BFL: Chips have shipped, on their way to US

[Korbman]

BFL already broke many laws and regulations.  And they still have no FCC radiated emissions testing done.

Nobody cares, apparently.

Hmm, interesting. Can you point out the specific laws and regulations violated by Butterfly Labs? I'm genuinely curious, actually.

[1715113875]

1715113875

[ecliptic]

BFL already broke many laws and regulations.  And they still have no FCC radiated emissions testing done.

Nobody cares, apparently.

Hmm, interesting. Can you point out the specific laws and regulations violated by Butterfly Labs? I'm genuinely curious, actually.

47 C.F.R. 15.1b for starters, unless they already have it licensed (I have seen nothing to that end except some empty talk many months ago)

[Korbman]

47 C.F.R. 15.1b for starters, unless they already have it licensed (I have seen nothing to that end except some empty talk many months ago)

My guess is that they've already passed this part...given that essentially any electronic device has to pass it before going to market. If they didn't get past this, do you really think they'd send out an "illegal" device to dozens of media outlets?

Anything else, or was this your only thought on "many broken laws and regulations"?

[meowmeowbrowncow]

When's someone gonna take them to court then?

It would have to be initiated by a govt agency if criminal.  Most likely State's Attorneys.  


Btw, State's Attorney(s) have already been in contact with BFL due to shipping delays.  There is one document with BFL's response to the S.A. floating around the forums somewhere.


If there were even a hint of fraud (patently false advertising), and considering the volume of disgruntled customers, I have a feeling the FTC or a State's Attorney would take interest in BFL again.


If you really want to see where that path goes, contact your S.A. and the FTC.

[erschiessen]

How do they hash at 10x the speed of Avalon with the same chip technology?
(110 nm)

I don't recall, I believe it was grnbrg, one of the early receivers of Jally's posted pix that showed 2 ASICs in the 5 GH machine.

I wish that BFL would have taken the OTHER characteristic from Avalon.
They emulate the same mentality toward their customers (a sense of superiority, a condescending attitude) .
I wish BFL would have taken a page from BitSymCom's work ethic.

[Korbman]

State's Attorney(s) have already been in contact with BFL due to shipping delays.  There is one document with BFL's response to the S.A. floating around the forums somewhere.

This was my initial thought as well. I remember seeing it ages ago, I just can't seem to find it again. Ah well..I know it's around here somewhere..

[ecliptic]

How do they hash at 10x the speed of Avalon with the same chip technology?
(110 nm)

I don't recall, I believe it was grnbrg, one of the early receivers of Jally's posted pix that showed 2 ASICs in the 5 GH machine.

I wish that BFL would have taken the OTHER characteristic from Avalon.
They emulate the same mentality toward their customers (a sense of superiority, a condescending attitude) .
I wish BFL would have taken a page from BitSymCom's work ethic.

One possibility is that BFL's chips may be larger, yielding a higher hash rate per chip, higher (relative to smaller chips) TDP per chip, but fewer chipers per wafer.

Avalon's 110nm 7x7mm 48-QFN chips are slower but theoretically require no external heatsinking, merely PCB design heatsinking

BFL using a BGA package has their thermal pad on the top of the chip (Just like CPU/GPU/etcs with high TDP) and have the external heatsink added on top.  The QFN has it on the bottom.

[erschiessen]

ecliptic,
You got me to thinking.

I will have to look up that pic, to see if there is a significant difference in footprint.

[ecliptic]

ecliptic,
You got me to thinking.

I will have to look up that pic, to see if there is a significant difference in footprint.

If i remember correctly, BFL has a little daughterboard PCB that the ASIC themselves mount to, that daughterboard is then soldered to their main PCB.

[PuertoLibre]

47 C.F.R. 15.1b for starters, unless they already have it licensed (I have seen nothing to that end except some empty talk many months ago)

My guess is that they've already passed this part...given that essentially any electronic device has to pass it before going to market. If they didn't get past this, do you really think they'd send out an "illegal" device to dozens of media outlets?

Anything else, or was this your only thought on "many broken laws and regulations"?

You just want to hear what you want to hear.

Anything contradictory will be ignored by you.

Your mental framing needs adjustments.

[kano]

How do they hash at 10x the speed of Avalon with the same chip technology?
(110 nm)

I don't recall, I believe it was grnbrg, one of the early receivers of Jally's posted pix that showed 2 ASICs in the 5 GH machine.

