Member Info for BobsSocks

No less of a troll than your other blitherers.

Has indicated that it has flat-lined with ETF influxes balanced by direct BTC sales with the expectation of a downwards correction.

"Is A Bitcoin Sell-Off Coming? | What No One Is Telling You..."

Excuse me whilst I do not link to the source. After all it's not the done thing around here. Squeal!

Just here, with my single ID, to uptickle posts with merit.

"It really is that simple and I'm just amazed that you still don't get it."

Hmmm. Sowing confusion. Another well known method used by TROLLS.

"You can judge whether it's a valid industry research or some guy down the pub."

"Through observing consumption of electricity and daily issuance of bitcoin, provided by Cambridge University, we can find out the average mining costs of bitcoin. When mining costs are lower than bitcoin's market value, more miners will join. When mining costs are higher than miner's revenue, number of miners will decrease."

I'm sure Cambridge University spends a lot of time down the pub. Blooming Students!

Then again of course we were always going to suffer from other people digging out their own research to counter research offered by others. Strange to say that's what actual TROLLS do.

Oh, bye Phil.

"You seem to want to misinform time and a gain Bob, that’s a bit devious isn’t it🤔"

No. Read the numbers stupid. I've got two choices. Either you cannot perform that simple task for yourself or it is you that is trying to twist them and be devious.

Bye

"Mystic, please provide a link to where it will cost $90,000 to mine post halving One BTC."

Just to preempt Jambones moans I am not helping MM out for the sake of taking sides. You asked for evidence, no doubt spotting an opportunity to question another contributors veracity for purpose,

Here is an interactive graph,

https://en.macromicro.me/charts/29435/bitcoin-production-total-cost

11th February 2024 Bitcoin Mining Cost $56,822 Bitcoin Price $48,293

You get half the bitcoin for mining the same block post Halving your Mining Cost becomes $112,000.

I hope that satisfies you but if you disagree then please explain why rather than resorting to insults.

No. In fact my initial comeback missed a point.

Whilst you do not wish to link to your quote I would be again be seriously concerned about the company PR because if they are recently claiming that their focus is still on the implementation of the ASICs then they would also appear to have missed or rather lost their plot.

Bye

Very on topic.

SNIP

Bye

"This typically entails these parties providing QBT with a number of the most commonly used mining rigs available in the market for the Company to study and implement the porting of its Method A and Method B chip enhancements."

I don't know where you got that quote from Jambone, no doubt you will not provide a source until you have milked it for insult value, but it states Method A and Method B *chip* enhancements so it likely refers to the ASICs used to solve blocks and as such will likely be dated. Once again we hit the issue of unfocused PR from QBT.

As we now know or assume the focus is on AI method B which again as we now know relates to the installation of firmware on rigs to link them to the SaaS solution. In no way does this directly modify the operation of those ASICs within the rig at the chip/ substrate level. At best it can modify supply voltages and clock speeds. Do not even try to argue differently because you will get another bye.

Once again you are simply spouting randoms from the QBT script and totally misunderstanding and misrepresenting them. I can almost see why you are trying it on here. It is because you want to reinforce the idea that miners have offered examples of their rig to QBT to see if the, any, modifications can be made.

That is a claim that has been made and makes sense but at this moment in time the focus is no longer on modifications at the ASIC level. It is at the firmware level. However you are asking people to believe in your random constructions whilst continually getting it wrong.

No doubt some of your clan will suggest that the above deconstruction of your latest foray into being wrong is unfair but that's what you get when you repeatedly make these mistakes.

"Think we'll just have to agree to disagree Bob. We obviously just have a different way of approaching/calculating it or of understanding what their 2.6x statement actually means."

Not really. We are just talking about opposite ends of the scale. I agree with the reduction in advantage that you are expressing here as implementation scale increases assuming it does but it is still the, low use, case that the 2.6x statement is unlikely to be realised. However your,

"that they did before"

might cover all events and yours, as expressed here, to a greater extent but for the low use case 51 years versus 19 years is neither here or anytime soon.

"No Bob I don’t think I do."

