No FCC or UL label on BFL's Jalapeño

[k9quaint]

With that said, I think this thread was more about catching BFL in a lie/broken promise. 

Indeed.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

I've read that testing for unintended emitters is fairly easy to pass, and way less stringent than intended emitters. Also so is enforcement on unintended emitters, which may be NIL since i cant find and cases about it. So maybe like jaywalking, ya its illegal but... Either way to be in the law ya needs FCC, unless sold unassembled to be classified as a subassembly of a computer peripheral device.

Try jaywalking in Las Vegas where many tourist were ticketed, with some arrested, spoiling their vacation plans.

Either way to be in the law ya needs FCC, unless sold unassembled to be classified as a subassembly of a computer peripheral device.

Hence, Josh putting the naysayers at ease by stating such certification was in the works, but as of yesterday, still no mention of BF Labs on the FCC site.

[smoothie]

And are we really surprised this is all unfinished even after 6 months after his 2 week estimate back in November?

 

[minternj]

I've read that testing for unintended emitters is fairly easy to pass, and way less stringent than intended emitters. Also so is enforcement on unintended emitters, which may be NIL since i cant find and cases about it. So maybe like jaywalking, ya its illegal but... Either way to be in the law ya needs FCC, unless sold unassembled to be classified as a subassembly of a computer peripheral device.

Try jaywalking in Las Vegas where many tourist were ticketed, with some arrested, spoiling their vacation plans.

Either way to be in the law ya needs FCC, unless sold unassembled to be classified as a subassembly of a computer peripheral device.

Hence, Josh putting the naysayers at ease by stating such certification was in the works, but as of yesterday, still no mention of BF Labs on the FCC site.

Which part of vegas? I assume you mean the strip. Doesnt the strip have pedestrian bridges along the length? You should get a ticket if you are jaywalking across the main strip thought that's like 6 lanes of traffic, you are a moron if you do.  Old vegas you can jaywalk, also suburbs?

[Phinnaeus Gage]

I've read that testing for unintended emitters is fairly easy to pass, and way less stringent than intended emitters. Also so is enforcement on unintended emitters, which may be NIL since i cant find and cases about it. So maybe like jaywalking, ya its illegal but... Either way to be in the law ya needs FCC, unless sold unassembled to be classified as a subassembly of a computer peripheral device.

Try jaywalking in Las Vegas where many tourist were ticketed, with some arrested, spoiling their vacation plans.

Either way to be in the law ya needs FCC, unless sold unassembled to be classified as a subassembly of a computer peripheral device.

Hence, Josh putting the naysayers at ease by stating such certification was in the works, but as of yesterday, still no mention of BF Labs on the FCC site.

Which part of vegas? I assume you mean the strip. Doesnt the strip have pedestrian bridges along the length? You should get a ticket if you are jaywalking across the main strip thought that's like 6 lanes of traffic, you are a moron if you do.  Old vegas you can jaywalk, also suburbs?

Fremont Street is notorious for jaywalkers to get ticketed. I've lived in Las Vegas six time, approximately six months each.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2002/dec/13/mayor-defends-fremont-street-arrests/

[minternj]

wow we are major off topic, but i go to vegas like twice a year. Be there next month. Where on freemont??? The whole thing is blocked off. Guessing you mean away from  the covered part?

[sensei]

FWIW, my BitForce FPGA Singles do not bear any FCC, CE, or UL stickers or marks (or anything else for that matter).

Nor does my Avalon.

Personally, I'm not real worried.  I'm sure some of the GPU rigs I've built and am now operating are much more of a fire (or RFI/EMI) risk than either of the above-mentioned devices.

I accept that mining is an "extreme hobby", and carries with it some risks, including the risk of burning down my house (or at least my miner shed).



With that said, I think this thread was more about catching BFL in a lie/broken promise.  Well, I don't think we'll have too much trouble finding numerous examples of those.  Shall we ask Honest Abe what charity they've donated 1,000 BTC to?

BFL did reply to me that they were going to have a CE mark; self certified.

[pikeadz]

Zero fucks given, regarding presence or non-presence said stickers. [Pssst. I tore the label off my mattress too!] 

I don't think the FCC, who gives many fucks, gives a fuck about the zero fucks that you are giving

[wrenchmonkey]

Zero fucks given, regarding presence or non-presence said stickers. [Pssst. I tore the label off my mattress too!]  

