Author

Topic: [LABCOIN] IPO [BTCT.CO] - Details/FAQ and Discussion (ASIC dev/sales/mining) - page 153. (Read 1079974 times)

KS
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
Agath, introduced by theSeven, had a talk with Alessia about the design of 65nm. He dropped from school and is an engineer taught by himself.

Just to be clear:

I have been contacted by someone who said to be Alessia Tatti on Freenode (delaria) a few months ago, and I had just a talk with her. Then I never heard from them anymore, and I am not involved in this project.

Ciao Paolo, che cos'è questa team mailing list? Cioè, non è che è una cosa vecchia, stiamo parlando di metà Agosto. Hai lasciato perdere oppure...?
KS
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
Ohh wait the designer you mean HOWARD WHO IS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE WORLD SINCE A MONTH AGO, that guy?

same state as Shiring from Wave Semi now.

That's either more practical or totally coincidental. No idea.
KS
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
http://lists.intercom.it/pipermail/btcgroup/2012-August/000015.html

[BTCGROUP] Update
Ken Shiring ken at shiring.com
Mon Aug 13 20:15:07 CEST 2012

    Previous message: [BTCGROUP] Update
    Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Thanks for asking Paolo, this is an important issue we should discuss. Here
is what I know so far:

We have 2 options for funding schedule.  Each option has pros and cons.
Let me explain a little first what our remaining design flow is, which will
give you some perspective on the process:

1. We receive the technology library from our services provider.  I think
we will be using Globalfoundries' 65nm process.
2. I synthesize the design to the given tech library.  I will have to spend
some time on this step to get best quality of results (QoR).
3. I handoff the post synthesis netlist to our services provider.
4. They perform several back-end steps, like scan chain insertion, place &
route, and DRC checks.
5. They produce a GDSII file (this is the file which represents physical
geometry at the mask level).
6. We handoff a GDSII file to the fab (Globalfoundries).
7. The fab produces a physical mask.
8. The mask is used to make wafers.
9. Wafers are cut, tested, and packaged into our specified packaging.
10. We get chips back from the foundry.

This is a quite a bit of detail, but I thought you should understand the
process so we can talk about how the different options affect our schedule.


1. Fast option: Highest risk.  We give the design to our services provider,
and we do steps 1-10 as quickly as possible.  In this case, we will produce
a mask that is usable directly for production.  The mask that is made can
be used for high volume (10k+ parts/month).  The fab does a small run of
wafers, and sends them back to us for testing.  We test the parts, and we
find out if they are good or bad.  If they are good, we use the existing
mask and go to volume production right away.  There will be some fab queue
delays involved, but I don't yet know how long (we are still waiting on the
details from our provider).  We can also pre-order any number of production
parts before we get prototypes (known as a hot run).  This preorder is
another direct risk; we would get these parts before knowing for sure
whether the parts come back good.  The size of the hot run is totally up to
us (we decide how much risk to take).

2. Slower option: Less risk.  We give the design to our services provider
after doing steps 1-6.  When the mask is made (7), we use a process called
a multi-project wafer (MPW).  MPWs put many different designs on a single
wafer from many different companies.  This means the cost of a mask (and
wafer) is split among many different companies, and the price goes down
considerably.  However, only a small run of chips can be made.  This
process is used for prototyping, and most of the large companies use this
model at 65nm or lower to mitigate risk.  This option is considerably less
risky financially.  However, if the design comes back fully functional, a
2nd mask set must be made for volume production.  Step 7 must be repeated
to make a production mask set.  There is a turnaround delay to make the 2nd
mask, which adds to the total project time.

With option #1, we would need nearly all the funds up front.  With option
#2, we would need much less up front.  However, option #2 still requires
the same total funding (slightly more in total due to the 2 mask sets) in
the end.  I don't have specific cost numbers yet, but option #2 should be
~250k to get to prototypes.  Option #1 is about ~1m to get to prototypes.

I think option #2 is the best idea from an engineering view.  It puts the
smallest amount of capital at risk, and it also allows us to potentially
get started sooner if you are willing to fund the smaller sum up front and
raise the rest later.  I need to call my services provider back and remind
them we are waiting on some numbers, so hopefully in a day or so I will
have concrete details for you.


