HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s

[MrTeal]

Can the Evo be down clocked way low to get better energy efficiency?

I've never done it, but I've take a Habanero down to 0.71J/GH with air cooling. I don't see why something similar wouldn't be possible with an Evo as well.

[1714481459]

1714481459

[1714481459]

1714481459

[1714481459]

1714481459

[Bicknellski]

Forget about the btc vs USD refunds argument.

Hashfast couldn't even give out USD refunds so either way you were fucked.

The problem is that hashfast spent more than $10/gh producing hardware that every other company was able to produce for $0.5-1/gh.

Either they were mind bogglingly incompetent, they were scammed, or they are scammers. Take your pick.

Scammers.

Glad we got to the bottom of that. BFL style.

[stan258]

Can the Evo be down clocked way low to get better energy efficiency?

I've never done it, but I've take a Habanero down to 0.71J/GH with air cooling. I don't see why something similar wouldn't be possible with an Evo as well.

With Cooling it would need to be in the mid 400 GH range.

By the time they got the money and order placed we miss a window which is right now?

 

[SolarSilver]

HF made a working product (please try to keep up).  The bankruptcy was due to an unfortunate confluence of adverse business conditions and early missteps like the first board rev.

Have you really never seen a tech company fail despite having a superior product?  I believe you have, but are just being dishonest.

And those early missteps are not to blame to incompetence? They royally screwed up the first batches of boards, 1/4 of them arriving worked at the promised specs. It's only a superior product if it actually works for the customer, not on the drawing board

[iCEBREAKER]

HF made a working product (please try to keep up).  The bankruptcy was due to an unfortunate confluence of adverse business conditions and early missteps like the first board rev.

Have you really never seen a tech company fail despite having a superior product?  I believe you have, but are just being dishonest.

And those early missteps are not to blame to incompetence? They royally screwed up the first batches of boards, 1/4 of them arriving worked at the promised specs. It's only a superior product if it actually works for the customer, not on the drawing board

The superior GN1 chip has always been ready to push 700+ GH/s, given enough juice.

The incompetent subcontractor for the first board screwed up royally, and the next ones could only do 400+ GH/s until the Yoli and Habanero designs.

Converting that much clean power in such a small area is no small engineering challenge.

[SolarSilver]

The incompetent subcontractor for the first board screwed up royally, and the next ones could only do 400+ GH/s until the Yoli and Habanero designs.

And who decided to go with this subcontractor in the first place, without having a backup plan in place? This coming from a company who claimed "in Bitcoin mining, time is everything"

[Gyrsur]

The incompetent subcontractor for the first board screwed up royally, and the next ones could only do 400+ GH/s until the Yoli and Habanero designs.

And who decided to go with this subcontractor in the first place, without having a backup plan in place? This coming from a company who claimed "in Bitcoin mining, time is everything"

I'm sure he has an answer for it.  

[Blazed]

How can anyone try and say HashFail was not incompetent...you can not blame a sub contractor since they hired him. HashFast were bumbling idiots with every aspect except the chip...and that was probably a just a lucky fluke.

[RoadStress]

The superior GN1 chip has always been ready to push 700+ GH/s, given enough juice.

The incompetent subcontractor for the first board screwed up royally, and the next ones could only do 400+ GH/s until the Yoli and Habanero designs.

Converting that much clean power in such a small area is no small engineering challenge.

And this is where their failure is (but of course not provable in court). Trying to use so much power in such a small area lead them to the bankruptcy. No other chip manufacturer used this approach and nobody will attempt to try it because it leads to so many problems. Bitcoin mining doesn't need a simple "fastest chip". Bitcoin mining needs a more balanced approach of many things besides speed. In my view HF failed when they chose this approach and also when they never thought of any plan B in case the subcontractor/PCB design fails. The only thing HF was good was spending a shitload of money while not being able to fully deliver their first batch of miners. The other things like refunds and MPP don't matter when you can't even fully ship your first batch of miners. Good ASIC design skills, but very bad management/business decisions. HashFail!

Edit: SolarSilver types faster

[Gyrsur]

How can anyone try and say HashFail was not incompetent...you can not blame a sub contractor since they hired him. HashFast were bumbling idiots with every aspect except the chip...and that was probably a just a lucky fluke.

the chip was Barber. but all around him were hobbyist with actor skills and GetRichQuick mentality.

[iCEBREAKER]

The incompetent subcontractor for the first board screwed up royally, and the next ones could only do 400+ GH/s until the Yoli and Habanero designs.

And who decided to go with this subcontractor in the first place, without having a backup plan in place? This coming from a company who claimed "in Bitcoin mining, time is everything"

I'm sure he has an answer for it.  

