Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 133. (Read 771280 times)

+1

I think I will write this off as a loss but saying that I still have a bit of hope left. also I have someone who prepares SEC and FINcen complaints for me and will have them ready if the shit hits the fan ( it's quite a long form and questionnaire) ken better get your shit together mate I am not the only one!

PS I had someone visited VMC premises in Springfield and he said he could not find it and he also asked in other units but it's quite a big industrial estate so he will be re-visiting this weekend and probably will have some photos as well

I can't think of anything to say right now but thought I'd post anyway.

EDIT:

oh yes.....update in about 54hrs!

Post deleted. I know better than to react to Canadian Guy.

The pictures illustrate how tragically wrong the arguments used to defend Active Mining are.  No one in his right mind would deal with HashFast, and KNC needs no advertising - if those chips were being sold and not mined, they'd sell themselves.
I do agree with you in one respect - this thread offers top-notch circle jerks, greatly superior to the feeble half-tugs found in the unmoderated thread.  Excelsior!

I wonder if Ken realised profitability was bad and decided to switch away from nextreme...

It's mind blowing that there are still people who believe this will work, when Ken has already admitted his own incompetency.  He has clearly come out and said that he doesn't know what he's doing, yet people still think he's going to end up with a product??  This is insanity at its most disturbing level.

That would be true if you would use most of the die estate. But these wafers contain various generic circuits that can be used for all kinds of applications, and therefore are anything but optimal for any particular application. Its a halfway solution between FGPA and ASIC. THere is also the tooling cost, since these wafers are produced in two phases, most of the layers for the generic easic nextreme process, and then later one application specific layer is etched. Fabs will charge you a pretty penny for that, even if eASIC wouldnt.

Then there is the ebeam thing; chips produced through ebeam will be a whole lot more expensive, because its a time consuming operation using very expensive equipment. I figure that will only apply to the first batch though, maybe as few as one single wafer to see if the chip works, and to allow PCB development/debugging.

is there a way to claim already the bitfunder active mining shares?

Rather than all this tit for tat useless bickering (edit: not directed at the last few posts), I propose a discussion which we can all benefit from.  Would anyone like to take a stab at covering the bigger picture of the effect of a rise in BTC value on ActM's business model?

It seems like only yesterday that the community was crying 'mining is dead' and calculator websites would churn out numbers showing that almost all hardware would never ROI.  Then overnight BTC value soared, a new confidence was found and people started switching back on their GPU farms which they thought had become obsolete.

Although surely the prefabricated wafers could have major cost advantages because those can be mass produced? Doubled edged sword.

We don't know yet because we don't know the stats of ActM Chips - there can be a massive variance in performance on the same node size. For example bitfury is 55nm at about 0.6w/gh, however Avalon v2 is also 55nm at about 2.5w/gh (or 1.5w in "low power" mode) - a factor of 2-4 x difference in power consumption.

I believe KNC second gen is supposed to be 20nm - this could take a while and will be a massive challenge for them.

$2/GH is very high by my estimate for pure asics. But dont forget these are not pure asics, they are structured asics. They are build on prefabricated wafers which carry a significant price premium, they are considerably less size efficient (and usually, less power efficient). Especially in smaller volumes, these chips may cost 10x more per GH than HF/KnC/CT/..   Now 10x their marginal asic production cost probably still means a profitable chip today, but Im not sure how long that will last.

eASIC does have a path towards pure asics, but expect the NRE for that to be similar as any from scratch asic development (if nothing else, a full mask set price is the same either way), and lead time will also be several months.

Is there any companys developing a better all round chip? I heard KNC are looking to ship in the summer and maybe ASICminer?

crumbs, this is a self moderated thread so of course Ken is going to delete posts when someone ups pictures promoting competitors hardware as a means to fud the company, so why not take your own advice and stick to your own unmoderated thread?  Then again it's probably not as much fun circling jerking with you fellow trolls with fewer people to wind up all day long.

There are a lot of strong opinions here and yet they can't all be right.  Some will try to back them up with cold hard facts, but the reality is there are so many unknowns that posting numbers is purely speculative at this stage and can't be used to justify either a win or lose outcome.  The scaremongers would have you believe that the rise in difficulty only applies to ActM.  But the difficulty factor is a red herring due to the fact that it has the same equal effect on all miners.  It's more important that ActM is able to take a percentage of the network (no matter how small) and, crucially, employ a business model which allows for the increase or maintenance of that percentage while profiting from chip and miner sales.  I think where a lot of contributors to this thread are going wrong is they have a blinkered view and can't see beyond the next few months. This industry is in it's infancy and when you consider that we are one of only two companies positioned as we are, then it becomes easier to understand that provided Ken is able to build working miners that shareholders will enjoy success.

Or grab a few drinks and... Ohshi

Ken is meeting with eASIC this week... Anyone in San Jose, maybe you can go get coffee...

Posting this for everyone who claims Ken doesn't delete posts, and those asking just what type of posts get deleted.  Crossposted to the unmoderated thread.
This is considered trolling, Flashman's pissy reply gets to stay


Stop fighting strawmen, and address what I have actually said.
I gave you line numbers to make it easier.  If you disagree with any of my points, feel free to refute them.


In the meantime, I'll explain where you went wrong with your list:

#1 - I have not mentioned node size.  I pointed out that the current trend is high GH/sec, high power ASICS.  By at least an order of magnitude more powerful than Ken's (if Ken actually *had* chips, which he doesn't).  KnC first generation, soon to be outmoded by their second generation.  HashFast.  Cointerra.  BFL.

#2. - 400W chips are not "contiguous squares," that's silly.  They are a set of dies set on a single substrate.  KNC.  HashFast.  Please, read up on this, or, at least, look at the pictures.  I'll put them right here:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/screenshots.angel.co/54/271640/677b9dae0811730975bf66e26843071e-thumb_jpg.jpg

HashFast, see the four dies?

https://i.imgur.com/Ji9zvNQ.jpg

KNC and no, it's not one die under that lid

#3. See above, and forget about 3D - you're confused.  The wafer doesn't dissipate much heat through its edges, that's why they're called "wafers" and not, oh.. "blocks."  Most of the heat is dissipated through just *one* of the surfaces, the one the heatsink sits on.

Keep trying though.