HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s

[RoadStress]

Have you included the PCB design too?

That's only the imaginary chips IP cost. PCB design costs are way, way lower. If you released the chip specs under public domain on tapeout's day you would probably get a few independent community designs + the ones you paid for ready for when you have the chips in hand.

Yes, but the total cost for PCB design and/or the components for 5k miners should add more than 1M$. I am sure that you are aware that ordering LOTS of components needs upfront money and a lead time.

[1714269166]

1714269166

[kikaha]

Thanks pmorici.  I will reach out and report back.

Are their any details on the next gen IP?  I would think it would have to be 16nm or 14nm and be in the sub 0.10 J/GH to stay competitive.  The real question is how much additional work/money is needed to make this a working chip.

You can contact the Hashfast CRO if you are interested, they would have the details you are looking for.  There are supposedly 3 generations of IP, 1, 1.5, and 2.

[kikaha]

I would also like to see the public release of schematics, bill of materials and PCB layout files for the load board (board used to bring up the new chip).  This can also help accelerate working board designs.

Have you included the PCB design too?

That's only the imaginary chips IP cost. PCB design costs are way, way lower. If you released the chip specs under public domain on tapeout's day you would probably get a few independent community designs + the ones you paid for ready for when you have the chips in hand.

[stan258]

The cost overruns in 16 NM come from the test wafers?

[kikaha]

I do not know what HF did or didn't do or what they had planned to do.

I can say that test chips are typically used to prove out sections of a new chip/new technology.  It is a small fraction ($100K range vs $Ms) of what a full tape-out costs and is used typically to mitigate risk.  It isn't typically viewed as an overrun, but more as money spent to reduce risk.

The cost overruns in 16 NM come from the test wafers?

[stan258]

I do not know what HF did or didn't do or what they had planned to do.

I can say that test chips are typically used to prove out sections of a new chip/new technology.  It is a small fraction ($100K range vs $Ms) of what a full tape-out costs and is used typically to mitigate risk.  It isn't typically viewed as an overrun, but more as money spent to reduce risk.

The cost overruns in 16 NM come from the test wafers?

From a business or bank side when a developer asks for x dollars and you pass it then ask for more cash was my thought process.

I was reading Bitfury scraped 16 NM because they ran into problems. 

Its about 80% more to develop 16NM compared to 28 but doesn't include what a developer can import from a previous chip?? It depends on how far along HF got.

[kikaha]

Chip development costs really vary.  Like you said, if they just did a process geometry shrink, then effort is small.  If they are designing a lot of new stuff, the effort is big.

The big difference is the tape out costs.  28nm is sub $2M, where as 16nm is around $8M now.

The other issue with HF seems to be whether they paid their design contractors/vendors.  Other than Simon, I am not sure they had any chip designers on staff.  I had heard that they outsourced much of this.  So maybe the IP is locked with different contractors.

I do not know what HF did or didn't do or what they had planned to do.

I can say that test chips are typically used to prove out sections of a new chip/new technology.  It is a small fraction ($100K range vs $Ms) of what a full tape-out costs and is used typically to mitigate risk.  It isn't typically viewed as an overrun, but more as money spent to reduce risk.

The cost overruns in 16 NM come from the test wafers?

From a business or bank side when a developer asks for x dollars and you pass it then ask for more cash was my thought process.

I was reading Bitfury scraped 16 NM because they ran into problems. 

Its about 80% more to develop 16NM compared to 28 but doesn't include what a developer can import from a previous chip?? It depends on how far along HF got.

[jjiimm_64]

The only reasonable interpretation is that the "refund in BTC" clause always meant "USD purchase price equivalent in BTC."  Ask any attorney with even a vague notion of contract law.

You have a very active imagination. Let's look at the actual wording.

The answer is if you buy Baby Jet for 51 BitCoins today and it does not ship, you will be refunded the 51 BitCoins you paid.

