ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It

[samson]

As far as I remember, friedcat considered building a proprietary ASICMINER platform for listing and trading shares. As listing on all the alternitve centralized exchanges with their ponzis comes with risk, I think a proprietary platform is the best solution. We don't even know the exact reasons why glbse went down! Do you really want to ride the same horse again?

A proprietary exchange sounds great.

I think it's going to be important to get shares listed and actively available to trade before anything is produced by the company.

Right now it's in a state of limbo and no shareholders have any proof of ownership at all. This will change once it's listed somewhere. I think it's important to fully establish share ownership prior to the production of any ASIC devices / mining activity.

[1714052464]

1714052464

[burnside]

What's the delay ?

I would prefer if it's not rushed. After the GLBSE fiasco, I'm not even sure listing on a centralized exchange is a good idea. With this in mind, I suspect that friedcat wouldn't relist all shares at once; making it opt-in might be the wisest choice, depending on the maintenance overhead.

As far as I remember, friedcat considered building a proprietary ASICMINER platform for listing and trading shares. As listing on all the alternitve centralized exchanges with their ponzis comes with risk, I think a proprietary platform is the best solution. We don't even know the exact reasons why glbse went down! Do you really want to ride the same horse again?

At least two of the exchange options have provide clear reports of shareholders to the asset issuers so something like GLBSE is not possible.  (btct.co, and bit funder)

[friedcat]

Update

There are several news:

1. The process of our rest layers are significantly faster, we are now in QC and expecting to have the wafer arrived at our packaging service next week. Then the slicing, packaging, and testing will start immediately.

2. The shares are under processing. Shareholders (determined per e-mail address) offering different addresses to GLBSE and to us will receive a confirmation mail asking which to use or whether changing to a newer one. And we also hope to identify the shareholders who claim both different e-mail addresses and different addresses as many as possible. The principle would basically be:
  1) If the shareholder has both claimed to GLBSE and to us, we will use the share number provided from GLBSE.
  2) If during analysis, the shareholder hasn't claimed to GLBSE but claimed to us, we will keep a separate list and see if it should be merged.
  3) If the shareholder hasn't claimed to us but claimed to GLBSE, we will of course use the GLBSE data.

Only important and relevant parts are:

1) When those chips are ready, is it guaranteed they actually work or will there be a random testing?

2) Will this happen before or after the shipping to ASICMINER team?

3) How many chips (%) to you think will be lemons?

Do not get too exited about the rest

1) There will be QC guaranteeing offering basic qualification, but the testing(functional, electronic, thermo) will be first done by us. After that, part of the testing (functional) will be done by the same company that does packaging for us.

2) After the shipping.

3) They would consider a 2/3 yield rate a non-failed one. However in most circumstances the rates are much higher than this bottom line. Made-in-China of course are connected with the impression of lower quality, but calculating with a whole project should put the overall cost into consideration. TSMC has higher threshold for newcomer clients and is less affordable.

As far as I remember, friedcat considered building a proprietary ASICMINER platform for listing and trading shares. As listing on all the alternitve centralized exchanges with their ponzis comes with risk, I think a proprietary platform is the best solution. We don't even know the exact reasons why glbse went down! Do you really want to ride the same horse again?

A proprietary exchange sounds great.

I think it's going to be important to get shares listed and actively available to trade before anything is produced by the company.

Right now it's in a state of limbo and no shareholders have any proof of ownership at all. This will change once it's listed somewhere. I think it's important to fully establish share ownership prior to the production of any ASIC devices / mining activity.

Yes. And we are working towards it. First we need to sort the actual data out from what we have now. We have a close partner working on a new platform that is considerably safer than GLBSE due to its more secure structure. And of course existing platforms like btc.co are also sound options. It is also optional for each shareholder to join the platform or to lock the shares in with us.

[Ukyo]

Seriously?

Terms:
1. We (BitFunder) do not accept responsibility for anything.
2. WARNING: Use at your own risk.
3. You must agree to 1 and 2.

At least they're honest  

Yes, very serious.
If you have any questions about it, feel free to join our discussion about it on the BitFunder launch thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=130117.0

Many questions have already been asked and answered, including how we differ from other exchanges. (Past and Present)
Of course those explanations include why you see the terms of service that you do. I do hope you at least give it a read.
Thus far, people have seemed very happy with the provided answers.

Oh and...

I'd like to see it listed on Bitfunder instead.

+1

At least two of the exchange options have provide clear reports of shareholders to the asset issuers so something like GLBSE is not possible.  (btct.co, and bit funder)

Yup, we both offer up different variations and styles to choose from. Although, I am trying to convince Burnside to join the dark side and list everything publically for both users and issuers. I have already described how/why in the link I already plugged above so I won't bother fluffing this thread with it.