Ken





On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 7:18 AM, Paolo Agazzone wrote:

> **
>
> Hello all,
>
> I hope that we finally found a working configuration for this list! :-)
>
>
> on August most people/companies are on summer vacations, so things are a
> bit slowed down.
>
>
> However I'll have a meeting with Luca on thursday where we will also
> discuss about this project.
>
>
> Meanwhile I have a question:
>
>
> in case we will successfully find all the required funds, in which steps
> will be they employed/required? All upfront, at the beginning, or there are
> several phases? If so, which would it be (ballpark figure) the amount
> needed for each step?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Paolo.
>
>
> --
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Paolo Agazzone aga at intercom.it http://blog.agazzone.it/
>
> Linux Reg. User: #205873 Vaprio d'Agogna (NO) - Italy
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Btcgroup mailing list
> Btcgroup at lists.intercom.it
> http://lists.intercom.it/mailman/listinfo/btcgroup
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
member
Activity: 109
Merit: 10

Im just spreading out a couple orders wanted to lighten up by about 50 shares, but i would rather just hold the 50 shares than sell under .003
You can spend all day on here talking shit about labcoin if you want but they are obviously not a scam, having difficulties sure but it takes some patience sometimes. In my case when I buy shares of anything its money that I dont need so I dont do the panic sell thing. I believe waiting this out will reap some reward by end of year if not huge rewards. Carry on with your fud seems like you have nothing better to do
hero member
Activity: 750
Merit: 500
www.coinschedule.com
No, they say Fabrizio is the CEO of I-tec Pro (which he is). And they did use this company as their legal entity.

Its either one or the other. Either i-tec is the legal umbrella, and then Fabr is CEO. Or i-tec is not directly involved and they are at the very least intentionally misleading by pretending i-tec is the legal umbrella with a "public figure" CEO.

Quote
TheSwede name is there.

Really? If it is, I missed it. What is it?
You are not confusing him with theseven are you?

Quote
Fabrizio's name is there.

But he isnt involved.

Quote
The 130nm is already designed. So why do they still need the designer? They need someone that can make the designed and produced chip work!

Typically the designer knows his design best. When are you working out problems with the PCB or even software, that person is key.


Ok, I meant TheSeven not TheSwede (they are both involved anyway).

Fabrizio may not be involved but he is a real life person that knows at least one of the others, so it's not like they took a completely random company and random guy. They are connected!

Anyway, this has been a long day. I just want to relax, make some popcorn and see what they are going to say/do next.

legendary
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
we need bitcoin talk to give us the IP adress of the swede and others involved
full member
Activity: 896
Merit: 102
Ohh wait the designer you mean HOWARD WHO IS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE WORLD SINCE A MONTH AGO, that guy?
full member
Activity: 896
Merit: 102
Pics of mining boards or scam

They can at least show a mining board even if it looks like crap, the fact that the havent shows they are lying.
legendary
Activity: 980
Merit: 1040
No, they say Fabrizio is the CEO of I-tec Pro (which he is). And they did use this company as their legal entity.

Its either one or the other. Either i-tec is the legal umbrella, and then Fabr is CEO. Or i-tec is not directly involved and they are at the very least intentionally misleading by pretending i-tec is the legal umbrella with a "public figure" CEO.

Quote
TheSwede name is there.

Really? If it is, I missed it. What is it?
You are not confusing him with theseven are you?

Quote
Fabrizio's name is there.

But he isnt involved.

Quote
The 130nm is already designed. So why do they still need the designer? They need someone that can make the designed and produced chip work!

Typically the designer knows his design best. When are you working out problems with the PCB or even software, that person is key.
full member
Activity: 896
Merit: 102
I accidently added a 0 to my sell order and sold 25 shares at .0003 ...fuck i meat to put .003. That would be why the price just dropped FML lol

Are you on drugs?
member
Activity: 109
Merit: 10
I accidently added a 0 to my sell order and sold 25 shares at .0003 ...fuck i meat to put .003. That would be why the price just dropped FML lol
hero member
Activity: 750
Merit: 500
www.coinschedule.com
- The "company registration" points to i-tec pro which is not really involved
- so called CEO isnt involved

No, they say Fabrizio is the CEO of I-tec Pro (which he is). And they did use this company as their legal entity.

- Real names of the people involved are hidden or using aliases (except for howard wang)

TheSwede name is there. Fabrizio's name is there. The only questions are Alissia Tatti (who wasn't listed) and who is Samuel Noi (which we could not confirm if he exists or not)

- Previous claims about having x TH online for several weeks are a lie (even if it werent, they are withholding the revenue)

Yes, this I agree. This is very annoying.

On top of that:
- No evidence of their own chip working at all, very strong indications they do have Avalons.

Indeed annoying (as above). I would like to know what is going on with the chips.

