HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s

[Xian01]

KnC shipped hardware, and we have benefited by learning from their mistakes.

 If you benefited by learning from their mistakes, why have you failed to ship your first offering when they are presently working on their second ?

 I do need to concur with others in this thread; Your hubris and attitude is beginning to mimic a certain COO we regard poorly.

[1714079240]

1714079240

[stompix]

KnC shipped hardware, and we have benefited by learning from their mistakes.

 If you benefited by learning from their mistakes, why have you failed to ship your first offering when they are presently working on their second ?

 I do need to concur with others in this thread; Your hubris and attitude is beginning to mimic a certain COO we regard poorly.

I have the impression they think KnC made a mistake by really shipping products.

[testerx]

HashFast does have a single chip running (underclocked) at 500GH, which is an impressive feat.

That's great that it's underclocked but uhh...isn't it also hitting 300watts per two cores...or 600 watts per 4-core chip right now?  If that's the power draw underclocked (1.2 watts per GH) what's the power use going to be clocked up?

[RoadStress]

HashFast does have a single chip running (underclocked) at 500GH, which is an impressive feat.

That's great that it's underclocked but uhh...isn't it also hitting 300watts per two cores...or 600 watts per 4-core chip right now?  If that's the power draw underclocked (1.2 watts per GH) what's the power use going to be clocked up?

Still no proof of the single chip running underclocked at 500GH. HashFast_CL you promissed me a blog post with an actual video. Where is it?

[monsieur]

I'd like to clarify that 50 btcs mined per Jupiter as someone mentioned here is more of an exception applicable to select few. I received my Saturn (1/2 of Jupiter) around 20th of October (and I was pretty far from last in the queue). If I didn't spend some btcs on upgrade modules I would've made just about 16 btcs by now.

[cedivad]

HF_CL must be a complete idiot.

He thinks that he can calm down the community this way, but the only thing he does is to give the community even more reasons to be afraid of the future. With this rise on the bitcoin price, and with this many customers that ordered several machines, it will be awesome to see how this evolves.

[aneutronic]

Can you believe that i went to this page before writing it and yet i got it wrong? http://web.ku.edu/~edit/lie.html
I guess that this time i will just use google translate. Thanks.

@Jutarul, while i understand and i agree completely with you (i'm just waiting for them to see when they ship the MPP to decide whenever or not i should pay the 20k retainer), i think that while HF should be less talky talky and more shippy shippy, we customers should be less talky talky and more "sue" sue-tty them.

If we don't do that, well, why should they even bother? They got it completely right, the results they got from studying BFL was perfect.

Save your money, these guys will do it on contingency.

http://www.bergermontague.com/practice-areas/consumer-protection

Berger & Montague's Consumer Protection Group protects consumers when they are injured by false or misleading advertising, defective products, data privacy breaches, and various other unfair trade practices.

Consumers too often suffer the brunt of corporate wrongdoing, particularly in the area of false or misleading advertising, defective products, and data or privacy breaches. Using class action litigation, consumers can employ economies of scale to confront corporate wrongdoing and obtain a remedy for all those who were harmed. Berger & Montague has successfully obtained many multi-million-dollar consumer class action settlements. View our  Representative Settlements for examples of large recoveries we obtained on behalf of our consumer clients.

No Fees Without Recovery

Berger & Montague's consumer class action cases are typically litigated on a contingent fee basis, so plaintiffs and the class do not pay attorneys' fees or court costs unless there is a recovery.

[cedivad]

This is so much fun. So the contract says that they can't have any class action against them? Am i reading it correctly? This is really so much fun...
To bad that there are at least 10 customers out there that will happily go on by their own, even if that point had anything legal in it...

Can we sue them for putting illegal points on their terms of sales terms and conditions of sales, too?

[aneutronic]

Not sure if this is legal. But...

https://hashfast.com/checkout/terms-of-sale/

(e)     NEITHER BUYER NOR HASHFAST SHALL BE ENTITLED TO JOIN OR CONSOLIDATE CLAIMS BY OR AGAINST OTHER BUYERS, OR ARBITRATE OR OTHERWISE PARTICIPATE IN ANY CLAIM AS A CLASS REPRESENTATIVE, CLASS MEMBER OR IN A PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL CAPACITY. If any provision of this arbitration agreement is found unenforceable, the unenforceable provision shall be severed and the remaining arbitration terms shall be enforced (but in no case shall there be a class arbitration).

*shrugs*

Doubtful, let the lawyers figure it out, that's what they get paid for.

[cedivad]

That's also true.

So what's the goal of that point in the contract, apart from scaring possible customers from participating in a class action against them and finally have them to be even more angry at you?

