So if your a normal user and hate GPU mining,get over it.Try this

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I don't mine and don't benefit in any way from the current state of the market. I see blockchain as a useful and will be an important technology going forward; so it kinda bugs me when people poo-poo it, knowing nothing about it other than it "inconveniences" them.

Fair enough!

Blockchain is fine,its the excuse making some here are making for the mad pricing of GPUs,ie,"deal with it" which comes across as very smug. If people had £100s of lying around to spend on the rigs upfront people wouldn't be buying mainstream parts. These mainstream parts have been hit just as hard by all the scalpers - even parts which are not 7NM. Secondhand pricing is utter madness.

 

[Jimmy Weirdarms]

Then why pretend it has no use? You should fully understand exactly why it exists and why it's important. Are there flaws? Yeah, absolutely - I see it as a beta version of what it can be and won't dismiss it because it's not perfect.

Because it doesn't.
It's been around well over a decade now and has seen no use outside of speculation. Every time a new "use" for it is proposed (is it an currency? a payment network? a digital asset? a replacement for gold? a platform for ... something?) it's shown to be lacking in the fundamental properties needed to be any of them. In the end Bitcoin most closely resembles some sort of distributed pyramid scheme, and Ether a massive set of solutions looking for a problem. Any problem.

"Blockchain" itself falls into this category too, and falls down when it has to deal with any real world situation, effectively acting as a worse, slower database.

Beyond the technical deficiencies, the marketplace for cryptocurrencies is far from trustless and open, being instead opaque and open to manipulation by a variety of actors from the Chinese state to the Bitfinex/tether guys.
It's a huge mess and it's open to (repeated) systemic fraud.

If you like gambling, go for it, but recognise that's what you're doing.

 

[Howling]

the excuse making some here are making for the mad pricing of GPUs,ie,"deal with it" which comes across as very smug.

And I absolutely disagree we should just "deal with it." But you can view it from 2 sides; you can either blame the miners for buying all the stock - or you can blame the manufacturers for not making enough. Which brings us to the amazing nVidia quote about the supply of 3080s not being a problem - the demand is just too high

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

And I absolutely disagree we should just "deal with it." But you can view it from 2 sides; you can either blame the miners for buying all the stock - or you can blame the manufacturers for not making enough. Which brings us to the amazing nVidia quote about the supply of 3080s not being a problem - the demand is just too high

The OP basically said "deal with it". Basically excuse making for the current state of the market,and I would imagine a lot of the sales must be going to miners,because even before launch they were showing off stacks of new GPUs. The fact is they have deeper pockets than mere gamers and are prepared to pay the price. It's a business for them. They get in quick when prices are high by throwing money at it - the average person with their single mainstream GPU is going to be affected by the volatility much more,as they have to mine for longer(and the difficulty is increasing).

It happened back in 2017 too when stock was fine. Also 14NM/16NM parts have been affected too,as has the secondhand market. Most of the current AMD/Nvidia production is still on 14NM/16NM which is lagging two generations behind what Apple,etc are using.

 

[FoxEye]

Regardless of ones moral position on mining, reasons aside, I think it is a bit extreme comparing mining to drug dealing.

I was just making the point that things can't/shouldn't be justified on the grounds that it's "good for my family".

Yes it was an extreme example and no I'm not saying they're in the same league. Just that it's not a catch-all reason to justify something, when we're aware of the negative repercussions. Mining is not without negative repercussions.

 

[Howling]

Because it doesn't.
It's been around well over a decade now and has seen no use outside of speculation. Every time a new "use" for it is proposed (is it an currency? a payment network? a digital asset?) it's shown to be lacking in the fundamental properties needed to be any of them. In the end Bitcoin most closely resembles some sort of distributed pyramid scheme, and Ether a massive set of solutions looking for a problem. Any problem.

"Blockchain" itself falls into this category too, and falls down when it has to deal with anyreal world situation, effectively acting as a worse, slower database.

Then we have a very large difference of opinion. I think, at the very fundamental level, the ability to transfer wealth/assets/data between Person A and Person B without requiring a third party is extremely valuable.

Beyond the technical deficiencies, the marketplace for cryptocurrencies is far from trustless and open, being instead opaque and open to manipulation by a variety of actors from the Chinese state to the Bitfinex/tether guys.
It's a huge mess and it's open to (repeated) systemic fraud.

If you like gambling, go for it, but recognise that's what you're doing.

I don't disagree with this.

