I have the absolute first order from BFL for any ASIC products. It is for one Jalapeno. I'll send it off to the winner as soon as I receive it.
BFL is promising 4.5gh/s at only 4.5 watts!
I just need to get some money together for college so I thought I'd give this a try.
Bidding starts at BTC1! Minimum increment of BTC0.1 please. Auction ends May 1st or when BFL ships. I reserve the right to cancel the auction at any point before payment is sent to me.
Additionally, BFL is offering the chance to upgrade this order to an SC Single, which would make this the first SC Single to be shipped. If you're interested in bidding on this, then make it clear in your bid that you are bidding for the SC Single by bidding with the format: "SC Single: BTC200". Minimum increment for bidding on SC Single is BTC1. If you're bidding for the Jalapeno, please signify that by following the format: "Jalapeno: BTC10".
If you have any questions I'll be happy to answer.
--Garrett
Jalapeno: BTC3
Wow. Just Wow. Bid shilling? Might have been worth it just to take hit for the BFL forced refund.... Less than five days left!
Current top bids:
2@62 - Werner
Ok, pattern of conduct proven. Scammer tag. Sockpuppets and astroturfing are standard practice in forums and auctions. I am surprised people are surprised. |
|
|
|
mmmm, pick n place porn.  |
|
|
|
Yes. It's been discussed in other threads before. Barring a few diehard BFL fanbois who think that the law does not apply to them.. the general opinion is that the court would simply order BFL to pay damages (which they clearly owe under contract law). If it does actually end up in court, it's extremely likely that BFL would settle as soon as they retained legal counsel.
FTFY. You are not a lawyer and have no understanding of how the law actually works, so I forgive your many errors. The most cogent discussion of this in the Legal subforum is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=217036.msg2290818#msg2290818 |
|
|
|
im going to say this your all idiots you loose your temper you get punished.... and rightly so u would cancel anyone's orders that was proving to be aggressive or unreasonable. you also forget at the end of the day Josh is not a PR man hes not be trained in the art of dealing with complete and utter tools so ofcorse hes going to loose his temper...... to be honest im surprised he does as well as he does.... you lost your temper and attacked him so you made it personal... if i was him id have kicked your ass into the next state
there is nothing worse than people loosing there tempers but when you get 2 or 3 of them in a day even the most calm people will blow up.
in the end its your own god damn faulty you dont bite the hand that feed you. anyone trying to sue BFL will not only loose any sense of respect from me and most of the community but also fails to understand new technology and to be blunt you invested in a chance and sadly BFL didnt get it quite right..... but thats what happens you roll the dice and you play the risk game. youve been able to get refunds which BFL didnt have to legaly do as the contract says no refunds so be happy you havnt lost eveything.... now get lost and dont come back
Funny how people with no ethics, morals, or empathy also have no understanding of the law. Coincidence? Probably not. |
|
|
|
OK, 2 problems:
1/ they can't get a better/other algo, it's SHA256 or nothing.
2/ they're a joke on the BUSINESS side. (relates to false claim about 1/).
They're full of it, period. This is not about the SHA256 algo, it's about their continuous BS. ORSoC is not making those stupid claims, it's all KNCMINER's doing (which brings me again to the fact that ORSoC is NOT KNCMINER, so don't confuse the two, even if they are in close ties - it'll be KNCMINER losing your money, if).
Get the head OUT of the tech, it's only a small part of it. It's the business that will screw you (if).
You obviously are not a software engineer. First, they never claimed to have improved the sha256 algorithm. You said that, not them. There is more to coding a usable ASIC than just the Algorithm, and there is always more than one way to code software. Saying that they improved their algorithm does not imply that they were referring to improving the SHA256 algorithm. They may have just been referring to their implimentation of it, or the code they wrote to support it. For example, if i code my asic to run 4 instances or SHA256, and then realize that there was actually room for 5. i could recode it to run 5. I've improved my algorithm without improving SHA256. I think this is a case of you not understanding what they meant. ^This +1 KS is also obviously not a hardware engineer. |
|
|
|
BFL can cancel orders for any reason (excluding discriminatory ones like race, gender, etc.), and if they refund the order money there's no harm done, in the legal sense.
