HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s

[Entropy-uc]

Since I don't think these guys are going to show up here, some more docs to cry over:

Contract for the 3 Petahash (2500 Sierra) order and "self-mine" kickback (3 October 13):
http://bit.ly/SnXpAm

Agreement to covert that order into 30,000 chips (4 March 14):
http://bit.ly/RXrOFe

Declaration of Gregory Bachrach, Liquidbits CEO (? May 14):
http://bit.ly/TyjpcO


And finally, for the moment, the memorandum summing it up (from Liquidbits' perspective) for the motion it made to hold the bankruptcy hearing earlier.  The motion was granted, and the hearing is tomorrow (Fri 23 May):

http://bit.ly/1hcNofg


Just call me PACER.  

But, hey, we should alert the press, and we should inform them of the perspective of the small customer.  This is not just a dispute between Hashfast and Liquidbits, there are also the interests of hundreds of unpaid small customers at stake.

The whole point of the bankruptcy filing was to make sure that Hashfast didn't cut deals benefiting one of their creditors over the others.  Small players will be protected by this.

Good on DeadTerra for outing Simon's attempt to steal the last few dollars from Hashfast.  It was exactly this kind of mistake that we were looking for when we put them into involuntary bankruptcy.

Koi will be supporting the request for a trustee tomorrow morning.

[1715062660]

1715062660

[1715062660]

1715062660

[1715062660]

1715062660

[bkminer]

I tried to sign up for Gallo's site and it said they can't help me.  How can I join the bankruptcy petition? I'm a small player.

[Entropy-uc]

I tried to sign up for Gallo's site and it said they can't help me.  How can I join the bankruptcy petition? I'm a small player.

There really isn't any need to do so.  The bankruptcy petition is already filed.

You may need to establish your status as a creditor at some point but for today, everything is already in motion.

[allinvain]

Here's to hoping all will turn out well. It is time to end this nightmare!

[dhenson]

I tried to sign up for Gallo's site and it said they can't help me.  How can I join the bankruptcy petition? I'm a small player.

There really isn't any need to do so.  The bankruptcy petition is already filed.

You may need to establish your status as a creditor at some point but for today, everything is already in motion.

1) I'm not sure why they would say that.  They are actively looking for new claimants.  Did they tell you that before the bankruptcy petition was filed? Prior to that point, they were only representing Batch 1 people.  Now they are looking to sign up everyone.
2) That isn't true Entropy.  The petition was filed by a large creditor, everyone else isn't going to be adequately represented by that action.  If Gallo can get enough claimants he will stand a good chance of being able to influence the outcome in our favor.  If you guys haven't signed up, please do!

[Entropy-uc]

I tried to sign up for Gallo's site and it said they can't help me.  How can I join the bankruptcy petition? I'm a small player.

There really isn't any need to do so.  The bankruptcy petition is already filed.

You may need to establish your status as a creditor at some point but for today, everything is already in motion.

1) I'm not sure why they would say that.  They are actively looking for new claimants.
2) That isn't true Entropy.  The petition was filed by a large creditor, everyone else isn't going to be adequately represented by that action.  If Gallo can get enough claimants he will stand a good chance of being able to influence the outcome in our favor.  If you guys haven't signed up, please do!

Let me try to be kind.  You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

I filed the bankruptcy petition.

'They' are lawyers looking for you to give up 50% of your recoveries in exchange for their services.  I'm sure 'they' are very eager to take 1/2 of whatever comes back to you in the bankruptcy. But 'they' will have little to no impact on what is actually recovered.

[dhenson]

Let me try to be kind.  You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

I filed the bankruptcy petition.

ROFL I don't deny that, though the document I read was filed on behalf of a large purchaser and I didn't assume that was you.  

Are you trying to dissuade additional claimants?

To be clear, I'm not trying to be argumentative.  I have no personal experience with this sort of thing (nor do I claim to), however I have on one hand a random anon on the internet telling me to do nothing, all is being taken care of.  And on the other hand, a lawyer that I trust telling me that he can influence the outcome in our favor if we have a larger percentage of claimants.

