They're doing a standard cell ASIC, not a mere FPGA copy over.
Which ASIC vendor and which process? Not sure either's been announced. But they have said it's a standard cell ASIC and not a mere FPGA copy-over. |
|
|
|
I was under the impression that since they aren't doing a 'pure asic' but just FPGA>ASIC (and already proved their FPGA) there is a chance they are just funneling this through the fab and there is no 'tape-out' party that they care about
I could be completely wrong but that is the impression that I get
They're doing a standard cell ASIC, not a mere FPGA copy over. It's not quite full custom, like Bitfury's however, but it's next best thing. The reason they can pull it off in the time frame they do is because they're able to access Orsoc's existing contractual agreements with the fabs they usually work with rather than starting from scratch like the other ASIC providers so far. Frankly I'd like to hear it from them when they receive chips, that's going to be a gigantic milestone that will make everyone a lot less nervous, even for people like me that have a lot of trust in their effort. If they don't receive chips in august that's a huge problem for everyone, because that will mean cancelled orders for them and a lot of refunds. They've got a fiduciary responsibility to people whose money they've already received, but they have to balance that against whatever risks of informing their competitors on what they're doing, but I don't really see how that can really hurt them. Might be an obvious question, but without hosting by KNC could it still be possible to mine in their pool? No, they will not allow this. |
|
|
|
Eligius has them for 340 TBC (0.55 BTC) now.
And you can choose your color there. |
|
|
|
My 2 cents...
None of the calculators, or mining forcasters seem to take in the fact/factor that in order for the difficulty changes to maintain a 20% increase every diffchange None of the calculators, take in factor the direct loses due to Internet connexion problems or pool problems ... Not so; at least one of them has an up-time field. |
|
|
|
|
BTCguild's online store is selling them for 0.6 BTC right now. Purchase queue over 600 now.
|
|
|
|
Unless I'm completely nuts it seems to me that I will take longer to get my ROI due to the presence of this new player, am I wrong? Not necessarily, since our return calculations include difficulty increases which assume others will be adding power to the network to make up those future increases after KNC ships. If others didn't ship, or existing network power went offline, we'd actually make a whole lot more. |
|
|
|
A 4-unit model cost 100 btc, or $7200 at the time of purchase, why are you struggling with this concept?  Units delivered soon will most likely achieve 100% return in terms of USD but probably not BTC. That's why I priced it in terms of what BTC would buy today. If you don't do so you don't know if you're earning a return in terms of BTC, which is the only important metric I care about. |
|
|
|
Why not respond to the concerns being raised here by restructuring the terms of your IPO?
Because the point of the IPO is to make him rich, why else? He's already lost the trust of the community in large measure by being so blatantly self-serving. It's over for him. This IPO is dead. |
|
|
|
I cant believe it. They shipped the chips first. We will never reach ROI now.
For batch-3 devices that are delivered soon, you're looking at a 3-4 month ROI. Not bad, but not great. Any significant delay will kill that ROI as lots of hashing power is coming online late this year. Can you provide a spreadsheet of your calculations? I believe you are way off and not even in the same ballpark. I think he's right, actually. This is incorrect. A 4-module unit cost 100 btc and the exchange at the time was around $72. You entered $7200 cost for the 3-module machine. Actually that was the defaults for an Avalon, so blame the page. In any case, if you want a return in terms of BTC you should be running it against what 100 BTC can buy today, meaning the cost of a 4-unit should be priced in dollar terms as just over $9k. Some calcs make this easier by allowing you to price cost in BTC too, but Coinish is down right now. There's your figures for an Avalon 4-unit, even worse:  |
|
|
|
I cant believe it. They shipped the chips first. We will never reach ROI now.
For batch-3 devices that are delivered soon, you're looking at a 3-4 month ROI. Not bad, but not great. Any significant delay will kill that ROI as lots of hashing power is coming online late this year. Can you provide a spreadsheet of your calculations? I believe you are way off and not even in the same ballpark. I think he's right, actually.  |
|
|
|
Hey guys about my issue they emailed me today and said they will refund me in USD!
The guys are very professional IMO and too bad I did not catch the pre-orders...
Next time!
I hope they will deliver on time, they deserve to succeed.
Did you originally pay in bitcoin or USD? |
|
|
|
|
If share dilution is so that you can involve others in the business, ie: by offering them new shares in exchange, then clearly that would be to the benefit of the other shareholders as well.
Why not enable voting rights on all shares then? Unless you plan to engage in a dilution that existing shareholders might not like? If it's in the interest of shareholders, surely they'll vote for it when it's needed.
You've given yourself terms that are far too generous for dilution and given shareholders zero recourse. We should expect absolute worst-case scenario, that you intend to issue 2 million new shares every year, devaluing the original investment by 20% a year at least.
No thanks.
What is it with all these investment schemes that seek to take advantage of people lately? It must be the incautious and the innumerate they plan to prey upon. Even if I trusted this offering, which I don't, the terms as given are awful.
|
|
|
|
Edit: He must mean jspielberg who thought he got a partial refund but confused it with other traffic. That can't have been the case with me however.
Yes, jspielberg is what I referred too. It's very odd you got your refund in 4 installments. Like they have to scrounge for coins from different wallets Running low on BTC? :-) It's not really that odd if you know how a bitcoin tx works, and if you look at the times it was actually done in two installments apparently. There was a 30 min time gap between first and the last ones, but the last three were simultaneous, meaning they came from a wallet that split into 3 payments because it was emptying sub-addresses and the like within an existing wallet, change, etc. Not that unusual at all. The 30 minute time gap after the first is a bit unusual perhaps. I don't know if it's very likely that that would happen automatically from a single transaction. Also they could've just bought the bitcoin on an exchange, coming from multiple sellers essentially, and sent it to me from there, dunno. |
|
|
|
what are ppl planning on doing with them after the difficulty makes them worthless next year?
Mine SHA256 ALT coins and pray they gain traction.  I should think most of the SHA256 ALT coins can be successfully 51% attacked and thus destroyed with these Avalons. I expect the alt-coins to gravitate to Scrypt simply out of sheer survival. |
|
|
|
what are ppl planning on doing with them after the difficulty makes them worthless next this year?
There, that's more like it  I hadn't really thought about it, but I figured the best thing would be if the exchange rate improves, that way you can run it profitably much longer. Alternate plan is to find some friendly business office with static electricity costs and a spare room and pay a nominal fee to them in bitcoin |
|
|
|
|
Mine was refunded. Maybe you'd care to strike me from the list or something?
|
|
|
|
OMG, I'm an exceptionally fast reader and I don't have anywhere near enough time to read all the "terms of service" contracts for all the software & services that I use. I hate it but I'm forced to "skim" many of them because there's just no friggin' way in hell that I could possibly read all that. The only way I could see this possibly working is if there was a standard rules agreement and people had to list where there rules deviated from that. Otherwise, it's just not happening baby - it's a pipe dream.
It's likely entire communities would adopt similar contracts, sort of like Blue Sky laws. Thus you'd only need to know what's common in that area and anywhere that points differ could be automatically pointed out for you. Gee, maybe I should bring this idea up at the next home owners association meeting. Having a slightly more restrictive set of laws, enforced by a small additional fee, that everyone agrees to when they buy in is such a novel concept. Really, guys? Tell me again how this scheme differs from what I am living in right now. I have the US law, with the local state law (CA) layered on top of that. Then the local county law and, in my case, the local homeowners association "rules". If I don't like the HOA, I sell and buy elsewhere. If I don't like the CA state laws, I move to a different state. If I don't like the US law, I immigrate to a place with "better" laws like Cuba (free medical) or Pitcairn Island (age of consent is 16 or perhaps lower). Personally, I like my current location better than my experiences in the Pacific Orient, Europe or the Middle East. Awe TomUnderSea, you're silly. But hey Anenome5, I think I'm starting to warm up to this idea. So how many communities will there be? Oh IDK, uh, say... how about 50 or so? And what will we call these communities?  50? I should say at least that many for an average sized community or town. Since this idea is designed to encourage as well as facilitate rapid legal evolution and experimentation, I would expect such communities to develop organically into whatever sizes are suitable and seem right to the people involved. As for what to call them, I've begun calling them 'Tuatha' after the Irish name for independent communities which feature from their legal history as an independent nation. I think communities would form along the lines of people's highest values in terms of how to live. There may be some who value quiet above all else, and they will form a community which caters to this value. That's virtually impossible in today's world outside being rich. Visitors to such areas would be asked to respect decorum and quiet as a condition of visitation. Since the streets would