This keeps getting better  Yep! Last night Josh proved that BFL did get FCC certification by showing the Nexus 7 was submitted and approved. Then proceeded to call me an idiot for not knowing the difference between a phone and miner. (paraphrased) |
|
|
|
Have a slice of the first ever Bitcoin cake from Walmart. I even have the receipt.  Though I have this image on my Flickr, I went to Google images to retrieve it only to learn that many other sites, many not Bitcoin related, took the liberty to embed said image onto their own sites, of which I don't mind. |
|
|
|
There is no failure to communicate here. There are no semantics. The definition of "screen" in this context is absolutely clear, as there is no other definition of screen that would apply in context. You asked for exactly what I gave you, here let me post it again: Josh, would you be so kind as to state which, what and when the screen was passed by the FCC? Us monumental assholes ain't got a clue as to how the FCC site works and desperately need your expertise in helping us find the info. Your failure to understand what you are asking for is not a failure to communicate. It's your failure to understand the situation, which has been what you've been doing for the past 3 months. It is not a failure on my part. Pay up and shut up, or are you going to weasel out of this commitment, too? Oh good. Josh is linking documents from the FCC. Please link the ones that correspond to this statement you made in November of 2012: When is the Jalapeno getting FCC approval?
With the bump in power requirements on the MR and the new screen, we had to make changes, although the new screen is already certified. We are doing all the devices at once, since they all share the same board. According to Josh, he did. See red bold statement above. Maybe two weeks? We are waiting for the test lab to issue the test report.
We are doing all the devices at once, since they all share the same board. The last sentence is in reference to the first sentence. The MR sentence was clearly injected to misdirect/misled for the sole purpose to garner more sales and pacify the naysayers. Somebody answer me this: Is threatening to stick a crowbar up some rainbow-colored poodle's ass considered a terrorist threat or should one be more concerned about PETA? Depends who is doing the sticking, and in what country!  You're no fun! Where did everybody else go?  |
|
|
|
There is no failure to communicate here. There are no semantics. The definition of "screen" in this context is absolutely clear, as there is no other definition of screen that would apply in context. You asked for exactly what I gave you, here let me post it again: Josh, would you be so kind as to state which, what and when the screen was passed by the FCC? Us monumental assholes ain't got a clue as to how the FCC site works and desperately need your expertise in helping us find the info. Your failure to understand what you are asking for is not a failure to communicate. It's your failure to understand the situation, which has been what you've been doing for the past 3 months. It is not a failure on my part. Pay up and shut up, or are you going to weasel out of this commitment, too? Oh good. Josh is linking documents from the FCC. Please link the ones that correspond to this statement you made in November of 2012: When is the Jalapeno getting FCC approval?
With the bump in power requirements on the MR and the new screen, we had to make changes, although the new screen is already certified. We are doing all the devices at once, since they all share the same board. According to Josh, he did. See red bold statement above. Maybe two weeks? We are waiting for the test lab to issue the test report.
We are doing all the devices at once, since they all share the same board. The last sentence is in reference to the first sentence. The MR sentence was clearly injected to misdirect/misled for the sole purpose to garner more sales and pacify the naysayers. Somebody answer me this: Is threatening to stick a crowbar up some rainbow-colored poodle's ass considered a terrorist threat or should one be more concerned about PETA? |
|
|
|
There is no failure to communicate here. There are no semantics. The definition of "screen" in this context is absolutely clear, as there is no other definition of screen that would apply in context. You asked for exactly what I gave you, here let me post it again: Josh, would you be so kind as to state which, what and when the screen was passed by the FCC? Us monumental assholes ain't got a clue as to how the FCC site works and desperately need your expertise in helping us find the info. Your failure to understand what you are asking for is not a failure to communicate. It's your failure to understand the situation, which has been what you've been doing for the past 3 months. It is not a failure on my part. Pay up and shut up, or are you going to weasel out of this commitment, too? You think you are so sleek, don't you Josh? For the past 10 months you know exactly what I, among others, have been asking for, and it has nothing to do with my statement earlier today (maybe it was late yesterday) about screens that now turn out to be the obsolete forerunner of the Nexus 7, for everybody on this forum, sans Dank, would know that it would have been submitted and probably approved. Back in November, 2012, you could have easily stated that one peripheral device has already been FCC certified, and today acknowledge that what you were in reference to was the Raspberry Pi. Same motherfuckin' thing! There is no fuckin' way you would let somebody feed you such a line of shit, yet here you are trying to spoonfeed and telling us to open wide while you cram it down our throats. Is this is not the sign of a true scam operation, then I don't know what is. And, this has nothing to do with that damn $200 either, for I'll tell you what I'll do in regards to that issue. You get one mod... JUST ONE... to come here and state that you have successfully address the FCC issue with your Nexus 7 claim, and Ill' gladly send you that $200 via BTC. I'm betting that not a single mod on this forum will put himself it that position unless he's an idiot and is willing to take heat (probably not from me) for making such a stance. But, even if I have to pay up, I'm not letting this issue die for it clearly has not been resolved. Boy! You ain't right! |
|
|
|
Haha, I knew you would back out of your commitment, yet again. You asked, I delivered, you failed. End of story.
