Pages:
Author

Topic: And some more delays in BFL shipment plans / no shipment before 14th Jan 2013 - page 4. (Read 22730 times)

hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
According to the BFL e-mail newsletter they will have an in-depth explanation on the delays on their own forum

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/content/127-bfl-asic-delays-depth-expanation.html

Site is down at the moment

edit: site is up

edit 2: lol the in-depth explanation is: The production of these very dense, hand-routed chips are the reason for the delay in the latest line of bitcoin mining machines... now we know much much more Wink
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000

They DID take into account the possibility of everything going wrong.  The way I saw it right from the start was that late October was an "if everything goes right" release date, and January 1st was an "if everything goes wrong" release date.  Obviously, they are now expecting to exceed their January 1st date, which irks me, but I was only expecting product before then if things went well.

Yeah, I believe that anyone who thought they'd be mining with any ASIC before the reward drop - no matter which vendor they ordered from - was delusional.  What these delays do mean, though, is that the time period between first batch customers and second batch customers receiving their orders will be greatly reduced.  I suspect many customers will be displeased about losing that particular advantage as they believe it's one they effectively paid for and it's one which is created at least in part by BFL's decisions.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005

I only see two setbacks, both of which are understandable IMO.

- The first batch of chips didn't work.  Delayed from October to late-November.
- Fab shop has delayed on BFL twice, pushing the date to early-December, and now mid-January.

Except that Josh's claim that there was a floored batch of chips was refuted by Nasser.

Quote
We've been very busy recently, unfortunately I couldn't catch up with the forums. There is a correction to be made: Chips are not and were not flawed. We decided to add certain clock buffers to improve noise-resistance and possibly increase frequency even further.

Obviously any delays caused by that decision cannot be blamed on the fab.

The fab burning down would be an "unexpected setback".  Delays caused by decisions made by the customer are not "unexpected".

The delays may be "understandable" - because no manufacturing process ever runs perfectly - but they can't legitimately be called "unexpected" because a properly planned project takes into account the possibility of pretty much everything going wrong and never sets it target dates basedon best case scenarios.
They DID take into account the possibility of everything going wrong.  The way I saw it right from the start was that late October was an "if everything goes right" release date, and January 1st was an "if everything goes wrong" release date.  Obviously, they are now expecting to exceed their January 1st date, which irks me, but I was only expecting product before then if things went well.
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000

I only see two setbacks, both of which are understandable IMO.

- The first batch of chips didn't work.  Delayed from October to late-November.
- Fab shop has delayed on BFL twice, pushing the date to early-December, and now mid-January.

Except that Josh's claim that there was a floored batch of chips was refuted by Nasser.

Quote
We've been very busy recently, unfortunately I couldn't catch up with the forums. There is a correction to be made: Chips are not and were not flawed. We decided to add certain clock buffers to improve noise-resistance and possibly increase frequency even further.

Obviously any delays caused by that decision cannot be blamed on the fab.

The fab burning down would be an "unexpected setback".  Delays caused by decisions made by the customer are not "unexpected".

The delays may be "understandable" - because no manufacturing process ever runs perfectly - but they can't legitimately be called "unexpected" because a properly planned project takes into account the possibility of pretty much everything going wrong and never sets it target dates basedon best case scenarios.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
They didn't lie, they had unexpected setbacks.  There's a difference.

They were told they couldn't do it that fast. They bragged about how expert they were. Then setbacks, and more setbacks, and then more setbacks. Sooner or later you have to conclude they are either grossly incompetent (which means their "expert" status was a lie), or just flat out lying about their dates. Take your pick.
I only see two setbacks, both of which are understandable IMO.

- The first batch of chips didn't work.  Delayed from October to late-November.
- Fab shop has delayed on BFL twice, pushing the date to early-December, and now mid-January.
legendary
Activity: 3878
Merit: 1193
They didn't lie, they had unexpected setbacks.  There's a difference.

They were told they couldn't do it that fast. They bragged about how expert they were. Then setbacks, and more setbacks, and then more setbacks. Sooner or later you have to conclude they are either grossly incompetent (which means their "expert" status was a lie), or just flat out lying about their dates. Take your pick.
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000

They are doing a full run without testing.  It doesn't cost much more when you're talking about millions of dollars of lost sales if they have to wait until test chips are ready to do a full run.  And if BFL had to add another 6-12 weeks on top of the current delay, you can bet a lot of people would be jumping ship!

