[ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 144.

Thumper650

newbie

Activity: 42

Merit: 0

Quote from: zefyr0s on January 10, 2014, 01:28:27 AM

Ugh. Failing to meet expectations is no evidence of intentional wrongdoing...

But failing to meet expectations by such a spectacular and dramatic margin sure is.
Either that, or new laws like Felonious Incompetence and Criminal Stupidity have to be passed.

Mabsark

legendary

Activity: 826

Merit: 1004

Quote from: kslaughter on January 08, 2014, 07:41:52 PM

Weekly Update: 1/8/13

Ken doesn't even know what day or even year it is. At least he got the month right though. Cheesy

iSnow

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: drawingthesun on January 10, 2014, 05:39:19 AM

EDIT: Which could mean we get the next prototype by early February?

Of course Ken has given us no information how the RTL redesign is going or when he onboarded the new ASIC engineers. Or which costs this failed attempt to do it all alone incurred. Or how many botched chips had been delivered.

drawingthesun

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1015

Quote from: iSnow on January 10, 2014, 05:31:49 AM

Quote from: drawingthesun on January 10, 2014, 05:12:28 AM

Hey ffssixtynine, what does "respining" mean in context of the eASIC chips?

DTS, you talking about this?

Quote

to make sure that when we spin up our chip it will work

If yes, then I'd say it is not a technical term but means "when we ramp up production of our chip..."

Yeah ok that makes a lot of sense.

So Ken is still getting the final ASIC design complete before eASIC starts producing for us.

EDIT: Which could mean we get the next prototype by early February?

iSnow

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: drawingthesun on January 10, 2014, 05:12:28 AM

Hey ffssixtynine, what does "respining" mean in context of the eASIC chips?

DTS, you talking about this?

Quote

to make sure that when we spin up our chip it will work

If yes, then I'd say it is not a technical term but means "when we ramp up production of our chip..."

drawingthesun

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1015

Quote from: ffssixtynine on January 10, 2014, 05:03:36 AM

If ken said units had been delivered to customers, I think it's fair to say full evidence needs to be provided and a full explanation of what has gone wrong since then. You can't claim delivery and then say something obscure about rtl code (which was Ken's task?) and engineering (pcb). Similarly about the extra hashing.

I'm concerned that things went wrong in October or November and that it was then handled badly. At that point I seems to remember seeing irc logs posted showing a very stressed Ken. I have no reason to think this was anything other than failures internally and/or at outsourcers, but one must manage those failures professionally.

One must certainly not mislead customers or investors over the following months.

Ken, I know you have always meant well but this needs an open and frank explanation, very quickly indeed. Both shareholders and buyers have reason to be angry.

For everyone else, Ken is really poor at communication and a lot of this may be down to that. I always found him much better voice than in any written means. I know two posters here are trying to meet/chat to him.

Hey ffssixtynine, what does "respining" mean in context of the eASIC chips?

ffssixtynine

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

If ken said units had been delivered to customers, I think it's fair to say full evidence needs to be provided and a full explanation of what has gone wrong since then. You can't claim delivery and then say something obscure about rtl code (which was Ken's task?) and engineering (pcb). Similarly about the extra hashing.

I'm concerned that things went wrong in October or November and that it was then handled badly. At that point I seems to remember seeing irc logs posted showing a very stressed Ken. I have no reason to think this was anything other than failures internally and/or at outsourcers, but one must manage those failures professionally.

One must certainly not mislead customers or investors over the following months.

Ken, I know you have always meant well but this needs an open and frank explanation, very quickly indeed. Both shareholders and buyers have reason to be angry.

For everyone else, Ken is really poor at communication and a lot of this may be down to that. I always found him much better voice than in any written means. I know two posters here are trying to meet/chat to him.

JimmyJazz

full member

Activity: 207

Merit: 100

Quote from: iSnow on January 10, 2014, 04:43:50 AM

Quote from: drawingthesun on January 10, 2014, 04:35:38 AM

RTL is the design before an ASIC gets commissioned correct? So if we have to get another RTL that means the ASIC can't exist at all right?

I ain't no chip designer either, but from what I googled, RTL is a high-level description of what the chips is supposed to do. It gets converted to low-level descriptions and those into masks from which the chips are made.