I'm not sure what the $200 issue is, but if this is all that's holding up the release of information pertaining to FCC certification of your ASIC chips, I would happily fund Bruno $200 USD equivalent in Bitcoin to enable him to satisfy whatever seems to be the crux of this dispute between you two. EDIT: To be clear, "chips" is a general term used to describe the electronics/components built around controlling and powering your ASIC processors, including the SHA256 ASIC processing chip itself. I have the funds, bud, but thanks anyway. I also now see what Wolf is in reference to. Josh, you damn well the FCC issue has always been centered around BFL devices and not the Nexus phone you referred to a screen. Of course that would have been submitted for approval, just like any other phone BFL would have chosen if it rooted properly. When is the Jalapeno getting FCC approval?
Maybe two weeks? We are waiting for the test lab to issue the test report. With the bump in power requirements on the MR and the new screen, we had to make changes, although the new screen is already certified. We are doing all the devices at once, since they all share the same board. To recap, a direct question was asked: When is the Jalepeno getting FCC approval? In which you kindly replied with... "Maybe two weeks?" So far, so good. Then you stated, "We are waiting for the test lab to issue the test report." Fine! Until we proved that nothing was submitted to the FCC. Then you go on and state that you had to make changes to the MR (MiniRig). Of which the new screen is already certified. At that penning, nobody outside of BFL knew what screen you were in reference to until the reveal at CES2012. You could've easily claimed then stuck a CB radio from the 70's in that box and claim that it too was certified by the FCC. Then you go on and state that you are doing all the boards at once since they are similar (paraphrased). There's not a single person on this forum that should come to your defense and state you were indeed speaking of two separate things--BFL miners and a smartphone. |
|
|
|
Haha, I knew you would back out of your commitment, yet again. You asked, I delivered, you failed. End of story.
I'm not sure what the $200 issue is, but if this is all that's holding up the release of information pertaining to FCC certification of your ASIC chips, I would happily fund Bruno $200 USD equivalent in Bitcoin to enable him to satisfy whatever seems to be the crux of this dispute between you two. Chips don't need an FCC certification, devices do. Reference: 3 Subassemblies of a Digital Device Circuit boards, integrated circuit chips, and other components that are completely internal to a digital device are subassemblies of the digital device. (Note, however, that circuit boards or cards that are connected to external devices or increase the operating or processing speed of a digital device are considered peripherals.) Examples of subassemblies include internal memory expansion boards, internal disk drives, internal disk drive controller boards, CPU boards, and power supplies. Section 15.101(e) Subassemblies may be sold to the general public or to manufacturers for incorporation into a final product. While subassemblies are not directly subject to FCC technical standards or equipment authorization requirements, digital devices containing subassemblies must still comply with the FCC's technical requirements. Accordingly, manufacturers of subassemblies should design their products so the digital devices into which they are installed will comply with the technical standards. You are correct, Wolf, but we can assume he simply misspoke. |
|
|
|
What the hell do you think is in the Minirig? A piece of toast? Just when I think you can't out do yourself in epic stupidity, you one up your previous best at showing the world how ignorant and idiotic you truly are. A piece of toast? eh? Nexus 7 is in Fact the Cancelled ASUS ME370T, In a Revamped VersionIn early 2011 ASUS announced a tablet called the Eee Pad MeMo, a 7 inch slate at the time with Android 3.0 and a Qualcomm dual core CPU. Well, that model was followed by an upgrade, the Eee Pad MeMo ME370T, showcased at CES 2012, that was meant to be a cheaper version of the original MeMo and also involved a stylus and a special slot for it. Apparently the project was canned, in order to spawn the Nexus 7 tablet, as rumored for a while now.  What we have here is failure to communicate due to semantics. |
|
|
|
What the hell do you think is in the Minirig? A piece of toast? Just when I think you can't out do yourself in epic stupidity, you one up your previous best at showing the world how ignorant and idiotic you truly are. I don't believe this! I swear to GOD, I honestly can't believe what I'm reading. CAN anybody else reading all this please explain it to me in baby talk, for obviously that's the only way I'll be able to digest this complex issue? |
|
|
|
Josh, would you be so kind as to state which, what and when the screen was passed by the FCC? Us monumental assholes ain't got a clue as to how the FCC site works and desperately need your expertise in helping us find the info.
