Next generation 14nm mining grid - page 2.

jimmothy

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 509

Quote from: MPOE-PR on December 06, 2013, 02:25:14 PM

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 01:37:07 PM

"The SVC2UK ‘100 Club’ is a group of individuals who we believe to have the most innovative, high-growth ventures and who show the greatest promise to become future serial entrepreneurs and investors themselves. The Club is rigorously handpicked by SVC2UK experts via a multi-step selection process, and consists of CEOs likely to build global businesses worth £100 million in the next three to five years."

Why do you think anyone cares what praises an organized circle jerk has made about itself? Contrary to what some threads on this forum might've lead you to believe, Bitcoin isn't suitable for this sort of nonsense. That you continually have to appeal to the "authority" of "professors" and whatnot exhibits quite plainly that you're out of your depth. Go back to my original post here and read the damned thing.

Seriously how dare you even do anything bitcoin related without the all mighty mr popescu's permission. If you aren't going to pay 30btc to signup for mpex you can fuck off.. /sarcasm

MPOE-PR

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 522

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 01:37:07 PM

"The SVC2UK ‘100 Club’ is a group of individuals who we believe to have the most innovative, high-growth ventures and who show the greatest promise to become future serial entrepreneurs and investors themselves. The Club is rigorously handpicked by SVC2UK experts via a multi-step selection process, and consists of CEOs likely to build global businesses worth £100 million in the next three to five years."

Why do you think anyone cares what praises an organized circle jerk has made about itself? Contrary to what some threads on this forum might've lead you to believe, Bitcoin isn't suitable for this sort of nonsense. That you continually have to appeal to the "authority" of "professors" and whatnot exhibits quite plainly that you're out of your depth. Go back to my original post here and read the damned thing.

crumbs

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

^^
Feel free to follow in his footsteps

EBM

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Hey crumbs - just so you know, you've been on ignore since page 2.

I've no idea why you're so infatuated with me, it's very flattering but I am taken - and also not gay.

Do please feel free to keep shouting at the walls if you like, but Elvis has left the building. Cool

crumbs

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Quote from: railzand on December 06, 2013, 01:21:24 PM

Mark is an ex-programmer and professional writer, who invented Charity Engine as part of a sci-fi novel, figured it would really work, so stopped writing the novel and started the company.

Read the same press as you.
The company's financial model is a flop -- hence the panhandling on this forum.
From the tech perspective, Charity Engine is no more interesting than a kid with a botnet.
His new scheme is nonsensical and technologically without merit.
The "charities" angle is a con to avoid having to pay people for their proc time.
Charities Engine name in itself is deceptive and misleading -- Charity Engine is a for-profit corporation.
As a con, its as lowbrow as it gets: "Win money for free while donating to charities."
Nothing new here, other than the level of laziness.

EBM

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: railzand on December 06, 2013, 01:21:24 PM

Mark is an ex-programmer and professional writer, who invented Charity Engine as part of a sci-fi novel, figured it would really work, so stopped writing the novel and started the company.

Yup. Best way to predict the future is to create it. Surprised you didn't post the link where that's from, though?

You know, the one that also says this about me and our company http://www.svc2uk.com/100club/ceo-profiles/ :

"The SVC2UK ‘100 Club’ is a group of individuals who we believe to have the most innovative, high-growth ventures and who show the greatest promise to become future serial entrepreneurs and investors themselves. The Club is rigorously handpicked by SVC2UK experts via a multi-step selection process, and consists of CEOs likely to build global businesses worth £100 million in the next three to five years."

FTFY

railzand

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Lux e tenebris

Mark is an ex-programmer and professional writer, who invented Charity Engine as part of a sci-fi novel, figured it would really work, so stopped writing the novel and started the company.

crumbs

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 11:16:01 AM

...
I'm a CEO, not a chip designer. That's why I took advice from a professor.

If you do not know WTF you're talking about, the smart thing to do is STFU.

EBM

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 10:44:22 AM

I thought you meant just an extra set of CPU commands or something. In fact, it's blatantly obvious I thought that. Hardly worth a shouting fit.

Anyway, as you're losing the ability to have a civil conversation, let's leave it there.

Wait, what? Extra set of CPU commands is what this *you* are referring to, and it's... hardware. You truly have no grasp of what you are talking about.

I have zero interest in being civil towards scammers.

Yes, I wasn't aware an extra set of CPU commands automatically means additional silicon. I thought it could be emulation - which is what I thought you were referring to. Alert the Washington Post.

I'm a CEO, not a chip designer. That's why I took advice from a professor.

