Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 1297. (Read 3917524 times)

Yes, very serious.
If you have any questions about it, feel free to join our discussion about it on the BitFunder launch thread:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitfunder-asset-exchange-marketplace-rewritable-options-trading-130117

Many questions have already been asked and answered, including how we differ from other exchanges. (Past and Present)
Of course those explanations include why you see the terms of service that you do. I do hope you at least give it a read.
Thus far, people have seemed very happy with the provided answers.

Oh and...


+1


Yup, we both offer up different variations and styles to choose from. Although, I am trying to convince Burnside to join the dark side and list everything publically for both users and issuers. I have already described how/why in the link I already plugged above so I won't bother fluffing this thread with it.

Friedcat, it does sound like you already have a lot of work to do, and in what appears to be a very short time span. As much as it may not be my business, it does kind of sound like you need all the time to focus on the main things that you can get, at least for the short term. (I may be very wrong, if so, just ignore me. 

BitFunder would be happy to help out any assets that even need a temporary home until other solutions can be finished. All our data us publicly listed, so everyone knows there is no funny business.

An issuer can pause trading when they are ready to do a migration. (We are not afraid of assets leaving us like other exchanges of the past who had a bad reaction.)
I am pretty sure I saw where btct.co has a trading pause option as well, however I cannot speak for Burnside & btct.co shareholders if they would want to do a "temporary" asset. I expect he will follow up shortly.

Thank you for the time and considerations!

Update

There are several news:

1. The process of our rest layers are significantly faster, we are now in QC and expecting to have the wafer arrived at our packaging service next week. Then the slicing, packaging, and testing will start immediately.

2. The shares are under processing. Shareholders (determined per e-mail address) offering different addresses to GLBSE and to us will receive a confirmation mail asking which to use or whether changing to a newer one. And we also hope to identify the shareholders who claim both different e-mail addresses and different addresses as many as possible. The principle would basically be:
  1) If the shareholder has both claimed to GLBSE and to us, we will use the share number provided from GLBSE.
  2) If during analysis, the shareholder hasn't claimed to GLBSE but claimed to us, we will keep a separate list and see if it should be merged.
  3) If the shareholder hasn't claimed to us but claimed to GLBSE, we will of course use the GLBSE data.

1) There will be QC guaranteeing offering basic qualification, but the testing(functional, electronic, thermo) will be first done by us. After that, part of the testing (functional) will be done by the same company that does packaging for us.

2) After the shipping.

3) They would consider a 2/3 yield rate a non-failed one. However in most circumstances the rates are much higher than this bottom line. Made-in-China of course are connected with the impression of lower quality, but calculating with a whole project should put the overall cost into consideration. TSMC has higher threshold for newcomer clients and is less affordable.

Yes. And we are working towards it. First we need to sort the actual data out from what we have now. We have a close partner working on a new platform that is considerably safer than GLBSE due to its more secure structure. And of course existing platforms like btc.co are also sound options. It is also optional for each shareholder to join the platform or to lock the shares in with us.

At least two of the exchange options have provide clear reports of shareholders to the asset issuers so something like GLBSE is not possible.  (btct.co, and bit funder)

A proprietary exchange sounds great.

I think it's going to be important to get shares listed and actively available to trade before anything is produced by the company.

Right now it's in a state of limbo and no shareholders have any proof of ownership at all. This will change once it's listed somewhere. I think it's important to fully establish share ownership prior to the production of any ASIC devices / mining activity.

As far as I remember, friedcat considered building a proprietary ASICMINER platform for listing and trading shares. As listing on all the alternitve centralized exchanges with their ponzis comes with risk, I think a proprietary platform is the best solution. We don't even know the exact reasons why glbse went down! Do you really want to ride the same horse again?

I would prefer if it's not rushed. After the GLBSE fiasco, I'm not even sure listing on a centralized exchange is a good idea. With this in mind, I suspect that friedcat wouldn't relist all shares at once; making it opt-in might be the wisest choice, depending on the maintenance overhead.

I'd like to see it listed somewhere.

What's the delay ?

From what I understand this could be listed in one of several places whenever the issuer chooses to list it.

Please send an update regarding what's happening with getting it listed on some exchange again.

+1 

Seriously?