In other words, they're putting all their eggs in one basket.  I hope that basket holds...

So if the first batch of 20,000 aren't up to scratch, problems can't be corrected until the next batch?
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
LTC
Quote from: BFL_Josh
I think we're going to see a lot more delays once they actually get the chips and realize the magnitude of their error(s).

There you go again. Predicting the future. You can't even predict your own future (Ship in Oct, ship in Nov, ship in Dec, ship in Jan, ...), what makes you think you can predict other companies futures?

What he probably means is that, except BFL (and maybe Tom), the other ASIC projects are at their first attempt. BFL is at their second (maybe even third). Josh is probably saying that it is very possible the others will be also forced to respin.
legendary
Activity: 3878
Merit: 1193
So let me get this straight... you want me to ... wait for it ... predict the future.

Quote from: BFL_Josh
I think we're going to see a lot more delays once they actually get the chips and realize the magnitude of their error(s).

There you go again. Predicting the future. You can't even predict your own future (Ship in Oct, ship in Nov, ship in Dec, ship in Jan, ...), what makes you think you can predict other companies futures?
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
Josh has confirmed that the new date is for delivery of the chips only and doesn't include assembly etc.

I'm far more interested in when they expect to receive test chips because they won't even have a working prototype until then and nobody with an ounce of sense is going to authorise the full production run until the test chips have been proven to work to contracted specifications.
They are doing a full run without testing.  It doesn't cost much more when you're talking about millions of dollars of lost sales if they have to wait until test chips are ready to do a full run.  And if BFL had to add another 6-12 weeks on top of the current delay, you can bet a lot of people would be jumping ship!

In other words, they're putting all their eggs in one basket.  I hope that basket holds...
hero member
Activity: 952
Merit: 1009
Seeing as how BFL customers have been very insistent on the products not being tested, so they can get them sooner, BFL should just send out the units no matter what. Who cares if they don't work, it's what the customers wanted.
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
Josh has confirmed that the new date is for delivery of the chips only and doesn't include assembly etc.

I'm far more interested in when they expect to receive test chips because they won't even have a working prototype until then and nobody with an ounce of sense is going to authorise the full production run until the test chips have been proven to work to contracted specifications.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 522
"the amount of the alleged “winnings” was far less than the amount the victim had sent in" but that's how a lottery works. The payouts are less than the draw. This wasn't a charity, it was a for profit business.

What I get you're saying is that their model was to steal from the pot far less than the government does. If this is correct then the alleged winnings cannot also be far less than the amount sent in, seeing how the government usually pays out about half to two thirds.

So this can come down to a debate as to whether or not lotteries themselves are moral.

No, it can come down to a debate of whether taking in 25mn, paying out 6mn and keeping 19mn of other people's money does or does not constitute 19mn worth of fraud. Hardly much of a debate, I agree.
legendary
Activity: 1458
Merit: 1006
Whatever your opinion on lotteries is, though, judgement of Sonny should be made based on the fact that he was part of an illegal lottery, and not that he "defrauded little old ladies." Little old ladies know what they are getting into when they buy a lottery ticket.

Do the victims of nigerian email scams also "know what they get"?

Not only did Vleisides & Co defraud little old ladies, they sold fake life insurance to little old ladies.



Samples letters from the extradition warrant follows:

Quote
One letter stated "For the first time in German History, the German Lottery Commission Trust has decided to sponsor a lottery cash rebate program . . .GERMAN GOVERNMENT WANTS TO HELP MAKE YOU MY FUTURE WINNER! . . . With such a positive turnover, even under the worst conditions, you are almost guaranteed to win money .... Warmest regards R.L. DOORNE."



Quote
b. Some of the solicitations Wood received were the following:

i.   A letter was postmarked May 27, 2005, from Little Rock, Arkansas. Inside was a cash rebate grant related to WORLD EXPERT and the German Lottery. The rebate grant looked like a check from Inter World Bank. However, on the endorsement section of the check were the sentences, "Do not deposit in US Bank. Return to Berlin for cashing." The letter stated as follows: "GERMAN GOVERNMENT IS GIVING YOU A ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY!! The German Lotto has grown enormously in an extremely short period of time making it one of the RICHEST lotteries offered to people today. Prize payouts now approximate as much as the equivalent of $915 MILLION U.S. DOLLARS yearly. With such a positive turnover, even under the worst conditions, you are almost guaranteed to win money by joining this SPECIAL FUND we've created to invest in this easy to win German Lottery. REMEMBER: This game is NOT stretched out for several months. You will receive your prize check in 21 days. Just fill out the enclosed green FUND OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE, mail it back to us, and within twenty one davs vou will receive a check for what could be as much as $658.000 U.S. Dollars as your share of the total won by this SPECIAL FUND." The letter went on to solicit money: "REMINDER: The rules of this promotional cash award require you to endorse the check and include it along with the balance of $27,29 and the enclosed $38 ONE PERCENT CERTIFICATE."

