Slashdot Mirror


Surge In Litecoin Mining Leads To Graphics Card Shortage

New submitter Kenseilon writes "Extremetech reports that the recent price hike of Litecoins has triggered yet another arms race for the *coinminers out there, leading to a shortage of AMD graphics cards. While Bitcoin mining is quickly becoming unfeasible for GPU rigs with general purpose graphics cards, there are several alternative currencies with opportunities. The primary candidate is now Litecoin, which has the aim of 'being silver if Bitcoin is gold' Swedish Tech site Sweclockers also reports [in Swedish] that GPU manufacturer Club3D have told them that miners are becoming a new important group of potential customers. However, concerns are being raised that this is a temporary boom that may hurt AMD in the long run, since gamers, their core consumer group, may not be able to acquire the cards and instead opt for Nvidia."

213 comments

  1. Obligatory first post: by Zanadou · · Score: 2, Funny
    1. Re:Obligatory first post: by gagol · · Score: 1

      The haves create the money has it always has been, what's new?

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
  2. Ummm Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All my usual retailers have stock, this is just an article to pump up litecoin activity and interest.
    It isn't silver to BTC gold, it offers no great advantages over BTC hat can't be integrated into the bitcoin protocol if deamed worthy and you cant buy anything with it except other crypto-currencies.

    This article is spam at best , a pump and dump endorsement at worst.

    1. Re:Ummm Bullshit by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 4, Informative
      Newegg has had a hard time keeping any 280x, 290, and 290x cards in stock. I haven't seen a 290 card in stock for a week now.

      Newegg has them priced $50-100 over retail, the demand is huge and when they restock, they tend to sell out within an hour or two.

    2. Re:Ummm Bullshit by martinux · · Score: 5, Informative

      What in fact has happened is the availability of a number of optimal* cards - particularly the Radeon 7950 - have massively decreased due to miners buying them. As you would expect market demand has resulted in a significant price hike. Radeon cards provide higher hash rates than nVidia cards and so they are more popular to miners in general. There are a number of benefits to litecoin, particularly the faster transaction time. If you're a litecoin miner decryption is optimised for GPUs rather than ASICs (which have a much, much higher uptake in bitcoin mining) and thus is not the realm of high-cost ASICs or FPGAs.

      Whilst I do appreciate that bitcoin and litecoin are 'hot topics' at the moment there are many interesting consequences that have emerged as a result of the uptake in both the currency and technology required to maintain the currency. Thus, I do think there is something to talk about here.

      * The cards are optimal in that they give the fastest hash-rate to power-consumption ratio.

    3. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah umm i call bullshit on your bullshit. The 280x is almost impossible to find right now, And any time a new shipment comes in its sold out again within 24 hours.
      The 290x is not nearly as good a price to kilo-hash ratio as the 280x and thus has sold slower but never the less has become itself difficult to track down. Only the 270x is still readily find-able right now due having the worst kilo-hash to cost ratio of the new line of AMD cards.

    4. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You are right, it isn't silver to BTC gold. They do not have any advantages - they are exactly the same. Only more people use BTC these days.

      I understand why BTC people hate LTC so much. It's because when BTC owners come to others and tell them "Come and play our game. We already have all the best cards in our hands, but that's OK because bla bla bla." they tell you "No, thanks. We have our own game."

    5. Re:Ummm Bullshit by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Can anyone explain why the Radeons is faster than the Nvidia cards?

      I could simply look over at wikipedia for how the cores are configured but I guess that may not tell the whole story. Anyone got the technical details?

      Is it a hardware difference or do it have anything to do with drivers too?

    6. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Dekker3D · · Score: 2

      Apparently, Radeons have an instruction that's really important for Scrypt mining, which nVidia cards lack. That's why Radeons of the same price generally reach perhaps 10 times as many hashes per second.

    7. Re:Ummm Bullshit by auric_dude · · Score: 1

      Now you have your graphics cards and hard mined coin what do you do next?
      Do you sit on them in the hope they grow; Do you purchase something with them or do you arbitrage them https://medium.com/bitcoin-bits-1/fc0098ac0511?
      Decisions, decisions, decisions. . .

    8. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Joce640k · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It isn't silver to BTC gold, it offers no great advantages over BTC hat can't be integrated into the bitcoin protocol if deamed worthy and you cant buy anything with it except other crypto-currencies.

      This article is spam at best , a pump and dump endorsement at worst.

      Sure, that's what they used to say about Bitcoin but look where Bitcoin is now.

      Litecoin is the future!

      --
      No sig today...
    9. Re:Ummm Bullshit by aliquis · · Score: 1

      And for bitcoins (SHA256?)? Same there?

    10. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Dekker3D · · Score: 1

      Probably, though I wouldn't know. I hadn't looked into mining until Bitcoins got so difficult to mine that graphics cards were completely irrelevant already. It's all ASICs now, and if you try to buy one you won't get it until it's become worthless. Expect to be scammed. That's mostly why Scrypt was made, afaik: to put power back in the users' hands, by making it difficult to mine by graphics card (failed) and by ASIC (hasn't failed yet; might later)

    11. Re: Ummm Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pump and dump... just like bitcoin, danish tulips and bad debt.

    12. Re: Ummm Bullshit by chill · · Score: 0

      And your mom. Proof that "pump and dump" is a recurring, profitable business.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    13. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You lost us at "it offers no great advantages over BTC "...

    14. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Chemisor · · Score: 1

      > it offers no great advantages over BTC

      At present it offers the great advantage of being worth mining. With bitcoin, the cost of production already exceeds value of the result, so there is no way to get rich quick. With litecoin there is. Until, that is, somebody comes up with yet another supercoin that everyone will start mining in hopes of a quick profit.

    15. Re:Ummm Bullshit by fastest+fascist · · Score: 1

      There are a number of benefits to litecoin, particularly the faster transaction time."

      Transaction times are the same as for Bitcoin - practically instant. The confirmations are faster, but I don't see why that's a benefit. Bitcoin could have a faster confirmation time, too. If you cut confirmation time in, say, half each confirmation would only provide half the security of the longer time since a confirmation would be twice as easy to get into the blockchain, all other things being equal.

      Now, you do get that first confirmation faster if the confirmation time target is lower, but if you're accepting Litecoins with only a few confirmations, you're probably dealing with small amounts and might as well accept 0-confirmation Bitcoin transactions.

      I'd be happy to hear why a shorter confirmation time is a real benefit, but AFAIK it's not.

    16. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When Newegg sells out like this, they are being successful. What retailer wants old stock sticking around on shelves?

    17. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pump and dump works very well for Bitcoin. Other ecoins will follow....

    18. Re:Ummm Bullshit by blackraven14250 · · Score: 2

      Yes, it's the same situation there. I forgot which instruction, but NVidia cards require 3 instructions to perform an operation ATI cards can do in 1, and it's a key instruction in both SHA256 and Scrypt algorithms. Combine that with lower clocks due to the architecture of NVidia cards, and you have your performance difference.

    19. Re:Ummm Bullshit by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      It's so impossible to find that I just looked it up on Amazon and found more than half a dozen different vendors on the first page of results that have it in stock.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    20. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, SHA-256 consists of bitwise ANDs, ORs, NOTs and XORs, bitwise rotate left, and integer addition on 32-bit unsigned integers - so the difference is probably can be stated simply as "NVidia's cards suck at 32 bit integer arithmetics".

    21. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all ASICs now, and if you try to buy one you won't get it until it's become worthless. Expect to be scammed.

      Are you sure? Maybe it's more about waiting for the right guarantee or right dollars per GHASH figure?

      I ordered a little single 30 Ghash unit from BFL back in 2012 or so for $600, and it was received sometime in September or October; it was almost 12 months between date of order and date of delivery; mining since delivery date, it's really approximately 25 GHash in practice; yielding approximately 0.02 BTC per day; which in 6 or 7 months should eventually turn a profit.

      However, based on recent closed eBay listings; it seems I might in theory be able to resell the unit for close to $2000, which would be about a 70% profit margin.

      I think the future depends entirely on what the network hash rate will be. The more popular Bitcoin mining, the more risky it could be, because the more unstable the network hash rate.

      I think the important thing to look into is (1) Dollars you pay per GHASH, and (2) Likelihood that the vendor will deliver

      Some vendors offering a guarantee to deliver more hashing power, if network difficulty rises.

    22. Re:Ummm Bullshit by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      How can you design an algorithm that works better on GPUs than ASICs? The only explanation I can think of is that the expectation is that it will never be popular enough to make designing the ASICs worthwhile as too few people would buy them.

      But that explanation implies that it will also not have the kind of trading volume that would make it stable enough to be worthwhile as a currency....

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    23. Re: Ummm Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pump and dump... just like bitcoin, danish tulips and bad debt.

      What's wrong with Tulip?

      (Hint: Danish != Dutch)

    24. Re:Ummm Bullshit by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1
      Sure, for over retail price...

      You can always find one for sale, if you're willing to pay over the moon for it.

    25. Re:Ummm Bullshit by blackraven14250 · · Score: 2

      It's the bitwise rotate left - they don't have a hardware instruction for it.

    26. Re:Ummm Bullshit by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      If you're buying it to make money mining cryptocurrencies, does it really matter whether it's $100 over retail? The parent poster said they were "almost impossible to find now", which clearly is not the case.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    27. Re:Ummm Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually Silver is not the same as Gold and in no way integrated to Gold, they trade totally separately a lot like BTC and LTC. If BTC has value then why not LTC, it is an arrogant argument that BTC does not need LTC (of course it does not) neither does Gold need silver or visa versa. I did not read the article but I don't believe that increased mining has much to do with if LTC is of value in your opinion or not pump and dump still needs to be pumped.

  3. Lol@fads. by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1, Troll

    Litecoin. Give me a fucking break.

    1. Re:Lol@fads. by neiras · · Score: 5, Informative

      I bought into Litecoin at under $5 with some hobby money some months ago and it's hanging out at $30. I cashed out my original investment (leaving several times that in Litecoin, yay profit), bought ten Radeon cards and some cheap motherboards with the money, threw together some Debian USB sticks in an evening and am now mining on P2Pool for shits and giggles.

