Bitcoin Forum
July 19, 2019, 08:59:51 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive Manufacturer Trustworthiness Guide [1st Feb 2016]  (Read 130989 times)
hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 12:13:44 PM
 #541

Fuck BFL. (Nothing personnal) Grin
1563526791
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563526791

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563526791
Reply with quote  #2

1563526791
Report to moderator
1563526791
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563526791

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563526791
Reply with quote  #2

1563526791
Report to moderator
1563526791
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563526791

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563526791
Reply with quote  #2

1563526791
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
jimmothy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 12:14:25 PM
 #542

But you continue to make my comments here, about BFL itself, when my comments are solely about the list.

I don't think there is anything wrong with a "bfl" rating. It's sort of like the opposite of a gold standard.

Other than outright scams, it doesn't get worse than BFL when it comes to ethics.
Pentax
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700
Merit: 500


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 12:30:39 PM
 #543

But you continue to make my comments here, about BFL itself, when my comments are solely about the list.

I don't think there is anything wrong with a "bfl" rating. It's sort of like the opposite of a gold standard.

Other than outright scams, it doesn't get worse than BFL when it comes to ethics.


Could be.  I never bought from BFL. 

What I would like to know, for those of us that don't know as we've never had the "pleasure" of doing business with BFL, is if "BFL'ing" is part of the ratings scale, what exactly is the definition if "BFL'ing"
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 12:33:06 PM
 #544

Do tell. What "ethics" are you so bent out of shape on? 

You bitch and you moan about "ethics" constantly, yet you ignore the fact that BFL has bent over backwards to try to satisfy customers.  Yes, BFL has been late. Yes, some of the products have failed to meet initial expectations from the design phase.  Beyond that, what ethics do you realistically have a problem with?  That BFL did not give refunds after shipping started (even though they gave full, 100% refunds up until that time.)?  You complain that they didn't give refunds after they spent the money to acquire the hardware to produce the product to deliver?  That's your beef?  You conveniently forget the months and months of full refunds that were offered prior to that.

What else?  People bitch about not communicating, except BFL has been the most open and forthcoming hardware manufacturer out there with timelines and states of progress.  That's really been the problem all along, BFL has been too open and communicative, which gives people false understand of the processes involved.  Anyone who's actually gone through the process understands the problems encountered.  Those that haven't are the ones that complain the loudest. 

What else is there?  Lets talk about design spec not meeting final product performance. 

1st generation FGPA?  Yep, it was off and it was late.  Refunds were offered.
2nd generation FPGA? Over performed initial spec, delivered on time.
1st generation ASIC? Yep, it was off and it was late. 100% refunds, no questions asked, were offered until the product actually started shipping, then on a case by case basis.
2nd generation ASIC? Learned from mistakes with 1st generation. Stated from the start that there was no definitive shipping date and if you were uncomfortable with this, in big bold letters you were told DO NOT PRE-ORDER THIS PRODUCT.  Here, let me quote the text you are presented with before ordering:

Quote
This is a Pre-Order product which is not yet shipping.  If you're uncomfortable waiting until the development is complete and the product is shipped, do NOT pre-order this product. Perhaps undesirable, but this is a pre-order market.  Customers flatly demand to get in line for the new technology before it's finished development.  All manufacturers in this space have experienced some degree of delay with their first generation ASIC, so we're reluctant to give a specific delivery date.

That has been there from DAY 1 on the Monarch.  Real unethical of BFL.  Telling people to NOT order the product if they don't want to take the risk of waiting for the product.  Telling people there is not delivery date.

Refunds offered? Check
Telling people not to pre-order? Check
Telling people there is no set delivery date? Check
Telling people where we are at with development process? Check
Longest warranty in the industry? Check
No questions asked RMA, even for 2nd hand devices? Check

What else is there?  What other "ethics" are so poor?  Do tell.  Try to be objective.


If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
Squeaker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 450
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 12:35:06 PM
 #545

and should BFL make more improvements, and improve their reputation, then how is that supposed to fit into the scale, if the scale itself, has them essentially hardcoded to permanently be the worst of the worst?

