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

[VinceSamios]

I can't be the only person that started scratching my head when it's announced that 10.488TH/s takes up 2 42u racks according to Ken.

Yes but.... Let's do the math with 28nm chips...


The numbers are:
30gh/chip
24 chips per card
230 cards per "system"
2 x 42U racks per "System"


Someone estimated it would take 190 racks to house 1ph of 55nm cards - so nearer 250 racks to host the 1.3PH ken suggested would come online.

This would be 125 "systems"

In 55nm with chips at 1.9gh/s that would be 10.5TH/s or 5.25TH/s per rack.

With 28nm chips it's 165.6TH/system or 82.8TH/rack

250 racks of 28nm chips is.... 20.7PH/s - this would only need 700,000 chips or around approx 200 x 28nm wafers. Or about $2mil-$5mil for NRE and wafer cost. For 3% TNHR if this came online in august...

So yes - the density of 55nm (1.9gh/s) chips might seem a little low, but the same space could eventually hold over 20PH of hashing power - that is a LOT of hashing power. Also the cost price of getting that hash power online is freakin tiny compared to current options.

So yes, we didn't start hashing when we'd hoped. Yes ken is pissing a lot of people off with shares (not getting trading sorted and dumping a tonne of shares at super low prices) - but things really are ONLY bleak if NOTHING ever happens. I'm of the feeling and understanding that with the engineering team and the tapeout of 55nm, the chance of "nothing" happening is... nil

[Vigil]

Whatever can get hashing going as soon as possible is the best option.

[keepinithamsta]

So yes, we didn't start hashing when we'd hoped. Yes ken is pissing a lot of people off with shares (not getting trading sorted and dumping a tonne of shares at super low prices) - but things really are ONLY bleak if NOTHING ever happens. I'm of the feeling and understanding that with the engineering team and the tapeout of 55nm, the chance of "nothing" happening is... nil

Ah, yes.  The tapeout.  Reminds me of "shipping this week".

[shaofis]

I can't be the only person that started scratching my head when it's announced that 10.488TH/s takes up 2 42u racks according to Ken.

Yes but.... Let's do the math with 28nm chips...


The numbers are:
30gh/chip
24 chips per card
230 cards per "system"
2 x 42U racks per "System"


Someone estimated it would take 190 racks to house 1ph of 55nm cards - so nearer 250 racks to host the 1.3PH ken suggested would come online.

This would be 125 "systems"

In 55nm with chips at 1.9gh/s that would be 10.5TH/s or 5.25TH/s per rack.

With 28nm chips it's 165.6TH/system or 82.8TH/rack

250 racks of 28nm chips is.... 20.7PH/s - this would only need 700,000 chips or around approx 200 x 28nm wafers. Or about $2mil-$5mil for NRE and wafer cost. For 3% TNHR if this came online in august...

So yes - the density of 55nm (1.9gh/s) chips might seem a little low, but the same space could eventually hold over 20PH of hashing power - that is a LOT of hashing power. Also the cost price of getting that hash power online is freakin tiny compared to current options.

So yes, we didn't start hashing when we'd hoped. Yes ken is pissing a lot of people off with shares (not getting trading sorted and dumping a tonne of shares at super low prices) - but things really are ONLY bleak if NOTHING ever happens. I'm of the feeling and understanding that with the engineering team and the tapeout of 55nm, the chance of "nothing" happening is... nil

Vince,

While I like your direction; I think you are extrapolating information that we just don't know yet.

• Die per board - Needed to estimate Board GH/s
• Die Size - Needed to estimate wafer cost
• Estimated power of 28nm

Honestly 30GH/s @ 28nm is better than I could have hoped for (assuming the die stays the same size as the 55nm or shrinks).

For comparison sake...

Cointerra 500GH per chip is 4 die... each die is 10x10 and produces 125GH.

A cointerera wafer would yield around 520 functional die per wafer. At a total hash estimated at 65,000GH.

Based on our 55nm asic; we are shooting for around 4.5nm x 4.5nm (Ken please correct me). Which as Ken indicated yields 6800 die per wafer or 12,920GH.

If Ken can increase the hash rate to 30GH without increasing the die size... at 6800 die per wafer you are looking at 204,000GH compared to Cointerra's 65,000GH.

if our die size increases to 10x10 (which is our package size) then we could be looking at 15,600GH per wafer.

Now this isn't exactly apples to apples... if Ken would tell us the die size of the 28nm we can better judge.

*** EDIT to correct numbers

6800 Yield would mean a 10sqmm die size or 3.16mm x 3.16mm

die per wafer calculator http://anysilicon.com/die-per-wafer-formula-free-calculators/

[EduardoDeCastro]

...
At some point, let's say December of 2014, if there is no trading, and no product being produced, there will be many angry, very angry "share holders".  

Well no.
With projects like Active Mining, endgame is the most important part.  Think of Active Mining as a shaken up bottle of seltzer; sure, if you unscrew the top like an imbecile, you'll be instantly drenched.  But if you carefully release the pressure in small increments, letting the seltzer outgas, you won't even get your hands wet.