 

[FoxEye]

And I absolutely disagree we should just "deal with it." But you can view it from 2 sides; you can either blame the miners for buying all the stock - or you can blame the manufacturers for not making enough. Which brings us to the amazing nVidia quote about the supply of 3080s not being a problem - the demand is just too high

Mining rigs can and will absorb all GPUs you can produce tho.

There isn't a point at which you can saturate the mining market.

So long as each GPU is individually profitable, do you expect the major players to stop buying them? If so, why?

 

[Jimmy Weirdarms]

Then we have a fundamental difference of opinion. I think, at the very fundamental level, the ability to transfer wealth/assets/data between Person A and Person B without requiring a third party is extremely valuable.

I'm not convinced it's anything other than a mirage. Transfer of wealth in such a way is only free of third parties if that 'wealth' is denominated in (a single) cryptocurrency, otherwise multiple third parties may be involved in order to transform that into useful instruments at either end, even to other crypto coins.

I also actually like living in a society where we can track and stop financial crimes in progress like large-scale fraud, money laundering etc. Though we could do with getting better at this in the "traditional" system too.

 

[SkillTim]

LOL. Not so long a go the scalping group buying up all the XBoxes released a statement.

You know what it said? "Some of our members are finding it hard to provide for their families in this difficult time. We give them the means to make money and put food on the table." I lol'd my ass off. This is a scalping group trying to improve its image much like you just did

Random drug dealer: "I only took up selling crack to provide for my family."

The tiny violins, I hear them!

OK I get it. You're single, hate business and capitalism, want the world to not be destroyed and take an extreme view with every post to get a rise. Pegged.

 

[FoxEye]

I attacked crypto therefore I must hate business and capitalism. Great deduction.

Oh and I attacked scalpers too. True that.

 

[Howling]

There isn't a point at which you can saturate the mining market.

Actually, there is. The more power thrown into the network the more difficult the algorithm becomes - meaning you have to do more work for the same reward, or conversely get less reward for the same work. Let's say you have 10 GPUs and they each generate you $10/day... You make that 10,000 GPUs and you're making $6/day... you make that 1,000,000 GPUs and you're down to $2/day - but then you have to factor in costs of cooling and the staff needed to keep the data centre running and you're now at a loss. (I pulled those numbers out my ass purely for demonstration purposes.. but the system does essentially work that way)

I'm not convinced it's anything other than a mirage. Transfer of wealth in such a way is only free of third parties if that 'wealth' is denominated in (a single) cryptocurrency, otherwise multiple third parties may be involved in order to transform that into useful instruments at either end, even to other crypto coins.

Currently.

I also actually like living in a society where we can track and stop financial crimes in progress like large-scale fraud, money laundering etc. Though we could do with getting better at this in the "traditional" system too.

Yeah, paper money is so easy to track. Heck, they can barely track digital transactions under the current system let alone the paper money trails... This really isn't the best attack vector for discrediting crypto....

 

[jaybee]

Aside from all the moaning here, what is the sweet spot now for which GPU to purchase for this given that one may be in the market for a new GPU anyway. Is it the 3060ti? It seems these can be picked up for around £400-500 ?

 

[Jimmy Weirdarms]

Currently

I don't see that changing really, cryptocurrencies are not great at being general currency or a payment mechanism, I don't see the need to transform it to useful instruments going away any time soon.

Yeah, paper money is so easy to track.

Paper money is more or less on the way out, large scale fraud is unlikely to be carried out with suitcases full of notes any more, and it can be often be detected when it hits the electronic banking system.

Heck, they can barely track digital transactions under the current system let alone the paper money trails... This really isn't the best attack vector for discrediting crypto....

Actually it's a great one IMHO - the 'traditional' banking system is far from perfect at catching this stuff*, but that doesn't mean I want to sign up for a system in which one of the stated aims is to stop financial oversight pretty much entirely.

(*frustratingly so as fraudsters seem to have ways to make funds disappear. One of the ways they do this at the moment is to get unwitting rubes to act as receivers and buy cryptocurrency with incoming funds)

(EDIT - look, it's clear we're not going to agree, and that's OK! I've been having these same arguments for years, and the fundamental disagreement often comes down to different viewpoints on a bunch of things. Which is all fine. I mostly get ****** off when people either make sweeping claims about the tech capabilities, or call every naysayer an ignoramus. Some of us know our stuff and still aren't on board.)

 

[FoxEye]

Actually, there is. The more power thrown into the network the more difficult the algorithm becomes - meaning you have to do more work for the same reward, or conversely get less reward for the same work. Let's say you have 10 GPUs and they each generate you $10/day... You make that 10,000 GPUs and you're making $6/day... you make that 1,000,000 GPUs and you're down to $2/day - but then you have to factor in costs of cooling and the staff needed to keep the data centre running and you're now at a loss. (I pulled those numbers out my ass purely for demonstration purposes.. but the system does essentially work that way)

I did qualify my statement with "So long as each GPU is individually profitable, ..."

