Xian01
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1067
Christian Antkow
|
 |
March 11, 2014, 06:55:35 PM |
|
It would be helpful if we could get updated pricing in the OP similar to how Bitmain displays their pricing.
I am following this product with great interest and intend to order one when the pricing becomes more attractive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Once a transaction has 6 confirmations, it is extremely unlikely that an attacker without at least 50% of the network's computation power would be able to reverse it.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
Aexcu
|
|
March 11, 2014, 06:58:24 PM |
|
Also following this product as it seems most viable from the new breed of 1 TH/s miners introduced so far, but at least for now it hasn't matched by pricing excpectation. At the same time I fully appreciate that OP is not entering a bidding competition against lower grade products.
|
|
|
|
|
|
wpgdeez
|
|
March 12, 2014, 04:00:26 PM |
|
When the price comes down I will buy from you. I can see the hard work that you have put in and I can't believe the balls of Bitmine. Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth. I hope they gave you some compensation for helping their business from going down in flames even further.
|
|
|
|
|
FrictionlessCoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
Cryptotalk.org - Get paid for every post!
|
|
March 12, 2014, 05:06:44 PM |
|
Of course not, what a FUD. Bitmine has the right for exclusiv (speculation) distribution in Europe and the USA (speculation) and bought the license to produce the chip, which was produced at innosilicon for bitmine (facts). Whats innosilicon rights for distribution are in irrelevant as they are the producer, who selling licences. Bitmine claim, its their work has been stolen and I guess its up to the courts to decide whats going on, BUT i looks like that Bitmine is a bunch of amateurs, with 3 months delays and not able to drive the production to a level that can satisfy customers at all. I have to agree with this. AMT (Bitmine's U.S. reseller) is just as amateurish. |
|
|
|
skyfromwell
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
March 12, 2014, 05:24:32 PM |
|
Of course not, what a FUD. Bitmine has the right for exclusiv (speculation) distribution in Europe and the USA (speculation) and bought the license to produce the chip, which was produced at innosilicon for bitmine (facts). Whats innosilicon rights for distribution are in irrelevant as they are the producer, who selling licences. Bitmine claim, its their work has been stolen and I guess its up to the courts to decide whats going on, BUT i looks like that Bitmine is a bunch of amateurs, with 3 months delays and not able to drive the production to a level that can satisfy customers at all. When Bitmine's first board design came up, my engineers are laughing and rolling on the floor. That was halirous. It was bound to fail. After three reversions, we gave them the help by telling them using MTU. So their 4th reversion fnally works. But they are still not deliver a workable solution right now. |
|
|
|
|
|
giorgiotheclown
|
|
March 12, 2014, 10:33:26 PM |
|
Of course not, what a FUD. Bitmine has the right for exclusiv (speculation) distribution in Europe and the USA (speculation) and bought the license to produce the chip, which was produced at innosilicon for bitmine (facts). Whats innosilicon rights for distribution are in irrelevant as they are the producer, who selling licences. Bitmine claim, its their work has been stolen and I guess its up to the courts to decide whats going on, BUT i looks like that Bitmine is a bunch of amateurs, with 3 months delays and not able to drive the production to a level that can satisfy customers at all. When Bitmine's first board design came up, my engineers are laughing and rolling on the floor. That was halirous. It was bound to fail. After three reversions, we gave them the help by telling them using MTU. So their 4th reversion fnally works. But they are still not deliver a workable solution right now. show us the mail or what ever |
|
|
|
skyfromwell
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
March 13, 2014, 01:03:13 AM |
|
Of course not, what a FUD. Bitmine has the right for exclusiv (speculation) distribution in Europe and the USA (speculation) and bought the license to produce the chip, which was produced at innosilicon for bitmine (facts). Whats innosilicon rights for distribution are in irrelevant as they are the producer, who selling licences. Bitmine claim, its their work has been stolen and I guess its up to the courts to decide whats going on, BUT i looks like that Bitmine is a bunch of amateurs, with 3 months delays and not able to drive the production to a level that can satisfy customers at all. When Bitmine's first board design came up, my engineers are laughing and rolling on the floor. That was halirous. It was bound to fail. After three reversions, we gave them the help by telling them using MTU. So their 4th reversion fnally works. But they are still not deliver a workable solution right now. show us the mail or what ever Pretty much everyone uisng a MCU solution is a copy from us. |
|
|
|
|
QuestionTime
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
March 13, 2014, 01:50:56 AM |
|
Of course not, what a FUD. Bitmine has the right for exclusiv (speculation) distribution in Europe and the USA (speculation) and bought the license to produce the chip, which was produced at innosilicon for bitmine (facts). Whats innosilicon rights for distribution are in irrelevant as they are the producer, who selling licences. Bitmine claim, its their work has been stolen and I guess its up to the courts to decide whats going on, BUT i looks like that Bitmine is a bunch of amateurs, with 3 months delays and not able to drive the production to a level that can satisfy customers at all. When Bitmine's first board design came up, my engineers are laughing and rolling on the floor. That was halirous. It was bound to fail. After three reversions, we gave them the help by telling them using MTU. So their 4th reversion fnally works. But they are still not deliver a workable solution right now. show us the mail or what ever Pretty much everyone uisng a MCU solution is a copy from us. So you say. Still, this does not change the fact that Innosilicon does not have the rights to produce and distribute the A1 chips without bitmine's permission. |
|
|
|
|
Syke
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3878
Merit: 1193
|
|
March 13, 2014, 01:57:01 AM |
|
Still, this does not change the fact that Innosilicon does not have the rights to produce and distribute the A1 chips without bitmine's permission.
