Author

Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s - page 438. (Read 880461 times)

legendary
Activity: 2912
Merit: 6403
Blackjack.fun



Posting a picture of HashFast's CEO holding a box of their finished wafers in poor lagging Cointerra's thread is just plain mean.

Have you no pity for Cointerra's ASIC design team, even as they are being replaced with more competent engineers?   Undecided

Also , I don't see a box of finished wafers , here it's just a box , it might even be weed in it , and that is plausible and matching his laugh.
For a month people are waiting for this and they show a picture with the box? Not the product?
And what's even worse , what's happening there at HF , and why have bears played with that box cause it sure looks like that.
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
 Smiley  KNC miner delays November shipping

http://mentaso.com/kncminer/knc-miner-delays-november-shipping-but-good-news-otherwise.html

Quote
Today we received an email from KNCminer that our 2 x Jupiter's where being delayed due to supplier issues. That will mean our competition will be delayed by a week, possibly more.

legendary
Activity: 2912
Merit: 6403
Blackjack.fun
Well , HF  may not have the best customer support , the best asic on the market , the best anything , but they do have the most annoying shill on the forum
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
I was up in Norway last year, way up in Norway, and flew back to Oslo with a big bunch of the crew of the Oden, the Swedish icebreaker. They were nice guys.  Tough, but nice.  This icebreaker we have around here gives them a bad name, because he's just nothing but quarrelsome.
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
ok Mr teal, here's your "simple answer."

IT DEPENDS.

I wasn't asking you.

Doesn't matter who you were asking.

The answer is "IT DEPENDS" for reasons which have already been explained.
legendary
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1005
Quote
Yes... I do agree with you. We run mentaso.com and I am in discussions with one of the Hashfast crew about getting some info your way. I have asked a few times and been presented with some stale info, but recently things have changed a bit and they are actually being more vocal with us. There are only so many email reminders I can send before I think a forum post is needed to push along the flow of info.

From what I have been told, they do have a unit running, but I dont believe its with their Hashfast Asic chip. Of course I cannot confirm this as I have yet to see the actual rig.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/hashfast-340079
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
  How come website did not need to register when you are new customer?  I am worrying to check my account later for no register at all.
hero member
Activity: 561
Merit: 521
Trustless IceColdWallet
I think, the nex ;Dt time we were heard from HF is the 6. December.

I hope, they will made an amazing video like Knc.

Then all hurts and pain are blowing away.

I pray for this.


Dear god of Bitcoins, please let my wishes comes true.

 Grin
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1002
Interesting thought.  Could you point out the MPP clause in the ToS you accepted when purchasing?

What's your point? 

You can go read the MPP yourself if you are confused about it. 

The MPP only guarantees more hashing power (with a cap) it doesn't guarantee an positive ROI.  Guaranteeing a positive ROI would require the MPP to offer unlimited additional hashrate and it clearly indicates it is capped at 400%.  I am not happy about it but a judge (if you want to waste your money and potentially see the inside of the court room in 3-6 months) is going to take a neutral aproach to the reading.  Just because someone "could" be confused isn't the standard of proof.  HashFast could probably have been more "creative" with the language and still win in court.

+10 ho yes !! Wink
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 501
in defi we trust
I would have to agree. People suddenly want refunds in BTC as an investment they never made. If you invested in BTC, then that's that. If you paid for something in BTC, then BTC rises, you can't demand a refund for an easy second route. A couple of weeks ago, cedivad let me borrow ~.03 btc when they were at around 100 something dollars. I just needed to get some btc out of my Bitpay. I told him I would pay it back, he said I could keep it. I said okay and thanks. Suddenly when BTC started rising, he told me to pay him back or he was going to make a claim against me here on BTC talk. I didn't have the coins anymore because I used them, because he let me have them.

I think we should all stop focusing on getting refunded in BTC and suddenly being rich over an in direct investment. We all purchased Baby jets. And we need to focus on getting those. If you want a refund, have some morals and be honest.

Let's try to get what we paid for.

WAIT!
People are still thinking there is a slight chance to get their refunds in BTC?
member
Activity: 85
Merit: 10
I just want to say that every time I read this thread my faith in humanity is restored.

I do not think that word means what you think it means.
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
I understand it would be very nice to have specific commitments of X MPP miniboards on Y date.

However, this is an unreasonable/impossible expectation for several reasons.


#1...because everything they promise is utter bullshit!

How's the printer?
full member
Activity: 125
Merit: 100
My deepest fear is that their business model was dependent on them shipping on time and that they were really hoping to not have to pay out any of the MPP, and now that it's obvious they will, there's no possible way for the company to honour the MPP without taking on substantial losses and/or bankrupty.  The hardware for the MPP is still going to cost the company more or less the same now as it does in a couple months, and if they made a gamble on not having to pay for it, everyone will suffer in the end.

That sounds like a good motivation for HashFast to withold hardware and mine.  I'm not saying they will, I'm saying it's something they've got to be factoring into the equation at this point, having already pissed everyone off significantly now.
legendary
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1005
I think it is WAY to early to make any assumptions about the companies ability to pay for hardware production for the MPP hardware.
I think it is best to just take on a wait and see approach for right now and not jump to any conclusions and start spreading any FUD and starting a angry mob mentality because every one is just speculating at this point.

