GekkoScience BM1384 Project Development Discussion

[PlanetCrypto]

All this talk here about fab'ing some GPL'ed Bitcoin calculation cores onto silicon, is it wrong to think maybe making a new post about making a Bitcoin calculation core from scratch?

Basically what I want to know is how a core works, what is required to make a core do its job, then go from there, making a prototype core (discrete logic), making a software version of it (programmable logic) etc, etc.  I'm probably using the wrong words for this, but I know what I mean

My intention is to create a new thread in the not so distant future.
I'll also be soliciting for moderators as I'm a F'ing newb at that too.

I'm a newb at fabbing chips, but have a strong desire to know/learn all the aspects ("inquiring minds wanna' know").
But I would not want to become a hindrance to the very gifted, brilliant, and accomplished folks that lurk in these here waters.

In the organization model I'll be proposing, a shareholder may raise a referendum to be included in the design team (or any other team for that matter).
Then all the shareholders vote that referendum up or down (I assume shareholders will vote based on the merit of their referendum).

With regard to the discussion that the design team has ongoing, I envision that will be a separate thread.
So that anyone (whether they are on the design team or not, a shareholder or not) may contribute to the "brain working" and/or learn the process.

This participation would only be limited by shareholder determined IP restrictions.
In other words, if the shareholders were to ratify a referendum that restricted the release of information regarding a design, for say patent/IP reasons, then those particular aspects of the design would be withheld.

Speaking of a new thread and parameters thereof; the entity will need a name.
My input would be "Alliance Chip & Circuit Design (ACCD)"

Suggestions? Thoughts? Inputs?

Thanks guys/gals.

[1714202983]

1714202983

[1714202983]

1714202983

[1714202983]

1714202983

[sidehack]

Just as an off-the-cuff opinion based on quickly perusing the thread after a 500 mile drive and 3 hours of sleep...

IP restrictions is a big deal for Novak and I. So that'll have to be taken seriously on our end if we want to pitch in. Additionally, decision-making rights based on how much money you have strikes me as not only the way literally everything is run, but also as a terrible idea. I have zero money so apparently would have no say in the project whether I were to help or not.

[PlanetCrypto]

Just as an off-the-cuff opinion based on quickly perusing the thread after a 500 mile drive and 3 hours of sleep...

IP restrictions is a big deal for Novak and I. So that'll have to be taken seriously on our end if we want to pitch in. Additionally, decision-making rights based on how much money you have strikes me as not only the way literally everything is run, but also as a terrible idea. I have zero money so apparently would have no say in the project whether I were to help or not.

Hey, glad to hear you made it home in one piece.

If a foundry mandates an NDA (effectively restricting the IP regarding how they make chips, if I understood 2112's post correctly, which I may not have) and one wants a chip made, the only alternative I see is to build a new foundry.
What am I missing?
Should "we" be considering creating an entity that is a foundry?
That operates under a different paradigm?

"Additionally, decision-making rights based on how much money you have strikes me as not only the way literally everything is run, but also as a terrible idea."
What other metric would you suggest for determining decision making rights?
What criteria must one meet or exceed to be endowed with the decision making responsibility?
And who determines what that criteria is?

Under the model I'm proposing, let me paint a simple possible worst case picture.
1) 10 VC whales each "invest" $100,000 (1 million voting shares).
2) 1,000 investors invest $1,000 each (1 million voting shares).
3) and one newb invests $1 (1 voting share).

The whales will likely communicate amongst themselves privately with greed as their motivation. The 1,000 will likely communicate amongst themselves in a variety of manners (Bitcoin thread, PM's, emails, etc. . .) along with the 1 one dollar investor with curiosity, creativity, and learning as their motivation. Assuming the community of $1,000 and the 1$ investors are of a like mindset and the whales are of a like mindset and a referendum is raised that is self serving, greedy, and not in keeping with the spirit (best interests) of the community at large. Who wins the vote? Maybe it's my naivete' and faith in mankind, but I contend the 1,000 and the 1 will prevail. What is required by the 1,001 is the same kind of due diligence that the 10 will exhibit (driven by greed). If individuals contained in the 1,000 are the designers, engineers, and other key technology players and the 1,001 do not apply due diligence and consequently lose the vote, how much productive work would one imagine will get done. My guess is that when work grinds to a halt, the whales will bail. And if the proper legal framework is in place the 10, 1,000, and the 1 all re-coup their investment. The community still wins as they are the possessor of the IP which the whales are clueless about. At this juncture, the community has a plethora of options on how to proceed with what will be disruptive technology.

