Mining driving up video card prices

[FordGT90Concept]

Oh and to correct the title of this thread. Mining is driving up prices on it's own. DEMAND IS DRIVING UP PRICES. The more cards sold and being used is really a good thing in my belief. It will force advancement in GPU even further than what we already have which is awesome.

You're forgetting the surge is followed by a slump. Once the latest cryptocurrency flavor of the week gets too saturated to be profitable, a lot of those used cards flood the market and the GPU manufacturers and retailers get stuck with huge inventories of used cards and new cards they can't move. That's *really* bad for them. Steady growth is best.

Do you really need proof that energy infrastructure will be improved if demand is there to improve it? They are selling a product.

Infrastructure is only improved if it is inadequate or breaks. It's not like someone buys a new computer and suddenly we got to replace all the wires between it and the power source.

In terms of the power source, it likely means power plants are running hotter to keep up with demand. And not just in power systems but also environmental cooling. I didn't even take that into consideration with my previous math (and it's significant).

Don't be so sure of that. Ethereum is the one set to overtake bitcoins market cap in"the Flippening" soon. Official endorsement means nothing in crypto-land.

Cryptocurrencies have near-zero value unless it is considered legal tender. Big investors won't touch it unless it is legal tender. If Etherium, by itself, is not considered legal tender in big economies (e.g. USA, EU, China), then to get any validity, it has to trade through a legal tender like Bitcoin. Bitcoin is and will remain king until something else gets *more* "official endorsements" than it.

I massively disagree about "likely" but it is likely to get more regulated as time goes on, yes. Taxing the "hell out of it?" No. No one wants to kill this at this point, save for people upset they can't get graphics cards.

The only reason why it hasn't been heavily taxed in the USA is because Washington, D.C. is in such massive disarray. Countries like Russia are moving much faster towards taxation. It's really a matter of "when."

For the record, I'm not currently in the market for a graphics card and I won't be for quite some time.

The only point you might have is it's "wastefulness of it physical resources" (personally, I think running a payment network is not wasteful, and really question whether it is that much more taxing vs what we did with these in the first place), the others are universal criminal activities that occur on all currencies, and are decidedly in the minority, especially since the shutdown of the silk road.

Currencies (especially USD) has means to be traced. Criminals have to *work* to scrub their dirty money which gives law enforcement time to catch them in the act. Whenever a marked, stolen dollar returns to a reserve, they know where that dollar was last in circulation.

You really don't think a bunch of services similar to Silk Road haven't popped up in their stead? Let's not forget the Silk Road was likely traced by the FBI using USD exchanges. Cryptocurrencies make it much more difficult to find sources and destinations of transactions.

That's a point as well. If they made a really awesome compute-only card as a result of this at a mainstreamist price point, well, supercomputers and miners everywhere would benefit.

Not really. Supercomputers have immense power so they can solve problems fast. Why? To move on to the next problem. In order for a supercomputer to be valuable, it has to be flexible, not one-trick ponies. Nothing *good* comes out of cryptocurrencies. I've not seen any significant evidence to contradict that.

People think the space race is a "massive waste of resources" as well. People in general are short-sighted. There are genuine returns from both these things that just because they cannot see them, they assume aren't there.

I have yet to meet a person that thinks "the space race is a massive waste of resources." The public support of the Apollo program evidences this. Hell, even for how much Bush and Obama got attacked for a lot of things, there was never really much backlash over them prioritizing a Mars mission for NASA. The collective response was more down the lines of "finally!"

 

[R-T-B]

Uh? Infrastructure is only improved if it is inadequate or breaks. It's not like someone buys a new computer and suddenly we got to replace all the wires between it and the power source.

In terms of the power source, it likely means power plants are running hotter to keep up with demand. In a lot of cases, that means more carbon dioxide for the atmosphere, yay!