ii.   Also in the letter was a gold sticker that claimed to be a seal from the "ELBC, European Lottery Brokers Commission," which "certifies your purchase is authentic and insured from fraud. . . ." Wood believed the seal represented that the venture was legitimate.



Quote
On one of these solicitations were the words "International Pension Fund Audit Bureau" encircling the US Treasury seal. Another letter for MUTUAL MEDICAL read, "Everything appears to be in order and your LIFE INSURANCE is now in force. However your first PENSION DIVIDEND in the amount of $112 has been delayed   The INSURANCE DEPARTMENT has been unable to VERIFY your BIRTH in the international BIRTH CERTIFICATE computer database If you have a PHOTOCOPY of [sic]youre BIRTH CERTIFICATE at home, we can RELEASE your first PENSION DIVIDEND immediately upon receiving this document."



Quote
b.   One letter that Bedwell received, which was signed by "Lee Ping, Secretary Treasurer," had a heading that stated: "OLD AMSTERDAM GOLD RESERVE MUTUAL PENSION POOL, Established in 1957." The letter stated in part the following: "As Secretary Treasurer it is my great pleasure to inform you that your application for PENSION POOL membership has been approved by the BOARD OF DIRECTORS. As a new MEMBER you will soon receive your first PENSION DIVIDEND CHECK. But first it is important that you review the enclosed information carefully and NAME the person who is to be your Beneficiary. . . . Just follow the instructions on the back of your INSURANCE POLICY. This special insurance is FREE to all members and will give your BENEFICIARY a MINIMUM amount of money regardless of the balance in your TRUST DEPOSIT ACCOUNT. As a Certified Public Accountant I have reviewed many good pension plans over the years and I find that this particular one is quite advantageous - especially for people who live in countries where the tax authorities use PROBATE as an excuse to collect heavy fees and taxes from Beneficiaries. Such unpleasantness can be avoided under our program. Any money in your TRUST ACCOUNT goes to your BENEFICIARY without the difficulty of a WILL or the intrusion of tax authorities. This means more money for your BENEFICIARY and, perhaps most important, PEACE OF MIND for both you and your Beneficiary."



Quote
A letter addressed to Greven stating it is an "Official Announcement of Winning Tickets in the 2003 Irish Sweepstake Triple Crown." The . letterhead indicated it was from "The Shamrock Agency" and claimed it had been a "Certified Service since 1959." The letter stated: "Millionaires by the score! We have just finished round one of the verification process of the Triple Crown 118 major Jackpot winning tickets. Enclosed is a list of the winning numbers. Congratulations to the jackpot winners.. . ." The letter informed Greven to be patient for "round 2 of the winning verification process" but encouraged him not to ".. . delay in getting the 'Jump' on next year's Triple Crown millions (order form enclosed)."

It also stated that the Triple Crown was unlike any other lottery because players could be sure there is no ". . . 'Inside corruption' or 'secret trick' . . . ." The letter was signed by "Sir William Winfield, Northup Manor, Shannon Ireland."



No lottery tickets were bought.
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
It's not about old ladies buying lottery tickets... it's about a company alleging that they are a pass through to a legal lottery, wheras in fact they never purchased any lottery tickets, but used money from new players to pay off old players.

They weren't running a lottery, they were running a ponzi scheme and the moment someone had bought a jackpot winner they would have never payed our as they didn't have the funds to do that.

That's why people are upset, not because they ran a lottery....but because they did not run a lottery, so there was no chance you could ever get payed a huge prize....
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
firstbits.com/1kznfw
The people got paid as according to their voluntary agreements, and they actually got paid much better than if they participated in the government sanctioned lottery.

Maybe I've missed something but afaik the ~19 million is still unreturned.