Additionally, if an individual shareholder had the ability to proxy their voting shares, for the exclusive purpose of voting in referendums, it would be easy for a singular individual to wield immense voting control. If numerous minority shareholders proxied their shares to a trusted individual of like minded high moral/ethical caliber . . . .

"I have zero money so apparently would have no say in the project whether I were to help or not."
1) As envisioned currently, which is subject to change as a result of a better idea, 1 share = $1 par value. I'll give you the dollar and I think many others would as well. But I think I get the jist of what your      saying/implying. I can think of, off the top of my head, several individuals who if they needed the "grub stake" I'd "sponsor" them, gratis, with the cash/BTC to become financially involved. Again, "no strings attached". And I think I'm not alone in this, as others would be with acquaintances they know.

Additionally, a referendum could be raised to bestow shares to an individual either by diluting everyone's outstanding shares or by issuing them from existing capital shares (i.e. shares the company owns that have not been assigned/purchased). This creates some interesting tax liabilities for the individual but not insurmountable ones. This happens fairly regularly in corporate America today at the executive level. Where a board of directors (shareholders in this model) either sell at a reduced cost or gift capital stock to executives so they "have some skin" in the game as part of their compensation package. The theory is that if they perform, share holder value will increase and their individual share value will increase along with it. Pay based performance, so to speak. As another example, several public companies I've worked for have allowed me to purchase capital stock at par value, which at the time of purchase was several hundred % less than what the market price was. Sometimes this is called an employee stock purchase plan.

So let's take an example, You're significantly contributing (or somebody just feels sorry for you) to the design team. A singular design team member could raise a referendum, given your stellar performance, to have the corporation gift you with XXX capital shares. If voted up and you accept the gifting, you become a vested shareholder with decision making authority and participate in any profit dispersal the company may declare going forward. i.e. you become a share holder of record just like anyone who plopped down cash/BTC.

Similarly, a referendum could be raised to make a cash/BTC payment (for services rendered) to an individual. The individual would then be free to do what they will with the money/BTC.
A referendum could be raised to loan money to an individual or other entity. And they could likewise spend the money however they see fit.

There are multiple paths to ownership suffice to say. But all are based on what the community (in this case share holders) deems is appropriate and prudent to the health of the entity and the community at large.

2) As envisioned currently, which is subject to change as a result of a better idea, participation would not be restricted as I imagine the discussion would be public.

3) Assuming this endeavor actually does get a chip to tapeout and they are sold for even a minuscule infinitesimal micro-miniature net profit,
    a) what would you envision doing with that profit?
    b) and assuming it would be dispersed, what would be a fair metric to determine how it would be dispersed?

The model I'm working on will give the "every man" share holder a say in the decision making process and if the "every man" share holder bands together (which I've seen this community do) it can effectively steer the direction the ecosystem goes. Regardless of powerful outside manipulators.

None of the above is said and questions asked with even a tincture of sarcasm (with the exception of the feeling sorry for comment,  ).
I am simply truly curious and welcome solutions to the existing paradigm.

If there is a way to make this happen fairly that prohibits ego's from manifesting themselves, that ethicality needs to be in the foundation.

And the topics/advantages of Public Benefit Nonprofit Corporations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public-benefit_nonprofit_corporation) and Mutual Benefit Nonprofit Corporations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual-benefit_nonprofit_corporation) have not even been broached.

As a footnote, I'm really glad these questions are surfacing now as opposed to later.

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." -- Maragret Mead

[sidehack]

Are we talking about whales with any technical expertise, or just people with lots of money who want to make lots more money? If there was a way to gauge actual competence and assign authority based on that, rather than who has the fattest wallet, I could get behind it. I'd pay a lot more attention to a filthy rich engineer with a record of building great stuff than a filthy rich investor with a record of keeping chairs warm while getting paid to watch others work.

I know people with fat wallets are going to want to keep a tight leash on what happens with their money. But if the goal of the project is to do something technically impressive (with profit as a requirement of secondary concern), and the administrative tasks require a fraction of the effort the technicals need, I'd rather see decision-making authority assigned more heavily to technical people than administrators, or people whose only vested interest is greed. The folks putting up 30 hours a week in free time to do all the heavy lifting, I think, ought have more say than the guy who spent five minutes cutting a check and an hour a week reading the group emails.

Is there a business model where a group of people come together with an idea of how something should be done, people hand them money in order to let them do it, and then have approximately no say after that because the core group is capable of doing it all themselves? Something where investors just sit back and watch instead of being able to screw things up.

