Why doesn't someone with an SDR just fire it up in proximity to a Jalapeno or something, and see if they can pick up any spurious transmissions. If there aren't any detectable at close range then can we let the FCC stuff just die? A huge number of devices are out there which are not FCC certified, and that law is very rarely applied proactively unless some very large businesses are involved (read as the Samsungs, Dells and Apples of this world).
If you have a concern and do want to talk to the FCC, go and get some hard data on how the device is potentially hazardous due to emitting unwanted RF interference and let them know.
Now, are we talking about FCC or CE certifications? Last time this discussion was had it was all about the CE mark...
You don't get it! Most here care less if BFL products are FCC certifiable or not. The issue is that Josh, acting in the capacity of BFL, lied about obtaining FCC cert for the sole purpose to garnering more sales, of which said task was accomplished. Ergo, if they are capable of lying about something so mundane as this, what the fuck else are they hiding? The conclusion most have come to is a helluva lot! Hows this for a theory: Original board sent off for certification, then BFL discover they have to redesign anyway. Cancels request for testing to be performed. That makes what Josh said true, however the end result is a device not certified. Makes sense given the revisions the devices were going through at the time. To add FCC certification back in further down the track would have resulted in a further delay which would have meant being raked over the coals for another Two Week delay. Excellent theory, but does have one tiny, itsy bitsy flaw... 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. Spot the lie? |
|
|
|
Why doesn't someone with an SDR just fire it up in proximity to a Jalapeno or something, and see if they can pick up any spurious transmissions. If there aren't any detectable at close range then can we let the FCC stuff just die? A huge number of devices are out there which are not FCC certified, and that law is very rarely applied proactively unless some very large businesses are involved (read as the Samsungs, Dells and Apples of this world).
If you have a concern and do want to talk to the FCC, go and get some hard data on how the device is potentially hazardous due to emitting unwanted RF interference and let them know.
Now, are we talking about FCC or CE certifications? Last time this discussion was had it was all about the CE mark...
The point isn't about FCC compliance. The point is Josh claimed they were getting FCC compliance on devices that did not exist in November of 2012 (the chips had not arrived from the fab yet, let alone be bumped, packaged, and put on a board). Then, after someone noticed this huge disparity between what Josh was claiming in November and what reality was showing in January, he has since refused to answer any questions about it or even discuss it in any way. Don't forget, this was before BFL discovered that the original Jalapeno form factor would not work. It was also before they got their boards to work right. So there is no way they could have had a working device to send to the FCC. But his statement sure made it sound like BFL had sent working devices. Here is Inaba's statement about it: 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. Fuck me! I keep forget this fact. The FCC couldn't inspect a unit that's not complete. Time for Josh to come here and state in no uncertain terms that we don't know how the FCC works in 5...4...3... |
|
|
|
Josh which testing lab do you guys use to certify your products? https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearch.cfmYou probably use this one, the only one in Kansas, right? Rogers Labs, Inc. Louisburg 06/27/2016 Scot Rogers 4405 West 259th Terrace Louisburg Kansas 66053 United States rogers@micoks.net 913-837-3214 913-837-3214 See I looked through the 302 tests he's done and I can't seem to find any for "Butterfly Labs". Did you certify the hardware under a different name?? Guessing it failed and they buried it... easy to speculate when there is little or no 'transparency' with BFL. Wouldn't it be FRAUD if he lied about the fact they were 2 weeks away from FCC approval and he never even sent it? It doesn't matter if it failed or past. It would show up as being in the queue to be inspected as if you or I submitted some device tomorrow, by Wednesday it will be available on the FCC site for all to see. Frankly, I don't see how the FCC can get away with their full disclosure/transparency practices. |
|
|
|
Why doesn't someone with an SDR just fire it up in proximity to a Jalapeno or something, and see if they can pick up any spurious transmissions. If there aren't any detectable at close range then can we let the FCC stuff just die? A huge number of devices are out there which are not FCC certified, and that law is very rarely applied proactively unless some very large businesses are involved (read as the Samsungs, Dells and Apples of this world).
If you have a concern and do want to talk to the FCC, go and get some hard data on how the device is potentially hazardous due to emitting unwanted RF interference and let them know.
Now, are we talking about FCC or CE certifications? Last time this discussion was had it was all about the CE mark...
You don't get it! Most here care less if BFL products are FCC certifiable or not. The issue is that Josh, acting in the capacity of BFL, lied about obtaining FCC cert for the sole purpose to garnering more sales, of which said task was accomplished. Ergo, if they are capable of lying about something so mundane as this, what the fuck else are they hiding? The conclusion most have come to is a helluva lot! |
|
|
|
Your search "bf labs" returned no results. |
|
|
|
Inaba has been dodging that question since November of 2012 when he made the claim that BFL was getting FCC certification. You can read his claim here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=119351.msg1314335#msg1314335When 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. He said the Jalapeno (original form factor, not the new Single case) had gone to a lab and they were just waiting on the report. Of course, we all know that the original form factor Jalapeno never worked, but that is besides the point. Good news everybody!: http://www.fcc.gov/search/results/butterfly%20labsFeel free to plug in BF Labs, too. (or any other variants you can think of) |
|
|
|
Ok, so Bick is your sock puppet, got it.
