Hmm.. yeah something is wrong with the NMC. I think I have a clue where it might be.  I will get that looked at shortly and report back.

Yep, there it is.  I love when people accuse me of this, because you look like such a dolt when I explain that you can see when a post was edited last if you use the default forum skin... and just like the last dolt who accused me of this, you are also full of so much fail.

PuertoLibre: I look forward to your compilation.  I have a request, though - please write the script so it includes a nice back catalog as well, going back a couple months at least.  It won't be as much fun if it's just from this point forward.  Also, please be sure to link each post to the thread it came from, so people can find it easily just by clicking on it.  I'm pretty excited for this, to be honest.  I feel like a celebrity!

Should be up.  I'm going to try to move the DB tonight or at least a test copy and see how things go.  I will make a post when I do the move - it will put the website offline for a few minutes when it happens.

Lol.  Classic!  It's like it came out of a textbook.  Is there a template somewhere that people follow for this shit?

No luck involved.  Email office@butterflylabs.com and we will happily refund your order at any time.  It's always been that way.

We've had, hmm, 6 order cancellations in the past 3 months.  Each time, the person emailed and we cancelled the order and refunded the money immediately.  BitcoinINV never once asked for a refund.

Yeah, website was down for about an hour and a half.  The last piece of the puzzle is still in the DC (one of the databases) and it needs to move over to the new DC.  I was hoping to get to it last week, but maybe I can get to it this weekend.  Mining should have still been up on US2 and US3.

Since you two seem to have trouble reading, here's a link back to the post:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=79637.msg1285889#msg1285889


Syke, can you please provide actual links to where I said that?  Seriously, I would like to see you link to a post where I said any of those things.  If you can't, then I'm afraid it's you who is the liar.

PuertoLibre:  You seem to be confused on a great many details.  I'd be happy to refute your incorrect points if you want, so which is it:  Do you want me to leave this thread alone or continue to point out the ludicrous nature of both Tom's waffling and your incorrect assessment of details (that can be easily verified if you spent 10 seconds actually, you know, reading my posts)?

Tom admitted that he lied about BFL's power, good enough for me.  It's a shame that he continues to lie to his customers, but that's not really any of my business if he continues to hide the important details about his product.  He's fleecing people for their pre-orders, and that's sad, but there's not much I can do about that.

Here's something I want you to ask yourself:  Tom has announced that he's using Cell ASIC design.  He's not announced the process node, but lets be generous and say it's 45nm, since he has already stated that it was BGA based.  He's stated that he has licensed the SHA256 IP core from somewhere, but where?  If it's licensed from somewhere, has it been optimized for bitcoin's requirements? Perhaps it's a hardcopy from his "prototype" he claimed to have back at the beginning of September... but regardless of the source of his the IP core, it's going to be power hungry by the very nature of it being a CBIC, and again, being generous, lets say it uses only 30% of the power of the Modminer Quad.

Modminer quad: 40w @ 800 MH/s = 20 MH/w

30% of 40w = 12w per 800 MH/s or 810w for 54 Gh/s ... and I'm being pretty darned generous with the figures.  But heck, I'm a generous guy, lets cut that in half just for giggles!  405w for 54 GH/s.  Welcome back GPU's!  At least we've found a use for all the extra PSU's out there from the GPU mining era.  Of course, I'm just speculating, since Tom won't release any details, so it could turn out that my speculation is totally off base... but if not and I were Tom, I'd be keeping my power estimates secret, too.

How's that transparency working out for you, BTW?

8 @ 3.25

Na, I knew Tom would chicken out and run back into his hole, so it was largely irrelevant as far as Tom goes.  I'm offering 1000 BTC on behalf of BFL regardless of what Tom does.  I never expected Tom to honor the intent of his bet anyway (Simply because he had no intention of going through with it from the start), so it was largely altruistic on my part to begin with, but only in so far as I don't think I will have to pay up and I know Tom would... but I'm more than willing to escrow the amount until such time as is required.

Countering speculation with speculation?  How do you figure that?  Can you show me where our power usage is speculation?

As for point number two, if you'll stop and read before flying off and hitting that reply button, you'll understand that I already said that if he's defining competitive as some ridiculous multiple of other offerings, then it's not a lie.  But the fact that he's refusing to even define what "competitive" means is telling in and of itself.

PS - My job isn't customer service, it's operations.

Sure, no problem, here you go:


Two lies, same post.  You lied about BFL power and you guarantee your ASIC will be competitive to any other ASIC on the market.  Now, if you are defining competitive as some ridiculous multiple of other units, well, then I guess you're being honest about it.  But since you refuse to define "competitive" it makes it kind of obvious that you are lying about that as well.

That's an easy question to answer, Tom.  Because you are lying to your customers.  More specifically, you lied about BFL's power and I called you out.  You are also lying about being "competitive*"  If you had not lied, I wouldn't be here... but there you have it.

Please, prove me wrong, Tom.  Tell us what your "competitive" power is likely to be. While you're at it, please show figures as to how you know BFL's power is impossible.

* For any reasonable value of "competitive"

Transparent huh?  Why don't you ask him about his power usage.  See how transparent he is.


You, sir, are a LI-AHHH!  Please provide proof you requested a refund prior to contacting the AG... oh you can't, because you never did, otherwise we would have refunded you.  We've never refused a refund to anyone who's asked for it.  

You are also lying about BFL selling pre-orders to fund the building of ASICs.  BFL is only shady when you make up stories about things that didn't happen.  But then again, any company can be shady when you don't have to use the truth in your description.  Good job though on your fabrication, I'm sure someone, somewhere might believe you.

Haha good job sweeping that pesky "power" issue under the rug, Tom!  Maybe you can keep your dirty little power problem a secret long enough to gain a few more pre-orders before the secret comes out.    WTG for transparency.

I also notice you squeaked your way out of the bet, too.  Quality work there!  Won't even back up the bet YOU tried to initiate for charity.

Hm... sounds like an ice cream flavor.  "Josh and Tom's: Derailment (with nuts)"

I'm speaking from a technical standpoint, not a statistical standpoint. 

The only "strengthening" of the network happening during mining is when you solve a block.  Mining without solving a block does nothing for the network.  Leaving the client on, without mining, does help, but just mining and never solving a block is the same as never mining.

That's great, Phinnaeus!  My only beef with EFF is their abandonment of Bitcoin, so I have to assess if that's enough to put them out of the running.  But if another worthy charity is put forth, I am certainly open to consider it.  

I would nominate Gmaxwell as escrow assuming he is agreeable to it.  Yes, I propose the loser pays the 1000 BTC to charity.