And some more delays in BFL shipment plans / no shipment before 14th Jan 2013

[elux]

Whatever your opinion on lotteries is, though, judgement of Sonny should be made based on the fact that he was part of an illegal lottery, and not that he "defrauded little old ladies." Little old ladies know what they are getting into when they buy a lottery ticket.

Do the victims of nigerian email scams also "know what they get"?

Not only did Vleisides & Co defraud little old ladies, they sold fake life insurance to little old ladies.


Samples letters from the extradition warrant follows:

One letter stated "For the first time in German History, the German Lottery Commission Trust has decided to sponsor a lottery cash rebate program . . .GERMAN GOVERNMENT WANTS TO HELP MAKE YOU MY FUTURE WINNER! . . . With such a positive turnover, even under the worst conditions, you are almost guaranteed to win money .... Warmest regards R.L. DOORNE."

b. Some of the solicitations Wood received were the following:

i.   A letter was postmarked May 27, 2005, from Little Rock, Arkansas. Inside was a cash rebate grant related to WORLD EXPERT and the German Lottery. The rebate grant looked like a check from Inter World Bank. However, on the endorsement section of the check were the sentences, "Do not deposit in US Bank. Return to Berlin for cashing." The letter stated as follows: "GERMAN GOVERNMENT IS GIVING YOU A ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY!! The German Lotto has grown enormously in an extremely short period of time making it one of the RICHEST lotteries offered to people today. Prize payouts now approximate as much as the equivalent of $915 MILLION U.S. DOLLARS yearly. With such a positive turnover, even under the worst conditions, you are almost guaranteed to win money by joining this SPECIAL FUND we've created to invest in this easy to win German Lottery. REMEMBER: This game is NOT stretched out for several months. You will receive your prize check in 21 days. Just fill out the enclosed green FUND OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE, mail it back to us, and within twenty one davs vou will receive a check for what could be as much as $658.000 U.S. Dollars as your share of the total won by this SPECIAL FUND." The letter went on to solicit money: "REMINDER: The rules of this promotional cash award require you to endorse the check and include it along with the balance of $27,29 and the enclosed $38 ONE PERCENT CERTIFICATE."

ii.   Also in the letter was a gold sticker that claimed to be a seal from the "ELBC, European Lottery Brokers Commission," which "certifies your purchase is authentic and insured from fraud. . . ." Wood believed the seal represented that the venture was legitimate.

On one of these solicitations were the words "International Pension Fund Audit Bureau" encircling the US Treasury seal. Another letter for MUTUAL MEDICAL read, "Everything appears to be in order and your LIFE INSURANCE is now in force. However your first PENSION DIVIDEND in the amount of $112 has been delayed   The INSURANCE DEPARTMENT has been unable to VERIFY your BIRTH in the international BIRTH CERTIFICATE computer database If you have a PHOTOCOPY of [sic]youre BIRTH CERTIFICATE at home, we can RELEASE your first PENSION DIVIDEND immediately upon receiving this document."

b.   One letter that Bedwell received, which was signed by "Lee Ping, Secretary Treasurer," had a heading that stated: "OLD AMSTERDAM GOLD RESERVE MUTUAL PENSION POOL, Established in 1957." The letter stated in part the following: "As Secretary Treasurer it is my great pleasure to inform you that your application for PENSION POOL membership has been approved by the BOARD OF DIRECTORS. As a new MEMBER you will soon receive your first PENSION DIVIDEND CHECK. But first it is important that you review the enclosed information carefully and NAME the person who is to be your Beneficiary. . . . Just follow the instructions on the back of your INSURANCE POLICY. This special insurance is FREE to all members and will give your BENEFICIARY a MINIMUM amount of money regardless of the balance in your TRUST DEPOSIT ACCOUNT. As a Certified Public Accountant I have reviewed many good pension plans over the years and I find that this particular one is quite advantageous - especially for people who live in countries where the tax authorities use PROBATE as an excuse to collect heavy fees and taxes from Beneficiaries. Such unpleasantness can be avoided under our program. Any money in your TRUST ACCOUNT goes to your BENEFICIARY without the difficulty of a WILL or the intrusion of tax authorities. This means more money for your BENEFICIARY and, perhaps most important, PEACE OF MIND for both you and your Beneficiary."

A letter addressed to Greven stating it is an "Official Announcement of Winning Tickets in the 2003 Irish Sweepstake Triple Crown." The . letterhead indicated it was from "The Shamrock Agency" and claimed it had been a "Certified Service since 1959." The letter stated: "Millionaires by the score! We have just finished round one of the verification process of the Triple Crown 118 major Jackpot winning tickets. Enclosed is a list of the winning numbers. Congratulations to the jackpot winners.. . ." The letter informed Greven to be patient for "round 2 of the winning verification process" but encouraged him not to ".. . delay in getting the 'Jump' on next year's Triple Crown millions (order form enclosed)."