      In a few weeks the equipment will have paid for itself, even accounting for the insane difficulty increases. Power is cheap here, so I will do pretty well for a while yet. Bonus: the rigs run hot so I'm basically making a little money heating my house.

      You can laugh all you want. I'm having a blast, I've made a tidy profit, I have a bunch of new toys to play with, and if Litecoin ever does go ballistic like Bitcoin did I won't be left on the sidelines like you will. Don't really care about the likelihood of *coins taking over the world, or whatever - there is money to be made and I'm happy to make it.

      It's a fun hobby. Honestly, it's play money to me and I've multiplied it several times. Not complaining. More fun than hitting the casino like some people I know, even if it's gambling all the same.

    2. Re:Lol@fads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought in at almost zero I have 6100 and I'll be fadding the shit out of those fuckers soon. I'm already living the easy life because of the BC "fad" 29 and retired set for life.

      If GW ca do it so can I

    3. Re:Lol@fads. by jhol13 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is exactly why I think Bitcoin will collapse. Or perhaps, "should". There are quite a few with high percentage of all the money, one with at least 20%.
      Sooner or later some of them are going to dump. Getting $1'000'000 for "nothing" is very tempting.
      Later, much later, the gullible are going to understand they were ripped of, several times. Then, again it might be so that they never understand as they see Bitcoin as "mathematically proven" money missing the problems entirely.

      I hope you have luck. I just cannot do the same for ethical & moral reasons. Damn, parents!

    4. Re:Lol@fads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you turn those coins into money?
      All the online credit card things accepted by mtgrox or something like that look like russian scam sites.

    5. Re:Lol@fads. by stinerman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Now that's the right attitude to have. You know it's a bunch of people buying an investment (not a currency), hoping it will appreciate so that they can cash out once it hits a high enough price point.

      Bitcoin/Litecoin is an (irrational) investment, not a currency.

    6. Re: Lol@fads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a passive solar house and the modest litecoin operation I have going is just enough to keep our electric furnace off on cold cloudy days. I run the waste heat right into our furnace out duct.

    7. Re:Lol@fads. by nu1x · · Score: 1

      Be creative. Buy tech. Or gold. Cash that out - some banks are iffy about associating TXes where BTC was involved.

      --
      I have nothing to lose but my bindings.
    8. Re:Lol@fads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kind of a shame that at 29 you're still writing like a 10-year old though.

    9. Re:Lol@fads. by Tynin · · Score: 1

      How do you turn those coins into money? All the online credit card things accepted by mtgrox or something like that look like russian scam sites.

      You trade them on an exchange, like vircurex.com or others. You send your coins into the exchange and trade them for bitcoins (or litecoins if the exchange does that).

      Now you take your bitcoins to some place like localbitcoins.com and find someone willing to send you $$$ for them. You find a buyer on the site, for me I find someone that'll do cash deposits into my bank, once you post the sell your bitcoins go into escrow. The buyer then confirms they can do the trade, at which point your bitcoin gets locked into escrow until you release it. The buyer then walks into a branch of your bank and deposits cash to your bank acct #. You validate you see the money hitting your account and then release the bitcoin from escrow.

      It is amazing that people will walk into your banks branch and give you hundreds of dollars for fractions of a bitcoin.

    10. Re:Lol@fads. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      All crypto currency needs to become a real currency is a government to declare it legal tender for all debts public and private. Then it would be just as valid as paper money with one major exception - it's extremely difficult to counterfeit.

      And governments might do it, despite that limitation (from the point of view of the central banks, it's a limitation...), because it has an offsetting benefit of being traceable.

      I'm really not sure what to root for, either. Un-counterfeitable money would be a great way to rein in the central banks that have been stealing wealth equivalent to 2% of everyone's savings, but traceable money is a great way to crack down on underground economies, which is a good thing if they're trafficking in murder but a potentially horrible thing if they're trafficking in politically unpopular goods and services that don't hurt anyone. I suppose this also depends on whether more perfect enforcement leads people to overturn the bad laws, or capricious enforcement leads to more corruption, oppression, and contempt for the law.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    11. Re:Lol@fads. by jbssm · · Score: 1

      It would be a bit dumb to whoever has 20% of the coin to just dump it. He would loose a huge amount of money that way.

      What would happen - assuming that person had an average or above average IQ - is that he will start selling it's bitcoins slowly.

      At the moment, if you sell 1000 BTC in MtGox over the course of a day (so, 20 BTC per hour), the impact in the price is minimal, so that person could cash out 1 million dollars per day without affecting the price considerably./b>

    12. Re:Lol@fads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the moment, if you sell 1000 BTC in MtGox over the course of a day (so, 20 BTC per hour)...

      Your days are 50 hours long? Where do you live?

    13. Re:Lol@fads. by buchner.johannes · · Score: 1

      I bought into Litecoin at under $5 with some hobby money some months ago and it's hanging out at $30. I cashed out my original investment (leaving several times that in Litecoin, yay profit), bought ten Radeon cards and some cheap motherboards with the money, threw together some Debian USB sticks in an evening and am now mining on P2Pool for shits and giggles.

      In a few weeks the equipment will have paid for itself, even accounting for the insane difficulty increases. Power is cheap here, so I will do pretty well for a while yet. Bonus: the rigs run hot so I'm basically making a little money heating my house.

      You can laugh all you want. I'm having a blast, I've made a tidy profit, I have a bunch of new toys to play with, and if Litecoin ever does go ballistic like Bitcoin did I won't be left on the sidelines like you will. Don't really care about the likelihood of *coins taking over the world, or whatever - there is money to be made and I'm happy to make it.

      It's a fun hobby. Honestly, it's play money to me and I've multiplied it several times. Not complaining. More fun than hitting the casino like some people I know, even if it's gambling all the same.

      http://paulocoelhoblog.com/2010/09/08/the-fisherman-and-the-businessman/

      There was once a businessman who was sitting by the beach in a small Brazilian village...

      One might argue that verifying Bitcoins is less meaningful a computation than contributing to a BOINC project. That said, yes, you do get money out of the one but not the other. But lets look at what you gained. You bought goods that before you didn't have a need for, and you now have a hobby that fills some of your spare time, which is partly technology and partly, as you put it, gambling.

      No thanks, I'd rather spend my spare time thinking about solving problems. All your story tells me is that fossil-fuel electricity is too cheap.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    14. Re:Lol@fads. by neiras · · Score: 1

      One might argue that verifying Bitcoins is less meaningful a computation than contributing to a BOINC project.

      I've played with BOINC before, as well as distributed.net, SETI@home, etc. Sure, those were fun to mess around with. It's all hobbies to me. Meaningfulness is entirely subjective. You might value one activity over another, but your values don't mean a thing to anyone else.

      That said, yes, you do get money out of the one but not the other. But lets look at what you gained. You bought goods that before you didn't have a need for, and you now have a hobby that fills some of your spare time, which is partly technology and partly, as you put it, gambling.

      If I buy supplies for my model train layout, I'm buying things I don't otherwise have a need for. So what? I take risks with my money all the time. What makes this one worse than any other?

      No thanks, I'd rather spend my spare time thinking about solving problems.

      Letting some computers run 24/7 doesn't take up much of my time. Bing! There's another litecoin in my account - guess I'll get back to working on my plan for world peace, elimination of malaria, and robotic dominatrixes for all.

      All your story tells me is that fossil-fuel electricity is too cheap.

      Hydro. We have so much of it here that we sell it to the US at exorbitant rates.

      So coin mining and taking risks with your money isn't your thing. Why judge me for my vices? I have earned them.

    15. Re:Lol@fads. by davidhoude · · Score: 1

      This made me laugh. Declare bitcoin legal tender for all debts? hahahaha. Come on, really? You really think the guy serving hot dogs on the street corner should be required by law to accept bitcoins?

    16. Re:Lol@fads. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      You weren't supposed to read that as an endorsement of bitcoin, but as an admonishment of paper money...

      And the guy serving hot dogs on the street isn't required to accept dollars, either. If you buy the dogs on credit, I guess the lender might be, but the lender is probably a credit card company with a pre-existing relationship with the vender in which they pay dollars to him on your behalf. They're not going to try and work out an exchange rate from bartered mittens or wagon axles to dollars just for you.

      If it becomes a stable currency, the street vendor would probably prefer crypto currency over dollars - with equipment little more complicated than a credit card reader, the vendor gets all of the benefits of credit cards - convenience for the customer, less cash on hand, etc, without the high transaction fees that the credit companies offer.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    17. Re:Lol@fads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At this point in time, yes it is an investment. But if people start using it to buy and sell stuff, it will become a currency.

    18. Re:Lol@fads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is exactly why I think Bitcoin will collapse. Or perhaps, "should". There are quite a few with high percentage of all the money, one with at least 20%.
      Sooner or later some of them are going to dump. Getting $1'000'000 for "nothing" is very tempting.
      Later, much later, the gullible are going to understand they were ripped of, several times. Then, again it might be so that they never understand as they see Bitcoin as "mathematically proven" money missing the problems entirely.

      I hope you have luck. I just cannot do the same for ethical & moral reasons. Damn, parents!

      Nothing immoral or unethical about using a new form of currency.

    19. Re:Lol@fads. by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 1

      Why "should"? Just because someone was a canny investor, you want them to fail? What's the ethical problem?

      --
      It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
    20. Re:Lol@fads. by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      When someone "bit rich" dumps bitcoins he has, the others lose money. When this happens several times, people should learn this is not sane money. Should, but probably will not.

  4. An Honest Question by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Please help me out here. I'm asking seriously. If all you need to do to succeed at bitcoin mining is throw computer resources at it, and they are $1000 apiece, then why aren't all the world's supercomputers on the job making a thousand bucks a minute? The answer is of course, they have more important things to do. But even if they don't, they have the capacity to. It doesn't make sense to me. The whole currency could be deflated to nothing in one swell foop. If it could be so easily destroyed, then is its foundation really a solid one. I await enlightenment.

    1. Re:An Honest Question by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Bitcoin is designed to be issued at a steady rate. If a dozen supercomputers suddenly starting mining, far fewer bitcoins would be issued. It would force the workload to the next harder level much sooner and thus reduce everyone's income.