Ken's statement imo indicates that he had an RTL description but it was faulty or underperforming so he finally hired some expert to help him out. What I take from this is that we had sample chips but they were no good and now the design has to be re-cast into silicon.

Someone with more knowledge? Mabs?

From what I have learnt - Ken wants a perfect product and won't budge one bit on his thinking.

This could all still be OK depending on the timeline, but it does not fill you with confidence when Ken states he has no clue on the dates. (However probably a lie)

iSnow

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: drawingthesun on January 10, 2014, 04:35:38 AM

RTL is the design before an ASIC gets commissioned correct? So if we have to get another RTL that means the ASIC can't exist at all right?

I ain't no chip designer either, but from what I googled, RTL is a high-level description of what the chips is supposed to do. It gets converted to low-level descriptions and those into masks from which the chips are made.

Ken's statement imo indicates that he had an RTL description but it was faulty or underperforming so he finally hired some expert to help him out. What I take from this is that we had sample chips but they were no good and now the design has to be re-cast into silicon.

Someone with more knowledge? Mabs?

drawingthesun

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1015

Quote from: iSnow on January 10, 2014, 04:09:31 AM

Quote from: drawingthesun on January 10, 2014, 12:02:42 AM

do we even have eASIC chips?

Uhm no, we don't. He has been pretty clear about that (the RTL stuff). The situation is actually much, much worse than I thought.

Due to huge gaps in my knowledge I am unsure what some of the terms mean.

RTL is the design before an ASIC gets commissioned correct? So if we have to get another RTL that means the ASIC can't exist at all right?

However Ken has said that we are not respining the chip, so I assumed that mean that the chips sort of exist?

I am confused about how we don't need to respin (whatever that means) but we are still working on RTL.

iSnow

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: drawingthesun on January 10, 2014, 12:02:42 AM

do we even have eASIC chips?

Uhm no, we don't. He has been pretty clear about that (the RTL stuff). The situation is actually much, much worse than I thought.

drawingthesun

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1015

Quote from: zefyr0s on January 10, 2014, 01:28:27 AM

Ugh. Failing to meet expectations is no evidence of intentional wrongdoing. This is not to say that there is not intentional wrongdoing occurring, just there is no evidence to support an argument in either direction. This absence of information however is the biggest problem I currently see with Active and certainly agree that we should have information be presented much more clearly. Sure, if it is not possible to present such information then explain why. If the explanation fits the realm of plausible occurrence, cool; otherwise we certainly need more fluid conversation with development.

I do not believe Ken has done any wrongdoing, it's possible all the contradictions are because events played out that way. but the silence and darkness is now insufferable.

I just want the truth at this point.

zefyr0s

sr. member

Activity: 245

Merit: 250

Ugh. Failing to meet expectations is no evidence of intentional wrongdoing. This is not to say that there is not intentional wrongdoing occurring, just there is no evidence to support an argument in either direction. This absence of information however is the biggest problem I currently see with Active and certainly agree that we should have information be presented much more clearly. Sure, if it is not possible to present such information then explain why. If the explanation fits the realm of plausible occurrence, cool; otherwise we certainly need more fluid conversation with development.

Jasun7211

sr. member

Activity: 517

Merit: 250

Welp...

zumzero

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

myBitcoin.Garden

Oh my.

drawingthesun

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1015

This has got out of hand, Ken you have contradicted yourself concerning the shares going online, legal issues, products shipped.

I suggest that you come clean and write a long post about what exactly has been going on over the past 4 months, please make it very detailed and describe failures in detail without pushing blame on others to save face.

You can no longer be silent, you have admitted we have nothing, no boards, do we even have eASIC chips? I suggest you write a very detailed account of the last 4 months events.

If you don't do this the shareholders are going to go insane and hunt you down, the only way to calm the crowd is the be 100% transparent.

I want to know what the hell is going on, and most of the information you're hiding is not covered by NDA and I know that for fact.

Time to tell the truth for once Ken.