I don't think the FCC, who gives many fucks, gives a fuck about the zero fucks that you are giving

Nor do I give any fucks about said FCC. They can fuck themselves all they want, and I'll still not give one single measly fuck about their fuckery.

This thread was intended to do nothing more than troll BFL even more. Not one single consumer really cares if they put a bureaucratic sticker on it or not. I give just as many fucks about BFL not having stickers as I give about Avalon not having stickers.

The difference is that there's not a merry band of roving trolls trying to stir up shit about Avalon, so the fact that Avalon doesn't have stickers gets ignored; meanwhile, the asshattery continues in trying to make a federal case out of some stickers.

And the consumers still continue to give zero fucks.

The FCC only gets involved if something starts transmitting interference that it shouldn't. If I get a Jalpeno, and it starts ruining my neighbor's TV signal, then they might come ask me about it. Otherwise, they'll never know or care.

Unless somebody has evidence that the BFL line of products is emitting unintentional radio interference, then the discussion is a moot one.

[ragingazn628]

"So the FCC won't let me be
Or let me be me so let me see
They tried to shut me down on MTV
But it feels so empty without me"

-Eminem

[pikeadz]

Zero fucks given, regarding presence or non-presence said stickers. [Pssst. I tore the label off my mattress too!]  

I don't think the FCC, who gives many fucks, gives a fuck about the zero fucks that you are giving

Nor do I give any fucks about said FCC. They can fuck themselves all they want, and I'll still not give one single measly fuck about their fuckery.

This thread was intended to do nothing more than troll BFL even more. Not one single consumer really cares if they put a bureaucratic sticker on it or not. I give just as many fucks about BFL not having stickers as I give about Avalon not having stickers.

The difference is that there's not a merry band of roving trolls trying to stir up shit about Avalon, so the fact that Avalon doesn't have stickers gets ignored; meanwhile, the asshattery continues in trying to make a federal case out of some stickers.

And the consumers still continue to give zero fucks.

The FCC only gets involved if something starts transmitting interference that it shouldn't. If I get a Jalpeno, and it starts ruining my neighbor's TV signal, then they might come ask me about it. Otherwise, they'll never know or care.

Unless somebody has evidence that the BFL line of products is emitting unintentional radio interference, then the discussion is a moot one.

It is definitely here to troll BFL, but BFL brought it upon itself.  Saying they would have the inspection done in November, and failing to do it, is amusing to me.  The FCC may or may not be amused, but they are good at giving fucks, and they are also good at ensuring compliance with the law.  Should be interesting to see how this plays out once they get wind of it.

[k9quaint]

It is definitely here to troll BFL, but BFL brought it upon itself.  Saying they would have the inspection done in November, and failing to do it, is amusing to me.  The FCC may or may not be amused, but they are good at giving fucks, and they are also good at ensuring compliance with the law.  Should be interesting to see how this plays out once they get wind of it.

Precisely. Nobody would have brought it up if BFL hadn't made statements about their progress with the process. Since we are going over BFLs statements about their progress, it is germane to the conversation.

[sensei]

If you are a DIYer and create a miner, no certification is needed. You need to follow good practices and you will be liable if there is any electromagnetic interference.

However, if you manufacturer and sell a product, in this case a class B digital device under FCC part 15, you are required to follow best practices and certify that the product meets FCC part 15 specifications and the following statement must be in a conspicuous place on the device:

This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions: (1) This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.

The following must also be in the user manual:

This equipment has been tested and found to comply with the limits for a Class B digital device, pursuant to part 15 of the FCC Rules. These limits are designed to provide reasonable protection against harmful interference in a residential installation. This equipment generates, uses and can radiate radio frequency energy and, if not installed and used in accordance with the instructions, may cause harmful interference to radio communications. However, there is no guarantee that interference will not occur in a particular installation. If this equipment does cause harmful interference to radio or television reception, which can be determined by turning the equipment off and on, the user is encouraged to try to correct the interference by one or more of the following measures:

Reorient or relocate the receiving antenna. Increase the separation between the equipment and receiver. Connect the equipment into an outlet on a circuit different from that to which the receiver is connected. Consult the dealer or an experienced radio/TV technician for help

Ultimately though it seems that it is the responsibility of the user to keep emissions down. If there is an issue, even if the product does not have a part 15 certification, it the users problem.