      Ironically, if the NSA wanted to mess with bitcoin, just spending a few weeks mining would really mess up the income of a lot of miners.

    2. Re:An Honest Question by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Simple: At the moment the electricity you need for Bitcoin mining costs more then the coins you get out of it, unless you have very specific hardware that is completely tuned to this task. Mining with graphics cards costs you money.

      The other thing is of course that Bitcoin is not a real currency and may crash at any time and without warning. All it takes is one large owner to cash in and the market panics. Even rumors of this happening could be enough. People that operate supercomputers are a bit more rational than the Bitcoin fanatics.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    3. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are a limited amount of coins being produced, 25 every 10 minutes. As you have to compete against all the other people mining to get the coins if all the world's supercomputers started mining they would all struggle to get many coins. While the coins are ~$1000 a piece the cost to mining a single coin is pretty high both in initial cost to get a powerful enough computer and in electricity costs to keep mining at maximum capacity.

    4. Re:An Honest Question by Keruo · · Score: 1

      Problem with bitcoin and other virtual currencies is pretty much same as real currencies as well.
      It accumulates to certain individuals who instead of keeping the cash flowing and market running hoard it like Scrooge McDuck.
      The imagined lack of availability with increased interest drives the price point up for those who participate at the market and this creates valuation bubble.
      Bitcointalk has nice estimates of the distribution in this thread

      --
      There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
    5. Re:An Honest Question by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      People that operate supercomputers are a bit more rational than the Bitcoin fanatics.

      Unless the owner of a supercomputer wants to crash the Bitcoin market. :)

    6. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      BitCoin has real value now. That is due to China (so much that the government had to take action.)

      There is no way BitCoin can become worthless now. It is just like gold and other precious metals -- it has value, and it can't be created willy-nilly like fiat currencies.

      So, it might be the "fifth element" for one's portfolio, in addition to gold, silver, platinum, and palladium.

    7. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually all those supercomputers your talking about are sorely outmatched by the sheer network processing capabilities of both bitcoin and litecoins. Also the General purpose processing capabilites of those supercomputers is poorly suited for mining either bitcoin or litecoin. Primecoin works fine though. And yes some actually are running primecoin mining software on those supercomputer systems in their off time. Most of those supercomputers are owned by partys interested in using them for a specific purpose. Which is at this time is almost never going to have anything to do with mining cryptocoins.

    8. Re:An Honest Question by rhodium_mir · · Score: 0

      Idiot, you forgot rhodium.

      --
      You can't spell "oneiromancy" without "roman".
    9. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My understanding is that the cost of the electricity to do that would be greater than the value of the bitcoin mined. So the only viable ways to make money mining bitcoin today are to a) steal electricity by using someone else's computers, b) build some kind of highly efficient FPGAs that have no purpose other than bitcoins, c) steal someone's keychain.

    10. Re:An Honest Question by gweihir · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nonsense. Every bubble is built on suckers like you, always trying to convince themselves the scam is real. Bitcoin does not even have the value the current used to create it had, as that cannot be recovered.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    11. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aside from the reasons already stated, say you get a coin or two per day using a supercomputer. How much do you think it costs you to buy those CPU cycles?

    12. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Essentially, all of the world's supercomputers ARE being used to mine bitcoin. well, at least, there's more than 256x the compute resources being thrown at mining BTC than the fastest 500 supercomputers combined.[1] Most of that is very specialized chips that can do nothing but mine bitcoin, but it's still a staggering amount of cycles being burnt through at an ever-increasing rate.

      [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/reuvencohen/2013/11/28/global-bitcoin-computing-power-now-256-times-faster-than-top-500-supercomputers-combined/

    13. Re:An Honest Question by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Supercomputers are generally built of a large number of general purpose CPUs, which aren't all that good at bitcoin mining compared to dedicated ASICs... Even with hundreds or thousands of CPUs, you will consume more in power than you ever make in bitcoin.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    14. Re:An Honest Question by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can easily envision three ways in which it could become worthless:
      1. A mathematical weakness in the protocol is found allowing for effective fraud. Not super-fast mining, but something like coin duplication or impersonation.
      2. A systematic crackdown by one or more major governments renders it impractical to openly accept bitcoins as payment. Right now, governments tolerate bitcoin because it's not really a force of any note. If it really took off? You can count on them to ban bitcoin in commercial operations. Later on, they will declare that posesssion of bitcoins is a sign of intent to purchase drugs or commit fraud, much in the same way that carrying around $10,000 in a briefcase might get you an interview with police today. Even if the crackdown was only half-effective, the fear would lead to a collapse in value - those $1000 coins would be selling for $5 each.
      3. Confidence crash. Bitcoin currently has value not so much because it can be spent (There isn't a great deal you can buy with it) as it does because of speculation. That's a dangerous situation - it's a perfect bubble. If the price should drop, even a little, then a lot of people are going to fear a decline and start selling off their coins - which will cause exactly the decline they fear. It's happened before many times. Ask anyone who's traded Noxcium in EVE.

    15. Re:An Honest Question by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      It accumulates to certain individuals who instead of keeping the cash flowing and market running hoard it like Scrooge McDuck.

      That isn't a problem. It just means few coins will exchange for more goods or services due to availability or lack there of.

      Sure long term deflation that does not end would be a problematic but there isn't much historic precedent out there for long term deflationary patterns. Where they have happened its been after a major inflationary event like a war, and the deflation mostly stops when the currency reaches prewar values such as the panics after the war of 1812.

      Ultimately deflation at the macro level is just a redistribution from debtors to creditors. At the macro level a monetary event not real wealth changing event. The creditors having just witnesses how the relative value of money can change start to want to diversify or just want a way to make more money so they start investing (lending) again.

      The only reasons this is a problem at all is because we have decided its a good political policy to enable half the population to run around with a negative net worth for large portions of their adult lives. Which leaves them with no flexibility whatsoever to cope with changing market conditions. If they can't get their paycheck for a few weeks, or if wages go down, or if interest rates go up, they can't adjust.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    16. Re:An Honest Question by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Simple: At the moment the electricity you need for Bitcoin mining costs more then the coins you get out of it, unless you have very specific hardware that is completely tuned to this task. Mining with graphics cards costs you money.

      That's why you mine other altcoins that are still minable on commodity hardware, like Litecoin. Their value goes up and down together with BTC, so the current sky-high BTC price also means that others are similarly high.

      The other thing is of course that Bitcoin is not a real currency and may crash at any time and without warning. All it takes is one large owner to cash in and the market panics. Even rumors of this happening could be enough.

      True, but if you pick the right coin, and you already have the hardware, you can completely recoup all present and future power costs for a month ahead in a couple of days right now. Cash those out (as in, money in your account in the bank), and from there on anything you mine is basically free money, with no risk whatsoever.

      You don't have to be a "Bitcoin fanatic" to be able to add up the numbers and conclude that, right now, this is a profitable game to play. Ideology has zero relevance here so long as there's real money to be had.

    17. Re:An Honest Question by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      I can easily envision three ways in which it could become worthless:
      3. Confidence crash. Bitcoin currently has value not so much because it can be spent (There isn't a great deal you can buy with it) as it does because of speculation. That's a dangerous situation - it's a perfect bubble. If the price should drop, even a little, then a lot of people are going to fear a decline and start selling off their coins - which will cause exactly the decline they fear. It's happened before many times.

      You mean like whatever-it-was that nearly halved its value last week?

      Yeah, that.

      Bitcoin has found its level. It's not going up any more, it's just going to oscillate around $1000 (a magic 'psychological' number that pretty much proves it's all speculation). There's nothing more to see here, time to move on to the Next Big Thing.

      --
      No sig today...
    18. Re:An Honest Question by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      why aren't all the world's supercomputers on the job making a thousand bucks a minute?

      A dozen basement dweller with a few dozen specialized ASICs each is probably as good as a "supercomputer" at mining bitcoins.

      People who pay for supercomputers have better things to do than try to make a couple of hundred bucks in a lottery^W market speculation.

      --
      No sig today...
    19. Re:An Honest Question by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

      Indeed, the best way to get rich with cryptocurrency is to create your own version, mine an initial amount for yourself, get enough people to join, and then sell yours before the bubble bursts. ;-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    20. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he only reasons this is a problem at all is because we have decided its a good political policy to enable half the population to run around with a negative net worth for large portions of their adult lives.

      What policy forces people to have debt and who is "we" that determined it? People have debt because of their own doing. Blame yourself for your debt, not someone else.

    21. Re:An Honest Question by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

      So in other words: People are the issue.

      Lol

    22. Re:An Honest Question by gweihir · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Simple: At the moment the electricity you need for Bitcoin mining costs more then the coins you get out of it, unless you have very specific hardware that is completely tuned to this task. Mining with graphics cards costs you money.

      That's why you mine other altcoins that are still minable on commodity hardware, like Litecoin. Their value goes up and down together with BTC, so the current sky-high BTC price also means that others are similarly high.

      Pure fantasy, designed to drive more people into the pyramid-scheme.

      The other thing is of course that Bitcoin is not a real currency and may crash at any time and without warning. All it takes is one large owner to cash in and the market panics. Even rumors of this happening could be enough.

      True, but if you pick the right coin, and you already have the hardware, you can completely recoup all present and future power costs for a month ahead in a couple of days right now. Cash those out (as in, money in your account in the bank), and from there on anything you mine is basically free money, with no risk whatsoever.

      You don't have to be a "Bitcoin fanatic" to be able to add up the numbers and conclude that, right now, this is a profitable game to play. Ideology has zero relevance here so long as there's real money to be had.

      No, it is not "profitable" at all. It is a pyramid scam, even if it is a complicated one. The fact of the matter is that in a pyramid scam, almost everybody involved looses big-time, while a few in early make tons of money. It also requires people like you driving more greedy, but stupid sheep in there, or otherwise the few early ones do not get their desired earnings.

      So, no, even if a few people manage to scam a lot of money with Bitcoin or Litecoin or any other Scamcoin, most that were not in it from very early on will just lose everything they invested.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    23. Re:An Honest Question by TheloniousToady · · Score: 1

      That seems to be a good explanation of why the the originator of Bitcoin currently is anonymous: I assume they've done just that.

