Topic: Cointerra AIRE Miner 16nm PreOrder - page 2. (Read 19889 times)

+1 to this. Though it does make me a little sad that there are no reputable American companies to buy from.

To all you doubters out there.  16nm is quarter or possible quarter 3 (oh and this doesn't include building the rest of the miner...) and it looks like Cointerra just defaulted on there notes.  I'm glad everyone pre-ordered, it worked out great for everyone didn't it?

Stick to companies you can trust, not ones that screw you over and aren't even profitable with there own farms.  Coin tera couldn't even produce a sub 1w / ghash unit with 28nm tech while spoondoolies and bitmain had about .65-.7watt per ghash, and people trusted them to make a 16nm super efficient unit.

I'm happy running a 1mw facility at sub $80 per KW costs with .65w/gh, enjoy cointerra fan boys....  Glad to see another shady mining company bite the dust.

bankrupt??

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2q958l/i_just_received_word_that_cointerra_is_closing/

  FUCK NO!

I once pre ordered a miner in the early days of mining it took six months by the time I got it I was never going to break even. Best bet is to invest in someone who has mining power to start your first earning. Depending on how much you are ready to make now or later.

I am. But they don't have a release date for their 14/16nm products.

I think the foundries are starting to realize that bitcoin mining HW manufacturers are the perfect customers for their early batches with new manufacturing processes. They HAVE TO have the newest tech, they don't mind high unit costs and they don't mind low yields. AMD and ARM normally wants more mature processes. So I thought maybe Cointerra had struck a deal to get some fresh tech.

Really OT but I can't help myself. If you want "proper" car reviews you can check carbuyer.co.uk or Autocar.

Top Gear is an entertainment program with three presenters/goofballs who, as most car lovers do, have strong emotional ties to certain brands or cars. Jeremy likes Ferrari (although he has admitted certain AMs and Porsches and others to be better than their Ferrari counterparts on several occasions), Richard (like I) likes the 911 and sees no reason why there should be any other Porsche (or any other car for that matter). The third likes tiny crap cars and old luxury barges and complains about stuff that can't be communicated with language.  I can't understand why people get so annoyed by these guys. Yes, Jeremy is an oaf but I have lots of friends who are oafs. And if you don't, you should get some. It's not like you elected him President of the US and let him start a war in Iraq (that would be stupid).

Disclaimer: Jeremy Clarkson knows nothing about politics, the climate, racial relations or gender equality. But he looks like a teapot when he's filling petrol and that's funny.

Don't hold your breath,they are scammers.Go with Spoondolies or Bitmain 

How alive is this company? It just says "out of stock" on the pre-order of Aire. Which is odd. Now, I wasn't planning on a pre-order but if they were shipping I might hold out for a proper order (if their stuff works this time) so any information on their progress would be welcome.

It is kind of moot if the price does not rise because surely no one is buying miners right now.

It can't be independent when Dogie is paid by companies on his list. Truly independent is off list. Worse still, he has links that he earns commission from. So the more he publishes, the more he gets paid. Click bait.

Dogie you can't run a serious rating system when you are connected to companies in said list. Grow up!

Of course in the ideal world Dogie should be 100% independent from companies money. But we are living in real word where everybody need money. We don't have any proof that Dogie's rating became dependent. We just may believe or not.
Nobody knows who paid Dogie, I read just (from Dogie) about Avalon and Bitmain. After his announced both of these companies lost rating's points. It's fact and we should consider it.

Regarding ethics - I think lie and cheat are much much much more seriously than self mining. If we will count the number of negative comments per user in KNC and Cointerra threads, we'll not have any questions about ratings of these companies.
Why owners of Mercedes factory can't use Mercedes as a car?

So I can't be sure, but I hope and believe that Dogie's rating independent.

FTC rules?

Here, here.

And that is clearly not going to happen in bitcointalk or with asic fabricators given the low volume of product produced.

The only alternative is for people to read the forums and find consumer feedback and assess what is likely to be the best company to deal with. Then again who knows if the next miner out off the production line is a dog or not.

Also when people avoid break even numbers and questions about cost vs return you might want to avoid listening to those people. Given the nature of mining now everything is "lottery-machine" unless you are building it yourself and have the money to build larger farms. If you are taking money to promote a fabricator then the community should rightly look at your commentary with the knowledge your "ratings" are bias based on that fact alone. Be safe out there people.

Don't buy from anyone that has burned the community in the past if you can purchase today from a reputable fabricator. Know that your investment in a machine today, any machine, in small quantities is not going to return you BTC for BTC. If you are buying in $ just buy BTC it is easier and more likely a better long term investment.

CAVEAT EMPTOR!

