HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s

[perezoso]

I started as a contractor and from today go full time to assist with technical support.

Why don't you start a thread specifically for questions and answers.  People post questions, you post answers. If you don't know the answer or are not authorized to divulge it, then you can reply and say "I don't know" or "I can't say".  This would create clarity about the situation and your position.

"Hashfast Community Liaison - Question and Answer Thread"

Questions and answers only.

Other discussion can stay here.

[Minor Miner]

I started as a contractor and from today go full time to assist with technical support.

Why don't you start a thread specifically for questions and answers.  People post questions, you post answers. If you don't know the answer or are not authorized to divulge it, then you can reply and say "I don't know" or "I can't say".  This would create clarity about the situation and your position.

"Hashfast Community Liaison - Question and Answer Thread"

Questions and answers only.

Other discussion can stay here.

Now there is a really good and sane suggestion.

[gmaxwell]

We permit self-moderated threads for a reason— too.

[RHA]

I was just looking at the cgminer image posted by gateway a few days ago and the work utility value on that screen seems really high for 422GH/s.

I would expect 422GH/s to show WU at about 6K, not the ~11K that is shown.  From the other stats on the screen it appears that it had been hashing for at least 10 minutes, so that should have been enough time for WU to stabilize.

It looks like the cgminer code was modified here a bit too much. On purpose?

[miaviator]

Jesus Christ, I thought I made it more than ludicrous enough that no one would believe it, especially since it's just a copy and paste of the last update. I guess I should have added a line or two about the new Dyson Sphere that's going to power the Sierra arriving for testing.

HashFast_CL, people wouldn't have to waste time messing around with jokes if you would actually give productive updates on where shipping is at and when you plan to start moving out the units. I'd also like to know who you are and what your relationship is to HashFast. I can't help but feel that we've been thrown another random poster like cypherdoc who supposes to speak for HashFast but when push comes to shove does not actually represent them and can't speak for them.
Are you directly employed by HashFast and do you have the authorization to speak for them as their agent?

"Dyson Sphere powered Sierra"    

I started as a contractor and from today go full time to assist with technical support.

I can only relay what I hear/am authorized to and so can't speak for customer service with regard to refund type stuff.

The "CL" stands for community liaison; my role is to facilitate communication between the community and the company.

I don't have any new information about shipping dates, but am as eager as everyone else to start hashing!

Best,

-HF_CL

So you voluntarily took a role getting shat on by everyone? 

[Biffa]

To stop the "lawsuit", all they have to do is pay off the litigious complainers with extra hashpower, shower them with BJ's and the pain will go away and no-one will be the wiser.

[gmaxwell]

The problem with "give more hashpower" is that its expensive and doesn't assure the company that the risk of lawsuits will go away.

A better path would be to offer the a choice of a full 1:1 refund in BTC as if the sale had never been made or enough additional hashpower that most customers would choose the latter.

The problem is that the 1:1 refund at this point would be a hard deal to match and I suspect that many people now believe the original October claims were flat out dishonest, making promises of further hash-power later unattractive.

This is what I was referring to earlier on the thread about there being potentially no clean solution. A half measure doesn't remove hashfast's legal exposure, and a full measure may not be within their ability to afford.

[jjiimm_64]

I started as a contractor and from today go full time to assist with technical support.

Why don't you start a thread specifically for questions and answers.  People post questions, you post answers. If you don't know the answer or are not authorized to divulge it, then you can reply and say "I don't know" or "I can't say".  This would create clarity about the situation and your position.

"Hashfast Community Liaison - Question and Answer Thread"

Questions and answers only.

Other discussion can stay here.

+1

[Rawrkanos]

Anyone else notice how the network hashrate jumped by over a petahash just a few days after HashFast really got down to testing their chips?

[calichomp]

Breakout the pitchforks.

[bitcoinermax]

If HF were self mining, then they can afford to refund everyone the BTCs!   

[jimmothy]

Anyone else notice how the network hashrate jumped by over a petahash just a few days after HashFast really got down to testing their chips?

No because it didn't happen.

[RickJamesBTC]

Hash Rate is right on trend.

[miaviator]

Anyone else notice how the network hashrate jumped by over a petahash just a few days after HashFast really got down to testing their chips?

No because it didn't happen.

Lol.  Slap in the face....

[Easy2Mine]

Still no tracking number for me.
I guess Santa Claus is not coming this year.

[dhenson]

Anyone else notice how the network hashrate jumped by over a petahash just a few days after HashFast really got down to testing their chips?

No because it didn't happen.

The network jumped from 7.5PH to 9.7PH without any  major new shipments.  How do you justify your statement?

[jimmothy]

Anyone else notice how the network hashrate jumped by over a petahash just a few days after HashFast really got down to testing their chips?

No because it didn't happen.

The network jumped from 7.5PH to 9.7PH without any  major new shipments.  How do you justify your statement?

Although I haven't been following the hashrate as closely as many I still noticed it jump back and forth between 8-10 the past month. You cant possibly think you know of every asic being shipped/being brought online. Could be more bitfurys/knc/butterflylabs. Hashrate is not climbing more than average.

1ph would be an incredible test. Maybe HF contributed to the rise but assuming HF alone caused any substancial rise with test units seems a bit far fetched imo.

I am sure if they were having such success we would hear about it.

[Xian01]

network jumped from 7.5PH to 9.7PH without any  major new shipments.  How do you justify your statement?

 Bitmain recently shipped several TH of 180GH/s Antminers.

[derekleong75]

To stop the "lawsuit", all they have to do is pay off the litigious complainers with extra hashpower, shower them with BJ's and the pain will go away and no-one will be the wiser.

"Shower them with BJs"

This, is the best laugh Ive had today...

[aerobatic]

The problem with "give more hashpower" is that its expensive and doesn't assure the company that the risk of lawsuits will go away.

A better path would be to offer the a choice of a full 1:1 refund in BTC as if the sale had never been made or enough additional hashpower that most customers would choose the latter.

The problem is that the 1:1 refund at this point would be a hard deal to match and I suspect that many people now believe the original October claims were flat out dishonest, making promises of further hash-power later unattractive.

This is what I was referring to earlier on the thread about there being potentially no clean solution. A half measure doesn't remove hashfast's legal exposure, and a full measure may not be within their ability to afford.

giving more hash power is less expensive than giving people refunds... especially if they have to refund in btc (which i can't see how they can afford to do, even if they promised it)

hash power only costs them 'cost price', whereas its value to customers is at 'retail price'... thus giving extra hash power is a valuable way for them to compensate people that costs less than its worth.