An operations layer covering facilities, devices, pools, efficiency and inventory, plus a customer-facing dashboard with wallet functions — replacing the separate local views that had grown up across the sites.
Case study
One operations layer across five mining sites
2017–2018 · Washington State, USA · Public. A single operational view across facilities, devices, pools, efficiency and inventory — built before, and separate from, what happened to the company afterwards.
What the operation looked like
Mining at this scale is a physical business. Giga Watt ran across five locations in Washington State — Ephrata, Moses Lake, George, East Wenatchee, and the Pangborn office park.
That distribution is the whole problem statement. Monitoring, pool control, efficiency tracking and stock management had each grown up locally, which meant no one could see the operation as a single thing. You cannot run capacity, spot a failing site, or answer a customer question from four disconnected views.
What was built
One operations layer spanning the parts that had been separate:
- Facilities — the sites themselves, as first-class objects rather than labels.
- Devices — the mining hardware installed across them.
- Pools — pool configuration and control.
- Efficiency — the operational numbers that decide whether a site is worth its power.
- Inventory — stock management for hardware that arrives, fails, and gets replaced constantly.
- Customer dashboard — including wallet-facing functions.
Two audiences, one system
The design constraint that shaped the product was that it served two different groups with opposing needs.
Site operators and technicians needed operational depth: what is running, what is failing, what needs replacing, which site is underperforming. They are inside the operation and want everything.
Owners of hosted mining equipment needed something narrower and more legible: the state of *their* hardware, its output, and the wallet-facing view — without exposure to the operational surface behind it.
One dataset, two products on top of it. Getting that split right is most of the work in any hosted-infrastructure business, because the second group is a customer, not a colleague.
What this case shows
| Claim | Evidence |
|---|---|
| The operation was genuinely distributed | five named Washington State locations, publicly documented by the company |
| The software unified previously separate concerns | facilities, devices, pools, efficiency, inventory and a customer dashboard in one layer |
| It served two distinct user groups | site operators and technicians; owners of hosted equipment with dashboard and wallet functions |
| The engagement is bounded | operational software, built 2017–2018 |
Scope of this case
This page covers the operational software built in 2017–2018 and nothing beyond it.
- Software scope only. The engagement was the operations layer described above. It does not extend to the company's commercial operations, and this case makes no claims about them.
- No device count. A reliable total for hardware under management is not established, and the 5,000-device figure from a separate mining-pool project does not belong to this one.
- No failure-handling detail. How the system behaved when a site dropped or connectivity was lost is not documented, so it is not described here.
- No outcome metric. This case describes what was built and for whom, not a measured operational improvement.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Five locations in Washington State: Ephrata, Moses Lake, George, East Wenatchee, and the Pangborn office park, as named in the company's own public updates.
The operational software was built in 2017–2018. This case is limited to that software scope and does not describe the company's commercial operations.
Because the two audiences want opposite things. Technicians need full operational depth across every site and device. Customers who own hosted hardware need a narrow, legible view of their own equipment and its output, without the operational surface behind it. One dataset, two products.
Not established. No reliable total is available for this project, and the 5,000-device figure associated with a separate mining-pool engagement does not apply here.
Prefer a conversation first?
If you would rather talk it through before sending a brief, book a short routing call and we will point you to the right next step.