Depends on the source. I know a lot of mining happens in the energy rich state of Washington, which is mostly hydroelectric. That said, I believe the current trend to be a temporary fad that is unsustainable. There may be another or even 3 more, but eventually it will stabilize back to only cheap energy regions doing it, generally hydro powered. Satoshi himself predicted that mining in the end should barely pay for itself. It's not supposed to be a living.

Either way, your argument doesn't hold much merrit as the same could be argued against tons of wasteful industries including supercomputing. I know, I know, "BUT SUPERCOMPUTING DOES SOMETHING!", right? Yeah, so does operating a cheap and globally accessible payment network.

Uh, cryptocurrencies have zero value unless it is considered legal tender. Big investors won't touch it unless it is legal tender. If Etherium, by itself, is not considered legal tender in big economies (e.g. USA, EU, China), then to get any validity, it has to trade through a legal tender like Bitcoin. Bitcoin is and will remain king until something else gets *more* "official endorsements" than it.

You don't need an "official endorsement" to trade it. You can trade Ethereum direct to USD right now in the USA, no official endorsement required (it's done privately via coinbase). Unless outlawed, there are exchanges for many cryptos straight to USD out there, I assure you. If it's worth more than a buck and not illegal, you can probably get it converted straight to greenback.

Of course, OUTLAWING it changes things, but I thought you were speaking purely to government endorsement? That matters little.

The only reason why it hasn't been heavily taxed in the USA is because Washington, D.C. is in such massive disarray. Countries like Russia are moving much faster towards taxation. It's really a matter of "when."

Comments from the legislature would indicate they are very much aware of bitcoin, and actually at the moment have no desire to move on it. I can cite some quotes if you need them. Of course, that may just be the current Trump-esque regime, but it was similar under Obama IIRC. They are even talking about setting up a publicly tradable option on the stock market to represent bitcoin under trump, IIRC. Obama's admin shut that down previously, Trump's is more open. Google it. It is certainly not going the direction you think.

For the record, I'm not currently in the market for a graphics card and I won't be for quite some time.

For the record, I am and it's frustrating as hell, which is why I don't deny there is an issue.

Currencies (especially USD) has means to be traced.

Bitcoin is actually the most traceable currency to date. I pointed this out earlier and it's the nature of blockchains. The problem is the nameless addresses. It needs some kind of "DNS" if you will. It's a technical problem, not a big one though.

Criminals have to *work* to scrub their dirty money which gives law enforcement time to catch them in the act. Whenever a marked, stolen dollar returns to a reserve, they know where that dollar was last in circulation.

Same with bitcoin. Problem is, when a dollar transitions from one meaningless string of ASCII characters to the next, it doesn't tell you much, does it?

Again, make people register with a DNS. Namecoin already has the means to provide a decentralized DNS, so the tech does exist.

You really don't think a bunch of services similar to Silk Road haven't popped up in their stead? Let's not forget the Silk Road was likely traced by the FBI using USD exchanges. Cryptocurrencies make it much more difficult to find sources and destinations of transactions.

You haven't been following the news on that, have you?

They did and got repeatedly closed down, to the point that some are now speculating the TOR network is "unsecure." It's certainly a mighty fine cooincidence that scared the criminals bad, if nothing else.

Not really. Supercomputers have immense power so they can solve problems fast. Why? To move on to the next problem. In order for a supercomputer to be valuable, it has to be flexible, not one-trick ponies. Nothing *good* comes out of cryptocurrencies. I've not seen any significant evidence to contradict that.

The amount of algorithms cryptos switch around on today to be ASIC-resistant makes them most certainly NOT one trick ponies. Bitcoin is, but Bitcoin is dying slowly, mark my words.

And if you don't see a new job market and multibillion dollar industry emerging to support it as a "good thing" then I guess you never will. I really don't think that's rational thinking, but it is your right.

I have yet to meet a person that thinks "the space race is a massive waste of resources." The public support of the Apollo program evidences this. Hell, even for how much Bush and Obama got attacked for a lot of things, there was never really much backlash over them prioritizing a Mars mission for NASA.