There is no way you can construe that to mean USD-equivalent. None. That is 100% clear. Full BTC refund.

That's merely a post on an internet forum, not binding "actual wording" from the relevant TOS. 

It also assumed BTC would remain in the ~$100 trading band, not spike to $1000.  What if BTC had fallen to $1 or risen to $1,000,000?  Now do you see how silly the argument you are making is?  Of course you don't, because that would require setting aside your greed and being rational for a change.   

The first clue that your interpretation is absurd is when we find it leading to ridiculous demands for outrageous windfalls, or (in the case that BTC had went down) justifying refunds of less than the purchase price.

This issue was argued to death months ago.  Why are you bringing it up again now, when it is meaningless wailing and gnashing of teeth?

I guess you've never heard the phrase "DYODD."  The law w/r/t mail order refunds is clear and settled.  Do you just like to whinge about stuff you can do nothing about?   

Ice,

I did my owm due diligence.  the 51 btc statement is not just a post on the forum. it comes from an email thread between me and HF with the subj refund policy.  I specifically asked that question and they gave me a specific answer BEFORE i ordered. 4 babyjets

[Gleb Gamow]

The only reasonable interpretation is that the "refund in BTC" clause always meant "USD purchase price equivalent in BTC."  Ask any attorney with even a vague notion of contract law.

You have a very active imagination. Let's look at the actual wording.

The answer is if you buy Baby Jet for 51 BitCoins today and it does not ship, you will be refunded the 51 BitCoins you paid.

There is no way you can construe that to mean USD-equivalent. None. That is 100% clear. Full BTC refund.

That's merely a post on an internet forum, not binding "actual wording" from the relevant TOS.  

It also assumed BTC would remain in the ~$100 trading band, not spike to $1000.  What if BTC had fallen to $1 or risen to $1,000,000?  Now do you see how silly the argument you are making is?  Of course you don't, because that would require setting aside your greed and being rational for a change.  

The first clue that your interpretation is absurd is when we find it leading to ridiculous demands for outrageous windfalls, or (in the case that BTC had went down) justifying refunds of less than the purchase price.

This issue was argued to death months ago.  Why are you bringing it up again now, when it is meaningless wailing and gnashing of teeth?

I guess you've never heard the phrase "DYODD."  The law w/r/t mail order refunds is clear and settled.  Do you just like to whinge about stuff you can do nothing about?  

Ice,

I did my owm due diligence.  the 51 btc statement is not just a post on the forum. it comes from an email thread between me and HF with the subj refund policy.  I specifically asked that question and they gave me a specific answer BEFORE i ordered. 4 babyjets

Philip, the initial buy in was something like 1.55 BTC, not .6 BTC...

While I agree that $200 is not THAT MUCH, when HashFast started this out, they were leaning toward full BTC refunds, one person even has an email where HashFast got back to him (after a short delay, to go up the chain) saying that refunds paid in BTC would be in full...

eceived: by 10.194.138.199 with SMTP id qs7csp90853wjb;
        Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.236.45.102 with SMTP id o66mr196684yhb.13.1376696316262;
        Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <bitpaysupport@hashfast.com>

Hi Jim,
Thank you so much for your patience while I got the answer for you, I greatly appreciate it.

The answer is if you buy Baby Jet for 51 BitCoins today and it does not ship, you will be refunded the 51 BitCoins you paid.

I hope that helps and hope you have a good weekend!

Thanks,
Cara

Plus stuff like this...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=262052.msg4213062#msg4213062

Plus you had cypherdoc mention that (at least HE thought,) they were holding all the BTC until the end of the year in the event that they did not deliver:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=270363.msg2894478#msg2894478

they want only those committed to leaving their BTC with HashFast until the end of the year.  if they fail to deliver, they have said they will give full refunds in BTC.

again, anything i say here needs to be confirmed by the officials of the company.