    24. Re:An Honest Question by pla · · Score: 1

      I can easily envision three ways in which USD could become worthless:
      1) Molecular-level replicators. We will have them in the next few decades.
      2) A systematic "stay the course" approach to the current totally-fucking-insane fiscal policy of The US government, eventually making our money about as valuable as Reichsmark or Zimbabwean dollars.
      3) Confidence crash. USD has value not so much because it can be spent as it does because of confidence in a group of inbred whackjobs most Americans consider little short of "enemies of the state". But hey, wouldn't want the wrong lizard getting in, now would we?


      * Just one specific peeve - You can buy just about anything with BTC today. Really, paying your taxes counts as just about the only thing you can't do with it.

    25. Re:An Honest Question by nu1x · · Score: 0

      What ? So you mean these things I buy with BTC are imaginary, and gold cannot be trivially redeemed for cash in street gold stores ? Oh, ok.

      See ya later.

      --
      I have nothing to lose but my bindings.
    26. Re:An Honest Question by nu1x · · Score: 1

      > not a great deal

      you mean like everything in www.bitcoinstore.com, and also gold and other PMs ? Which can then trivially be redeemed for cash ?

      Noone will dump 1 Megabuck on a market without rebuying later, because it is NONTRIVIAL getting 1 Megabuck TXed to your bank account; (go on, try it).

      What is trivial, is buying a few 100s grams of gold. At a significant markup, but gold is valued much over the "official" rate anyway, on the street.

      This is quite real I assure you - and people give other people hundreds of dollars for 1 BTC not because they lack confidence in BTC -- IT IS BECAUSE THEY LACK CONFIDENCE IN DOLLARS.

      In case you haven't noticed, we have impending US dollar currency crash, and people are starting to get clued in.

      --
      I have nothing to lose but my bindings.
    27. Re:An Honest Question by nu1x · · Score: 1

      I have news to you buddy.

      Archive this message, and look at it in one year.

      1 BTC will have passed 2500 USD mark at that point. If there will be a USD.

      --
      I have nothing to lose but my bindings.
    28. Re:An Honest Question by couchslug · · Score: 2

      Cash out before the bubble bursts and you do well.

      Gambling does have some winners.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    29. Re:An Honest Question by TheGavster · · Score: 1

      When a block of Bitcoin is solved, the bonus goes to the machine that solved the block and then everyone starts over. You're basically in a race each block to be the one to solve it. By having a larger portion of the total computing power, you increase your chances of hitting each block, but are by no means guaranteed to ever hit (much as you can put money down on both red and black on a roulette table and still lose since the house is playing green). At most, someone could approach generating BTC2.5/min as their hash rate approached 100% of the total. Bitcoin would collapse long before that point, though, since once you hit 51% of the total hash rate, you can double spend and send yourself infinite coins.

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
    30. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Really? I have never personally seen a single physical store that would accept bitcoin for anything. Most importantly, if I wanted to use BTC for my 2 most important expenses (rent and food), I'd be met with confusion or incredulity.

      It may depend on where you live, but outside of decent range of websites, a couple of brick-and-mortar niche markets or very limited localities BTC is nothing.

    31. Re:An Honest Question by TheGavster · · Score: 1

      What attribute of a "real" currency prevents collapse? Governments (looking at you Venezuela) will claim to enforce exchange rates, but once they run out of hard currency to trade at their declared rate (or just refuse to exchange at that rate), the collapse happens anyway. It's unlikely that there is anyone who would attempt to maintain a charade around a collapsed Bitcoin, but just because someone is willing to pretend doesn't make something real.

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
    32. Re: An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I love how people compare bitcoin to gold, since there are limited bitcoins that can be created, yet as litecoin, peercoin, fastcoin etc have shown, there is no limit to the number of crypto coins, yet there is a limit to precious metals (on earth anyway). Haven'tseenanyone come out with a gold2 version of the metal

    33. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Coin duplication already happens, but it's even more problematic. A coin may be duplicated a number of times, but the coin can only be spent once, rending all other copies useless.

      This creates the unique problem of people stealing your wallet by way of copying, and then spending it's contents, without the wallet holder realizing that all of their currency is no longer worth anything, even if the X-coins are.

    34. Re: An Honest Question by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Oh, for a mod point.

      --
      No sig today...
    35. Re:An Honest Question by Xylantiel · · Score: 1

      Once again a bitcoiner doesn't understand that the ever-increasing value of a bitcoin is a primary problem with it as a currency. Nobody is saying its not working out as a great speculative investment vehicle. Currently the fed is fighting deflation like crazy to keep the economy stable. Currency and investment are different things.

    36. Re: An Honest Question by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      yet there is a limit to precious metals

      Quite right. It's not like you can dig them out of the ground or anything like that.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    37. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to be a "Bitcoin fanatic" to be able to add up the numbers and conclude that, right now, this is a profitable game to play. Ideology has zero relevance here so long as there's real money to be had.

      If I believed that, I wouldn't tell anybody.

    38. Re:An Honest Question by jbssm · · Score: 1

      I guess when they discovered gold, there was someone saying exactly the same.

    39. Re:An Honest Question by jbssm · · Score: 1

      Why is the ever increasing value a problem? Multiply the number of BTC that exists (or that will ever exist... about double what we have now), per it's price in USD. Now compare that to the world GDP... it's much, much lower, so no... BTC is not overpriced, in fact, far from it in case it want to become a real currency.

    40. Re:An Honest Question by jbssm · · Score: 1

      What policy forces people to have debt and who is "we" that determined it? People have debt because of their own doing. Blame yourself for your debt, not someone else.

      You are right sir. I guess most of the world population could just live in the street... or you know, not eat. That way they would be free of debt. FREEDOM!

    41. Re:An Honest Question by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Pure fantasy, designed to drive more people into the pyramid-scheme. ... No, it is not "profitable" at all. It is a pyramid scam, even if it is a complicated one.

      $100 in my bank account say otherwise. What do you have to back your theories?

      And yes, sure, it is a pyramid scheme right now (well, actually, just a plain old bubble). I never contradicted that or claimed anything long-term, only that there's money to be had right now in this. The point is that with mining, this bubble can be milked with practically zero risk, right now. And I mean anyone mining, not just "a few".

      I already gave the specific numbers, I don't know why you persist in pretending that they don't exist. With a single Radeon 280X, I mined enough to pay for the increase in my power bill for the entire month in advance (i.e. I can keep mining till the end of the year now essentially for free, I have already recouped the associated power cost) in three days. I'm now mining at zero risk, even if the bubble bursts midway through (I do cash out my coins very quickly though to minimize the lost potential profit).

    42. Re:An Honest Question by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Why not? It's free money that takes zero effort to get, I'm not particularly attached to it. If more people come to get their slice of it, and I get a few less dollars at the end of the month because the difficulty grows faster due to extra miners, no big deal.

      Besides, here on Slashdot, the majority largely falls into two camps: Bitcoin believers, who are already mining it anyway (but won't sell it just yet, which is nice of them, since that keeps the supply lower and the prices higher), and Bitcoin haters, who won't dabble in anything related to it for purely ideological reasons, even if there's actual money to be had.

    43. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ironically, if the NSA wanted to mess with bitcoin, just spending a few weeks mining would really mess up the income of a lot of miners.

      They could probably mess with it a lot more, if they time their mining with the changes of difficulty set by the bitcoin protocol.

      If it takes less than two weeks to mine 2016 blocks (it would if they mined like crazy during the mining for those 2016 blocks), the difficulty would be higher for the following 2016 blocks.

      If they don't help in mining any of the following 2016 blocks, it would take longer than usual for those 2016 blocks to be mined. Since it would take more than two weeks to mine those 2016 blocks, the difficulty would be lower for the following 2016 blocks. Lower than it is right now.

      If they then mined like crazy again for those 2016 blocks, they could mine some of those 2016 blocks even faster than the first 2016 blocks they mined and the difficulty would be higher for the next 2016 blocks. Higher than it would be after their first mining period.

      The bitcoin protocol does try to minimize this fluctuation in difficulty a bit. If it takes less than two weeks/4 to mine 2016 blocks, the calculation of the next difficulty pretends it took two weeks/4. Likewise if it took longer than two weeks*4. But they could probably still drive some miners crazy with this on and off mining approach.

      After repeating the cycle a couple of times, they could sell all their bitcoins at $1 each to drive miners even more crazy.

    44. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing more to see here, time to move on to the Next Big Thing.

      NBT-Coins! - Get 'em while they're hot!

    45. Re:An Honest Question by crtreece · · Score: 1

      ever-increasing value of a bitcoin

      This can also be seen as the ever-decreasing value of the USD. The Federal Reserve has been been buying $80+billion in Treasury Bonds every month since the third round of Quantitative Easing started in September 2012. Lets see if they follow through on the tapering program this time.

      --
      file: .signature not found
    46. Re:An Honest Question by dkf · · Score: 2

      Why is the ever increasing value a problem?

      In general? Because it discourages spending and encourages hoarding and speculation. Speculative bubbles can get people very badly burned, and currency speculation is a way to lose a lot of money.

      There are vicious sharks in these waters, and nobody's going to bail you out.

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    47. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That seems to be a good explanation of why the the originator of Bitcoin currently is anonymous: I assume they've done just that.

      Here's the first bitcoin block. As you can see, it haven't been transferred anywhere yet.

      Click on Next block and you'll see that one haven't been transferred either.

      Continue clicking on "Next block" until you get to block 170. That's the first bitcoin block that has been involved in a transfer and after that the block haven't been touched again.

      The reward for mining bitcoin blocks was 50 bitcoins back then, so we have at least 170 blocks * 50 bitcoins/block = 8500 bitcoins that haven't been transferred or "cashed out" yet.

      A more likely reason for the inventor still being anonymous: He lost the key to unlock all of his initial bitcoins and don't want to be ridiculed.

    48. Re:An Honest Question by tftp · · Score: 2

      Confidence crash. USD has value not so much because it can be spent as it does because of confidence in a group of inbred whackjobs most Americans consider little short of "enemies of the state".

      I don't know why you associate stability of the USD with the US Government and Congress. The USD is stable for one simple reason: you can buy stuff with it. You can buy it today, and in any volume. You can buy the entire oil output of Saudi Arabia with it. In fact, that's exactly what is happening. The USD is stabilized by an enormous mass of vendors that are willing to trade their goods for USD.

