Already delays in BFL shipment plans?

[squeept]

Nope, no evidence whatsoever. No ASIC has ever been made for anything. Your alarm clock is a lie.

[greyhawk]

Nope, no evidence whatsoever. No ASIC has ever been made for anything. Your alarm clock is a lie.

Will the LM8560 in my alarm clock help me hash SHA256?



Answer: No, specifically because the LM8560 is an ASIC.

[squeept]

Nope, no evidence whatsoever. No ASIC has ever been made for anything. Your alarm clock is a lie.

Will the LM8560 in my alarm clock help me hash SHA256?



Answer: No, specifically because the LM8560 is an ASIC.

I don't know what point you're trying to make? Question mark? My point was that this person above seems to not believe that ASIC devices exist at all. My point was that thousands of companies produce ASIC devices, and that he most likely has dozens of them currently within a 10 foot radius of himself.

(blah blah blah bitcoin miner harder than alarm clock blah blah blah fuck off)

[greyhawk]

My point was that this person above seems to not believe that ASIC devices exist at all.

My point was how you would arrive at the conclusion that he meant ASICs in general and not SHA256 hashing ASICs (which would be much more logical considering where we are)? Because there is nothing that points to him talking about ASICs in general.

[ElectricMucus]

Substitute for Bitcoin ASICs.

I think there is a good chance there will be no Bitcoin ASICs from those who announced them ever.

[squeept]

Gotcha. Because this guy ^ exists.

[bitmar]

My point was that this person above seems to not believe that ASIC devices exist at all.

My point was how you would arrive at the conclusion that he meant ASICs in general and not SHA256 hashing ASICs (which would be much more logical considering where we are)? Because there is nothing that points to him talking about ASICs in general.

There is a lot  SHA256 hashing ASIC but they are similar (performance) to FPGA. A lot of major electronics companies (like ALTERA,  Xilinx, IP Cores, helion) have tried to make several times faster ASIC than FPGA (SHA256) but without success. BFL will make a breakthrough on a global scale.

http://www.cast-inc.com/ip-cores/encryption/sha-256/index.html
http://www.heliontech.com/fast_hash.htm
http://www.chipestimate.com/ip.php?High+Performance+SHA+and+MD5+Hashing+Cores&id=24018
http://www.xilinx.com/products/intellectual-property/Fast_SHA-1-SHA-256_MD5_Hashing_cores.htm
http://www.ipcores.com/sha_ip_core.htm

[squeept]

Yep. It's amazing that Dell ever stopped using an FPGA as the CPU of their computers, since the performance is so close.

[abeaulieu]

Response from Nasser regarding the BFL chip revision:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=128019.msg1363605#msg1363605

Substitute for Bitcoin ASICs.

I think there is a good chance there will be no Bitcoin ASICs from those who announced them ever.

Maybe not sufficient proof for you to believe there are. Even if half of the community is hashing with 3 different ASIC devices at the beginning of next year, you will somehow declare there's not enough proof.

[AndrewBUD]

When people are mining with them and talking about them.. When dev's have had a chance to customize existing software for them.


We'll be talking about this exact same thing in about 3 months when the next delay is announced.

[squeept]

Well, just to nitpick, the next delay from any company would be announced in 2 weeks. Otherwise, there will be hardware on the way.

[squeept]

...

Well, just to nitpick, the next delay from any company would be announced in 2 weeks. Otherwise, there will be hardware on the way.

Goodluck... I wouldn't get my hopes up.

About what? It's one or the other. There's no "maybe" in there.

[AndrewBUD]

I'll guess that they won't ship in January either.

[squeept]

I'll guess that they won't ship in January either.

You're just talking to yourself, aren't you?

[mrb]

BFL's legitimacy is dead simple to assert: they managed to be greatly successful and profitable inventing, making, and selling thousands of FPGA Singles. I have many of them in my very own hands.

And if you have a profitable business, the natural human reaction, even for greedy people (the type who may want to defraud), is to simply expand the business, not to do something riskier by defrauding your customers.

Pirate paid out for awhile, too.

