[ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread

[ArcticWolf]

P.G. is insinuating that bfl is getting their upcoming 28nm chips from active mining.

Is he insinuating that because eAsic uses Global Foundries as one of their fabs, and that BFL uses Global Foundries to fab their 28nm as well that BFL is getting their 28nm from us? Thats a very tenuous connection at best.

[dhenson]

P.G. is insinuating that bfl is getting their upcoming 28nm chips from active mining.

Is he insinuating that because eAsic uses Global Foundries as one of their fabs, and that BFL uses Global Foundries to fab their 28nm as well that BFL is getting their 28nm from us? Thats a very tenuous connection at best.

He mentioned that the tapeout dates are the same also.

[ArcticWolf]

P.G. is insinuating that bfl is getting their upcoming 28nm chips from active mining.

Is he insinuating that because eAsic uses Global Foundries as one of their fabs, and that BFL uses Global Foundries to fab their 28nm as well that BFL is getting their 28nm from us? Thats a very tenuous connection at best.

He mentioned that the tapeout dates are the same also.

Im pretty certain that ActM hasnt said when tapeout is - because we simply dont know yet.

EDIT: Also as far as I am aware, we are not supplying BFL with anything.

[knybe]

I'm under the impression that PG is suggesting that BFL is getting their 28nm chips for monarch from eASIC... And that this info has been "scrubbed," as it were, from the Internet.

[Ozymandias]

As extraordinarily unlikely as that is, if BFL were getting there chips from us, wouldn't that be extremely bullish for ActM? It does sound like absolutely wild speculation though.

[djbooth007]

As extraordinarily unlikely as that is, if BFL were getting there chips from us, wouldn't that be extremely bullish for ActM? It does sound like absolutely wild speculation though.

Agreed. BFL *should* use ActM as their supplier. More ActM chip resellers on board, the better.

[freedomno1]

That would be a weird connection, still interesting enough.

[Stuartuk]

Thanks to Jeff Ownby scrubbing the internet, his actions caused me to dig a little deeper. Care to guess where those 28nm chips are coming from?

Hi, I like your other thread because is shows this guy you mention has worked in businesses before that were not offering the most flexible of services and received some complaints. But in a way that's business, you can't please everyone all the time - customers are free to take their business elsewhere (except where they have agreed to use non-flexible hosting services for example!). If you want to do a similar investigation on ACtM there is no-one to stop you but I don't think it would be welcome on this thread as we are already a very busy thread. So feel free to start your own but be aware there was a huge amount of digging done on ACtM in this thread in the early days and I think you should take a good look at that before you start reposting stuff we already know about. Thanks.

[yuansuyi]

Our chips
Generation 1: Block Eruptor. 130nm with 6-8J/GH. Each chip's rated frequency is 336MHz at 1.05V. It translates to 336MH/s because it does one hash per cycle. The chips work stable and well at 392MH/s at 1.15V. Further overclocking needs proper handling of heat and power supply.

Our chips in development
Generation 1: Fast-Hash. 28nm. Each chip's rated frequency is 800 MHz at 1.15V. It translates to 16,000 MH/s because it does 20 hashes per cycle. Chip requires proper handling of heat and power supply. It is expected the chip can be overclocked to 1000 MHz @ 20,000 MH/s.

[N_S]

Our chips
Generation 1: Block Eruptor. 130nm with 6-8J/GH. Each chip's rated frequency is 336MHz at 1.05V. It translates to 336MH/s because it does one hash per cycle. The chips work stable and well at 392MH/s at 1.15V. Further overclocking needs proper handling of heat and power supply.

Our chips in development
Generation 1: Fast-Hash. 28nm. Each chip's rated frequency is 800 MHz at 1.15V. It translates to 16,000 MH/s because it does 20 hashes per cycle. Chip requires proper handling of heat and power supply. It is expected the chip can be overclocked to 1000 MHz @ 20,000 MH/s.

Does....does this mean Ken = friedcat?

Ken  = friedcat everyone!! The friedcat's out of the bag! Everyone panic buy!!

[VolanicEruptor]

We've called him FriedKen before..

[alexius89]

I predict that BFL will ship before ActM.

Nice joke

[knybe]

man... the filth is seriously oozing out of the woodworks now.

[Ytterbium]

Our chips
Generation 1: Block Eruptor. 130nm with 6-8J/GH. Each chip's rated frequency is 336MHz at 1.05V. It translates to 336MH/s because it does one hash per cycle. The chips work stable and well at 392MH/s at 1.15V. Further overclocking needs proper handling of heat and power supply.

Our chips in development
Generation 1: Fast-Hash. 28nm. Each chip's rated frequency is 800 MHz at 1.15V. It translates to 16,000 MH/s because it does 20 hashes per cycle. Chip requires proper handling of heat and power supply. It is expected the chip can be overclocked to 1000 MHz @ 20,000 MH/s.