Doubtful. Innosilicon was the one who actually engineered the chip. |
Buy & Hold
|
|
|
QuestionTime
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
March 13, 2014, 02:08:58 AM |
|
Still, this does not change the fact that Innosilicon does not have the rights to produce and distribute the A1 chips without bitmine's permission.
Doubtful. Innosilicon was the one who actually engineered the chip. Engineering contracted and paid for by bitmine. --- Your miner is not from us and it is not the same as JTminer. Basically, the JTminer with smaller size is much stable and can do overclock. Please ask the suggestion from who you bought it if you want to do overclock. We are not responsible for what is not from us. Thanks. Recent summary: Advantage and difference from other miner: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5571215#msg5571215https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5580260#msg5580260https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5580260#msg5580260--------------------------------------------- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5572959#msg5572959Bitmine and Innosilicon worked together to produce the chips, so both of them have rights to produce/resell the chips. for @QuestionTime : We reserve our right to take legal action for your libel!https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5579060#msg5579060I´m a little bit confused.... how many representatives for the JingTian miner is on bitcointalk?
(Seeksilence, skyfromwell and JT miner)
Yes. Those are from my company. Alright, thanks for making that official  How about the pictures from the demonstration you held, will they be uploaded soon? I will let someone put more pictures here. I need to pick up my system now. LOL. I will try to do a good over clock then report to your guys. Im looking forward to the OC guide- Do you think a EVGA 1300W g2 is enough to overclock, or should we get something higher? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438011Bob, it is not problem of the power. It is the problem with the system you got. LOL. Don't over-clock it. The one who sell to you using cheap components in the board, so over-clock is NOT going to work there. Please stop telling me what I do or dont have. These are not knockoffs- I have been running them OC for weeks now, and they also look identical to all the other units me and my assosiates purchased. Same design, PCBs chips, etc as the legitimate ones. Oh, and and the PCBs + parts numbers match up with the ones your selling directly. JT, it seems like a Chinese manufacturer has ripped off your designs and is selling them as their own. Wait.. where have I seen that before  Libel? It sounds like you have a statement from Innosillicon contradicting bitmine's claims. Please do share. What is actually Innosilicon's current position on this matter is this, and I quote from their web : "Innosilicon Announce its 28nm Bitcoin Mining IP core in Production Innosilicon is proudly announcing that BitMine AG, a leading bitcoin mining system supplier, has licensed its ultra low power Hash IP Core for production at GF 28nm HPP process. This IP is designed from scratch using patent pending, customized VLSI computational Marco cells developed to squeeze the best possible power efficiency in 28nm. Its ultra high power efficiency and thermal reliability allows BitMine AG to pack just the right amount of innovative hash horse power inside a A1 CoinCraft ASIC. The availability of this 28nm hardened IP core instantly raised the bar in a crowded 28nm bitcoin mining ASIC field." This might mean, that : a) Bitmine.ch has patented (patent pending), their HPP proces (sublicenced from GF and forked), based on their Bitcoin Mining IP core b) Innosilicon has given permission to Bitmine.ch to use their ultra-low-power Hash IP core for 28 nm DIE for chips produced by Innosilicon for Bitmine, and probably given only to Bitmine and nobody else. c) Who did customized VLSI computational Marco cell (power train in 28 nm) - Synapse, Verisilicon, Innosilicon, Bitmine or GlobalFoundries is not known to me at this point. Also not known if this customized VLSI method is patented by someone. Even though somebody could obtain licence from Innosilicon for power layer, other layers are still not Innosilicon property, so without Bitmine's sublicence on final design, full tapeout of cloned chips is not [legally] possible. It has nothing to do with BRANDNAME - "COINCRAFT A1" as s BRAND, but with TOPOGRAPHIC DESIGN OF INTEGRATED CIRCUITS, which is SEPARATE LEVEL OF INTELECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION FROM BRAND(NAME) PROTECTION, patent pending according to Madrid Convention of the World Intelectual property organisation. Patents are accesible from WIPO portal, and they are many, and non of which are the property JingTian. If you check the news http://bitmine.ch/?page_id=863, you should know bitmine is just in co-operation with some Chinese company. They just bought the chip from the Chinese company and name it as "Coincraft A1" chip. The Chinese company can also sell the A1 chip. They can call it any name they want like "ABC A1" chip. So the question comes: Does the "Coincraft A1" chip means "A1" chip？I don't think so. This is something like Mcdonalds can make their hamburger and KFC can make their own too. We do NOT buy chips from bitmine and have no business with them. From that link: Designed from scratch, Bitmine’s Coincraft A1 is a third generation Bitcoin Mining IC developed by Bitmine in co-operation with a team of expert engineers from Innosilicon.
