction is processed first, for being more miner-beneficial, the nonce will then be completed, and the old transaction will be dropped because it requests an invalid, now-outdated nonce. Your account will soon be usable!
Go to the Gas Tracker, and it may or may not provide an informative reading. Choose whatever amount you think is best, but choose wisely; if you're too stingy it may get stuck again, and you'd need to pay another txn's gas to attempt another txn-fix.
At the time I write this, I'd recommend 50-100 gwei; to repeat myself, gas requirements are insane right now. To be safe, make the gas limit a little higher than MCW's automatic calculation, you may need to undo the check-mark for "Automatically Calculate Gas Limit".
Press "Send Transaction"!!!
You will need to validate the action through your nano. It will have you validate three different things if you are moving an ERC20 Token. It's a good idea to verify accuracy, as always.
Well, I hope this worked for you! If not, you can let me know in a reply and I'll try to figure it out with you. I like making these in-depth educational posts, so if you appreciate it please let me know; I'll probably make more posts like this in the future! ( Surely this is at least far better than Ledger's "Support" article where they basically just tell you "Yeah, we haven't bothered to make a way to manually select nonces. I guess we might try to make that available for Bitcoin accounts at some point in the future; who knows? lol"... that's not infuriating at all, right?)
AAA: Before I tell you how to find your address, I will first make it clear, within the italicized text, exactly which address you are looking for, if you are not already sure: You may also skip the text written in italics if your issue does not include an ERC20 token, if you wish. Ledger Live can confuse some users with its interface. On LL, to manage an ERC20 token, you first must go to your Ethereum account and add the token. When you then click on the added token under "Tokens" below the graph chart for your account's ETH amount over time, the screen will then open a new screen, that looks just the same, except focused on the specific ERC20 token. To confuse users further, there is then an option to "Star account", which then add the ETH icon with the ERC20 token's first letter or symbol overlapping, onto the easy access sidebar, as if it was another account of similar independency to the ETH account it was added to. This improperly displays the two "accounts" relation to each other. Your ERC20 holdings (at least for any and all ERC20 that I know of) are "held" in the exact-same address as the Ethereum address it was added to, which also "holds" any Ether you've added to it. You send both Ether (ETH) and any ERC20 Tokens to and from only Ethereum addresses of equivalent capabilities, in both qualities and quantities. In all basic terms and uses, they are the same. So, to know what the problematic account's address is, find the address of the Ethereum account it was added to in Ledger Live. Now, to find your address on MyCrypto, the most reliable way to find it, that I am aware of, is this: Open Ledger Live. Go to the screen of your Ethereum address (again, this is the one that you added your ERC20 token, if applicable. If you're not dealing with an ERC20 token, you may ignore everything I've put in Italics). Click on "Edit account"; this is the icon next to the star that may look like a hex-wrench tool. On the new screen-overlay, you will see "> ADVANCED LOGS". Click on the ">" and it will point down while revealing a drop-down with some data that you may or may not recognize/understand. Likely to be found indented and in the middle-ish area, you will see this line, or something hopefully similar: "freshAddressPath": "44'/60'/X'/0/0", The "X" will probably be the only thing that changes, and the actual data will have a number in its place; it will not be a letter. Let's now put that line to use in MyCrypto: Take the 44'/60'/X'/0/0 , and make sure you DO NOT copy the quotation marks, or that comma at the end either. You can do this before or after copying and/or pasting, but drop the second "/0" at the end; it was not necessary in my case, I expect that you won't need it either, and will probably just make MyCrypto see it as an invalid input. Okay, now go back to the "Select an Address" screen-overlay in MyCrypto. Next to "Addresses", click on the box on the right, and you should be shown a list of options to select from in a drop-down menu. Scroll all the way down, and you should find the "Custom" option at the very bottom. Select it. A new box will appear; probably directly to the right of the now-shortened box that now displays the "Custom" option that you just selected. This box will offer an interface for typed input. ...yep... once again, believe it or not, you should click it. Type " m/ ", no spaces before or after. Type in or paste the data we retrieved from ledger live. The box should now hold this: m/44'/60'/X'/0 Again, X should be a number. In fact, that number is probably equal to the number of Ethereum (not including any ERC20 wannabe) accounts that you've made on Ledger Live before making the one we're working on right now! (1st Eth. Acc. would have: X = 0, 2nd: X = 1, 3rd: X = 2, ...) Make sure you've included every apostrophe ( ' ), and solidus ( / ); there is NO APOSTROPHE for the "m" at the start and the "/0" at the end! If you press the enter key or click on the check-mark to the right of where you typed, the appropriate addresses will be generated, and the address you created through Ledger Live should be the first one on the list! Select your address and press "Unlock", and you are now accessing your account through the MyCrypto app's interface!
AAB: In order to access your ERC20 token, you will need to add them first. You may have to scroll down, but on the right-side of your unlocked account screen, you'll see a box with "Token Balances" as its header. Click "Scan for tokens". This may take a short bit of time, and when it's done it may or may not display your ERC20 token. If it worked, you can head on back to the main part. If you got the result I did, it won't display your token, or, if our result was exactly the same, it won't display any at all. However, you should now have the "Add Custom Token" option available, so see where that takes you. You should discover four boxes, specified in order (Address/ Decimals / Token_Symbol / Balance). You may only need to fill in the "Address" box, but if you need to fill others, you'll find those with the token's address; here's 2 ways to find it, if you don't already know. Method I: Since you've probably already been managing your token with Ledger Live, you can go to the LL screen of your "account" for that token; Right next to the account's icon, and directly above the name, you'll see: Contract: 0x??????...???????? Yes, go on; click it. You'll find the token's page on Etherscan; this was just a shortcut to the same place that both of the two previously referenced methods lead to. Skip to method... III? Method II: Go toEtherscan.com, or a similar Ethereum-blockchain-monitoring website, if you have a different preference. Search for the name of your token, and you should be able to see it as a search result. Activate your search manually of by selecting search option. Continue on with Method III. Method III (I&II; what makes you think there was a third method? I said 2!): At this point, you should find the "contract address" somewhere on the screen. This is the identity of the creature that breathes life into the token, allowing it to exist within the world of Ethereum. Steal it, and tell MyCrypto that you've left some of "your" tokens in the address of your ledger's Ethereum account. MyCrypto will trust and believe you without any concern or doubt, just by putting "your" contract address in the box for "Address"; it's almost too easy! Well whaddya know, this one isn't actually too long! Don't tell anyone who may have taken a little longer whilst finding out how to do it themselves, though. There's value in trying to do something on your own, at least at first, so I'll let them think they made the right choice (¬‿¬). But take this star for humbling yourself enough to seek further help when you need it, since that is a very important life skill as well! (o゜▽゜)o☆ Now, back to the useful stuff at the top...
EDIT: A comment below made me realize that this info should be added too. Here is my reply to the comment saying I could just use MetaMask. I said in the title that this guide is for questions where MEW and MetaMask aren’t working, but I guess it’s easy to miss. I used my u/caddark account to respond: (Using this account because u/caddarkcrypto doesn’t meet the karma/age standards to comment; the post had to be manually approved.) I guess I didn’t make it entirely clear; sorry: The target audience for this guide is anyone with a stuck Ethereum transaction that was initiated through Ledger Live AND are experiencing the same difficulties I had encountered while trying to fix this issue for myself. This wasn’t any regular stuck Ethereum transaction. Apparently before, there was an issue that made a Ledger Nano nearly impossible to connect to MetaMask (which is also Brave Browser’s integrated “crypto wallet” for the desktop version) and/or MEW (also perhaps any other browser wallets made for chrome and/or brave) that I heard was supposed to be fixed in a recent update. It might’ve been mostly patched, idk, but during my experience, (in which I was using the latest version of Ledger Live that is available right now,) that issue still remained. The really weird part was that it successfully connected to the browser wallets again after I fixed the stuck transaction. At first I thought that somehow the txn was what was bugging the connection. However, later, during no txn issues, I was again unable to connect. Seeing the same connection error again later, I opened up the MCW app I downloaded the day before, and was going to just use that. While in the process of operating MCW, I suddenly had another idea to try for the browser wallet so I went back to that just to quickly test it. The browser wallet worked perfectly... I don’t know how, but I think that somehow, something in MCW’s software, makes the browser wallets work. They don’t work for me without having MCW opened in the background first. EDIT 2: Markdown decided to stop working after I did the first edit... I might fix it tomorrow... how did that happen though??? What did I do? EDIT 3: nvm, I'm just fixing it now; I won't get much sleep tonight I guess.
Author: Gamals Ahmed, CoinEx Business Ambassador https://preview.redd.it/5bqakdqgl3g51.jpg?width=865&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b709794863977eb6554e3919b9e00ca750e3e704 A decentralized storage network that transforms cloud storage into an account market. Miners obtain the integrity of the original protocol by providing data storage and / or retrieval. On the contrary, customers pay miners to store or distribute data and retrieve it. Filecoin announced, that there will be more delays before its main network is officially launched. Filecoin developers postponed the release date of their main network to late July to late August 2020. As mentioned in a recent announcement, the Filecoin team said that the initiative completed the first round of the internal protocol security audit. Platform developers claim that the results of the review showed that they need to make several changes to the protocol’s code base before performing the second stage of the software testing process. Created by Protocol Labs, Filecoin was developed using File System (IPFS), which is a peer-to-peer data storage network. Filecoin will allow users to trade storage space in an open and decentralized market. Filecoin developers implemented one of the largest cryptocurrency sales in 2017. They have privately obtained over $ 200 million from professional or accredited investors, including many institutional investors. The main network was slated to launch last month, but in February 2020, the Philly Queen development team delayed the release of the main network between July 15 and July 17, 2020. They claimed that the outbreak of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) in China was the main cause of the delay. The developers now say that they need more time to solve the problems found during a recent codecase audit. The Filecoin team noted the following: “We have drafted a number of protocol changes to ensure that building our major network launch is safe and economically sound.” The project developers will add them to two different implementations of Filecoin (Lotus and go-filecoin) in the coming weeks. Filecoin developers conducted a survey to allow platform community members to cast their votes on three different launch dates for Testnet Phase 2 and mainnet. The team reported that the community gave their votes. Based on the vote results, the Filecoin team announced a “conservative” estimate that the second phase of the network test should begin by May 11, 2020. The main Filecoin network may be launched sometime between July 20 and August 21, 2020. The updates to the project can be found on the Filecoin Road Map. Filecoin developers stated: “This option will make us get the most important protocol changes first, and then implement the rest as protocol updates during testnet.” Filecoin is back down from the final test stage. Another filecoin decentralized storage network provider launched its catalytic test network, the final stage of the storage network test that supports the blockchain. In a blog post on her website, Filecoin said she will postpone the last test round until August. The company also announced a calibration period from July 20 to August 3 to allow miners to test their mining settings and get an idea of how competition conditions affected their rewards. Filecoin had announced earlier last month that the catalytic testnet test would precede its flagship launch. The delay in the final test also means that the company has returned the main launch window between August 31 and September 21. Despite the lack of clear incentives for miners and multiple delays, Filecoin has succeeded in attracting huge interest, especially in China. Investors remained highly speculating on the network’s mining hardware and its premium price. Mining in Filecoin In most blockchain protocols, “miners” are network participants who do the work necessary to promote and maintain the blockchain. To provide these services, miners are compensated in the original cryptocurrency. Mining in Filecoin works completely differently — instead of contributing to computational power, miners contribute storage capacity to use for dealing with customers looking to store data. Filecoin will contain several types of miners: Storage miners responsible for storing files and data on the network. Miners retrieval, responsible for providing quick tubes for file recovery. Miners repair to be carried out. Storage miners are the heart of the network. They earn Filecoin by storing data for clients, and computerizing cipher directories to check storage over time. The probability of earning the reward reward and transaction fees is proportional to the amount of storage that the Miner contributes to the Filecoin network, not the hash power. Retriever miners are the veins of the network. They earn Filecoin by winning bids and mining fees for a specific file, which is determined by the market value of the said file size. Miners bandwidth and recovery / initial transaction response time will determine its ability to close recovery deals on the network. The maximum bandwidth of the recovery miners will determine the total amount of deals that it can enter into. In the current implementation, the focus is mostly on storage miners, who sell storage capacity for FIL.
The current system specifications recommended for running the miner are:
NVIDIA-manufactured GPU (to be expanded).
SSD drive designated as large buffer (512GB +).