Not true. I've been informed this is a Breach of Contract and Civil RICO offense. Contract law is all about making the damaged party "whole", ie. recovering their losses. If the purchase price is refunded there are no damages. Potential lost profits on a speculative crypto-currency don't count. RICO, as in racketeering? Please. If what you say is true, then I could buy a future contract to sell one ounce of gold at $1600 2 years from now. If the price of gold is higher than that, I "refund" the original price to the contract holder and unilaterally dissolve the contract, otherwise I just buy the gold for cheaper and sell it for $1600. The other party was expecting to be able to buy that ounce of gold and then turn around and sell it (or use it) at a profit. They waited 2 years for that opportunity, and I took it from them by "refunding" the original price. Your interpretation of contract law would destroy every futures and options market in the country. It would also be mistaken.  |
|
|
|
Like I said, the Mars miner is fact number 1 (on the positives, I won't recap the negs again, read the 120+ pages). Can't wait for more facts (& less wishful thinking/excuses/speculation).
Given that neither of the naysayers in this thread will admit that there is more than one way to implement an algorithm (and thusly demonstrate they are not engineers and in no position to judge KNC or OrSoc), the only thing that will satisfy them is a free fully operational Saturn from KNCMiner. Lots of luck. |
|
|
|
BFL: What's your excuse for this one?
you are marked as delievered, did you get it? anyway, how do I let BFL know that I don't mind not getting the power brick that I have my PSU?? Nope I've got no SC Single from them. 1 Jalapeno has been delivered but that order was in the two-thousands. I imagine the SC will show up in the next few weeks. At least they exist. |
|
|
|
2. Designing an FPGA is totally different from designing an asic. I'm not going to go into the details, just
ask anyone who works in the industry. To think that you just take the same HDL code and out pops
your asic is not the case. Any competent engineering graduate could write the HDL for a SHA256
engine in an afternoon, and put together a compiled FPGA solution in a few days, at most.
To do the same in an asic is a totally different ball game. Clearly the lads at KNC either have never
done this,or are making some potentially fatal assumptions.
Or they wanted to build the boards, case, cooling solutions and integrate all of it (and test it) in parallel while OrSoc builds the ASIC (which is probably pin-out compatible with the FPGA). Yes, laying out an ASIC is different than laying out an FPGA and that is probably why they went with a serious ASIC design house instead of trying to do it themselves. However, there are quite a few "tricks" to be done while setting up a 128 stage pipeline be it on ASIC or on FPGA. |
|
|
|
BFL is finally shipping significant hash rate! Hopefully, they get the singles and mini-rigs out to everyone in 2-3 weeks so they can get some of their BTC back before Avalon and KNCMiner (possibly) deliver.
Oh, the irony Well, if they string it out over 90 days...some people are going to get wrecked. Honestly I think this is more smoke and mirrors by BFL. They are shipping BOTH mini rigs and singles, honest, honestly, they honestly are..... Well. They exist. That is much better than yesterday (and the preceding 12 months). |
|
|
|
BFL is finally shipping significant hash rate! Hopefully, they get the singles and mini-rigs out to everyone in 2-3 weeks so they can get some of their BTC back before Avalon and KNCMiner (possibly) deliver.
Oh, the irony Well, if they string it out over 90 days...some people are going to get wrecked. |
|
|
|
It's been up and down numerous times as I've been chipping away at the code to make it work at its theoretical maximum 480GH. It's mostly working now. Here's what I've got: cgminer version 3.2.2 - Started: [2013-06-19 02:17:06]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):477.6G (avg):472.1Gh/s | A:16 R:0 HW:193 U:10.8/m WU:6575.3/m
ST: 2 SS: 0 NB: 2 LW: 11012 GF: 0 RF: 0
Connected to XXX diff 500
Block: 00179d4404ca1359... Diff:19.3M Started: [02:18:28] Best share: 9.56K
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[P]ool management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
BAS 0: max 68C 3.28V | 56.23G/58.22Gh/s | A:1 R:0 HW:18 U: 0.67/m
BAS 1: max 69C 3.27V | 58.92G/60.48Gh/s | A:1 R:0 HW:23 U: 0.67/m
BAS 2: max 74C 3.27V | 60.53G/59.85Gh/s | A:4 R:0 HW:19 U: 2.69/m
BAS 3: max 80C 3.28V | 62.52G/61.58Gh/s | A:1 R:0 HW:20 U: 0.67/m
BAS 4: max 86C 3.27V | 74.56G/59.90Gh/s | A:4 R:0 HW:39 U: 2.69/m
BAS 5: max 71C 3.28V | 64.25G/58.79Gh/s | A:1 R:0 HW:25 U: 0.67/m
BAS 6: max 81C 3.27V | 59.93G/58.98Gh/s | A:2 R:0 HW:25 U: 1.34/m