Doesn't say bitmine bought the chip from a Chinese company. I'm assuming that the R&D funds came from bitmine and it's customers and that Innosilicon was contracted by bitmine for R&D, ergo, bitmine retains IP rights of the A1 chip. Unless the use of the A1 chip in these Chinese 28nm miners has been authorised by bitmine, what we're seeing here is corporate theft and entities being in possession of or receiving these miners, liable for a criminal offence. and the major contributor to the know-how of the inner workings that led to its development. We are aware of things like the one happening here and we even made a press release news concerning this matter: http://bitmine.ch/?p=5178Whoever purchases these does that on its own risk and may be liable in its own country since we hold IP on that. Yes, that's China. Authorised distributors of bitmine tech: http://bitmine.ch/?page_id=5204 - unless the chips were sourced from one of these guys or bitmine themselves it's corporate theft. Bitmine have already made themselves quite clear on the issue and until they've made a statement retracting the previous statement it's much more likely the the statement was deleted/moderated rather than retracted. Furthermore, we have yet to hear anything from Innosilicon to suggest that they have obtained the rights from bitmine to produce these chips for sale. Certainly it's plausible Innosillion also have the rights to sell the chip, but it is also certainly plausible Innosilicon does not have the rights to sell the chip. In the absence of an official statement from Innosilicon contradicting the official statement from bitmine and the presence of the well known culture of rampant IP theft that goes on in China, on the balance of probabilities, it is much more likely the Chinese machines using 28nm A1 chips from Innosilicon are the product of stolen property and therefore illegal to receive and/or possess in most common law jurisdictions. Customers have the right to purchase goods that are 100% legitimately manufactured. I would not want to buy a car that has been assembled from stolen parts. |
|
|
|
|
Syke
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3878
Merit: 1193
|
|
March 13, 2014, 02:47:46 AM |
|
Precisely, we are the owner of the IP inside the A1 chip
Innosilicon is proudly announcing that BitMine AG, a leading bitcoin mining system supplier, has licensed its ultra low power Hash IP Core for production
Bitmine says they own it. Innosilicon says Bitmine licensed it. Innosilicon isn't a brand new company. Bitmine is. I'd give the benefit of the doubt to Innosilicon. |
Buy & Hold
|
|
|
|
bcmine
|
|
March 13, 2014, 03:00:05 AM |
|
Still, this does not change the fact that Innosilicon does not have the rights to produce and distribute the A1 chips without bitmine's permission.
Doubtful. Innosilicon was the one who actually engineered the chip. Engineering contracted and paid for by bitmine. --- Your miner is not from us and it is not the same as JTminer. Basically, the JTminer with smaller size is much stable and can do overclock. Please ask the suggestion from who you bought it if you want to do overclock. We are not responsible for what is not from us. Thanks. Recent summary: Advantage and difference from other miner: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5571215#msg5571215https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5580260#msg5580260https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5580260#msg5580260--------------------------------------------- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5572959#msg5572959Bitmine and Innosilicon worked together to produce the chips, so both of them have rights to produce/resell the chips. for @QuestionTime : We reserve our right to take legal action for your libel!https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5579060#msg5579060I´m a little bit confused.... how many representatives for the JingTian miner is on [Suspicious link removed]eeksilence, skyfromwell and JT miner)
Yes. Those are from my company. Alright, thanks for making that official How about the pictures from the demonstration you held, will they be uploaded soon? I will let someone put more pictures here. I need to pick up my system now. LOL. I will try to do a good over clock then report to your guys. Im looking forward to the OC guide- Do you think a EVGA 1300W g2 is enough to overclock, or should we get something higher? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438011Bob, it is not problem of the power. It is the problem with the system you got. LOL. Don't over-clock it. The one who sell to you using cheap components in the board, so over-clock is NOT going to work there. Please stop telling me what I do or dont have. These are not knockoffs- I have been running them OC for weeks now, and they also look identical to all the other units me and my assosiates purchased. Same design, PCBs chips, etc as the legitimate ones. Oh, and and the PCBs + parts numbers match up with the ones your selling directly. JT, it seems like a Chinese manufacturer has ripped off your designs and is selling them as their own. Wait.. where have I seen that before Libel? It sounds like you have a statement from Innosillicon contradicting bitmine's claims. Please do share. What is actually Innosilicon's current position on this matter is this, and I quote from their web : "Innosilicon Announce its 28nm Bitcoin Mining IP core in Production Innosilicon is proudly announcing that BitMine AG, a leading bitcoin mining system supplier, has licensed its ultra low power Hash IP Core for production at GF 28nm HPP process. This IP is designed from scratch using patent pending, customized VLSI computational Marco cells developed to squeeze the best possible power efficiency in 28nm. Its ultra high power efficiency and thermal reliability allows BitMine AG to pack just the right amount of innovative hash horse power inside a A1 CoinCraft ASIC. The availability of this 