Why wouldn't I have "an answer for it?"  Is that bitchy little dig supposed to mean something?   

There was a backup plan in place, otherwise the products would have shipped even later than they already did.

HF put in their best effort.  Those best efforts were documented and that documentation was accepted by the court as the basis for avoiding Chapter 7 via Chapter 11.

All a company can (reasonably) be expected to do is their best effort.  HF went above and beyond that mandate, sleeping under desks and whatnot.

You don't get to demand success; that's not a reasonable standard.  Failure happens often in new ventures, despite the best efforts of the employees and management.

You don't get a guarantee of success; new ventures are risky.

HF gave it the old college try, but it wasn't good enough to appease those eager to force their issues into court and enrich bankruptcy lawyers with our money.

We are all disappointed, but only some of us choose to Go Ugly and make defamatory personal accusations of scamming/incompetence (despite an utter lack of evidence and rulings to the contrary).

[cedivad]

the chip was Barber. but all around him were hobbyist with actor skills and GetRichQuick mentality.

Barber was also the one that didn't stop his own company from claiming that everything was still on track for shipping in a few days:

1) The day before announcing an undefined delay, that would have afterwards be explained as a
2) Substrate delay
3) That doesn't explain in any way the board delay, since that in the delay announcement every other component of the miner is claimed to be "on schedule or ahead of schedule", and when asked to prove it, they  
4) Claimed to have pictures of the boards on hand that couldn't be released due to a NDA and
5) After having realised that the outsourced things weren't going properly, failed to produce a working board until mid Jan, and last but not least,
6) Helped everyone else dissipating what was left after the involuntary chapter 7 converting it to chapter 11, negotiating a deal with liquidbits that would have profited him and the rest of the management, while taking a month long holiday in the process.

... And that is a partial list.

So yeah, the problem wasn't everyone but Barber. The problem was that they decided to fuck us and our money, and the us law has protected them in their legalised theft so far.

And off course, they did so collectively. So they must have benefited collectively.

[iCEBREAKER]

2) Substrate delay
3) That doesn't explain in any way the board delay

The problem was that they decided to fuck us and our money, and the us law has protected them in their legalised theft so far.

You want the law to forbid new ventures in unproven markets?  You think the law can prohibit companies from failing?  You want to require something more than best efforts from a company?

You think that if a company fails despite their best effort, the people involved should have unlimited personally liability?

You believe it is possible to have reward without risk?

That kind of anti-capitalist BS is why other countries (EG Italy) can't compete with all the innovation that happens in Silicon Valley.

You knew HF was based in the US when you ordered.  You accepted that venue for potential disputes.

Now you want to whine about US law because it isn't doing exactly as you would desire?

Look, the people who ordered from Bitmine are sipping the same weak tea as you are, only the Swiss version:

I contacted the Swiss ambassador to my country and made ​​a written statement on the criminal activities of Bitmine AG. I'm already sure that I lost my money. The behavior of these people is typical behavior of scammers. My request to the Ambassador was to cause judicial authorities and tax authorities in Switzerland to investigate Bitmine  AG. I refuse to accept that these people will get away with our money hidden behind the Swiss jurisdiction.

You should grow up and stop pouting about how everything is a criminal conspiracy to steal from you, when in fact there is a more logical, court-tested explanation.

Why don't you be a brave boy, and come to SF so you can tell Judge Montali to his face that he is 'protecting HF in their legalized theft?'   

PS  You can't finish a board design until the substrate is done, dumbass.   

[Syke]

Converting that much clean power in such a small area is no small engineering challenge.

Sound like a fatal design flaw.

[BitCoin Operated Boy]

Judges are not there to arrive at intelligent and informed decisions but they are there to make decisions according to their legal programming. There is a big difference between making decisons and arriving at decisions.

They are like robots trained to judge instead of understanding.
Judges have no education in regard to human behavioral biology or bio-psycho-social factors shaping human behaviour.
They don't have scientific nor technical knowledge.
They are there to enforce the law regardless of what the law says and if it has any coherent and intelligent back up in science and rational.

Just because some judge robot failed to recognise your sociopathic behaviour and socially parasitic attitude and deeds of your comapny doesn't mean that you are correct.

As I said, your constant smileys and cheerful nature in your replies with content lacking any regard and consideration for human beings you have exploited, self evidently proves that you are an utter sociopath.

[iCEBREAKER]

Judges are not there to arrive at intelligent and informed decisions but they are there to make decisions according to their legal programming. There is a big difference between making decisons and arriving at decisions.

They are like robots trained to judge instead of understanding.
Judges have no education in regard to human behavioral biology or bio-psycho-social factors shaping human behaviour.
They don't have scientific nor technical knowledge.
They are there to enforce the law regardless of what the law says and if it has any coherent and intelligent back up in science and rational.