=squeak=

Squeaker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 450
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 12:42:30 PM
 #546

and now, ethically, the maintainers of the list should go through each claim that Inaba has just made, to either confirm or invalidate each claim, WITH EVIDENCE, and if BFL's entry needs to be updated based on the new info, then it should be done... OBJECTIVELY, without bias or personal grudges involved.

ethics works both ways...

if I am to rely on this list to be an accurate reference for who I will do business with, then it needs to be objective and without bias, and their homework needs to be done... and not just base it on a bunch of loudmouthed socially-inept geeks who lack the ability to give reasonable criticism.

=squeak=

Collider
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 12:44:01 PM
 #547

BFL consistenly and systematically fucked customers over last year, denying them refunds although they were required BY LAW to give them, as they didn´t ship their product near advertised time or on spec (efficiency!).

BFL delay tactics in regards to refunds were still a huge issue this year, and have only recently improved slightly, after they essentially got "free loans" (and only because they delayed refunds again).

BFL pricing is a huge ripoff and nowhere near competetive ( see AM / Bitmain / spondoolies / A1 pricing).

BFL consistently lead their customers to believe shipping was "immininent", "in two weeks" and other similar variations of these phrases, which somehow proved to be wrong again and again.



Bad business ethics includes all the mentioned problems, aswell as the systematic preying on newbies through false advertising.

So yeah, BFL actually deserves a much worse rating than what dogie gave you, so stop bitching about it inaba.


There is a reason why your company coined the phrase BFLed, and I for one cannot understand how you even bring up the courage to show your face to anyone related to bitcoin mining.
(Then again, you are just ranting here, which might protect you from a lot of anger)
dogie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1119


dogiecoin.com


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 12:44:19 PM
 #548


I can't just set all their scores to 1 because you don't like them, its not how it works.

Are you serious?  That's exactly how it works.  Lets see here:

BFL:

Delivered miners?  Few ... I mean, it's not like BFL hasen't delivered over 50k miners or anything.  I guess anyone who's delivered less than 50k miners has delivered "few."  Oh wait... that doesn't jive with the rest of your chart.
Uses preorders?   Yes ... O Rly? BFL Hasn't taken preorders in months. Additionally we were and are selling off the shelf miners from the 65nm generation.
Refund Issues?   BFL has been issuing refunds to anyone and everyone who asks for them prior to delivery of their order for awhile now. Prior to that, any order that was over 6 months old was refundable in full.
Communication? We are more open about our process and timeline than just about anyone else in the industry.
Ethics: You've created a special category with our name because you don't like us, plain and simple.

So what's this BS about "I can't just set all their scores to 1 because you don't like them" again?  That's all your guide is, there's nothing objective about it. You set scores arbitrarily based off of zero facts or figures.  It's all about your flawed, biased opinion.  At least Bickdullski admits his guide is opinionated and biased.   

But by all means, carry on.  I just wanted to laugh at your knee slapper of a quote and point out your incredible hypocrisy.

The system is weighted heavily on the immediate past, so the delivered miners is referring to the monarchs. At this point, yes, you have only delivered a few, and yes, you have again amassed a backlog. Once you've shipped more, you'll get the 10 points same as anyone else.

I'm not sure how you can argue you don't use preorders, you have done, and you continue to do as your main business model. 65nm (for the vast majority) and your monarchs were both sold as preorder products, delivered in 2 weeks. Unless you're talking about this split second at which point the only things you're selling are 10GH miners @ $5/GH - I can't give you a pat on the back for that. If you do sell in hand Monarchs once your queue is cleared AND then don't sell preorders on whatever comes after then you'll of course get your deserved 20 points. Heck, I'll even send you a prize in the post if I can get it through customs Smiley

Refund issues stick much longer through history. The tldr is why did people have to sue individually and class action if you were issuing refund fluidly? You might be doing fine at the moment, but unfortunately this one sticks longer than the others. Have a look at the other companies though, you're not alone.

Regarding communication, remember that the standard is 7. You don't have to do much at all to drop down to 4. You have a 1 because there is too much smoke. The catchphrase 2 weeks doesn't just appear without reason. You ban anyone who says ANYTHING negative about you on your forums, and say the rest of the world is out to get you. Maybe you have self justified some tilted reasons, but it doesn't help your customers. Oh, and you don't declare everyone else who disagrees with you as a troll (and pay people to discredit them).

I didn't create your category, you did. First with the bad company performance to make it the lowest/near lowest performing company, and then again with the smear campaign as an ethical infraction. You've done well to actually raise your company out of the BFL scoring category which if you stay out of it next time can finally be renamed!!!!. You were the only company in it for so long it only made sense it call it the BFL tier. Remember VMC is bankrupt and doesn't exist.