Large amount of RAM for data replication account (128GB +)
Compared to the hardware requirements for running a validity checker, these standards are much higher — although they definitely deserve it. Since these will not increase in the presumed future, the money spent on Filecoin mining hardware will provide users with many years of reliable service, and they pay themselves many times. Think of investing as a small business for cloud storage. To launch a model on the current data hosting model, it will cost millions of dollars in infrastructure and logistics to get started. With Filecoin, you can do the same for a few thousand dollars. Proceed to mining Deals are the primary function of the Filecoin network, and it represents an agreement between a client and miners for a “storage” contract. Once the customer decides to have a miner to store based on the available capacity, duration and price required, he secures sufficient funds in a linked portfolio to cover the total cost of the deal. The deal is then published once the mine accepts the storage agreement. By default, all Filecoin miners are set to automatically accept any deal that meets their criteria, although this can be disabled for miners who prefer to organize their deals manually. After the deal is published, the customer prepares the data for storage and then transfers it to the miner. Upon receiving all the data, the miner fills in the data in a sector, closes it, and begins to provide proofs to the chain. Once the first confirmation is obtained, the customer can make sure the data is stored correctly, and the deal has officially started. Throughout the deal, the miner provides continuous proofs to the chain. Clients gradually pay with money they previously closed. If there is missing or late evidence, the miner is punished. More information about this can be found in the Runtime, Cut and Penalties section of this page. At Filecoin, miners earn two different types of rewards for their efforts: storage fees and reward prevention. Storage fees are the fees that customers pay regularly after reaching a deal, in exchange for storing data. This fee is automatically deposited into the withdrawal portfolio associated with miners while they continue to perform their duties over time, and is locked for a short period upon receipt. Block rewards are large sums given to miners calculated on a new block. Unlike storage fees, these rewards do not come from a linked customer; Instead, the new FIL “prints” the network as an inflationary and incentive measure for miners to develop the chain. All active miners on the network have a chance to get a block bonus, their chance to be directly proportional to the amount of storage space that is currently being contributed to the network. Duration of operation, cutting and penalties “Slashing” is a feature found in most blockchain protocols, and is used to punish miners who fail to provide reliable uptime or act maliciously against the network. In Filecoin, miners are susceptible to two different types of cut: storage error cut, unanimously reduce error. Storage Error Reduction is a term used to include a wider range of penalties, including error fees, sector penalties, and termination fees. Miners must pay these penalties if they fail to provide reliability of the sector or decide to leave the network voluntarily. An error fee is a penalty that a miner incurs for each non-working day. Sector punishment: A penalty incurred by a miner of a disrupted sector for which no error was reported before the WindowPoSt inspection. The sector will pay an error fee after the penalty of the sector once the error is discovered. Termination Fee: A penalty that a miner incurs when a sector is voluntary or involuntarily terminated and removed from the network. Cutting consensus error is the penalty that a miner incurs for committing consensus errors. This punishment applies to miners who have acted maliciously against the network consensus function. Filecoin miners Eight of the top 10 Felticoin miners are Chinese investors or companies, according to the blockchain explorer, while more companies are selling cloud mining contracts and distributed file sharing system hardware. CoinDesk’s Wolfe Chao wrote: “China’s craze for Filecoin may have been largely related to the long-standing popularity of crypto mining in the country overall, which is home to about 65% of the computing power on Bitcoin at discretion.” With Filecoin approaching the launch of the mainnet blocknet — after several delays since the $ 200 million increase in 2017 — Chinese investors are once again speculating strongly about network mining devices and their premium prices. Since Protocol Labs, the company behind Filecoin, released its “Test Incentives” program on June 9 that was scheduled to start in a week’s time, more than a dozen Chinese companies have started selling cloud mining contracts and hardware — despite important details such as economics Mining incentives on the main network are still endless. Sales volumes to date for each of these companies can range from half a million to tens of millions of dollars, according to self-reported data on these platforms that CoinDesk has watched and interviews with several mining hardware manufacturers. Filecoin’s goal is to build a distributed storage network with token rewards to spur storage hosting as a way to drive wider adoption. Protocol Labs launched a test network in December 2019. But the tokens mined in the testing environment so far are not representative of the true silicon coin that can be traded when the main network is turned on. Moreover, the mining incentive economics on testnet do not represent how final block rewards will be available on the main network. However, data from Blockecoin’s blocknetin testnet explorers show that eight out of 10 miners with the most effective mining force on testnet are currently Chinese miners. These eight miners have about 15 petabytes (PB) of effective storage mining power, accounting for more than 85% of the total test of 17.9 petable. For the context, 1 petabyte of hard disk storage = 1000 terabytes (terabytes) = 1 million gigabytes (GB). Filecoin craze in China may be closely related to the long-standing popularity of crypt mining in the country overall, which is home to about 65% of the computing power on Bitcoin by estimation. In addition, there has been a lot of hype in China about foreign exchange mining since 2018, as companies promote all types of devices when the network is still in development. “Encryption mining has always been popular in China,” said Andy Tien, co-founder of 1475, one of several mining hardware manufacturers in Philquin supported by prominent Chinese video indicators such as Fenbushi and Hashkey Capital. “Even though the Velikoyen mining process is more technologically sophisticated, the idea of mining using hard drives instead of specialized machines like Bitcoin ASIC may be a lot easier for retailers to understand,” he said. Meanwhile, according to Feixiaohao, a Chinese service comparable to CoinMarketCap, nearly 50 Chinese crypto exchanges are often somewhat unknown with some of the more well-known exchanges including Gate.io and Biki — have listed trading pairs for Filecoin currency contracts for USDT. In bitcoin mining, at the current difficulty level, one segment per second (TH / s) fragmentation rate is expected to generate around 0.000008 BTC within 24 hours. The higher the number of TH / s, the greater the number of bitcoins it should be able to produce proportionately. But in Filecoin, the efficient mining force of miners depends on the amount of data stamped on the hard drive, not the total size of the hard drive. To close data in the hard drive, the Filecoin miner still needs processing power, i.e. CPU or GPU as well as RAM. More powerful processors with improved software can confine data to the hard drive more quickly, so miners can combine more efficient mining energy faster on a given day. As of this stage, there appears to be no transparent way at the network level for retail investors to see how much of the purchased hard disk drive was purchased which actually represents an effective mining force. The U.S.-based Labs Protocol was behind Filecoin’s initial coin offer for 2017, which raised an astonishing $ 200 million. This was in addition to a $ 50 million increase in private investment supported by notable venture capital projects including Sequoia, Anderson Horowitz and Union Square Ventures. CoinDk’s parent company, CoinDk, has also invested in Protocol Labs. After rounds of delay, Protocol Protocols said in September 2019 that a testnet launch would be available around December 2019 and the main network would be rolled out in the first quarter of 2020. The test started as promised, but the main network has been delayed again and is now expected to launch in August 2020. What is Filecoin mining process? Filecoin mainly consists of three parts: the storage market (the chain), the blockecin Filecoin, and the search market (under the chain). Storage and research market in series and series respectively for security and efficiency. For users, the storage frequency is relatively low, and the security requirements are relatively high, so the storage process is placed on the chain. The retrieval frequency is much higher than the storage frequency when there is a certain amount of data. Given the performance problem in processing data on the chain, the retrieval process under the chain is performed. In order to solve the security issue of payment in the retrieval process, Filecoin adopts the micro-payment strategy. In simple terms, the process is to split the document into several copies, and every time the user gets a portion of the data, the corresponding fee is paid. Types of mines corresponding to Filecoin’s two major markets are miners and warehousers, among whom miners are primarily responsible for storing data and block packages, while miners are primarily responsible for data query. After the stable operation of the major Filecoin network in the future, the mining operator will be introduced, who is the main responsible for data maintenance. In the initial release of Filecoin, the request matching mechanism was not implemented in the storage market and retrieval market, but the takeover mechanism was adopted. The three main parts of Filecoin correspond to three processes, namely the stored procedure, retrieval process, packaging and reward process. The following figure shows the simplified process and the income of the miners: The Filecoin mining process is much more complicated, and the important factor in determining the previous mining profit is efficient storage. Effective storage is a key feature that distinguishes Filecoin from other decentralized storage projects. In Filecoin’s EC consensus, effective storage is similar to interest in PoS, which determines the likelihood that a miner will get the right to fill, that is, the proportion of miners effectively stored in the entire network is proportional to final mining revenue. It is also possible to obtain higher effective storage under the same hardware conditions by improving the mining algorithm. However, the current increase in the number of benefits that can be achieved by improving the algorithm is still unknown. It seeks to promote mining using Filecoin Discover Filecoin announced Filecoin Discover — a step to encourage miners to join the Filecoin network. According to the company, Filecoin Discover is “an ever-growing catalog of numerous petabytes of public data covering literature, science, art, and history.” Miners interested in sharing can choose which data sets they want to store, and receive that data on a drive at a cost. In exchange for storing this verified data, miners will earn additional Filecoin above the regular block rewards for storing data. Includes the current catalog of open source data sets; ENCODE, 1000 Genomes, Project Gutenberg, Berkley Self-driving data, more projects, and datasets are added every day. Ian Darrow, Head of Operations at Filecoin, commented on the announcement: “Over 2.5 quintillion bytes of data are created every day. This data includes 294 billion emails, 500 million tweets and 64 billion messages on social media. But it is also climatology reports, disease tracking maps, connected vehicle coordinates and much more. It is extremely important that we maintain data that will serve as the backbone for future research and discovery”. Miners who choose to participate in Filecoin Discover may receive hard drives pre-loaded with verified data, as well as setup and maintenance instructions, depending on the company. The Filecoin team will also host the Slack (fil-Discover-support) channel where miners can learn more. Filecoin got its fair share of obstacles along the way. Last month Filecoin announced a further delay before its main network was officially launched — after years of raising funds. In late July QEBR (OTC: QEBR) announced that it had ceded ownership of two subsidiaries in order to focus all of the company’s resources on building blockchain-based mining operations. The QEBR technology team previously announced that it has proven its system as a Filecoin node valid with CPU, GPU, bandwidth and storage compatibility that meets all IPFS guidelines. The QEBR test system is connected to the main Filecoin blockchain and the already mined filecoin coin has already been tested. “The disclosure of Sheen Boom and Jihye will allow our team to focus only on the upcoming global launch of Filecoin. QEBR branch, Shenzhen DZD Digital Technology Ltd. (“ DZD “), has a strong background in blockchain development, extraction Data, data acquisition, data processing, data technology research. We strongly believe Filecoin has the potential to be a leading blockchain-based cryptocurrency and will make every effort to make QEBR an important player when Mainecoin mainnet will be launched soon”. IPFS and Filecoin Filecoin and IPFS are complementary protocols for storing and sharing data in a decentralized network. While users are not required to use Filecoin and IPFS together, the two combined are working to resolve major failures in the current web infrastructure. IPFS It is an open source protocol that allows users to store and transmit verifiable data with each other. IPFS users insist on data on the network by installing it on their own device, to a third-party cloud service (known as Pinning Services), or through community-oriented systems where a group of individual IPFS users share resources to ensure the content stays live. The lack of an integrated catalytic mechanism is the challenge Filecoin hopes to solve by allowing users to catalyze long-term distributed storage at competitive prices through the storage contract market, while maintaining the efficiency and flexibility that the IPFS network provides. Using IPFS In IPFS, the data is hosted by the required data installation nodes. For data to persist while the user node is offline, users must either rely on their other peers to install their data voluntarily or use a central install service to store data. Peer-to-peer reliance caching data may be a good thing as one or multiple organizations share common files on an internal network, or where strong social contracts can be used to ensure continued hosting and preservation of content in the long run. Most users in an IPFS network use an installation service. Using Filecoin The last option is to install your data in a decentralized storage market, such as Filecoin. In Filecoin’s structure, customers make regular small payments to store data when a certain availability, while miners earn those payments by constantly checking the integrity of this data, storing it, and ensuring its quick recovery. This allows users to motivate Filecoin miners to ensure that their content will be live when it is needed, a distinct advantage of relying only on other network users as required using IPFS alone. Filecoin, powered by IPFS It is important to know that Filecoin is built on top of IPFS. Filecoin aims to be a very integrated and seamless storage market that takes advantage of the basic functions provided by IPFS, they are connected to each other, but can be implemented completely independently of each other. Users do not need to interact with Filecoin in order to use IPFS. Some advantages of sharing Filecoin with IPFS:
Filecoin and IPFS CIDs share hash specifications.
Use libp2p by Filecoin nodes to create secure connections with each other.
Messaging between nodes and cluster propagation is facilitated in Filecoin by libp2p pubsub.
IPLD use for blockchain data structures.
Use Graphsync to transfer data between nodes.
Of all the decentralized storage projects, Filecoin is undoubtedly the most interested, and IPFS has been running stably for two years, fully demonstrating the strength of its core protocol. Filecoin’s ability to obtain market share from traditional central storage depends on end-user experience and storage price. Currently, most Filecoin nodes are posted in the IDC room. Actual deployment and operation costs are not reduced compared to traditional central cloud storage, and the storage process is more complicated. PoRep and PoSt, which has a large number of proofs of unknown operation, are required to cause the actual storage cost to be so, in the early days of the release of Filecoin. The actual cost of storing data may be higher than the cost of central cloud storage, but the initial storage node may reduce the storage price in order to obtain block rewards, which may result in the actual storage price lower than traditional central cloud storage. In the long term, Filecoin still needs to take full advantage of its P2P storage, convert storage devices from specialization to civil use, and improve its algorithms to reduce storage costs without affecting user experience. The storage problem is an important problem to be solved in the blockchain field, so a large number of storage projects were presented at the 19th Web3 Summit. IPFS is an important part of Web3 visibility. Its development will affect the development of Web3 to some extent. Likewise, Web3 development somewhat determines the future of IPFS. Filecoin is an IPFS-based storage class project initiated by IPFS. There is no doubt that he is highly expected. Resources :
I am working with a friend to set up a bitcoin mining rig our university. I'm a business major, but my friend is in engineering and has unlimited free access to a 220v power supply. Would it be worth buying 100 AntMiner S9's on eBay and making our own rig? The math breaks down as follows according to https://www.cryptocompare.com/mining/calculatobtc?HashingPower=1350&HashingUnit=TH%2Fs&PowerConsumption=137500&CostPerkWh=0&MiningPoolFee=1 1350 TH/s hashrate (with 100 S9s at 13.5 TH/s for each unit) Electricity cost is zero. Predicted payout is $3,390/month. Am I missing something? It seems too good to be true, making 4k/month with only 10k up front. EDIT: Assume the rig was well hidden and not discovered for a few years.