[hacko86]

I mostly agree with Sidehack in this round, except for one thing

i also think that a whale wallet should not be able to interfere with the ideas of a "technical" experts, but we must recognise that the technical expert should have the agreement from THE INNER CIRCLE (cit. american dad)
The inner circle is as side said the ensamble of technical, management, sales and pr team.

These people should be elected by every other inner circle's startup component OR/AND by shareholders accordingly.

The thing that i agree the most with sidehack is that more money should not mean more voting capacity, IMO every holder counts 1(because the only thing we assume as always true is that every shareholder has interest in the success of the company).

i personally do not agree with what side said about importance of duty holders.
i am sure for personal experience that a dev will not arrive to success without a salesman, a manager or a pr guy(or a financier). BUT true also that any of these others will not obtain anything without a dev!
The hours that you put now into the project will be the same that the others will dedicate when the product will be ready (i am not saing that these hours have the same technical or financial value.. maybe less or maybe more).

About the value given to a worker like sidehack...
too many options... really...
-Assign a fixed percentage of every financier's input to him or anyone else actively working (inner circle)
-Salary (totally given or partially converted in shares)
-Assign a value to him(and all the inner members) based on the job done or to do in the project and pay it in shares

many other ways....

Thanks guys for keeping my brain moving 

[philipma1957]

well I can always add 2-6 coins to a joint venture.

I can run a demo/review thread.

And since I am only going for 2 to 6 coins my vote is going to agree with sidehack and Novac.  I don't want much say in the venture.  As I am more of a guy that does a little bit of everything.  I am more of a Doctor Watson then a sherlock Holmes.

I would be sidehack's sidekick (pun was poor but well meant)

 

[PlanetCrypto]

Are we talking about whales with any technical expertise, or just people with lots of money who want to make lots more money? If there was a way to gauge actual competence and assign authority based on that, rather than who has the fattest wallet, I could get behind it. I'd pay a lot more attention to a filthy rich engineer with a record of building great stuff than a filthy rich investor with a record of keeping chairs warm while getting paid to watch others work.

I know people with fat wallets are going to want to keep a tight leash on what happens with their money. But if the goal of the project is to do something technically impressive (with profit as a requirement of secondary concern), and the administrative tasks require a fraction of the effort the technicals need, I'd rather see decision-making authority assigned more heavily to technical people than administrators, or people whose only vested interest is greed. The folks putting up 30 hours a week in free time to do all the heavy lifting, I think, ought have more say than the guy who spent five minutes cutting a check and an hour a week reading the group emails.

Is there a business model where a group of people come together with an idea of how something should be done, people hand them money in order to let them do it, and then have approximately no say after that because the core group is capable of doing it all themselves? Something where investors just sit back and watch instead of being able to screw things up.

In the extreme, the "whales" are technologically clueless "people with lots of money who want to make lots more money".
Gauging competence (in any discipline) is the task of the many and is delegated by the many through the referendum process.
As, ultimately, the many are supremely responsible and culpable for the actions of the entity.
Personally, I pay attention to competence regardless of the individuals chosen field; engineering, administration, physical prowess, financial, sales, people skills, etc. . .

"I know people with fat wallets are going to want to keep a tight leash on what happens with their money." I categorize it as a disease, akin to obsessive hoarding. The more one hoards (money in this example) the more the individual agonizes over retaining the hoard and eventually becomes delusional.

"But if the goal of the project is to do something technically impressive ..."
The goal here is to not just do something technologically impressive, to some extent that's already been done and your efforts are a prime example, but to take that technological thing and make it the defacto standard of the many. Thereby causing the playing field to become leveled for all players.

I think that any "folks putting up 30 hours a week in free time to do all the heavy lifting," "ought have more say than the guy who spent five minutes" doing whatever.

"Is there a business model where a group of people come together with an idea of how something should be done, people hand them money in order to let them do it, and then have approximately no say after that because the core group is capable of doing it all themselves?"
Yes there are plethora of them.

"Something where investors just sit back and watch instead of being able to screw things up."
Yes, any publicly traded company on any of the exchanges meets this criteria.

The difference between a startup and a publicly traded company can be distilled down to track record. The previous has none while the latter oozes success. And that's where the rub is when initiating a venture that requires hideous amounts of capital.

I can easily imagine that if a technologically advanced chip is brought to tapeout any endeavors the entity would want to pursue after that will be easily funded.
That entity, "having figured out the wheel" could then transpose that model to others who may have other disruptive ideas.