[defcon23]

KnC shipped hardware, and we have benefited by learning from their mistakes.

 If you benefited by learning from their mistakes, why have you failed to ship your first offering when they are presently working on their second ?

 I do need to concur with others in this thread; Your hubris and attitude is beginning to mimic a certain COO we regard poorly.

+1

[cedivad]

Yes, i also think that contract to be our best and easiest way to definitively prove their intentions.
Personally, i think that it will be really easy to have a judge to force them to so, i mean, what's the problem with sharing the delivery date TSMC promised on the contract if they have nothing to hide?
I can't see anyone in good faith denying you to do so, especially after all of the BS they told us that we can prove.

I mean, they have lost even before starting.

[jspielberg]

That's also true.

So what's the goal of that point in the contract, apart from scaring possible customers from participating in a class action against them and finally have them to be even more angry at you?

What I'm more curious about is if a court can force them to disclose their contract with the fab. If the contract says the chips wouldn't be produced until after october it's game over for them.

You would need the entire supply chain... chip would be a good start, but substrate manufacturer, assembly house.

I think I have gone through denial, anger, bargaining, and depression and I feel I am now in acceptance.  We aren't going to make our BTC back.

If they deliver quickly and deliver the full MPP 90 days after October 30th, and difficulty enters a linear phase at 100,000,000 daily increment rather than exponential, we could make back a bit better than 70% over the course of a year.

At least according to my model:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Auya3iRE6az1dDc0UVgwMU52YVpTazVjSHByOGNiWHc&usp=sharing

Obviously a lot of assumptions.  The exponential difficulty growth may last longer than the 100M daily difficulty rise... HF may be late on the Feb.1 MPPs.  The longer they delay shipping initial and MPP, the worse the numbers get.

[cedivad]

@jspielberg, if they didn't do everything necessary to have every single component needed by november at the latest, they have lost.

Remeber that the PCB was designed and manufactured and they where gonna send us pictures of it in a few days (back in middle OCTOBER), but that moment never come due to... NDA contracts whose contracts where covered by a NDA as well? It's freking ridiculous, and it's oblivious that this is an incredible starting point for us.

If we are not gonna get every single BTC that we paid back, we are __all__ gonna use __fractions__ of the revenues to pay for first class lawyers to rip them off.

Worst case scenario? We will own the IP of the chip and it will be the first open source RTL (maybe we could just organise group buys directly to the FAB, where every detail is public and we get a % to recover our losses).

What makes me wonder the most about HF? Their stupidity about continuously releasing proofs to use against them. I mean, there must be a reason for that. They must be really self confident. (and that must be john, but don't worry john, we will fix that).

[Puppet]

Worst case scenario? We will own the IP of the chip and it will be the first open source RTL

Im pretty sure the contract with TSMC will make that impossible.

[cedivad]

Im pretty sure the contract with TSMC will make that impossible.

Ok, then we will organise group buys at costs from TSMC after that we have taken away a little % to recover our HF losses...
Would you mind to expand your answer? Thanks.

[jspielberg]

@jspielberg, if they didn't do everything necessary to every every single component needed by november at the latest, they have lost.

Remeber that the PCB was designed and manufactured and they where gonna send us pictures of it in a few days (back in middle OCTOBER), but that moment never come due to... NDA contracts whose contracts where covered by a NDA as well? It's freking ridiculous, and it's oblivious that this is an incredible starting point for us.

If we are not gonna get every single BTC that we paid back, we are __all__ gonna use __fractions__ of the revenues to pay for first class lawyers to rip them off.

Worst case scenario? We will own the IP of the chip and it will be the first open source RTL (maybe we could just organise group buys directly to the FAB, where every detail is public and we get a % to recover our losses).

Worst case scenarios (from worst to least worst):
1) They don't ship at all and close shop selling their IP to stakeholders with a real legal contract on assets
2) They refund in USD at current exchange rate (locking in a 90% loss)
3) They ship initial B1s before deadline but are very late on MPP (>50% loss?)
4) They ship initial B1s before deadline but get MPP out end of Jan. (~30% loss)
5) They miss their initial shipment date and refund the original currency at original rate (0% loss)

Kind of sad that the best case scenario is just that they refund all of B1 (at original exchange rate) and just make B2 the new first batch... everybody wins.
I would not be happy with scenario 4, but I am an adult and can take some lumps that would come along with it.  Pitchforks and lawyers would probably come out with anything worse than 4.

[cedivad]

I don't know, but this is how i see it:
If a company screws it's customers and then closes shop, customers can go against what the company owns. The company can't give what he owns away to it's shareholders, because the shareholders are part of the company and are part of the people that have to pay for the company screwing customers.