But yeah, if I arbitrarily set companies I didn't like to 1 then why would I have just raised BFLs score more than any other company in the latest update? According to you I'm highly biased against you.

dogie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1119


dogiecoin.com


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 12:49:27 PM
 #549

What I'm talking about is this:
Quote
Rating System
Position in the list signifies trustworthiness, the higher the better. A perfect score is 100 and the worst possible score is 10. Criteria includes the use of preorders, prompt delivery, the investment of custom chips, hardware and refund issues, communication ability, ethical behaviour and company size.
   90+ = AAA tier firm
   80+ = A tier firm
   70+ = B tier firm, solid company but can improve practises
   50+ = C tier firm, issues to be resolved
   30+ = D tier firm, significant issues or problems
   30-  = BFL tier
No amount of improvement in their service, is going to matter to you guys, cuz you made it personal. You're no longer objective, and you're just going to keep on bashing BFL no matter what, solely because they're BFL and you got your crusade that takes precedence.

I have my own issues with BFL, but that doesn't stop me from being objective, and the maintainers of this list should have the personal integrity to be objective too, or they're no better than the level of ethics they accuse BFL of, themselves.

1) That's not a rating criteria, thats the result of being rated. Its like energy efficiency:



Saying a bulb is F or G efficiency doesn't make it inefficient - it was inefficient in the first place and calling it F or G is just a label to represent that inefficiency.

2) Please stop confusing me with Bicknellski. He has qualms with BFL but they are separate from my discussion and this guide. He has his own guide here. Speak about ours separately, we don't act together.

Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 12:58:21 PM
 #550

BFL consistenly and systematically fucked customers over last year, denying them refunds although they were required BY LAW to give them, as they didn´t ship their product near advertised time or on spec (efficiency!).

False. There was no law requiring us to give refunds. Please cite caselaw to support your position (you can't, since it doesn't exist. Please consult a lawyer before addressing this issue going forward. As for the advertised spec, people were offered refunds and were in fact REQUIRED to accept the new specs or they would be given a refund if they did not respond in a certain amount of time.  How much more proactive and ethical can it get in that regard?

Quote
BFL delay tactics in regards to refunds were still a huge issue this year, and have only recently improved slightly, after they essentially got "free loans" (and only because they delayed refunds again).

False. There are no delay tactics. I don't even know what you are referring to. You ask for a refund, you get a refund. How hard is that?  Additionally, it was stated BEFORE you ordered that there were no refunds and you were told you NOT TO ORDER if you didn't agree with that.

Quote
BFL pricing is a huge ripoff and nowhere near competetive ( see AM / Bitmain / spondoolies / A1 pricing).
 

That's your opinion, not really an ethical issue.

Quote
BFL consistently lead their customers to believe shipping was "immininent", "in two weeks" and other similar variations of these phrases, which somehow proved to be wrong again and again.

The only time I have said two weeks is in response to Bruno's stupid crusade to find out about FCC certification.  I replied to a post asking when it would be FCC certified with "Umm, two weeks?" otherwise, I have never said two weeks about shipping that I can recall.  Please provide evidence to the contrary.  The estimations I have given on shipping have ALWAYS been tentative and have been labeled as such. I'm sorry the estimations have been wrong, but I use the best information I have available at the time.

Quote
Bad business ethics includes all the mentioned problems, aswell as the systematic preying on newbies through false advertising.

What false advertising would that be?


If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
Squeaker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 450
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 01:02:28 PM
 #551

2) Please stop confusing me with Bicknellski. He has qualms with BFL but they are separate from my discussion and this guide. He has his own guide here. Speak about ours separately, we don't act together.
Fair enuf... my bad for getting you guys mixed up.

=squeak=

Collider
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 01:03:20 PM
 #552

Bite me Josh. Let´s see how your court cases turn out.

Until then, I hope you will be able to sell as little as possible of your overpriced, late delivered garbage to people who do not know better.

I think it is clear to anyone with a halfway decently working memory that you shouldn´t buy at BFL unless you are a masochist.
Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 01:11:49 PM
 #553

The system is weighted heavily on the immediate past, so the delivered miners is referring to the monarchs. At this point, yes, you have only delivered a few, and yes, you have again amassed a backlog. Once you've shipped more, you'll get the 10 points same as anyone else.