- Lead designer for 130nm has left, no mention of that, no clue who is leading the work now.
- no known lead designer for 65nm and frankly, both financially and time wise feasibility of this 65nm chip seems very questionable to me.

The 130nm is already designed. So why do they still need the designer? They need someone that can make the designed and produced chip work!

The 65nm being possible or not, I cannot comment. My guess is as good as yours, I can only hope they have a good plan.

legendary
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1808
Exchange Bitcoin quickly-https://blockchain.com.do
I'm sure this isn't a scam, I'm also sure they have issues with the chips. I just hope we get some honesty out of them now about it all. Whatever the problem is we just want the information
legendary
Activity: 980
Merit: 1040
This, plus no pictures of the miners ever posted. Its been a few days still no mention of new exchange, nobody wants this lying scam company.

To be fair, if this:
http://www.labcoin.com/img/pic3.jpg

is a render, then its a rather good one, and someone put a fair amount of work in to making it look credible.
member
Activity: 109
Merit: 10
Figures Labcoins .002 on Havelock, possibilities that they allow a share transfer?

Because thats the price havelock like to scam its investors at lol
Conspiracy theory, or fact (any proof)

Havelock buys labcoin shares and sells it to its investors. You cannot sell your own shares on havelock, they are the only ones who can.

that was the price when trading was frozen, why would they start it anywhere else?
full member
Activity: 896
Merit: 102
Ok guys, I must say now: I am feeling a bit more confident in Labcoin now than I was this morning.

These are real people. There is a real project, they've spent money, they seem to know their stuff.

YES, something is wrong
YES, they should have communicated better.

But now we have their contact info, their names etc.. and they match what they told us before.

So I say, let them think about all that has been done here today, and let them breathe a little bit a come to us.

I tend to agree.
Although this also reveals they are being dishonest.
- The "company registration" points to i-tec pro which is not really involved
- so called CEO isnt involved
- Real names of the people involved are hidden or using aliases (except for howard wang)
- Previous claims about having x TH online for several weeks are a lie (even if it werent, they are withholding the revenue)

If we cant believe that, its hard to believe anything they say.  

On top of that:
- No evidence of their own chip working at all, very strong indications they do have Avalons.
- Lead designer for 130nm has left, no mention of that, no clue who is leading the work now.
- no known lead designer for 65nm and frankly, both financially and time wise this the 65nm seems very questionable to me.

Ultimately they or may or may not get something hashing but who's willing to bet that, given what we know?



This, plus no pictures of the miners ever posted. Its been a few days still no mention of new exchange, nobody wants this lying scam company.
full member
Activity: 896
Merit: 102
Figures Labcoins .002 on Havelock, possibilities that they allow a share transfer?

Because thats the price havelock like to scam its investors at lol
Conspiracy theory, or fact (any proof)

Havelock buys labcoin shares and sells it to its investors. You cannot sell your own shares on havelock, they are the only ones who can.
full member
Activity: 158
Merit: 100
Figures Labcoins .002 on Havelock, possibilities that they allow a share transfer?

Because thats the price havelock like to scam its investors at lol
Conspiracy theory, or fact (any proof)
legendary
Activity: 980
Merit: 1040
Ok guys, I must say now: I am feeling a bit more confident in Labcoin now than I was this morning.

These are real people. There is a real project, they've spent money, they seem to know their stuff.

YES, something is wrong
YES, they should have communicated better.

But now we have their contact info, their names etc.. and they match what they told us before.

So I say, let them think about all that has been done here today, and let them breathe a little bit a come to us.

I tend to agree.
Although this also reveals they are being dishonest.
- The "company registration" points to i-tec pro which is not really involved
- so called CEO isnt involved
- Real names of the people involved are hidden or using aliases (except for howard wang)
- Previous claims about having x TH online for several weeks are a lie (even if it werent, they are withholding the revenue)

If we cant believe that, its hard to believe anything they say.  

On top of that:
- No evidence of their own chip working at all, very strong indications they do have Avalons.
- Lead designer for 130nm has left, no mention of that, no clue who is leading the work now.
- no known lead designer for 65nm and frankly, both financially and time wise feasibility of this 65nm chip seems very questionable to me.

Ultimately they or may or may not get something hashing but who's willing to bet that, given what we know?
Sou
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
(Bitcoin related text here)
Swede why is HOWARD NOT IN CHINA, BUT IS IN AMERICA?
Why do you have 0GH FOR OVER 2 DAYS?

It's not 0 GH. Close, but not 0.
Jump to: