Hopefully, whatever adjustments to the on-board firm-ware, hard-ware or SOC, will not require extensive redesign of the die and this thing will be done sooner than we think.
But do you see that if the problem doesn't involve ASIC redesign, the line about chips being delayed makes no sense? Unfortunately everything Crumbs has said is correct and on the mark. He has been civil for once and is not being misleading. If the issue is software, we would not be re-waiting like we are. I think a new mask is being prepared for the next design. What do you mean "next design"? |
|
|
|
Hopefully, whatever adjustments to the on-board firm-ware, hard-ware or SOC, will not require extensive redesign of the die and this thing will be done sooner than we think.
But do you see that if the problem doesn't involve ASIC redesign, the line about chips being delayed makes no sense? *I'm sure there could be a whole other slew of problems -- bad host boards, bad drivers, bad software -- but none of this has anything to do with the chips themselves. Yes, unless it is a SOC issue and it takes a while to flash 1000s of chips. Or perhaps the initial hard-wired design cannot accommodate the new software. |
|
|
|
Hopefully, whatever adjustments to the on-board firm-ware, hard-ware or SOC, will not require extensive redesign of the die and this thing will be done sooner than we think. I am worried this might be the end guys, we will probably never hear from "ken" again. Hes busy right? ok but he still has time to login everyday? I hope I'm wrong but for now this is looking very bad and don't forget that most of us if not all rightfully gave back "tendered" all our shares back to him and in return we got what? promises and excuses? shit.. I just hope I am wrong.. The thought of us giving back our shares came across my mind, but I don't really think Ken is trying to scam us out of anything. He has been straight-forward with the shares up to this point, finding us a way to successfully transfer out of BTCT and I believe he will do so again. Had the Avalon fiasco never occurred there would be a lot less worry over ActM. We have a bit of a delay and a lot of silence but this is not a train-wreck. |
|
|
|
|
I thought eASIC had a copy process where they could basically take an FPGA and create an ASIC chip. If this is so, how could our chips have turned out to be duds?
|
|
|
|
|
Whatever the unit is for daily transactions it should just be called "Coin". That seems to be a fairly popular way of referring to bitcoins.
|
|
|
|
Perhaps Ken wants to surprise us all come Christmas time. He doesn't want to let us know what we are getting before we open it.  |
|
|
|
|
I asked Ken for more details regarding what units were shipped out and the Intellihash. He stated that he couldn't say anymore and that what was provided on the 30th was all that would be said at this point.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't understand how Intellihash can possibly work unless the chips are gimped from the start due to inefficient firmware. Chips: "Mining difficulty is increasing, we are now able to activate hashing thrusters because they couldn't be activated at a difficulty of x.xx Ph but can be at x.xx+.01 Ph..." For it to be anything other than initially gimped hashing power, it would require some as of yet undiscovered mathematical connection between difficulty and hashing rate. Whereby the ActM chip logic can use the increased difficulty to its advantage over other chips.
Otherwise why couldn't this be solved simply through a firmware update? Or is this Intellihash actually making the chips themselves upgradeable to some extent?
Edit: Not that I am an expert in this or calling Ken a liar, I just don't understand how this works.
|
|
|
|
...
all you have to do is a Google search to get a feel for how Ken thinks. ...
I know how you can get a better feel: A bottle of NyQuil chased with a glass of nail polish remover. Never tried it. What I say is easily researchable in reality. If you understood Ken's background you would understand the Intelahash idea is a great feature, and is something taken from the HFT world. It shows me he knows a thing or two about networking and latency, which as competition for mining increases will push activemining, or even the biggest current miners out of the game. I love the direction he is going...and have no doubt he will execute. Remember the word latency as it will become a big buzz word in BTC mining in the future. Those are some physical facts, not spouted out comments that sound like they came from the head rancher at the "Horny unicorn dude ranch". Like grandma says good things take time to make. Explain this latency thing and how you think it plays into Intellihash. |
|
|
|
|
I don't understand how it is possible to increase the hashing performance as time goes on. Isn't the hashing ability already hardwired into the chip? Is this intellihash software going to learn how to hash more efficiently as time moves on or something through AI? It sounds great but I don't understand. Why not just program the chip to use its full potential from the beginning?
|
|
|
|
Okay Stuart, I've ignored them all to see how that goes.
Much obliged. Eventually, if it isn't this way already, this thread will separate into two separate worlds: the troll circlejerk and the supporter circlejerk (come on guys, no use denying it, we have some cool stuff in the works and we *may* get a bit overexcited sometimes) with those in one camp having those in the other camp on ignore. I do sympathize with the casual observer who will inevitably confused as to the completely separate conversations going on in this poor ol' thread. Things sound potentially interesting, but we have no details on anything. What are these products that were shipped? Are they miners? What models and what hash rate? How much are we mining with? When will we start mining with the new (or original) chips? When are we going to get our dividends that were halted a month ago? What was the hash rate prior to this "Intellihash"? etc. |
|
|
|
|
When are we getting our dividends for the past month?
|
|
|
|
|
So what was shipped? How long until these chips are done and hashing? Not sure that we got any clear info here.
|
|
|
|
Get ready ladies... Gox is about to take off.
Well... looks like I was wrong. |
|
|
|
Up, but slowly over the next day or two.
WTF kind of take off is "slowly over a day or two"? That's indistinguishable from what happens all the time. That is how it starts. Approaching mid Sunday to early Monday we will see much sharper increases. IOW, it is the last chance to buy in if you don't want to be left behind (if you sold out of your position). That was my point. We will hit 1300 before there is any decent sell-off. Actually, there will be no sell-off at 1300 but maybe at 1400-1450. |
|
|
|
Get ready ladies... Gox is about to take off.
Which way? Up, but slowly over the next day or two. |
|
|
|
|
Get ready ladies... Gox is about to take off.
|
|
|
|
Am I the only one that is seeing that coins on much more sparse on Mtgox than on Stamp? If this is true, it would suggest that in the future it is going to be impossible for Stamp to keep up with Gox.
So much has been talked about regarding the fiat "stuck" in Gox and how people would theoretically have to buy bitcoin to get their currency out. However, the other thing is that who wants to sell their coins there if you can't get the money out? If most people with coins who need the money quickly would prefer to use Bitstamp for these obvious reasons, there is just going to be ALOT more bitcoins available on Bitstamp
We are seeing this in the last week. The spread has been over $200 for no particularly good reason.
Its a little crazy that with all these different exchanges, there are such different situations at each one that change the price dramatically and that most people are not (or can not) taking advantage of it (arbitrage).
I can't wait until there is parity in the exchange prices. Although I really question if that will happen anytime soon.
You can't take advantage of arbitrage because there is no easy way to transfer fiat between the exchanges. BitInstant was the ticket between Gox and BTC-e but it has been down for months. |
|
|
|
Nice job spotting the pattern, but I think they are just classic head and shoulders...they repeat like that as levels of support and resistance are broken.
I don't think someone would program to generate a H&S, more likely they would program a bot to profit from one(s) already building based on the proportions.
Perhaps, they seem extremely uniform though. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