What is your definition of "few" then?  10?  50?  100?  500?  1000?  10,000?

Quote
I'm not sure how you can argue you don't use preorders, you have done, and you continue to do as your main business model. 65nm (for the vast majority) and your monarchs were both sold as preorder products, delivered in 2 weeks. Unless you're talking about this split second at which point the only things you're selling are 10GH miners @ $5/GH - I can't give you a pat on the back for that. If you do sell in hand Monarchs once your queue is cleared AND then don't sell preorders on whatever comes after then you'll of course get your deserved 20 points. Heck, I'll even send you a prize in the post if I can get it through customs Smiley

Easily. We have not accepted any orders for months... I think we discontinued it in May for the 28nm line, almost 1/2 a year ago.  Here, let me quote you a few sentences ago: "The system is weighted heavily on the immediate past" ... so what does the 65nm line have to do with it?  So which is it, is it weighted on the immediate past or is it since last year?  Make up your mind.

Quote
Refund issues stick much longer through history. The tldr is why did people have to sue individually and class action if you were issuing refund fluidly? You might be doing fine at the moment, but unfortunately this one sticks longer than the others. Have a look at the other companies though, you're not alone.

Who is suing individually and in a class action?  The Woodlawn thing is not a class action suit and probably never will be.  The one other lawsuit is just as laughable.  So there are exactly two lawsuits pending, the rest have been either dismissed or I think there might be summary judgement since BFL was never actually served properly.  If they had been, those cases would have been dismissed as well.  There's a reason none of the lawsuits have been successful when they actually make it to court.

Quote
Regarding communication, remember that the standard is 7. You don't have to do much at all to drop down to 4. You have a 1 because there is too much smoke. The catchphrase 2 weeks doesn't just appear without reason. You ban anyone who says ANYTHING negative about you on your forums, and say the rest of the world is out to get you. Maybe you have self justified some tilted reasons, but it doesn't help your customers. Oh, and you don't declare everyone else who disagrees with you as a troll (and pay people to discredit them).

See, you are lying again. First of all, as I stated in the previous post, I never said two weeks in regards to shipping.  Please prove me wrong with a quote.  If I have said it, I said in an isolated post, but I've been unable to find any evidence of it.  The only "two weeks" I've ever commented on was Bruno's stupid FCC tirade.  No one has been banned for saying anything negative about BFL on the BFL forums.  Your statement to the contrary is easily falsified by browsing the forums and looking at the negative posts.  People are banned for trolling, posting the same junk over and over or posting false information (usually repeatedly).  It has nothing to do with negativity and everything to do with post content and presentation.  Please demonstrate evidence to the contrary.

I have no idea what you're babbling about when you talk about paying people to discredit them.  WTF?  Conspiracy much?

Quote
I didn't create your category, you did. First with the bad company performance to make it the lowest/near lowest performing company, and then again with the smear campaign as an ethical infraction. You've done well to actually raise your company out of the BFL scoring category which if you stay out of it next time can finally be renamed!!!!. You were the only company in it for so long it only made sense it call it the BFL tier. Remember VMC is bankrupt and doesn't exist.

Oh, this isn't your guide?  You didn't create it?  The only reason BFL was "in it" was because you are biased and opinionated. You don't take actual facts into consideration, just your own personal feelings.  Once again, I point out the facts and you respond with hyperbole, myths and lies. This is your guide, you created the category.  That is a lie right there.  I've already refuted the rest of your claims, yet you cling to them without providing a shred of evidence or proof.

Quote
I'm highly biased against you.

Well, at least you go that part right.


If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
jimmothy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770
Merit: 500



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 01:15:19 PM
 #554

BFL consistenly and systematically fucked customers over last year, denying them refunds although they were required BY LAW to give them, as they didn´t ship their product near advertised time or on spec (efficiency!).

False. There was no law requiring us to give refunds. Please cite caselaw to support your position (you can't, since it doesn't exist. Please consult a lawyer before addressing this issue going forward. As for the advertised spec, people were offered refunds and were in fact REQUIRED to accept the new specs or they would be given a refund if they did not respond in a certain amount of time.  How much more proactive and ethical can it get in that regard?

http://www.business.ftc.gov/documents/bus02-business-guide-mail-and-telephone-order-merchandise-rule


Quote
Quote
BFL delay tactics in regards to refunds were still a huge issue this year, and have only recently improved slightly, after they essentially got "free loans" (and only because they delayed refunds again).