[PlanetCrypto]

well I can always add 2-6 coins to a joint venture.

I can run a demo/review thread.

And since I am only going for 2 to 6 coins my vote is going to agree with sidehack and Novac.  I don't want much say in the venture.  As I am more of a guy that does a little bit of everything.  I am more of a Doctor Watson then a sherlock Holmes.

I would be sidehack's sidekick (pun was poor but well meant)

 

Are you offering to spawn a thread and mother it for the chip thingy?

Hope so, cuz' I suck at that.

[sidehack]

I think my opinions regarding publicly-traded companies is reasonably well-known, but I'll go ahead and restate it. My company (GekkoScience) will never be publicly traded. No shares will ever be sold. I am fundamentally opposed to the idea of paying someone who did not work for it, and I don't consider "having money already" as an adequate replacement for actual labor. I am also fundamentally opposed to the idea of someone buying a position of authority over my decisions. It's for these reasons that we avoid investors wherever possible (and loans are a last-ditch measure).

Yes, I know a two million dollar price tag pretty much requires investors. Loans are probably out because there's no security; just like with a building loan, the collateral is being invented and until all the money is spent to finish the project it's not really worth anything. I just really don't like the idea of some nontechnical with money being able to dictate the goings-on of a technical enterprise simply by paying for the right. If the many what put up cash want to elect the "inner circle" based on criteria of competence in their various fields (technical expertise for dev teams, managerial experience for administration, etc), then have no further real active role in the process, that'd be alright.

As for compensation of individuals working within the project, I really have no opinion yet worth expressing. That'll take some time to think about. Something like a salary, dividing up the required tasks and assigning a value to each portion, payable upon completion of that portion, I'd accept that for myself at least. That motivates a person to get things done efficiently but effectively.

[hacko86]

" If the many what put up cash want to elect the "inner circle" based on criteria of competence in their various fields (technical expertise for dev teams, managerial experience for administration, etc), then have no further real active role in the process, that'd be alright"

Pretty much what i meant


But please remember that you are still dividing gekkoscience from the investors

"My company (GekkoScience) will never be publicly traded. No shares will ever be sold. I am fundamentally opposed to the idea of paying someone who did not work for it, and I don't consider "having money already" as an adequate replacement for actual labor. I am also fundamentally opposed to the idea of someone buying a position of authority over my decisions. It's for these reasons that we avoid investors wherever possible (and loans are a last-ditch measure)."

Having a financing entity AND gekkosciance is pretty much the same than financing INTO gekkoscience.

You can call it as you want but if a whale retrieves the investment you lose the ability to finish your product...
Thin line between whay you stated and what planetcrypto stated.

Still think that he he is right about caring on investors.

Whouldnt you reward philipma for babysitting the eventual thread?
Cheers guys, have a nice day

[ZenFr]

And some news of the sticks ?

[sidehack]

GekkoScience and whatever PlanetCrypto does are completely separate entities. Of course I'll separate my business from his investors. The only GekkoScience products that go unfinished because a whale retrieved the investment are projects specifically commissioned by said whale who then backed out of the contract, which makes it not investment but a contract job. In general, we are our own financing entity.


There is no news of the sticks. Until I get the parts in to start building and shipping, everything that needs to be said has been said already.

[ZenFr]

There is no news of the sticks. Until I get the parts in to start building and shipping, everything that needs to be said has been said already.

Ok, thanks Sidehack.

[cavaliersrus]

takin from the sticks pre order area

I expect to start shipping sticks (in the order payments arrived, with some quota queueing for prearranged bulk orders) by August 25th. Any delays in this timeline will be announced as they are discovered. This project cannot exist without transparency.

i do beleave that hes covered this here in orginal posting but there are always possibilities of delays and he said any delays will be posted in this so please

be patient

[sidehack]

There's some pre-order sale threads over in Group Buys, and I'll be starting to bring in parts before long. PCBs and heatsinks should be in hand in about two weeks. Novak's on vacation and I'm tied up with assembly tasks for a huge PSU boards order so there probably won't be any dev work done on either hardware or code until next week. I think we're going to skip Amita design and go right into a simple multi-chip board with full software control of clock, voltage and fan. From there we can extend it to 18- and 30-chip designs.

Independent from what PlanetCrypto is working on, we've been thinking about building a 4U machine made for swappable boards and such. With BM1384 it'd put up 5TH, so next-gen chips would be even better. The plan was to make the layout fairly flexible, internal connections a generic USB bus, and publish the specs in case anyone else wanted to build boards for the same form-factor. Basically, an intention to define an open standard. Once I get back to hardware dev we'll see what happens.