I'm not saying there is all that much basis for a legal battle, but..."wtf" kind of comes up in the head.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=270363.msg2894518#msg2894518

once you see details of their Miner Protection Plan and refund details all your fears will melt away.

"I'm melting! I'm melting away!"

[Gleb Gamow]

Hoped you're stocked up on the above because...

https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=25485471&authType=name&authToken=b6an&trk=prof-sb-browse_map-name

Director of Sales

HashFast Technologies

November 2013 – March 2014 (5 months)San Francisco Bay Area
- Closed over $5M in sales pre product launch
- Managed custom salesforce integration
- Responsible for managing sales pipeline

(Open)1 recommendation

John S. ---> Long Dong Skropenis a.k.a. John Skrodenis
John S.
Experienced Sales & Marketing Executive

http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/next-generation-asic-mining-can-save-coin/

The first generation of mining ASIC startups including BitFury, KnC, Hashfast, and BFL, thrived at the end of 2013 by tapping into the Bitcoin ‘gold-rush’ to sell millions of dollars of mining hardware on pre-order to eager and willing prospectors. In the frantic race to be the first to market and capture maximum profits, many startups were created ad-hoc without much attention given to planning or even best practices. Large amounts of money were thrown at ASIC design firms to compress schedules and shortcut steps in the production cycle in order to meet overly aggressive delivery dates promised to customers, as a way to attract more orders. This vicious cycle led to startups foolishly taking on more and more operational risk, for many teams that were already inexperienced or overrun by greed. Soon enough, one startup after another began missing delivery dates, delaying shipments, or failing to deliver altogether, triggering widespread market panic, customer outrage, and consumer lawsuits. When it was all said and done, many consumers had been taken to the cleaners and left many distrustful if not hostile towards vendors in this space. That is when we hit the trough of disillusionment, where we are today.

"...(see bold in red above)therefore I, Paul Chen, with infinite wisdom at my exposal have brought on board the venerable Abram James Kottmeier, know as James CockMeyer on BitconTalk for his teaming up with Long Dong Skropenis in their adult film entities, both of which were instrumental in fleecing millions from HashFast customers, something I'm hoping to repeat several fold with Bliss because the general consensus is that them monumental assholes still have bitcoins to burn, and we here at Bliss Devices want our share before they either become the wiser or go broke, with chances are the latter being the end game, for there's NO chance in hell of the former ever happening in ours or their's lifetime."

http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/author/paul-chen/

Prior to founding Bliss Devices, Paul managed the business operations of the Display Systems product line at Maxim Integrated, including overseeing chip design, production and delivery to major customers such as Samsung, LG, and Sharp. Paul was also the lead designer at Fortinet for various security-based ASIC products, and co-founded PypeTV, a next-generation Smart TV platform for creators and audiences worldwide. Paul has a Master’s Degree in Electrical Engineering from Columbia University and a Bachelor’s Degree in Computer Science from Brown University, and a MBA in Entrepreneurship from MIT Sloan.

As shown above, nary a Bitcoiner has taken the time to discuss Bliss Devices in spite of them directly AND indirectly building their IP atop HashFast's IP with the former's investormers' prior funding.

http://blissdevices.com/



https://who.godaddy.com/whoisstd.aspx?domain=blissdevices.com&prog_id=GoDaddy&k=84GEZuvWNRmWoArVvkIg8oxThOC5HoztvKV32SJnbrYV4gIEi8TsIjczlcHBb1DK

Domain Name: BLISSDEVICES.COM
Registry Domain ID: 1779091598_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.godaddy.com
Registrar URL: http://www.godaddy.com
Update Date: 2014-02-12 03:09:23
Creation Date: 2013-02-08 01:03:38
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2015-02-08 01:03:38
Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC
Registrar IANA ID: 146
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: abuse@godaddy.com
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.480-624-2505
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited
Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Domain Status: clientRenewProhibited
Domain Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Registry Registrant ID:
Registrant Name: Paul Chen
Registrant Organization: Bliss Devices Distribution
Registrant Street: 333 1st Street
Registrant Street: Suite C
Registrant City: San Francisco
Registrant State/Province: California
Registrant Postal Code: 94105
Registrant Country: United States
Registrant Phone: +1.6505173497

