Bitcoin Forum
August 23, 2019, 05:36:22 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 [91] 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 »
  Print  
Author Topic: DragonMint T1 16TH/S halongmining.com  (Read 79327 times)
radiu_s
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2
Merit: 0


View Profile
April 05, 2018, 01:44:47 PM
 #1801

Hello,

I like to know if anyone has already received his Dragonmint 16T/T1 (Maybe buyers of the "first" March batch?).

Thank you in advance for a short info.
1566538582
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566538582

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566538582
Reply with quote  #2

1566538582
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1566538582
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566538582

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566538582
Reply with quote  #2

1566538582
Report to moderator
1566538582
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566538582

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566538582
Reply with quote  #2

1566538582
Report to moderator
Megaquake
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 605
Merit: 505


View Profile WWW
April 05, 2018, 02:07:01 PM
 #1802

or pay 2000 for a 15.2th machine pulling 1500 watts 6 month warranty runs on 2 pools = dragon mint t1


Well lets hope it is more accurate than Ebang on it's e-10 lol

Mines at Kano.is best profit in the world!

在Kano.is的BTC
compjunction
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1
Merit: 0


View Profile
April 05, 2018, 02:19:12 PM
Last edit: April 05, 2018, 10:56:09 PM by frodocooper
 #1803

Hello,

I like to know if anyone has already received his Dragonmint 16T/T1 (Maybe buyers of the "first" March batch?).

Thank you in advance for a short info.

Yep received a few days ago.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DaBGKKDX4AIqDlO.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DaBGKKGXkAEaVxu.jpg

http://ckpool.org/users/3HhjdPLw39eXBhV2RjKdM6Ceapon89EPpP



Moderator's note: This post was edited by frodocooper to remove inline image tags.
dimaze
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 179
Merit: 53


View Profile
April 05, 2018, 04:20:07 PM
 #1804

Powerful actors exist in many industries who want to mitigate the progress of competitors, but that doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to new market entrants who skirt longstanding international business norms that are designed: (1) to help provide consumer protection and safety, and (2) to help ensure fair dealing in the line of commerce among market participants.

As to safety, consider this analogy. If a new startup pharmaceutical company wanted to take on the big pharma players (who in many cases have monopolies on the treatment of certain conditions due to patent protection), would you risk your or your loved ones' lives and ingest pills from that company, even if you had no idea who they were, who their management was, where they are operating, whether they had a business license, and from where they were sourcing their chemicals? Even if the startup were well-intentioned, if they made an innocent mistake and released a drug that caused serious health problems or birth defects, shouldn't that company be held accountable if it acted negligently or improperly?

The DragonMint from Halong Mining is anlogous in certain respects. A purported "start-up" claims it wants to embark on grand plans to decentralize and take on the massive player, Bitmain. It operates totally anonymously. Even if Halong were well-intentioned, if they made an innocent mistake and released a product that burned down your house or mining operation --- or emitted fumes that caused serious health problems or birth defects, shouldn't Halong be held accountable if it acted negligently or improperly?

I appreciate that the worst experience you've had is seeing thousands of miners with KNC connectors with extremely high failure rates. What if Halong's miners end up having connectors with extremely high failure rates due to negligence during the manufacturing process or a flawed design? And since Halong is totally anonymous, we'd have no way to hold it accountable if Halong choose not to assume responsibility for them. Would you find that acceptable?

I understand your concern about health concerns and liability, however, if there were widespread issues in this industry with regards to safety, there would be much more stringent policies in place than your pharmaceutical company example. We are talking about silicon here. There is a degree of common sense people are responsible for, which would be far more likely to cause health risks. For example, you don't sleep in the hot isle at your facility. You don't pop 10x the recommended dosage. Had these units pulled more electricity per PCI connector similar to the KNC offerings, I would absolutely be concerned. However, that is not the case. Their hardware specs fall in line with general industry standards for the T1, and they've exceeded other specifications and delivery projections on other offerings.

Hypothetically, if Bernie had engaged in theft of intellectual property from an ASIC hardware manufacturer, so long as you received your hardware from him and your Bitcoin account is growing, you're good with that? Don't you think Bernie's ASIC manufacturing company should be held to account?