This is what's happening now.  Ken is feeding you bits of bad news, letting you vent...  By the time all's said and done, the worst he'll see is a couple of civil lawsuits from large "investors" (that he could settle for a tiny fraction of the raised coin).
PROFIT.

[nyc77]

A story......

Years ago, I worked as a software engineer for a large company which at the time was rather well known and which, and because of many bad decisions both before and after the death of its founder went bankrupt.

One of the reasons the company failed was because some manager got the brilliant idea of only releasing products that had no bugs at all. He insisted that software be tested, tested again, and then retested over and over, until there were no bugs. He could not understand why it was not possible to bug free software. Often he would talk about how if a car or refrigerator  was sold with as many bugs as our software, no one would buy a refrigerator.

We tried to explain to him that there was a balance between bugs and delivery date. You could not wait so long making a product so perfect that it never gets delivered, because there is always a window of opportunity past which, the product won't be able to capture any market share.

In the most recent PR announcement, Ken gave us a date of April to be in the heart of production and mining.

It seems as if with each PR announcement, the start of trading gets delayed again. Ken has made many promises which he has broken.  Continuing to do that just breaks any remaining confidence the community has in him. 

At some point, let's say December of 2014, if there is no trading, and no product being produced, there will be many angry, very angry "share holders". 

Hi. Please dont disturb them, they are doing the math. Because nerdgasm.

[mainline]

A challenger appears...

http://s28.postimg.org/ed2ct03v1/Capture.jpg

The cutthroat world of high finance

[minerpart]

'We are also thinking about going to a 20nm custom chip and skipping the 28nm, if we can get it produced fast enough.' - Ken.

I'm confused by the reaction to this. Ken has said that he never stops thinking about how he can generate profit for this company. Here he is thinking outside of the box and thinking big and all the girls on here start screaming and crying.

We need a decent level of debate  about this and we need to offer Ken our best advice, not throw a tantrum and call him a scammer. Fact - if he was a scammer eASIC, who have a serious reputation to maintain, would have exposed him months ago.

--------------------------------------------------------------

My advice to Ken on this-

After reading an article I am sceptical about the promised benefits of a 20nm die when you have non-scaleable components you have to build it around. Transistors are not scaling down on par with the die reduction so you have relatively larger sized components than as used in 28nm.  So as far as I understand it significant 20nm efficiencies over 28nm are currently largely theoretical and will be extremely difficult or impossible to produce with current tech.

This is essential reading, as far as I'm aware this is still current:
http://www.altera.co.uk/technology/system-design/articles/2012/20nm-systems-era.html

The key section is:

The Fine-Print Take Away
The ability to spend transistors to buy performance is absolutely vital to 20 nm SoCs for one simple reason: at the block level, 20 nm chips will not be much faster than their 28 nm equivalents. This is not immediately obvious from the publicity. TSMC, for example, claims that their 20 nm technology “…can provide 30 percent higher speed…than its 28 nm technology.” That is not the doubling we used to expect between process generations, but it is not trivial. Yet to achieve that speed on an entire block, rather than on a few critical paths, might require lavish use of low-Vt transistors with very significant leakage current, raising the issue of local-heating problems. Even without the thermal issues, the design might never close timing across all the many process, voltage, and temperature corners that 20 nm presents. Some engineers have suggested that taking power and variations into consideration, blocks simply ported to 20 nm may gain no speed at all.

[mainline]

... Fact - if he was a scammer eASIC, who have a serious reputation to maintain, would have exposed him months ago.
...

They couldn't.  Because NDA

Otherwise, Reuters News:

AMC, a virtual identity totally owned by Active Mining Corporation (Belize), turns out to be a scam.
In an impromptu press conference, President Obama expressed shock and disbelief, stating:  "A virtual identity wholly owned by Active Mining Corporation (Belize) a scam?  In MY America?  Say it ain't so!  How could this happen?!"

Derp.

[klondike_bar]

IMO, if the 20nm can absolutely positively be online WELL before the 55nm stuff is useless, with room for error. Then 20nm is a better move than playing catchup on 28.

We seem to sort of "own" a chip team as part of the 55nm deal and some IP involved with that, if they think they can do 20, and we're not losing much since 28 seems back to scratch anyway because eASIC seems to have failed us, then let's do 20.

It might be a longer term thing than some shareholders would like, but next year, 28 might look stupid when we could have had 20. 20 might keep us earning into 2015, 28 might crap out in Q4 this year.

I think its important to look at the competitors - its clear that chip design trumps size.

Bitfury 55nm :    0.8-1.1W/GH
Antminer 55nm : 1.9-2.2W/GH
ASICMINER 40nm : 0.4W/GH or less

compared to most 28nm designs being in the 0.6-0.9W/GH range and KNC promising ~0.3W/GH at 20nm

It seems obvious that the silicon design is more important than its size, since Bitfury's 55nm technology is competitive with chips much smaller than it. Asicminer is making promises of a 40nm chip that will beat out current 28nm designs and compete with the KNC 20nm design even

[minerpart]

Excellent points Klondike.

[shadallion]

I just can't fathom why it has taken nearly two months to get these damn shares verified and listed on Crypto-Trade.