      The opposite is the problem of BTC. It is not used in economy, for many reasons. This means that the BTC value can go 50% up or down within an hour, and there is nothing to dampen the oscillation.

      * Just one specific peeve - You can buy just about anything with BTC today

      "about nothing" - FTFY. The only thing that you can reliably buy with BTC is other currencies.

      Besides, why would you want to spend BTC on a cup of coffee if that same BTC will double in price within a year? You would be better off paying in local currency, which is inflating, and keeping the BTC. Spending the coin is unwise; only true fanatics of BTC would do that, against their own interests.

    49. Re:An Honest Question by guises · · Score: 1

      No, it is not "profitable" at all. It is a pyramid scam, even if it is a complicated one.

      Thank you for using the word pyramid. I've seen "Ponzi" so many times in relation to Bitcoin, despite being utterly unrelated. And then the Bitcoin defenders come out and say, "No, it isn't a Ponzi scheme." and of course they're correct, even though that's missing the point entirely.

    50. Re: An Honest Question by lorax · · Score: 1

      Lets see, there is Gold, Silver, Platinum, Palladium, and Rhodium. That is quite a selection of precious metals available.

    51. Re:An Honest Question by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 1

      > The other thing is of course that Bitcoin is not a real currency and may crash at any time and without warning.

      You are confused about the nature of bitcoin. There are two entities with that name. One is the "Bitcoin network", which consists of software, apps, computers that relay and verify transactions, and a big database. That network does the same job as Western Union or bank wires - moving value from place to place. But it does it much faster and cheaper. Therefore the network has value because of it's usefulness. The other entity is the unit of measure for address balances and transactions, also called "a bitcoin", in the same sense a unit of length is called "a meter". Thus an address may have a balance of "3.436 bitcoins".

      However, balances have value only because of the network they are part of. So long as the network does its job better than the alternatives, people will want to use it. Since using it requires having a balance to make transactions with, that creates a demand for balances, thus they acquire value. The exchange rate may fluctuate from day to day, but the underlying value of the network is more steady.

    52. Re:An Honest Question by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      The set of people responsible for scheduling time on actual supercomputers don't intersect with the set of paranoid kooks who think the Federal Reserve is going to collapse any second now.

      The latter group is the one interested in alternative currencies.

    53. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      carrying around $10,000 in a briefcase might get you an interview with police today.

      Why would someone carry such a small sum as 10k in a briefcase? You're just calling attention to yourself, and greatly increasing your risk of getting robbed.

      You don't need a briefcase to carry 10,000 in cash. While a stack of 100 100's is too thick for a wallet, it should fit fine in your pocket. 20's are more cumbersome, but I can still fit 10,000 in 20's in my jacket pockets.

      I sometimes ride a city bus while carrying up to 10,000 in cash. I don't worry about it because it's not conspicuous.

    54. Re:An Honest Question by pla · · Score: 1

      "about nothing" - FTFY. The only thing that you can reliably buy with BTC is other currencies.

      That seems like an awfully lot of "About nothing" , then. Yes, Bitcoin merchants tend to sell services rather than goods just by virtue of the sort of people who have actually heard of it; but I stopped counting sites listed on that page selling physical product at 300, and that included at least a dozen "general purpose" stores and 25-30 C2C markets (online BTC flea-markets, basically).


      Besides, why would you want to spend BTC on a cup of coffee if that same BTC will double in price within a year?

      I know you wouldn't believe it from reading the average Slashdot post about Bitcoin, but not everyone using Bitcoin does so as speculation. Some of us just really want to see the success of a currency outside the control of any of the irresponsible jackasses currently in charge of global fiscal policy.

      Unsurprisingly, Germany seems like a real hotbed of BTC use - Imagine that, the single most responsible economy on the planet right now, and what do they get for it? "Thanks for bailing out Greece and Cyprus, can you get started on that check for Slovenia?"

    55. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Traditional centralized-currency fractional-reserve banking is much more of a pyramid scam than bitcoin. At least with bitcoin, there is no monopoly on the money-making process and no one has the power to reduce other peoples savings to dust (inflation).

    56. Re:An Honest Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The idea of "cashing out" is imagining that dollars or euros were any more "real money" than bitcoin is.

    57. Re:An Honest Question by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 1

      Isn't 2 & 3 what happened last week, but BTC recovered in a few days?

      --
      It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
    58. Re:An Honest Question by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 1

      Except then the adopters had gold, which has a number of properties that make it desirable. With digital currency you just have magic numbers some arbitrary authority says are really magic.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    59. Re: An Honest Question by Hugonz · · Score: 1

      Consider tungsten or platinum, they're theoretical competitors to gold and silver and comparable in their abundance, yet they never took off as currency. Same thing with altcoins: there's history, network effects, etc. The important thing with money is that people think it will be accepted tomorrow.

  5. It hurt AMD today... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I would love to buy a pair of 290x cards and Crossfire them, but the delay in aftermarket coolers has hurt and the overall beta state of their newest drivers hurts as well.

    NewEgg shipped my new pair of 780 TI cards today, equipped with Gigabyte Windforce aftermarket coolers, I'll finally get rid of most of the crappy FPS problem on my 3 Dell 30" monitors thanks to only having a single AMD 7970 card.

    Why not just buy a second 7970 card and Crossfire them? I considered it, but since they are impossible to find for a reasonable price, forget it (2 months ago they were under $300, today they are closer to $500). The microstutter problem also remains when Crossfiring two cards and also running Eyefinity.

    Given that the problem has been known for a year and still isn't fixed, I'm not giving AMD any more time.

    Off to NVidia for me! Oh well, shame on you AMD, loyal customer here, but you just didn't leave me any options.

    1. Re:It hurt AMD today... by arbiter1 · · Score: 1

      that stutter thing with eyefinity is AMD SAYS they will have driver for in January, but its AMD and they have a shakey record keep time tables for things like this.

    2. Re: It hurt AMD today... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could have crossfired an amd 7970 with a r9 280x.

    3. Re:It hurt AMD today... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 0
      :) AMD said they would have a driver for it last month (November). That came and went without so much as a squeak.

      The thing is, the 290/290x cards were released without finished drivers. The 280x is just a 7970 rebadge so I'm sure those drivers are fine, so long as you don't use both crossfire and eyefinity.

      Since I use both, it is annoying. I actually used to crossfire and pulled the second card because of this issue. I thought it would be fixed a year ago, then it was, for single cards.

      I watched several youtube reviews of BF4 and other modern games played on the 780 in SLI on 3 monitors, looked very smooth to me, so NVidia just got $1,400 from me yesterday. (well, Newegg did, don't know how much goes to NVidia).

      Playing games on three 30" monitors at 7680x1600 with a single 7970 has sucked for awhile now. :)

      For example, Mass Effect 3 is playable, so long as AA is turned off and you don't mind slowdowns here and there. Turn AA on even 2x and it is unbearable. More modern stuff like BF4 is completely unplayable on my 3 monitors with my current card.

      From the numbers I've seen, a pair of 290x cards in Crossfire would have been beautiful, oh well...

    4. Re: It hurt AMD today... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      You could have crossfired an amd 7970 with a r9 280x.

      Yes, but two problems with that... the 280x cards are expensive and hard to find, and the microstutter when running on 3 monitors has not been solved by AMD yet.

      They did solve it in hardware on the 290/290x cards, so crossfiring those would have been fine, but the 7970/280x cards still have microstutter and it is annoying.

    5. Re:It hurt AMD today... by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      Im fairly certain the actual drivers are NOT .NET. The interface might be, but Id hazard that the actual drivers are C, C++, or assembly. like 99% of the drivers out there.

    6. Re:It hurt AMD today... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, at least we now know you're a complete idiot.
      Hint: CCC != driver. Additionally, anything CCC does can be done through the ADL API.

    7. Re:It hurt AMD today... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, half the people of the world suffer from hunger right now, and you complain about driver for 30" gaming? Fuck off!

    8. Re:It hurt AMD today... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      Must... not... respond... to... flamebait... :)

    9. Re:It hurt AMD today... by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      I left ATI (now acquired by AMD) 9 years ago. And just the other day, I find their drivers are still written in .NET.

      Hahhhahhaaa... drivers written in .NET, sure... :D

    10. Re:It hurt AMD today... by ckatko · · Score: 1

      All that money... just so you can play the same videogames at twice the resolution as everyone else...

    11. Re:It hurt AMD today... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1
      Yes, that is true... however, in all fairness... once you have a trio of 30" monitors that cost over $3,000 to buy, spending $1,400 on video cards isn't quite as insane.

      Yea, ok, it is... a bit... :)

      People spend money on funny things, I've posted here before what I drive and where I live, so, well, this isn't the end of the world. Hopefully I get 2 to 3 years of good gaming out of these cards.

      Frankly, I would have been happy crossfiring a second 7970 (or 280x) with my current card, if the prices hadn't gone up and if the drivers didn't still suck.

      I could have purchased a pair of standard 780 cards and saved $400, but I figure if you're going to do it, do it right.

    12. Re:It hurt AMD today... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      He means their Control Panel integration.

    13. Re:It hurt AMD today... by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      A trio of 30" monitors just to play a video game isn't insane enough?

      --
      No sig today...
    14. Re:It hurt AMD today... by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Yeah, yeah, I know, I know... although Catalyst Control Center is integrated to the Control Panel (Settings Manager or something like that) only under Linux.

    15. Re:It hurt AMD today... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      You guys have nothing, I mean nothing, on people who do 'recreational' boating.

      If you look at the etymology of the word 'boat' you'll find all sorts of silly things. It's simply an acronym:

      Bring On Another Thousand.

      $1400? I sneeze on your three digit gizmo.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    16. Re:It hurt AMD today... by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      dude, half the people of the world suffer from hunger right now, and complain about someone posting in /.?? Fuck off! ;)

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    17. Re:It hurt AMD today... by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      That was fixed last March.

      The ATI driver fud is getting very old as the rage pro 128s that had the problem were discontinued over 10 years ago!

      Its like soviet union russia where a lie repeated over and over again is assumed as truth. I left nvidia due to unstable drivers and buggy hardware. ATI has served me well as a result.