Without a doubt, Halong Mining warrants our legitimate concern and rigorous scrutiny. I've never claimed that anyone is "forcing" me to do anything. My purpose is conclusively illustrating that Halong Mining is engaging in highly questionable business practices, and prospective buyers should proceed with caution and realize that they have no reasonable recourse to hold this "company" accountable should the need arise. In addition, Halong has made claims about the DragonMint that we cannot verify, such as the existence of its supposed FCC certification. Red flags galore, people. Red flags.

I support collaboration and unity with any field, as long as it improves the consumer experience and performance. If a manufacturer was using a variation of Asicboost, there's nothing wrong with other manufacturers getting on that train. It's inevitable, especially with the high level of efficiency gains. In a competitive market, manufacturers often use advancements in the field to their own benefit.  I'm going to guess if certain big players got wind at exactly what Halong was doing, they would have tried to disrupt them as much as they could. This includes supply chain, legal, and all sort of covert approaches, as I'm sure some have already tried. Look at the fake sites popping up that are using falsely using reputable people's accounts with capital i's in hopes to scam and do phishing. I for one understand the level of privacy Halong had, especially before the ASICBoost defensive patent announcement.

As for accountability on that end, there's some contacts listed below with the patent announcement.
https://www.asicboost.com/single-post/2018/03/01/offering-announcement-blockchain-defensive-patent-license/

vincl
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 330
Merit: 18


View Profile
April 06, 2018, 12:43:51 PM
 #1805

so nobody on this forum received their T1 except a user with only 1 post?
philipma1957
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2562
Merit: 1864



View Profile
April 06, 2018, 02:07:45 PM
Last edit: April 06, 2018, 02:26:22 PM by philipma1957
 #1806

so nobody on this forum received their T1 except a user with only 1 post?

No  2 real members  got them:


 Biffa

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=149433


elokk

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=558138


the status on the gear is :

1) it is real
2) some t1's reached real members --  Edit> long time miners on this site
3) it works on 2 pools --- Edit > slush and -ck kano may add his pool
4) it appears that  it does 0.10 watts per gh -- Edit> based on info from elokk 
5) no one has demo'ed a unit  doing 16th at 1450 watts ------  Edit > other then Halong early video

basically  I am still waiting for my test unit.

I will be able to do extensive testing  with these psus using 220 volts

1) https://shop.bitmain.com/product/detail?pid=00020180316201909316Kk2Q3O5W063B  bitmain APW3++

2) https://halongmining.com/shop/psu-1600w/                                                                 Halong dragonmint 1600watt

3) https://www.ebay.com/itm/DPS-2400AB-200V-240V-SWITCHING-POWER-SUPLLY-1-set-of-Cables-1-Board/332593405016? Delta  2400 watt

4) https://www.ebay.com/itm/IBM-39Y7408-39Y7409-Astec-AA23920L-2880W-AC-Server-Power-Supply-w-Fan/202263541041? ibm 2880 watt

5) https://www.ebay.com/itm/IBM-BLADECENTER-SERVER-COMPUTER-POWER-SUPPLY-2980-WATT-39Y7415-39Y7414/173196693884? ibm 2980 watt




6) https://www.corsair.com/us/en/Power/Plug-Type/axi-series-config/p/CP-9020057-NA  corsair Ax1500i

I see BTC as the super highway and alt coins as taxis and trucks needed to move transactions.
Dr.Mann
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 40
Merit: 120


View Profile
April 06, 2018, 02:38:43 PM
Last edit: April 06, 2018, 05:59:13 PM by Dr.Mann
Merited by frodocooper (5)
 #1807

Powerful actors exist in many industries who want to mitigate the progress of competitors, but that doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to new market entrants who skirt longstanding international business norms that are designed: (1) to help provide consumer protection and safety, and (2) to help ensure fair dealing in the line of commerce among market participants. [....] [Halong Mining] operates totally anonymously. Even if Halong were well-intentioned, if they made an innocent mistake and released a product that burned down your house or mining operation --- or emitted fumes that caused serious health problems or birth defects, shouldn't Halong be held accountable if it acted negligently or improperly? [....] What if Halong's miners end up having connectors with extremely high failure rates due to negligence during the manufacturing process or a flawed design? And since Halong is totally anonymous, we'd have no way to hold it accountable if Halong choose not to assume responsibility for them. Would you find that acceptable?