Does....does this mean Ken = friedcat?

Ken  = friedcat everyone!! The friedcat's out of the bag! Everyone panic buy!!

Or maybe friedcat just copied ken's template. (Edit: just saw friedcat was 2012, in which case this slightly raises my eyebrow)

Huh. How difficult is it to write a sentence like that without plagiarism?   "We're currently developing a 28nm IC, computing 20 double SHA256 hashes per clock, and a design operating frequency of 800Mhz,  we expect to see around 16Gh/chip, potentially overclockable to 20Gh/s/chip" .  I don't get why you'd even bother to plagiarize something like that.

[LorenzoMoney]

Please provide concrete, empirical evidence for your claim. Opinions based upon feelings are fluff.

We have definite evidence that Ken really does have a deal under NDA with eAsic. Many people from this thread have spoken with Ken personally. Nothing Ken claims is outrageous. He is not proposing a liquid Nitrogen, quantum computer miner.

Ken may not be good at keeping the shareholders and public informed of the details of what he is doing, but he ID put a PR person in place, and his pattern is to actually listen and pay attention to what people suggest to him.

IF he was a true grifter, he would have fled long ago.

The evidence suggests that we all (meaning all bitcoiners looking into the next gen miners) are waiting for the same thing, which is for Asic Miner or some other company,to finalize design and manufacture plans.  

So far, everything Ken claims is a technological and business possibility. We can talk to Ken, we know where he lives, and your comments are unsubstantiated. Ken is NOT an "old school grifter". Ken IS an old school dreamer and this dream is being realized through negotiation and out sourcing design and manufacture of the chips.

Let's talk about something related. What if, the deal with eAsic is real, and in September or October, the chips flow in, and ActM has better chips faster and before anyone else. And what is ActM ends up mining their own hardware, and selling mining hardware and does well? And what if, with those revenues, ActM does the next thing and develops the following generation of miner, or expands in to other areas of bitcoin development.

Well, that is likely to happen, and more likely than your doom scenarios given what we know about what is in the planning development and negotiation stages.


My take on all this is that right now we are seeing bargain prices and that in January or February of 2014, people will be regretting not having bought more now.

[Ytterbium]

Our chips
Generation 1: Block Eruptor. 130nm with 6-8J/GH. Each chip's rated frequency is 336MHz at 1.05V. It translates to 336MH/s because it does one hash per cycle. The chips work stable and well at 392MH/s at 1.15V. Further overclocking needs proper handling of heat and power supply.

Our chips in development
Generation 1: Fast-Hash. 28nm. Each chip's rated frequency is 800 MHz at 1.15V. It translates to 16,000 MH/s because it does 20 hashes per cycle. Chip requires proper handling of heat and power supply. It is expected the chip can be overclocked to 1000 MHz @ 20,000 MH/s.

Does....does this mean Ken = friedcat?

Ken  = friedcat everyone!! The friedcat's out of the bag! Everyone panic buy!!

Or maybe friedcat just copied ken's template. (Edit: just saw friedcat was 2012, in which case this slightly raises my eyebrow)

Huh. How difficult is it to write a sentence like that without plagiarism?   "We're currently developing a 28nm IC, computing 20 double SHA256 hashes per clock, and a design operating frequency of 800Mhz,  we expect to see around 16Gh/chip, potentially overclockable to 20Gh/s/chip" .  I don't get why you'd even bother to plagiarize something like that.

It this really the type of issue you guys bring up?

These are specs, who the fuck cares how he typed them up?

I'm not saying it's a scam because it's plagiarized, but it is sloppy and unprofessional.

[Vigil]

I think he just used friedcat's spec post as a reference. It keeps things consistent.

[abuelau]

If I were Ken, I would also use friedcat's post as a reference. Why re-invent the wheel? There are things you can just copy from the best (and there will be still other things you can improve, but this 1 paragraph text is not the thing Ken needs to spend most of his time with).

[VolanicEruptor]

You could theoretically make a USB miner out of one of these chips, with voltage requirement only slightly higher than friedcats.  It would be roughly the same size as an asicminer usb, but cranking out 16GH/s.  How would you cool these little bitches though?  Fans just don't just don't cut it..

edit:  What if you were to extend the usb miners with conductive plating ..these plates would stick into a refrigerant filled vessel that's part of a cooling system.  The plates would be constantly drawing heat away from the miners via heat conduction.

Or something like this that fits around it,

[Stuartuk]

I think he just used friedcat's spec post as a reference. It keeps things consistent.

Yes and competitors do this all the time in the real world - it's called a 'side by side comparison' and I think it would have been done intentionally.