I'll choose to listen to my lawyer, and thank you for doing all you have done.

[Entropy-uc]

Let me try to be kind.  You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

I filed the bankruptcy petition.

ROFL I don't deny that, though the document I read was filed on behalf of a large purchaser and I didn't assume that was you. 

Are you trying to dissuade additional claimants?

The petition is filed.  We gave people 2 weeks to join.  Why the fuck would you think I'm trying to dissuade anyone now?

There is nothing to join.  As the bankruptcy proceeds creditors will need to file claims but that has nothing to do with the current state of the case.

[Minor Miner]

Let me try to be kind.  You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

I filed the bankruptcy petition.

ROFL I don't deny that, though the document I read was filed on behalf of a large purchaser and I didn't assume that was you. 

Are you trying to dissuade additional claimants?

If the court accepts it, every person that has money owed with become a claimant.   The receiver chosen by the court will represent everyone equally.    Let's say there is $5,000,000 owed and they recover 3M from HF and the owners of HF and some of the customers of HF that may have received what would be considered compensation (below market deals).    Then everyone will get about 60% back.   etc.

[cedivad]

If the new chip really "screams", as Amy the 2nd claimed, I think that IceDrill Will detected that Simon may have been trying to play him as the fool.  That Simon wanted to offload Hashfast's baggage onto IceDrill and all jurisdictional crap and confusion that would cause, and try to walk away with the (possible) new chip.

Two chips (the second one should be a scrypt one), and the other one has possibly taped out already (and the only value would be in the fact that they paid the tapeout already). Someone keeps repeating me that tsmc won't allow a 16nm tapeout until q3 this year, so maybe it's really only a dream of mine. Or maybe it's another 28nm chip, but it sounds improbable given the better efficiency.

Anyway, good scouting tomorrow. I keep seeing only Technologies LLC on the documents. I known that you will, but try to get a hold of the Superbunker LLC proprieties too. If Barber tried to sell the Technologies LLC proprieties without giving a damn last week I don't want to think what happened already to whatever the various Superbunker LLC have.

[perezoso]

I may have unfortunately generated confusion by being unclear about the relationship between Liquidbits and the petitioners in the Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing. My apologies if I screwed anything up.  

In my posts earlier today, I referred to Liquidbits as a fellow creditor, possibly giving the impression that Liquidbits was "in" on the original bankruptcy petition, rather than an intervenor. But Entropy-UC is quite clear.  

To be perfectly honest, I was deliberately ambiguous because I wasn't sure that Liquidbits didn't have some relationship to one of the named creditors in that filing that, for some reason, hadn't been fully revealed until now.  Maybe I was too cautious.

In any event, dhenson and entropy-uc, I'm sorry if my ambiguity contributed to a misunderstanding.

I am committed in my own small way to the entropy-uc-led Chapter 7 filing, and that's where I intend to stay.

[Entropy-uc]

I may have unfortunately generated confusion by being unclear about the relationship between Liquidbits and the petitioners in the Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing. My apologies if I screwed anything up.  

In my posts earlier today, I referred to Liquidbits as a fellow creditor, possibly giving the impression that Liquidbits was "in" on the original bankruptcy petition, rather than an intervenor. But Entropy-UC is quite clear that this is not the case.  

To be perfectly honest, I was deliberately ambiguous because I wasn't sure that Liquidbits didn't have some relationship to one of the named creditors in that filing that, for some reason, hadn't been fully revealed until now.  Maybe I was too cautious.

In any event, dhenson and entropy-uc, I'm sorry if my ambiguity contributed to a misunderstanding.

I am committed in my own small way to the entropy-uc-led Chapter 7 filing, and that's where I intend to stay.

Based on what was revealed today everyone here should be very grateful for the few folks who stepped up to make the bankruptcy filing.