You must live in an isolated community. There are people on this very forum that regularly post stuff to that nature. Heck, there are people on this forum who don't even believe we went to the frickin' moon.

It's not the majority, but it's not a few either. Start a poll and be depressed. Don't say I did not warn you.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Either way, your argument doesn't hold much merrit as the same could be argued against tons of wasteful industries including supercomputing. I know, I know, "BUT SUPERCOMPUTING DOES SOMETHING!", right? Yeah, so does operating a cheap and globally accessible payment network.

Super computers cost $100k+. You don't buy them unless you have a very specific reason to. Most super computers are operated by governments for the purpose of furthering scientific endeavors. Pretty sure the US Department of Energy has the lion's share of them.

USD is cheaper and more accessible.

You don't need an "official endorsement" to trade it. You can trade Ethereum direct to USD right now in the USA, no official endorsement required (it's done privately via coinbase). Unless outlawed, there are exchanges for many cryptos straight to USD out there, I assure you. If it's worth more than a buck and not illegal, you can probably get it converted straight to greenback.

Because there's investors willing to take a risk on accumulating them. They're banking on the idea of them gaining value like Bitcoin did so they can cash in themselves later. As long as there is someone willing to take the risk, you can get USD from them. This is also the very same reason why they're so volatile.

Comments from the legislature would indicate they are very much aware of bitcoin, and actually at the moment have no desire to move on it. I can cite some quotes if you need them. Of course, that may just be the current Trump-esque regime, but it was similar under Obama IIRC. They are even talking about setting up a publicly tradable option on the stock market to represent bitcoin under trump, IIRC. Obama's admin shut that down previously, Trump's is more open. Google it. It is certainly not going the direction you think.

Let's see what results I got...
SEC Charges Bitcoin Mining Companies
SEC Charges Texas Man With Running Bitcoin-Denominated Ponzi Scheme
SEC Rejects Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF, Sending Price Tumbling
IRS goes after Coinbase
Bitcoin Experts to Congress: Overseas Exchanges Are Enabling Cybercrime
...the vice is closing.

They did and got repeatedly closed down, to the point that some are now speculating the TOR network is "unsecure." It's certainly a mighty fine cooincidence that scared the criminals bad, if nothing else.

Sting operation, most likely. Agents pose as a seller and buyer and they trace all facets of the transaction (digital and physical), subpoena the records, and make the arrests.

And if you don't see a new job market and multibillion dollar industry emerging to support it as a "good thing" then I guess you never will. I really don't think that's rational thinking, but it is your right.

Remember the little thing called the Great Depression where the government created the FDIC and NCUA to restore faith in financial institutions? Cryptocurrencies have no similar backing. They're like stocks more than currencies. So what do these stocks represent? The cost of obtaining them? So they're fundamentally investments in AMD, NVIDIA, ASIC manufacturers, and exchanges they are traded on. Thing is, we don't see $40 billion dollars materializing out of thin air in those company's bank accounts, do we? That's a bubble, and it's going to burst. When there's nothing tangible to give a stock stability, it's going to boom, bubble, and burst over and over until people abandon it or regulators choke it to death. As far as I can tell, this is the nature of cryptocurrencies and no amount of changing the mathematic expressions is going to change that; only directly tying it to something physical would which defeats the very purpose of it.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Super computers cost $100k+. You don't buy them unless you have a very specific reason to. Most super computers are operated by governments for the purpose of furthering scientific endeavors. Pretty sure the US Department of Energy has the lion's share of them.

USD is cheaper and more accessible.


Because there's investors willing to take a risk on accumulating them. They're banking on the idea of them gaining value like Bitcoin did so they can cash in themselves later. As long as there is someone willing to take the risk, you can get USD from them. This is also the very same reason why they're so volatile.