    18. Re: It hurt AMD today... by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Google it?

      It was solved last March

    19. Re: It hurt AMD today... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Correct. The basic binaries will work just fine. But most people that wipe and reload a machine will get whatever the latest driver suite is available.

      I've seen .NET framework get hosed on Windows before. While it can be repaired by ripping it out and reload it, it's often such a major PITA it's easier to backup user data and wipe/reload the hard drive. Regardless, I don't think any subset of a driver package should be written in .NET or an language that requires a co-dependency with a framework separate from the underlaying OS it runs on.

      Just my two cents.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    20. Re: It hurt AMD today... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Regardless, I don't think any subset of a driver package should be written in .NET or an language that requires a co-dependency with a framework separate from the underlaying OS it runs on.

      FWIW, .NET has been a part of the OS (not removable by any supported means) since Vista.

    21. Re: It hurt AMD today... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      It was solved last march for single cards and for crossfire cards on single monitors... for cards in crossfire on multiple monitors, it was not.

    22. Re:It hurt AMD today... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      A trio of 30" monitors just to play a video game isn't insane enough?

      No, not really... :)

      A have a friend who is serious into bicycles, he has single bicycles that cost over $2K and has over $10K worth in his garage.

      We each have our hobbies...

  6. Don't worry by gweihir · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When the bubble bursts, cheap cards will be available in large numbers. And the bubble will burst, even Bitcoin is subject to economic rules and historically demonstrated facts. Its very volatility shows that its value has no basis in reality.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Don't worry by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Bitcoin is speculative. By design, it's not backed by any sovereign nation and its government. It's truly a double-edge sword. It also makes for great legalized gambling. Anyone that's in the Bitcoin scene knows it. It's always been a game of skill and luck as to who can cash out in real Dollars/Yuan/Euros/ before the majority does. You know, to the kind that is sovereign currency! Hah!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:Don't worry by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I don't dispute that. And if you have disposable income to use here and understand what the nature of the game is, that is fine.

      The problem is that many, many people do not get that this is how the game is rigged, and for them it becomes a non-classical Pyramid scam. Sure, stupidity has its cost, but this is not mere stupidity. It is people all over the Internet deliberately lying about the nature of Bitcoin, in the hopes of attracting more suckers so their payout will be larger. As in a classical pyramid-scheme, the ones that believe they are on the top of the pyramid are driving in more sheep to be slaughtered.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    3. Re:Don't worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is so volatile just because people haven't started using it large scale (yet). If people would start accepting bitcoin transfers for your morning coffee, show ticket, TV etc. with bitcoins the value would increase dramatically. Probably thousands of times or much more. As of now the value is mostly speculation, because people haven't started using it yet...

  7. Bitcoin, Litecoin... what next? by viperidaenz · · Score: 0

    I think sexcoin has the best name
    But Junkcoin has the most accurate name. Looks like it's already junk though.

    1. Re:Bitcoin, Litecoin... what next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuckcoin. So yes. A single fuck was given that day!

    2. Re:Bitcoin, Litecoin... what next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well the interesting thing is if currencies themselves can be so easily created, does that not just devalue all currencies and make exhanges and regulation incredibly complex?

      Imagine if each person on the planet could have their own currency and demand that they are paid in their own currency. A unique version of "MyCoin"...
      Now what happens? Your employer has to either mine your coins to pay you, or buy them from you, to pay you. The more need of your services there is, the higher the value of your personal currency becomes. Crazy idea, but logistical nightmare. Insurances companies would like it, as now you would have a personal value of worth.

    3. Re:Bitcoin, Litecoin... what next? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Third option: Your employer can simply decide not to be your employer (that is, not employ you, or fire you if you are already employed) unless you accept your payment in legal tender. And every court in the world would approve that.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    4. Re:Bitcoin, Litecoin... what next? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      For sexcoin, your proof of work is in form of a sperm probe?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    5. Re:Bitcoin, Litecoin... what next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well.. when we "Imagine" it also means that we imagine the tender of currency is legitimately/legally accepted.

      But for arguments sake lets follow your thought: The employer must pay you with legal tender.

      Before we start we must understand the difference between currency and tender. Legal tender is a very strange thing. "Tender" is the manifestation of a currency, not the currency itself. "Legal tender" is a manifestation of a currency recognised by a government. Government issued coins and notes are legal tender that manifest themselves as a representation of the currency of the country. Tender is not currency! Currency is not tender! Many people get confused by that, but it is very simple.

      If your employer had to pay you in legal tender, technically he would have to give you a packet of physical government issued coins and notes. If the courts forced you to get paid in legal tender and your employer would write your pay as a bank cheque, you could refuse it. Bank cheques are not legal tender. Being payed by your employer by electronic funds tranfer to your bank account is also not technically being payed in legal tender, it is just one bank saying to another, "I will reduce the number in my balance sheet and you can increase that number in yours. "

      Being payed in legal tender means to being payed in government issued coins and notes in your hand! When you buy milk at the corner store with coins you are paying in legal tender. When you buy the milk with your credit/debit card you are not paying in legal tender. Bank issued credit and debit cards are not legal tender! This concept blows alot of people away when they really think about it. Banks actually hold more virtual numbers in their balance sheets than they have physical legal tender. This is why when a bank becomes untrusted to meet their "supposed" value, a "run on the bank" can occur where everyone in panic tries to convert their virtually held numbers into legal tender. But I am getting side tracked....

      BTW the courts may approve that you get paid in legal tender, but most businesses would not pursue that angle, just because it costs more in administration to handle legal tender for employee payment. They all much prefer electronic fund transfers. In the old days business would have to move physical cash from the banks to the office to make employee payments. They don't want to go back to that. Very few of us these days get paid in legal tender. It was more common in the days before electronic banking, when people got their pay in little brown/yellow envelopes.

      However just because the tender of a currency is not registered by a government does not make it an invalid currency. As far as I am aware of, Bitcoin does not have a tender anywhere on this planet but it is a valid currency, it is actually a "community currency". Community currencies can be valid forms of payment just like any other currency.

      The reality is we generally dont get paid in legal tender these days, maybe we should! It might solve many global financial problems that have occured because of uncovered financial institutions pretending to have more than what they really have. Call their bluff!

      Anyway I hope you found that informative.

    6. Re:Bitcoin, Litecoin... what next? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Well, the point I was trying to make is that your employer is not required to employ you. So if you make unreasonable demands on payment modalities, the employer can simply not employ you.

      But thank you for explaining the term "legal tender"; I indeed didn't understand that correctly, although that was not central to my argument.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    7. Re:Bitcoin, Litecoin... what next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it wasn't for the fact that "paid" was spelled "payed", just by sheer word count I'd have thought the AC here was Bennett Haselton. :-)

    8. Re:Bitcoin, Litecoin... what next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what if people started demanding payment in bitcoins en masse. Companies and countries not allowing that type of payment would be dumped and starved of employees. There's always the "voting with your feet" alternative if your situation is not bearable. Todays workforce of highly specialized workers, especially in "high tech" areas. Then if a specialist makes a demand maybe the companys choice is between agreeing to the demand or missing out on the competence. Not having the right competences has been the death of companies many times in history.

  8. To the not-so-rich ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... alt-coin mining is one of the few remaining industries that they can get in with not so much upfront money.

    1. Re:To the not-so-rich ... by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      After the gold rush was over, there was still plenty of money to be made selling picks, shovels and mules to the prospectors.

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:To the not-so-rich ... by soundguy · · Score: 1

      There was a lot more money in selling them whores, bullets, and booze.

      --
      Nothing worthwhile ever happens before noon
  9. How about the latest batch of the Rx 200 cards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is the performance of the latest batch of the ATI cards, the Rx 200 series, codename Hawaii, as compared to the HD7950 ?

    Are they faster than HD7950 ?

    1. Re:How about the latest batch of the Rx 200 cards? by martinux · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The general consensus is that the newer cards are faster but they are also drawing more power per 'unit of work' and thus are not as good a solution. Note that this has not stopped people using these cards (and indeed, older, less powerful cards) as one can still make a small profit on relatively modest hardware.

      Ultimately the aim of the coin miner is to find the hardware that provides a reasonable mining rate whilst costing as little to run as possible. At some point the value of a litecoin may increase to the point where electricity costs become less of a factor in the choice of mining hardware. You'll start to see people moving to the newer cards if this happens.

      Another thing to consider is ASICs. These devices are generally expensive in terms of R&D but their performance can be orders of magnitude higher than GPUs. The problem described in the article is that ASICs are not ideal at solving scrypt. However, I think it's inevitable that hardware specifically designed to mine litecoin is inevitable if the value continues to rise.

    2. Re:How about the latest batch of the Rx 200 cards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another thing to consider is ASICs. These devices are generally expensive in terms of R&D but their performance can be orders of magnitude higher than GPUs. The problem described in the article is that ASICs are not ideal at solving scrypt. However, I think it's inevitable that hardware specifically designed to mine litecoin is inevitable if the value continues to rise

      For what I have read so far in the many articles in the alt-coin mining sites, the scrypt-based coins rely heavily upon the RAM.

      In fact, there are some articles saying that it's better to OC the RAM so that it matches the speed of the GPU in order to get the "optimum hash rate".

      I dunno. I'm still experimenting / tweaking the 7970 card I have.

      Thanks for the heads up, buddy !!

    3. Re:How about the latest batch of the Rx 200 cards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The issue is that yes, you could make asics perform better than gpus, but it's not as dramatic as an increase from going to asic on bitcoin. Bitcoin depends on maybe thousands or ten thousands of gates to construct an effective solver core.

      Litecoin needs something similar plus a ton of RAM bandwidth into a bit more than a 128KB RAM. So, now you have a much more complicated and difficult to manufacture solver core that you won't fit as many of on a chip. Interestingly though, it doesn't appear that current GPU cores are particularly well suited to this RAM requirement (there is a bonus to using GPUs with fast RAM chips). Future GPU generations may be able to run it in internal cache. For this reason, scrypt algorithm seems strangely chosen. If you require a "large" RAM, why not require a *large* RAM? There won't be 1GB caches on-chip for a while.

