Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #27852

Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check.

Show key headers only | View raw

On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 10:18:17 -0500, Albert van der Horst
<albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:

> I've recently looked at the Green Array chips with bitcoins
> in mind. [...]  This looks like a promissing area for the GA144.

Ok, distantly Forth related...

<OT: Bitcoins>

> With the current state of affairs a bitcoin is
> approximately worth the expense in energy consumption to
> generate it.

FYI, that assumption is only true you're paying an "expense
in energy consumption" to someone else in the first place...

I.e., if you're generating your own power cost effectively, e.g.,
highly efficient diesel generator or solar power generation, or
you're generating power at wholesale prices instead of retail,
you could maximize that energy's value by mining.

As long as you're paying someone else for power and paying
someone else for special processing circuitry, you're unlikely
to recover your financial inputs, at least currently and
into the future.  One or both of those costs needs to be made
neglible to make a profit.

> There is special hardware to do 300 GigaHash/second at 175 Watts.
> Not even considering whether it is even possible to harness
> the GA144 to arrive at this level of bulk performance, lets
> look at the energy picture.

If you were able to (legally) obtain a large quantity of processors
without paying much for them, and you have a cheap source of
electricity, and/or you have a cheap supply of cooling, i.e.,
iceberg or a mine or caves, then it's at least worth looking into
Bitcoin mining for profit.  That's assuming their value will
continue to increase, which may happen, but is doubtful.

Otherwise, I see no point.  Bitcoin has numerous technical flaws,
e.g., exponentially growing public ledger or blockchain, legal
issues and challenges, i.e., simple use constitutes money laundering
under some government laws, e.g., U.S.A., and it doesn't provide
the user with any advantage over the current banking system or
credit/debit cards.  They can be lost or stolen just like cash and
must be converted to/from fiat currency or legal tender, allowing
governments to track activity.  Transactions aren't reversible which
allows for fraud and theft.  Lack of irreversible transactions was
the main reason people converted from cash to traveller's checks (cheques)
and credit cards.  They are anonymous in name only since the "wallet"
or account number (public key) can't easily be linked to you.  But,
the accounts and all transactions are known and public, forever, so
legal agencies can piece together information from standard investigative
methods and confiscate the assets.

There is just too much to cover here.  So, if you're still interested,
i.e., passion, obsession, delusional, moron, gambler, etc.  Here are
some links:

http://www.bitcoin.org
https://bitcointalk.org
https://blockchain.info/
https://blockchain.info/address/"address"
https://github.com/znort987/blockparser
http://bitcoinrichlist.com/top100
http://bitcoincharts.com/
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_Ladder
http://www.bitcoinx.com/profit/
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Power_Calc

P.S.  Yes, it's true that simple usage of Bitcoin constitutes money
laundering under U.S. Federal laws.  It's a non-legal tender transaction
with indeterminable source and destination that didn't occur within
the financial system.  The U.S. has two definitions of money laundering.
That's the second one.  The first is that money comes from an unlawful
activity.  The second one needs *NO* illegal activity other than use.
That's why you can be charged with money laundering from using poker
chips, Canadian dollars used in the US, (etc.) to "transfer" money...


Rod Pemberton

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-12 15:18 +0000
  Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> - 2014-01-12 17:02 +0000
    Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-12 17:27 +0000
      Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. Tristan Plumb <firth@trstn.net> - 2014-01-12 22:40 +0000
        Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-12 23:03 +0000
          Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-12 16:54 -0800
  Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-13 02:45 -0500
    Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-13 02:54 -0500
      Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-13 02:57 -0500
    Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-13 12:32 +0000
      Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-13 09:52 -0500
        Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. mszepien@gmail.com - 2014-01-19 11:01 -0800
          Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-19 19:38 +0000
            Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. mszepien@gmail.com - 2014-01-19 13:40 -0800
              Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-19 17:50 -0500
                Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. mszepien@gmail.com - 2014-01-20 12:55 -0800
                Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-20 16:34 -0500
                Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. mszepien@gmail.com - 2014-01-21 04:49 -0800
                Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-21 10:48 -0500
                Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. mszepien@gmail.com - 2014-01-21 14:37 -0800
                Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-01-22 19:30 +0000
    Re: Green Array energy consumption: a reality check. "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-01-27 16:26 -0500

csiph-web