Bull market is back… Another wave of hacker attacks starts again?
The picture from COINDESK related reports On Aug. 2, Ethereum Classic Labs (ETC Labs) made an important announcement on ETC blockchain. ETC Labs said due to network attack, Ethereum Classic suffered a reorganization on August 1st. This has been the second attack on the Ethereum Classic Network this year. Did renting-power cause the problem again? In this ETC incident, one of the miners mined a large number of blocks offline. When the miner went online, due to its high computing power, and some versions of mining software did not support large-scale blockchain mergers, the consensus failed. Therefore, the entire network was out of sync, which produced an effect similar to a 51% attack. Finally, it caused the reorganization of 3693 blocks, starting at 10904147. The deposit and withdrawal between the exchanges and mining pools had to be suspended for troubleshooting during this period. Media report shows that the blockchain reorganization may be caused by a miner (or a mining pool) disconnected during mining. Although it has been restored to normal after 15 hours of repair, it does reflect the vulnerability of the Proof of Work (PoW) network: once the computing power of the network is insufficient, the performance of one single mining pool can affect the entire network, which is neither distributed nor secure for the blockchain. Neither does it have efficiency. At present, most consensus algorithms of blockchains are using PoW, which has been adopted over 10 years. In PoW, each miner solves a hashing problem. The probability to solve the problem successfully is proportional to the ratio of the miner’s hash power to the total hash power of mainnet. Although PoW has been running for a long time, the attack model against PoW is very straightforward to understand, and has attracted people’s attention for a long time: such an attack, also known as double-spending attack, may happen when an attacker possesses 51% of the overall network hash power. The attacker can roll back any blocks in the blockchain by creating a longer and more difficult chain and as a result, modify the transaction information. Since hash power can be rented to launch attacks, some top 30 projects have suffered from such attacks. In addition to this interference, the main attack method is through the computing power market such as Nice Hash. Hackers can rent hashpower to facilitate their attacks, which allows the computing power to rise rapidly in a short time and rewrite information. In January of this year, the Ethereum Classic was attacked once, and it was also the case that hackers can migrate computing power from the fiercely competitive Bitcoin and Ethereum, and use it to attack smaller projects, such as ETH Classic. The picture shows the cost of attacking ETH Classic. It can be seen that it costs only $6,634 to attack ETH Classic for one hour. The security of one network is no longer limited by whether miners within the main net take more than 51% of the total hash power, rather it is determined by whether the benevolent (non-hackers) miners take more than 51% of the total hash power from the pool of projects that use similar consensus algorithm. For example, the hash power of Ethereum is 176 TH/s and that of Ethereum Classic is 9 TH/s. In this way, if one diverts some hash power from Ethereum (176 TH/s) to Ethereum Classic, then one can easily launch a double-spending attack to Ethereum Classic. The hash power ratio for this attack between the two projects is 9/176 = 5.2%, which is a tiny number. https://preview.redd.it/qj57vgmgb9f51.png?width=699&format=png&auto=webp&s=39c1efc3645f268dbf1c73e1b373d532d5461006 As one of the top 30 blockchain projects, Ethereum Classic has been attacked several times. Therefore, those small and medium-sized projects with low hash power and up-and-coming future projects are facing great potential risks. This is the reason that many emerging public chain projects abandon PoW and adopt PoS. Proof of Stake (PoS) can prevent 51% attack but has problems of its own In addition to PoW consensus, another well-adopted consensus algorithm is Proof of Stake (PoS). The fundamental concept is that the one who holds more tokens has the right to create the blocks. This is similar to shareholders in the stock market. The token holders also have the opportunities to get rewards. The advantages of PoS are: (i) the algorithm avoids wasting energy like that in PoW calculation; and (ii) its design determines that the PoS will not be subjected to 51% hash power attack since the algorithm requires the miner to possess tokens in order to modify the ledger. In this way, 51% attack becomes costly and meaningless. https://preview.redd.it/rf65o1vhb9f51.png?width=685&format=png&auto=webp&s=9d7a9f9dab6ce823a224e91afa9d116310cf27e1 In terms of disadvantages, nodes face the problem of accessibility. PoS requires a permission to enter the network and nodes cannot enter and exit freely and thus lacks openness. It can easily be forked. In the long run, the algorithm is short of decentralization, and leads to the Matthew effect of accumulated advantages whereby miners with more tokens will receive more rewards and perpetuate the cycle. More importantly, the current PoS consensus has not been verified for long-term reliability. Whether it can be as stable as the PoW system is yet to be verified. For some of the PoW public chains that are already launched, if they want to switch consensus, they need to do hard fork, which divides communities and carries out a long consensus upgrade and through which Ethereum is undergoing. Is there a safer and better solution? QuarkChain Provide THE Solution: High TPS Protection + PoSW Consensus For new-born projects, and some small or medium-sized projects, they all are facing the problem of power attack. For PoW-based chains, there are always some chains with lower hash power than others (ETC vs. ETH, BCH vs BTC), and thus the risk of attack is increased. In addition, the interoperability among the chains, such as cross-chain operation, is also a problem. In response, QuarkChain has designed a series of mechanisms to solve this problem. This can be summed up as a two-layer structure with a calculation power allocation and Proof of Staked Work (PoSW) consensus. First of all, there is a layer of sharding, which can be considered as some parallel chains. Each sharding chain handles the transactions relatively independently. Such design forms the basis to ensure the performance of the entire system. To avoid security issues caused by the dilution of the hash power, we also have a root chain. The blocks of the root chain do not contain transactions, but are responsible for verifying the transactions of each shard. Relying on the hash power distribution algorithm, the hash power of the root chain will always account for 51% of the net. Each shard, on the other hand, packages their transactions according to their own consensus and transaction models. Moreover, QuarkChain relies on flexibility that allows each shard to have different consensus and transaction models. Someone who wants to launch a double-spending attack on a shard that is already contained in the root chain must attack the block on the root chain, which requires calling the 51% hash power of the root chain. That is, if there are vertical field projects that open new shards on QuarkChain, even with insufficient hash power, an attacker must first attack the root chain if he or she wants to attack a new shard. The root chain has maintained more than 51% of the network’s hash power, which makes the attack very difficult. https://preview.redd.it/rxpohs7jb9f51.png?width=674&format=png&auto=webp&s=e2df1307a1753542472f2b6da88e7a4022b30884 As illustrated in the diagram, if the attacker wants to attack the QuarkChain network, one would need to attack the shard and the root chain simultaneously. PoW has achieved a high level of decentralization and has been verified for its stability for a long time. Combining PoW with the staking capability for PoS would make use of the advantages of both consensus mechanisms. That is what QuarkChain’s PoSW achieves exactly. PoSW, which is Proof of Staked Work, is exclusively developed by QuarkChain and runs on shards. PoSW allows miners to enjoy the benefits of lower mining difficulty by staking original tokens (currently it’s 20 times lower). Conversely, if someone malicious with a high hash power and does not stake tokens on QuarkChain, he will be punishable by receiving 20 times the difficulty of the hash power, which increases the cost of attack. If the attacker stakes tokens in order to reduce the cost of attack, he/she needs to stake the corresponding amount of tokens, which may cost even more. Thus, the whole network is more secure. Taking Ethereum Classics (ETC) as an example, if ETC uses the PoSW consensus, if there was another double-spending attack similar to the one in January, the attacker will need at least 110Th/s hash power or 650320 ETC (worth $3.2 million, and 8 TH/s hash power) to create this attack, which is far greater than the cost of the current attack on the network (8Th/s hash power) and revenue (219500 ETC). Relying on multiple sets of security mechanisms, QuarkChain ensures its own security, while providing security for new shards and small and medium-sized projects. Its high level of flexibility also allows the projects to support different types of ledger models, transaction models, virtual machines, and token economics. Such great degrees of security and flexibility will facilitate the blockchain ecosystem to accelerate growth of innovative blockchain applications. Learn more about QuarkChain Website https://www.quarkchain.io Telegram https://t.me/quarkchainio Twitter https://twitter.com/Quark_Chain Medium https://medium.com/quarkchain-official Reddit https://www.reddit.com/quarkchainio/ Community https://community.quarkchain.io/
Bitcoin at $ 288,000? BTC price shows bullish signal like 2016
Bitcoin's price development has been relatively stable in recent weeks. The cryptocurrency has been trading in the $ 9,200 range since early June, which is the price at the time of publication. However, Bitcoin is currently showing signals that could indicate an upcoming bull market. According to a report by the Kraken Stock Exchange, Bitcoin is only a 10% jump away from entering a massive upward trend. As Kraken describes, to enter a bull market, Bitcoin must break the key resistance at $ 10,500, as shown below. https://preview.redd.it/0d4bm64zsla51.png?width=1276&format=png&auto=webp&s=b3a670c135792f34af6714fc8ab9d48cef7dc77e With that in mind, the report says Bitcoin could soon break resistance or take the risk of testing support at $ 6,000 to $ 7,000. This would end a period that some analysts have described as very stable. In fact, this is similar to the price development in 2016 and 2017, when Bitcoin initially tended to move sideways for a very long time and finally reached its all-time high of USD 20,000 in late 2017. According to analyst Moon Capital, the Bitcoin hash ribbons have crossed, revealing a massive buy signal that has historically pushed Bitcoin's price up. The signal was also there before the 2017 Bull Run. Therefore, the analyst predicts that BTC will rise to $ 288,000. The "hash ribbons" indicator is based on the hash rate of the Bitcoin network. It is calculated by comparing the short-term moving average and the long-term moving average of the Bitcoin hash rate. As soon as these two cross, a bullish indicator is generated. A breakdown is considered bearish. Capriole's digital asset manager, Charles Edwards, also noted the formation of this indicator. However, Edwards recommended waiting until midnight today (July 12th UTC) for the crossing of the hash ribbons to be confirmed. He also said the BTC price for confirmation should close above $ 9,230.
Bitcoin fundamentals support upcoming uptrend
On the other hand, Bitcoin's fundamentals seem to support a bull market. Bitcoin's hash rate has increased significantly since the difficulty adjustment in June. According to blockchain.com, the hash rate of Bitcoin reached a new high of 125.99 terra hashes per second (TH / s) on July 7. In this context, analyst and inventor of Bitcoin's stock-to-flow model, Plan B, said Bitcoin has weathered the worst of the past few months. In addition, he stressed that the cryptocurrency will soon peak at its hash rate, confirming the good health of the Bitcoin network.
So I was discussing this last week and honestly it all felt too simple, so I'm trying to get some stronger counterpoints to this argument. Goes something like this. You have some pool miner that wants to do a 51% attack. Lets assume the attack has three phases, the first phase is to try to accumulate 51% of the hashing power, next is the accumulation of more hashing power by ejecting other pools from through reorg. Finally when they aquired enough mining power they could blacklist exchange hotwallets or all manner of nefariousness. Lets further assume that everyone will act purely in their own self interest. For simplicity lets call the attacker "Spectre Pool".
Assuming Spectre Pool can hit something like 41% of the hashing power, the first goal is to accumulate more resources to hit 51%. Since pool mining is a commodity market, all Spectre has to do in this imaginary world is offer more than the market rate. Since they are already at 41% hashrate, they need to entice another 10% of the market to come to their pool. The obvious way to do this would be to offer a "new customer bonus" or something like that. Some promotion where they pay 1% above market price for the hashing power of pool members. So, given a network hashrate of 116.73 EH and a market rate of 0.101 USD/TH per day, the cost they would have to bear to offer a 1% promotion to entice 10% of the network would be: 116.73_EH / 0.101_USD/TH * 10% * 1% = 1,155,742 USD per day for each 1% "bonus" So, assuming they were willing to spend that much on "marketing", and that all miners worked in their own self interest, eventually they could lure enough miners over to achive 51%. Once they hit this threshold they could scale back on the "marketing" and thus reduce their daily burn.
