Liquid Synergy Designs Inc. -ASIC mining hardware

[cp1]

I can't imagine anything but sending the first 10k chips to batch 1 customers and so on. 

[1714725223]

1714725223

[1714725223]

1714725223

[1714725223]

1714725223

[1714725223]

1714725223

[cp1]

I guess we can estimate the total number of chips ordered based on Avalon's address 1FGAftzSTztFSB8LMwsrdCKTyqGY6zr3sU.  If this is the only address for chip orders then 75,779.8 BTC received would give us 97 batches total paid to that address.  So roughly, about 10 batches total per our batch orders.

[Boxman90]

I can't imagine anything but sending the first 10k chips to batch 1 customers and so on. 

But what if they're technically not the owners of those chips? I don't think that being a batch1 customer grants you the advantage of running 0 risk, while every next batch runs exponentially more risk. Every batch should run the risk of their particular order imo.

[voxelot]

I think we should use the time extra time that we now have productively.

Maybe a fully functioning K16 could be assembled (with sample chips), by either Steamboat, or BkkCoins (or somebody else), and be used to make sure CG miner works with it just fine.

Maybe explore some overclocking options on it, do some benchmarks, that sort of thing, and post them, so that people know what to expect.

Hopefully, that will get everything running smoothly once the chips DO get here.

Get rid of all the negativity...man...it's like walking into a total bitchfest on these forums lately.

K16's have been assembled and mining for about 3 weeks now by bkkcoins.  Cgminer works just fine..  I am not sure if anyone aside from Bkkcoins has the K16 or has burned any ASICs to them... I'm currently a few weeks from receiving my K1 and K16 boards.. I have one of these stupid avalons already sitting on my laptop from the samples sent out from sebastianJu's kindness... If anyone would like to donate more chips I could open threads to show the process of burning them to K16's.. which I will being doing for the K1 and usb dongle soon.. wish me luck.. at this time I have only one shot at getting it right =)

[nightengale]

I bought into batches 3 & 4, specifically batches 3 & 4. If they legitimately and verifiably come last, that is the risk that I took. But whenever the chips that I ordered arrive, specifically whenever the chips with order numbers matching batches 3 & 4 arrive, I would like the order I placed to be processed.

BitSyncom is apparently anything but predictable or reliable, so we'll just see.

[cardcomm]

I can't imagine anything but sending the first 10k chips to batch 1 customers and so on. 

Spoken like a true batch one buyer 

But seriously, IMO the chips from each batch belong the the purchasers of THAT SPECIFIC BATCH. If later batches come in before "my" batch, I'd expect to see those buyers get the chips. I have no claim to them, since I didn't purchase them.

As has already been stated, the buyers in each batch assumed the risks of THAT batch. I'm not keen on giving chips from "my" batch to another buyer, and I wouldn't expect THEM to give ME their chips.

We are being told to act like big boys, wait for our chips and take our lumps. So we sure as heck shouldn't be re-allocating chips from one batch to another, to ease earlier buyers risk.

[driksson]

Yes, but so far no chips have arrived. Only so far the remaining batches sample chips did arrive according to his post..

[ionstorm]

The other question is this: the funds from batch 1 and 2 as well as assembly costs were used to acquire PCB and components, labor and fund everything through batch 4 minus the chips.  Assembly should still be done in order of who purchased assembly.  So if batch 5 comes first it would be allot less than fair for them to get assembled units sooner than batch 1.  So batch 1 and 2 paid for assembly through batch 4 and that should be theirs.  I believe steamboat should have people wait or ship them their chips

[Unacceptable]

So you guys are saying,if the order# on the box recieved is for batch 3 chips,they get thiers first??? I'm in batch 3 & would be uncomfortable with this..................

First batch recieved goes to the first batch buyers......regardless of order # on the box    Its only fair.

Y I FU has screwed us,not our fellows in the other batch orders or Steamboat................

[Xian01]

I can't imagine anything but sending the first 10k chips to batch 1 customers and so on. 

 Absolutely this. I imagine doing anything other than a FIFO queue for batches would be courting massive customer backlash.

[cpengr]

I can't imagine anything but sending the first 10k chips to batch 1 customers and so on. 

Spoken like a true batch one buyer 

But seriously, IMO the chips from each batch belong the the purchasers of THAT SPECIFIC BATCH. If later batches come in before "my" batch, I'd expect to see those buyers get the chips. I have no claim to them, since I didn't purchase them.

As has already been stated, the buyers in each batch assumed the risks of THAT batch. I'm not keen on giving chips from "my" batch to another buyer, and I wouldn't expect THEM to give ME their chips.

We are being told to act like big boys, wait for our chips and take our lumps. So we sure as heck shouldn't be re-allocating chips from one batch to another, to ease earlier buyers risk.

I certainly hope none of this happens, so that this unfortunate conversation becomes irrelevant. However, considering recent events, I hope steamboat will clarify what he would do in these cases.

While I admit I am in later batches, I do think cardcomm's suggestion is fair. Doing otherwise unfairly increases the risk for those in later batches.

So you guys are saying,if the order# on the box recieved is for batch 3 chips,they get thiers first??? I'm in batch 3 & would be uncomfortable with this..................

First batch recieved goes to the first batch buyers......regardless of order # on the box    Its only fair.

Y I FU has screwed us,not our fellows in the other batch orders or Steamboat................

I think I see what you're saying, and you'd be trying to correct Yifu's screw-up, which--right or wrong--would make some sense.

However, what happens if one of the batches never arrives at all, and Avalon never makes it right? In any scenario where at least one batch never arrives, then batch 6 buyers never gets their chips. Does that seem fair to you?