I understand your concern about health concerns and liability, however, if there were widespread issues in this industry with regards to safety, there would be much more stringent policies in place than your pharmaceutical company example. We are talking about silicon here. There is a degree of common sense people are responsible for, which would be far more likely to cause health risks. For example, you don't sleep in the hot isle at your facility. You don't pop 10x the recommended dosage. Had these units pulled more electricity per PCI connector similar to the KNC offerings, I would absolutely be concerned. However, that is not the case. Their hardware specs fall in line with general industry standards for the T1, and they've exceeded other specifications and delivery projections on other offerings.


With all due respect, I was not asking you how risky you believe it is to operate a DragonMint.  Silicon is not the only material inside of the DragonMint and its PSU. Other risk factors exist, such as extremely high voltage. Yet the central question from my previous post remains, which you did not answer. Should it be possible in a court of law to hold Halong Mining accountable, if someone has a valid claim against it? Should Halong be held accountable if it negligently released a defective product that posed an unacceptable risk of danger? Of course it should. Every business should be held to account if it acts with negligence or if someone has a valid claim against it. I am not saying that Halong Mining has done any of these things (although the Innosilicon board looks staggeringly similar to that of the DM, see https://i.imgur.com/RgI9Eoy.jpg), but I have a real problem with the public's not having the information needed to sue and recover from someone if valid claims arise. Do you share this concern? If you do, then please realize that to hold a business operator accountable, we have to know, at a minimum, where we can deliver a copy of the lawsuit. That is why businesses are required to have a registered agent who can receive service of process from a court.

Using extremely high voltage is not an activity anyone should take lightly, even if you consider silicon safe. Even low wattage smartphones have been known to burn dangerously due to defective components. The DragonMint operates at 1500 watts, has no FCC certification that I have been able to verify (despite Halong's claim that it exists), and it is the first ever product from a new hardware manufacturer with no track record that insists on operating with total anonymity and impunity.

The mining industry is still young enough and its hardware rare enough that regulators still don't fully understand them. Governments are just starting to wrap their minds around the need for economic regulation of cryptocurrencies. The G20 leaders announced last month that cryptocurrency is on their radar. South Korea weeks ago banned anonymous cryptocurrency accounts. Regulation on the hardware side is just starting to happen too. The U.S. FCC in February sent a cease and desist letter to a home miner in Brooklyn, New York due to a Bitmain Antminer that the FCC believed disrupted a cell phone network. The disruption was so serious that T-Mobile, a U.S. corporation, spent thousands of dollars investigating the source of the interference and finally triangulated the interference to one man's Brooklyn apartment.

If someone in New York or anywhere else can't place a phone call to emergency medical services, for example, because a Bitmain miner is disrupting their cell phone signal, can't we all agree that is an example of a legitimate safety concern? If we learn that Bitmain miners disrupt mobile phone communications to a dangerous degree, and if that disruption is due to a design defect or gross negligence by Bitmain, can't we all agree that Bitmain should assume responsibility for its actions?  If, hypothetically, Bitmain were to try to skirt responsibility, can't we all agree that a court of proper jurisdiction should force Bitmain to assume responsibility? The same should happen to Halong Mining (or any other entity) if for some reason Halong is ever found to have acted with negligence or some other valid claim against it exists.

Hypothetically, if Bernie had engaged in theft of intellectual property from an ASIC hardware manufacturer, so long as you received your hardware from him and your Bitcoin account is growing, you're good with that? Don't you think Bernie's ASIC manufacturing company should be held to account? [....] My purpose is conclusively illustrating that Halong Mining is engaging in highly questionable business practices, and prospective buyers should proceed with caution and realize that they have no reasonable recourse to hold this "company" accountable should the need arise. [....]

I support collaboration and unity with any field, as long as it improves the consumer experience and performance. If a manufacturer was using a variation of Asicboost, there's nothing wrong with other manufacturers getting on that train. It's inevitable, especially with the high level of efficiency gains. In a competitive market, manufacturers often use advancements in the field to their own benefit.  I'm going to guess if certain big players got wind at exactly what Halong was doing, they would have tried to disrupt them as much as they could. This includes supply chain, legal, and all sort of covert approaches, as I'm sure some have already tried. Look at the fake sites popping up that are using falsely using reputable people's accounts with capital i's in hopes to scam and do phishing. I for one understand the level of privacy Halong had, especially before the ASICBoost defensive patent announcement.