be privately owned as well, kicking out an offender is really easy compared to living in a modern city, where again, nothing short of being rich or rather well-off will get you a gated community. In a tuath, every community is effectively gated. You might have a community of people on ketogenic diets, where the only food sold is extremely low-carb. Imagine that. Naturally there would be communities stratified by age, by interest, party-going college-town type wild places where partying into the night is expected and celebrated and you'd never get the cops called on you. You'd have large places where people raise families and look out for each others' kids in that way. The possibilities of how to setup such places are really endless, and that's very exciting to me, to see what people would do with such a place. Anyway, I've been quietly building a client program to facilitate this, to allow people to serve contracts to others effortlessly, using the web, and I call it "Bitlaw." Uses P2P messaging and decentralization to send out contracts either publicly or privately, allows instant editing of contracts and back-and-forth negotiation of contracts, digital sales receipts, and more. Law is the last major bastion to escape the impact of the coming digital age. I intend to change all of that with Bitlaw and unleash a revolution of creative legal development. I think of it as the revenge of individualism. 150 years ago the socialists believed socialism as a principle for ordering society would be an effective way to order economic affairs. They produced communism and it failed spectacularly to produce economic gains over the free market--which was intrinsically individualist. Now I want to take the next step and introduce political individualism taken to its ultimate extreme--individual sovereignty as a social system. This has never been tried before. It's going to change everything. Anenome5, I was being sarcastic, meaning "50", as in 50 states. All kidding aside though (for now, hehe), something must be done and so why not try the way that gives each individual the maximum freedom? That really sounds appealing to me and towards my pursuits of life, liberty, and happiness. And so I really am starting to like the idea: it could become a great civilization - I mean after all the fighting and slaughtering of each other (over water & mineral & land rights and rights of way) dies down. Love the bitlaw idea. Could you make one also for sexual agreements? That way when I pick up a hottie at the club - there's no possible legal repercussions later when she gets pissed when I tell her to go home. BTW, how about a hitchhiker's agreement too? You could even make it so people had to register - and have online ratings & trust levels & ride reports: you could also enter the pickup details online, just in case the person you pick up turns out to be someone like that crazy cat-lady in here.  Ah yeah, I'm so far outside the state-paradigm it didn't even occur to me Historically nothing was run on the level or size of a state. You had city-states, not nations, and people considered themselves, for example, Venetians not Italians. I think my idea would constitute largely a return to local power, indeed the most local power, the individual, and would bring down national governments entirely. My life will be a failure if I don't make it happen in my lifetime on some small scale at least, a seed for the spring of humanity. |
|
|
|
Just want to point out for the sake of anyone trying to do a thread search that you've misspelled my pseudonym, two-N's, one M. |
|
|
|
has anyone else received a Batch 3 refund except the one documented case above
which documented case? The only one I saw was somebody who received a transaction from somebody else and confused it for a refund Anenome5. He attached screenshots of the transaction for proof. See earlier in this thread. So far, he's the only one who has received a refund. My assumption is that he got it so quickly because he happened to fill out the form RIGHT when Yifu sent out the newsletter. Yifu was probably still around/online, and therefore able to send it out quickly. As always, pure speculation Quite possibly. I read the email, contemplated the numbers, and decided to do it. I also had all the information quickly and easily available to me, finding it didn't take long. Still boggles me that I'm the only confirmed refund. I'm thinking they started doing refunds then got flooded with way more requests than expected and something 'came up' which demanded attention. Some communication from them on what's going on would be huge. Why can't these companies seriously spend 5 minutes at the end of the day to type up a 1 paragraph status update. I would do that daily if I were them. |
|
|
|
has anyone else received a Batch 3 refund except the one documented case above
which documented case? The only one I saw was somebody who received a transaction from somebody else and confused it for a refund Nah dude. That's a fresh receiving address I created for the refund, thus the label on it, that's been used with no one else and was public nowhere previously. It could not have been anyone but Bitsyncom. Nor was I expecting any other transactions. It was for the amount paid for a 4-unit in total. If random people are just sending out 101+BTC to non-public addresses that's news to me. Edit: He must mean jspielberg who thought he got a partial refund but confused it with other traffic. That can't have been the case with me however. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