Once at 51%, the next attack of Spectre will be to put their smallest competitor out of buisness. Lets call that the "Bond Pool", and pretend that Bond has 1.5% of the network hashing power. To put Bond out of buisness, with 51%, Spectere will need to reorg whenever Bond wins a block. By reorging to a chain without Bond, this will put Spectre one block behind and they will need to catch up. Once the reorg begins, Spectre will need to produce the longest chain on its own while starting one block behind. So we need to determine how long (statisticly) it will take Specter to produce n+1 blocks and compare that to how long (statisticly) it will take Bond to win one block. Although this can be hammered out in an iterive calculation, a better approach will be an algebraic solution. Lets walk through the equations:
d - The delta above majority. So at 51%, d=1%
n - The length of reorg that the minority pool could attempt
t - The pre-attack blocktime based on hashrate (assume 10 min)
M (aka Mp) - The percent of hashpower held by minority (49%)
S (aka Sp) - The percent of hashpower held by Spectre (51%)
m (aka Mt) - The blocktime durring attack on the minority chain
s (aka St) - The blocktime durring attack on the Spectre chain
n*m = s*(n+1) - Break even, when minority mines n at the same rate Spectre mines n+1
You can put the following into a GeoGebra CAS calculator to substitute and simplify the equations solve(n*m = s*(n+1), n) M = 1/2-d S = 1/2+d m = t/M s = t/S solve(n*m = s*(n+1), d) n = s/(m-s) b = m*M/p solve(b = s*(n+1),p) This will produce the following equations for the values we are interested in. m(t,d): t/(1/2-d) # from `m` define s(t,d): t/(1/2-d) # from `s` define n(s,m): s/(m-s) # from `n` solve d(n): 1/(4*n+2) # from `d` solve p(d): 2*d # from `p` solve b(t,p): t/p # from `b` define Plugging the equations into excel produces the following (assuming t=10)
So once d=0.98%, Specture will have 50.98% of the hashing power, allowing him to eject 1.96% of all blocks mined at will. Of course this is all statistical, so Spectre will want some margin for randomness. So it would make sense to attach 1.5% of the blocks when Spectre reaches 51% So once Spectre reaches 51% he has enough hashing power to prevent any of Bonds blocks (1.5%) from being included. Spectre can win a reorg (statistically) every 8.5 hrs and Bond can only produce a block (statisticly) every 11.1 hours. So once this attack starts, Spectre simply flashes his promotion to lure the miners in the Bond pool (who are receiving no reward) over to the Spectre pool. If he only gets one third of them, then he can increase his influence to 52% Doing the same math again, with 52% Spectre can ice out any pool who has up to 4% of the hashing. Then running the promotion, Spectre will try to get 40% of the "homeless miners". Now Spectre's power grows to 55% giving him the power to ice out 10% of his competitors. This can cascade on and on until Spectre is the only public pool left. Now, at 51% the attack and reorgs take many hours, but as more and more pools get targeted, more and more miners will jump ship and end up at Spectre so long as they can hold the promotion. Bond's only choice would be to either close up, or leverage everything and mine at a loss for weeks hoping that Spectre eventually drops below the threshold for his attack. Of course Spectre has even more tremendous expenses. To offer the 1% promo to 10% of the network would cost Spectre $1.16 million / day, or 3.52 million per month for each percent of miners it lures over. So going from 41% to 61% would cost Spectre $70.3 million / month, but at that point he can attack 20% of the network giving him a reach of about 80% which is pretty much the entire pooled mining capacity today. Seems like $70 million is a small price to pay to buy the entire bitcoin network. Other expenses Spectre would accrue would be related to the attacks and reorgs. The early attacks will take hours and throughout Spectre needs to continue payouts to the pool even though he is generating no BTC durring the attack. So long as his chain is orphaned, his blocks have no value. Only after the attack and reorg when his chain becomes longest will he be able to claim the block reward for all the blocks he minded. This (in my opinion) will the the hardest challenge. The first attack and 25 block reorg will require Spectre to put his entire 51% hashing power on an orphaned chain for 8 hours requireing $208.6 million in payouts. Once he wins the attack and the chain reorgs he can cover his expeses with the block reward, but borrowing $208 million for 8 hours is still a very difficult thing to pull off. The interest alone on the attack is over $40,000 (20% interest compounded continually). Below is a table of the calculations
Levrg / Block
Of course, once Spectre gets 2/3 of the hashing power he controls the entire chain since he can include or exclude any block he wants. So this "Total Self Interest" simulation of a 6 day attack puts Spectre's expenses at $10.3 million in promotions and $71,000 in interest, or about $10.4 million total. 1 - All "hashes" are hashes per second 2 - TH = 1012 or 10004 hashes per second 3 - EH = 1018 or 10006 hashes per second 4 - Assume a market rate of 0.101 USD / TH / day 5 - Assume an average daily network hashrate of 116.73 EH
TH = 1012 = 10004 hashes_per_second EH = 1018 = 10006 hashes_per_second 21.113 0.101 daily USD per TH/s 116.73 EH/s So I was discussing this last week and honestly it all felt too simple, so I'm trying to get some stronger counterpoints to this argument. Goes something like this. You have some pool miner that wants to do a 51% attack. Lets assume the attack has three phases, the first phase is to try to accumulate 51% of the hashing power, next is the accumulation of more hashing power by ejecting other pools from through reorg. Finally when they aquired enough mining power they could blacklist exchange hotwallets or all manner of nefariousness. Lets further assume that everyone will act purely in their own self interest. For simplicity lets call the attacker "Spectre Pool".
Assuming Spectre Pool can hit something like 41% of the hashing power, the first goal is to accumulate more resources to hit 51%. Since pool mining is a commodity market, all Spectre has to do in this imaginary world is offer more than the market rate. Since they are already at 41% hashrate, they need to entice another 10% of the market to come to their pool. The obvious way to do this would be to offer a "new customer bonus" or something like that. Some promotion where they pay 1% above market price for the hashing power of pool members. So, given a network hashrate of 116.73 EH and a market rate of 0.101 USD/TH per day, the cost they would have to bear to offer a 1% promotion to entice 10% of the network would be: 116.73_EH / 0.101_USD/TH * 10% * 1% = 1,155,742 USD per day for each 1% "bonus" So, assuming they were willing to spend that much on "marketing", and that all miners worked in their own self interest, eventually they could lure enough miners over to achive 51%. Once they hit this threahold they could scale back on the "marketing" and thus reduce their daily burn.
Once at 51%, the next attack of Spectre will be to put their smallest competitor out of buisness. Lets call that the "Bond Pool", and pretend that Bond has 1.5% of the network hashing power. To put Bond out of buisness, with 51%, Spectere will need to reorg whenever Bond wins a block. By reorging to a chain without Bond, this will put Spectre one block behind and they will need to catch up. Once the reorg begins, Spectre will need to produce the longest chain on its own while starting one block behind. So we need to determine how long (statisticly) it will take Specter to produce an n+1 blocks and compare that to how long (statisticly) with take Bond to produce another block. Although this can be hammered out iterive calculations, a better approach will be an algebraic solution. Lets walk through the equations:
d - The delta above majority. So at 51%, d=1%
n - The number of blocks the majority can reorg
t - The pre-reorg blocktime based on hashrate (10 min)
M (aka Mp) - The percent of hashpower held by minority (49%)
S (aka Mp) - The percent of hashpower held by Spectre (51%)
m (aka Mp) - The blocktime durring attack on the minority chain
s (aka Mp) - The blocktime durring attack on the Spectre chain
n*m = s*(n+1) - Break even, when minority mines n at the same rate Spectre mines n+1
You can put the following into a GeoGebra CAS calculator to substitute and simplify the equations solve(n*m = s*(n+1), n) M = 1/2-d S = 1/2+d m = t/M s = t/S solve(n*m = s*(n+1), d) n = s/(m-s) b = m*M/p solve(b = s*(n+1),p) This will produce the following equations for the values we are interested in. m(t,d): t*(1/2-d) # from `m` define s(t,d): t*(1/2-d) # from `s` define n(s,m): s/(m-s) # from `n` solve d(n): 1/(4*n+2) # from `d` solve p(d): 2*d # from `p` solve b(t,p): t/p # from `b` define Here's a table
solve(nm = s(n+1), d) n = s/(m-s) b = m*M/p ``` Tb = The avg time between blocks won by Bond durring the reorg Ts = The avg time for Spectre to produce a block durring the reorg Tm = The avg time for the main chain to produce a block durring the reorg n = The number of blocks Specter will need to reorg Tb = 10_min / 49% / 3% = 10.89 Hrs Ts = 10_min / 51% = 19.61 Min Tm = 10_min / 49% = 20.41 Min Solve for the amount of blocks Specter can reorg Tmn > Ts(n+1) Tnn > Tsn + Ts n > Ts/(Tn - Ts) n > 24.5 Therefore: Spectre can produce 26 blocks faster than the main chain can produce 25. Specter has to win the reorg before Bond produces another block Assert: Ts * (n+1) < Tb 19.61_min * 26 < 10.89_hrs 8.50_hrs < 10.89_hrs ``` So once Spectre reaches 51% he has enough hashing power to prevent any of Bonds blocks from being included. Spectre can win a reorg (statistically) every 8.5 hrs and Bond can only produce a block (statisticly) every 10.89 hours. So once this attack starts, Spectre simply flashes his promotion to lure the miners in the Bond pool (who are receiving no reward) over to the Spectre pool. If he only gets one third of them, then he can increase his influence to 52% Doing the same math again, with 52% Spectre can ice out any pool who has up to 7% of the hashing. Then running the promotion, Spectre will try to get 40% of the "homeless miners". Now Spectre's power grows to 55% giving him the power to ice out 16% of his competitors. This can cascade on and on until Spectre is the only public pool left. 1 - All "hashes" are hashes per second 2 - TH = 1012 or 10004 hashes per second 3 - EH = 1018 or 10006 hashes per second 4 - Assume a market rate of 0.101 USD / TH / day 5 - Assume an average daily network hashrate of 116.73 EH ``` solve(nm = s(n+1), n) M = 1/2-d S = 1/2+d m = t/M s = t/S solve(nm = s(n+1), d) n = s/(m-s) b = mM/p solve(b = s(n+1),p) m(t,d): t(1/2-d) # from m define s(t,d): t(1/2-d) # from s define n(s,m): s/(m-s) # from n solve d(n): 1/(4n+2) # from d solve p(d): 2d # from p solve b(t,p): t/p # from b define ```
Doubts about my identity seem to crop up, so I like to address all those once more. Hopefully in a comprehensive way. First of all, to explain the situation from my article again, originstamp.org is my go-to service. Usually, 24h is plenty and suffices to timestamp everything. But in this case, Core went quickly ahead with release information, which made the 24h window (due to fees) too small to conclusively prove ownership on the BTC chain. But let's have a look in detail. This is the text that I wrote:
BitcoinABC does not check for duplicate inputs when processing a block, only when inserting a transaction into the mempool. This is dangerous as blocks can be generated with duplicate transactions and then sent through e.g. compact block missing transactions and avoid hitting the mempool, creating money out of thin air. awemany
If you SHA256 this, it calculates to: 5c45a1ba957362a2ba97c9f8c48d4d59d4fa990945b7094a8d2a98c3a91ed9b6 Exhibit A: I timestamped that here: https://originstamp.org/s/5c45a1ba957362a2ba97c9f8c48d4d59d4fa990945b7094a8d2a98c3a91ed9b6 Note that there is a timestamp when it entered their system, which is before anything else became public and which is: 17.9.2018, 14:54:19 CEST It shows it in your local time zone in your browser, a fact that Peter Todd apparently tripped over as well: https://archive.fo/W1gdf Scroll down to "Submission to OriginStamp" at the end. This timestamp is, however, just from their service and thus centralized. But if you think I faked that, that would mean that I must have hacked their service in time to do so. In the last few days. Furthermore, the window for this hack would be quite small, as there is also a later submission into the blockchain. So if you doubt this information alone, it would mean I'd had to hack the service in time (within a few hours window) just to claim this identity, leave no trace of all of this, face the risk of being called out by the true finder of the bug (who'd be different then) and write this long article ... But there's more: Exhibit B: For anyone who is a member of the BU slack, I posted a message that was the above hash (as I said in my medium article) and which is still sitting unedited on the slack as well, in the #general channel. There are likely several hundred members of this slack, and all of them who read it should have seen this message in time. I believe there are also (well-behaved) Core supporters in there. I would need to have hacked that service in an undetected way as well and fool or collude with all active members therein as well. That now creates a pretty big collusion, don't you think? Exhibit C: Finally, let me close with this PGP signed message. I created a PGP key just to keep my identity separate, at least for a while, from my main pseudonym awemany. And in the email I send out to the developers, I have added myself as a recipient. Even though the message has not been signed (I didn't see any reason to do so at the time of release), my full key id is still in this message. And that is, as far as I know, a 128-bit hash for which it is practically impossible to find a preimage for. This explicit 'encrypt-to-self' is because I fucked up with PGP encryption in the past (because, as I say in my article, mistakes just happen) and I wanted to at least be able to read my own encrypted message later. I have created sitations for myself where I wasn't able to read my own encrypted emails. Yes, call me a crypto noob, say PEBKAC or whatever, it is exactly an example of why I am saying that I am not perfect but so is no one else! Here is this message, which I am sure anyone owning the original disclosure email is happy for you to confirm that it is the same key id:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 This messsage is signed by the beardnboobies GPG key that I created just in time for the vulnerability disclosure. In reality, I am awemany on reddit and elsewhere. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGzBAEBCgAdFiEERGszUXtt2s3Wfkt1yydp8d93NcQFAlumBkAACgkQyydp8d93 NcQvegwAmcfqKSp/RZVE6HIyN9gbxa5oz2YFaaoeVCoQTsDZPX08zjBjp7jzMUGW izraVk+yOz8Yxdv7re8G+CBqnpgfpNvMoHPe75bgoyKzavTtukVSScDUHZ9Tu9D7 xQcfWnwZhsUjsTsxFD7B6PLAWzeh7cA3d0xUwrFJoa//hlOylnlC/76cbBspqSll ispvQgBcEM6NfKvmCTb9LItts2/QrXX891LK9I4vPC1WpOrXPA9lNnuuP8/S/ey9 O7iqwW+oCwGKLELQJE58hgwt7keQukrPEfwUtBXACW77gtk1dXaxRL5RqCkmMsMn rBMkTGmjDit+AVE/5oW+flds8/Hq+kQDXUZfaLbnOrleW50LTTi+etA/PPhHxe45 CUD7Jm8d2LbTIjFWsZT/Rq2Djsy3gBcHeKqFMRXEBI7WoFe431q38gVSyfvbCrPR R4AJsg2eGgysu0E/SZecHHULc4CU6RdLmCRrORRSv1T9tOyJcRpfwRlE4FnT9LTC /+5v9mXI =k2oE -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
And here is the public key which matches that key Id and which has likewise not been made public yet:
I am not going to disclose the original email just yet, because there is exploit code in there. Even though I think that exploit code is quite simple and will likely not do harm, there is no reason to add more risk and this could also still be used against me by trolls by being called irresponsible. So I hope folks understand why I refrain from that for now.