EDIT: Well, well, well. "In traditional CPU design there have been two common approaches: hardwired logic and emulation. The 80x86 family uses both of these techniques." http://www.plantation-productions.com/Webster/www.artofasm.com/Linux/HTML/CPUArchitecturea3.html

crumbs

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 10:44:22 AM

I thought you meant just an extra set of CPU commands or something. In fact, it's blatantly obvious I thought that. Hardly worth a shouting fit.

Anyway, as you're losing the ability to have a civil conversation, let's leave it there.

Wait, what? Extra set of CPU commands is what this *you* are referring to, and it's... hardware. You truly have no grasp of what you are talking about.

I have zero interest in being civil towards scammers.

You are not so much dealing with raw stupidity as much as a lazy scam. It's pointless to offer logical arguments when you're engaging someone like that.
After his arguments are conclusively shown to be meritless, he refuses to concede. There is nothing else you can do.

Posting gifs used to help, but now the animations don't work Angry

crumbs

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Quote from: crumbs on December 06, 2013, 07:39:57 AM

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 03:37:17 AM

...
In that article:

"Columbia’s Sethumadhavan says custom ASICs may soon face a challenge from chips for mobile devices with circuits dedicated to performing encryption operations. These chips, expected next year, will probably be designed to a standard higher than the miners can reach and could be used to build powerful mining rigs without ASICs."
...

That article was written over a year ago, on December 5, 2012. It was wrong then, and now it is verifiably wrong. Don't try to bootstrap your scam on top of another man's mistakes.

Many here think that you are clueless, giving too much credence to the adage "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."
Not I.
You're here to con and bilk coin.
Monumental stupidity required for your scheme is not realizable within the constraints of spacetime as we know it.
Bitcoin is not a playground for failed scammers. It is not a nursing home where burnt down scams come to die.
Pool's closed

Just get out.

EBM

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 10:14:43 AM

They're not "just measly SHA-256 instructions", they will be hardware.

that's what I meant dum-dum.

AGAIN YOU ARE STILL CONFUSING GENERIC HARDWARE SHA-256 INSTRUCTIONS WITH WHAT BITCOIN ASICS DO. YOU ARE EITHER A SCAMMER OR REALLY REALLY DUMB.

Or maybe I just didn't get what you meant because it wasn't what you said. That's the first time you've even used the word 'hardware'.

I thought you meant just an extra set of CPU commands or something. In fact, it's blatantly obvious I thought that. Hardly worth a shouting fit.

Anyway, as you're losing the ability to have a civil conversation, let's leave it there.

EBM

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: ?? on ??

We've had 40 nm Bitcoin ASICs be more efficient than 28 nm ones, so stop with the process size obsession already.

But again, those are not Bitcoin ASICs, but just measly SHA-256 instructions, which isn't what the Bitcoin ASICs do. Please stop ignoring that simple fact.

Quote from: ?? on ??

Bitcoin ASICs do not simply SHA256(x), they do the whole "search for SHA256(SHA256(x+y)) and gimme y when the result has zeroes".

They're not "just measly SHA-256 instructions", they will be hardware. Yes, I understand that BTC ASICS are doing the exact equation and I'm sure the mobile chips won't be. But there is more to it than that - and I don't just mean process size (which is a huge deal, and the obsession of every chip maker out there, including the ASIC guys). Indeed, if you've heard of 40nm ASICs beating 28nm ones (really?), then you've already alluded to this.

A handful of bootstrapped ASIC makers has nowhere near the chip design expertise of the multi-billion-dollar mobile industry. Cellphone chips have every energy-saving optimization trick in the book. ASICs don't.

ASICs are getting more efficient, sure, but that's down to the process size and not much else. They're certainly not designed to be mobile. Even the USB ones only just scraped under 5W.

So yes, I do get your point: these things won't be true 'baby BTC ASICs', but they'll still be ridiculously energy-efficient and kicking out well over a GH/s per Watt.

And more to the point; there will be millions of them just sat there every night doing absolutely nothing but watch a battery charge - and some web-crawling. We'd be crazy not to tap them for mining as well.

EBM

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: Mabsark on December 06, 2013, 07:10:54 AM

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 06:49:10 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 06:39:33 AM

Why won't smaller, more efficient chips be usable as miners?

I just told you twice. They do not remotely compare to Bitcoin ASICs, and you only want see the magic "SHA-256" word.

Quote

We have a professor of Comp Sci who says they will be.

Hilarious.

I'm aware they won't be as powerful, per unit, as mains-powered ASICs. (Although they will be more efficient in hashing per watt.) They're mobile chips. That's not in debate.

Why does that make them unusable?

How on earth is a 14nm general purpose SHA-256 ASIC going to be more efficient that a 14nm ASIC designed specifically to mine bitcoins?

What you are saying makes no sense.

Er, it wouldn't be. I never said a 14nm would be more efficient than another 14nm.