As soon as you show us, I will send that $200 I owe you/BFL, and you can use if for whatevery you want. It doesn't have to go to any charity. You, Sonny, and your wifes/lady friends can go to a fancy restaurant and enjoy a fine meal using the funds. No problem here, bud.
All you have to do is show us monumental assholes where to look, and your golden, and we're square.
I'll also take a week off and not state one iota negative comment about you, Sonny, BFL, et al. I promise... I mean Honest Abe.
Bruno Kucinskas
406 W. Center St.
Sandwich, IL 60548
815-508-1668
Surrrre you will. Just like you lied last time about sending $200 to charity? You are a habitual liar, Bruno. You are a thief. You are an embezzler. You have no redeeming quality... But lets see you hang yourself this time, here you go: https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=132722&fcc_id='MSQME370T' Can somebody confirm that what Josh linked to is a BFL Bitcoin Miner. I'm seeing pics that don't resemble anything I've seen before stemming from Camp BFL. Ooop, there we go. You are already trying to back out of your commitment. No surprise there. Of course it's not a bitcoin miner you fucking idiot. It's a screen, that's what you asked for. It's the screen in the Minirig, which is what you requested. It's also the only device BFL sells that HAS a screen. How stupid are you, seriously? Do they even have a scale for your level of stupidity? Can you not even remember what you type? Josh, would you be so kind as to state which, what and when the screen was passed by the FCC? Us monumental assholes ain't got a clue as to how the FCC site works and desperately need your expertise in helping us find the info.
There, I bolded it for you, you fucking moron. BRB! I'm going to Walmart and buying me a smartphone for that I can have its screen approved by the FCC for the 7nm ASIC Bitcoin Miner MiniRig encased in Barn Wood that I'm going to build, for delivery in Q3, 2014. Seriously, you're not serious? |
|
|
|
Josh, would you be so kind as to state which, what and when the screen was passed by the FCC? Us monumental assholes ain't got a clue as to how the FCC site works and desperately need your expertise in helping us find the info.
As soon as you show us, I will send that $200 I owe you/BFL, and you can use if for whatevery you want. It doesn't have to go to any charity. You, Sonny, and your wifes/lady friends can go to a fancy restaurant and enjoy a fine meal using the funds. No problem here, bud.
All you have to do is show us monumental assholes where to look, and your golden, and we're square.
I'll also take a week off and not state one iota negative comment about you, Sonny, BFL, et al. I promise... I mean Honest Abe.
Bruno Kucinskas
406 W. Center St.
Sandwich, IL 60548
815-508-1668
Surrrre you will. Just like you lied last time about sending $200 to charity? You are a habitual liar, Bruno. You are a thief. You are an embezzler. You have no redeeming quality... But lets see you hang yourself this time, here you go: https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=132722&fcc_id='MSQME370T' Can somebody confirm that what Josh linked to is a BFL Bitcoin Miner. I'm seeing pics that don't resemble anything I've seen before stemming from Camp BFL. Looks like a tablet to me... Dunno if mislinked, trolling or what. Can't get half the links to load though. A couple of the PDFs take a little longer, but I have had them load, bud. |
|
|
|
Josh, would you be so kind as to state which, what and when the screen was passed by the FCC? Us monumental assholes ain't got a clue as to how the FCC site works and desperately need your expertise in helping us find the info.