Let's see what results I got...
SEC Charges Bitcoin Mining Companies
SEC Charges Texas Man With Running Bitcoin-Denominated Ponzi Scheme
SEC Rejects Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF, Sending Price Tumbling
IRS goes after Coinbase
Bitcoin Experts to Congress: Overseas Exchanges Are Enabling Cybercrime
...the vice is closing.


Sting operation, most likely. Agents pose as a seller and buyer and they trace all facets of the transaction (digital and physical), subpoena the records, and make the arrests.


Remember the little thing called the Great Depression where the government created the FDIC and NCUA to restore faith in financial institutions? Cryptocurrencies have no similar backing. They're like stocks more than currencies. So what do these stocks represent? The cost of obtaining them? So they're fundamentally investments in AMD, NVIDIA, ASIC manufacturers, and exchanges they are traded on. Thing is, we don't see $40 billion dollars materializing out of thin air in those company's bank accounts, do we? That's a bubble, and it's going to burst. When there's nothing tangible to give a stock stability, it's going to boom, bubble, and burst over and over until people abandon it or regulators choke it to death. As far as I can tell, this is the nature of cryptocurrencies and no amount of changing the mathematic expressions is going to change that; only directly tying it to something physical would which defeats the very purpose of it.

That's the point your not appreciating i think of them as stocks in bitcoin , then mentally it works.
Its worth is both its value And its potential to have value and due to the ammount presently invested it's not going to be easy to sideline , big American money is no doubt involved and might have more sway then you or I ,do you not think a fedcoin is likely at some point?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

But it doesn't because stocks represent real assets, liabilities, and debts. Virtually everything that represents a cryptocurrency is already represented in stock markets (AMD and NVIDIA are publically traded C-corps). In short, cryptocurrencies are like other financial devices in that they exist for one reason and one reason alone: to use leverage money to make money. Fear and greed on a ticker.

No, Uncle Sam isn't going to create its own cryptocurrency because of the inherit instability and wastefulness of cryptocurrencies. USD already can be transmitted digitally through bank transfers. The systems are well established (widely used), trusted (bank-to-bank, heavily regulated and insured), and secure (have yet to hear of major breaches, largely supported by the decentralized nature of the banking system).

 

[R-T-B]

You missed the SWIFT breach I think, not sure if that qualifies as major though.

...the vice is closing.

Those are all obama era comments, lol. I admitted to those. I said its changing. And I'm sure you are selecting things that only fit your narritive in that search.

I'd get MY sources together, but I'll save it for my upcoming editorial on this subject, as no offense, but this is already eating a lot of my time and I do not get paid for this one.

At any rate, a bitcoin public trust has already happened, google would show. Looks like it wasn't hogwash then.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Bitcoin Experts to Congress: Overseas Exchanges Are Enabling Cybercrime is June 9, 2017.
IRS goes after Coinbase is May 21, 2017.
SEC Rejects Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF, Sending Price Tumbling is March 10, 2017.

IRS, SEC, Congress, etc. generally operate on previous direction until ordered otherwise. Trump really hasn't applied the brakes.

And no, my searches were "SEC bitcoin" and "Congress bitcoin" (Bitcoin is the buzzword that media ties all cryptocurrencies too for recognition).


Edit: out of curiosity, I did a search for "Trump cryptocurrency" and "Trump bitcoin." The former was mostly about TrumpCoin (totally heading for a collision with Trump Inc. on that for using his likeness without consent). The latter, individually, didn't strike me as anything out of the ordinary but the aggregate paints an interesting picture.

Long version: Stocks surged after Trump won last year until Wall Street was reminded that POTUS is relatively powerless without Congressional support. After investors realized the stock markets have really reached their peaks, that's when Bitcoin started surging again. Bitcoin has become a cash sync for US investor money. As such, I suspect it wouldn't take much of a shake up in either market to cause a huge shift of funds between them. If investors feel good about pumping money back into corporations, Bitcoin will plummet. If the stock markets look like they're going to fall (which could actually be right now), money surges into Bitcoin as investors look to make significant short-term gains. This completely explains why the market cap has exceeded $40 billion and also why it could go much higher. At the same time, it could be $1 billion tomorrow. Bitcoin doesn't have protections built-in like major stock exchanges do.