But even then it's not so black and white. Some people will continue mining during periods of non-profitability, in the hope that the value will increase in future.

Not just altcoins but Bitcoin too.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Hah, I got served an hour-long YT advert the other day (I watched 10 mins then Googled the company and had a good laugh).

Some chap selling "Genesis Technology".

I just kept wanting to shout "KHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!" whenever he mentioned it.

It's comedy gold tho. He wants people to know about this Genesis thing because - in his own words - he wants to share the wealth. That's why he wants you to buy into his mailing list for £5k Instead of, you know, just telling people for free

It's so awful, it's hillarious.

e: Sorry this post doesn't make sense until I explain that it's all about blockchain The chap in question is trying to sell a newsletter where he lists his 5 "hot pick" buttcoins to invest in that month. And he charges $1000s to receive the newsletter. Somebody tracked his previous "top 5" coins and most of them either flatlined or made a loss..

Guys we better shut down all the stock exchanges then.

What you said above happens there and more often.

Yes there are scammers out there plugging their scam coins and that's always happened in the stocks and shares sector too as both are similar in that regard.

I could show you adverts to sites saying how you can make billions by giving them x to invest in stocks and shares they have cherry picked for you.

There are scams in every investment sector. I have seen scams in crypto too and walked away.

If you cannot differentiate between obvious scams and pyramid schemes and the real deal then yeah it's not for you and maybe you should avoid discussing the topic too on that note.

 

[FoxEye]

@Psycho Sonny Tbh I'm surprised you're into mining. I thought (from GD threads) that you have a massive BTL portfolio that you manage... why would you need to get into something like mining where you're barely making £100 a day from your 10 3080s? Small change isn't it?

 

[gpuerrilla]

Wow this thread is hilarious (the parts I read); not sure how some folk can hate something they demonstrably don't have a clue about

Well its not that they dont have a clue about it, some do understand pretty well the fundamentals. You have to digest the materials all the way back to 2010, the methods, exchanges, protocols, pitfalls, benefits to really be able to have an educated comment about what technology is right, what is wrong etc. There has been a long journey over the ten years and as someone in this thread put it well, you cannot make sweeping generalisations and conclude with - miners are the bane of humanity and lets get the pitchforks out. Completely missing the mark, then you have mumbo jumbo about energy resources and inefficiencies again generalising to suit ones arguments to try and look clever.

When using paper money is it not wasteful to employ armed vans going round collecting bags of money?, devices to protect and add die in case they get stolen, petrol/diesel, uniforms blah blah just to move money about? Multiply that globally and FIAT is incredibly wasteful, dirty and consumes thousands of tons of energy and has done for hundreds of years. Its needing change as is lots of industrial activities polluting the planet. All them toxic components making computer parts and precious metals... on a overclocking forum which encourages burning more energy and spending money to play games...

 

[gpuerrilla]

Aside from all the moaning here, what is the sweet spot now for which GPU to purchase for this given that one may be in the market for a new GPU anyway. Is it the 3060ti? It seems these can be picked up for around £400-500 ?

Yeah 3060 cards would be sweet spot, depends on what prices you can source 30 series cards for really.

 

[Jimmy Weirdarms]

Guys we better shut down all the stock exchanges then.

What you said above happens there and more often.

But there's very often some comeback there, in terms of regulations on financial advice, protection schemes etc. It's not as blatant, nor is it punted to the general public in the same way.

FIAT is incredibly wasteful

It's not in the same league, bitcoin is anti-efficient. As the value rises more more electricity is competitively burned through just to service the network, until the price of the electricity is roughly equal to the value of the block reward. And this is for a network that can really only support a handful of transactions a second. The 'fiat' system as you put it services the entire world. Bitcoin could barely service a mid-sized town and burns through more power than a lot of small to mid-sized countries.
This energy use is in order to preserve its decentralisation properties, which are at this point more or less a lie anyway, because only the companies with access to the newest ASICs can actually participate in BTC mining now.

 

[gpuerrilla]

It's not in the same league, bitcoin is anti-efficient. As the value rises more and more electricity is competitively burned through just to service the network. A network that can really only support a handful of transactions a second. The 'fiat' system as you put it services the entire world. Bitcoin could barely service a mid-sized town and burns through more power than a lot of small to mid-sized countries.

You still have not read about Proof of Stake - shows ignorance, I posted it pages back.