I wish that BFL would have taken the OTHER characteristic from Avalon.
They emulate the same mentality toward their customers (a sense of superiority, a condescending attitude) .
I wish BFL would have taken a page from BitSymCom's work ethic.

65nm

[PuertoLibre]

State's Attorney(s) have already been in contact with BFL due to shipping delays.  There is one document with BFL's response to the S.A. floating around the forums somewhere.

This was my initial thought as well. I remember seeing it ages ago, I just can't seem to find it again. Ah well..I know it's around here somewhere..

[PuertoLibre]

How do they hash at 10x the speed of Avalon with the same chip technology?
(110 nm)

I don't recall, I believe it was grnbrg, one of the early receivers of Jally's posted pix that showed 2 ASICs in the 5 GH machine.

I wish that BFL would have taken the OTHER characteristic from Avalon.
They emulate the same mentality toward their customers (a sense of superiority, a condescending attitude) .
I wish BFL would have taken a page from BitSymCom's work ethic.

65nm

Fun factoid.

The original 65nm (single chip/16 core) design was supposed yield 7.5Gh/s per chip.

The current specs shown to date are actually about 2.5Gh/s

[kano]

How do they hash at 10x the speed of Avalon with the same chip technology?
(110 nm)

I don't recall, I believe it was grnbrg, one of the early receivers of Jally's posted pix that showed 2 ASICs in the 5 GH machine.

I wish that BFL would have taken the OTHER characteristic from Avalon.
They emulate the same mentality toward their customers (a sense of superiority, a condescending attitude) .
I wish BFL would have taken a page from BitSymCom's work ethic.

65nm

Fun factoid.

The original 65nm (single chip/16 core) design was supposed yield 7.5Gh/s per chip.

The current specs shown to date are actually about 2.5Gh/s

Yeah damn - only 9 times the Avalon chip for 2/3 the Watts and it's also under clocked in the original Jalapenos ...

[tvbcof]

65nm

Fun factoid.

The original 65nm (single chip/16 core) design was supposed yield 7.5Gh/s per chip.

The current specs shown to date are actually about 2.5Gh/s

Yeah damn - only 9 times the Avalon chip for 2/3 the Watts and it's also under clocked in the original Jalapenos ...

Yup.  If blowing the estimate by three X was the worst mistake that BFL has made it would be a much happier world for their 'customers'.  I mean how big a deal is power usage in production-level mining-land anyway?

If there is actually a reliable betting site in the Bitcoin ecosystem these days someone should do a bet on whether the chip in the devices BFL has shipped is actually 65nm.

[Korbman]

47 C.F.R. 15.1b for starters, unless they already have it licensed (I have seen nothing to that end except some empty talk many months ago)

My guess is that they've already passed this part...given that essentially any electronic device has to pass it before going to market. If they didn't get past this, do you really think they'd send out an "illegal" device to dozens of media outlets?

Anything else, or was this your only thought on "many broken laws and regulations"?

You just want to hear what you want to hear.

Anything contradictory will be ignored by you.

Your mental framing needs adjustments.

If only that were true...I'm more than happy to acknowledge serious arguments, but the problem is I very rarely get any. Saying "BFL has broken so many laws and regulations" without pointing out anything of substance is not an argument.

And, as usual, I see you have absolutely nothing to add to the argument Puerto..just more conspiracy theories and "scam scam scam". As I've noted before: Point out the specific laws that BFL has broken, and I will show you why you're wrong. Simple as that.

[PuertoLibre]

47 C.F.R. 15.1b for starters, unless they already have it licensed (I have seen nothing to that end except some empty talk many months ago)

My guess is that they've already passed this part...given that essentially any electronic device has to pass it before going to market. If they didn't get past this, do you really think they'd send out an "illegal" device to dozens of media outlets?

Anything else, or was this your only thought on "many broken laws and regulations"?

You just want to hear what you want to hear.

Anything contradictory will be ignored by you.

Your mental framing needs adjustments.

If only that were true...I'm more than happy to acknowledge serious arguments, but the problem is I very rarely get any. Saying "BFL has broken so many laws and regulations" without pointing out anything of substance is not an argument.

And, as usual, I see you have absolutely nothing to add to the argument Puerto..just more conspiracy theories and "scam scam scam". As I've noted before: Point out the specific laws that BFL has broken, and I will show you why you're wrong. Simple as that.