      For what it's worth, an FPGA with lots of 32-128KB or so RAMs would probably not be much less effective than an ASIC, as the RAM can be manufactured just as well there.

    4. Re:How about the latest batch of the Rx 200 cards? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not all of us who are mining LTC now bought new cards solely for that purpose.

      Personally, I just happened to derive some unexpected profits from the few BTC I had lying around for ages, and, having looked at LTC mining feasibility, decided that I'll use that cash to entertain myself with a new graphics card for my gaming rig - and will also use it to mine LTC while it's reasonably profitable, to recoup as much of the card's cost as possible. So I've got Radeon 280X, not because it had the best hashrate, but because it seemed like the best deal in terms of price to perf right now, within the lower performance limit that I've set.

  10. Poor AMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can really see the "hurt" for AMD here...given that they cannot keep up with demand! -I'm pretty confident they will post some impressive sales figures.

    Perhaps now it's time AMD will create a mining edition card? -so the games can have something & the miners as well.

    Let's see what mantle can do for mining.

  11. Make mining useful by benob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When will a *coin virtual currency make calculations useful for science? I can't help but feel this whole thing is total a waste of energy.

    1. Re:Make mining useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      When will a *coin virtual currency make calculations useful for science? I can't help but feel this whole thing is total a waste of energy.

      There already is, Timekoin is the most efficient digital currency out there, any spare CPU time can be used for a whole range of science research from any number of old servers given new life.

    2. Re:Make mining useful by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      SETICoin? However that would collapse the very moment extraterrestrial life is found. :-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    3. Re:Make mining useful by angryfirelord · · Score: 1

      I've had the same thoughts as well. If it was incorporated into something like Folding@home, you could get "paid" for completing so many work units.

    4. Re:Make mining useful by SpinyNorman · · Score: 1

      There's PrimeCoin where the miners generate prime numbers

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primecoin

    5. Re:Make mining useful by Idou · · Score: 1

      Looks like there are some non-trivial challenges to doing this:

      --
      Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
  12. Amusing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amusing day for this newspiece. Just a day after steamos launches with only nvidia support and no amd.

  13. Waiing for . .. KiteCoin myself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because if you can't kite a coin what good is it?

    1. Re:Waiing for . .. KiteCoin myself by game+kid · · Score: 1

      Why would you need to kite a coin? It's not like it would know how to nuke you with an AOE.

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    2. Re:Waiing for . .. KiteCoin myself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all about aggroing as many suckers as you can and kiting them around.

  14. what a by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    load of tripe!

  15. Stop... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just... stop it.
    Anyone willing to even taking virtual currency and exchange it for goods/real money is just plain crazy and shouldn't have those to begin with. These are just get rich quick scheme that only benefits the early adopters, it's too late for anyone to just join in and actually make it rich.

    1. Re:Stop... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like someone is a bit grumpy for not jumping in at the ground floor... ;-)

    2. Re:Stop... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      A lot of people are. We saw what looked like some crazy flash-in-the-pan project. By the time we realised this might actually be worth taking seriously, it was already too late to make the mega-bucks.

      I've looked at it, but by the time I did it was already at the point where GPU mining was barely covering the cost of power. ASICs still turn a profit, but that's a big investment in something that might well collapse any day now. It's a bubble, everyone knows it, and when it bursts it'll burst fast.

    3. Re:Stop... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      These are just get rich quick scheme that only benefits the early adopters, it's too late for anyone to just join in and actually make it rich.

      Make it rich, no.

      Buy a new shiny video card and recoup its cost is totally doable, though.

    4. Re:Stop... by TheloniousToady · · Score: 1

      Is it also too late to invest in tulip bulbs?

    5. Re:Stop... by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      This. It's a reasonable way of making a gaming hobby pay for itself.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  16. The environment thanks you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Buying multiple carbon intensive products and running them 24/7. I'll stick with actual coins thanks.

    1. Re:The environment thanks you. by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      You mean, those where you first have to move tons of material to get the ore (and in doing so not only consume energy, but also damage the environment), then to consume energy to transport it to the place where the ore can be converted to metal, a process which itself takes a lot of energy, then you have to transport the metal to the mint (consuming energy) where you have to again melt it to get it into the right portions, and finally you coin them, probably using a machine which again uses energy for operation?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  17. AMD stock has just been upgraded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    time to buy some AMD stock I guess!!!

  18. Re:Dogecoin overtook litecoin twice last night by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Who cares about the absolute value of any particular coin? What matters is the ratio of its value to mining difficulty - i.e. how much $$$ you can mine per day. CoinWarz maintains a list, and there are mining pools now which automatically switch coins based on which one is the most profitable currently (and immediately exchange them for BTC at the end of the round).

  19. PSU's too by nicxz · · Score: 1

    Lots of >=1000W PSU's are hard to come by also at the moment. I expect because of Litecoin mining also.

    1. Re:PSU's too by citizenr · · Score: 1

      only if you are retarded, Dell server 3KW psu is about $40 on ebay.

      --
      Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
  20. Re: How about the latest batch of the Rx 200 cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does the latency of the RAM matter, or more sheer bandwidth? I just wonder how an xbone would do with it's low latency ram available to the GPU. It wouldn't do so well if it's just bandwidth that's needed though.

  21. Re:Dogecoin overtook litecoin twice last night by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

    Who cares about the absolute value of any particular coin?

    Anyopne speculating with them, I guess. And anyone using it as a payment system.

    What matters is the ratio of its value to mining difficulty

    That matters to miners. To others it only matters very little.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  22. Alternate cryptocurrencies by TheloniousToady · · Score: 1

    As I understand it, the supply of maximum number of Bitcoin is limited, which is supposed to preserve the value, much as the limit on the amount of available gold, and the cost of mining additional gold, preserves its value. But aren't there an unlimited possible number of cryptocurrencies like Litecoin?

    In the world of metals, by analogy, it would be as if there were a limited supply of silver and gold, but a new precious metal (with its own limited supply) could be created at any time. Would metals then be rare enough to be useful as currency?

    As another analogy, in the world of fiat (paper) currencies, governments control the supply of their currency (in theory) to preserve the value. Assuming each government creates just one fiat currency (not always the case, I know) then the number of fiat currencies will be limited. Imagine a world, though, in which anyone - including someone anonymous - could create their own fiat currency. The first person to do so might create a currency with value, especially if their new currency served a need unmet by other currencies, e.g. anonymity and cheap micro-transactions. But as more homemade fiat currencies began to emerge, would the first one retain its value?

    1. Re:Alternate cryptocurrencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I understand it, the supply of maximum number of Bitcoin is limited, which is supposed to preserve the value, much as the limit on the amount of available gold, and the cost of mining additional gold, preserves its value.

      Gold is NOT limited in amount. Gold is just diffuse on Earth. This makes gold a much superior currency (for now) than anything like Bitcoin.

      Bitcoin, on the other hand, is limited, making it useless. It is just another pyramid scheme.

  23. Re:ReFlash by ganjadude · · Score: 4, Insightful

    why would someone intentionally cripple their product as to avoid sales? Any company in their right mind would be thrilled that their product is flying off the shelves

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  24. Is the pound better than the euro? by tepples · · Score: 1

    Who cares about the absolute value of any particular coin?

    Anyopne speculating with them, I guess. And anyone using it as a payment system.

    So is the U.S. dollar a hundred times "better" than the yen in some sense? Is the euro "better" than the dollar because 1 EUR is worth more than 1 USD? Is the pound "better" than the euro because 1 GBP is worth more than 1 EUR? What really matters to the users of a currency is the rate of change in exchange rates between two currencies over time, or between a currency and goods and services over time.

    1. Re:Is the pound better than the euro? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      It's not about "better". But if someone offered me a product for 100 dollars, and someone else offered me the same product for 100 euros, then I'd certainly prefer the 100 dollar offer. And to decide that, I have to know the absolute value of the euro in dollars.

      Now it's unlikely that I get a product offered both in euros and dollars, but most probably a product I get offered in bitcoins is also available in euros (I'm in Europe; in the US, you'll likely get it offered in dollars). And if I don't know the absolute value of the bitcoins in euros, I have no idea which of the offers is better. Therefore the absolute value matters for anyone paying in bitcoins.

      Why anyone speculating with them needs to know the absolute value should need no explanation.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  25. shortage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if there is a shortage of ATI radeon cards, then I will buy an Nvidia Geforce card instead. Problem solved. hopefully the miners won't buy all the Nvidia cards too.

  26. Not for miners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're making some sweeping judgments here, that just aren't true. Let's say that the cryptocurrency market is a scam, as you say.

    If you know what to mine, at this current moment in time, the "bubble" prices are high enough that you can purchase the hardware to mine and recoup your investment by daily transfers *in US dollars*, in just a few weeks. Do you believe that the pyramid scheme will collapse within a month? As far as your risk of an investment in mining equipment and power is concerned, that is the primary question that matters. Whether it is a scam or not is besides the point.

    Say whatever you will about the future of cryptocurrencies. Right now, some of them have a decent price, and can be mined for fairly cheap. If the tulips are insanely priced at $1000's, and you can grow them for peanuts, you don't shout "SCAM" and avoid it, YOU GROW THE TULIPS.

    Disclaimer: I don't think it's a pyramid scheme. Frankly, while I'm not sure bitcoin or any other crypto will survive long term, betting against bitcoin seems pretty much insane.

    Anything that is scarce can be used as a currency. Having been designed to fill that role, Bitcoin does it fairly well. Billions of dollars of wealth could be transfered *anonymously*/securely to other side of the planet within a few minutes. Are you really saying that this has no value over our current systems?

    1. Re:Not for miners by gweihir · · Score: 2

      Oh, I do not dispute that the scam in here is cleverly disguised. The possibility to "mine" Bitcoins is a truly impressive misdirection and supports the legend that this "currency" is made by users. But as soon as you look at the increase in mining effort, the pyramid in this scheme becomes blatantly obvious again. The matter of the fact is that the Bitcoin mining difficulty was cleverly designed to make mining hard just when the currency takes off. In addition, the early miners (the very top of the pyramid) got their coins basically for free.

      That said, not all cryptocurrencies are a scam. Those that are ground in real value and are up-front and honest about the properties of the scheme are not.