Seems like a few dedicated hours of spreadsheet work would do it.

Ken think of your own personal joy when you list the shares and the Negative Nellies finally get to cash out and vanish into the ether?   Do it for yourself, if nothing else!

[Desmond.Paris]

Validation of shares and restarting trading has taken too long.

Ken, quit making excuses and focus on fulfilling your promises.

You promised many things but you are losing credibility each time you delay, make up a new excuse or even have a delay because you make an engineering change and return to the drawing board.

The speed of each individual chip is less important than the over all total of hashing power and the cost of running those miners. The chips could be 100nm in size, but as long as there in enough hashing power and the cost of operations is low enough, Active Mining will still make money.

At this point, Ken, you may not be able to make the engineers work faster or the chip manufacturer produce the chips faster, but you DO have control over starting verification of shares and resuming trading.

This needs to be done quickly. The consequences of it not happening soon will be ugly.


What I mean by that is that you will end up alienating the few shareholders who still defend you. You will have no one to defend you should the company really go legs up. However you justify delaying this just a little bit longer, you need to quit it.  You have a pattern of justifying your actions, whether it was when the first IPO came out to reoffer shares at a different price, or to decide to wait until the price of bitcoin would go up to get out of hibernation of engineering design, or like right now, when you keep going back to the drawing board. Quit rationalizing things to delay. You are only delaying because you are afraid the product you finally come up with won't be perfect.  The more you delay, the less profit the company will be able to make.  The more you delay, the more it feels like a betrayal of those who believed in you from the start.

Now is the time to focus on starting trading again and let the engineers you hired focus on the chips.

When will trading start again?

[Desmond.Paris]

What an interesting thought! Ken in jail!

We do know that he has had a few conversations with the SEC, or at least he has alleged that.

He also claims to have spent some guilders getting the advice of lawyers.

What happens if all the share holders who no longer have faith in the company sell?

The price will drop. If it goes low enough, some remaining believers will buy shares and the price would stabilize.

Then, every time Ken makes an announcement, the price will spike up. Eventually, unless Ken comes out with real working miners, the price will collapse and never return.

If Ken really does still believe in his company, it is in his benefit to allow the share price to fall as low as possible and then buy up those depressed shares.

Some people will think that is price manipulation, or insider trading, but it really is not. It would benefit him, because the more shares he has, if the company finally does succeed, he will own more of it and make more money.

His buying shares would show his own confidence in the mess he has created.

Let trading restart. Let the price go to wherever it should. Trust the market. 


This is just about Ken being paternalistic again. I bet he thinks he is somehow protecting all of us by delaying this one more week.

Enough already. Re-start trading now!

I just can't fathom why it has taken nearly two months to get these damn shares verified and listed on Crypto-Trade.

Seems like a few dedicated hours of spreadsheet work would do it.

Ken think of your own personal joy when you list the shares and the Negative Nellies finally get to cash out and vanish into the ether?   Do it for yourself, if nothing else!

If shares are ever released most of the cheerleaders on here will disappear so fast you'll wonder what happened.  Most of the supporters here are actually just trying to pump up enthusiasm so they can dump their shares and escape with some BTC intact.

Where will a washed up loser like Ken every find a fan club like this again?  I don't think he'll get quite as much of a thrill from the fat old housewives that volunteer to be prison pen-pals!

[mainline]

...
If Ken really does still believe in his company, it is in his benefit to allow the share price to fall as low as possible and then buy up those depressed shares.

...

If Ken had any wits about him, he would buy up the shares @.0005, instead  of selling them.  Regardless of his belief in the company.

If the company makes a profit (I know, i know...  just humor me for a sec), it's a wise investment.
When it becomes obvious to everyone that it's a scam, there would be no shareholders to complain.
Nothing wrong with buying your own stock @80% discount.  80% of a few mil with 0 risk is decent cheddar.

Dumping is stupid regardless of whether he's scamming or honest.  My guess is "unforeseen circumstances or acts of god."  Something went seriously wrong.

[wasubii]

20 might keep us earning into 2015, 28 might crap out in Q4 this year.

20nm compared to 28nm is negligible efficiency difference, and the /GH cost of 20nm is probably higher. Also at the moment some of the most efficient chips on the market are 55nm, so designing a good chip is far more important that a smaller process size.

^^^ This

[DeadwoodDan]

If Ken really does still believe in his company, it is in his benefit to allow the share price to fall as low as possible and then buy up those depressed shares.

So Ken is trolling shareholders and spreading FUD because he just wants some cheap shares?

[JimmyJazz]

From ACTM details on CT.

320600 / 25000000 Outstanding

How many shares did Ukyo own?
Has Ken been selling some of his on the sly?

[JoTheKhan]

From ACTM details on CT.

320600 / 25000000 Outstanding

How many shares did Ukyo own?
Has Ken been selling some of his on the sly?

[equipoise]

From ACTM details on CT.

320600 / 25000000 Outstanding

How many shares did Ukyo own?
Has Ken been selling some of his on the sly?

Those are all the shares ActM issued - 15000000 won't have dividends till 0.0025 dividends reached on the other 10000000. This is just the CT presetting in order to have all of our shares transferred.