Though the FCC may still come a knockin' at the manufacturers door. As long as a neighbor doesn't complain (highly unlikely), I don't think there will be a problem.

This is my understanding for now. If I am shown I am wrong, then it will change.

[pikeadz]

If you are a DIYer and create a miner, no certification is needed. You need to follow good practices and you will be liable if there is any electromagnetic interference.

However, if you manufacturer and sell a product, in this case a class B digital device under FCC part 15, you are required to follow best practices and certify that the product meets FCC part 15 specifications and the following statement must be in a conspicuous place on the device:

This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions: (1) This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.

The following must also be in the user manual:

This equipment has been tested and found to comply with the limits for a Class B digital device, pursuant to part 15 of the FCC Rules. These limits are designed to provide reasonable protection against harmful interference in a residential installation. This equipment generates, uses and can radiate radio frequency energy and, if not installed and used in accordance with the instructions, may cause harmful interference to radio communications. However, there is no guarantee that interference will not occur in a particular installation. If this equipment does cause harmful interference to radio or television reception, which can be determined by turning the equipment off and on, the user is encouraged to try to correct the interference by one or more of the following measures:

Reorient or relocate the receiving antenna. Increase the separation between the equipment and receiver. Connect the equipment into an outlet on a circuit different from that to which the receiver is connected. Consult the dealer or an experienced radio/TV technician for help

Ultimately though it seems that it is the responsibility of the user to keep emissions down. If there is an issue, even if the product does not have a part 15 certification, it the users problem.

Though the FCC may still come a knockin' at the manufacturers door. As long as a neighbor doesn't complain (highly unlikely), I don't think there will be a problem.

This is my understanding for now. If I am shown I am wrong, then it will change.

I don't think it's outside of the realm of possibility that someone files a complaint from here.  BFL has enough enemies that probably have some interference on their televisions, which, quite possibly could be caused by an uninspected Jalapeno down the block, or across the country.  I'm just saying.  

[iCEBREAKER]

And no one gave a flying fuck.

IKR?  Who cares?  What could possibly go wrong?

[centove]

You guys do realize not everything that is FCC certified has a sticker on it stating so?? Look at your cell phone, where is the sticker? Look at a cordless phone, where is the sticker??? Computer motherboard? Video Card? Generally you'll hunt in the book and lo-and behold there is the FCC compliance statement. Just saying...

And as far as the UL label on the power-supply, unless BFL is making that (and it looks like a fairly standard switching power supply brick, probably for a laptop) that's the manufacturer of said product.

[k9quaint]

You guys do realize not everything that is FCC certified has a sticker on it stating so?? Look at your cell phone, where is the sticker? Look at a cordless phone, where is the sticker??? Computer motherboard? Video Card? Generally you'll hunt in the book and lo-and behold there is the FCC compliance statement. Just saying...

And as far as the UL label on the power-supply, unless BFL is making that (and it looks like a fairly standard switching power supply brick, probably for a laptop) that's the manufacturer of said product.

I checked my motherboard, a DVD drive, a video card from Nvidia, and a video card from AMD. They all had the FCC compliance logo on them.
I popped open an old phone, it had it on the inside of the case.

[Syke]

You guys do realize not everything that is FCC certified has a sticker on it stating so?? Look at your cell phone, where is the sticker? Look at a cordless phone, where is the sticker??? Computer motherboard? Video Card? Generally you'll hunt in the book and lo-and behold there is the FCC compliance statement. Just saying...

And as far as the UL label on the power-supply, unless BFL is making that (and it looks like a fairly standard switching power supply brick, probably for a laptop) that's the manufacturer of said product.

Look under the battery, that's where my cell phone hides the FCC logo. Feel free to post a link verifying the FCC approval of any BFL product at www.fcc.gov.

[repentance]

Details....details....



It is not like anyone is actually going to report them to the FCC!

Yeah, it must be sheer coincidence that PayPal has contacted customers asking whether they've received their BFL orders and that BFL is suddenly going to issue automatic refunds to customers who don't confirm their pre-orders...right?

[PuertoLibre]

Details....details....



It is not like anyone is actually going to report them to the FCC!

Yeah, it must be sheer coincidence that PayPal has contacted customers asking whether they've received their BFL orders and that BFL is suddenly going to issue automatic refunds to customers who don't confirm their pre-orders...right?

Who knows why it happens?



In either case, one more win for the customers of Paypal.