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Fx7rSijyXkIJ:cecukon.allalla.com/ydyj+&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us



If you like SH256 shoved up your ass, you're simply goin' love Scrypt shoved even further.



http://bitcoinmagazine.com/13000/new-benchmark-scrypt-mining/

Abram Kottmeier, Co-Founder and Chief Strategy Officer of Bliss Devices said, “Miners want to know much hashing power they can buy and what the total cost of ownership will be. I think miners will be blown away when they see the results of our FPGA (field-programmable gate array) prototyping tests.”

Here's my assessment: If you order from Bliss Devices, YOU WILL BE FUCKED!

~Bruno Kucinskas

UPDATE:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=621361.0;all
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=523896.0

What a fuckin' idiot this Paul fuck turned out to be. He could've easily amassed millions from the Bitcoin community by simply not affiliating himself with CockMeyer. Worse, he posted about how the affiliation was of no count, further stating that CockBreath was at HashFast only briefly, thus a moot issue in spite of CockDickBreath being instrumental in fleecing $5M+ USD from HF's investormers along with Long Dong Skropenis.

Ironically, the main reason Bliss wasn't picked up by Havelock at the time was due to ALL the information I uncovered pertaining to Skropenis and CockMeyer as it related to HashFast. No wonder HashFast_CL has the red-ass toward me. They can't get a break to fleece once again with the likes of me around. No wonder I, among others, are on Joshua Zipkin's (AMT) hit list.

[cedivad]

Bruno, did you find any information about how much HF paid to Uniquify? I'm quite sure to have read it somewhere, probably in the examinations, but I don't remember where exactly. It's something that has been bothering me for a while.

[Gleb Gamow]

Bruno, did you find any information about how much HF paid to Uniquify? I'm quite sure to have read it somewhere, probably in the examinations, but I don't remember where exactly. It's something that has been bothering me for a while.

Looking for it now while I take a shit and ponder why Rishi's deleting his tweets with Bitcoin in them: https://twitter.com/itsrishi/statuses/380826364808409089

Meanwhile, enjoy:

When will you stop lying?

When will you learn to read?

3. DELIVERY AND QUANTITIES.
(a) Guaranteed Baby Jet Delivery Dates – Batch 1. All of the 550 Baby Jet units from Hashfast’s first production batch are guaranteed for delivery by December 31, 2013.

When will you learn to only risk what you can afford to lose?

When will you learn to stop blaming others for your own lack of due diligence and responsibility?

WWJD ---> DYODD 

[Gleb Gamow]

Bruno, did you find any information about how much HF paid to Uniquify? I'm quite sure to have read it somewhere, probably in the examinations, but I don't remember where exactly. It's something that has been bothering me for a while.

Is this what you're looking for?: http://hashfast.org/071514.2.pdf

A.· ·The total cost of the contract is 982K.· The
·5· ·payment plan was 100K upfront, plus 425K, divided into
·6· ·equal payments -- September 1st, 85; October 1st, 85;
·7· ·November 1, 85; December 1, 85; and then 1/1, 85.· And
·8· ·then 200K was for the tape-out.· A subsequent 100K a
·9· ·month after tape-out.· And then the final two payments
10· ·of 100K and 57K, two months and three months after
11· ·tape-out.

