[ANN] Spondoolies-Tech - carrier grade, data center ready mining rigs

[dogie]

Anyone got a spare SP35 PSU they can sell me? SP-tech are out of spares. PM if you do please.

Cheers

I thought on this thread there was a way to 'rig something up' as such already....but could have been another thread

doggie? others with more expertise then myself?  sorry all that comes to mind

There is no way to rig anything up without the case open, and even then it'd be the nastiest mod you've ever seen. The PSU *should* be an Artesyn DS1600SPE-3 which are about $400 new.

[Searing]

Anyone got a spare SP35 PSU they can sell me? SP-tech are out of spares. PM if you do please.

Cheers

I thought on this thread there was a way to 'rig something up' as such already....but could have been another thread

doggie? others with more expertise then myself?  sorry all that comes to mind

There is no way to rig anything up without the case open, and even then it'd be the nastiest mod you've ever seen. The PSU *should* be an Artesyn DS1600SPE-3 which are about $400 new.

Ack! ok well that sure clears that up......

[mavericklm]

From what i remember, you could declare the psu as ''generic'' and use whatever psu you want!
Just wire it through the empty space of the old and broken psu

[dogie]

From what i remember, you could declare the psu as ''generic'' and use whatever psu you want!
Just wire it through the empty space of the old and broken psu

Its the model which is the problem but the requirements of a 1600W 1U PSU with the same finger interface. The solution comes out at either the one I linked (hence it was chosen in the first place) or a PSU with a similar cost.

[Guy Corem]

https://medium.com/@bramcohen/bitcoin-s-ironic-crisis-32226a85e39f#.83jqtklv3

[alienesb]

https://medium.com/@bramcohen/bitcoin-s-ironic-crisis-32226a85e39f#.83jqtklv3

Hitching your star to this I guess. Hardware ready yet?

[dmwardjr]

https://medium.com/@bramcohen/bitcoin-s-ironic-crisis-32226a85e39f#.83jqtklv3

Why so damn negative?

I'm sure you have heard of "soft forks" as a means of implementing changes to strengthen the network without a hard fork.  Maybe, you should spend your time on your chip development and the SP50 rather than trying to bring everyone down to your current level.  You might try a smaller rig than the SP50 as well for the public (home miners) rather than large investors only.

As far as I'm concerned, you're in league with Hearn.

We have a lot of new upcoming advancements for the blockchain to make it better without the changes you want to implement.

Check this video out for instance:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSq-58ElBzk

Also, how about you and everyone else reading some "bullish" news for a change instead of searching for pessimistic news to try to bring everyone down to your level.

Here's an excellent thread for bullish news:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1166428.2020

[Biffa]

From what i remember, you could declare the psu as ''generic'' and use whatever psu you want!
Just wire it through the empty space of the old and broken psu

My understanding is even if you purchase the exact same model of PSU you then have to declare it as generic as it doesn't have the "firmware" that sp-tech used in their ones.

The unit I have is rackmounted in a datacenter, jury rigging any old PSU won't do, it has to be a direct replacement that goes into the same slot, so either one from another SP35 or I have to purchase an Artesyn and set it up as generic.

Just putting some feelers out if anyone has a broken down SP35 that they want to get rid of either in its entirety or just the PSU's I'd prefer not to spend $400 on a new PSU if I can help it.

[padrino]

https://medium.com/@bramcohen/bitcoin-s-ironic-crisis-32226a85e39f#.83jqtklv3

Why so damn negative?

I'm sure you have heard of "soft forks" as a means of implementing changes to strengthen the network without a hard fork.  Maybe, you should spend your time on your chip development and the SP50 rather than trying to bring everyone down to your current level.  You might try a smaller rig than the SP50 as well for the public (home miners) rather than large investors only.

As far as I'm concerned, you're in league with Hearn.

We have a lot of new upcoming advancements for the blockchain to make it better without the changes you want to implement.

Check this video out for instance:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSq-58ElBzk

Also, how about you and everyone else reading some "bullish" news for a change instead of searching for pessimistic news to try to bring everyone down to your level.

Here's an excellent thread for bullish news:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1166428.2020

Your attitude is the core of the problem at hand.. So you didn't like the perspective in the article and you focus on attacking the fact that it was even posted, how is it you can have a discussion when you simply bitch about a viewpoint that isn't your own?

[notlist3d]

https://medium.com/@bramcohen/bitcoin-s-ironic-crisis-32226a85e39f#.83jqtklv3

Why so damn negative?