Please before the other shareholders begin legal proceedings. You need to give us something.

zefyr0s

sr. member

Activity: 245

Merit: 250

Quote from: mannybitcoins on January 09, 2014, 10:28:35 PM

Quote from: zefyr0s on January 09, 2014, 10:22:30 PM

Is this business going the way we want it to? Absolutely not. Is it Ken's fault? He gets a lot of the blame here, whether the engineers messed up, or whether they couldn't integrate the new design, either way who chose them? Is this a scam? Absolutely not. You would be incredibly foolish to think that Ken has specifically attempted to scam people out of anything on purpose at all, given how public a company this is. There's so much evidence that the SEC wouldn't have to even say anything, they'd just have to be like "C'mon, really dude? You thought you would get away with this?"

Tensions are high, but to call this a scam would be doing an incredible disservice to reality.

So you're saying this isn't a scam because if it were a scam it would be too obvious that it was a scam? Nice.

Essentially, yes. Even if Ken were lying about knowing the SEC has been already looking into ActM, do you really think they aren't keeping an eye on the bitcoin security world? How out-of-touch do you mistakenly think the SEC are?

VolanicEruptor

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

Quote from: thefunkybits on January 09, 2014, 10:47:01 PM

Quote from: VolanicEruptor on January 09, 2014, 10:45:48 PM

Quote from: thefunkybits on January 09, 2014, 10:43:39 PM

This eASIC press release is proof that we are not being scammed:

http://www.easic.com/vmc-uses-easic-to-achieve-24-756-ths-bitcoin-miner/

Boards are being redesigned and Ken still owes us all 25,000 BTC before he takes a profit. When shares start trading and big divs start rolling in our share price will hit new all time highs. Just calm down, have some patience and let the man do his work. We have enough liquid cash to keep this this going and it's in the best interest of the shareholders to keep working on the company with that money (instead of doing a share buyback which some have suggested). As much as I didn't like what I heard this recent update was fine by me as we are finally seeing some transparency and honesty

Please explain openly how that news release is "proof"? Most shareholders at this point would disagree with this old assumption.

Third party validation of our claims as a company, simple as that. eASIC is a reputable company and they are backing us. Labcoin had nothing but in-house engineers

If I told you I was assembling computers, and had proof that "eASIC" was supplying me the video cards, and they even had a news release stating that they would supply me, would you be completely confident that I am not scamming you?

We fail to see your reasoning. Please explain how eASIC is backing us at all? Perhaps you missed the last weekly update..

thefunkybits

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1000

Quote from: VolanicEruptor on January 09, 2014, 10:45:48 PM

Quote from: thefunkybits on January 09, 2014, 10:43:39 PM

This eASIC press release is proof that we are not being scammed:

http://www.easic.com/vmc-uses-easic-to-achieve-24-756-ths-bitcoin-miner/

Boards are being redesigned and Ken still owes us all 25,000 BTC before he takes a profit. When shares start trading and big divs start rolling in our share price will hit new all time highs. Just calm down, have some patience and let the man do his work. We have enough liquid cash to keep this this going and it's in the best interest of the shareholders to keep working on the company with that money (instead of doing a share buyback which some have suggested). As much as I didn't like what I heard this recent update was fine by me as we are finally seeing some transparency and honesty

Please explain openly how that news release is "proof"? Most shareholders at this point would disagree with this old assumption.

Third party validation of our claims as a company, simple as that. eASIC is a reputable company and they are backing us. Labcoin had nothing but in-house engineers

VolanicEruptor

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

Quote from: thefunkybits on January 09, 2014, 10:43:39 PM

This eASIC press release is proof that we are not being scammed:

http://www.easic.com/vmc-uses-easic-to-achieve-24-756-ths-bitcoin-miner/

Boards are being redesigned and Ken still owes us all 25,000 BTC before he takes a profit. When shares start trading and big divs start rolling in our share price will hit new all time highs. Just calm down, have some patience and let the man do his work. We have enough liquid cash to keep this this going and it's in the best interest of the shareholders to keep working on the company with that money (instead of doing a share buyback which some have suggested). As much as I didn't like what I heard this recent update was fine by me as we are finally seeing some transparency and honesty

Please explain openly how that news release is "proof"? Most shareholders at this point would disagree with this old assumption.

Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 144. (Read 771512 times)