No worries bro. We're all learning.
Yes, thank you for the discussion; I can see that you've got a great deal of knowledge about the field and it does increase my confidence in this project that you have high hopes for it.
Whilst I appreciate the compliment,
please do not base any investment decision on my cautious optimism.
I studied engineering design, I'm doing a lot of reading up on the subject of ASIC design, I have the time available right now (not sure if that's a blessing or a curse as it's not paying my bills), I find it very interesting. Undertaking my own research and educating myself is a means to limit my own risk if I can. I may even wish to pursue some work within the field. It's certainly an exciting time for that industry to be tied to pioneering cryptocurrencies. In addition, I live in Europe.
In my mind KNC have done little to doubt them and are making positive progress. I just want to know more about when they expect us to fund in relation to a realistic delivery time and associated payment methods buyer protection. I want the confidence of a secure investment.
Also I came across a mention in a question and answer in this thread from another potential mining equipment manufacturer, and would love to hear KNC's reasoning on the matter. They apparently, like Bitsyncom/Avalon have connections via university and work and are currently based in China. No proof they are genuine, it's an old account, that's just become active with this new thread stating their intentions and gave an opinion in their answer to the question below;
Also, companies like KnCMiner claim 28nm ASIC. I recall another person (i cannot recall the name) mentioning they were in the works for creating 28nm asics, but would only sell to companies (like a real semiconductor company usually does..)
Also, Bitfury is 28nm i think?
Seems like this is a frequent question. I d like to explain it minutely
1. In the present case (hundreds T size) , 28nm is totally unrealistic, it sounds like: pay millions more to save one dollar for electricity charges. With a rough calculation, 28nm would probably get a real advantage after hash rate achieve 50k+T
2. The thought that 28nm&45nm is "better" than 130nm is purely amateur, which nm number to choose depends on many factors, also,good optimizations in both FPGA and ASIC increase the function of chips so much, which means that, even for 130nm/110nm, there are still several aspects exist to improve.
3. I have no idea about what is the real plan of bitfuty/KNC. I am not saying that theirs are fake, but I see no reason to develop 28nm at the moment,which is, extreme expensive/sounds pretty cool/highest risk and lowest return.Original thread;
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=213172.40