As soon as you show us, I will send that $200 I owe you/BFL, and you can use if for whatevery you want. It doesn't have to go to any charity. You, Sonny, and your wifes/lady friends can go to a fancy restaurant and enjoy a fine meal using the funds. No problem here, bud.
All you have to do is show us monumental assholes where to look, and your golden, and we're square.
I'll also take a week off and not state one iota negative comment about you, Sonny, BFL, et al. I promise... I mean Honest Abe.
Bruno Kucinskas
406 W. Center St.
Sandwich, IL 60548
815-508-1668
Surrrre you will. Just like you lied last time about sending $200 to charity? You are a habitual liar, Bruno. You are a thief. You are an embezzler. You have no redeeming quality... But lets see you hang yourself this time, here you go: https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=Exhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=132722&fcc_id='MSQME370T' Can somebody confirm that what Josh linked to is a BFL Bitcoin Miner. I'm seeing pics that don't resemble anything I've seen before stemming from Camp BFL. |
|
|
|
nightengale, This is what I was talking about. https://www.kncminer.com/news/news-24 KnCMiner Network Protection Statement
At KnCMiner we are aware of the service we are providing to our customers. We are also aware that we need our customers to have a return on their devices in order to purchase form us again. With the scale of the supply chains, agreements and factories we have access to, we need to be cautious we don’t ship too many devices and therefore reduce the return to our customers. So with that in mind our plan is to do as follows: We will ship no devices in December 2013, January 2014 or February 2014. Meaning that once we have taken the difficulty up at the end of November we will not release any more hashing power for 3 months. We will then release our new generation of devices, which will begin shipping in March 2014. These devices will also have a much higher GH/$ rating than any of our current offerings. We would like to state that If any of our competitors continues to add large amounts of hashing power to the network during December, January or February. We will continue to release our devices as competitively priced as we can to protect our customers share of the network.ThanksKnCMiner Team I'm curious as to what exchange rate parameters they used to justify such calculations. If the rate happens to go up five fold, wouldn't they be kicking themselves in the butt for not have products available during D, J and F? |
|
|
|
I'm not sure I can take any more of this inane back-and-forth. This entire thread has become a  LUNCH! Pass the salt, please. |
|
|
|
|
Where the fuck did clown-nose go? Is that fucker laughing at us in the wings?
|
|
|
|
Josh, would you be so kind as to state which, what and when the screen was passed by the FCC? Us monumental assholes ain't got a clue as to how the FCC site works and desperately need your expertise in helping us find the info.
As soon as you show us, I will send that $200 I owe you/BFL, and you can use if for whatevery you want. It doesn't have to go to any charity. You, Sonny, and your wifes/lady friends can go to a fancy restaurant and enjoy a fine meal using the funds. No problem here, bud.
All you have to do is show us monumental assholes where to look, and your golden, and we're square.
I'll also take a week off and not state one iota negative comment about you, Sonny, BFL, et al. I promise... I mean Honest Abe.
Bruno Kucinskas
406 W. Center St.
Sandwich, IL 60548
815-508-1668
I've been thinking... what if they are certified and he just doesn't want to tell you so he can laugh at you repeating yourselves? Naw, no one is THAT cruel... Oh, wait, *I* would be Unless BF Labs Inc. is using a different name or some unknown address, a result similar to the following would be on the FCC site: https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101568825&formid=349&fac_num=144604 |
|
|
|
|
Josh, would you be so kind as to state which, what and when the screen was passed by the FCC? Us monumental assholes ain't got a clue as to how the FCC site works and desperately need your expertise in helping us find the info.
As soon as you show us, I will send that $200 I owe you/BFL, and you can use if for whatevery you want. It doesn't have to go to any charity. You, Sonny, and your wifes/lady friends can go to a fancy restaurant and enjoy a fine meal using the funds. No problem here, bud.
All you have to do is show us monumental assholes where to look, and your golden, and we're square.
I'll also take a week off and not state one iota negative comment about you, Sonny, BFL, et al. I promise... I mean Honest Abe.
Bruno Kucinskas
406 W. Center St.
Sandwich, IL 60548
815-508-1668
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