BAS 7: max 72C 3.27V | 43.22G/60.81Gh/s | A:2 R:0 HW:25 U: 1.34/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note the hardware error count may appear very high, but bear in mind that it's mining at diff 500 That's just too hot, 86C degree??? Delta fans needed  BFL is finally shipping significant hash rate! Hopefully, they get the singles and mini-rigs out to everyone in 2-3 weeks so they can get some of their BTC back before Avalon and KNCMiner (possibly) deliver. |
|
|
|
Some more pics   At least you have something. |
|
|
|
Couldn't help it. 5Gh/s is not 5000 Mh/s. Rather it is 5120Mh/s. Basic computer science:
1 Bit = Binary Digit
8 Bits = 1 Byte
1024 Bytes = 1 Kilobyte
1024 Kilobytes = 1 Megabyte
1024 Megabytes = 1 Gigabyte
1024 Gigabytes = 1 Terabyte
Wrong! Hash has nothing to do with byte! Therefore, 5 GH/s = 5000 MH/s! This is correct. When we talk about hashing, we are talking about frequency (each hash = 1 cycle), not bytes. In frequency measurements, 1 MHz = 1000000 hertz. 1 GHz = 1000000000 hertz. So 5 Gigahashes per second is hashing with a frequency of 5 billion times a second. |
|
|
|
Until there are companies that can deliver existing inventory at the drop of a hat, there is nothing to hold these ASIC companies honest. At least ASICMiner is up front about it.  ASICMiner is such a company. You get your order delivered within a few days. I thought that the Eruptor Blade sale was a one time offer of a fixed number of blades. It sold out, and now ASICMiner is not offering more blades yet. The USB sticks are gimmicks that don't really add much to the hash rate (and are horribly overpriced). |
|
|
|
thousands of the erupters were sold in a couple of weeks
a fool and his bitcoin are soon parted Truer words have never been spoken. Except for Kate Upton has nice boobs. Very nice. |
|
|
|
I feel that they should be mining on the testnet if they were going to be mining for an extended period of time. If they were going to be mining on the mainnet to do testing it should be no more than 24-48 hours at most. After the short test period as long as the unit did not experience any issues it should be shipped out immediately. It is unfortunate that they are mining and profiting off the customers units that have been crowd funded.  Did you do the math? If they have 1200 units in batch 2 and 3, and they are currently generating about 3 BTC per day (and more back in April), how many Bitcoins would have been generated with a 24-48 hour burn-in test? Hint: A lot more than the 716 BTC mentioned here! This is the issue with pre-ordering and paying full price up front. It is a crap shoot. Until there are companies that can deliver existing inventory at the drop of a hat, there is nothing to hold these ASIC companies honest. At least ASICMiner is up front about it. |
|
|
|
What is the purpose of these? Is it a promotional aid? e.g. they expected to sell at $50, so they price to $75, then give away effectively enough "coupons", such that their sale price is $50? Or, are they really giving something back to the early orders - is it possible to get a Cash Alternative? Or, say use 3 coupons, such to get a free chip?
They tried to sell at $90 and couldn't. Then they tried to sell at $75. Then they added the coupon discount. At $50, the economics are better but still pretty grim with 100 days of difficulty growth before the chips are delivered. Then a week or two for the boards to be populated and shipped. I think you can only use 1 coupon per 1 chip. |
|
|
|
I am really not interested in Open Days, just plain old transparency. It works.
Got one on order, have you?
Date Registered: June 02, 2013, 10:19:42 PM OK! Yep, pretty transparent attack on KNC. Notice how he has not addressed any rebuttals to his statements. |
|
|
|
The real question to ask yourself is:
What do I think an improvement of x% to the SHA256 algorithm means?
Most everybody will think it means x% more hash rate, yes? Inferring that their SHA is better than others,
yes? So their product is superior?
You cannot change the SHA256 algorithm or it isn't SHA256 anymore. A hardware tweak which enables a higher clock rate has nothing to do with the algorithm itself, so why try to claim otherwise? I don't even know if KNC have used the methods in the paper - I doubt it - and they have given no details about their mathematical wizardry. I would, if I was them, there is no shame in being genuinely creative, like the
authors of the paper. But to use these tactics?
I am sure KNC was talking about improvement to the Bitcoin hash algorithm as it pertains to mining not changing or breaking SHA-256. Improving the Bitcoin mining algorithm is possible, since you do not need to produce all 256 bits of the second SHA-256 hash. You only need to produce the part that is examined for difficulty. The ZTEX FPGA mining code has an example of this. Also, they are talking about the algorithm as instantiated in silicon, not the SHA 256 pseudo-code algorithm. How many registers are used, how the adders are built and shared, how many loops are performed. There are endless possibilities for improving how SHA-256 is done in any language be it C, C++, Go, Verilog, or laid out in an ASIC. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