False. There are no delay tactics. I don't even know what you are referring to. You ask for a refund, you get a refund. How hard is that?  Additionally, it was stated BEFORE you ordered that there were no refunds and you were told you NOT TO ORDER if you didn't agree with that.

"Only two more weeks" did not become a phrase because you said it once.

If refunds were so easy, you wouldn't have had several lawsuits, forced paypal/CC refunds, and customer complaints.


Quote
Quote
BFL pricing is a huge ripoff and nowhere near competetive ( see AM / Bitmain / spondoolies / A1 pricing).
 

That's your opinion, not really an ethical issue.

It becomes an ethics issue when you advertise the competition as $17.50/GH.

Quote
What false advertising would that be?

Here's a bit of it:

1. (monarch) The fastest and most power-efficient Bitcoin miner yet
2. Butterfly Labs has shipped more ASIC products than all competitors combined
3. Our facility in Kansas has the largest production capacity of all Bitcoin hardware manufacturers.
4. The Competition at least $ 17.50 /GH
5. 65nm ASIC chip is now powering the majority of the bitcoin network
6. The bottom line is that BFL is the only 28nm chip manufacturer on its 2nd generation ASIC
7. All manufacturers in this space have experienced some degree of delay with their first generation ASIC
8. 28nm products won't begin shipping til year end
9. (monarch) plan to begin shipments in February, 2014
10. Orders are shipped in order date priority so any order placed now should be expected to be delivered in March.
11. We are pioneers of the industry - having manufactured the first commercial Bitcoin mining hardware.
12. November / December    Initial Shipping
13. still on track for December/January
14. As we enter the 28nm era, we're the only competitor with a proven ASIC design in the field.
15. Tape out August 2013
16. Gen1 65nm asics will be around 1w/gh
17. BTC mining, being a zero sum activity, makes it viable and profitable to get as many people to cancel their orders as possible, so your position improves
18. We are so confident in our power consumption that we are offering up 1000 BTC to charity if we miss our power consumption targets by more than 10%
19. Everyone should be aware of the fact that you are allowed to upgrade 1, 2, 3 or 4 Jalepeno's to 1 Single and keep your place in line
20. Individual orders that are less than 6 months old and that paid for the reduced price 600GH or 300GH Monarch will likely not be delayed past the expected delivery date
21. We have developed the most technologically advanced, most power efficient mining chip on the planet by a factor of two.
22. KnC's new 20nm chip isn't even close to our 28nm chip in terms of performance.
23. I have spoken with Theymos, the operator of Bitcointalk, about this and I have his full knowledge and permission to perform this experiment
24. plan to begin shipments in March 2014
25. However, this is our second generation, so we have much greater clarity on the process
26. meaning the deployment of the Monarch will be delayed about 5 weeks from now
27. it is possible we will begin shipping limited quantities by the end of the week of the 21st(april), it's more likely we will begin shipping the following week, assuming no blocking issues arise.
28. our mining chip is more than 2x efficient than any other chip out
29. The Monarch product line is essentially 3x - 5x more efficient at any comparable hashrate than the competition
Bicknellski
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 01:15:51 PM
 #555

There is no difference between a 33% and Do not Buy.

BFL should be avoided simple as that. There is absolutely no debate on that point.


Dogie trust abuse, spam, bullying, conspiracy posts & insults to forum members. Ask the mods or admins to move Dogie's spam or off topic stalking posts to the link above.
Squeaker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 450
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 01:35:24 PM
 #556

There seems to be debate, actually.

=squeak=

Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 01:39:01 PM
 #557


Does not apply.  Like I said, provide some caselaw to the contrary.  Otherwise you're just being an armchair lawyer that has no understanding of the actual legal system.

Quote
"Only two more weeks" did not become a phrase because you said it once.

Fair enough, please provide proof to back up your claim.  I already asked for this, you've still failed to provide it.


Quote
If refunds were so easy, you wouldn't have had several lawsuits, forced paypal/CC refunds, and customer complaints.

The lawsuits are for people complaining about not becoming millionaries in 3 weeks by mining, not about refunds.  Check your facts.  The lawsuits have never been about refunds.