Nope, Bick is not my sock puppet. What products have you registered with the FCC and what are there registration numbers? Please correct your spelling, otherwise Josh's next post will consist of the proper usage of the words there, their and they're. |
|
|
|
Was the FCC sent a BFL unit for testing yes or no?
Last chance to answer.
Oooo or what, Bick? What are you going to do, you scarey man. Are you threatening me? heh. Like I said Bick, you provide some proof of your accusations and I'll answer all your questions. Until then, you've got nothing. So that be no proof. Figured as much. So you lied about that. He has been dodging that question since November of 2012 when he made the claim that BFL was getting FCC certification. You can read his claim here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=119351.msg1314335#msg1314335When 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. He said the Jalapeno (original form factor, not the new Single case) had gone to a lab and they were just waiting on the report. The reason Josh hasn't answered the question is because we haven't been asking nicely like SgtSpike did but Josh must not have seen the question back in January of this year on BFL's forum, otherwise this issue would have been resolved then: https://forums.butterflylabs.com/bfl-forum-miscellaneous/690-13-jan-2013-asic-update-discussion-thread-41.html#post12289Josh, can you comment on the FCC certification process? Has BFL already acquired the necessary certification? If so, how was that accomplished without working chips on hand? |
|
|
|
Phinn, one word of advice from a friend: STOP!
This is the thread you worried about? There is far far worse from PG around. Weirdly, this one is semi-relevant to the forum and is not a scam accusation. Not worried about any thread. Worried about Phinn's obsession. It all stated when I started smokin' the shit you sent me.  |
|
|
|
I not sure that bcp19 is Josh.
More than likely someone like Ivan Frimmel, or another patron of the Shitbox.
Nope, not Ivan either. I'm going to respectively ask Viceroy to lock this thread because I it's 100% confirmed that BCP19 is not Josh. I honestly voted no prior to even having the following information. I just got off the phone with him after enjoying an ~30min call. I have his phone # and first name of which I will reveal to NOONE! I won't even take the time to Google his number. The only thing I will state is that he's not a teenage and is closer to my age (53) than to ages of most on this forum. No other privileged information will be provided. The guy is pretty straight up, albeit his stance toward BFL does not necessarily mirror us naysayers, thus respecting his opinions. I'm sure he'll kindly accept any apologies sent his way if any are needed, and once sent you could still have civil disagreement conversations with him. In closing, BCP19 is an alright guy who just happened to drink the Kool Aid. |
|
|
|
it'll get deleted, so why bother refuting idiots? Is it possible for you and I to talk on the phone so that I can somehow end this particular episode? I do promise not to give out any number you provide to anybody, though a phone number would not be proof anyway. Nor would I record the call. The phone I would be using is a basic TracFone with the number 815-508-1668. Hope you're up to a little freindly conversation, bud. Bruno Kucinskas |
|
|
|
Nobody posted anything contrary to me. Not even sure what that means, Josh.
edit:
Maybe you can explain, you are so smart!
You deleted Red_Wolf_2's post more than once. You obviously did not like that he disagreed with you about me being Josh. He also said something about int03h who turned out to be Ivan. Guess you just need your talking heads to agree with you and anything else gets deleted. Who cares! take this to direct post, and get a room! Enough already! Agreed, for the love of (insert deity here) would a moderator PLEASE step in and shut down this giant pile of useless non-hardware related posts that are cluttering up the forums? They are supposed to be for discussing custom hardware, not who is and isn't "shady" (to use a phrase Bicknellski likes to use so much) It is more about the lack of hardware. If somebody could step in and PLEASE make BFL ship the devices they promised, then we wouldn't need threads like this one. Also, the BFL fan-bois wouldn't have to beg to make it go away. So unseemly seeing them grovel.  Last year, they promised to work through the holidays to get as many units out as possible. Since April Fools Day, 2013, they've yet to work a Sunday, even taking some Saturdays off. |
|
|
|
http://codinginmysleep.com/non-bfl-asic/gregorowell · 49 weeks ago
"BFL is so back-ordered that a unit ordered today would likely not arrive until March of next year..."
[needs citation]
Report
Reply2 replies · active 35 weeks ago
+1's avatar - Go to profile
David Perry · 49 weeks ago
[citation] Personal opinion, educated guess, chatter on the forums, and the likelihood of history repeating [citation]
But no, seriously, it's just my best educated guess.
Report
Reply
0's avatar - Go to profile
Satchel French · 35 weeks ago
I actually emailed them and asked, and they confirmed, around march.
|
|
|
|
....