Still, ionstorm does bring up an interesting point, which further complicates things. I personally am undecided on whether I agree.

The other question is this: the funds from batch 1 and 2 as well as assembly costs were used to acquire PCB and components, labor and fund everything through batch 4 minus the chips.  Assembly should still be done in order of who purchased assembly.  So if batch 5 comes first it would be allot less than fair for them to get assembled units sooner than batch 1.  So batch 1 and 2 paid for assembly through batch 4 and that should be theirs.  I believe steamboat should have people wait or ship them their chips

[dmcdad]

I can't imagine anything but sending the first 10k chips to batch 1 customers and so on.  

 Absolutely this. I imagine doing anything other than a FIFO queue for batches would be courting massive customer backlash.

No, not matching up incoming batch orders (if possible) with the actual batches would cause a backlash. Why should the last batch take all of the burden of a very late or lost shipment?

Thought experiment: what if there were 500 batches and the odds of at least one of those 500 batches never being delivered was 85% (sounds like a reasonable probability) -- would it make logical sense that the last batch has 100% of the burden of the possibility of any one of the 500 batches never being delivered? Absolutely not.

[nightengale]

However, what happens if one of the batches never arrives at all, and Avalon never makes it right? In any scenario where at least one batch never arrives, then batch 6 buyers never gets their chips. Does that seem fair to you?

Most compelling point yet.

[professorY]

Clearly the first batch to arrive should go to the Batch #1 buyers, who have been waiting the longest.

Anything else is ridiculous.

This buy has been FIFO since day one. Who cares about whatever number Avalon decides to stick on the side of a box?

[bigbeninlondon]

However, what happens if one of the batches never arrives at all, and Avalon never makes it right? In any scenario where at least one batch never arrives, then batch 6 buyers never gets their chips. Does that seem fair to you?

Most compelling point yet.

Except it DOES seem fair to me.  It's like saying "Do you think it's fair that the first 10 people at the Black Friday sale get the 10 $.99 TVs?"  Absolutely. 

[nightengale]

However, what happens if one of the batches never arrives at all, and Avalon never makes it right? In any scenario where at least one batch never arrives, then batch 6 buyers never gets their chips. Does that seem fair to you?

Most compelling point yet.

Except it DOES seem fair to me.  It's like saying "Do you think it's fair that the first 10 people at the Black Friday sale get the 10 $.99 TVs?"  Absolutely. 

Bad analogy -- this isn't Black Friday, everyone had already paid good money to get into the door.

Steamboat has explicitly correlated batch numbers with Avalon order numbers in the OP. The assumption is that the batches would ship in order, however there is no fine print that details how the other batches will be expected to forfeit their chips if the orders arrive out of sequence. The correlation in the OP is an implicit agreement as to which chips belong to which buyers. Any deviation from those assignments would be changing the terms of the purchase agreement. 

Hopefully SB will issue some clarity on this, and hopefully more so it won't end up being an issue.

[thejestre]

Perhaps it is best to avoid speculating about what could happen.

I mean, little green men could come down from Mars and steal batch 1.  What happens then?

Steamboat probably already knows what he will do, and I bet most buyers in his group buys will agree with his decision.

_theJestre

[dmcdad]

Clearly the first batch to arrive should go to the Batch #1 buyers, who have been waiting the longest.

Anything else is ridiculous.

This buy has been FIFO since day one. Who cares about whatever number Avalon decides to stick on the side of a box?

Hogwash. The burden of lost/late/never shipments should not be pushed down the line to the last batch. That is ridiculous. Each batch transaction is clearly independent of the others. They each had to meet a chip quantity ordered before purchased, they each have their own order date, and they each have their own Avalon order number. The only thing in common between the batches is they are organized by the same group buy leader -- that doesn't mean they should automatically become dependent on one another.

By placing an order for chips not in the first few batches I have no intention of shouldering the burden of order problems on previous batches, just like my batch purchase shouldn't be impacted by order problems in other non-steamboat group buys. If you expect the last batch or two customers to get get stuck holding the bag if any batch doesn't fulfill, then clearly those batch customers should have received a steep discount compared to the other batches. Insurance like that isn't free.

I don't think you all understand how the probability on this works. Here is some math from Statistics 101. Let's say the probability of any given shipment never arriving is 15%.
If everyone shares the burden equally then there is a 15% change you'll be SOL. Sounds fair to me. Equal burden for all.
If you push the burden down the line to later batches, then:
 the probability that batch 1 won't receive chips drops from 15% to 0.0011390625% (.15 * .15 * .15 * .15 * .15)
  - AND -
 the probability that batch 6 is screwed jumps from 15% to 62.285% (1 - [.85 * .85 * .85 * .85 * .85]).

Again, there is no way it would be fair for later batch customers to have all of the burden of lost/late/never shipments. That burden should be spread out across the batches evenly.

[ik2013]

Personally I think it is a ridiculous topic of discussion. We just got over the drama and we are right back in it now. I trust Steamboat will find an equitable solution to this sort of (far-fetched) situation. I'd like to think it is more likely we will see multiple batches arrive at once.

[dmcdad]

Personally I think it is a ridiculous topic of discussion. We just got over the drama and we are right back in it now. I trust Steamboat will find an equitable solution to this sort of (far-fetched) situation. I'd like to think it is more likely we will see multiple batches arrive at once.

Given Avalon's shipping history I'm not sure it is totally ridiculous (just ask the customers that still don't have their batch 2 miners from Avalon). I also think that steamboat, who I also trust will make a fair decision, should make his policy public before chips start arriving. My 2 cents.