I'm sure you have heard of "soft forks" as a means of implementing changes to strengthen the network without a hard fork.  Maybe, you should spend your time on your chip development and the SP50 rather than trying to bring everyone down to your current level.  You might try a smaller rig than the SP50 as well for the public (home miners) rather than large investors only.

As far as I'm concerned, you're in league with Hearn.

We have a lot of new upcoming advancements for the blockchain to make it better without the changes you want to implement.

Check this video out for instance:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSq-58ElBzk

Also, how about you and everyone else reading some "bullish" news for a change instead of searching for pessimistic news to try to bring everyone down to your level.

Here's an excellent thread for bullish news:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1166428.2020

Your attitude is the core of the problem at hand.. So you didn't like the perspective in the article and you focus on attacking the fact that it was even posted, how is it you can have a discussion when you simply bitch about a viewpoint that isn't your own?

This thread has gotten a little off topic it seems it has not been about hardware in a while.  SP team/Guy why don't you update us on chips or SP-50?  Some new news would be great if your able to.

[Fatman3001]

https://medium.com/@bramcohen/bitcoin-s-ironic-crisis-32226a85e39f#.83jqtklv3

Why so damn negative?

I'm sure you have heard of "soft forks" as a means of implementing changes to strengthen the network without a hard fork.  Maybe, you should spend your time on your chip development and the SP50 rather than trying to bring everyone down to your current level.  You might try a smaller rig than the SP50 as well for the public (home miners) rather than large investors only.

As far as I'm concerned, you're in league with Hearn.

We have a lot of new upcoming advancements for the blockchain to make it better without the changes you want to implement.

Check this video out for instance:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSq-58ElBzk

Also, how about you and everyone else reading some "bullish" news for a change instead of searching for pessimistic news to try to bring everyone down to your level.

Here's an excellent thread for bullish news:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1166428.2020

Your attitude is the core of the problem at hand.. So you didn't like the perspective in the article and you focus on attacking the fact that it was even posted, how is it you can have a discussion when you simply bitch about a viewpoint that isn't your own?

People who's tired of the poo slinging is hardly the problem.

People like this dude: https://twitter.com/bramcohen/status/697705876337995776 is the problem.

And he happens to be the same guy who wrote that article dmwardjr reacted to.

And people like this dude: https://forum.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-discussion/bigger-blocks-discussion-jonathan-toomin-guy-corem-t5080.html is the problem.

And he just happens to be the CEO of SP tech...

[shacky]

edited. Scam website. sorry

[dogie]

Recent SEC filing here. Some slides:

1. Want to target bigger customers than Bitmain but smaller than Bitfury?


2. Comparing competitors


And some great quotes from this filing. Interesting that they consider the core developers a potential thread to their business, meanwhile the CEO of one of their 'partner companies' is advocating for a non-ASIC PoW change...

Our auditors have issued a “going concern” audit opinion.
Our independent auditors have indicated in their report on our December 31, 2014 financial statements that there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. A “going concern” opinion indicates that the financial statements have been prepared assuming we will continue as a going concern and do not include any adjustments to reflect the possible future effects on the recoverability and classification of assets, or the amounts and classification of liabilities that may result if we do not continue as a going concern. Therefore, you should not rely on our consolidated balance sheet as an indication of the amount of proceeds that would be available to satisfy claims of creditors, and potentially be available for distribution to stockholders, in the event of liquidation.

...

Our common stock is deemed a “penny stock,” which would make it more difficult for our investors to sell their shares.
Our common stock is subject to the “penny stock” rules adopted under Section 15(g) of the Exchange Act. The penny stock rules generally apply to companies whose common stock is not listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market or other national securities exchange and trades at less than $4.00 per share, other than companies that have had average revenue of at least $6,000,000 for the last three years or that have tangible net worth of at least $5,000,000 ($2,000,000 if the company has been operating for three or more years). These rules require, among other things, that brokers who trade penny stock to persons other than “established customers” complete certain documentation, make suitability inquiries of investors and provide investors with certain information concerning trading in the security, including a risk disclosure document and quote information under certain circumstances. Many brokers have decided not to trade penny stocks because of the requirements of the penny stock rules and, as a result, the number of broker-dealers willing to act as market makers in such securities is limited. If we remain subject to the penny stock rules for any significant period, it could have an adverse effect on the market, if any, for our securities. If our securities are subject to the penny stock rules, investors will find it more difficult to dispose of our securities.