Check my math: With $50k of hashpower over a 24 hour period, there's a 75% chance of me giving a transaction 1 fake confirmation, a 1% chance of me giving it 2 fake confirmations, and a 0.01% chance of 3 fake confirmations? Thanks
Edit 1: By "fake" confirmations, I mean the kind that allows me to reverse/double-spend the transaction as referred to here : https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough Edit 2 : If directly using NiceHash wouldn't work for such an attack (being a mining pool) then instead can we just use their rate as an approximation of the cost of hashpower to mine such transactions as an individual. Original post : NiceHash currently offers 180 TH/s for 24 hrs for $50. Assuming they could give me $50k of hashpower at this rate, that would be 180 PH/s for 24 hrs. That's 0.3% of the 60 EH/s approximate total hash rate of the bitcoin network. According to https://people.xiph.org/~greg/attack_success.html that gives me a 0.6% chance of getting 1 confirmation per block, or a 99.4% chance of not getting that 1 confirmation in 1 block, or a 0.994240 = 23.6% chance of not getting 1 confirmation in the 240 blocks of the 24 hour period. So that's just over 75% chance of getting 1 fake confirmation in 24 hrs for $50k. The same process gives a 1% chance of getting 2 confirmations in 24 hrs, and a 0. 01% chance of 3 confirmations. Is this a reasonable way of calculating of how "fake" confirmations might be achieved?
My Recent Experience With Genesis Mining // Read This Before You Buy A Contract
I put $8,200 USD on a total of three Genesis Mining contracts for 50 TH/s of hash power last November, and which only went into effect a mere six months ago in February/March of this year. Now, they're in danger of becoming terminated in less than 60 days because of the low BTC price + increased hash rate difficulty. I had done a bit of research beforehand and tested out some hash rate mining scenarios that may occur at some point in the near future; even multiplying the then hash rate several times over, while keeping the BTC price relatively average (back then it was around the $8K mark and rising). In all my benchmarks, the amount of hash power I had purchased appeared to make a profit, albeit a small one in even an increasing hash rate difficulty scenario—but never did I imagine that the contract would become unprofitable in such a short period of time. I thought I'd be able to ride it out for at least 1–2 years and either make my ROI or hold for longer to make a possible margin of profit. Plus, my payouts (when they were being generated) never reflected the numbers I had come up with using mining calculators during my research phase; instead, I was only generating half of what was depicted, which was another unexpected curve ball. Genesis Mining had the audacity of sending out an email about two weeks ago where they stated the following: In a couple of days, we will roll out a very special offer only for our existing Bitcoin Mining customers. You better stay tuned! So that very special offer arrived earlier today via another email, and if was for existing customers to upgrade to the new Radiant contracts for $180 per 1 TH/s, which if you do the math would come out to $9000 for the 50 TH/s (or more than I had paid for the original contracts to begin with). They also callously stated in that same email: As a result, some user contracts are now mining less than the daily maintenance fee requires to be covered, and thus they entered the 60 days grace period, after which open-ended contracts will get terminated. Although I agreed to Genesis' terms prior to signing up, I never imagined this scenario unfolding in such a short time; however, for them to also add insult to injury with a deplorable marketing scheme as the one I illustrated in the email above should hopefully give you an idea of who you'll be doing business with, in case you're considering a cloud mining contract with them. My advice to anyone interested in cloud mining would be to either pay for your own equipment and mine the BTC yourself, or better yet, buy the BTC directly from an exchange, especially right now while its price is relatively low and hold onto it. I would discourage anyone from pursuing cloud mining as you'll most-likely have no legal recourse since you'll be dealing with a foreign entity that's not bound by the same laws or ethical requirements as the ones in your country.
You might have heard that Bitmain has announced the next generation Antminer ASIC mining devices.These devices (S17+ and T17+) are expected to deliver higher hash rates while keeping relatively comparable energy consumption rates. Bitmain stays true to itself and regularly releases new hardware on its Antminer line. Usually, their products are the top ones on the market in terms of hash rate, but it’s always just a matter of time until the competition catches up. https://preview.redd.it/131m5wm3wgu31.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=f96ef5ad457b46ec058849117432921c2da4821e Also, there is another problem with third-parties pre-empting the devices and then reselling them at a much higher price. One can only hope that this time Bitmain manages to deliver a reasonable amount of devices. This time, Bitmain is releasing two devices: S17+ with a hashrate of 72 TH/s that is consuming around 2,920 watts of power and an ‘economy class’ T17+ with 64 TH/s and 3,200 watts of power consumption.
What’s the Profit?
So how profitable it is to run one of these devices considering the current state of market? According to Blockonomi’s calculations, S17+ is profitable to operate, but if you’re hoping for big wins, that’s not going to happen. Assuming an electricity price of $0.10 per kilowatt and running your device for 24/7 for an entire year (no change in difficulty considered) you can expect to earn about half a bitcoin. However at the end of the day, it all comes down to electricity costs. As for T17+, you could get about 0.45156798 BTC, at the cost of $2,8 in electricity fees.
Is it worth it?
Like everything in the crypto space, this is very hard to predict. Once these devices hit the market, they will set the hash rate standard, which means increasing network difficulty and lowering the efficiency of the hardware. Moreover, the bitcoin prices have been bouncing around the $7,500 to $8,000 mark for a while, and if your goal is to sell all of the bitcoin you’ve mined right away, you would probably be able just to cover the equipment and electricity cost after one year but nothing more. If you are determined that ASIC mining is your thing, it can be a good idea to buy one of these devices but avoid purchasing it from the resellers.
The Bottom Line
No matter which equipment you decide to go with, you can use CoinFly to increase your profits. We offer you an opportunity to mine the most profitable currency and optimize the mining profit automatically: once the situation on the market changes, the system will just switch to mining the most profitable coin, thus, you will have the possibility to tune your hardware online to achieve optimal performance. Sign up for our beta-testingand check out the benefits of mining with CoinFly!
How low could Bitcoin go before being 51% attacked
Assuming that bitcoin miners are mining at a loss below $6,000, they will shut their machines off at some point. Of course that is an average, and some people on solar power with battery backup, or geothermal, have a power cost of $0, so it would always be profitable to mine for them. So, as price declines, so will hash rate as miners shut down. Will there ever be a price low enough that someone will successfully 51% attack Bitcoin? According to hash rate calculators, the maximum hashrate bitcoin has ever seen is 62,000,000 TH (https://www.blockchain.com/en/charts/hash-rate). Let's imagine that, including other miners, the world has 100,000,000 TH of machines capable of mining bitcoin. The lowest recent dip of hashrate was 35,000,000 TH due to price declines (and the Bitcoin cash forking debacle). Theoretically under those conditions it would already be doable to have turned that 65,000,000 TH of Bitcoin hash on and done a doublespend attack, but Bitcoin isn't centralized enough for an attack to be mounted at that level, in my opinion. But we might get to 20,000,000TH (my guess), if the price of Bitcoin goes to $1,500, at which point I believe that a bad actor could/would do a double spend attack with their and possibly their corporate friends' hashing power. So, my question is: Do you think that I'm right, that a low enough price will cause Bitcoin's hash rate to collapse and someone will successfully double spend attack it? If so, what price would you speculate it would happen at?
Coins Mined with CPU: Ethereum, Monero, Bitcoin Gold, Zcash, Electroneum, and many others
GPU (or Graphics Processing Unit) is the chip on your graphics card that does repetitive calculations for processing graphics and was initially used mainly by gamers for better graphics. But once Ethereum came along people started buying them up, the price skyrocketed and now there is a certain shortage of gaming graphics cards on the market. Ethereum Mining with GPUs All Ethereum based coins use the Ethash algorithm for mining, an algorithm “designed to be ASIC-resistant via memory-hardness.” There might be several reasons behind this, one of them being the possibility of Ethereum switching from Proof of Work to Proof of Stake. And since ASIC mining is off-limits for Ethereum, using a GPU is a good alternative. CPU Mining
Coins Mined with CPU: Monero, Electroneum, and Bytecoin
The CPU is the Central Processing Unit of any computer. Basically, it is the brains of the computer. When Bitcoin was first released, you could mine 100 coins a day using just your CPU, which is impossible today. CPU design optimizes for quickly switching between different tasks. If a coin allows CPU mining, there’s less power in the hands of large mining farms because everyone who has a computer can easily start mining. The hashing required for Proof of Work is a repetitive mathematical calculation. CPUs have fewer arithmetic logic units, circuits that perform arithmetic operations, and thus are relatively slow when it comes to performing large amounts of calculations. The Main Difference GPU mining is the more powerful and lucrative version of CPU mining and yields a better return on investment. GPUs offer a higher level of processing power which in some cases are up to 800 times more than that of a CPU. #mining#blockchain#ethereum#fintech#bitcoin#MiningOS#COS#CoinFly#CoinflyCOS#GPUmining#Software
Bitcoin mining has become more competitive than ever. Bitcoin mining difficulty – the measure of how hard it is to earn mining rewards in the world’s largest cryptocurrency by market cap – has reached a new record high above 7.93 trillion. That’s a seven percent jump from the 7.45 trillion record set during the recent two-week adjustment cycle, which was the highest since October 2018. Bitcoin is designed to adjust its mining difficulty every 2,016 blocks (approximately 14 days), based on the amount of computing power deployed to the network. This is done to ensure the block production interval at the next period will remain constant at around every 10 minutes. When there are fewer machines racing to solve math problems to earn the next payout of newly created bitcoin, difficulty falls; when there are more computers in the game, it rises. https://preview.redd.it/s7grcdbkzdn31.png?width=728&format=png&auto=webp&s=4fc30767e70d67539747186fdd5a7d01511c4cbd Data from Bitcoin Block Explorer - BTCNEWZ.com Right now the machines are humming furiously. Bitcoin miners across the world have been performing calculations at an average 56.77 quintillion hashes per second (EH/s) over the last 14 days to compete for mining rewards on the world’s first blockchain, according to data from mining pool. Data further indicates the average bitcoin mining hash rate in the last 24-hour and three-day periods were 59.58 EH/s and 59.70 EH/s, respectively, even higher than the average 56.77 EH/s from May 15 to June 27, or any 14-day data in the network’s history. Similarly, data from blockchain also shows the aggregate of bitcoin computing power was around 66 EH/s as of June 22, surpassing last year’s record high of 61.86 EH/s tracked by the site, and has more than doubled since December 2018 when the hash rate dropped to as low as 31 EH/s amid bitcoin’s price fall. Assuming all such additional computing power has come from more widely used equipment such as the AntMiner S9, which performs calculations at an average rate of 14 tera hashes per second (TH/s), that suggests more than 2 million units of mining equipment may have been switched on over the past several months. (1 EH/s equals to 1 million TH/s) https://preview.redd.it/b681p3plzdn31.png?width=1440&format=png&auto=webp&s=49efa21d8460553aceb87b64a106170b30a4c76a The increase in capacity is also in line with bitcoin’s price jump over the first half of 2019, which caused the price of second-hand mining equipment to double in China, and also juiced demand for new machines. Further estimates the bitcoin mining difficulty will jump by another seven percent at the beginning of the next adjustment cycle, which would be the first time for bitcoin mining difficulty to cross the eight trillion threshold. Delayed plugging in Such computing interest comes at a time when mining farms in China, especially in the country’s mountainous southwest, have been gradually plugging in equipment as the rainy summer approaches. According to a report published by blockchain research firm Coinshare, as of earlier this month, 50 percent of the global bitcoin computing power was located in China’s Sichuan province. However, it’s important to note that this year, the arrival of the rainy season in China’s southwest has been delayed by nearly a month compared to previous years. As a result, some local mining farms were only running less than half of their total capacity in the past month. Xun Zheng, CEO of mining farm operator Hashage based in Chengdu that owns several facilities across China’s southwestern provinces, said there had been no rain in the area for over 20 days since early May, which was “unusual.” “In the past years, it usually starts raining continuously throughout May so [hydropower plants] normally will have enough water resources by early June,” he said. As a result, in early June his firm was only operating at 40 percent of capacity; it can host more than 200,000 ASIC miners. But as the rain has arrived gradually over the past two weeks, the proportion has climbed to over 60 percent. Mining farms in China previously estimated that the total hash rate this year during the peak of the rainy season around August could break the threshold of 70EH/s. That means another 300,000 units of mining machines could be further activated, assuming all are AntMiner S9s or similar models. Those waiting to be switched on will also include new capital in the sector such as Shanghai-based Fundamental Labs, a blockchain fund that has invested $44 million on top-of-the-line mining equipment, which will be activated in June.