Friedcat, it does sound like you already have a lot of work to do, and in what appears to be a very short time span. As much as it may not be my business, it does kind of sound like you need all the time to focus on the main things that you can get, at least for the short term. (I may be very wrong, if so, just ignore me. 

BitFunder would be happy to help out any assets that even need a temporary home until other solutions can be finished. All our data us publicly listed, so everyone knows there is no funny business.

An issuer can pause trading when they are ready to do a migration. (We are not afraid of assets leaving us like other exchanges of the past who had a bad reaction.)
I am pretty sure I saw where btct.co has a trading pause option as well, however I cannot speak for Burnside & btct.co shareholders if they would want to do a "temporary" asset. I expect he will follow up shortly.

Thank you for the time and considerations!

[Mausini]

Update

There are several news:

1. The process of our rest layers are significantly faster, we are now in QC and expecting to have the wafer arrived at our packaging service next week. Then the slicing, packaging, and testing will start immediately.

2. The shares are under processing. Shareholders (determined per e-mail address) offering different addresses to GLBSE and to us will receive a confirmation mail asking which to use or whether changing to a newer one. And we also hope to identify the shareholders who claim both different e-mail addresses and different addresses as many as possible. The principle would basically be:
  1) If the shareholder has both claimed to GLBSE and to us, we will use the share number provided from GLBSE.
  2) If during analysis, the shareholder hasn't claimed to GLBSE but claimed to us, we will keep a separate list and see if it should be merged.
  3) If the shareholder hasn't claimed to us but claimed to GLBSE, we will of course use the GLBSE data.

Only important and relevant parts are:

1) When those chips are ready, is it guaranteed they actually work or will there be a random testing?

2) Will this happen before or after the shipping to ASICMINER team?

3) How many chips (%) to you think will be lemons?

Do not get too exited about the rest

1) There will be QC guaranteeing offering basic qualification, but the testing(functional, electronic, thermo) will be first done by us. After that, part of the testing (functional) will be done by the same company that does packaging for us.

2) After the shipping.

3) They would consider a 2/3 yield rate a non-failed one. However in most circumstances the rates are much higher than this bottom line. Made-in-China of course are connected with the impression of lower quality, but calculating with a whole project should put the overall cost into consideration. TSMC has higher threshold for newcomer clients and is less affordable.

As far as I remember, friedcat considered building a proprietary ASICMINER platform for listing and trading shares. As listing on all the alternitve centralized exchanges with their ponzis comes with risk, I think a proprietary platform is the best solution. We don't even know the exact reasons why glbse went down! Do you really want to ride the same horse again?

A proprietary exchange sounds great.

I think it's going to be important to get shares listed and actively available to trade before anything is produced by the company.

Right now it's in a state of limbo and no shareholders have any proof of ownership at all. This will change once it's listed somewhere. I think it's important to fully establish share ownership prior to the production of any ASIC devices / mining activity.

Yes. And we are working towards it. First we need to sort the actual data out from what we have now. We have a close partner working on a new platform that is considerably safer than GLBSE due to its more secure structure. And of course existing platforms like btc.co are also sound options. It is also optional for each shareholder to join the platform or to lock the shares in with us.

Great news!!!! Awesome news!!!

[DiabloD3]

Update

Please let me buy the first completed unit. Even if you don't sell any of the other units and keep them all for the shareholder farm, let me buy the first one.

1) I want to get it working on DiabloMiner.
2) I can prove to the rest of the Bitcoin community that it really does exist and everyone can quit with the bullshit on the forums.

[LazyOtto]

claimed to GLBSE

I don't understand what that phrase means.

Therefore, it is an action I probably never explicitly performed.

A clarification, please?

[bitfair]

claimed to GLBSE

I don't understand what that phrase means.

Therefore, it is an action I probably never explicitly performed.

A clarification, please?

I'm not the original author, but I have no doubt that "claimed to GLBSE" refers to completing the claims process at GLBSE. Friedcat refers to (1) those that completed both his claims process and the claims process of GLBSE, (2) those that completed only his claims process, and (3) those that completed only the GLBSE claims process. That should just about cover everybody with a stake in the company, except for those whose shares were not even originally on GLBSE...

Edit: And a big round of applause for friedcat and friends!

[DutchBrat]

Update

There are several news:

1. The process of our rest layers are significantly faster, we are now in QC and expecting to have the wafer arrived at our packaging service next week. Then the slicing, packaging, and testing will start immediately.

That is the best news so far this week

[niko]

Yes. And we are working towards it. First we need to sort the actual data out from what we have now. We have a close partner working on a new platform that is considerably safer than GLBSE due to its more secure structure. And of course existing platforms like btc.co are also sound options. It is also optional for each shareholder to join the platform or to lock the shares in with us.

If I understand correctly, the new platform is being worked on by people legally distinct and isolated from ASICMINER. This is good. Also, it is good to keep the option of shareholders locking in directly with ASICMINER (no "trading securities" for ASICMINER and for those shareholders).