Quote
It becomes an ethics issue when you advertise the competition as $17.50/GH.

Which was true when the advertisements were created.

Quote
1. (monarch) The fastest and most power-efficient Bitcoin miner yet

True at the time and pretty much still true now.  Which miner can achieve .45W/GH efficiency currently?  Is there one?  Not saying there isn't, but it's not an unrealistic claim.

Quote
2. Butterfly Labs has shipped more ASIC products than all competitors combined

True, although I might grant that if you include the ASIC miner USB sticks, they might have more units shipped than we do.  If you do not include those, then yes, it's absolutely true.

Quote
3. Our facility in Kansas has the largest production capacity of all Bitcoin hardware manufacturers.

Absolutely true.  Any of the other large scale manufacturers outsource their production capacity to other companies.  

Quote
4. The Competition at least $ 17.50 /GH
Already addressed above.

Quote
5. 65nm ASIC chip is now powering the majority of the bitcoin network

Was true at the time of the advertisement creation.

Quote
6. The bottom line is that BFL is the only 28nm chip manufacturer on its 2nd generation ASIC

Was true at the time of the advertisement creation.

Quote
7. All manufacturers in this space have experienced some degree of delay with their first generation ASIC

Still true.

Quote
8. 28nm products won't begin shipping til year end

Believed to be true at the time.  Where do you even see this?

Quote
9. (monarch) plan to begin shipments in February, 2014

How is this false?  That was most assuredly the plan.

Quote
10. Orders are shipped in order date priority so any order placed now should be expected to be delivered in March.

Also true.

Quote
11. We are pioneers of the industry - having manufactured the first commercial Bitcoin mining hardware.

True statement. How is this a false advertisement?

Quote
12. November / December    Initial Shipping

True at the time.

Quote
13. still on track for December/January

True at the time.

Quote
14. As we enter the 28nm era, we're the only competitor with a proven ASIC design in the field.

True at the time.

Quote
15. Tape out August 2013

True.

Quote
16. Gen1 65nm asics will be around 1w/gh

Believed to be true at the time. Customers offered full refunds if they were unhappy with the new specs.

Quote
17. BTC mining, being a zero sum activity, makes it viable and profitable to get as many people to cancel their orders as possible, so your position improves

Are you seriously trying to say this is false?!

Quote
18. We are so confident in our power consumption that we are offering up 1000 BTC to charity if we miss our power consumption targets by more than 10%

And this is false how?

Quote
19. Everyone should be aware of the fact that you are allowed to upgrade 1, 2, 3 or 4 Jalepeno's to 1 Single and keep your place in line

False how? We did exactly that.

Quote
20. Individual orders that are less than 6 months old and that paid for the reduced price 600GH or 300GH Monarch will likely not be delayed past the expected delivery date

This is false how?

Quote
21. We have developed the most technologically advanced, most power efficient mining chip on the planet by a factor of two.

Most definitely true at the time.

Quote
22. KnC's new 20nm chip isn't even close to our 28nm chip in terms of performance.

I suppose close is relative. At .7 W/GH vs .5 W/GH, I'd say you could classify it as true.

Quote
23. I have spoken with Theymos, the operator of Bitcointalk, about this and I have his full knowledge and permission to perform this experiment

This is not an advertisement. But regardless, it's true and Theymos confirmed it himself on these forums.

Quote
24. plan to begin shipments in March 2014

Absolutely true.

Quote
25. However, this is our second generation, so we have much greater clarity on the process

Not really an advertisement, but regardless, it is true.

Quote
26. meaning the deployment of the Monarch will be delayed about 5 weeks from now

Believed to be true at the time.

Quote
27. it is possible we will begin shipping limited quantities by the end of the week of the 21st(april), it's more likely we will begin shipping the following week, assuming no blocking issues arise.

Absolutely true.

Quote
28. our mining chip is more than 2x efficient than any other chip out

True at the time.

Quote
29. The Monarch product line is essentially 3x - 5x more efficient at any comparable hashrate than the competition

True at the time.

Wow... you are 0/29, ouch!


If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
Bicknellski
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 01:48:58 PM
 #558

There seems to be debate, actually.

=squeak=


Go ahead you first.

Seems you never answered. Here is something to debate.

Bitmaintech vs. BFL where would you put your money?

Wonder why that would be a hard question to answer?