Yeah, you're missing, I think, the whole point of the indictment. Look at the statements from the postal inspector:

Quote
According to the indictment the victims were purchasing “positions” in tickets for lotteries that would be grouped together or “pooled” to buy larger blocks of tickets thereby increasing their chances of winning. Funds received from victims were not used to purchase tickets, but to pay “winnings” to other victims, to fund the scheme and to benefit the defendants. Victims were sent checks falsely represented as lottery “winnings,” however the amount of the alleged “winnings” was far less than the amount the victim had sent in.

The total amount collected from selling the tickets was $25 million. That's not net, it's gross, and it's what the government projects as "the fraud" as. From the perspective of the government, any money sent to the lottery scheme is fraudulent. Their argument is that because the lottery company was representing themselves as being a pass through to sanctioned tickets, that all of the people were defrauded. Like I said, maybe they were, maybe they weren't. I don't really know because the documents don't detail any evidence that indicates this either way. I'd like to see what this company actually sent to people in their advertising in order to make a judgement. But even assuming that this is the case, it seems to me that they made these statements in order to evade prosecution while running an illegal lottery.

But what is clear is that they were running a lottery and they were paying the people who were participating according to their positions. Some people might be hung up on the statement that "the amount of the alleged “winnings” was far less than the amount the victim had sent in" but that's how a lottery works. The payouts are less than the draw. This wasn't a charity, it was a for profit business.

So this can come down to a debate as to whether or not lotteries themselves are moral. I personally don't care to debate this: I feel they are moral as long as the payouts are as agreed. I respect and understand the arguments towards the opinion that all lotteries are immoral. I cannot accept a position that lotteries are moral when run by the government, but immoral when run by individuals. Whatever your opinion on lotteries is, though, judgement of Sonny should be made based on the fact that he was part of an illegal lottery, and not that he "defrauded little old ladies." Little old ladies know what they are getting into when they buy a lottery ticket.
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
interesting

next delivery time 14.01.2013

 Grin

I doubt that's an estimated delivery time.  Until they've got test chips in their hands and have made a working prototype, they're not going to give the go ahead for the production run proper.  From what Josh has posted, even the test chips don't exist yet.  Hell, he hasn't even said that the masks are complete yet.
full member
Activity: 125
Merit: 100
This place absolutely never fails to defend major scammers just before they steal everything and split.  I mean never; it happened with pirate, Patrick, Nefario, Zhou, the list just goes on. 

It boggles the mind how you can get scammed so many times and not learn a goddamned thing.

This is an interesting response to a post that links to an argument for giving BFL representatives a scammer tag, while calling them dishonest and naive. I think you would do well to try to understand a post before commenting on it.

I did.  He talked about giving them a scammer tag, and I reminded him that bitcointalk has a long and proud tradition of defending their scammers. 
legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1000
interesting

next delivery time 14.01.2013

 Grin

hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 522
I wonder where the foul mouthed BFL spokesdude has gone too. The silence is deafening. Hello? If you miss your daily quota of personal attacks and trolling accusations, this is going to reflect badly in your performance review under the "productivity" section. Please think of the children and save Christmas.

He's busy doing math.

BFL sure likes to blame the fab since being unknown they can't come here and defend themselves.

The conversation probably went like this:

BFL: We want to do a fully custom ASIC.
Fab: Have you ever done ASICs before?
BFL: Sure, we programmed FPGAs. That's the same thing, right?
Fab: Uh, no. Very different.
BFL: Well, how long will it take?
Fab: Someone with experience can do it in 6 months, but since this is your first attempt, expect 1-2 years.
BFL: Ok, great, thanks.

BFL to public: We'll have a finished product in 6 months, guaranteed! The fab said so.


Sounds possible, if we accept they actually talked to a fab.


If they didn't have such a history of saying whatever seems to work at the time that might carry a lot more water. They could have said this at any point prior to it becoming a critical save.

I respond to posts with verifiable information.

Cute.

BFL has shown themselves to be dishonest through ommission about their delivery dates, allowing customers to continue to believe that chips would be arriving in late November when they knew that they were making clock buffer adjustments that would delay at least until mid-December..

They had no idea they were making such adjustments until it became necessary for it to be announced at which point it was announced. Exactly like they have no idea currently as to location of their production facility. It will become known once circumstances force the bs team to say something definite on that topic. And then it'll move.

The people got paid as according to their voluntary agreements, and they actually got paid much better than if they participated in the government sanctioned lottery.

Maybe I've missed something but afaik the ~19 million is still unreturned.
Pages:
Jump to: