Topic: Butterfly Labs - page 2. (Read 9783 times)

They disagree with what?  They choose to reveal trade secrets and that is somehow evidence of disagreement?  This doesn't even make sense.  Do you even know what you're talking about?


Again, what compulsion does BFL have to open their books?  I ask this again.  Post your tax returns and paystubs.  Why are you evading the question?  Why are not posting them?


So disagreeing with you and explaining why your questions are stupid = "red in the face" ... right.  So basically this conversation is already over, you've given up after two posts and moved on to "Nya nya nya, it's this way because I say it is and your logic and common sense have no effect on me!"  GG!

Your statement that "You guys presold the units and yet are holding on to this" is utter garbage.  Do you have proof, or hell, even any EVIDENCE of this?  No?  Why not?  Because it's idiotic, that's why.  This whole question has been answered, ad naseum, on the forum.  You failed to do you due diligence and now you're flailing around trying to justify your stupid questions.


That's right, you have no power to compel BFL to open their books.  A court of law and government agency will laugh in your face when you try to get them to compel BFL to open the books.  Here's the way that conversation will go:

Charles: There's this company, Butterfly Labs, that has taken preorders for a product and hasn't shipped mine yet.  I want you to force them to publicly post an audit of their books.
Court: On what grounds do you request we compel an audit?
Charles: I think they are using preorder funds to develop their product.
Court: What evidence do you have for this?  
Charles: Well, I don't have any evidence.
Court: So why do you think they are doing this, have they said they were?  When did you make your preorder?
Charles: No, they said they wern't doing it.  I made a preorder in January.  I think they are a scam and a ponzi scheme.
Court: I see... So you ordered in January, when did you ask for a refund?
Charles: I've haven't asked for a refund.
Court: So, you think they are a scam, but you haven't requested a refund?  Why not?  Has anyone else requested a refund?
Charles: Well, I don't really have a good answer as to why I haven't requested a refund.  Yes, other people have requested refunds.
Court: How many refunds were requested?  How many were denied?
Charles: Well, I'm sure lots were requested.  I haven't heard of any being denied.
Court: So... people have requested refunds and been given them.  You have an order with the company and you haven't canceled it and requested a refund.  You say they are scam, but have no evidence, no one has ever been denied a refund and they are a privately held company. Is that correct?
Charles: Well, yes, basically. But... they haven't shipped my order yet!
Court: Baliff, please escort this man off the premises.  If he resists, I recommend holding him for psychiatric evaluation.

I'd wager that's a fairly accurate representation of what a court of law would say.


No, you've just made unfounded accusations and made ludicrous demands.  I suggest you look up what "order of magnitude" means, since you clearly don't understand it.  I have NFC what you are talking about with regards to building a 1.5 TH machine last year, are you insane, delusional or just confused?

Look, there is a lot of passion in this argument because people have invested a great deal of money on blind faith your corp will deliver a good ASIC miner to the market. I commend you for the hard work and dedication of your engineers and the efforts of BFL to do something as difficult as designing an ASIC that has to run 24/7 reliably while doing billions of hash computations a second. That isn't easy and no one is trying to claim it isn't an accomplishment.

The primary issue I have and many people in the community as well is that we feel you guys made promises without the facts to back them up. If I claim an ASIC will run on 5 watts and I'm off by nearly an order of magnitude, then that is a big issue. Not for small scale miners, but certain when we want to increase to something like a 1500 GH/s rig. We wouldn't be having this conversation if the only product in the queue was a 5 GH/s rig. But you have presold 1500 GH/s rigs that I'm fundamentally skeptical can exist with what you have demonstrated in the marketplace.

Your response is to use personal attacks. How about you grow up and be a real CEO. Issue a press release thanking your customers for their patience and loyalty and give a heartfelt and concise explanation why you didn't reach your benchmarks- remember the ones you set. Then give a reasonable roadmap and shipping schedule. That's how my friend Elon Musk did it when he missed his benchmarks last year at Tesla. That's how a good leader does it. You only get a pass because you are in a small market. Once bitcoin becomes mainstream. Your company will not survive if you continue to manage like this.  

OMG the dumb hertz my eyes!

Charles, how much, exactly, have you spent on hardware at BFL

http://hothardware.com/Articles/An-Introduction-To-Global-Foundries/
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/graphics/display/2012120230059_TSMC_Set_to_Produce_Nvidia_Maxwell_Graphics_Chips_Using_20nm_Process_Technology.html

I guess AMD and Nvidia disagree. Also, a vendor can confirm the order volume without revealing anything else. That would go a long way to prove BFL didn't dip into preorder money for R&D.


And has this ever been verified by any outside party? I understand Josh that you can say no. You have the books. I can't comment on it.  


You ok? You seem a little red in the face? Don't you think asking if BFL has mined with their own product and to what extent is a little legitimate? You guys presold the units yet are holding on to them. Thus you can double dip by using them to mine until the margins lower and then ship the queue. I'm not saying you did that, but it is definitely an option and something the community would love to know. Also how did you do any form of reliability testing without mining for some window of time with the units?