Short version: A Trump administration could send bitcoin prices spiking (a year ago today: July 4, 2016)

If Donald Trump becomes president of the U.S., there is the very real prospect of turmoil on world markets — the Economist Intelligence Unit ranks his presidency within the Top 10 global risks; however, bitcoin trading would thrive in such an environment, at least until the impact on major fiat currencies becomes clear.

Shortest version: run to Bitcoin when all else is too risky.

 

[R-T-B]

Bitcoin Experts to Congress: Overseas Exchanges Are Enabling Cybercrime is June 9, 2017.
IRS goes after Coinbase is May 21, 2017.
SEC Rejects Winklevoss Bitcoin ETF, Sending Price Tumbling is March 10, 2017.

IRS, SEC, Congress, etc. generally operate on previous direction until ordered otherwise. Trump really hasn't applied the brakes.

And no, my searches were "SEC bitcoin" and "Congress bitcoin" (Bitcoin is the buzzword that media ties all cryptocurrencies too for recognition).

Yeah, got me there on the dates. Still those searches will naturally bring up pro-regulation articles. I will recant on that point all the same, but I still would be deeply surprised if bitcoin is limited in any way by law, mark my words there.

Obviously, I do believe in cryptos future. I'll elaborate with a better formulated argument in a newsfeed near you soon... Don't worry, citations will be provided where applicable.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I thought the topic was regulative action on cryptocurrencies in the USA. Those are the regulators so it's not really "pro-" nor "anti-", it's history or history in the making.

Bitcoin looks to me a lot like DotComs did in the late 90s. Investors are splurging on it without really understanding what it is they're purchasing. This is the kind of climate where a major shake up can lead to a major US government reaction (think Dodd-Frank post 2008 collapse).

The bigger they are, the harder they fall (and more likely to get regulated).

 

[dorsetknob]

I thought the topic was regulative action on cryptocurrencies in the USA

funny there was me thinking Thread was about
"Mining driving up video card prices"
and not cryptocurrency Regulation

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Regulation has a retarding effect on mining. If SEC/Congress/FTC/etc. imposes new regulations on mining, demand for graphics cards in the USA would plummet in response. The same applies to other countries and their respective demand for graphics cards.

Example: That last article is very interesting (not even a month old). Congress could pass a law that outlaws cryptocurrency transactions on unapproved exchanges. Bitcoin value would plummet if it became law.

 

[R-T-B]

All I can say is I really really doubt legislative action would go that far, and I'm certainly hoping they won't. Only time will tell though.

As for the unapproved exchanges bit, is that for crypto to fiat? If so, due to money transmitter laws and licensing, thats basically the status quo already, so nothing new. Yes price would briefly drop due to shock, but only for the short term, and little would change.

I'd actually support such a measure.

 

[hat]

But that's exactly why cryptocurrencies are popular. Not because of illegal activity, but because there is no central agency (think governments, banks) controlling it.

 

[R-T-B]

But that's exactly why cryptocurrencies are popular. Not because of illegal activity, but because there is no central agency (think governments, banks) controlling it.

There need not be a central bank controlling the currency, only the bridge to fiat, so to speak.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

But that's exactly why cryptocurrencies are popular. Not because of illegal activity, but because there is no central agency (think governments, banks) controlling it.

And with that comes all the downsides like instability. USD is dominant because it is stable. Cryptocurrencies look more like financial device stock than an actual currency. That's never going to change because of the nature of it. Greedy people will loot and pillage it until it isn't profitable then it collapses again until some new shiny thing drives up the greed. The only question is when? When it happens, a lot of the video cards purchased for mining will flood the market and that will be the best time to buy them.

 

[RejZoR]

Constan creation of new crypto currencies when old one loses value is an equivalent of printing more money. It just doesn't work.