...

Use of social media may adversely impact our reputation.
There has been a marked increase in use of social media platforms and similar devices, including weblogs (blogs), social media websites, and other forms of Internet-based communications which allow individual access to a broad audience of consumers and other interested persons. Consumers value readily available information concerning retailers, manufacturers, and their goods and services and often act on such information without further investigation, authentication and without regard to its accuracy. The availability of information on social media platforms and devices is virtually immediate as is its impact. Social media platforms and devices immediately publish the content their subscribers and participants post, often without filters or checks on accuracy of the content posted. The opportunity for dissemination of information, including inaccurate information, is virtually limitless. Information concerning or affecting us may be posted on such platforms and devices at any time. Information posted may be inaccurate and adverse to us, and it may harm our business. The harm may be immediate without affording us an opportunity for redress or correction. Such platforms also could be used for the dissemination of trade secret information or compromise of other valuable company assets, any of which could harm our business.

...

The Core Developers or other programmers could propose amendments to the Bitcoin Network’s protocols and software that, if accepted and authorized by the Bitcoin Network’s community, could adversely affect an investment in us.
The Bitcoin Network is based on a math-based protocol that governs the peer-to-peer interactions between computers connected to the Bitcoin Network. The code that sets forth the protocol is informally managed by a development team known as the Core Developers that was initially appointed informally by the Bitcoin Network’s purported creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. The members of the Core Developers evolve over time, largely based on self-determined participation in the resource section dedicated to bitcoin on Github.com. The Core Developers can propose amendments to the Bitcoin Network’s source code through one or more software upgrades that alter the protocols and software that govern the Bitcoin Network and the properties of bitcoins, including the irreversibility of transactions and limitations on the mining of new bitcoins. Proposals for upgrades and discussions relating thereto take place on online forums including GitHub.com and Bitcointalk.org. To the extent that a significant majority of the users and miners on the Bitcoin Network install such software upgrade(s), the Bitcoin Network would be subject to new protocols and software that may adversely affect an investment in us. If less than a significant majority of the users and miners on the Bitcoin Network install such software upgrade(s), the Bitcoin Network could “fork.”

The open-source structure of the Bitcoin Network protocol means that the Core Developers and other contributors to the protocol are generally not directly compensated for their contributions in maintaining and developing the protocol. A failure to properly monitor and upgrade the protocol could damage the Bitcoin Network and an investment in us.

The Bitcoin Network operates based on an open-source protocol maintained by the Core Developers and other contributors, largely on the GitHub resource section dedicated to bitcoin development. As the Bitcoin Network protocol is not sold and its use does not generate revenues for its development team, the Core Developers are generally not compensated for maintaining and updating the Bitcoin Network protocol. To the extent that material issues arise with the Bitcoin Network protocol, and the Core Developers and open-source contributor community are unable to address the issues adequately or in a timely manner, the Bitcoin Network and an investment in us may be adversely affected.

...

Our Partner Companies may be subject to legal liability.
Some of our Partner Companies may be subject to legal claims. Claims could involve matters such as defamation, invasion of privacy, copyright infringement etc. Any of our Partner Companies that incur this type of unexpected liability may not have insurance to cover the claim or its insurance may not provide sufficient coverage. If our Partner Companies incur substantial cost because of this type of unexpected liability, the expenses incurred by our Partner Companies will increase and their profits, if any, will decrease.

...

Operating Expenses
Operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2014 were $14,933,441 as compared to $12,203 for the period from July 28, 2013 (inception) through December 31, 2013, an increase of $14,921,238. The increase is primarily due to the grant of non-cash stock based compensation. General and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily consisted of compensation and benefits of $239,248, accounting and legal fees of $361,428, impairment loss on website development of $144,796, impairment loss on investment of $400,004 and stock based compensation of $13,126,445 related to the grant of 6,201,472 stock options to management on February 5, 2014 and 12,450,000 stock options on November 7, 2014.

[kilo17]

That is interesting, I really enjoy looking at their bullshit, I mean take on the target market.  I have not seen any data centers that care if it is 1 big unit that loses a bunch of hash power if something goes wrong or multiple little units- I guess investors are suckers because it looks to me that BOTH the left and right side overlap the Spondoolies picture.  Bitfury has stated they are releasing chips to third parties and miners will be available.

The second thing I love about that is the "Roadmap In Development" statement- meaning they still don't have shit.

LOL.  