From a marketing standpoint, I've been having a very difficult time redefining the 100 aspect of Bitcoin 100. At the onset, it made perfect sense, but no longer.
Can we brainstorm to the nth degree to come up with what the 100 could mean so that years down the road it wouldn't once again lose its meaning?
The most powerful marketing tool you have is a good story. There nothing wrong with "outgrowing" a name when it means you were more successful than expected. Here's a quick example of what I'm talking about. "Bitcoin100 started off with humble beginnings. We set out to raise what, at the time, seemed like a daunting amount of 100 Bitcoins. As the project picked up steam though, we learned that the community behind bitcoins is much more generous than we would have ever imagined. We've smashed our original goal of raising 100 BTC and to date, we've donated more than "X" dollars to charities in need. There's no slow down in sight, either. Bitcoin100 is a powerful evidence of how bitcoins are the currency for a new generation, a generation that wants to fundamentally change the world." The goal is obviously to effectively communicate that bitcoin, and the Bitcoin100, is bigger than the technology that runs the protocol. It's growing faster than even its core members (That's you Phinnaeus) can predict. Everyday people are excited by big, growing movements and are liable to donate just to be a part of the Bitcoin100 movement if you can portray a sense of "organic" and "bigger than we ever expected". The "100" MEANS growth beyond our imagination. Damn, that's well-written, albeit I was thinkin' more in line of 100% (e.g.) as in all NPOs now are able to retain 100% of all funds donated, never having to pay a processing fee ever again. If somebody on the other side of the globe donates $1,000 to a non-profit, the entire sum is deposited into their banking institute if/when they convert. But if the NPO desires to use the funds to purchase online products and services they are already buying, they would do such from a master list where they would not be paying 100% retail, but only 90% or less of what others pay. An example of that last part would be if the NPO needs folding chairs and they normally sell for $30 each, the NPO is able to obtain them for no more than $27 each. And, what if Bitcoin 100 provided the affiliate link, enabling us to earn only a 1% fee? The chair company is really not out 10%, due to margins and creative tax filings. The NPO retains 100% of all donations regardless of what they do with them, with the exception of converting the bitcoins for less than what was donated. The NPO has at least 10% more purchasing power. The above paragraph is what I envision for the next level of Bitcoin 100, acting as a portal, of sorts. I'm not sure if you all are aware of it or not, but Tony's sister of BitPay has started up a Bitcoin-base charity: http://www.coindesk.com/bitgive-and-songs-of-love-charities-accept-donations-in-bitcoin/I also think it's just about time to start thinking about Bitcoin 100 becoming a 501c3 organization. Does anybody know what it cost to do such or what it curtails? |
|
|
|
I was contacted by a friend regarding this charity http://ibme.info/Here was the short pitch: Please meet my good friend Jessie Morey. She's the awesome director of a nonprofit that teaches meditation skills to teens to improve emotion-regulation and self-esteem, among other things. It's called Inward Bound Mindfulness Education.
It basically sounds like the new field of "mindfullness" education that is being discussed for use in schools, that teaches kids how to think, focus/concentrate, manage emotions, and understand others (this was briefly covered in my MBA curriculum, too btw). I would support it, since "learning how to manage your own thoughts and emotions" is a valued skill, but I'm concerned some here may associate this with "hippy stuff." Anyway, let me know what you guys thing, and whether we should pursue them to add Bitcoin as a donation option. Think New Age, oppose to Hippy. That said, how many times did Satoshi Nakamoto use the word "Karma"? |
|
|
|
Not to worry. They'll just announce a second-gen ASIC product, and push the remaining order holders to "upgrade" their order to the new product.
Nostradamus Define "Nostradamus"! |
|
|
|
On the other hand, BFL managed to create a chip from scratch, design and manufacture numerous boards. Design and manufacture cases, power supplies, heat sinks, cables and a whole host of other parts.
I call BS, simply because you took too much money from ordinary customers to accomplish that. With all that money at your disposal you are a total failure. Your timing is a failure, your product is a failure, your company is a failure, and you are a total failure. He knows he is a failure. No need to rub it in. I on the other hand am not so easily dissuaded. Let us see who gets sued less that be the benchmark I would love to be measured against. Heh... that's what I thought. The "Busineess for Dummies" book that you read didn't work out and now you're throwing a tantrum to try to take attention away from the fact that your entire business is a failure from start to finish. Meanwhile, in BFL land, more product than what all the other companies combined have or haven't shipped doesn't exceed what BFL has yet to be placed on our assembly line, mainly due to not having enough parts in the warehouse and we don't work on Sundays. More hashrate than any other company has been shipped. Poor Bick is left looking at his failure of a plan wondering what went wrong. So sad. Sadly, the altered text (by me) is so true, even Josh won't even try to refute that fact. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