Yeah.
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
Co-Owner Of DCMCo-Op Mining Farm at 3.5 th/s
I think it is WAY to early to make any assumptions about the companies ability to pay for hardware production for the MPP hardware.
I think it is best to just take on a wait and see approach for right now and not jump to any conclusions and start spreading any FUD and starting a angry mob mentality because every one is just speculating at this point.
sr. member
Activity: 446
Merit: 250
Providing MPP modules to Batch 1 customers at no additional cost and after the sale has been the best thing HF has done so far. I don't understand how you can criticize them about that, much less take them to court. You can pound your chest all you want but this is just not going to happen.

The thing I object to is that MPP was designed to protect against excessive difficulty increases. Not delays.

HF has done nothing to compensate against delays so it is the customers that will pay the price for HF failures.
correct. Also see [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=262052.msg3527186#msg3527186].

The MPP was born in an attempt to attract customers at a time the network difficulty grew dramatically. It is a value-added deal which makes this offer very attractive.

With the radio silence from Hashfast there is hardly any way to know what is really going on behind the curtain. All things are possible - from an honest attempt to fix engineering problems and avoiding PR interference to an attempted cover-up of fraudulent advertisement.

Dependent on how Hashfast used customer money to finance production (which has not been stated anywhere and should be considered malpractice), Hashfast customers may be locked into the fate of the company. If it succeeds customers will either be compensated for any shortcomings or may otherwise have grounds for litigation charges. If it fails, customers will have a claim on any left-overs after the company will have to file for bankruptcy. If customer funds were used, it's a misuse of financing, because it lets customers take all the risk while the potential gains (overall profitability of the company) is kept in private hands. Equity financing would have been more appropriate in that case.

Again - without anymore information coming from Hashfast it's hard to paint a precise picture of what is going on. For one it would be interesting to learn how Hashfast stored the customer funds to keep them available for a refund.

My deepest fear is that their business model was dependent on them shipping on time and that they were really hoping to not have to pay out any of the MPP, and now that it's obvious they will, there's no possible way for the company to honour the MPP without taking on substantial losses and/or bankrupty.  The hardware for the MPP is still going to cost the company more or less the same now as it does in a couple months, and if they made a gamble on not having to pay for it, everyone will suffer in the end.

I don't want to spread FUD though, I guess we'll have to give HashFast the benefit of the doubt until we hear otherwise.  Like everyone else, I'm crossing my fingers and hoping from an e-mail from them saying they haven't slept for the past two weeks because they've been trying to prevent their company from being insolvent and working hard on getting the consumers their hardware out as fast as they can, while what they're doing is still relevant.

Well, if they held on to any of the bitcoin they were paid with they should be sitting really good for paying for additional hardware.
legendary
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1005
Providing MPP modules to Batch 1 customers at no additional cost and after the sale has been the best thing HF has done so far. I don't understand how you can criticize them about that, much less take them to court. You can pound your chest all you want but this is just not going to happen.

The thing I object to is that MPP was designed to protect against excessive difficulty increases. Not delays.

HF has done nothing to compensate against delays so it is the customers that will pay the price for HF failures.
correct. Also see [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=262052.msg3527186#msg3527186].

The MPP was born in an attempt to attract customers at a time the network difficulty grew dramatically. It is a value-added deal which makes this offer very attractive.

With the radio silence from Hashfast there is hardly any way to know what is really going on behind the curtain. All things are possible - from an honest attempt to fix engineering problems and avoiding PR interference to an attempted cover-up of fraudulent advertisement.

Dependent on how Hashfast used customer money to finance production (which has not been stated anywhere and should be considered malpractice), Hashfast customers may be locked into the fate of the company. If it succeeds customers will either be compensated for any shortcomings or may otherwise have grounds for litigation charges. If it fails, customers will have a claim on any left-overs after the company will have to file for bankruptcy. If customer funds were used, it's a misuse of financing, because it lets customers take all the risk while the potential gains (overall profitability of the company) is kept in private hands. Equity financing would have been more appropriate in that case.

Again - without anymore information coming from Hashfast it's hard to paint a precise picture of what is going on. For one it would be interesting to learn how Hashfast stored the customer funds to keep them available for a refund.

My deepest fear is that their business model was dependent on them shipping on time and that they were really hoping to not have to pay out any of the MPP, and now that it's obvious they will, there's no possible way for the company to honour the MPP without taking on substantial losses and/or bankrupty.  The hardware for the MPP is still going to cost the company more or less the same now as it does in a couple months, and if they made a gamble on not having to pay for it, everyone will suffer in the end.

I don't want to spread FUD though, I guess we'll have to give HashFast the benefit of the doubt until we hear otherwise.  Like everyone else, I'm crossing my fingers and hoping from an e-mail from them saying they haven't slept for the past two weeks because they've been trying to prevent their company from being insolvent and working hard on getting the consumers their hardware out as fast as they can, while what they're doing is still relevant.
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
I just want to say that every time I read this thread my faith in humanity is restored.
legendary
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1004
ok Mr teal, here's your "simple answer."

IT DEPENDS.

I wasn't asking you.
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
ok Mr teal, here's your "simple answer."

IT DEPENDS.
Jump to: