Not offered = have chips + could make something S6 shaped + lets just wait. The S*even* has to clear rack space of something earlier to be sold in any volume, but there wasn't enough of an improvement to do that.

Thread moved to reputation, I guess that's right? Maybe meta needs a trust subsection as most of the spammy threads would also fit into there.

That's the type of transparency which is good for everyone. This shouldn't become an industry which relies on "this tiny 20g portion of cake is only 100 calories!" style marketing. If you're going to claim a power efficiency (J/GH) it should be:

• The power efficiency of a marketable machine at the wall (J/GH)
• Or the real world power efficiency of a chip test at the predicted machine voltage (J/GH)
• Or a full voltage / power efficiency curve similar to Bitmain (J/GH graph)
• Or nothing at all

Currently it appears you've got a graph of J/GH and have simply quoted the lowest J/GH at the lowest voltage possible, even though you know you'll never ever run a machine that slow. We understand you have VCs to appease, but that doesn't mean you can't still play the gentlemanly game. Everyone loses when manufacturers revert to unsavoury marketing, such as the latest bitcoin miner I designed which achieves a record breaking 0.000 J/GH! You can preorder it today and get free staples along with your stapler miner! VCs hit me up, you'll want to fund the market leader over here!

Does that explain why others are often skeptical about your claims? Even if they're true, its impossible to know if its 10% or 90% marketing fluff.

If they're permabanned can they even log in? Most of the permabanned accounts I see are never logged into again.

I haven't been contracted by Bitmain since May, so no they do not "pay me for PR". I've also generally been a supporter of Bitfury, who had the top spot and a near perfect score in my guide for a long long time. Guy claimed that the rating criteria specifically targeted them when it just didn't as it was applied on BFL first, and they still had 88/100 score. The rating criteria are designed to protect buyers, and their claims that they'd be able to finance the next generation without preorders or investment did indeed turn out to be false.

Back on topic, all I said about Bitfury is that no one has actually ever tested their miners who is able to speak about it, and so its hard to really take their repeated claims seriously. If you think I'm paid for PR, why don't you talk to Bitfury's actual PR company or their Head of Global PR.

Of course you wouldn't, not unless you're willing to shell out $100-$200k for a lawyer over 2 years, and can prove and quantify damages. Do you have $100-$200k to waste?

Jeez, I bet my RNG is right at the top of the range then before I can get there they'll raise the requirements again.

Better Google than pretty much everyone else. At least Google is using it for advertising and trying to keep it out of the hands of the NSA. Unlike Microsoft who gives them a direct feed lmao.

It would probably break on sold accounts as there would be so much old counter information muddying the new poster's style. Unless you manually cut it off at the proposed sale date and analysed the two sets separately.

Of power claims? Its only evidence that they have money, and $60M buys you a lot of miners and a lot of PR.

I've found 2 other ways. Popup email notifier for Gmail on chrome, or auto-refresh a tab on Firefox to prompt the PM popup.

Bit of a weird thread to bump, but I'll believe it when I see it. The last 3 chips have never been independently verified or even seen outside of a super farm.

The S4+ was "basically your S6". The S5+ was basically your 3xS5+ on steroids.

The account has been online every day since they were posted.

No problem, thanks all for participating. I'll lock this now, PM me if anyone needs anything.

I'd consider it to do a review I guess. I don't like missing models out, PM me.

Lets be honest here, you were both using shill armies to fight each other, one to promote to BAN, one to damage BAN. The only difference was that he ended up doing other things to get himself permabanned.

An account which hasn't posted in nearly a year, and has only ever posted in Spondoolies' thread, interesting...

Its an example of someone who has a balance with Spondoolies that they refuse to / are unable to pay. You're attitude is doing a good job proving everything else that was said about you though.

The difference in my case is that they decided after the sale had been made, and once Guy had had a chance to speak to Gadi. Do you have a timestamp on when you were told it was no longer tiered?