The difference being that Pirate was obviously loosing money by loaning it from his customers at 7%/week.
Whereas BFL is obviously making money by selling the FPGA Singles ($430 or $150 profit margin out of the $600 price, as per FPGA cost estimated by ngzhang to be respectively either $50 or $200, plus $50 for the PCB/case).

[ElectricMucus]

BFL's legitimacy is dead simple to assert: they managed to be greatly successful and profitable inventing, making, and selling thousands of FPGA Singles. I have many of them in my very own hands.

And if you have a profitable business, the natural human reaction, even for greedy people (the type who may want to defraud), is to simply expand the business, not to do something riskier by defrauding your customers.

Pirate paid out for awhile, too.

The difference being that Pirate was obviously loosing money by loaning it from his customers at 7%/week.
Whereas BFL is obviously making money by selling the FPGA Singles ($430 or $150 profit margin out of the $600 price, as per FPGA cost estimated by ngzhang to be respectively either $50 or $200, plus $50 for the PCB/case).

That estimation was very forthcoming. Everybody said from the beginning that if they were forced to pay even remotely retail prices (which isn't that unlikely considering the quantity is low for the industry)
it would have been a net loss for them.

I'd say it entirely possible that the FPGA Singles were produced at a loss to start the confidence game. Added to that if BFL really were a scam you betcha the ones who came after would be to so ngzangs motives are in question here.

[Coinoisseur]

BFL's legitimacy is dead simple to assert: they managed to be greatly successful and profitable inventing, making, and selling thousands of FPGA Singles. I have many of them in my very own hands.

And if you have a profitable business, the natural human reaction, even for greedy people (the type who may want to defraud), is to simply expand the business, not to do something riskier by defrauding your customers.

Pirate paid out for awhile, too.

The difference being that Pirate was obviously loosing money by loaning it from his customers at 7%/week.
Whereas BFL is obviously making money by selling the FPGA Singles ($430 or $150 profit margin out of the $600 price, as per FPGA cost estimated by ngzhang to be respectively either $50 or $200, plus $50 for the PCB/case).

That estimation was very forthcoming. Everybody said from the beginning that if they were forced to pay even remotely retail prices (which isn't that unlikely considering the quantity is low for the industry)
it would have been a net loss for them.

I'd say it entirely possible that the FPGA Singles were produced at a loss to start the confidence game. Added to that if BFL really were a scam you betcha the ones who came after would be to so ngzangs motives are in question here.

I think it's much more plausible that they acquired repurposed used FPGA chips since the Bitcoin market has shown a remarkable tolerance in the FPGA realm for short warranties.

[creativex]

I wonder what BFL's balance sheet looks like. They could be at real risk of bankruptcy, particularly if they have actually dipped into pre-order funds for all this supposed chip tinkering. I wonder how long they can stay affloat while talking about bullet runs, respins, and multiple product delays.

Ironically it's ASICs and their pre-order launch in particular that's crimped the FPGA market, so I'm sure sales of existing products must be way down even with the upgrade policy in place.

[psilan]

I wonder what BFL's balance sheet looks like. They could be at real risk of bankruptcy, particularly if they have actually dipped into pre-order funds for all this supposed chip tinkering. I wonder how long they can stay affloat while talking about bullet runs, respins, and multiple product delays.

Ironically it's ASICs and their pre-order launch in particular that's crimped the FPGA market, so I'm sure sales of existing products must be way down even with the upgrade policy in place.

They only have enough FPGAs to help replacements. They don't have any left to sell.

[Inaba]

I wonder what BFL's balance sheet looks like. They could be at real risk of bankruptcy, particularly if they have actually dipped into pre-order funds for all this supposed chip tinkering. I wonder how long they can stay affloat while talking about bullet runs, respins, and multiple product delays.

Ironically it's ASICs and their pre-order launch in particular that's crimped the FPGA market, so I'm sure sales of existing products must be way down even with the upgrade policy in place.

Yeah, I bet you do wonder... because it's clear you know absolutely nothing about anything.  "At real risk of bankruptcy" yeah, right.  The only thread of bankruptcy here is your credibility, which went bankrupt a long time ago.  How's that transparency working out for you over in BTCFPGA land?