28nm hardened IP core instantly raised the bar in a crowded 28nm bitcoin mining ASIC field." This might mean, that : a) Bitmine.ch has patented (patent pending), their HPP proces (sublicenced from GF and forked), based on their Bitcoin Mining IP core b) Innosilicon has given permission to Bitmine.ch to use their ultra-low-power Hash IP core for 28 nm DIE for chips produced by Innosilicon for Bitmine, and probably given only to Bitmine and nobody else. c) Who did customized VLSI computational Marco cell (power train in 28 nm) - Synapse, Verisilicon, Innosilicon, Bitmine or GlobalFoundries is not known to me at this point. Also not known if this customized VLSI method is patented by someone. Even though somebody could obtain licence from Innosilicon for power layer, other layers are still not Innosilicon property, so without Bitmine's sublicence on final design, full tapeout of cloned chips is not [legally] possible. It has nothing to do with BRANDNAME - "COINCRAFT A1" as s BRAND, but with TOPOGRAPHIC DESIGN OF INTEGRATED CIRCUITS, which is SEPARATE LEVEL OF INTELECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION FROM BRAND(NAME) PROTECTION, patent pending according to Madrid Convention of the World Intelectual property organisation. Patents are accesible from WIPO portal, and they are many, and non of which are the property JingTian. If you check the news http://bitmine.ch/?page_id=863, you should know bitmine is just in co-operation with some Chinese company. They just bought the chip from the Chinese company and name it as "Coincraft A1" chip. The Chinese company can also sell the A1 chip. They can call it any name they want like "ABC A1" chip. So the question comes: Does the "Coincraft A1" chip means "A1" chip？I don't think so. This is something like Mcdonalds can make their hamburger and KFC can make their own too. We do NOT buy chips from bitmine and have no business with them. From that link: Designed from scratch, Bitmine’s Coincraft A1 is a third generation Bitcoin Mining IC developed by Bitmine in co-operation with a team of expert engineers from Innosilicon.
Doesn't say bitmine bought the chip from a Chinese company. I'm assuming that the R&D funds came from bitmine and it's customers and that Innosilicon was contracted by bitmine for R&D, ergo, bitmine retains IP rights of the A1 chip. Unless the use of the A1 chip in these Chinese 28nm miners has been authorised by bitmine, what we're seeing here is corporate theft and entities being in possession of or receiving these miners, liable for a criminal offence. and the major contributor to the know-how of the inner workings that led to its development. We are aware of things like the one happening here and we even made a press release news concerning this matter: http://bitmine.ch/?p=5178Whoever purchases these does that on its own risk and may be liable in its own country since we hold IP on that. Yes, that's China. Authorised distributors of bitmine tech: http://bitmine.ch/?page_id=5204 - unless the chips were sourced from one of these guys or bitmine themselves it's corporate theft. Bitmine have already made themselves quite clear on the issue and until they've made a statement retracting the previous statement it's much more likely the the statement was deleted/moderated rather than retracted. Furthermore, we have yet to hear anything from Innosilicon to suggest that they have obtained the rights from bitmine to produce these chips for sale. Certainly it's plausible Innosillion also have the rights to sell the chip, but it is also certainly plausible Innosilicon does not have the rights to sell the chip. In the absence of an official statement from Innosilicon contradicting the official statement from bitmine and the presence of the well known culture of rampant IP theft that goes on in China, on the balance of probabilities, it is much more likely the Chinese machines using 28nm A1 chips from Innosilicon are the product of stolen property and therefore illegal to receive and/or possess in most common law jurisdictions.Customers have the right to purchase goods that are 100% legitimately manufactured. I would not want to buy a car that has been assembled from stolen parts. Exacly thats the point. I have seen contracts which are giving to both parties (producer and developer) the same rights. Thats good for both, because the developer thinks, the producer will do alot of affort to go on a fast and good production level and the producer will do alot of affort, because he can sell the chips by himself. Also the developer of the chip can negotiate lower costs. Then all of this is contracted with licenses and exclusiv licensing of territories. The most probably situation is (speculation) that innosilicon and all distributers of the chips in machines is forbidden to export the good to Europe and USA (exclusiv licenses) but not in Asia. So if you buy a Miner a keep it running in Europe/USA than it could be illigal (speculation). I guess, we will see high technology products from bitmine.ch as from Jin Tian. Both are doing excellent work. I see Bitmines, Innosilicon is very good on ASIC design, Jin Tian very much more as just competitive on PCBs. Congratulation to both parties. When we dont see the contracts we cant know who is right, neither innosilicon nor bitminie. Certainly plausible, as what we see, is that innosilicon is in right (he thinks he is) and bitmine changed his cooperation partner, what make possible that they are angry, but maybe its because innosilicon technology level is limited. They want to work with Intel next, which is having a brand new Asics 14nm fab. Giorgiomassa, can you give us a copy of your contract with innosilicon, so we can review the point here? |
|
|
|
|
skyfromwell
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
March 13, 2014, 04:03:35 AM |
|
Still, this does not change the fact that Innosilicon does not have the rights to produce and distribute the A1 chips without bitmine's permission.