I have no power to compel BFL to open their books. A court of law and a government agency can do that. And they will do that if your corporation continues to delay its shipments while still taking preorders. What I say and do has no impact on that reality. You can deny it, but it doesn't make it any less true.  


Well Josh, I for one never accepted millions of dollars of other people's money off of a promise to deliver something and then spent months delaying until I eventually delivered something that is an order of magnitude outside of spec. Also how exactly are you able to build a minirig running at 1500 GH/s with that kind of TDP? Didn't you sell a few of those over the last year? Surely that meant you guys had a working prototype that allowed you to infer a reasonable TDP for the size.

+1.  You got a vote equal to the amount of your order.  If you are 1 of 100 customers, you get a 1% say in things.  If you haven't placed an order, well, that puts you in the 0% range.  (Like myself)

I'm going to wait and see if they ship anything, and decide from there.

If they ship all their systems, and it means I have to buy a 50 GH/s rig to mine $1 a day worth of bitcoins, I'm probably not going to buy one.

Now put down the pitchfork, snuff the torch, and:

1.) Ask for your money back if you purchased
2.) Don't ask for your money back if you didn't purchase
3.) Wait and buy
4.) Wait and don't buy

Think that just about covers it.  This forum is starting to get the Glenn Beck tendency of "This is my crazy conspiracy theory, if you don't prove me wrong, it must be right".

Everybody else is just like "Meh, I'm not going to both with this nonsense".

I know you "feel" the questions are legitimate, but they aren't.  Can you give a single compelling reason that BFL would open their financial books to anyone other than the tax man?  Just because you "want to know" and "feel" that you deserve to know does not make it a legitimate reason.  The entire premise is ludicrous.  How about this: You post your last 3 years of tax returns, and your last twelve paystubs, as well as your marriage license if you're married, unredacted, on this forum.  Are you willing to do that?  No?  Why not?


This question has been answered countless times.  The answer has always been no.


This question is ludicrous, even more so than the audit question.  Why does it matter who is fabricating the chips and how could revealing that NOT reveal a trade secret?  Why would BFL be compelled to post a contract between one vendor and BFL to satisfy your curiosity?  How is this a legitimate question?  What company reveals this sort of information?  None.


Another question that has been answered countless times on this forum.  This is what I'm talking about.  Your questions are either already answered or completely ridiculous.  This entire thread is basically an exercise in mental masturbation, resulting in blue balls for those involved.  You are deluding yourself if you think the questions are legitimate and the chances of you getting answers to your unreasonable and completely ludicrous questions is so close to zero that it can't be measured with any instruments known to man.

I am aware of your position and opinion about BFL. And no they are under no legal obligation to answer to me. I feel the questions are quite legitimate and can be structured in a way not to expose trade secrets of BFL. Frankly, answering them would dramatically improve their perception in the community and also their order volume. I'm on hold until orders ship and we will go from there.

Are you under the mistaken impression that BFL is a publicly traded company? They are not compelled to answer any of your questions.  The questions you listed are ridiculous.  I challenge you to take the questions that haven't already been answered hundreds of times on this forum to any corporation in America and see what they say.  Be sure to wear some heavily padded clothes for when you get tossed out of the building on your butt.

An Audit would occur only if an open letter and lingering questions result in a significant cancellation of preorders. As long as the questions are legitimate and fair. The preorder shipping continues to either be non-existent or very slow. And they do not provide a tangible explanation about the 1500 GH/s minirigs. The pressure will continue to build.   

Why would they consent to an audit in any case?

Some points:

1.) They already have your money, they don't need your trust or good will
2.) BitCoin is supposed to be all about independence and security and anonymity.  Why would they open up their books?
3.) The best case scenario for them allowing an audit, would be some people on a forum would trust them more.

They'll either deliver or they won't.

These are by far the most important points. I doubt they will consent to an audit, though that would GREATLY clear the air. Also, an audit would clear up the second point I quoted. If they DID finance with preorder money, which I guarantee they did, they are violating at least one regulation since they are not regulate as a security. I would almost guarantee this and this is the reason the will not consent to an audit

You missed the entire point of this post, but that's OK.  I want you to experience this joy for yourself.  Go legally acquire a copy of Back to the Future and watch it.

Good.  Please place a wager that they WILL deliver.  It ups the odds

Imho they had the first working piece of ASIC hardware in late March 2013. Which leads to the questions: How can they ensure in September 2012 that they can meet the October 2012 shipping deadline?

imho a blatant lie.

90's child detected

Thank you for this link. We can only wait at this point.

Look here for my previous posts:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=114329.380

During my first posts which is the reason I joined was to warn people that BFL EITHER did not issue full refunds or had a cock up in their billing system. I posted my receipt for my jap and my credit note with an adjustment fee. I posted this in the newbie section and "inaba" quickly made a post saying that what I had posted was made up as I was accusing them that they were taking a cut from refunds. So I challenged him to reply to state why that appeared on my refund and he didn't reply. In the end, I did get my full refund, but this doesn't look good for auditing their books.

It is fraud. They knowingly took money to deliver products they had no reasonable way of knowing would work. Should the development fail, then there was no way to refund the money nor deliver the product.

I think he is referring to BFL. I believe the community will survive if BFL went toast.