Also, something you once linked to:  https://processgeneral.s3.amazonaws.com/media/case_5/document/Docket%20179.pdf?Signature=i32d6dp5HnD2r0F2ieQApURhpfI%3D&Expires=1410660048&AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAINPHWHY7KWKMORRQ

http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/28mzy2tfp/california-northern-bankruptcy-court/hashfast-technologies-llc/

[iCEBREAKER]

Ice,

I did my owm due diligence.  the 51 btc statement is not just a post on the forum. it comes from an email thread between me and HF with the subj refund policy.  I specifically asked that question and they gave me a specific answer BEFORE i ordered. 4 babyjets

The 51 BTC statement assumed the exchange rate would remain stable, not spike 5-10 times and set new records.

YODD involves more than getting an email (from a non-executive no less) telling you want you want to hear.

YODD requires you and your attorney critically evaluate the firm's ability to deliver on their statements and your possible recourse if they fail.

In this case, it was obvious that the start-up had absolutely no ability to give you back your BTC 'No Matter What^TM.'

Any lawyer you asked would have informed you such a claim may not be interpreted to provide windfalls in the case of substantial BTC/USD appreciation.

We all knew the BTC were converted to fiat and spent to get the chips/boards/machines built.  We all knew the BTC weren't sitting in escrow.

It took a student still in law school about 45 seconds to disabuse me of the delusion that such windfalls were reasonable, much less actionable.   

Granted, I have a strong background in legal studies, but the entire concept chain from common law to equity to 'No Windfalls Allowed' has been explained in detail ad nauseum.

Even the slow learners like cedivad should be able to understand that a tiny new firm is obviously not going to be able to pay out windfalls.

As for the hilarious MMQ about 'hurr-durr they should have bought futures and hedged.'  Those services, even if available somewhere at the the time, were not yet legal in the US.  The first one was just approved yesterday: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/12/us-usa-bitcoin-cftc-idUSKBN0H71FU20140912?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologyNews

Sorry you were never offered a refund.  That sucks, but there is hope we may be compensated to some degree as a result of the HF IP auction in Oct.

How do you feel about those who got 105% refunds, but refused to take them because they felt so entitled to windfalls at impossible expense to HF?

How do you feel about the BTCT Internet Lawyers who created their impossible windfall expectations, and then advised others against taking their 105% refunds when they had the chance?

Ironically, it's actually good for us they refused their 105% refunds because that left more money to pay the 15 lawyers now feasting off HF's corpse, which in turn means we may gain an addition one percent or two on our claims.   

[Syke]

The 51 BTC statement assumed the exchange rate would remain stable, not spike 5-10 times and set new records.

Prove it. Show the statement from HF stating such a restriction. PROVE IT OR YOU ARE LYING.

[Gleb Gamow]

Ice,

I did my owm due diligence.  the 51 btc statement is not just a post on the forum. it comes from an email thread between me and HF with the subj refund policy.  I specifically asked that question and they gave me a specific answer BEFORE i ordered. 4 babyjets

The 51 BTC statement assumed the exchange rate would remain stable, not spike 5-10 times and set new records.

YODD involves more than getting an email (from a non-executive no less) telling you want you want to hear.

YODD requires you and your attorney critically evaluate the firm's ability to deliver on their statements and your possible recourse if they fail.

In this case, it was obvious that the start-up had absolutely no ability to give you back your BTC 'No Matter What^TM.'

Any lawyer you asked would have informed you such a claim may not be interpreted to provide windfalls in the case of substantial BTC/USD appreciation.

We all knew the BTC were converted to fiat and spent to get the chips/boards/machines built.  We all knew the BTC weren't sitting in escrow.

It took a student still in law school about 45 seconds to disabuse me of the delusion that such windfalls were reasonable, much less actionable.  

Granted, I have a strong background in legal studies, but the entire concept chain from common law to equity to 'No Windfalls Allowed' has been explained in detail ad nauseum.

Even the slow learners like cedivad should be able to understand that a tiny new firm is obviously not going to be able to pay out windfalls.

As for the hilarious MMQ about 'hurr-durr they should have bought futures and hedged.'  Those services, even if available somewhere at the the time, were not yet legal in the US.  The first one was just approved yesterday: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/12/us-usa-bitcoin-cftc-idUSKBN0H71FU20140912?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologyNews

Sorry you were never offered a refund.  That sucks, but there is hope we may be compensated to some degree as a result of the HF IP auction in Oct.