Doubtful. Innosilicon was the one who actually engineered the chip. Engineering contracted and paid for by bitmine. --- Your miner is not from us and it is not the same as JTminer. Basically, the JTminer with smaller size is much stable and can do overclock. Please ask the suggestion from who you bought it if you want to do overclock. We are not responsible for what is not from us. Thanks. Recent summary: Advantage and difference from other miner: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5571215#msg5571215https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5580260#msg5580260https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5580260#msg5580260--------------------------------------------- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5572959#msg5572959Bitmine and Innosilicon worked together to produce the chips, so both of them have rights to produce/resell the chips. for @QuestionTime : We reserve our right to take legal action for your libel!https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5579060#msg5579060I´m a little bit confused.... how many representatives for the JingTian miner is on [Suspicious link removed]eeksilence, skyfromwell and JT miner)
Yes. Those are from my company. Alright, thanks for making that official How about the pictures from the demonstration you held, will they be uploaded soon? I will let someone put more pictures here. I need to pick up my system now. LOL. I will try to do a good over clock then report to your guys. Im looking forward to the OC guide- Do you think a EVGA 1300W g2 is enough to overclock, or should we get something higher? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438011Bob, it is not problem of the power. It is the problem with the system you got. LOL. Don't over-clock it. The one who sell to you using cheap components in the board, so over-clock is NOT going to work there. Please stop telling me what I do or dont have. These are not knockoffs- I have been running them OC for weeks now, and they also look identical to all the other units me and my assosiates purchased. Same design, PCBs chips, etc as the legitimate ones. Oh, and and the PCBs + parts numbers match up with the ones your selling directly. JT, it seems like a Chinese manufacturer has ripped off your designs and is selling them as their own. Wait.. where have I seen that before Libel? It sounds like you have a statement from Innosillicon contradicting bitmine's claims. Please do share. What is actually Innosilicon's current position on this matter is this, and I quote from their web : "Innosilicon Announce its 28nm Bitcoin Mining IP core in Production Innosilicon is proudly announcing that BitMine AG, a leading bitcoin mining system supplier, has licensed its ultra low power Hash IP Core for production at GF 28nm HPP process. This IP is designed from scratch using patent pending, customized VLSI computational Marco cells developed to squeeze the best possible power efficiency in 28nm. Its ultra high power efficiency and thermal reliability allows BitMine AG to pack just the right amount of innovative hash horse power inside a A1 CoinCraft ASIC. The availability of this 28nm hardened IP core instantly raised the bar in a crowded 28nm bitcoin mining ASIC field." This might mean, that : a) Bitmine.ch has patented (patent pending), their HPP proces (sublicenced from GF and forked), based on their Bitcoin Mining IP core b) Innosilicon has given permission to Bitmine.ch to use their ultra-low-power Hash IP core for 28 nm DIE for chips produced by Innosilicon for Bitmine, and probably given only to Bitmine and nobody else. c) Who did customized VLSI computational Marco cell (power train in 28 nm) - Synapse, Verisilicon, Innosilicon, Bitmine or GlobalFoundries is not known to me at this point. Also not known if this customized VLSI method is patented by someone. Even though somebody could obtain licence from Innosilicon for power layer, other layers are still not Innosilicon property, so without Bitmine's sublicence on final design, full tapeout of cloned chips is not [legally] possible. It has nothing to do with BRANDNAME - "COINCRAFT A1" as s BRAND, but with TOPOGRAPHIC DESIGN OF INTEGRATED CIRCUITS, which is SEPARATE LEVEL OF INTELECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION FROM BRAND(NAME) PROTECTION, patent pending according to Madrid Convention of the World Intelectual property organisation. Patents are accesible from WIPO portal, and they are many, and non of which are the property JingTian. If you check the news http://bitmine.ch/?page_id=863, you should know bitmine is just in co-operation with some Chinese company. They just bought the chip from the Chinese company and name it as "Coincraft A1" chip. The Chinese company can also sell the A1 chip. They can call it any name they want like "ABC A1" chip. So the question comes: Does the "Coincraft A1" chip means "A1" chip？I don't think so. This is something like Mcdonalds can make their hamburger and KFC can make their own too. We do NOT buy chips from bitmine and have no business with them. From that link: Designed from scratch, Bitmine’s Coincraft A1 is a third generation Bitcoin Mining IC developed by Bitmine in co-operation with a team of expert engineers from Innosilicon.