It's easy to compare blockchain hashrates when the Proof-of-Work algorithm is the same. For example if Bitcoin has a hashrate of SHA-256 @ 40 PH/s and Bitcoin Cash has a hashrate of SHA-256 @ 2 PH/s, it's easy to see that for a given period of time the Bitcoin blockchain will have 20x (40/2) the amount of work securing it than the Bitcoin Cash blockchain. Or to say that differently, you need to wait for 20x more Bitcoin Cash confirmations before an equivalent amount of work has been done compared to the Bitcoin blockchain. So 6 Bitcoin confirmations would be roughly equivalent to 120 Bitcoin Cash confirmations in the amount of work done. However if the Proof-of-Work algorithms are different, how can we compare the hashrate? If we're comparing Bitcoin (SHA-256 @ 40 PH/s) against Litecoin (Scrypt @ 300 TH/s), the hashes aren't equal, one round of SHA-256 is not equivalent to one round of Scrypt. What we really want to know is how much energy is being consumed to provide the current hash rate. Literal energy, as in joules or kilowatt hours. It would be great if we had a universal metric across blockchains like kWh/s to measure immutability. However that's fairly hard to calculate, we need to know the average power consumption of the average device used to mine. For GPU/CPU mined Proof-of-Work algorithms this varies greatly. For ASIC mined Proof-of-Work algorithms it varies less, however it's likely that ASIC manufacturers are mining with next generation hardware long before the public is made aware of them, which we can't account for. There's no automated way to get this data and no reliable data source to scrape it from. We'd need to manually research all mining hardware and collate the data ourself. And as soon as newer mining hardware comes out our results will be outdated. Is there a simpler way to get an estimated amount of work per blockchain in a single metric we can use for comparisons? Yeah, there is, we can use NiceHash prices to estimate the cost in $ to secure a blockchain for a given timeframe. This is directly comparable across blockchains and should be directly proportionate to kWh/s, because after all, the energy needs to be paid for in $. How can we estimate this?
Get the blockchains Proof-of-Work algorithm
Lookup the average price per hash on NiceHash for this algorithm
Multiply price per hash by total hashrate per second
Now we have an estimated total Proof-of-Work metric measured in dollars per second ($/s). The $/s metric may not be that accurate. Miners will mark up the cost when reselling on NiceHash and we're making the assumption that NiceHash supply is infinite. You can't actually rent 100% of Bitcoin's hashpower from NiceHash, there isn't enough supply. However that's not really an issue for this metric, we aren't trying to calculate the theoretical cost to rent an additional 100% of the hashrate, we're trying to get a figure that allows us to compare the cost of the current total hashrate accross blockchains. Even if the exact $ value we end up with is not that accurate, it should still be proportionate to kWh/s. This means it's still an accurate metric to compare the difference in work done over a given amount of time between blockchains. So how do we compare these values between blockchains? Once we've done the above calculations and got a $/s cost for each blockchain, we just need to factor in the average block time and calculate the total $ cost for a given number of confirmations. Then see how much time is required on the other blockchain at it's $/s value to equal the total cost. So to calculate how many Litecoin confirmations are equivalent to 6 Bitcoin confirmations we would do:
Bitcoin (SHA-256 @ 40 PH/s) or ($100/s)
Litecoin (Scrypt @ 300 TH/s) or ($10/s)
Bitcoin's average block time is 10 minutes (600 seconds)
6 Bitcoin confirmations on average is 60 minutes (3,600 seconds)
Bitcoin's total $ cost for 6 confirmations is ($100 * 3,600 seconds) $360,000
At Litecoin's hashrate of $10/s it would take ($360,000 / $10) 36,000 seconds (10 hours) to complete an equivalent amount of work
Litecoin's average block time is 2.5 minutes (150 seconds)
The amount of Litecoin blocks expected over this period of time is (36,000 seconds / 150 seconds) 240 blocks.
Therefore we can say that 240 Litecoin confirmations are roughly equal to 6 Bitcoin confirmations in total amount of work done.
$/s doesn't mean what it sounds like it means.
The $/s values should not be taken as literal costs. For example:
Bitcoin's total $ cost for 6 confirmations is ($100 * 3,600 seconds) $360,000
This is does not mean you could do a 51% attack on Bitcoin and roll back 6 blocks for a cost of $360,000. An attack like that would be much more expensive. The $/s value is a metric to compare the amount of work at the current hashrate between blockchains. It is not the same as the cost to add hashrate to the network. When adding hashrate to a network the cost will not scale linearly with hashrate. It will jump suddenly at certain intervals. For example, once you've used up the available hashrate on NiceHash you need to add the costs of purchasing ASICs, then once you've bought all the ASICs in the world, you'd need to add the costs of fabricating your own chips to keep increasing hashrate.
These metrics are measuring "work done", not security.
More "work done" doesn't necessarily mean "more security". For example take the following two blockchains:
Bitcoin Cash (SHA-256 @ 2 PH/s) or ($5/s)
Zcash (Equihash @ 4 GH/s) or ($3/s)
Bitcoin Cash has a higher $/s value than Zcash so we can deduce it has more "work done" over a given timeframe than Zcash. More kWh/s are required to secure it's blockchain. However does that really mean it's safer? Zcash is the dominant blockchain for it's Proof-of-Work algorithm (Equihash). Whereas Bitcoin Cash isn't, it uses the same algorithm as Bitcoin. In fact just 5% of Bitcoin's hashrate is equivalent to all of Bitcoin Cash's hashrate. This means the cost of a 51% attack against Bitcoin Cash could actually be much lower than a 51% attack against Zcash, even though you need to aquire more kWh/s of work, the cost to aquire those kWh/s will likely be lower. To attack Bitcoin Cash you don't need to acquire any hardware, you just need to convince 5% of the Bitcoin hashrate to lend their SHA-256 hashpower to you. To attack Zcash, you would likely need to fabricate your own Equihash ASICs, as almost all the Equihash mining hardware in the world is already securing Zcash.
Accurately calculating security is much more complicated.
These metrics give a good estimated value to compare the hashrate accross different Proof-of-Work blockchains. However to calculate if a payment can be considered "finalised" involves many more variables. You should factor in:
Is this cryptocurrency the dominant cryptocurrency for it's Proof-of-Work algorithm?
What is the market cap of this cryptocurrency?
What is the daily trading volume of this cryptocurrency?
What is the $ value of this transaction?
If the cryptocurrency doesn't dominate the Proof-of-Work it can be attacked more cheaply. If the market cap or trading volume is really low, an attacker may crash the price of the currency before they can successfully double spend it and make a profit. Although that's more relevant in the context of exchanges rather than individuals accepting payments. If the value of the transaction is low enough, it may cost more to double spend than an attacker would profit from the double spend. Ultimately, once the cost of a double spend becomes higher than an attacker can expect to profit from the double spend, that is when a payment can probably be considered "finalised".
Bitcoin Mining Power Hits New High as Half a Million New ASICs Go Online
News by Coindesk: Wolfie Zhao The computing power dedicated to mining bitcoin has hit yet another new high, suggesting that more than 600,000 powerful new machines may have come online in the last three months. According to data from crypto mining pool BTC.com, bitcoin’s two-week average hash rate has crossed another major threshold, reaching 85 exahashes per second (EH/s) around 19:00 UTC last Friday. Meanwhile, mining difficulty also adjusted to a new record of nearly 12 trillion. Notably, both figures have jumped 60 percent since June 14, the data shows. Bitcoin’s mining difficulty — a measure of how hard it is to create a block of transactions — adjusts after 2,016 blocks, or roughly every two weeks. This is to ensure the time to produce a block remains around 10 minutes, even as the amount of hashing power, deployed by machines around the globe competing to win freshly minted bitcoins, fluctuates. Several new models of application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) miners hit the market over the summer, with an average hashing power around 55 tera hashes per second (TH/s). Assuming all of the 35 EH/s of new hashing power added since mid-June came from these top-of-the-line models, a back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that more than half a million such machines have connected to the bitcoin network. (1 EH/s =1 million TH/s)
These powerful ASIC miners, made by major manufacturers such as Bitmain, Canaan, InnoSilicon and MicroBT, are priced from $1,500 to $2,500 each. So if more than half a million of them were delivered, as estimated above, the leading miner makers could have made $1 billion in revenue over the past three months. Bitcoin’s spiking hash rate and difficulty are in line with the soaring price since earlier this year, which led to increasing demand for mining equipment that has significantly outstripped supply. It’s also in part thanks to the rainy summer season in southwestern China which resulted in cheap, abundant hydroelectric power. Further, there has also been a growing interest in Russia’s Eastern Siberia region, where the Brastsk hydropower station built in the Cold War era has been utilized to power mining farms that are estimated to account for almost 10 percent of the total computing power on the bitcoin network. Miners in China estimated earlier this year that bitcoin’s average hash rate in the summer would break the level of 70 EH/s, which happened in August. As such, major miner manufacturers have already sold out equipment that is due for shipment until the end of the year with customers placing pre-orders three months in advance. TokenInsight, a startup that focuses on analysis of crypto trading and mining activities, said in a report published Friday that additional supplies of miners are expected to hit the market in the coming months. “Following the drastic increase in bitcoin’s price, the bitcoin mining market saw significant inflation in Q2 2019. Most of the miners from various manufacturers were in serious shortage and pre-orders submitted in Q2 and Q3 are to be delivered by the end of the year,” the report states. Therefore, the firm estimates mining difficulty will maintain its growth momentum to reach 15 trillion by the end of the year — with bitcoin’s average total hashing power crossing the threshold of 100 EH/s for the first time in its history. Bitcoin mining facility image courtesy of Bcause
I've been working on a bot for crypto subs like /r/bitcoin for a few days now. Say hello to crypto_bot!
Hey guys, I've been working on crypto_bot for some time now. It provides a bunch of features that I hope will enhance your experience on /bitcoin (and any other subreddit). You can call it by mentioning it in a comment. I started working on this a few days ago. I'm constantly adding new features and will update this post when I do, but if you're interested I'll post all updates and some tips at /crypto_bot. Please either comment here, message me, or post there if you'd like to report a bug, request a feature, or offer feedback. There's also one hidden command :) You can call multiple commands in one comment. Here's a description of the commands you can use:
Responds with the USD price of one bitcoin from an average of six of the top bitcoin exchanges (BTC-E, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Coinbase, Kraken, Cryptsy).
Responds with the USD price of one bitcoin at seven exchanges (all of the ones listed above, plus LocalBitcoins). Also lists the average at the bottom.
Responds with the USD price of one bitcoin from [exchange] (any of the seven listed above).
Responds with the USD price of one litecoin, or the price of 1 doge and 1,000 doge.
crypto_bot litecoin|ltc [exchange]
Responds with the USD price of one litecoin from BTC-E, Bitfinex, Kraken, or Cryptsy.
Responds with the price of one bitcoin in the specified currency. Available currencies (symbols): JPY, CNY, SGD, HKD, CAD, NZD, AUD, CLP, GBP, DKK, SEK, ISK, CHF, BRL, EUR, RUB, PLN, THB, KRW, TWD.
crypto_bot [about|info] [arg]
Responds with a short description about [arg], as well as a link to an external site (Wikipedia, bitcoin.it, and some others) for more information. You can list multiple arguments and get a description for each. Available arguments: bitcoin, block chain, transaction, address, genesis, satoshi, mining, confirmation, coinbase, gox, cold wallet, hot wallet.
Responds with calculations and information about how a miner would do with the above data (mining calculator). The only required field is mining speed. Order of the arguments does not matter. Everything other than hashrate defaults to the following if not given: w (watts): 0, kwh ($kilowatt cost/hour): 0, difficulty: current network difficulty, hc$ (hardware cost): $0, $: current bitcoin price in usd (according to Coinbase), % (pool fee): 0. The calculator does not account for nor allow for input of the increase/decrease of difficulty over time, though I may add this feature soon. Working hashing speeds: h/s, kh/s, mh/s, gh/s, th/s, ph/s. Example usage: "crypto_bot calc 30th/s 10w .12kwh hc$55 1.5%" (to make it easier to remember, th/s can also be inputted as ths). This calls the bot with a hashrate of 30 th/s, electricity usage of 10w, a cost of $.12 kWh, a hardware cost of $55, and a pool fee of 1.5%.
crypto_bot number of btc <$amount to convert> [bp$bitcoin price]
Responds with the number of bitcoins you could buy with <$amount to convert>. If the comment specifies a [bp$bitcoin price], it calculates it with that exchange rate. Otherwise, it uses the rate from Coinbase. Example usage: "crypto_bot $419.29 bp$180.32" This calculates how many bitcoins you can buy if you have $419.29 and the bitcoin exchange rate is $180.32.