Without that filing, Liquidbits would have walked away with all the remaining chips Hashfast had on hand, and the remaining creditors would have been left with nothing.

[cedivad]

How that could ever be possible is beyond my understanding.

[aasl]

wait and see.

[Entropy-uc]

How that could ever be possible is beyond my understanding.

Read the filings.  Liquidbits had a restraining order controlling nearly all of the supposed chip inventory.

The really interesting question is this: Liquidbits made this deal for chips and 25% of revenue being kicked back to Hashfast on March 4th.  But Hashfast defaulted.  So who made Hashfast a better offer?

[cedivad]

Read the filings.  Liquidbits had a restraining order controlling nearly all of the supposed chip inventory.

I did read the filing. Their emergency arbitrator and the restraining order for 30k chips because of the previous contract, but since that HF had a total of 30k chips, I don't see how they could have paid them as if they were the only creditor.

Another question is, liquidbits paid 2400$/sierra. Is that a legitimate price, while everyone else paid 6k or more for the first batch of sierra (batch 2?). The trustee has the power to scratch that contract.

---

So liquidbits wants to liquidate the 30k chips for a bargain (like $3M) and buy them, since that they had everything ready. They don't have any interest to bring their investment inside the company and share it with others, they will rather liquidate it and handle it themselves.

That, and another detail I'm still waiting a confirmation of, makes me think that we have a damn problem ahead.

---

The emergency arbitrator order: http://hashfast.org/14-30725.12.pdf
So basically HF 1) didn't want to deliver the chips and 2) didn't want to refund them immediately because 3) it would have resulted in them filing for a (voluntary) bankruptcy petition.

-8 hours to the hearing, that is public, so maybe someone could give us a report.

[armyof1ne]

Read the filings.  Liquidbits had a restraining order controlling nearly all of the supposed chip inventory.

I did read the filing. Their emergency arbitrator and the restraining order for 30k chips because of the previous contract, but since that HF had a total of 30k chips, I don't see how they could have paid them as if they were the only creditor.

Another question is, liquidbits paid 2400$/sierra. Is that a legitimate price, while everyone else paid 6k or more for the first batch of sierra (batch 2?). The trustee has the power to scratch that contract.

---

So liquidbits wants to liquidate the 30k chips for a bargain (like $3M) and buy them, since that they had everything ready. They don't have any interest to bring their investment inside the company and share it with others, they will rather liquidate it and handle it themselves.

That, and another detail I'm still waiting a confirmation of, makes me think that we have a damn problem ahead.

---

The emergency arbitrator order: http://hashfast.org/14-30725.12.pdf
So basically HF 1) didn't want to deliver the chips and 2) didn't want to refund them immediately because 3) it would have resulted in them filing for a (voluntary) bankruptcy petition.

-8 hours to the hearing, that is public, so maybe someone could give us a report.

hmmm, i was unaware of this one, isn't that technically worth between 24-12 petahashes of power? wouldn't that kinda break bitcoin if they were all brought online at the same time? over the 50% mark right?

[RoadStress]

hmmm, i was unaware of this one, isn't that technically worth between 24-12 petahashes of power? wouldn't that kinda break bitcoin if they were all brought online at the same time? over the 50% mark right?

We are hashing at ~73PH right now so the answer to your question is no.

[defcon23]

    http://www.coindesk.com/hashfast-just-one-hearing-away-involuntary-bankruptcy/?utm_source=CoinDesk+subscribers&utm_campaign=bb31ed02da-EMAIL_RSS_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_74abb9e6ab-bb31ed02da-72116193

[cedivad]

hmmm, i was unaware of this one, isn't that technically worth between 24-12 petahashes of power? wouldn't that kinda break bitcoin if they were all brought online at the same time? over the 50% mark right?

We are hashing at ~73PH right now so the answer to your question is no.

He wanted to be quoted with that huge post to further derail the discussion. "break bitcoin", yeah.

Anyway, Difficulty: +17%; Price: +16%. Let's hope the latter to hold.