Doesn't say bitmine bought the chip from a Chinese company. I'm assuming that the R&D funds came from bitmine and it's customers and that Innosilicon was contracted by bitmine for R&D, ergo, bitmine retains IP rights of the A1 chip. Unless the use of the A1 chip in these Chinese 28nm miners has been authorised by bitmine, what we're seeing here is corporate theft and entities being in possession of or receiving these miners, liable for a criminal offence. and the major contributor to the know-how of the inner workings that led to its development. We are aware of things like the one happening here and we even made a press release news concerning this matter: http://bitmine.ch/?p=5178Whoever purchases these does that on its own risk and may be liable in its own country since we hold IP on that. Yes, that's China. Authorised distributors of bitmine tech: http://bitmine.ch/?page_id=5204 - unless the chips were sourced from one of these guys or bitmine themselves it's corporate theft. Bitmine have already made themselves quite clear on the issue and until they've made a statement retracting the previous statement it's much more likely the the statement was deleted/moderated rather than retracted. Furthermore, we have yet to hear anything from Innosilicon to suggest that they have obtained the rights from bitmine to produce these chips for sale. Certainly it's plausible Innosillion also have the rights to sell the chip, but it is also certainly plausible Innosilicon does not have the rights to sell the chip. In the absence of an official statement from Innosilicon contradicting the official statement from bitmine and the presence of the well known culture of rampant IP theft that goes on in China, on the balance of probabilities, it is much more likely the Chinese machines using 28nm A1 chips from Innosilicon are the product of stolen property and therefore illegal to receive and/or possess in most common law jurisdictions.Customers have the right to purchase goods that are 100% legitimately manufactured. I would not want to buy a car that has been assembled from stolen parts. Exacly thats the point. I have seen contracts which are giving to both parties (producer and developer) the same rights. Thats good for both, because the developer thinks, the producer will do alot of affort to go on a fast and good production level and the producer will do alot of affort, because he can sell the chips by himself. Also the developer of the chip can negotiate lower costs. Then all of this is contracted with licenses and exclusiv licensing of territories. The most probably situation is (speculation) that innosilicon and all distributers of the chips in machines is forbidden to export the good to Europe and USA (exclusiv licenses) but not in Asia. So if you buy a Miner a keep it running in Europe/USA than it could be illigal (speculation). I guess, we will see high technology products from bitmine.ch as from Jin Tian. Both are doing excellent work. I see Bitmines, Innosilicon is very good on ASIC design, Jin Tian very much more as just competitive on PCBs. Congratulation to both parties. When we dont see the contracts we cant know who is right, neither innosilicon nor bitminie. Certainly plausible, as what we see, is that innosilicon is in right (he thinks he is) and bitmine changed his cooperation partner, what make possible that they are angry, but maybe its because innosilicon technology level is limited. They want to work with Intel next, which is having a brand new Asics 14nm fab. Giorgiomassa, can you give us a copy of your contract with innosilicon, so we can review the point here? As I know, there are three markets -- North America, Europe and China. Bitmine cannot sell in China, but I can sell in all areas. |
|
|
|
|
|
Easy2Mine
|
|
March 13, 2014, 05:36:39 AM |
|
I just hear a rumor that the internal parts of the 1T Dragonminer is the same as yours JingTian miner and they come from the same factory, but you ask the factory to use a custom case for your JingTian miner so it will not look the same.
Is this true?
|
|
|
|
|
JT Miner
|
|
March 13, 2014, 06:09:40 AM |
|
I just hear a rumor that the internal parts of the 1T Dragonminer is the same as yours JingTian miner and they come from the same factory, but you ask the factory to use a custom case for your JingTian miner so it will not look the same.
