[ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated]

[MilkyLep]

I suppose we'll see another meaningless update without further explanation next wednesday...SUPER! 

[st4nl3y]

I suppose we'll see another meaningless update without further explanation next wednesday...SUPER! 

business as usual

[fannybaws]

I'll take a meaningless update every week on time over no updates at all.  It shows commitment to shareholders.  Head over to the NEO thread and read comments about there not having been anything posted in a month.  Nowt wrong with people focussing on the 'core business'.

With the meeting this weekend and the feathers that have been ruffled in the last few days let's hope that Ken pleasures us with something meaty.  

[VolanicEruptor]

It's funny how all these supporters have less than 100 posts.  They all have such positive things to say about a failed company.  Goes to show you what measures Ken will take to desperately keep us patient.

Anyone who is not an established member of Bitcointalk should be ignored.  Their opinion is worthless because they could be anybody, including Ken himself.

If anybody thinks this is far fetched, Icebreaker was called out for being Eduardo from Hashfast.  Within a matter of hours of this accusation his posts went down to nearly 0/day.

Lesson learned: Users should never be assumed to be who they portray themselves to be, especially with an extremely low post count.  

Read with caution.

[MilkyLep]

I'll take a meaningless update every week on time over no updates at all.  It shows commitment to shareholders.  Head over to the NEO thread and read comments about there not having been anything posted in a month.  Nowt wrong with people focussing on the 'core business'.

With the meeting this weekend and the feathers that have been ruffled in the last few days let's hope that Ken pleasures us with something meaty.  

You're kidding me right...please don't compare NeoBee to ActM nor Danny fucking Brewter to Ken Slaughter...yet.

Danny is busy attending meetings and conferences throughout the EU while Ken & Co are busy deleting posts rather than answering questions in a public forum.

NeoBee is on a planned warpath while ActM is drifting off to sea.

Ignored.

[fannybaws]

Ouch.

Edit-  Milky, I'm a shareholder in both companies from their initial IPO's and that allows me to compare both companies if I wish.  My point was that we are lucky to have regular weekly updates even if the content isn't to everyone's liking.

Canadian Guy, you have a bloody nerve.

[Stuartuk]

5 months later, that process is still not commercially available and no word of it on their website. I dont see how you could hold Ken responsible for that. ANd it does to some extend help explain why Ken is so restricted by NDA's.

This is very interesting and makes a lot of sense. I have wondered a few times why the 'wraps' are still on eASIC's 28nm product line.

[iSnow]

It's funny how all these supporters have less than 100 posts.  They all have such positive things to say about a failed company.  Goes to show you what measures Ken will take to desperately keep us patient.

Anyone who is not an established member of Bitcointalk should be ignored.  Their opinion is worthless because they could be anybody, including Ken himself.

If anybody thinks this is far fetched, Icebreaker was called out for being Eduardo from Hashfast.  Within a matter of hours of this accusation his posts went down to nearly 0/day.

Lesson learned: Users should never be assumed to be who they portray themselves to be, especially with an extremely low post count.  

Read with caution.

VE how is your inquiry at eASIC into their relationship with Ken going?

[Puppet]

If you don't want to dig through this thread, i'll give you a short list of things that don't jive with eAsic screw-up:

1.  Ken announced that he started shipping product. If this is an announcement about shipping cases, it is intentionally deceptive.  If he meant miners,  those require chips.

Like I said, I dont feel too comfortable defending Ken. There is no excuse for stuff like that. That doesnt mean eASIC doesnt bear any responsibility.

2.  He said that he decided to respin the chips to be compatible with Intellihash, mysterious software that makes shit 20% cooler.  This implies that he had chips to respin, not that eAsic was unable to master its new process.

Id like to see the exact wording of the original statement if you have it at hand. You can do a respin without having any chips, a respin just means you are redesigning one or more metal interconnect layers (not that I would count on Ken to use the correct terminology).  Did he really have chips and if so, did they even work? Who knows, but I think its highly doubtful. Fact is, there is no record of any 28nm nextreme 3 chip working, easic doesnt even promote it or solicit projects for them. IF the process is healthy, how come?

3.  What kind of a contract did he make with eAsic?  He offered projections and timelines, which have not been met.  Was the contract "give it a shot, if you can't, you can't"?  What money is he entitled to?  What new muppetry is this?

eASIC would have been suicidal to give iron clad guarantees with large late fees for an unreleased process. More likely is that they cut ActM a sweet deal to be a guinea pig for their new process. A bitcoin asic is pretty much a perfect test chip for a new process, so this could have been a win-win.

[gogxmagog]

…
until these shares are fully listed, we don't know if ken even has the btc he already owes in past divs.
...

divs are right here: https://blockchain.info/address/1DJpsvnM7xTnQbWEhLYyCyfxQyxwupEzCa

thanks for link. Sorry if I have been going off the handle last few days, I got caught up in the hysteria. Have taken deep breath and am looking with fresh eyes now. Things aren't great, but they aren't a total disaster either. Delays in engineering and production. Part of the game.

Now, when I look at these divs I see the results of hashing with ~ 5500 GHs, am I correct? More detailed specs of the mining operation would be good, is there a stasts page for this?

anyway, onward and upward. This pony ain't finished the race yet!

[450Desmo]

we should make a poll on here for what competitor we think is behind all the nasty, rotten noob troll accounts incessantly posting only in this thread…

This is Ken's thread.  For him to "program" a poll here would take... oh, a couple of months?
Sit tight, buddy

[damiano]

…
until these shares are fully listed, we don't know if ken even has the btc he already owes in past divs.
...

divs are right here: https://blockchain.info/address/1DJpsvnM7xTnQbWEhLYyCyfxQyxwupEzCa

thanks for link. Sorry if I have been going off the handle last few days, I got caught up in the hysteria. Have taken deep breath and am looking with fresh eyes now. Things aren't great, but they aren't a total disaster either. Delays in engineering and production. Part of the game.

Now, when I look at these divs I see the results of hashing with ~ 5500 GHs, am I correct? More detailed specs of the mining operation would be good, is there a stasts page for this?

anyway, onward and upward. This pony ain't finished the race yet!

Indeed.

Hashfast just barely shipped and the were suppose to ship back in October.

[VolanicEruptor]

It's funny how all these supporters have less than 100 posts.  They all have such positive things to say about a failed company.  Goes to show you what measures Ken will take to desperately keep us patient.

Anyone who is not an established member of Bitcointalk should be ignored.  Their opinion is worthless because they could be anybody, including Ken himself.

If anybody thinks this is far fetched, Icebreaker was called out for being Eduardo from Hashfast.  Within a matter of hours of this accusation his posts went down to nearly 0/day.

Lesson learned: Users should never be assumed to be who they portray themselves to be, especially with an extremely low post count.  

Read with caution.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Ok, I am not the smartest guy in the world so let me see if I understand.
Ken Slaughter and his relative have taken in $4M from investors (number correct?) and claims to have taken $6M in pre-orders (number correct?) and the only picture/evidence of progress toward the investors' end goal has been a picture of Ken in a garage looking warehouse space that would cost less than $2,000 per month to rent?
Is this correct?   Or can someone please post some stuff showing some sane reason that people would have bought $6M of pre-orders based on a dirty garage picture?
btw, how many months did it take for him to rent the dirty garage?   Perhaps, you can use this as a benchmark for the timeline of how long it will take him to design, produce, de-bug and deliver a miner?

Pay me $10K USD via BTC, and I'll show you via Google (a search engine, for those who have more money than brains) that there is no fuckin' way one satoshi should have gone to any entity that has Kenneth Slaughter's, et al. name on it.