It also stated that the Triple Crown was unlike any other lottery because players could be sure there is no ". . . 'Inside corruption' or 'secret trick' . . . ." The letter was signed by "Sir William Winfield, Northup Manor, Shannon Ireland."

No lottery tickets were bought.

[MPOE-PR]

"the amount of the alleged “winnings” was far less than the amount the victim had sent in" but that's how a lottery works. The payouts are less than the draw. This wasn't a charity, it was a for profit business.

What I get you're saying is that their model was to steal from the pot far less than the government does. If this is correct then the alleged winnings cannot also be far less than the amount sent in, seeing how the government usually pays out about half to two thirds.

So this can come down to a debate as to whether or not lotteries themselves are moral.

No, it can come down to a debate of whether taking in 25mn, paying out 6mn and keeping 19mn of other people's money does or does not constitute 19mn worth of fraud. Hardly much of a debate, I agree.

[repentance]

Josh has confirmed that the new date is for delivery of the chips only and doesn't include assembly etc.

I'm far more interested in when they expect to receive test chips because they won't even have a working prototype until then and nobody with an ounce of sense is going to authorise the full production run until the test chips have been proven to work to contracted specifications.

[greyhawk]

Seeing as how BFL customers have been very insistent on the products not being tested, so they can get them sooner, BFL should just send out the units no matter what. Who cares if they don't work, it's what the customers wanted.

[SgtSpike]

Josh has confirmed that the new date is for delivery of the chips only and doesn't include assembly etc.

I'm far more interested in when they expect to receive test chips because they won't even have a working prototype until then and nobody with an ounce of sense is going to authorise the full production run until the test chips have been proven to work to contracted specifications.

They are doing a full run without testing.  It doesn't cost much more when you're talking about millions of dollars of lost sales if they have to wait until test chips are ready to do a full run.  And if BFL had to add another 6-12 weeks on top of the current delay, you can bet a lot of people would be jumping ship!

In other words, they're putting all their eggs in one basket.  I hope that basket holds...

[Syke]

So let me get this straight... you want me to ... wait for it ... predict the future.

I think we're going to see a lot more delays once they actually get the chips and realize the magnitude of their error(s).

There you go again. Predicting the future. You can't even predict your own future (Ship in Oct, ship in Nov, ship in Dec, ship in Jan, ...), what makes you think you can predict other companies futures?

[beekeeper]

I think we're going to see a lot more delays once they actually get the chips and realize the magnitude of their error(s).

There you go again. Predicting the future. You can't even predict your own future (Ship in Oct, ship in Nov, ship in Dec, ship in Jan, ...), what makes you think you can predict other companies futures?

What he probably means is that, except BFL (and maybe Tom), the other ASIC projects are at their first attempt. BFL is at their second (maybe even third). Josh is probably saying that it is very possible the others will be also forced to respin.

[repentance]

They are doing a full run without testing.  It doesn't cost much more when you're talking about millions of dollars of lost sales if they have to wait until test chips are ready to do a full run.  And if BFL had to add another 6-12 weeks on top of the current delay, you can bet a lot of people would be jumping ship!

In other words, they're putting all their eggs in one basket.  I hope that basket holds...

So if the first batch of 20,000 aren't up to scratch, problems can't be corrected until the next batch?

[Syke]

They didn't lie, they had unexpected setbacks.  There's a difference.

They were told they couldn't do it that fast. They bragged about how expert they were. Then setbacks, and more setbacks, and then more setbacks. Sooner or later you have to conclude they are either grossly incompetent (which means their "expert" status was a lie), or just flat out lying about their dates. Take your pick.

[SgtSpike]

They didn't lie, they had unexpected setbacks.  There's a difference.

They were told they couldn't do it that fast. They bragged about how expert they were. Then setbacks, and more setbacks, and then more setbacks. Sooner or later you have to conclude they are either grossly incompetent (which means their "expert" status was a lie), or just flat out lying about their dates. Take your pick.

I only see two setbacks, both of which are understandable IMO.

- The first batch of chips didn't work.  Delayed from October to late-November.
- Fab shop has delayed on BFL twice, pushing the date to early-December, and now mid-January.

[repentance]

I only see two setbacks, both of which are understandable IMO.

- The first batch of chips didn't work.  Delayed from October to late-November.
- Fab shop has delayed on BFL twice, pushing the date to early-December, and now mid-January.

Except that Josh's claim that there was a floored batch of chips was refuted by Nasser.

We've been very busy recently, unfortunately I couldn't catch up with the forums. There is a correction to be made: Chips are not and were not flawed. We decided to add certain clock buffers to improve noise-resistance and possibly increase frequency even further.

Obviously any delays caused by that decision cannot be blamed on the fab.

The fab burning down would be an "unexpected setback".  Delays caused by decisions made by the customer are not "unexpected".

The delays may be "understandable" - because no manufacturing process ever runs perfectly - but they can't legitimately be called "unexpected" because a properly planned project takes into account the possibility of pretty much everything going wrong and never sets it target dates basedon best case scenarios.