Is this true?
not exactly. 1)JTminer use Linear Technology power supply chips, They use different chip for power supply. 2) We use the separate heat-sink for every chip, they use a larger heat sink to cover 8 chips.you can tell the difference at first glance. 3) JT miner has factory dedicated for the mining machine. we don't share facility with others. 4) We designed the MCU firmware from scratch. and lit the whole system since 1/Jan/2014. As you know, the chip came out around 12/29/2013. |
|
|
|
QuestionTime
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
March 13, 2014, 09:44:56 AM |
|
Precisely, we are the owner of the IP inside the A1 chip
Innosilicon is proudly announcing that BitMine AG, a leading bitcoin mining system supplier, has licensed its ultra low power Hash IP Core for production
Bitmine says they own it. Innosilicon says Bitmine licensed it. Innosilicon isn't a brand new company. Bitmine is. I'd give the benefit of the doubt to Innosilicon. Your miner is not from us and it is not the same as JTminer. Basically, the JTminer with smaller size is much stable and can do overclock. Please ask the suggestion from who you bought it if you want to do overclock. We are not responsible for what is not from us. Thanks. Recent summary: Advantage and difference from other miner: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5571215#msg5571215https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5580260#msg5580260https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5580260#msg5580260--------------------------------------------- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5572959#msg5572959Bitmine and Innosilicon worked together to produce the chips, so both of them have rights to produce/resell the chips. for @QuestionTime : We reserve our right to take legal action for your libel!https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=470386.msg5579060#msg5579060I´m a little bit confused.... how many representatives for the JingTian miner is on bitcointalk?
(Seeksilence, skyfromwell and JT miner)
Yes. Those are from my company. Alright, thanks for making that official How about the pictures from the demonstration you held, will they be uploaded soon? I will let someone put more pictures here. I need to pick up my system now. LOL. I will try to do a good over clock then report to your guys. Im looking forward to the OC guide- Do you think a EVGA 1300W g2 is enough to overclock, or should we get something higher? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438011Bob, it is not problem of the power. It is the problem with the system you got. LOL. Don't over-clock it. The one who sell to you using cheap components in the board, so over-clock is NOT going to work there. Please stop telling me what I do or dont have. These are not knockoffs- I have been running them OC for weeks now, and they also look identical to all the other units me and my assosiates purchased. Same design, PCBs chips, etc as the legitimate ones. Oh, and and the PCBs + parts numbers match up with the ones your selling directly. JT, it seems like a Chinese manufacturer has ripped off your designs and is selling them as their own. Wait.. where have I seen that before Libel? It sounds like you have a statement from Innosillicon contradicting bitmine's claims. Please do share. What is actually Innosilicon's current position on this matter is this, and I quote from their web : "Innosilicon Announce its 28nm Bitcoin Mining IP core in Production Innosilicon is proudly announcing that BitMine AG, a leading bitcoin mining system supplier, has licensed its ultra low power Hash IP Core for production at GF 28nm HPP process. This IP is designed from scratch using patent pending, customized VLSI computational Marco cells developed to squeeze the best possible power efficiency in 28nm. Its ultra high power efficiency and thermal reliability allows BitMine AG to pack just the right amount of innovative hash horse power inside a A1 CoinCraft ASIC. The availability of this 28nm hardened IP core instantly raised the bar in a crowded 28nm bitcoin mining ASIC field." This might mean, that : a) Bitmine.ch has patented (patent pending), their HPP proces (sublicenced from GF and forked), based on their Bitcoin Mining IP core b) Innosilicon has given permission to Bitmine.ch to use their ultra-low-power Hash IP core for 28 nm DIE for chips produced by Innosilicon for Bitmine, and probably given only to Bitmine and nobody else. c) Who did customized VLSI computational Marco cell (power train in 28 nm) - Synapse, Verisilicon, Innosilicon, Bitmine or GlobalFoundries is not known to me at this point. Also not known if this customized VLSI method is patented by someone. Even though somebody could obtain licence from Innosilicon for power layer, other layers are still not Innosilicon property, so without Bitmine's sublicence on final design, full tapeout of cloned chips is not [legally] possible. It has nothing to do with BRANDNAME - "COINCRAFT A1" as s BRAND, but with TOPOGRAPHIC DESIGN OF INTEGRATED CIRCUITS, which is SEPARATE LEVEL OF INTELECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION FROM BRAND(NAME) PROTECTION, patent pending according to Madrid Convention of the World Intelectual property organisation. Patents are accesible from WIPO portal, and they are many, and non of which are the property JingTian. There's more than one IP inside the chip. All stakeholders must unanimously agree on the conditions of use. There is no disagreement between stakeholders regarding bitmine's right to sell the A1 chip. There is disagreement between stakeholders regarding Innosilicon's right to sell the A1 chip. Now these two love birds may work it out in the end with Innosilicon also obtaining the rights to sell the chip. But as things stand, Innosilicon does not have the right to sell the chip and therefore all Chinese miners based on the 28nm A1 chips obtained from Innosilicon are the product of IP theft. |
|
|
|
|
|
sikke
|
|
March 13, 2014, 09:56:58 AM
Last edit: March 13, 2014, 10:11:46 AM by sikke |
|
So you say.