1)  I read it on your guide page.  its listed as your criteria under the 'Ethics' section and clearly has F for large mine and FF for very large mine.  its still there right now.   I am only reading what you wrote.  If you decide you don't want to apply your own criteria to the ratings, well, that just underscores what I've been accusing you of - that you come up with the scores that You Want.  and you don't let the facts get in the way.   Your scores are arbitrary at best, and biassed at worst.

2.  Great, go ahead and mock me.   Your defensiveness and mocking anyone you disagree with shows you can't take criticism.  No surprise, we already know you can't.  I'm not the only one that believes you decide what you want in your guide.  There are competing guides setup to try and bring additional perspectives to the issue (Bick etc).

3.  your scoring system isn't exactly easy to understand. i may have read that one wrong and i admit it.  I should've added -4 to 10, and not used -4 absolutely.  But the principle I'm highlighting remains the same.  that you decide what the score is yourself, independent of your published criteria.  You choose to ignore the criteria whenever it suits you and add an element of your own interpretation to it.  This is far from scientific.  It is, and always has been mostly your opinions, dressed up as a numeric score.

4.  Yes, you ignored them months ago when i first highlighted them to you - privately in an email - and you said you wouldn't deal with it til i published it on the forum.   Then i did that, and you still did nothing, despite me bringing several factual errors to light.   You cannot admit that you've made some mistakes in your charts.   You're incapable of taking criticism or input from anyone else.

and in the example i gave, I'm not accusing you of bias.   But in general i am.  You take payment, either in cash or in kind from bitcoin mining hardware companies.  And you can't claim it doesn't influence you.  If you wanted to be impartial you should not take inducements nor incentives from bitcoin mining companies.    Its wrong !

clearly, we're never going to agree.

-- Jez

ps.  thanks bronto for the kind note

Gentlemen,

Much though I'm sure the forum readers are enjoying seeing two members have a go at one another, your disagreement certainly confirms what most technical professional know about any kind of product evaluation - it should be carried out by properly qualified, paid third parties who have no bias in their measurement criteria and can maintain objectivity.

Unfortunately the world doesn't always work that way, but I for one have always found it rather unsettling that mining rig manufacturers find it necessary to submit products to forum member(s) for evaluation - and hopefully endorsement. It's unprofessional and exemplifies the amateur attitude  of most of the rig companies. There are plenty of companies they could go to and pay to get a proper engineering evaluation done, and the results might be surprising as there would be no biases.

Look at the car market - you get dyed in the wool journalists who will never criticise their favourite manufacturer, even if they make a real dog. On UK TV we have a program called Top Gear hosted by a obnoxious oaf called Jeremy Clarkson who will never, ever admit that anyone can make a better sportscar than Ferrari, despite clear evidence to the contrary. They (Ferrari ) treat him like royalty, and he repays them in spades.

At the opposite end of the spectrum, the bias shown to Cointerra in the forums, admittedly mostly due to their previously appalling customer service, means that probably they'll never again get a truly objective view taken of their business by any forum member.

Objectivity goes out the window in both these cases, and that's why product evaluations and comparisons should be done by independents like the UK's Which? organisation or JD Power, leaving technical testing to properly qualified, independent experts.

Aerobatic has never tried to hide his investment in Cointerra and probably feels that they have been unfairly criticised. He's a very articulate and clearly thoughtful person who believes the in the company and was willing to put his hand in his pocket as a result. I personally enjoy reading his input to the forums and if he's complaining about something it's usually for good reasons.

Confirmed, you can't read.

1) As I've said twice already now, there is no FF ratings any more.
2) No, you didn't 'get me', I was mocking you. Everything you said was absolutely wrong - as you'd see if you actually bothered to read the rating criteria.
3) Oh dear, how would a company score -4 on a scale of 1 to 10?
4) Not only are you making mistakes, but then you're repeating them again and again and again as if you know what you're talking about.

no, I've proven one example where your exact criteria is very explicit and where you've deliberately chosen the wrong numbers to make one company score higher than it should and another score lower than it should.

you've already admitted 'i got you' and that i was right, but will you fix it in your chart?  of course not.  because you never let the facts get in the way of your scores being absolutely your decision.

in that particiular example, bitfury would've scored -4 instead of 8.  thats a 12 point difference, taking their score from 92 to 80.  that would take them from position number 1 in the chart to position number, er, 8?    you see, it makes a huge difference to your chart.   its not a minor error of a bad doggie who should wag a finger.  its a MAJOR change in position of the top rated company in your list, simply because you've arbitrarily doled out the numbers in the way you see fit rather than relying on the facts.

as i said, you can go through every single line in your ratings system and find HUGE errors that amount to deliberate manipulation of the figures.  the entire ratings system is YOUR fabrication.

An 'example' which turned out to be you not reading the criteria and blaming that on me, nice.