      But all that are build on nothing and have strongly progressive mining effort (i.e. far, far stronger than hardware speed advances) are. The idea is a truly beautiful scam that facilitates elaborate misdirection. Take for example all the claims that Bitcoin was "anonymous". Not so, as current research shows. I am pretty sure the designers were aware of this, but hoped that it would stay hidden for long enough. It did. Or take security. They must have been aware that stealing Bitcoins would be ridiculously easy. All the users and exchanges that have been robbed make a pretty impressive statement as to its insecurity. So from a technical perspective, Bitcoin is a pretty bad, insecure and non-anonymous hack and that likely was clear to its designers. Yet they went ahead nonetheless. Why? Because they never cared about its users, except as people to be separated from their money.

      Now, I _am_ impressed by Bitcoin. Usually a scam has to be simple to be successful. The designers managed to use something complex and successfully lied about its properties and made it _appear_ to be simple (secure, anonymous, "you mine it yourself"), without any of that actually being the truth. And they have pulled it off, like quite a few other pupils of the great Ponzi.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  27. Absolute vs. relative value by tepples · · Score: 1

    And if I don't know the absolute value of the bitcoins in euros

    I don't see how that's an absolute value. The value of bitcoins relative to euros is 1 BTC = 649.50 EUR as of today, but the "absolute" value of 1 BTC depends on how you define the "absolute" value of the goods that 649.50 EUR will buy you.

    1. Re:Absolute vs. relative value by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Of course the absolute value of 649,50 EUR is the absolute value of those goods, and therefore the absolute value of those goods is 649,50 EUR. And the absolute value of 1 BTC is also the same.

      Otherwise, the concept of absolute value makes no sense at all.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  28. Maybe a idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bought @ 100$ and cashed out @ 1100$. Winning, no bi-winning.

  29. Big sales of your product are a bad thing? Really? by JDG1980 · · Score: 1

    However, concerns are being raised that this is a temporary boom that may hurt AMD in the long run, since gamers, their core consumer group, may not be able to acquire the cards and instead opt for Nvidia

    Concerns? Sounds like concern trolling to me. Since when is it a bad thing that your products are so popular that you can barely keep them on the shelf, and they're selling well above MSRP? Most vendors would kill to attain that level of popularity. It's not just due to short supply, either – the Tahiti GPU (7950/7970/280X) is about 2 years old, and was being deeply discounted up until the recent boom.

    Personally, I think this is great. AMD has been chronically short of funds for R&D, and hopefully the recent boom in high-end GPUs will give them a much-needed infusion of cash. A competitive market is good for everyone, even if you're an Intel/Nvidia fan.

  30. Lol@posturing by neiras · · Score: 1

    It's not unethical to sell people stuff that they want at a price they deem fair. I make no claims about Litecoin as an investment. I make my own decisions, other people can do the same.

    As for mining - I am paid for verifying transactions on the network. That's honest work.

    I really don't understand why you think participating in a marketplace is immoral. So there are some whales out there with big balances... So what? They didn't set Bitcoin's value. If you've been watching the exchanges recently, you sometimes see whales coordinating to cause a sell-off so they can snap up cheap coins. Lately, though, it hasn't been working for them. They dump coins and the market doesn't even blink, and then they're forced to buy back in at a loss.

    This kind of manipulation happens in every market. It's human nature. Playing the holier than thou morality card is your choice, I guess. As for me, I'll keep selling coins to people that want them, and building the network by doing the useful work of verifying transactions.

    1. Re:Lol@posturing by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      It's not unethical to sell people stuff that they want at a price they deem fair.

      On this we just have to agree to disagree. Most frauds are done with this principle in mind.
      Note that I am not saying you should not do it, just that I will not myself do it.

    2. Re:Lol@posturing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've never heard of the stock markets have you?

    3. Re:Lol@posturing by neiras · · Score: 1

      It's not unethical to sell people stuff that they want at a price they deem fair.

      On this we just have to agree to disagree. Most frauds are done with this principle in mind.
      Note that I am not saying you should not do it, just that I will not myself do it.

      So... would you refuse to sell a pefectly good used car because some unscrupulous dealer might sell someone else a lemon? Most unscrupulous auto dealers sell lemons, so you should not sell cars?

      Seems like a pretty silly moral stand. Can you elaborate on how your choice makes any sense at all, or who it benefits?

      A sale only becomes fraud when the *seller* misrepresents his goods and takes advantage of the buyer. When people buy my coins, they determine that they want them without any interaction with me. There's nothing immoral about buying or selling *anything* when there's no coercion going on.

    4. Re:Lol@posturing by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      My moral prohibits me from taking advantage of the buyer, no matter whether I "misrepresent" the goods or not.

      If I have the knowledge that something is not as valuable as the price is, due to reasons the buyer does not understand, I just skip it. I will not sell a lemon car even if the buyer does not have the mechanical knowledge to find out it is lemon. I will not sell lemon eletronic coins because I know they are lemon.

      I do not expect you to hold these values.

    5. Re:Lol@posturing by neiras · · Score: 2

      My moral prohibits me from taking advantage of the buyer, no matter whether I "misrepresent" the goods or not.

      If I have the knowledge that something is not as valuable as the price is, due to reasons the buyer does not understand, I just skip it. I will not sell a lemon car even if the buyer does not have the mechanical knowledge to find out it is lemon.

      Hey, those values I share! The only difference between us is that I don't believe accepting market value for anything, from wool socks to XBoxes, is "taking advantage of the buyer." When I sell a coin, I get $30, my buyer gets 1 LTC, and both parties are happy. If that's taking advantage of someone, I hope you don't work anywhere that sells a product - that might comprimise your morals! So much cognitive dissonance.

      I don't have any knowledge that LTC or BTC are somehow flawed. I know how they work, but people set their value, and people are unpredictable.

      I will not sell lemon eletronic coins because I know they are lemon.

      I do not expect you to hold these values.

      You don't actually know that online coins are lemons despite all your posturing. It's a belief you hold, fine, but you haven't made a case for it. I invite you to back up your assertions by taking a short position on cryptocurrency. At least then you could make some money if you prove to be right.

      I'm no more immoral for participating in the cryptocoin economy than someone else is for participating in the Craigslist economy.

  31. Re:Dogecoin overtook litecoin twice last night by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Anyone speculating with them, I guess.

    Anyone speculating only cares about percentage increases. If what I have is $1k, it doesn't matter if I buy 10 coins with it or 1000; it only matters that the amount I buy, I can later sell for $2k.

  32. Re:Big sales of your product are a bad thing? Real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Well, there _are_ such things as "brand" and "brand loyalty".

    Imagine two firms producing hard drives, X and Y, both quite competetive in quality and performance on servers. Hunting season comes and people notice that X brand hard drives are _awesome_ for skeet shooting, and so they buy out X's hard drives clean.

    But then hunting season ends, and more servers are equipped with Y brand drives, because X was out of stock all the time. When they're going to upgrade they're likely to say "Well, Y served us well, let's see what's their new series are", and when they're asked what to get for your own server they're likely to say "We're using Y, works great, why don't you get one too?", so X gets a long-term loss in market share, even though it had a huge spike while it lasted.

    TL;DR: I can see the reasoning, though I don't believe there're enough skeet-shooters to empty the shelves. Shops near me don't seem to have shortages, at least.

  33. Re: How about the latest batch of the Rx 200 cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think mostly it is just bandwidth, or maybe more accurately, "seeks" per second. That is, there is no advantage to be had from retrieving more than a few bytes from a spot at once. When you look at a GPU, you have tons of execution units that can hide latency and keep the RAM busy, because mining is an embarrassingly parallel operation.

  34. "All You Need?" LOL Yeah right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It isn't as simple as buying computer, some graphics cards and installing software.

    Like growing prized roses or cannabis... there's a shit-ton of information you need to have in your brain before you're going to get awesome results. Two people throw $10,000 at mining equipment, one who knows computers and one who doesn't. The one who knows computers and overclocking and scripts and can work numbers well is going to make a significantly more money than the one who doesn't.

    Oh... and AMD isn't worried about Nvidia because Nvidia cards suck for mining. Yeah... they work... but so does using a spoon instead of a shovel to dig a hole. Lot more work and a lot less result with the spoon.

  35. AMD is NOT hurt. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good luck with your Nvidia card.

    Ever dig a hole with a spoon? That's what mining with an Nvidia card is like.

    As for crossfire? It doesn't help mining and usually slows you down. Why would you do that? (Because people don't know crap about mining and just throw phrases out there they think will sound right. lol)

    Read a bit more on a subject before posting next time. :)

  36. Re:ReFlash by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    why would someone intentionally cripple their product as to avoid sales?

    That would be the case if someone was running the company as a tax write-off for some other reason.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  37. Not Ideal? by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 2

    The problem described in the article is that ASICs are not ideal at solving scrypt.

    ASIC Bitcoin miners can't solve scrypt at all - you can't mine Litecoin with them. I guess you could call that "not ideal".

    --
    It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
    1. Re:Not Ideal? by tech.kyle · · Score: 1

      There's talk of ASIC scrypt miners coming out. The general consensus is that ASICs aren't generally strong at memory bandwidth and are unlikely to make GPU mining completely obsolete for Scrypt.

      --
      If we colonize Mars, it won't be the World Wide Web anymore. UWW?
  38. Re:ReFlash by tech.kyle · · Score: 2

    ..and I'm thrilled that when Scrypt miners dump their GPUs on eBay en masse (like SHA-256 miners did with Bitcoin), the market will be flooded with a nice supply of Radeons.

    ..and yes, while I am concerned about the stress the cards are put under for 99% of their life, most miners seem to peg their card's fan speed at 80-100%.

    --
    If we colonize Mars, it won't be the World Wide Web anymore. UWW?
  39. If you're trying to get in now, you're too late by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

    I bought my R9 290 a week and a half ago, and even then I knew something was up with this, as cards started showing "out of stock". I paid $400, the going price at the time, and got it in last Monday. At the time I ordered, it looked like I could make $600/mo off of mining from it. Now it's close to $200/mo. I'll likely be able to eventually recover my initial cost, or sell right now on ebay for ~$200 profit and go back to my GTX 760, but the chance to make real money is long since over.