[fannybaws]

How about you give me nothing and I'll show you via this post how your opinion also means nothing?  Have you ever asked yourself why you surf threads and post rubbish for no good reason other than to fulfil your quest to get to either 20,000 posts or an activity of 1000 first?  Let me explain.  You think it adds to your misguided belief that your hero status makes you important. Wrong.  It's not the quantity of your posts but the quality that define you.  Here is my very favourite post of yours on the 9th of January and believe me there were many, lol.  

This thread had no posts in 2013.

Now hurry back to Hashfast as I'm sure they are missing you already.  

[Puppet]

1. Hi, here's the quote, including both Intellihash and the respin (sorry, it was me that misremembered "respin" - i guess i was trying to reconcile stuff subconsciously, the original is simply ridiculous):

Intellihash(tm)

Intellihash is our new trademark for our new Bitcoin mining software which gives up to a 20% increase in hashing speed and has the possibility to increase the speed of our mining machines as the difficulty goes up.  We have had to modify the software in our chips to make it work with our new software.  The chips are going to be late; however, our new Intellihash software could be a game changer for the company.

link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=297543.msg3782916#msg3782916

"modify the software in our chips to work with our software"?  So you can mine while you mine?

Like I said, wouldnt count on Ken using the correct terminology .

But there could be some truth to this apparently nonsensical statement; FPGA's do run microcode ('software'). 'our chips' would then have to be referring to FPGA's still. That may sound disastrous that at that point they would still be working on the FPGA prototype, but do keep in mind eASIC nextreme works differently than traditional asics. It uses standard partially processed wafers on which just one layer is changed, and this can be done using an e-Beam; that would be done in house and could be done very fast (within hours literally I believe, but lets call it days).

So here is one hypothesis:
- Nextreme 3 preprocessed wafers are not ready yet or are having issues and they need a respin. Ken may not be allowed to say this publicly.
- meanwhile work is continuing on the ActM FPGA code, changes are made to implement whatever "intellihash" means

The bringing together of those 2 can be done very much faster than with traditional asics, at least for low volume production; its pretty much impossible to guess their timeline, but once working nextreme 3 wafers get delivered, it could be only a matter of days to implement the FPGA code and get working ActM chips (well, wafers) based on them.

2. If the contract with eAsic was for Ken to be a guinea pig, he simply lied to his investors by misrepresenting the risks.  There's a guy here who invested his retirement fund into this disaster.  

I dont quite see how anyone could have thought a startup company producing bitcoin specific hardware could be risk free. FWIW, KnC is also not telling its Neptune customers its using a brand new, barely tested 20nm process, the equipment for which is still being ordered by TSMC. That may or may not pan out, but TBH, I would rate that higher risk than I would have rated eASIC's ability to bring a well understood structured asic migration process to a well understood mature silicon production process. If I were Ken, I would probably have made that same bet.

[iSnow]

Wow Puppet, thank you so much for chiming in. Finally someone who brings both chip knowledge and common sense to this thread.

Please don't exhaust yourself answering the brats here, I'd rather you comment when necessary instead of fighting with fools and then turning your back in frustration.

So thanks again.

[drawingthesun]

2. If the contract with eAsic was for Ken to be a guinea pig, he simply lied to his investors by misrepresenting the risks.  There's a guy here who invested his retirement fund into this disaster.  

Haha that guy is probably me. At least I have a few years before retirement to make it back.

[Puppet]

Wow Puppet, thank you so much for chiming in. Finally someone who brings both chip knowledge and common sense to this thread.

Im hardly an expert, but Ive considered the structured asic approach for a long time myself. It made complete sense a year ago, since it allows close to asic performance with comparatively low NRE, much lower risk and in theory (on an established process), much faster time to market. However, if its true ActM collected $10M, that choice becomes more questionable. And for sure the clock is ticking, the disadvantages of a structured asic cant be ignored in the face of mounting competition; they are less power efficient (color me skeptical about the claims made in that regard) and they cost a lot more per chip. IF its going to happen it had better happen soon, because obsolesce is looming around the corner.

[hammurabi]

Anybody knows what the fate of non-tendered shares stored on BF is? Thx.