[Jutarul]

3) They would consider a 2/3 yield rate a non-failed one. However in most circumstances the rates are much higher than this bottom line. Made-in-China of course are connected with the impression of lower quality, but calculating with a whole project should put the overall cost into consideration. TSMC has higher threshold for newcomer clients and is less affordable.

I am curious. What do they offer in case of a lower yield? Discounts?

[beekeeper]

Dude, can I get some wafer with chocolate? 

Ok, serious tone now, when will chips be available for those of us who want to assemble their stuff themselves?

[niko]

Dude, can I get some wafer with chocolate? 

Ok, serious tone now, when will chips be available for those of us who want to assemble their stuff themselves?

Am I thinking about this right: if there is an incentive for somebody to buy mining equipment from this project, that would mean that this project is forfeiting a profit opportunity at the expense of non-mining shareholders. If, on the other hand, there is an incentive for this project to sell equipment (that is, we are better off selling than mining), that would mean the buyers are making a bad move, as they are getting something which is not profitable. Either way, it does not make sense to offer our mining equipment for sale. The price of electricity may be one factor to make a difference, but ASICMINER should be able to set up the mining operation where electricity is cheap.

[LazyOtto]

niko and beekeeper, your topic is addressed in the OP.

[2weiX]

can you remove all that GLBSE history from the OP and instead focus on what happened to y/our claims, our shares, your manufacturing process?

[eb3full]

Yes, the OP should be changed to reflect the current situation so people don't have to trudge through crap from August to get a sense of what's going on.

[DutchBrat]

Seems we will have an extra week of mining as the only ASICMINER in town

Avalon just announced a possible 4 - 7 days delay

Updating as promised,

Let's be frank. We ran into a potential delay of 4-7 days.

What does this mean?

We when taped out the chips to TSMC we had a "projected out date" of Jan 3, 2013 which is on schedule with our late dec. / early jan. demonstration dates. Now however after this week's website update our "projected out date" has changed to Jan 7th, 2013 and "committed date" has been revealed to be Jan 10th, 2013. TSMC did not give us a reason for this, but as a small customer you are really at the mercy of bigger customers running higher priority lots. e.g. "super hot lot"  The "committed date" is the promised date of delivery, it is very unusual for TSMC to break their "committed date", so we expect our chips to ship on or before Jan 10th, 2013.

Another potential problem is Customs clearing, the packaging company Fujitsu is located in Shanghai's Export Processing Zone (EPZ), while the packaging itself will not see delays, it may take an additional 2-3 days to clear Customs. To make up for this, if it occurs, we will be flying down to Shanghai to the demonstration in the EPZ instead of waiting for the shipping to the factory for assembly.

With all this happening, it has burned through the 1 week additional leeway time we originally left out. I must say it will be difficulty for us to ship on Jan 14th, we however expect to ship around Jan 18 ~ 20.

[DiabloD3]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=130795.0

[bitfair]

Update

We are still waiting for the payment and the shareholders' information from GLBSE. It seems that it hasn't made any further payments after the first two. This is the address after the payment of 5443BTC, and the coins haven't been sent anywhere else yet:

http://blockchain.info/address/17pzgcf1v7zwvQczw1WE3sv2u8LZtub2Kz

The probability, we believe, that they refuse to pay and recover the shareholders' share numbers, is low. But we have to be more active pursuing the direct answer.

A letter to the board members has also been sent.

Best regards,

friedcat

Just out of curiosity [and possibly to lay dead the issue]: have the outstanding 5443 BTC been recovered from GLBSE? At least the coins moved on from the given address on Dec. 3, and I hope they went to the rightful owners...

[memvola]

From Block Erupter thread:

Now people are seeing it as a threat as 50TH would be enough to take over the block chain should BFL fail to produce a single working chip.

But it would not  be in the interest of the shareholders if ASICMINER became a threat to Bitcoin as the value of BTC would plummet.

Should BFL go bust then I think it is in everyone's interest if ASICMINER changed it's business plan to make sure everyone understand and sees it is not a threat to anything or anyone.

As it stands at the moment, ASICMINER will be the first ASIC around and small enough to NOT be a threat to Bitcoin. Doe sit suck for people that invested heavily with BFL, of course it does.... but does that mean that ASICMINER is a threat? NO !

Let's hope that we don't get delayed as well. In the end, we are going through *almost* the same process.

Though I wouldn't call it a change in plan, because I don't think there is a plan yet. I guess at that point, everyone would want an ASICMINER device.

But what if it's not convenient for ASICMINER to produce and ship consumer grade products, or somehow can't do it fast enough to counter its own hashrate? I imagine the second best option is to sell mining plants. As long as they are in a different location and under different management, we should be OK. The party that buys the plant can lease it out as well.