[alienesb]

There's some pre-order sale threads over in Group Buys, and I'll be starting to bring in parts before long. PCBs and heatsinks should be in hand in about two weeks. Novak's on vacation and I'm tied up with assembly tasks for a huge PSU boards order so there probably won't be any dev work done on either hardware or code until next week. I think we're going to skip Amita design and go right into a simple multi-chip board with full software control of clock, voltage and fan. From there we can extend it to 18- and 30-chip designs.

Independent from what PlanetCrypto is working on, we've been thinking about building a 4U machine made for swappable boards and such. With BM1384 it'd put up 5TH, so next-gen chips would be even better. The plan was to make the layout fairly flexible, internal connections a generic USB bus, and publish the specs in case anyone else wanted to build boards for the same form-factor. Basically, an intention to define an open standard. Once I get back to hardware dev we'll see what happens.

I'd be down for at least one of these beasts, maybe more 

[PlanetCrypto]

There's some pre-order sale threads over in Group Buys, and I'll be starting to bring in parts before long. PCBs and heatsinks should be in hand in about two weeks. Novak's on vacation and I'm tied up with assembly tasks for a huge PSU boards order so there probably won't be any dev work done on either hardware or code until next week. I think we're going to skip Amita design and go right into a simple multi-chip board with full software control of clock, voltage and fan. From there we can extend it to 18- and 30-chip designs.

Independent from what PlanetCrypto is working on, we've been thinking about building a 4U machine made for swappable boards and such. With BM1384 it'd put up 5TH, so next-gen chips would be even better. The plan was to make the layout fairly flexible, internal connections a generic USB bus, and publish the specs in case anyone else wanted to build boards for the same form-factor. Basically, an intention to define an open standard. Once I get back to hardware dev we'll see what happens.

To clarify:
Gekkoscience is a standalone entity as is Planetcrypto.
I can unequivocally say that any interaction between the proposed entity and PC will be contractual in nature as it has been between Gekkoscience and PC.
We, as a company, may elect to contribute, gratis, resources/assets to any company or individual (time on one of our super computers, for instance, for chip simulation) at our discretion.
PC will probably fund the proposed entity (subject to our share holder approval) through the share purchase vehicle as I will personally.

Currently, I'm leaning towards a corporate organizational model that files for an IRS 503(c)(6) tax status which is commonly known as a Mutual Benefit Nonprofit Corporation.
Briefly described here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual-benefit_nonprofit_corporation
This will make investing in the organization less attractive to "whales", i.e. individuals looking to make huge ROI's in the short term.
But is, I think, more philosophically inline with what the Bitcoin mining community needs.

To quote from the Wiki referene:
"Mutual benefit corporations are formed for common gain purposes such as ..." "... promoting the social or economic welfare of member individuals or organizations (for example through trade groups, professional organizations or business districts)." In this instance the the proposed organization would be loosely defined as Bitcoin mining hardware manufacturers.

Stated succinctly, The proposed Mutual Benefit Nonprofit Corporation will promote the social and economic welfare (common gain) of member individuals and organizations by getting to tapeout a state-of-the-art Bitcoin SHA-256 hashing chip.

And yeah, PC will be interested in purchasing some of those 5TH machines as well.

[chiguireitor]

There's some pre-order sale threads over in Group Buys, and I'll be starting to bring in parts before long. PCBs and heatsinks should be in hand in about two weeks. Novak's on vacation and I'm tied up with assembly tasks for a huge PSU boards order so there probably won't be any dev work done on either hardware or code until next week. I think we're going to skip Amita design and go right into a simple multi-chip board with full software control of clock, voltage and fan. From there we can extend it to 18- and 30-chip designs.

Independent from what PlanetCrypto is working on, we've been thinking about building a 4U machine made for swappable boards and such. With BM1384 it'd put up 5TH, so next-gen chips would be even better. The plan was to make the layout fairly flexible, internal connections a generic USB bus, and publish the specs in case anyone else wanted to build boards for the same form-factor. Basically, an intention to define an open standard. Once I get back to hardware dev we'll see what happens.

I'm building a waterblock with the S5 form factor (hence the PM i sent you before). This could line up nicely with this project

[sidehack]

The big'n won't be built around the 18-chip board.

[chiguireitor]

The big'n won't be built around the 18-chip board.

If you have a set design, please let me know... i can coordinate with you so people can have variety of options when cooling down everything especially for tropical countries like mine where ambient 30ºC  is the lower bound on a normal day