Signs a message in the bitcoin block chain in a transaction using OP_RETURN. The message must be less than 40 characters. Example usage: "SignMessage! "Post messages in the block chain!"" I hope you find this bot useful! Again, if you have any questions or comments, please either comment on this post, message me, or post on /crypto_bot. Update 1 (June 24, 2015, 17:35): The bot now responds with information if you post a link to a block, transaction, or address on Blockchain.info in a comment, even if you don't call it. For example, if I wrote "https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000126448be07fb1f82af19fbbf07dd7e07ebcd08d42c2660cb" in a comment, it would respond with information about block #362,377. Update 2 (July 10, 2015, 1:59): The bot now has two additional commands: "unconfirmed transactions" (or "unconfirmed tx") and "explain transaction delay" (or "explain tx delay"). The first command responds with the number of unconfirmed transactions, and the second explains why transactions might take extra time to confirm. Update 3 (August 24, 2015, 1:34): The bot now responds in a better way than before when transaction ids or addresses are posted. Before, it only responded when the transaction id or address was used in a link to Blockchain.info. Now the bot will respond whenever a transaction id or address is posted at all; a link to Blockchain.info is no longer necessary. Update 4 (August 27, 2015, 3:00): The bot can now sign messages in the Bitcoin block chain using OP_RETURN.
Bitmain is regarded as one of the most influential companies in the ASIC mining industry. It is estimated that they have manufactured approximately 53% of all mining equipment.Without including their mining profits, that’s around $140 million dollars in sales. These figures are staggering, but Bitmain’s monopoly of the Bitcoin ASIC market may come to an end, following the release of PowerAsic’s asicpower AP9-SHA256.
About the asicpower AP9-SHA256
Designed with brand new technology and boasting 94 TH/s per miner, the AP(-SHA256 is the most powerful and efficient Bitcoin miner to date.PowerAsic claims they spent $12 million dollars on research, development, and prototypes.PowerAsic also noted that their miners take advantage of ASICBOOST, an exploit of Bitcoin’s algorithm which improves mining efficiency by 20%.An unusual approach separate Powerasic’s miner to the other manufactures is the implementation of copper heat-sink claimed to have a superior thermal conductivity 69% better than aluminium. Don’t take their words for it but confirm the facts are correct on widely well known and published science documents as this one.The first batch of miners were announced and made available for order in August of 2019, with start scheduled for shipment in September, 2019. Powerasic claims that the machines are around 40 percent more productive than the most proficient ASIC on the market, Bitmain’s Antminer S17.According to PowerAsic, they started a mining project with the aim to bring much needed competition to the market…We want to ‘make SHA256 great again.Sitting at the hefty price of $2,795.00, the powerasic AP9-SHA256 is far from affordable for the average person. Fortunately, due to the newly born rivalry between Bitmain and Powerasic, the price will probably lower with time and competition.The power supply for this unit is included and integrated in the top-box also including the controler card as a one unit. You will also get standard power cable, network cable, manual and software in the packet. In comparison to the price of the Antminer S17 , the Powerasic AP9-Sha256 is a better value.
The integrated PSU 3300W has a inputVoltage 220V 50Hz 30A. There are 2 fan 40mm., 1 fan 60mm to keep it cool and the power cable 3 legs following CEE 7 standard.Professional mining hardware runs optimally at 220-240V, hence why mining farms step down their own electricity supply to 220-240V. Note that 220V current is only found outside of the US – American outlets are 110V by default. Unless you want to hire an electrician, this could cause some people trouble adapt to the eficient and recomended 220V power needed, still 110V will get the job done, but they are not ideal for optimum mining performance.
Thanks to the powerasic AP9-HA256’s new 7nm generation of ASIC chips, the AP9-SHA256 has become the most electrically-efficient miner on the market.Consuming merely 30.J/TB, or 2860W from the wall, the 16T is 30% more electrically-efficient than the Antminer S17.
Powerasic ’s new ASIC technology is impressive. When compared to its closest competitor, the Antminer S17, the powerasic AP9-HA256 is the clear winner. It hashes at 94 TH/s, as opposed to the S17’s 56 TH/s. Moreover, the the AP9-HA256 consumes 30J/GH, whereas the S17 consumes 39-45J/TB.The difference in power consumption is miniscule, but when it comes to large-scale mining, the the AP9-HA256’s edge will drastically increase the profitability of a mining operation. This ASIC is profitable not only for mining on a large scale, but for the individual miner as well.Take a look at the projected mining profitability of a single miner:Note that is appears profitable even with high electricity costs ($0.1 per KW/h). With $0.05 / KW/h it’s even more profitable:📷Each powerasic AP9-HA256 will generate about $6,009 per year (calculated with 1 BTC=$10,141.5). Mining profitability may vary. You can usethis free profitability calculator to determine your projected earnings.
Is powerasic AP9-HA256 a Scam?
There is been a lot of talk on Twitter that powerasic AP9-HA256 is a scam. It appears it is not, as many users are already claiming to have received their miners.Slush, the creator ot Slush Mining Pool and the TREZOR hardware wallet, claims on Twitter that he has seen units and knows people who have had their miners delivered:
Verdict: Is The Antminer S17 Outdated?
When the first batch of Bitmain’s Antminer S17 ASICs reached the eager hands of miners, they were all the rage. The S17 was renowned as the most efficient ASIC miner on the market. Many used the S17 as the industry’s golden standard.Up until the launch of the powerasic AP9-HA256, it was the golden standard.But, now?Things have changed.Not only is the powerasic AP9-HA256 more powerful than its predecessor from Bitmain, but also more efficient, and therefore, more profitable.Ever since the announcement of the new ASIC, there was widespread speculation of its legitimacy – and rightly so.The Bitcoin community has been plagued with small, phony companies manipulating images of preexisting antminers as a ploy to hype up their fake products. Nevertheless, powerasic AP9-HA256 is taking things seriously, and their first batch of miners have lived up to expectations.The fact of the matter is, Bitmain’s most powerful and efficient antminer has been dethroned by the new reigning king of ASICs: The powerasic AP9-HA256.
Bitmain has dominated the ASIC market since its inception in 2013.There are a few other companies producing ASICs. However, before the creation of PowerAsics AP9-SHA256., Bitmain was the only company with a proven track record that sold efficient miners directly to the public.Powerasic AP9-HA256 has the potential to bring Bitmain’s monopoly to an end. Powerasic AP9-HA256 has a bright future ahead of them. Now that Bitmain has noteworthy competition, it will be interesting to see how it affects the market. The powerasic AP9-HA256 is the best option (for now) for anyone getting started with mining. Powerasic’s innovation should force other ASIC producers to innovate and force other companies to release new miners with better efficiency. So whether you’re buying a miner now or soon, you’re likely to benefit from the development of this new miner. For more, Visit Us: https://asicpower.net/product.php
How much would I have to spend to profitably mine bitcoin?
Currently (Nov. 28th 2017.) annual net earnings just with one Antminer s9 in Serbia is 8.986 USD. As an investor or small/middle size miner you should consider: the price of bitcoin, investment for mining equipment and the price of electricity. Superb mining equipment are ASIC processors specially made for bitcoin and alternative (all other) coins mining. Currently (Nov. 2017.) for mining the bitcoin the best ASIK processor in the world is Antminer s9. It cost from $1.500 up to $3.500. The price varies depending on the series (each subsequent series has better performance), where it is bought (it's a big difference if you buy it directly from the manufacturer or via eBay or Amazon), shipping costs (can be from $0-200) and power supply unit cost from $105 to $200. The cheapest electricity in Europe is in Serbia. 0,065 € (≈0,077 USD) Source: Eurostat._YB16.png) (Eurostat is a statistical office of the European Union located in Luxembourg). One of the essential heritage of communism that has remained in Serbia is that the price of electricity is a social category. So, in Serbia, unlike the rest of the world (perhaps in the communist countries), it is a cheaper electrical cost for domestic households than for the industry. I decided to pinpoint exactly how much it would electricity cost if 2 Antminers s9 were mining 24/7 365 days a year. The calculation is based on Serbian Dinars. The final value is in US Dollars. In Serbia, there are 3 zones of electricity categories depending how much of power do you consume per 30 days accounting period: green (0-350 KWh) blue (351 KWh-1.600 KWh) and red zone (more than 1.600KWh). Each zone has own price range. Each zone has night ( lower) and day ( higher) price. Night prices are calculated from 11pm-6am for each zone. Meaning, 16 hours (66,66%) during a day processor will consume higher priced el.energy and 8 hours ( 33,33%) lower priced el.energy. One Antminer s9 processor consumes 1.400W = 1,4 KW x 24h = 33,6KW / h consumed in one day. So two processors consume 67,2 KW / h / day Green zone is up to 350 KWh. So, 350 KWh: 67,2 KWh / per day = 5,2083 days 5,2083 days x 24h = 124,9992 h. 33,33% of 124,9992 h = 41,6622h (lower price hours) x 1,419din. (lower price of el. in the green zone) = 59,1187 din. 66,66% of 124,9992 h = 83,3244 h (higher price hours) x 5,962din. (higher price of el. in green zone) = 496,7804 din. The blue zone is from 350 KW to 1.600KW 1.600 KW-350 KW = 1.250 KW (the amount of electricity that can be spent in the blue zone price range) 1250KW: 67,2 KWh / per day = 18,6011 days 18,6011 days x 24h = 446,4264 h. 33,33% of 446,4264 h = 148,7939 h (lower price hours) x 2,236din. (lower price of el.price in blue zone) = 332,7032 din. 66,66% of 446,4264 h = 297,5878 h (higher price hours) x 8,943din.(higher price of el.price in blue zone) = 2.661,3280 din. Red Zone It remains 6,2 days in the red zone The number of days spent in the green zone is 5,2 + The number of days spent in the blue zone is 18,6 23,8 days spent Calculation period 30 days -23,8 = 6,2 days in the red zone 6,2 x 24h = 148,8h 33,33% of 148,8h = 49,5950h (lower price hours) x 4,472din. (lower price of el. coast in the red zone) = 221,7890 din. 66,66% of 148,8h = 98,208h (higher priced hours) x 17,887din. (higher price of el.cost in the red zone) = 1.756,6464 din. …………In total: 5.528,3657 dinars( basic amount for tax calculation)……………. Tax calculation Note: Some tax I can't translate literary or it is to long for translation, so I have named them Fixed Tax -Basic amount: ……………………………………......... 5.528,3657 din. -Fixed Tax : 11,04 KW x 48,552 din.: …………...+ 536,01 din. -Fixed Tax: …………………………………………........... + 132,76 din. -Total: …………………………………………..........….…… 6.197,1357 din. -5% discount on regularity of payment: .....… - 309,8567 din. -Total: ……………………………………………….........…. 5.887,279 din. -Tax for green energy: …………………….....……… + 187,48 din. -Total: ……………………………………………........……. 6.074,767 din. -Excise (7,5%): ……………………………….....……… +455,6075 din. -Total: …………………………………………….........…… 6.530,3745 din. -VAT (20%): ………………………………….....……… +1.306,0749 din. -Total: …………………………………………….........…… 7.836,4494 din. -Nacional Television Tax: ………….......…………….. 150,00 din. ……… Grand total: 7.986,4494 din. ≈79,45 $ ……………………………. The exact price KWh for a given period is only 3,9615 din. ≈ 0,039 $ Official National Bank of Serbia exchange rate for Nov. 28th, 2017. 7.986,4494 din : 2.016KWh (total el. power consumption for 30 days) = 3,9615 din. ≈$0,039 per kilowatt/hour. In this way, it is actually cheaper than the average price in China, India or UAE. I'll never complain again about el.price in my country. Worldwide electricity price by region, source: statista.com The profitability of mining bitcoin ( and other altcoins) is calculated with the power consumption calculator. Simply, chose the coin ( in this case bitcoin) enter the hash power of processor ( in this case 14 TH) and el. coast ( in this case 0,039 USD). When you put all this data, you are making just with 1 Antminer s9 $8,986 in Serbia. Power consumption calculator. Source: cryptocompare.com Now we can do a little investment brainstorming. Let's say you rent 10 apartments and in each, you will put two S9s. Rent in Serbia (not in Belgrade) for a flat on less attractive location, is $ 110 (can be even less), x 10 apartments that will cost you $1.100 a month. The Internet per month is $12 x 10 flats = $120 Electricity per month is $79,45 x 10 flats = $794,5 Since this is a serious investment and business, you need 3 people (8 hours shift) for monitoring the processors pay the bills preventing possible stilling, just to make sure everything goes smoothly. The salary per person is $300, so monthly is $900. For these three persons, you can rent an apartment from where they will monitor the processors, which is an additional $ 200 per month (maybe even less). Monthly expenses are 3.114,5 $ 2 Antminers s9 are making (with current bitcoin mining difficulty, block size and price rate) $1.477,3 x 10 flats = $14.773 per month Month Net Profit: $11.658,5 x 12 months = $139.902 Annual Net Profit The variable cost is purchasing price of Antminer s9. From $ 1.500 to $ 3.500 (customs, delivery charges, where do you bay). We need 20 Antminers x $3.500 = $70.000 In a year (at the current bitcoin price) the gross profit is $139.902 - $70.000 ( purchasing price for 20 Antminer s9) = Net profit: $ 69.902 in the first year. The costs could be further reduced: ~~ If you pay in advance ( 6 months or 1 year ) rant ~~ The price of an Antminer s9 is cheaper in a larger quantity order, ~~ I am not sure but, I spouse you can have better price from internet provider for large internet packet Why two Antminers s9? Under the law, EPS ( Serbian state electrical company) is required to provide up to 30.000KWh annually to each household. The two Antminers S9 spend 24.192KWh yearly. …..and there is more to talk about this subject. So, if you have someone in Serbia I wish you all the best. Call me for dinner ( at least you owe me that :)) . Or, if you are interested in this and you don’t have contacts in Serbia, you can contact me about this project. [email protected] Stay happy, Lazar
Alright, so I'm thinking about getting into mining Litecoin. I've never mined before, and sadly, my computer, even though it's great for gaming, just won't cut it because of ASIC computers. So I was looking at this one and it said the hash rate was 13.5 TH/s so I went to this website to see how much that would equate to in USD. It says I'd make more than $2 million every month, which I know is very very far off. But what did I do wrong to calculate it?