Still, this does not change the fact that Innosilicon does not have the rights to produce and distribute the A1 chips without bitmine's permission.
There's more than one IP inside the chip.
All stakeholders must unanimously agree on the conditions of use. There is no disagreement between stakeholders regarding bitmine's right to sell the A1 chip. There is disagreement between stakeholders regarding Innosilicon's right to sell the A1 chip.
Now these two love birds may work it out in the end with Innosilicon also obtaining the rights to sell the chip. But as things stand, Innosilicon does not have the right to sell the chip and therefore all Chinese miners based on the 28nm A1 chips obtained from Innosilicon are the product of IP theft.
 You have lost your Battle. Cant imagine whats your motivation to keep up this silly fight... you cant win this. Who ships out miner gets the sales. Innosilicon secluded rights to sell the chip. Bitmine has failed and keeps on failin. What ever they make china makes x10 of these miners with 50% of the costs. Nothing stops production in China if there is $ to make. They do not have copyright laws, you can cry all you want eaven multibillion companys have failed in China to secure some of their IP Bitmine is out of the game. They screwed their customers, they had weak contract with the maker. Lesson learned time to move on. This stuff happens all the time. Who can keep their customers will win... Dont look too good for Bitmine. Looks hell of a better for Chinese makers who can cut the costs and bring up these miners with 2500$ and lower eventually.. |
|
|
|
|
Biffa
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3220
Merit: 1220
|
|
March 13, 2014, 10:18:16 AM |
|
So you say.
Still, this does not change the fact that Innosilicon does not have the rights to produce and distribute the A1 chips without bitmine's permission.
There's more than one IP inside the chip.
All stakeholders must unanimously agree on the conditions of use. There is no disagreement between stakeholders regarding bitmine's right to sell the A1 chip. There is disagreement between stakeholders regarding Innosilicon's right to sell the A1 chip.
Now these two love birds may work it out in the end with Innosilicon also obtaining the rights to sell the chip. But as things stand, Innosilicon does not have the right to sell the chip and therefore all Chinese miners based on the 28nm A1 chips obtained from Innosilicon are the product of IP theft.
You have lost your Battle. Cant imagine whats your motivation to keep up this silly fight... you cant win this. Who ships out miner gets the sales. Innosilicon secluded rights to sell the chip. Bitmine has failed and keeps on failin. What ever they make china makes x10 of these miners with 50% of the costs. Nothing stops production in China if there is $ to make. They do not have copyright laws, you can cry all you want eaven multibillion companys have failed in China to secure some of their IP Bitmine is out of the game. They screwed their customers, they had weak contract with the maker. Lesson learned time to move on. This stuff happens all the time. Who can keep their customers will win... Dont look too good for Bitmine. Looks hell of a better for Chinese makers who can cut the costs and bring up these miners with 2500$ and lower eventually.. There is no point arguing with him, he obviously works for Bitmine and is being paid to try and spread as much FUD as possible, he doesn't listen to reason, he's got vague ideas about law, contract law and the legal process, all he does is regurgitate the crap that comes out of someone elses mouth to fit his own, and Bitmines, agenda. What it comes down to is who you believe, a bunch of incompetants and scammers in Switzerland who can't ship their own overpriced product, or a bunch of unknown guys in China who are shipping them at reasonable cost. My dealings with China (Bitmain) have so far been excellent, I wish these guys could get their act together as well as Bitmain have and have as slick a production run of in-stock, reasonably priced product, they would have people crawling all over them to order. I imagine that they were trying to do a similar model (make loads, mine the crap out of them and then sell them as in-stock product and a gradually reducing price) but got a bit ahead of themselves. |
|
|
|
QuestionTime
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
March 13, 2014, 10:35:31 AM |
|
Bitmain and their Ants are definitely what all vendors should be aspiring to; good price performance and 100% legal. It goes to show that not all Chinese companies are the same and that one should be vigilant against companies like JT, JianTian, Dragon, etc who have no qualms with using stolen technology in their products.
Frankly I don't see any reason why anyone would want to purchase anything based on the A1 as currently it simply isn't a competitive option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bicknellski
|
|
March 13, 2014, 11:48:00 AM |
|
Bitmain and their Ants are definitely what all vendors should be aspiring to; good price performance and 100% legal. It goes to show that not all Chinese companies are the same and that one should be vigilant against companies like JT, JianTian, Dragon, etc who have no qualms with using stolen technology in their products.
Frankly I don't see any reason why anyone would want to purchase anything based on the A1 as currently it simply isn't a competitive option.
Lesson learned. Don't use Innosilicon ever. |
|
|
|
|