As for accountability on that end, there's some contacts listed below with the patent announcement.
https://www.asicboost.com/single-post/2018/03/01/offering-announcement-blockchain-defensive-patent-license/

Collaboration, unity, improved consumer experience, improved performance.... These goals are wonderful. I share them with you. But please realize that "improved consumer experience" requires the possibility that a manufacturer can be held accountable for valid legal claims against it. It doesn't matter who the business is. You don't get to operate with impunity in business under any circumstances.

As for the contact at the URL you provided, the contact information shown on that page is for Little Dragon Technology LLC -- and notes nothing about Halong Mining. I found no evidence that an association exists between these two entities other than Halong Mining says it is a licensor of the patent purportedly owned by Little Dragon Technology. Halong wrote on its blog, "After Little Dragon Technology LLC acquired the patent from the original inventors, we negotiated a license to use AsicBoost in our miners on the understanding that AsicBoost would be opened up to everyone to use, under some form of defensive patent license, in the hopes it can help protect decentralization of Bitcoin mining. " (See: https://halongmining.com/blog/.)

I checked the Statement of Information on file with the California Secretary of State for the entity Little Dragon Technology LLC, and the filing does not note any association between Little Dragon Technology LLC and Halong Mining. To that extent, I am inclined to believe that Little Dragon Technology LLC is simply a shell company with no legal connection to Halong Mining, and that Halong Mining is using the AsicBoost license just as anyone else is authorized to do. The key point is that one cannot successfully sue Little Dragon Technology LLC for valid legal claims against Halong Mining.
philipma1957
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2562
Merit: 1864



View Profile
April 06, 2018, 04:32:29 PM
 #1808

 Well on the subject of lawsuits.

 Lets say the gear works safely and the one issue it has is it does 15.25 th at 1550 watts.

The DragonMint T1 is the worlds most efficient Bitcoin miner, operating at 16TH with AsicBoost technology inside for greater power efficiency.
At the wall power consumption of with DragonMint 1600W PSU and dual fans 1480W @ 240V at ambient temperature 25°C. Variation of ±8% is expected.


the specs are above

If that statement turns out to be pretty far off the mark on unit after unit after unit
There is a possibility that people will look for refunds or compensation.
 -ck has said firmware tweaks  may get the power lower.
 this is an indication they did not meet  the specs


so 1480/16000 =  0.0925 watts a gh

and if they avg

1550/15250  = 0.1016 watts a gh  it is off by 9.837% 

It remains to be seen just how many units will come close to 16000 gh at 1480 watts at that wall.


 

I see BTC as the super highway and alt coins as taxis and trucks needed to move transactions.
Biffa
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1059



View Profile
April 06, 2018, 05:27:22 PM
 #1809

so nobody on this forum received their T1 except a user with only 1 post?

No  2 real members  got them:


 Biffa

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=149433



Just to clarify I haven't got mine yet, 6 boxes have  shipped and are currently in customs, and have been for the past 3 days with a "clearance event" holding things up.


Mine at pools that pay transaction fees & don't mine empty blocks :: kanopool :: ckpool ::
:: Dalcore's Crypto Mining H/W Hosting Directory & Reputation ::
philipma1957
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2562
Merit: 1864



View Profile
April 06, 2018, 05:32:41 PM
 #1810

so nobody on this forum received their T1 except a user with only 1 post?

No  2 real members  got them:


 Biffa

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=149433



Just to clarify I haven't got mine yet, 6 boxes have  shipped and are currently in customs, and have been for the past 3 days with a "clearance event" holding things up.



My bad  thought they came already.