 

[Vya Domus]

Constan creation of new crypto currencies when old one loses value is an equivalent of printing more money. It just doesn't work.

Not in fairyland.

 

[P4-630]

Fairly indicative that your country doesn't have many that are doing cryptocurrency mining.

Don't know how many but some are doing it at a pro level:
https://www.arcticsecrets.nl/gpu-miners

 

[R-T-B]

Constan creation of new crypto currencies when old one loses value is an equivalent of printing more money. It just doesn't work.

Eventually, the market will find some coin with a fixed supply and stick with it. The others will fall to the side.

When that day comes I'd actually trust its stability more than fiat, which is subject to the whims of erratic government and not governed by cold, hard math. But we are still very much in the "beta" phase of crypto (as bitcoin and others always point out in their versioning), so that's a ways off even in my views. But the idea of a currency governed by the laws of math and not increasingly unreliable government policy should appeal to many, and it is.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

It has already happened to Bitcoin. It's the USD of cryptocurrencies.

The very nature of cryptocurrencies doesn't permit stability.

Gold was, and still is, the most stable benchmark for valuation. It's uncovered at a relatively stable rate, it's a commodity that is desired by many industries, and it's easy to trade against everything else. Problem is, hoarding gold is wasteful too which is why governments have abandoned it for fiat currencies.

Don't know how many but some are doing it at a pro level:
https://www.arcticsecrets.nl/gpu-miners

They only do RX 470, GTX 1060, and GTX 1070. You provided graphs for RX 480, GTX 1060, and GTX 1070. So assuming there is a large group of miners in the Netherlands, either they're not buying MSI variants of those cards or they're some how keeping card supply up with demand. Likely it's a combination of both (not a huge number of miners and no shortage of cards).

 

[Vario]

Its Global
mining is Affecting the Availability of New Cards and their price
S/H Cards are also Affected as Miners buy up the best of the Available Cards Pushing up the S/H Price

heck even with "Non Viable for Mining" Graphics Cards are Seeing a S/H Price Hike as unscrupulous people try and cash in on the Craze

Predict a Flood of S/H Graphics Cards hitting the Market in ^ Months Time
All worn out with Mining AND Still over priced ( Expectations of the miners to recoup costs).

The Future S/H Market for Decent Graphics Cards WILL BE A MINEFIELD OF GLOBAL CRAP

Bought a S/H mining card once, never again.

 

[yotano211]

I have an Rx 580 card on my computer - is it any worth trying out mining on my PC?

I would sell it and pick up a 1070. THose rx580, if you have the 8gb version, go for 1070 prices on ebay.

 

[R-T-B]

I have an Rx 580 card on my computer - is it any worth trying out mining on my PC?

It could be, but it is stressful to the graphics card. You will have to weigh that against your earnings.

You might try asking in the "Crypto wave" thread what kind of money you'd make with that. This is more focused on the philosophical and actual pros/cons of cryptos effect on GPU market and such, apparently.

EDIT:

I would sell it and pick up a 1070. THose rx580, if you have the 8gb version, go for 1070 prices on ebay.

On second thought, just listen to this man. He's made more money than I likely ever will make in crypto or ebay, so I trust his logic.

 

[yotano211]

It could be, but it is stressful to the graphics card. You will have to weigh that against your earnings.

You might try asking in the "Crypto wave" thread what kind of money you'd make with that. This is more focused on the philosophical and actual pros/cons of cryptos effect on GPU market and such, apparently.

EDIT:



On second thought, just listen to this man. He's made more money than I likely ever will make in crypto or ebay, so I trust his logic.

thank you but I dont see it has a money making thing for me, just a hobby and I like working around computers. All of my knowledge came from people like you over chat or from youtube videos and mostly from trial and error. The trial and error part is the most from I learned from, that and burning down a 1060 from too much overclocking the memory. Costly knowledge.

 

[Vya Domus]

thank you but I dont see it has a money making thing for me

Maybe not you but oh boy , for the vast majority into this ...