I do have plenty to add, I am just not doing it with you. You are a known BFL supported and strong shill for them.

People don't really gain anything substantial by answering your demands. You simply ignore the points made even when perfectly legitimate. (Just as you did now) The question is, are you even worth the effort. I think not.

[PuertoLibre]

And update from BFL_Josh:

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/bfl-forum-miscellaneous/2604-10-may-2013-update-7.html#post32042

Well, I was going to pick on post and reply to it as representative of the rest of the questions, but there isn't really a point in picking one post.

Here's the deal: We are not going to provide minute by minute accounts of our comings and goings. We are not going to provide detailed numbers with regards to what we are working on or shipping. It's really as simple as that. It's just not something a company does. I have tried it in the past and been burned on it when I have given out numbers that have changed and thus the numbers I gave out originally are no longer accurate. I've said it before and I will say it again: That is not going to happen going forward if I have anything to say about it. If I could give a number or a date that I was 100% confident in meeting, then I would. However, as the past few months has shown us, I simply can't be sure of any dates I have with 100% confidence right now, thus I'm not going to give dates or numbers. If I give a date or a number that does not have the caveat "should be," "hope to," etc... around it, then you can be sure I am pretty darned confident in that date or number. If not, then the number or date is subject to change. I always wondered why companies weren't more open with their customers and now I understand why.

Like I said, going forward, future products are going to be shipping "when they are done" if I have anything to say about it.

Nothing good has ever come of me giving out numbers or dates. Just look at the issues people are focusing on now, because I gave numbers for chips and wafers. Now everyone wants to know the disposition of every chip in every wafer and where they went, what they are doing now, what they've eaten for breakfast and when their last BM was. It's a nightmare. If I could go back and do it again I would absolutely not have given wafer counts or chips per wafer and everyone would be just as happy (or not) as they are now. We have given far, far too much insight into our process and it's burned us many times over and it won't be happening again in the future.

Some people are great, understanding and intelligent, and I am happy to share details with those people. I would love to talk shop with those people, explain the problems we are facing and use the collective wisdom of those people. Some people... aren't any of those things and the spoil it for everyone. I don't see any way to separate the intelligent people from the useless people who just want to complain and wreck excellent discourse for everyone else. I could potentially create a forum where you have to be given access, but that seems to be very labor intensive and the content would certainly make it's way into the public, so we'd be right back in the same boat we are in now. I honestly don't see a way around it. It's a real shame that there are people who can't have a civil, intelligent discussion, but it's the internet and everyone has an opinion, no matter how worthless it is, and they feel the need and entitlement to express it to anyone and everyone.

Sorry, you are out of luck folks.

Oh by the way, the first refund window for Paypal for orders after April 1st, 2013 (@ 2500$) is coming up in about 3 days.

Word to the wise, "refresh" your orders as Paypal only protects you for 45 days on claims.

[Korbman]

I do have plenty to add, I am just not doing it with you. You are a known BFL supported and strong shill for them.

People don't really gain anything substantial by answering your demands. You simply ignore the points made even when perfectly legitimate. (Just as you did now) The question is, are you even worth the effort. I think not.

Bwahahaha that's a long way of saying "I have no evidence, so instead I will resort to mocking".

And I'm not just a BFL supporter..I'm also a huge fan of Avalon and ASICMiner.

Sorry, you are out of luck folks.

Not sure if you know this or not, but Butterfly Labs is a private company. They don't have to give us any information on anything going on there...the same applies to Avalon or ASICMiner. The information we've received so far from all companies has been a courtesy.

[PuertoLibre]

Not sure if you know this or not, but Butterfly Labs is a private company. They don't have to give us any information on anything going on there...the same applies to Avalon or ASICMiner. The information we've received so far from all companies has been a courtesy.

Various members have researched (a heck of alot of issues) surrounding pre-orders and legal constraints and demands that companies must perform within a certain time frame.

For example, BFL was supposed to have notified their customers within 60 days of any changes to the status of pre-order shipments.

I recall it just only recently happened about 5 months late than prescribed. They are also required to communicate written notification to buyers. I made the argument that this would mean email as that is the official, directed form of communicating with buyers.

I think it is safe to say that none of these guidelines were adhered to until very recently when (coincidentally) BFL asked everyone to agree to new terms and specifications.

----------------------------

The folks who ordered after April 1st, have 15~20 days before they have to be notified (officially) that they will have any changes made to their delivered product.

But who knows if that will happen, right?