Topic: AMT users thread. - page 46. (Read 60118 times)

Like any engineering enterprise, you got to validate some initial prototypes work out the issues then go towards mass production.   The Bitmine and AMT boards were labeled revision 3, so there were at least 3 attempts to fix issues.  In fact, the latest Bitmine board doesn't look anything like the previous AMT rev. 3 board.  It has 10 chips instead of 8 chips. 

Now if a company takes the risk of going for a full production run without adequate testing,  that is a risk they take.  However, that's the gamble you make when you claim delivery earlier than everyone else.   The penalty for failure should fall on the company and not the customers.

The post in question about heatsinks was in response to my question on testing done by IMET https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7100933

Specifically the last sentence of 1st paragraph.

It in turn brought a response about testing for more than a few min. Anywho that usually means that sinks were used that could not handle extended running. Not uncommon for limited full power go/no-go test rigs - but - ONLY after longer testing proves that it is good enough and then they were removed. Sadly once again, no time was allowed for proveout. Was this the case? (test-only rig)

Given the nature of these beasties personally I would do only full power testing after the boards were attached to their real-use heatsinks... At least the big'uns on the back. For short ter-testing the chips would run topless so to speak. A lot less trouble/expense than mounting to test sinks & then removing them/cleaning up just for the real heatsinks to attached later on... However, that is not what IMET said, they only talked about heatsinks for testing and nothing beyond that.

Back to the show.

Right the precedent has been set... And this could lead to more of those kinds of interventions.  Would effectively end the preorder market from a legal standpoint good news IMO.

Honestly, the presence of this MPP with words like Return Of Investment could lead to the involvement of the SEC.

The SEC already got involved with Virtual Mining Corp ( a Bitcoin miner ) http://www.coindesk.com/missouri-secretary-state-halts-mining-business-deceptive-tactics/ 

Why do you guys worry so much? You will ROI anyway, no matter how late they ship. They guarantee it:


https://advancedminers.com/miner-protection-plan/

Dont forget to screenshot/save that page, may come in handy.

Well the 10th is coming pretty quick. Obviously the legal team will have all this info and will know how to proceed with it. The discrediting thing is not going to work anyway. Least hearing both sides we get to figure out what the deal is. I checked out their awards claims and those are valid. Obviously you don't get awards like that without doing something right. And they clearly are demonstrating that.

All said and done I am personally interested in the facts wherever that takes me. I think its safe to say we all want the facts. As much as things are what they are the part that sucks here is that we are waiting for hardware and compensation that may or may not fully come. Hopefully the court situation and discovery process enlightens the truth of the matter.

He probably read the IMET post wrong and then was going to exploit the possible mistake by claiming that IMET lied.

Anyway, here is a posting from AMT's website:  https://advancedminers.com/amt-starts-production-1-2th-miners/


Note: spelling errors in the posting were not mine.

AMT deleted their own post. Josh realized he was about to be caught in yet another lie. It's a hell of a web he has woven for himself.

AMT is going to take any opportunity to discredit everyone associated with this.   They are trying to discredit IMET because their case rests on the argument that IMET did a terrible job.

However, AMT does not have a case because they need to prove that they made every effort to ensure delivery of products.   How is sending a "bouncing check" to your contract manufacturer a step in that direction?

Now we have evidence that AMT is pulling out parts from non-working boards using a hot air soldering gun!

Where is the post that is quoted by AMT? A bit confused here.

WOW.
Up until now all this could have been chalked up to gross incompetence, which I'm pretty sure is not a crime. But knowingly passing bad checks will land a person in jail.

No problem.  Never in my life have I seen anything quite like this.   

Thanks for that IMET, it is interesting to hear your side of the story. Until now we have only heard one side.

IMET only built PCBs.  That is it, nothing more.  AMT did mechanical assembly and was responsible for everything else besides PCBs.  The check was dated 4/18/14 and from what I understand from our bank, the AMT account was closed a while before.  AMT did a good job of taking stuff out of my shop before the check problem and I have not seen Josh since; therefore, I can only assume that he knew what he was doing there.  I am sure that AMT does have a lot of stuff that could be useful to its customers based on what I have been able to do with the stuff he left here.  The smashed units that I saw on this forum are utterly disturbing, and I have no idea how many he sent out.  I have made the following public offering to AMT, but I believe AMT does not believe that I have done anything and I am bluffing.  We/I do not work that way.  Take a look at our name on the Internet.  In fact, we were just named "Manufacturer of the Year" by the Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce.  IMET put a lot into this project, so we also want to get what we deserve from AMT.  If AMT pays the remainder of their bill for services rendered, I'd be willing to give up what I know and hence help AMT customers as well.  I have reached out to AMT and did get a response but it has been quiet for the last day.  Maybe, the customers can push AMT to help my cause and theirs.  At this point, I have put a lot into this on my own time/dime to try to make something positive happen.  I do not know about the other CM but from pictures, it appears that AMT is taking A1 chips off of boards that IMET built.  Based on the TV in the background, no static jacket (ground strap?), and the hot air gun and hot plate, I am assuming that this is not being done at a CM.  AMT is actually compromising the A1 chips using this method of removal.  Temperature cannot be accurately controlled on such a setup.  We have a $50k machine here that removes parts in a controlled and repeatable process.  I reached out to him about this as well because the picture is concerning from a manufacturing point of view.         

I am looking at this photo and I am wondering. What is the top most heatsink for?  It does not appear to be mounted on any board.

In fact, how are these boards even held together,  I don't see a frame.

Yes, the date is off, however the diff looks correct.  

I am utterly surprised and dumfounded here to see this hashing on 5 boards without any problems!  Could the problems be as basic as AMT not applying enough or correct thermal paste?

I thought AMT was using IMET for their assembly of their miners.  They certainly did not do assembly from their small office in Haverford.

IMET, when did AMT stop payment and therefore stop assembling miners?

Also,  AMT claims to be working with another contract manufacturer 30 miles away (PTC?) with a different board design.  There certainly are a lot of unwanted parts that IMET has manufactured that may be valuable to AMT customers who have been left without any technical support.