[SgtSpike]

I only see two setbacks, both of which are understandable IMO.

- The first batch of chips didn't work.  Delayed from October to late-November.
- Fab shop has delayed on BFL twice, pushing the date to early-December, and now mid-January.

Except that Josh's claim that there was a floored batch of chips was refuted by Nasser.

We've been very busy recently, unfortunately I couldn't catch up with the forums. There is a correction to be made: Chips are not and were not flawed. We decided to add certain clock buffers to improve noise-resistance and possibly increase frequency even further.

Obviously any delays caused by that decision cannot be blamed on the fab.

The fab burning down would be an "unexpected setback".  Delays caused by decisions made by the customer are not "unexpected".

The delays may be "understandable" - because no manufacturing process ever runs perfectly - but they can't legitimately be called "unexpected" because a properly planned project takes into account the possibility of pretty much everything going wrong and never sets it target dates basedon best case scenarios.

They DID take into account the possibility of everything going wrong.  The way I saw it right from the start was that late October was an "if everything goes right" release date, and January 1st was an "if everything goes wrong" release date.  Obviously, they are now expecting to exceed their January 1st date, which irks me, but I was only expecting product before then if things went well.

[repentance]

They DID take into account the possibility of everything going wrong.  The way I saw it right from the start was that late October was an "if everything goes right" release date, and January 1st was an "if everything goes wrong" release date.  Obviously, they are now expecting to exceed their January 1st date, which irks me, but I was only expecting product before then if things went well.

Yeah, I believe that anyone who thought they'd be mining with any ASIC before the reward drop - no matter which vendor they ordered from - was delusional.  What these delays do mean, though, is that the time period between first batch customers and second batch customers receiving their orders will be greatly reduced.  I suspect many customers will be displeased about losing that particular advantage as they believe it's one they effectively paid for and it's one which is created at least in part by BFL's decisions.

[DutchBrat]

According to the BFL e-mail newsletter they will have an in-depth explanation on the delays on their own forum

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/content/127-bfl-asic-delays-depth-expanation.html

Site is down at the moment

edit: site is up

edit 2: lol the in-depth explanation is: The production of these very dense, hand-routed chips are the reason for the delay in the latest line of bitcoin mining machines... now we know much much more

[Syke]

They DID take into account the possibility of everything going wrong.  The way I saw it right from the start was that late October was an "if everything goes right" release date, and January 1st was an "if everything goes wrong" release date.

That's not how they portrayed things:

our team is highly experienced in exactly this field and we're currently ahead of our original timeline.  Honest Abe, we're scheduling shipments for October of 2012.

They made it sound like there was no way they'd miss Oct. Let's see what BFL_Josh really said:

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/pre-sales-questions/104-shipping-2-3-weeks-2.html#post1461

When we made our announcement for shipping dates, we padded in some extra weeks in case of delays

We have basically padded everything we could in terms of estimates and that padding is what has allowed us to bump specs on short notice and keep our shipping times in line even in the face of delays.

There has been some delays at that stage, but we have the padding, so it's not been a critical issue.

There has also been some delays at the foundry, but again, we have padding, so it's not been a critical issue.

I would like to tell you we are still on time or pretty close to it, because we are.

That post is from Oct! Oct was never portrayed as a best-case scenario. It was always portrayed as an almost sure thing. Read the actual quotes again. Even in Oct they claimed they were "on time", which by now should be clear was a flat out lie. They're still not close to finishing even after months have passed.

[SgtSpike]

Syke, that's because, at the time, they WERE close to shipping.  Until the chips came in wrong, and they had to redo them, and now they're stuck waiting on the foundry to make the changes.

[MrTeal]

Syke, that's because, at the time, they WERE close to shipping.  Until the chips came in wrong, and they had to redo them, and now they're stuck waiting on the foundry to make the changes.

I thought there wasn't problems with the chips, and they just wanted to make improvements?

[greyhawk]

Syke, that's because, at the time, they WERE close to shipping.  Until the chips came in wrong, and they had to redo them, and now they're stuck waiting on the foundry to make the changes.

I thought there wasn't problems with the chips, and they just wanted to make improvements?

That's what Nasser says, yup.

[elux]

Syke, that's because, at the time, they WERE close to shipping.  
Until the chips came in wrong, and they had to redo them,
and now they're stuck waiting on the foundry to make the changes.

You're completely pulling this out of your ass, am I right? Ten bucks says I'm right.

What does "the chips came in wrong" even mean?

You believe they had actual chips, but were "unsatisfied with performance" and trashed them?

That was Nasser's late November spin on the situation IIRC.

Then the latest story: "The fucking foundry, man... Made our chips all wrong so that we have to redesign them."

And let's not forget, they were "close to shipping" in October.

[Syke]

Syke, that's because, at the time, they WERE close to shipping.  Until the chips came in wrong, and they had to redo them, and now they're stuck waiting on the foundry to make the changes.

Without working chips, they were never close to shipping.