Terms:
1. We (BitFunder) do not accept responsibility for anything.
2. WARNING: Use at your own risk.
3. You must agree to 1 and 2.

At least they're honest 

I'd like to see it listed on Bitfunder instead.

Back on topic for a moment -

Have we made progress on re-listing ASICMINER on another exchange (now that the list has been received from GLBSE)

I'd like to reiterate my vote for    BTCT.CO   https://btct.co/

Another asset of mine (BAKEWELL) has just been reborn there, and I'm pleased with the results.

I believe we'll actually see the share price of ASICMINER jump once trading has resumed. I know I'll be bidding...

Both at the same facility in Austin, correct?

Samsung has 2 large memory fabs in the US.

It's been more than a few years. Hell, for DRAM this is from 2001

Micron in the US is 17%, Elpida in Japan is 6%, Samsung and Hynix in Korea total 43%. I'm not really sure where all Infineon's fabs were in 2001 but I don't think they had any in Taiwan or China, I know they had a joint fab with Nanya later than that in Taiwan.
For flash, the market share has even less produced in China/Taiwan
http://www.statista.com/statistics/201746/market-share-of-leading-nand-flash-memory-manufacturers-worldwide/
Intel's production is in the US, Samsung in Korea and Toshiba in Japan. Micron is in the US and Singapore.

You can order GloFo runs through MOSIS both for MPW and COT runs.
http://www.mosis.com/vendors/view/global-foundries
CMP offers access to ST's processes down to 28nm on MPW and small volumes, or you could go direct to ST for larger runs.

We should/could get another production update from Friedcat tomorrow....

No, the 98% figure was true up to about a few years ago. Now its Taiwan and South Korea, both countries being in the shadow of China (and Taiwan even still calls itself the Republic of China, rejecting the Communist revolution). I simply forgot about the newer Korean fabs.

GloFo AFAIK doesn't take jobs this small, but I could be wrong. And a lot of their fab power is in Singapore, which is still within the sphere of the Chinese tech sector's influence.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'd love these chips to be fabbed in the US. Like, NatSemi still has a fab in Portland Maine, which is like 5 hours away from me, but I don't they think they take contract jobs (and I don't think they offer a node size small enough at that location, but they do at ). But look at the rest of friedcat's competitiors: its all TSMC (China, Taiwan), UMC (Taiwan, Singapore), or SMIC (China).

Friedcat needs to produce these at a fab that can do this with sufficient quality and still be cheap, as does everyone else. If doing it in the US or EU increases the cost even 10-15%, then this makes it that much harder to profit.

Nice... another month. I think many people now are angry that they put their money into bfl for months and the outcome of this is very open. The better for asicminer.


Sounds correct taking friedcats last update into account. At the moment there should be around 8 layers left if the speed remains the same. I guess the layers are done at decembre 26th. Could be a hard race but friedcat said asicminer has the opportunity that shipping is done in the same city. So shipping will be faster probably. At the end... i wonder how much worth one day mining without competition will be.

Only important and relevant parts are:

1) When those chips are ready, is it guaranteed they actually work or will there be a random testing?

2) Will this happen before or after the shipping to ASICMINER team?

3) How many chips (%) to you think will be lemons?

Do not get too exited about the rest

You didn't say "the kind of fab you need for this project is in Taiwan", you said that 90% of chips are fabricated in China and Taiwan, and the ones that aren't are high end CPUs or rad-hard chips, as well as 98% of memory being made in Taiwan. Both of those are very, very incorrect.

ST in Europe does a lot of contract fab work, and is another very viable option for a project like this. GloFo is also accessible @ 65nm.

I forgot about the Korean memory fabs. Its still the same thing in the end.

As for your list, yes, I'm aware of it. I have it in my bookmarks just for chip origin research purposes. Problem is, the list does not include how many chips the fabs produce every year. For example, TI's fab do not produce a lot of non-TI chips, and TI's most popular chips (which are not complex things like ARM SoCs) are often not fabbed at TI.

And yes, Freescale is still largely US, which is great. Samsung also does a lot more than just memory, also.

Now, given the kinds of fabs we need for this kind of project.... TI and Freescale and Samsung can't help us. Virtually all of those really are in China/Taiwan/Korea, although I think I remember ArtForz saying there was one in Mexico thats popular but the quality is worse than Chinese fabs.