I see BTC as the super highway and alt coins as taxis and trucks needed to move transactions.
dimaze
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 179
Merit: 53


View Profile
April 06, 2018, 06:16:10 PM
 #1811

With all due respect, I was not asking you how risky you believe it is to operate a DragonMint.  Silicon is not the only material inside of the DragonMint and its PSU. Other risk factors exist, such as extremely high voltage. Yet the central question from my previous post remains, which you did not answer. Should it be possible in a court of law to hold Halong Mining accountable, if someone has a valid claim against it? Should Halong be held accountable if it negligently released a defective product that posed an unacceptable risk of danger? Of course it should. Every business should be held to account if it acts with negligence or if someone has a valid claim against it. I am not saying that Halong Mining has done any of these things (although the Innosilicon board looks staggeringly similar to that of the DM, see https://i.imgur.com/RgI9Eoy.jpg), but I have a real problem with the public's not having the information needed to sue and recover from someone if valid claims arise. Do you share this concern? If you do, then please realize that to hold a business operator accountable, we have to know, at a minimum, where we can deliver a copy of the lawsuit. That is why businesses are required to have a registered agent who can receive service of process from a court.

Using extremely high voltage is not an activity anyone should take lightly, even if you consider silicon safe. Even low wattage smartphones have been known to burn dangerously due to defective components. The DragonMint operates at 1500 watts, has no FCC certification that I have been able to verify (despite Halong's claim that it exists), and it is a new product from a new hardware manufacturer that insists on operating with total anonymity and impunity.

The mining industry is still young enough and its hardware rare enough that regulators still don't fully understand them. Governments are just starting to wrap their minds around the need for economic regulation of cryptocurrencies. The G20 leaders announced last month that cryptocurrency is on their radar. South Korea weeks ago banned anonymous cryptocurrency accounts. Regulation on the hardware side is just starting to happen too. The U.S. FCC in February sent a cease and desist letter to a home miner in Brooklyn, New York due to a Bitmain Antminer that the FCC believed disrupted a cell phone network. The disruption was so serious that T-Mobile, a U.S. corporation, spent thousands of dollars investigating the source of the interference and finally triangulated the interference to one man's Brooklyn apartment.

If someone in New York or anywhere else can't place a phone call to emergency medical services, for example, because a Bitmain miner is disrupting their cell phone signal, can't we all agree that is an example of a legitimate safety concern? If we learn that Bitmain miners disrupt mobile phone communications to a dangerous degree, and if that disruption is due to a design defect or gross negligence by Bitmain, can't we all agree that Bitmain should assume responsibility for its actions?  If, hypothetically, Bitmain were to try to skirt responsibility, can't we all agree that a court of proper jurisdiction should force Bitmain to assume responsibility? The same should happen to Halong Mining (or any other entity) if for some reason Halong is ever found to have acted with negligence or some other valid claim against it exists.

Collaboration, unity, improved consumer experience, improved performance.... These goals are wonderful. I share them with you. But please realize that "improved consumer experience" requires the possibility that a manufacturer can be held accountable for valid legal claims against it. It doesn't matter who the business is. You don't get to operate with impunity in business under any circumstances.

As for the contact at the URL you provided, the contact information shown on that page is for Little Dragon Technology LLC -- and notes nothing about Halong Mining. I found no evidence that an association exists between these two entities other than Halong Mining says it is a licensor of the patent purportedly owned by Little Dragon Technology. Halong wrote on its blog, "After Little Dragon Technology LLC acquired the patent from the original inventors, we negotiated a license to use AsicBoost in our miners on the understanding that AsicBoost would be opened up to everyone to use, under some form of defensive patent license, in the hopes it can help protect decentralization of Bitcoin mining. " (See: https://halongmining.com/blog/.)

I checked the Statement of Information on file with the California Secretary of State for the entity Little Dragon Technology LLC, and the filing does not note any association between Little Dragon Technology LLC and Halong Mining. To that extent, I am inclined to believe that Little Dragon Technology LLC is simply a shell company with no legal connection to Halong Mining, and that Halong Mining is using the AsicBoost license just as anyone else is authorized to do. The key point is that one cannot successfully sue Little Dragon Technology LLC for valid legal claims against Halong Mining.

I can appreciate the concern to hold any manufacturer accountable, and if something were to arise, I'm quite certain there would be an effort to ensure accountability by defective and dangerous hardware delivered by said agents. This goes for any products out there. My first concern with any manufacturer certainly isn't who I can serve papers to in the scenario of said defect. I feel comfortable enough to purchase the units without digging into those what if legalities. I can also understand why Halong wants to be discrete on certain aspects, especially prior to their ASICBoost announcement. It's quite possible if all that information was so readily available months, Halong may have had a tougher time getting units out as advertised due to more covert factors by other players. As indicated in the prior post, there are already social media avenues, fake sites, among other tactics being used to attempt to mitigate legitimacy and damage Halong's reputation. As a business owner, I'd also take steps to safeguard my business and employees, so I understand Halong's approach. I'm way more concerned with them delivering units as advertised, which they've mostly fulfilled within the timeframes indicated. They've met my criteria to purchase from, and I've been overall pretty satisfied with my interactions with them. If they've indicated it's FCC certified, I have no reason to think otherwise. That's my personal stance, and I hope you find what you're looking for out of Halong. I should get 6 units from them today, which I'll post about here.

The Bitmain case in NY in regards to the 700 band was related to the S5's modified in close proximity to a T-Mobile communications hub/tower from my understanding. It'll be an interesting subject to follow, I'm not sure if the guy got back to the FCC with details yet. More details here for those curious in the FCC report: https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2018/db0215/DOC-349258A1.pdf

dimaze
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 179
Merit: 53


View Profile
April 06, 2018, 06:17:16 PM
 #1812

Just to clarify I haven't got mine yet, 6 boxes have  shipped and are currently in customs, and have been for the past 3 days with a "clearance event" holding things up.

I had to reach out to DHL and provide my tax ID before customs released them. Have you called them yet?

Dr.Mann
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 40
Merit: 120


View Profile
April 06, 2018, 07:31:14 PM
 #1813

I can appreciate the concern to hold any manufacturer accountable, and if something were to arise, I'm quite certain there would be an effort to ensure accountability by defective and dangerous hardware delivered by said agents. This goes for any products out there. My first concern with any manufacturer certainly isn't who I can serve papers to in the scenario of said defect. I feel comfortable enough to purchase the units without digging into those what if legalities. I can also understand why Halong wants to be discrete on certain aspects, especially prior to their ASICBoost announcement. It's quite possible if all that information was so readily available months, Halong may have had a tougher time getting units out as advertised due to more covert factors by other players. As indicated in the prior post, there are already social media avenues, fake sites, among other tactics being used to attempt to mitigate legitimacy and damage Halong's reputation.

Through Halong's obfuscation, its lack of transparency, its refusal to disclose the country or jurisdiction in which it is incorporated, its refusal to disclose its incorporation number or proof of its business license, its effort to avoid accountability for its products, its refusal to produce evidence of the DragonMint's alleged FCC certificate, it is clear that Halong Mining has done more to damage Halong Mining's reputation than any other party. None of the covert tactics you describe justify this conduct. Halong is operating more like a dealer of enriched uranium on the black market than a manufacturer of computer hardware.

As a business owner, I'd also take steps to safeguard my business and employees, so I understand Halong's approach. [....]

As a business owner, do you hide your business address from your customers or from law enforcement? Do feel it is important for your customers or the judicial system to know how to contact your business? If you refused to provide this information, for how long do you think you could stay in business? If you told your customers that your products possess a 3rd party certification that attests to their safety, do you feel an obligation to provide evidence of such certification, if asked?

They've met my criteria to purchase from. . . . If they've indicated it's FCC certified, I have no reason to think otherwise. [....]

One reason you might consider is that the FCC has no record of Halong Mining or the DragonMint that I can find. You can search for yourself the FCC's certification database here:
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm

Halong has claimed in this very thread that the DM has received FCC certification.
NotFuzzyWarm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1308


Evil beware: We have waffles!


View Profile
April 06, 2018, 07:52:01 PM
Last edit: April 06, 2018, 08:04:03 PM by NotFuzzyWarm
Merited by Dr.Mann (2)
 #1814

Quote
One reason you might consider is that the FCC has no record of Halong Mining or the DragonMint that I can find. You can search for yourself the FCC's certification database here:
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm

Halong has claimed in this very thread that the DM has received FCC certification.
Just to clarify this point: For devices that are NOT intended to be radio transmitters the FCC does not require anything to be on-file with them nor do they do the actual testing.

EMI testing is done either by a company's FCC certified in-house testing lab or one of the many 3rd-party FCC certified testing labs around the world. Said testing labs are the people who determine pass/fail and issue the FCC compliance tag. That said, the EMI test results ARE required to be available to anyone who requests them.

Of course that means that there must be a way for someone to contact the company to obtain the pass/fail report. Therein lies the problem with Halong's equipment.

For bitcoin to succeed the community must police itself - Joshua Zipkin aka Joshua Alexander leaked AMT A1 miner skype chats
How a miner mfgr SHOULD operate: HaggsFIN trip to Canaan My info useful? Donations welcome! 1Fuzzyk398kDWVjuC5qPX5v6CjSkvbgAbd
-Support Sidehacks miner development. Donations to:   1BURGERAXHH6Yi6LRybRJK7ybEm5m5HwTr
Biffa
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1059



View Profile
April 07, 2018, 07:16:41 AM
 #1815

Just to clarify I haven't got mine yet, 6 boxes have  shipped and are currently in customs, and have been for the past 3 days with a "clearance event" holding things up.

I had to reach out to DHL and provide my tax ID before customs released them. Have you called them yet?

It's been sorted now. Delivery should be soon.

Mine at pools that pay transaction fees & don't mine empty blocks :: kanopool :: ckpool ::
:: Dalcore's Crypto Mining H/W Hosting Directory & Reputation ::
Gyrsur
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2254
Merit: 1154



View Profile WWW
April 07, 2018, 12:38:37 PM
 #1816

Just to clarify I haven't got mine yet, 6 boxes have  shipped and are currently in customs, and have been for the past 3 days with a "clearance event" holding things up.

I had to reach out to DHL and provide my tax ID before customs released them. Have you called them yet?

It's been sorted now. Delivery should be soon.

in 2weeksTM ??
philipma1957
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2562
Merit: 1864



View Profile
April 07, 2018, 01:48:07 PM
 #1817

Just to clarify I haven't got mine yet, 6 boxes have  shipped and are currently in customs, and have been for the past 3 days with a "clearance event" holding things up.

I had to reach out to DHL and provide my tax ID before customs released them. Have you called them yet?

It's been sorted now. Delivery should be soon.

in 2weeksTM ??

Butterfly labs funny

I see BTC as the super highway and alt coins as taxis and trucks needed to move transactions.
dimaze
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 179
Merit: 53


View Profile
April 07, 2018, 04:51:15 PM
 #1818

With all due respect, I was not asking you how risky you believe it is to operate a DragonMint.  Silicon is not the only material inside of the DragonMint and its PSU. Other risk factors exist, such as extremely high voltage. Yet the central question from my previous post remains, which you did not answer. Should it be possible in a court of law to hold Halong Mining accountable, if someone has a valid claim against it? Should Halong be held accountable if it negligently released a defective product that posed an unacceptable risk of danger? Of course it should. Every business should be held to account if it acts with negligence or if someone has a valid claim against it. I am not saying that Halong Mining has done any of these things (although the Innosilicon board looks staggeringly similar to that of the DM, see https://i.imgur.com/RgI9Eoy.jpg), but I have a real problem with the public's not having the information needed to sue and recover from someone if valid claims arise. Do you share this concern? If you do, then please realize that to hold a business operator accountable, we have to know, at a minimum, where we can deliver a copy of the lawsuit. That is why businesses are required to have a registered agent who can receive service of process from a court.

Using extremely high voltage is not an activity anyone should take lightly, even if you consider silicon safe. Even low wattage smartphones have been known to burn dangerously due to defective components. The DragonMint operates at 1500 watts, has no FCC certification that I have been able to verify (despite Halong's claim that it exists), and it is the first ever product from a new hardware manufacturer with no track record that insists on operating with total anonymity and impunity.

The mining industry is still young enough and its hardware rare enough that regulators still don't fully understand them. Governments are just starting to wrap their minds around the need for economic regulation of cryptocurrencies. The G20 leaders announced last month that cryptocurrency is on their radar. South Korea weeks ago banned anonymous cryptocurrency accounts. Regulation on the hardware side is just starting to happen too. The U.S. FCC in February sent a cease and desist letter to a home miner in Brooklyn, New York due to a Bitmain Antminer that the FCC believed disrupted a cell phone network. The disruption was so serious that T-Mobile, a U.S. corporation, spent thousands of dollars investigating the source of the interference and finally triangulated the interference to one man's Brooklyn apartment.

If someone in New York or anywhere else can't place a phone call to emergency medical services, for example, because a Bitmain miner is disrupting their cell phone signal, can't we all agree that is an example of a legitimate safety concern? If we learn that Bitmain miners disrupt mobile phone communications to a dangerous degree, and if that disruption is due to a design defect or gross negligence by Bitmain, can't we all agree that Bitmain should assume responsibility for its actions?  If, hypothetically, Bitmain were to try to skirt responsibility, can't we all agree that a court of proper jurisdiction should force Bitmain to assume responsibility? The same should happen to Halong Mining (or any other entity) if for some reason Halong is ever found to have acted with negligence or some other valid claim against it exists.

Collaboration, unity, improved consumer experience, improved performance.... These goals are wonderful. I share them with you. But please realize that "improved consumer experience" requires the possibility that a manufacturer can be held accountable for valid legal claims against it. It doesn't matter who the business is. You don't get to operate with impunity in business under any circumstances.

As for the contact at the URL you provided, the contact information shown on that page is for Little Dragon Technology LLC -- and notes nothing about Halong Mining. I found no evidence that an association exists between these two entities other than Halong Mining says it is a licensor of the patent purportedly owned by Little Dragon Technology. Halong wrote on its blog, "After Little Dragon Technology LLC acquired the patent from the original inventors, we negotiated a license to use AsicBoost in our miners on the understanding that AsicBoost would be opened up to everyone to use, under some form of defensive patent license, in the hopes it can help protect decentralization of Bitcoin mining. " (See: https://halongmining.com/blog/.)

I checked the Statement of Information on file with the California Secretary of State for the entity Little Dragon Technology LLC, and the filing does not note any association between Little Dragon Technology LLC and Halong Mining. To that extent, I am inclined to believe that Little Dragon Technology LLC is simply a shell company with no legal connection to Halong Mining, and that Halong Mining is using the AsicBoost license just as anyone else is authorized to do. The key point is that one cannot successfully sue Little Dragon Technology LLC for valid legal claims against Halong Mining.

I personally trust the company enough to where if they say they're certified, that's good enough for me. I've had enough experience in the mining industry to make a judgement call on that without vetting further company details. I understand your desire to vet those aspects, everyone has a criteria they look for. Halong has fulfilled mine. I would much rather Halong focus on making and delivering hardware, as they continue to do. I'm sure they wouldn't risk importing tens of millions worth of hardware if it wasn't legitimate.

As for the miner in NY, that is far more likely to be a fluke than commonplace in the industry. It'll be an interesting case to follow, I'm not sure if the gentleman responded to FCC's questions yet.

dimaze
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 179
Merit: 53


View Profile
April 07, 2018, 04:55:53 PM
 #1819

Just to clarify I haven't got mine yet, 6 boxes have  shipped and are currently in customs, and have been for the past 3 days with a "clearance event" holding things up.

I had to reach out to DHL and provide my tax ID before customs released them. Have you called them yet?

It's been sorted now. Delivery should be soon.

Good to hear. I got my first Halong units yesterday -- They're all hashing about 10% above advertised spec with a bit less power pull than advertised too Smiley

philipma1957
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2562
Merit: 1864



View Profile
April 07, 2018, 05:08:55 PM
 #1820

Just to clarify I haven't got mine yet, 6 boxes have  shipped and are currently in customs, and have been for the past 3 days with a "clearance event" holding things up.

I had to reach out to DHL and provide my tax ID before customs released them. Have you called them yet?

It's been sorted now. Delivery should be soon.

Good to hear. I got my first Halong units yesterday -- They're all hashing about 10% above advertised spec with a bit less power pull than advertised too Smiley

 show  us clear evidence

this means 16th x 1.1 = 17.6th  and  a bit under 1480 watts   or say 1460 watts.

I would love to see this.  with meters and not type set.

I still don't have my demo and no tracking or contact from them.

So I have contacted forum member to see if they would be willing to send me a unit. for testing.

Since you claim to have really good ones send me one so I can show clear evidence that the gear is better then spec.


I see BTC as the super highway and alt coins as taxis and trucks needed to move transactions.
Pages: « 1 ... 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 [91] 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!