How do you feel about those who got 105% refunds, but refused to take them because they felt so entitled to windfalls at impossible expense to HF?

How do you feel about the BTCT Internet Lawyers who created their impossible windfall expectations, and then advised others against taking their 105% refunds when they had the chance?

Ironically, it's actually good for us they refused their 105% refunds because that left more money to pay the 15 lawyers now feasting off HF's corpse, which in turn means we may gain an addition one percent or two on our claims.  

I'm curious as to what capacity you're still playing at HashFast, for I've yet to determine your last name, R.... .

[User705]

The 51 BTC statement assumed the exchange rate would remain stable, not spike 5-10 times and set new records.

Prove it. Show the statement from HF stating such a restriction. PROVE IT OR YOU ARE LYING.

sorry to put salt on old wounds but lying is rarely legally actionable.  If someone lies to you and it is obvious to a reasonable person then you can't rely on that lie and claim damages.  The very fact that the TOS was directly oposite of those BTC refund marketing statements should've been a big red flag.

[Gleb Gamow]

The 51 BTC statement assumed the exchange rate would remain stable, not spike 5-10 times and set new records.

Prove it. Show the statement from HF stating such a restriction. PROVE IT OR YOU ARE LYING.

I can easily prove that such was the case with the following as proof:

eceived: by 10.194.138.199 with SMTP id qs7csp90853wjb;
        Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.236.45.102 with SMTP id o66mr196684yhb.13.1376696316262;
        Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <bitpaysupport@hashfast.com>

Hi Jim,
Thank you so much for your patience while I got the answer for you, I greatly appreciate it.

The answer is if you buy Baby Jet for 51 BitCoins today and it does not ship, you will be refunded the 51 BitCoins you paid.

I hope that helps and hope you have a good weekend!

Thanks,
Cara

Regardless what capacity Cara had over at HashFast at the time, the truth of the matter is that once such was published on this forum and elsewhere, NOBODY at HashFast disputed the claim(s) until it was convenient for them to do such, in spite of HashFast's main principals addressing every other issue under the sun at their earliest possible convenience to further ensure garnering more sales.

Fuck, a Shakespearean janitor could've pen the email prose, but HashFast was well aware of its existence, yet never commented on it till shit really started hitting the fan and the fictive janitor was let go, possibly seeking employment over at Bliss Devices.

[iCEBREAKER]

Regardless what capacity Cara had over at HashFast at the time, the truth of the matter is that once such was published on this forum and elsewhere, NOBODY at HashFast disputed the claim(s) until it was convenient for them to do such, in spite of HashFast's main principals addressing every other issue under the sun at their earliest possible convenience to further ensure garnering more sales.

Fuck, janitor could've pen the email reply, but HashFast was well aware of its existence, yet never commented on it till shit really started hitting the fan and the fictive janitor was let go.

You may disregard relevant details, such as the capacity and authority of the respondent, all you like.  But a judge won't, as your due diligence lawyer should have advised you.

Make all the noise you want, it will never change the fact that your expectation for a windfall No Matter What^TM was unreasonable (based on common sense and common law), impossible (based on financial reality), and harmful (because it led people to lose their chance at 105% refunds by gambling on legally unsound wishful thinking).

Many people tried their best to explain this before it was too late, but we were drowned out by the shrieking of trolls like yourself and the rest of your Free Stuff Army.   

[jimmothy]

Many people tried their best to explain this before it was too late, but we were drowned out by the shrieking of trolls like yourself and the rest of your Free Stuff Army.   

If HashFast doesn't ship anything this year, apart from Christmas cards, I get a full refund.  In BTC.

Given the coins have appreciated 300% vs fiat since I spent them, I'm fine with that.