And those financials - they are from 2014, wake up Spondoolies we are in 2016 - I bet those numbers are looking bad now

[kilo17]

Here is my personal favorite- check out the last paragraph shown below.

1- Who's hardware are they using? They are using about 1 megawatt for 1.8 Ph - ouch
2- It obviously shows they SP50 has not been deployed.
3- If they are expanding hash with poor efficient miners then they must be hurting and need to generate some cash flow to keep the boat afloat.

[Unacceptable]

So they (BTCS) made about $500,000 in BTC (1,797 BTC at $250 each) in 2015,then deduct electric 

[jamesg]

Based off of BTCS own numbers, it costs them $125,870 per month to run their 1.8Ph/s.

At current difficulty (144,116,447,847) and price ($419/BTC), they make ~44 BTC per week, or ~$18.5k per week. So they are completely in the RED on operations or have shut down, aka, no revenue.

They've also stated that these operational numbers were gross, so they probably do not take into account personnel and other ancillary costs.

[notlist3d]

Based off of BTCS own numbers, it costs them $125,870 per month to run their 1.8Ph/s.

At current difficulty (144,116,447,847) and price ($419/BTC), they make ~44 BTC per week, or ~$18.5k per week. So they are completely in the RED on operations or have shut down, aka, no revenue.

They've also stated that these operational numbers were gross, so they probably do not take into account personnel and other ancillary costs.

I love that this company is public we get to see inside which most we don't.  With others keeping private we will likely never see info like we do with SP.  It is interesting to say the least.

I don't see how they are going for different market then Bitfury though from Dogies pic.  I think SP and Bitfury will be fighting for the same big operations.   And bitfury threw a heck of a punch with demos of chip already, and beating SP50 specs.   I think SP has a hard time coming up.

Biggest chance i see is if they can beat bitfury on price.  And we have no idea what that price is right now.   I'm still wondering if they are making SP50 or call it a sunk cost.  Seems hard to justify when you know  your chip is already beat.  How it's been same rendering for so long I think sunk cost is more and more likely.

[Unacceptable]

Based off of BTCS own numbers, it costs them $125,870 per month to run their 1.8Ph/s.

At current difficulty (144,116,447,847) and price ($419/BTC), they make ~44 BTC per week, or ~$18.5k per week. So they are completely in the RED on operations or have shut down, aka, no revenue.

They've also stated that these operational numbers were gross, so they probably do not take into account personnel and other ancillary costs.

I love that this company is public we get to see inside which most we don't.  With others keeping private we will likely never see info like we do with SP.  It is interesting to say the least.

I don't see how they are going for different market then Bitfury though from Dogies pic.  I think SP and Bitfury will be fighting for the same big operations.   And bitfury threw a heck of a punch with demos of chip already, and beating SP50 specs.   I think SP has a hard time coming up.

Biggest chance i see is if they can beat bitfury on price.  And we have no idea what that price is right now.   I'm still wondering if they are making SP50 or call it a sunk cost.  Seems hard to justify when you know  your chip is already beat.  How it's been same rendering for so long I think sunk cost is more and more likely.

Sidehack has said he would not like to work with SP's chips,too complicated,sooo not worth the effort & time 

[dogie]

Based off of BTCS own numbers, it costs them $125,870 per month to run their 1.8Ph/s.

At current difficulty (144,116,447,847) and price ($419/BTC), they make ~44 BTC per week, or ~$18.5k per week. So they are completely in the RED on operations or have shut down, aka, no revenue.

They've also stated that these operational numbers were gross, so they probably do not take into account personnel and other ancillary costs.

I love that this company is public we get to see inside which most we don't.  With others keeping private we will likely never see info like we do with SP.  It is interesting to say the least.

I don't see how they are going for different market then Bitfury though from Dogies pic.  I think SP and Bitfury will be fighting for the same big operations.   And bitfury threw a heck of a punch with demos of chip already, and beating SP50 specs.   I think SP has a hard time coming up.

Biggest chance i see is if they can beat bitfury on price.  And we have no idea what that price is right now.   I'm still wondering if they are making SP50 or call it a sunk cost.  Seems hard to justify when you know  your chip is already beat.  How it's been same rendering for so long I think sunk cost is more and more likely.

Sidehack has said he would not like to work with SP's chips,too complicated,sooo not worth the effort & time 

That was in relation to the previous generation's fat chips. SP50s are estimated to be ~20W compared to the SP35s of ~110W.