I mean, you can't stole the candies and then says that you can't get the candies back because i you to give them to the people who sent you to stole candies.

[Hoofprint]

If I sell you equipment that makes bitcoins using 500GH/s and offer to ship it (per our plan) in October if you pay a very high premium. Then fail to send it within that time frame....

What you get is a machine that produces less product (bitcoins) as the days roll forward. Every 11 days, the machine losses a percentage of it's productive capacity.

If in the time from October till December the machine lost -90% of it's productive capacity....then a representative being "happy" to announce a +25% increase in efficiency makes no literal sense.

Why would someone be happy about a meager increase in efficiency if by the time it ships it will be completely negated by rising difficulty when it gets into it's customers hands? The machine might not even pay itself off due to decreasing efficiency at producing bitcoins.

HashFast still anticipates shipping Batch One before the Dec 31 deadline. 

If we fail to ship within the advertised Oct-Dec time frame, refunds will be issued.

All Batch One orders come with the Miner Protection Plan, providing up to 400% more hashpower than initially purchased.

This MPP has been upgraded twice, free of charge.

The first upgrade changed the raw chips into complete miniboards.

The second upgrade started the MPP countdown on Oct 31, instead of the shipping date.

And now, HashFast is giving its customers an extra 25% initial hashing power beyond the advertised spec.

Those are three significant factors giving HashFast customers a good chance to keep up with the rising difficulty (which is beyond our control).

Hasfast_CL id like to point out Hashast's TOS clearly states Failure to deliver by the 31st not ship.

[/quote] 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.  If Buyer ordered one or more units of such Baby Jets, and Hashfast does not deliver such units by that date, then Buyer may cancel the undelivered portion of the order at Buyer’s request and Hashfast will provide a refund for the units that Buyer purchased but did not receive and cancelled.  This cancellation and refund is Buyer’s sole and exclusive remedy for Hashfast failing to deliver by the December 31, 2013 guaranteed delivery date.  To avail itself of this remedy, Buyer must cancel the order before such unit(s) are delivered by Hashfast, and in any case before March 31, 2014.[/quote]

Thats from the current Tos, but its the same in the older ones as well.
So please pass on to John and Eddie if they haven't posted my rig by the 19th express shipping to Aus i wont get it before January 2014

[jjiimm_64]

If I sell you equipment that makes bitcoins using 500GH/s and offer to ship it (per our plan) in October if you pay a very high premium. Then fail to send it within that time frame....

What you get is a machine that produces less product (bitcoins) as the days roll forward. Every 11 days, the machine losses a percentage of it's productive capacity.

If in the time from October till December the machine lost -90% of it's productive capacity....then a representative being "happy" to announce a +25% increase in efficiency makes no literal sense.

Why would someone be happy about a meager increase in efficiency if by the time it ships it will be completely negated by rising difficulty when it gets into it's customers hands? The machine might not even pay itself off due to decreasing efficiency at producing bitcoins.

HashFast still anticipates shipping Batch One before the Dec 31 deadline. 

If we fail to ship within the advertised Oct-Dec time frame, refunds will be issued.

All Batch One orders come with the Miner Protection Plan, providing up to 400% more hashpower than initially purchased.

This MPP has been upgraded twice, free of charge.

The first upgrade changed the raw chips into complete miniboards.

The second upgrade started the MPP countdown on Oct 31, instead of the shipping date.

And now, HashFast is giving its customers an extra 25% initial hashing power beyond the advertised spec.

Those are three significant factors giving HashFast customers a good chance to keep up with the rising difficulty (which is beyond our control).

Hasfast_CL id like to point out Hashast's TOS clearly states Failure to deliver by the 31st not ship.

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.  If Buyer ordered one or more units of such Baby Jets, and Hashfast does not deliver such units by that date, then Buyer may cancel the undelivered portion of the order at Buyer’s request and Hashfast will provide a refund for the units that Buyer purchased but did not receive and cancelled.  This cancellation and refund is Buyer’s sole and exclusive remedy for Hashfast failing to deliver by the December 31, 2013 guaranteed delivery date.  To avail itself of this remedy, Buyer must cancel the order before such unit(s) are delivered by Hashfast, and in any case before March 31, 2014.[/quote]

Thats from the current Tos, but its the same in the older ones as well.
So please pass on to John and Eddie if they haven't posted my rig by the 19th express shipping to Aus i wont get it before January 2014


[/quote]

Then you are in a better position then most of us.. because since the TOS clearly states that it must be delivered by dec31, then you will be able to  request a refund on Jan 1st.  AND  IF you paid btc directly to HF's wallet, then you will be able to get your btc back.

question is, if they come to your door with the equipment on Jan 2nd, will you accept delivery?