Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s - page 127. (Read 880461 times)

If you guys are going to continue to deal with liars & thieves, like scamfast & bfl, then it seems you'll have to get used to getting hit with some mud yourselves.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/meet-hashfast-another-bitcoin-miner-manufacturer-accused-of-fraud/2/


Sorta like the BFL playbook. http://www.woodlaw.com/sites/default/files/casedocs/2014-04-29%20Answer.pdf

We just saw this article today, and felt the need to clarify a few points in it as they did spend a little time talking about Pepper Mining but never even fired off an email to us, and some of the information therein has been a little damaging to us.

https://peppermining.com/response-to-ars-technica-article/

Long story short, Pepper Mining is not based in California and we do not have a partnership agreement with HashFast other than the HDK agreement we signed back in the early spring to be a licensee that can make boards based on their chips. They did say they were planning on doing a blog post about us, but the new and fancy sounding Premier Design Partner label for board designers is news to us and there is not any sort of business partnership between the two companies.

Mostly privately both directly and through a lawyer over the course of 2 months, though I also specifically recall saying in response to one of your posts that I was open to talking to them but correct me if I'm wrong they never responded to your requests to meet with them either.  I've spoken privately to half a dozen other Hashfast customers with similar stories they all tried to contact Hashfast only to be met with silence or BS.  The only thing Hashfast has ever offered was predicated on signing that onerous release that didn't even guarantee they would send you a USD refund and made you sign away any legal right you had to hold them accountable in court.

Privately, or publicly?

Funny how they're playing so humble we're-victims-too after months of treating customers like crap— not just ignoring them, but truly excellent stunts like claiming here that they owed me nothing because I declined their crazy settlement and gag agreement.

And, of course, — like many other batch 1 customers, no product no refund and no communication since the last time I commented.

Back in October when apparently they knew they were going to miss on the basis of having no board, they were still telling the public that they were on track. How many people placed orders on the basis of those claims?

It must have been another fire.

So back in September the house fire was dismissed as no big deal and deCastro managed to show up for a morning media interview the next day and now they claim it was a major contributor to their utter failure.

http://www.businessweek.com/printer/articles/185877-the-bitcoin-mining-arms-race-heats-up


vs.

I feel offended by this and since that it's the third time in a row you post it, I'm gonna answer your flame: We all worked together and went to great lengths to persuade HF to work with us, independently from how we paid. None of us succeeded, but not for a fault from our side. They decided to wait until their assets devaluated to this ridiculous standard before starting to help us helping them. What a great plan!

One little and now public contraction: The reason why they didn't noticed that the boards were late, two blogposts or so ago, was that the core competence was focused on the ASIC. I underlined during that Skype call that no matter how much they wanted to focus on the ASIC, there really wasn't anything you could do on your ASIC once that you taped it out, apart from maybe staring at it. I guess that they agreed with me on that since that they changed their version, now it being that due to Edward's house fire (I'm really sorry to hear that, Edward. Happy that you recovered.) Simon was temporarily in charge of the business aspects and forgot to take a look at the status of the board in the meanwhile.

About HashFast LLC holding the IP... Is anyone surprised?

Now, the subsequent and logical question becomes, how did HashFast Technologies paid for the usage of the IP HashFast LLC holds? Maybe with a famous Bitcoin transaction?

No, I refuse to believe that.

That's just not true.  I and many others tried to contact them offering to work out something reasonable Hashfast simply didn't respond.

Has there been ANYONE that has received a refund from HashFast yet? Until I start seeing refunds, yes, you are a fucking scam. I requested a refund 2 months ago and still have not received it. They will not answer any of my emails.

I dunno, but they sure are trying to cultivate a humble image.  

Somebody give Simon a haircut, for god's sake, he's about to start looking like a dirt-eater from Alabama. Were it not for that glass he's holding. A lot of my work colleagues are Cambridge types, and there's no hope for them, but I'll be damned if it doesn't seem like if Simon went to enough Drive by Truckers shows that he'd learn how to fit in with Bubba.

And Eddie, with his shirt untucked!  My heavens.  Contrived?  No way!  Just a working stiff, that Eddie, with a gold-plated bidness education?  Untucking his button-down, wow, that says desperation like nothing else.

Should have engaged their customers in late 2013 with the truth, humility, and a earnest desire for a mutually-agreed plan.  I was here screaming for it.  They had no interest.  And, to be honest, those that wanted BTC refunds didn't have much interest either.  It was people like me, USD customers in the middle, who were looking hardest for a fair path.  They were too arrogant to realize their predicament.

http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/13963172720_05ab7fc682_b-640x480.jpg

Is Eduardo wearing his sleek Bluetooth again?

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/embattled-ceo-of-bitcoin-miner-firm-we-are-as-poor-as-church-mice/
http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/05/gallery-inside-hashfast-a-struggling-bitcoin-chipmaker-startup/#image-7

Some interesting details gossip.

That should be a stand alone sticky thread right under caveat emptor.

http://www.coindesk.com/46k-spent-mining-hardware-happened-next/

We all know how that turned out.

Agreed.

More permanent link: http://web.archive.org/web/20131207160528/https://hashfast.com/silicon-in-silicon-valley/ Create an account on the .org and I will be glad to give you editing privileges Edit: It's already there.

Anyway there is a lot more than that to prove our points (even that simple and single point) and force them to disclose contracts, emails, tracking, etc. I'm reluctant in talking about that because I don't see why I should help them filing the huge holes of their story, so keeping it private makes sense for now.

There was also the blog post on Nov 8th saying "Today we have reached a real milestone: Silicon Wafers Have Arrived in Silicon Valley!"  They now expect us to believe the chips actually arrived in Oct. (just barely) despite making multiple posts back in Nov. stating that the chips arrived in November.  

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3pw0UOayk_4J:hashfast.com/silicon-in-silicon-valley/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

@Cedivad can you add the above link to the timeline on Hashfast.org I don't think it is currently in there.