Just because some judge robot failed to recognise your sociopathic behaviour and socially parasitic attitude and deeds of your comapny doesn't mean that you are correct.

As I said, your constant smileys and cheerful nature in your replies with content lacking any regard and consideration for human beings you have exploited, self evidently proves that you are an utter sociopath.

The only people trying to exploit this unfortunate situation are the ones demanding windfalls at HF's expense.

Your generic indictments of all judges in general has no applicability to the specific case of HF as overseen by Judge Montali.

If you could be bothered to listen to the hearings, you'd find out he is intelligent, understands the issues presented, and is not a robot.

Spare us the armchair psychology.  Such ad hom is a cheap shot of last resort, because you don't have any good argument.   

If the judge and I agreed with your position, you wouldn't be forced to substitute insult for analysis by pathologizing disagreement.   

Good job awarding yourself the moral high ground.  Now please go tell Judge Montali his actions are incoherent and irrational to his face!

[RoadStress]

The only people trying to exploit this unfortunate situation are the ones demanding windfalls at HF's expense.

Stop with the windfall crap. Cara, a HashFail representative, explicitly said that if the miner doesn't ship the customer gets his full 51 bitcoins back. There is no windfall in that statement. It's pure and clear!

Converting that much clean power in such a small area is no small engineering challenge.

Sound like a fatal design flaw.

Exactly!

[iCEBREAKER]

The only people trying to exploit this unfortunate situation are the ones demanding windfalls at HF's expense.

Stop with the windfall crap. Cara, a HashFail representative, explicitly said that if the miner doesn't ship the customer gets his full 51 bitcoins back. There is no windfall in that statement. It's pure and clear!

Converting that much clean power in such a small area is no small engineering challenge.

Sound like a fatal design flaw.

Exactly!

51 bitcoins were worth $6800 at the time of purchase, but since they would be worth some other amount when a refund became due, you get more or less btc on a pro rata basis.  I'm sorry you are still clinging to an invalid interpretation, even though its been debunked.

There is a good reason no court in the US would ever agree with your interpretation.  The reason is that you are a a stupid dumbass trying, but failing, to be cute.   

The first board rev used a flawed design, but the chip works fine.  You are not using the term 'design flaw' correctly.

This isn't hard.  You can understand this.

[RoadStress]

51 bitcoins were worth $6800 at the time of purchase, but since they would be worth some other amount when a refund became due, you get more or less btc on a pro rata basis.  I'm sorry you are still clinging to an invalid interpretation, even though its been debunked.

There is a good reason no court in the US would ever agree with your interpretation.  The reason is that you are a a stupid dumbass trying, but failing, to be cute.   

The first board rev used a flawed design, but the chip works fine.  You are not using the term 'design flaw' correctly.

This isn't hard.  You can understand this.

Cara stated clearly in the e-mail. If product doesn't ship you get 51 bitcoins. She never mentioned anything about $6800 or exchange rate or dollar or fiat or anything. Now I don't know why that e-mail didn't held in court but if a company tells me that they will refund 51 bitcoins I expect 51 bitcoins. Note that the statement wasn't "full refund" or anything like that. It was pure 51 bitcoins with no mention whatsoever of the exchange rate.

[iCEBREAKER]

51 bitcoins were worth $6800 at the time of purchase, but since they would be worth some other amount when a refund became due, you get more or less btc on a pro rata basis.  I'm sorry you are still clinging to an invalid interpretation, even though its been debunked.

There is a good reason no court in the US would ever agree with your interpretation.  The reason is that you are a a stupid dumbass trying, but failing, to be cute.   

The first board rev used a flawed design, but the chip works fine.  You are not using the term 'design flaw' correctly.

This isn't hard.  You can understand this.

Cara stated clearly in the e-mail. If product doesn't ship you get 51 bitcoins. She never mentioned anything about $6800 or exchange rate or dollar or fiat or anything. Now I don't know why that e-mail didn't held in court but if a company tells me that they will refund 51 bitcoins I expect 51 bitcoins. Note that the statement wasn't "full refund" or anything like that. It was pure 51 bitcoins with no mention whatsoever of the exchange rate.

Does the CS rep have the power to modify the TOS?  No, she does not.

Did the CS rep say "you get 51 bitcoins NO MATTER WHAT THE PRICE OF BITCOINS DOES?"

No, she didn't.  You should have been intelligent and reasonable enough to understand that the statement was made ceteris parabus.

You can google that phrase if your shitty HS econ teacher didn't teach it to you.   

If you think you are right, please take the matter to court.  You will find, like pmorici already has, that your interpretation is FOS and won't hold water.