Bitmain is a technology company specializing in high-speed, low-power custom chip design and development, successfully designed and produced a variety of ASIC custom chips and integrated systems. Bitmain was founded in 2013. In the same year, it launched the first generation bitcoin mining machine of the ant mining machine series - Antminer S1. After more than five years of development, the antminer series bitcoin mining machine passed S1, S2, S3, S4 Iterations of multiple models of S5, S7 and S9, the latest bitcoin mining models are S15 and T15, which will be sold on November 8, 2018. The Antminer S15 adopts a new 7nm chip process. The official evaluation of the S15 is durable, energy saving. Emphasizing the characteristics of "high performance, more durable, and more power saving". From the officially announced parameters, the Antminer S15 is built in. Standard and low-power mining modes. The officially announced parameters have a unit-to-power ratio of 57J/T in standard mode, and the unit-to-power ratio of low-power mode has reached 50J/T. Compared to the products in the current market, in terms of Bitcoin miners, this unit power consumption ratio has set a new record. Antminer S15 official parameters, https://preview.redd.it/9fgwfaqp6bd21.jpg?width=1015&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8239da7bcece1abb80f1fb56708e02fa111a150b Recently, the Antminer S15 has sent to Cybtc for testing. Please see the third-party independent review by us. I. Unpacking: Because the Antminer S15 adopts a new all-in-one and parallel fan design, the packaging box has changed from the previous generations. The previous cuboid has changed into a square-like style. The packaging material is still packaged in an industrial carton, and the box is marked manufacturer information, logistics warehousing logo, mining machine specification model and strip identification code, outer box size: 486*388*265, weight about 8.7kg. The interior of the two pieces of styrofoam is firmly packed in the box from the upper and lower sides to ensure the safety of the mining machine during transportation. There is also a gap around the pearl foam for easy access. Take out the styrofoam on one side to see the main body of the mining machine. The mining machine is wrapped by an anti-electrostatic bag. Compared with the box, the mining machine looks very small and only takes up about half of the box space. The Antminer S15 changed the style of single-tube with double cooling fans as S1-S9 models, and became a dual-fan parallel single-side air intake and adopted the integrated machine design of the mining machine + power supply. The whole machine size is 279*175*221mm, weight 7.13 kg. https://preview.redd.it/k0xp89yy6bd21.jpg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5504d958a4cc6fdb1c01783b777e60483ea7ef9a The Antminer S15 is small and neat, the air inlet side and the mining machine interface side are on the same side, the fan is removed from the air outlet side, and a honeycomb-shaped baffle is used. https://preview.redd.it/ex187jf27bd21.jpg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e8210c514e186dae075d9b986f7682a49141aa6a The advantage of the all-in-one design is that the wire connection is reduced. The appearance of the mining machine is more compact, and the use and operation and maintenance are more convenient. The connection between the Antminer S15 mining machine and the power supply uses a clip-connected design, and the controller and the power board are still connected by flat signal cable. https://preview.redd.it/85cz4u4c7bd21.jpg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ab87c2f4c2943f0e9eb3dbbe2576f9d043add399 The nameplate of the mining machine body is marked with the model number, hash rate, and identification bar code. If the bottom part can increase the anti-slip mat, it is better to strengthen the stability of the mining machine when it is placed horizontally. The mining machine supports the erect and horizontal two ways. On the rack, the miner can choose the placement method according to the size of the mine rack. https://preview.redd.it/wxavyize7bd21.jpg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5ab2335eabb3b13731284f89805abcb131bfbda4 II. Antminer S15 installation: The design of the Antminer S15 all-in-one machine reduces the link of the power line of the plugging and unloading machine. As long as it is placed in the rack, plug in the power cable and the network cable to complete the hardware installation. Find the mine IP address. Antminer S15 mining machine is automatically assigned IP mode, you can enter the local router to view the IP address named "antMiner". Or use the ant official mining machine management software BitmainMinerTool to scan the IP address of the current mining machine. You can also use the management software to set the mining pool address and worker name, update the firmware, etc. When the number of mining machines is large, you can also use the mining machine. IP report button to find the IP address of the mining machine. To view the real-time status of a single mining machine, you need to enter the mining machine control page. First, enter the mining machine IP into the control page home page, and then enter the default user name and password (the default is root) to enter the mining machine control page. The new mining machine needs to modify the name of the mining pool and miners, click on the “Miner Configuration” page to modify the main mining pool address and worker name, and modify the two alternate mining pool addresses and miners' names as needed. Antminer S15 has built-in standard and low-power mining modes, so you can easily select any mode mining on this page according to your needs. After each setting is completed, click “Save&Apply” to save the settings and apply. After saving, the miner will restart the mining procedure. After about a few minutes of normal operation of the mining machine, you can enter the mining operation interface “Miner Status” to check the operation of the mining machine, including running time, hash rate, Chip status, operating frequency, PCB board and chip temperature, fan speed and other parameters information. III. Review: The Antminer S15 has standard mining mode and low power consumption mode. Therefore, we tested the two modes for 24 hours respectively. The test environment temperature is about 17 degrees, and the noise value is around 36 decibels. https://preview.redd.it/2wzornwmabd21.jpg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=62e6e57755d70d526eeda4066a31b042473871a8 After the mining machine is turned on, the fan runs at full speed, the power consumption of the boot is about 25W and further increases slowly, and the noise level is up to 81.2 dB. Standard mode test Power consumption: The miner's chip is fully operational, and the control page power is 28T. The measured power consumption of the miner is 1610-1620W, which is in line with the officially announced 1596W ±7% level. Noise: Due to the low ambient temperature, the number of fan rotations is basically stable at around 3120 rpm. The noise value of the operating environment is measured to be 76.5 decibels. The distance of the mine is 27.7 meters, and the noise level is properly controlled. Temperature: Antminer S15 has a total of four mining boards. There are four temperature-sensing modules distributed on each calculation board. The chip temperature is at least 44 degrees and the highest is 78 degrees. Thanks to the Exposed Die package, the outlet temperature is about 42 degrees. The power outlet temperature is about 28 degrees. https://preview.redd.it/h71plzf0bbd21.jpg?width=641&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=588728e6a87b510d5cc65eb41a1ffe80d6435f17 Because the Antminer S15 adopts the one-piece design, We also test the contact temperature of the power supply and the mining machine's power board. It can be clearly seen that the temperature values of each point are different. https://preview.redd.it/4ghcl4i3bbd21.jpg?width=990&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a344917e4a3b529aef58127f5e5c8fdaa61c62fa Hash rate: After 24 hours test in the btc.com mining pool, the average hash rate of the Antminer S15 in 24 hours was 28.56 TH/s. Thus calculate the unit energy efficiency ratio = 1620W / 28.56 ≈ 56.72W / T, and the official published data 57 J / T consistent. Low power mode test Power consumption: After checking the option behind “Low Power Mode” on the Antminer S15 Pool Settings page and saving the application, the miner can run in low power mode. After the power of the mining machine control page reaches 17T, the measured power consumption is up to 836.6W, and the running data meets the official data of 775W ±7% - 900W ±7%. Noise: As the power and power consumption are reduced, the fan speed is basically stable at around 2400 rpm, the measured operating environment noise value is 77 decibels, and the distance measured by the mining machine is about 66 decibels at a distance of 2 meters. The noise level and the standard mode. At the same level. Temperature: The four mining board chips have a minimum temperature of 25 degrees and a maximum of 62 degrees. The outlet temperature is about 30 degrees, which is slightly lower than the standard mode. The temperature of the power outlet is about 20 degrees. https://preview.redd.it/r4f2ww96cbd21.jpg?width=641&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ae3051c74634ac9d98373d71e8fee3f542d455c5 Contact point temperature value between the power supply and mining machine mining board. https://preview.redd.it/fskmubi8cbd21.jpg?width=990&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a1616d21af2b87bc0996f1ce388b3ab9983d33dd Hash rate: After 24 hours of testing in the btc.com mine, the average 24-hour power was measured at 17.5TH/S. Thus calculate the unit energy efficiency ratio = 836.6W / 17.5 ≈ 47.8W / T, lower than the official published data 50 J / T. IV. Summary: Two built-in mining modes. The power consumption per unit of power in low-power mode is lower than 50W/T, which is better. The lower the power consumption ratio, the lower the price of the shutdown. One machine design reduces the wire, beautiful and convenient. Exposed Die package improves heat dissipation, increasing the number of chips per unit volume and reducing heat sinks, reducing overall weight. The new AWP8 power supply is used, easy to assemble and disassemble. The machine noise is lower and the temperature is lower than other mining machines. The calculation power of the whole machine is stable and fluctuating. Finally, exposed power connectors may cause problems if touch the iron on the shelf. Maybe it can have improvement. The Antminer series mining machine has evolved from S1 to S15, and the computing power has evolved from S180's 180G/360W to S15's 28000G/1600W. This is not just a digital evolution, but also the ups and downs of the Bitcoin industry. The mining machine is upgrading. Bitcoin is advancing, leaving many stories in the chain, the currency circle and the mining ring than the ten-year journey of holding the currency. In the two-year life cycle of S9, S9's bitcoin mining machine market share is far ahead, and currently in the market background of the rising bitcoin computing power, the depressed bear market and more new mining machines, Whether the ant S15 can create a new benchmark for the bitcoin mining machine, time will give us the answer. More miner and crypto reviews on: cybtc.org Telegram：https://t.me/joinchat/LgPYnE1vPpXqYDVpPaQyxw Discord：https://discord.gg/RfCZMNY
With this simple hashrate calculator you can convert Hash to KiloHash to MegaHash to GigaHash to TeraHash to PetaHash to ExaHash to ZettaHash and vice versa. How to use this HashPower calculator? To use this calculator just input your mining hardware hashing power and it will automatically convert to all other units. For example the current network hashrate of Bitcoin is 140 EH/s (Exa hashes ... The Bitcoin mining calculator helps you to know how much profit you can earn from a Bitcoin miner. Considering all the relevant costs, including electricity, fees, and hardware, this mining calculator provides an estimated profit amount. Following are the detailed instructions on the usage of Bitcoin mining calculator – The Bitcoin network hash rate is growing at a rate of 0.4527678% per day. This means if you buy 50 TH/s of mining hardware your total share of the network will go DOWN every day compared to the total network hash rate. Our calculator assumes the 0.4527678% daily increase in network hash rate that has been the average daily increase over the past 6 months. Without factoring in this growth, most ... Accurate Bitcoin mining calculator trusted by millions of cryptocurrency miners since May 2013 - developed by an OG Bitcoin miner looking to maximize on mining profits and calculate ROI for new ASIC miners. Updated in 2020, the newest version of the Bitcoin mining calculator makes it simple and easy to quickly calculate mining profitability for your Bitcoin mining hardware. he CoinDesk Bitcoin Calculator converts bitcoin into any world currency using the Bitcoin Price Index, including USD, GBP, EUR, CNY, JPY, and more.
bitcoin mining - new bitcoin mining website kumita ...
This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue 1000 TH/s SHA Bitcoin Mining bei Hashflare Experiment (150.000$ investiert) Krypto Magazin. Loading... Unsubscribe from Krypto Magazin? Cancel Unsubscribe. Working... Subscribe Subscribed ... Own a Rack and get BTC 300 TH/s or ETH 57.7 MH/s of mining power. Not only Bitcoin, you can mine various growing cryptocurrencies and allot power as per Not only Bitcoin, you can mine various ... Bitcoin Hash Calculator use to calculate the profitability of Bitcoin and the tool to find good return bitcoin miners to buy. You can easily calculate how many Bitcoins mines with your hash rates ... I've decided to start with hash flare because genesis mining is out of BITCOIN CONTRACTS. Bought 0.79 TH/s Hashflare ... BITCOIN mining HASHFLARE - 2018 calculation of profit. - Duration: 12:40 ...