No. It's the other way around. At least I think that's what we agreed on based on my modelling of one or a few QBT rigs versus the total number of rigs. Of course you are also right that towards the other end of the scale, or perhaps earlier, the QBT enhanced rigs will lose their effective advantage because they will increasingly be competing against themselves.

Interesting dynamics. It's a shame that QBT are unable to explain these effects to their investors. Hopefully they do a better job with their prospective clients.... Or maybe that would be too much to hope for given it might explain that the prospect is not as good as the headline numbers.

"Garbage......Last BTC to be mined in 2140 so if pulled forward a few decades, won't bother any of us!"

I think you might find Hexam was referring to the fact that difficulty is adjusted to maintain the mining rate at 1 block every ten minutes. In that sense the rate of supply is fixed.

"Bob, you seem to be arguing that any attempt by a miner to increase their hash is pointless."

Not at all. You also appear to be falling into the statistical trap. The 2.6 figure is based on a one rig against one rig competition. This is why the testing has to be done at scale. This, assuming they are testing and the indication is that they supposedly are, will be why that testing may take some time to produce a statistically significant result and not your, I believe it was you who suggested it, 12 or 20 days.

"They have potential geothermal power."

I'll be wrong but the significance of this to me is that they have drilled into an actively productive region of fission products, i.e Helium, which will still be producing, no idea as to the rate of that production, for some time to come. If that is the case and it is significant then they will also be producing Helium for some time.

"At $50k BTC, 1% of the global hash rate is worth 1% x 900 x 365 x 50k = $164m pa.

So if the QBT solution adds another 1.6x then this is over $250m additional revenue to the miners (assuming they are not in pools or it impacts all the miners in a pool)."

You need to rethink those numbers. As we have accepted the maximum probability gain has been based on a one on one match. Now you are proposing a 1 on 99 match so that will markedly reduce the suggested 2.6 times figure.

Wet finger maths suggests that your realisable profit figure just got reduced by 99/2.6 or a factor of 38.

It's not my fault that's the way it works and you, conveniently, keep forgetting about. That's just how it is

"I should start charging you..."

IT'S A TRAP!1!

You'll become a paid for poster by proxy.

"There is a fair bit of leeway before strike off and checking their history it is something that has happened before on with these forms and other firms the CEO has been involved with."

No doubt but the previous Gazette was dealt with within a day whilst this time it has been over a month with less than a month to go. Of course, as we all know, Companies House is a bit of a waste of space and let's people get away with all sorts of shenanigans.

Given Jambone has the ear of the company perhaps they can give them a possible warning. They may know this or my concerns might be misplaced but as a just in case,

ATM Lottery

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/05012433/filing-history

Bacteria Intelligence

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/12021476/filing-history

ATM Lottery has received a First Gazette dated 02/01/24, notice for compulsory strike off, and will be struck off not less than two months from this date, presumably 02/03/24.

"Upon the Company's dissolution, all property and rights vested in, or held in trust for, the company are deemed to be bona vacantia, and will belong to the crown."

All shares in ATM Lottery are held by FG.

The last confirmation statement with updates on 28th May 2021 for Bacteria Intelligence show that there are 5 shares. 4 of them held by ATM Lottery. It might be reasonable to assume that if ATM Lottery is not salvaged then those shares will revert to The Crown.

It is also interesting to note that in the case of at least Bacteria Intelligence, as is found elsewhere, that its going concern status is based on support via loans from the director's and, in the case of FG, that support might be in question given,

https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/images/QBT_-_RNS_-_Repo.pdf

he is presently unable to service the debt owed to MC Strategies AG.

Both ATM Lottery and Bacteria Intelligence are still listed as being at 22 Great St James Street having not made the cut, whichever way the cut may fall, for the transfer to 1 Chancery Lane.

Of course Jambone might choose to ignore this post and instead as an opportunity to ask more poorly phrased and meaningless questions suggesting that they are simple and moaning about a lack of answer or use the other ploy of re-posting his latest lengthy cut and paste of speculative nothing.

"Bought it back up for discussion as it’s something that we all seen to agree on."

If SpaceX buys the company for £10,000,000 then you will have £10,000,000.

That's what your discussion is. Dreaming in the hope that others will think that there is some substance to you dream and invest.

That is all I have to say about your, lack of, discussion.