====

Monarch Customer vs. S1, S2 or S3 Customers over the past 12 months... can we do the comparisons?

No debate required.


Dogie trust abuse, spam, bullying, conspiracy posts & insults to forum members. Ask the mods or admins to move Dogie's spam or off topic stalking posts to the link above.
dogie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1119


dogiecoin.com


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 02:00:48 PM
 #559

What is your definition of "few" then?  10?  50?  100?  500?  1000?  10,000?

As many as is considered acceptable by customers. Having a backlog of orders behind schedule isn't considered acceptable - unless they're being compensated acceptably. Note thats actually being compensated, not promised to be compensated.


Easily. We have not accepted any orders for months... I think we discontinued it in May for the 28nm line, almost 1/2 a year ago.  Here, let me quote you a few sentences ago: "The system is weighted heavily on the immediate past" ... so what does the 65nm line have to do with it?  So which is it, is it weighted on the immediate past or is it since last year?  Make up your mind.

Eh? You're saying "we don't use preorders" on the basis that you don't take any sales at all. In that case you should be removed from the list entirely because you're not an ASIC company in the recent few months right? You're business model is currently preorder based and until you make an effort to change that you will remain 1/20 for that category.


Who is suing individually and in a class action?  The Woodlawn thing is not a class action suit and probably never will be.  The one other lawsuit is just as laughable.  So there are exactly two lawsuits pending, the rest have been either dismissed or I think there might be summary judgement since BFL was never actually served properly.  If they had been, those cases would have been dismissed as well.  There's a reason none of the lawsuits have been successful when they actually make it to court.

Do you have a link to any cases I can view online so I can review? The papers from Woodlaw schedule show nothing to prevent it being a class action.


See, you are lying again. First of all, as I stated in the previous post, I never said two weeks in regards to shipping.  Please prove me wrong with a quote.  If I have said it, I said in an isolated post, but I've been unable to find any evidence of it.  The only "two weeks" I've ever commented on was Bruno's stupid FCC tirade.  No one has been banned for saying anything negative about BFL on the BFL forums.  Your statement to the contrary is easily falsified by browsing the forums and looking at the negative posts.  People are banned for trolling, posting the same junk over and over or posting false information (usually repeatedly).  It has nothing to do with negativity and everything to do with post content and presentation.  Please demonstrate evidence to the contrary.

I have no idea what you're babbling about when you talk about paying people to discredit them.  WTF?  Conspiracy much?

And I never said the two weeks was in regards to shipping. Saying no one has ever been banned from the BFL forums for saying anything negative though is pretty laughable though. Every time you ban an innocent they come over here and make a post along the lines of "yeah I just said "when can we expect x y z and got permabanned? :/." I'm not one of those obsessed with your company and I'm not going to turn this into a quote war. I'm not even going to invite anyone else to do so because I don't want this thead to turn into BFL vs the world like the other 10 threads.

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/announcements/8203-win-butterfly-labs-imperial-monarch.html You paid your customers to discredit me.


Oh, this isn't your guide?  You didn't create it?  The only reason BFL was "in it" was because you are biased and opinionated. You don't take actual facts into consideration, just your own personal feelings.  Once again, I point out the facts and you respond with hyperbole, myths and lies. This is your guide, you created the category.  That is a lie right there.  I've already refuted the rest of your claims, yet you cling to them without providing a shred of evidence or proof.

You've not pointed out any facts, nor presented any evidence. You keep saying "that's a lie that's a lie" yet you're not actually talking about anything, its hard to argue against that :s


Quote
I'm highly biased against you.

Well, at least you go that part right.

Its a shame you made that quote up. GL with your talk.

But yeah, if I arbitrarily set companies I didn't like to 1 then why would I have just raised BFLs score more than any other company in the latest update? According to you I'm highly biased against you.

Squeaker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 450
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 02:03:12 PM
 #560

There seems to be debate, actually.

=squeak=


Go ahead you first.

Seems you never answered. Here is something to debate.

Bitmaintech vs. BFL where would you put your money?

Wonder why that would be a hard question to answer?

====

Monarch Customer vs. S1, S2 or S3 Customers over the past 12 months... can we do the comparisons?

No debate required.


I'm not here to debate company vs company, and don't have any experience with Bitmaintech in any event.

At this point, I'm just watching the existing debate that you earlier said there isn't.

=squeak=

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!