But it will be more efficient than a 25nm. Or a 20nm.

The point is; whatever is the cutting-edge process at the time (14nm, 12nm, 9nm, whatever) - that's only in the mobiles, stamped out in their hundreds of millions.

You can't afford the latest process (or even obtain it) for small production runs, eg. BTC ASICS. They will always be a couple of generations behind.

crumbs

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 03:37:17 AM

...
In that article:

"Columbia’s Sethumadhavan says custom ASICs may soon face a challenge from chips for mobile devices with circuits dedicated to performing encryption operations. These chips, expected next year, will probably be designed to a standard higher than the miners can reach and could be used to build powerful mining rigs without ASICs."
...

That article was written over a year ago, on December 5, 2012. It was wrong then, and now it is verifiably wrong. Don't try to bootstrap your scam on top of another man's mistakes.

Many here think that you are clueless, giving too much credence to the adage "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."
Not I.
You're here to con and bilk coin.
Monumental stupidity required for your scheme is not realizable within the constraints of spacetime as we know it.
Bitcoin is not a playground for failed scammers. It is not a nursing home where burnt down scams come to die.
Pool's closed

Mabsark

legendary

Activity: 826

Merit: 1004

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 06:49:10 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 06:39:33 AM

Why won't smaller, more efficient chips be usable as miners?

I just told you twice. They do not remotely compare to Bitcoin ASICs, and you only want see the magic "SHA-256" word.

Quote

We have a professor of Comp Sci who says they will be.

Hilarious.

I'm aware they won't be as powerful, per unit, as mains-powered ASICs. (Although they will be more efficient in hashing per watt.) They're mobile chips. That's not in debate.

Why does that make them unusable?

How on earth is a 14nm general purpose SHA-256 ASIC going to be more efficient that a 14nm ASIC designed specifically to mine bitcoins?

What you are saying makes no sense.

EBM

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: EBM on December 06, 2013, 06:39:33 AM

Why won't smaller, more efficient chips be usable as miners?

I just told you twice. They do not remotely compare to Bitcoin ASICs, and you only want see the magic "SHA-256" word.

Quote

We have a professor of Comp Sci who says they will be.

Hilarious.

I'm aware they won't be as powerful, per unit, as mains-powered ASICs. (Although they will be more efficient in hashing per watt.) They're mobile chips. That's not in debate.

"Columbia’s Sethumadhavan says custom ASICs may soon face a challenge from chips for mobile devices with circuits dedicated to performing encryption operations. These chips, expected next year, will probably be designed to a standard higher than the miners can reach and could be used to build powerful mining rigs without ASICs." http://www.technologyreview.com/news/508061/custom-chips-could-be-the-shovels-in-a-bitcoin-gold-rush/

(Sorry, he's actually an Assistant Prof of Comp Sci. My mistake.)

EDIT - we are not just going by this one MIT article. We followed it up.

EBM

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: ?? on ??

Ugh. You still don't understand anything about my point.
And your way of misleading people makes you no better than a scammer.

Then explain. And less of the insults, please. If I'm missing the point, tell me.

Why won't smaller, more efficient chips be usable as miners?

We have a professor of Comp Sci who says they will be. I'm quite open to hearing why you think they won't.

EBM

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: ?? on ??

Still that "SHA-256" nonsense. The thing is, running a mining pool with many of little slow as fuck devices (because again Bitcoin ASICs aren't doing SHA-256 like that) is going to be very costly. Most pools are already phasing out diff1 shares!

Why would you ever need "investors" for a mobile application anyway?

It's not that costly if you don't have to pay out 97% of the earnings, like every other pool does.

We need investors to expand the company, not just for the mobile app. Read the pitch deck. The PC app is earning nicely, thanks.

EBM

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: jimmothy on December 06, 2013, 04:52:50 AM

Can we get an estimate on total hashrate in an optimum situation in your mind? How much electricity would this farm require vs competitors? Trying to get a better understanding of the plan.

It won't be a farm as such, merely a network of idle charging Android devices all around the world. The more people run the app, the greater the hashrate - so number of users is the limiting factor.

The more people have the app, the more it earns, the bigger the donations and prize payouts - which encourages more people to get the app, etc. Scale is everything.

Actual hashrate per device is unknown. All we know is that custom SHA-256 silicon is coming to mobiles, and smarter people than us are adamant they will be more efficient, pound-for-pound, than ASICs. (We have that in writing.)

Electricity usage will also depend on user numbers, but mobile devices always have the lowest-energy chips with the lowest nanometer processes. For each individual contributor, it will barely be noticeable. A few hours per night using a couple of watts, maximum.

As for us, we could admin a million nodes with two racks of servers.

Topic: Next generation 14nm mining grid - page 2. (Read 7651 times)