The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Deserves it own thread. Hat Tip to Brew.
"So with a pool you get rewarded with a proportion on the BTC mined by the pool, typically based on your hash rate contribution."
It might be interesting to know what the breakdown is but I think you might get extra for solving the block.
However... Again I go back to my supposition that QBT have been forced to mine in a pool because they have had to use a customised version of CGminer, because it is too hard for the QBT gurus to work out, that the author has tied to that pool in order to support their development costs. Is anyone going to be interested in using it on release when they find out it has been poisoned by a company that is not Community Centric?
I am going to take a guess and suggest that, if they had any sense, QBT would have first approached the originators of CGminer and offered them options, QBT does not pay hard cash, and, having got /dev/nulled, worked their way down the list until they found a mug who would tell them the time of day according to a stopped clock and later on QBT will suffer a rug pull.
The RNS/PRN was not...
"QBT, the leading originator of doing clever stuff much faster on The Block, are pleased to announce a partnership with Jeff Garzik the originator of CPUMiner"
What is it with QBT having access to multiple highly qualified experts in the tech but none of them wanting to announce their association with the company?
Waking up one morning and realising you're in a dead end job with a dead end company working for options you will never convert and just to top it off your contribution to society feeds the fantasies of a bunch of rabid crypto zoomers. Perhaps the monastery wasn't such a bad idea after all.
We shall now be testing our Drag Racer with various levels of meth as determined by our three separate expert groups in search of peak performance. Apparently there is also something called Nitro and we will be filing a patent on that as soon as we have reverse engineered our drag car. We are now in advanced negotiations with the top ten drag car operators in order to source a drag car and will be performing testing of our flange bracket as soon as we have completed design of the spanners required to fit it. Please be patient as we work out how to reverse engineer Whitworth.
I should mention that I am in advanced discussions with one of the originators of CGminer. Who is presently in ignore mode.
As a result I *expect* that the project will be resurrected and reestablish itself as a major force within the Open Source Community and they will be generating revenue as QBT goes into administration.
OOP DYOR GLA E&OE
"Source, trust me Bro."
No offence I originally did but now I sort of don't.
Source:
https://github.com/skot/BM1397/blob/master/registers.md#bm1397-registers-map
Explanation. Each chip includes a,
https://github.com/skot/BM1397/blob/master/registers.md#chip-nonce-offset
https://github.com/skot/BM1397/blob/master/registers.md#hash-counting-number
https://github.com/skot/BM1397/blob/master/registers.md#ticket-mask
Therefore, at least at this level it is apparent that you can set a nonce offset or count starting point. I'm not sure about the counting number but the ticket mask is likely to be the number of leading zeroes required to satisfy the block and win the coins.
Given each chip on a hashboard is independently addressable and that is done by the firmware and the firmware is connected to the pool (or farm controller for that matter) I will state that it is possible, and you would be stupid not to do it, to at least assign starting points to every ASIC available from your resources to maximise your search range and avoid overlap. If you were to do this then such start points would only need updating when you add more resource.
That is the simple case.
However if we are to understand the meaning of QBT's PR then Method B supposedly guesses the most probable search ranges and as such they would have to adjust those starting points across the available resource. That becomes harder to do. However it is likely that they were forced to adopt an SaaS model, a central controller, to dole out those start points. In effect the SaaS solution is just another excuse for delays to excuse a poorly thought through methodology.
I'll go further, This talk of CGminer being hard coz it has 50,000 lines is, to me, also an excuse for delays or not knowing what they are doing. They should have immediately hacked the interface to the hash boards. It might be a 40 pin header and gives you direct control of the registers in the ASICs via their address lines and in particular the nonce-offset register. Then you program the internal controller to waggle the pins the way that you want to.
Instant Manufacturer Bypass.
Blaming CGminer for being bloated is also just being ignorant for purpose. CGminer covers a range of mining options. CPU, GPU and ASIC along with a number of Crypto Currencies that you can mine. It tries to be a Swiss Army Knife. Sure rig manufacturers might use it as a starting point but they will just compile the bits they need and, if necessary, hack them for communications. Stop moaning about 50K lines and RTFM.
Better still just bin it and hack the board communications interface. It's not Rocket Science.
Https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/images/QBT_-_RD_Update_March_24-_final.pdf
"The key issues have been addressed and the Company is performing intensive live mining tests 24/7 using ASIC-based Bitcoin mining devices connected to two large mining pools."
Last one. The intrinsic Hidden Lie.
"The Company is performing intensive live mining."
This is not Live. Live does not involve the use of a Mining Pool as a Proxy. Especially when your actions are likely to break that proxy.
Https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/images/QBT_-_RD_Update_March_24-_final.pdf
"The key issues have been addressed and the Company is performing intensive live mining tests 24/7 using ASIC-based Bitcoin mining devices connected to two large mining pools."
What reasonable concerns might arise from the use of Mining Pools including Two of them?
Part 3)
And Mining Pools in general.
Let's say you have a Large Mining Pool or even a small one.
The next block comes in and you have to find the nonce that gives the right answer. The first thing you do not do is tell all of your rigs and all of the ASICS to search in the range 0-100. You dole out non-overlapping nonce ranges for your rigs to search in.
Before taking a deeper dive let's all remember the video where the poorly drawn plan was converted to words and one of the target customers were Mining Pools.
Now QBT rocks up to your Pool for some testing that, in part, involves Method B which, if you can decipher the description, uses AI to predict more probable Search Ranges for nonces. By definition Method B has to ignore what the Pool tells it to look for and do its own thing.
What if Method B is wrong but the Pool told it to look in the right place? No other rig would have looked there. That's the way it works to avoid wasted duplication. The Pool has lost a block and not won the coins to share with others.
That's a 6.25 x $68K or $425,000 loss to the Pool because someone was doing an experiment.
Who is liable for that loss and do the people who provided the firmware or the pool it is linked to know about the possibility? Do the other members of the pool care about being part of an experiment with the opportunity to lose and if they do what happens to the reputation of the pool?
Perhaps I should ask some of them.
Https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/images/QBT_-_RD_Update_March_24-_final.pdf
"The key issues have been addressed and the Company is performing intensive live mining tests 24/7 using ASIC-based Bitcoin mining devices connected to two large mining pools."
What reasonable concerns might arise from the use of Mining Pools including Two of them?
Part 2)
So what about Two Mining Pools?
What are they testing now? Two sets of Firmware or Two Sets of Method B vs Brute force with Four rigs. Or one Method B rig on one pool with one set of Firmware and One Brute Force rig on another pool with a different set of Firmware. Again they give no numbers or description of the methodology.
You do not set up a Scientific experiment in order to measure a difference unless you use the same environment. The results will be worthless.
Https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/images/QBT_-_RD_Update_March_24-_final.pdf
"The key issues have been addressed and the Company is performing intensive live mining tests 24/7 using ASIC-based Bitcoin mining devices connected to two large mining pools."
What reasonable concerns might arise from the use of Mining Pools including Two of them?
I may need many posts in this thread to cover those.
As we know the Company has previously expressed problems with the implementation of firmware suggesting it would take at least Six Months to develop. Later they advised that were cooperating with a third party to provide this for them. Now they are having problems reading 50,000 lines of open source code and they are connecting to Mining Pools.
The implication here is that they are indeed using a third party source for their firmware but the concern would be that people who provide such software get payment because they tie you into a specific Mining Pool and take a cut of your or the pools winnings in order to support their development. If it exists can they break away from that contractual obligation?
If they had solved this firmware problem and now owned their own they should be properly on the network. No Ifs or Buts.
Https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/images/QBT_-_RD_Update_March_24-_final.pdf
"The key issues have been addressed and the Company is performing intensive live mining tests 24/7 using ASIC-based Bitcoin mining devices connected to two large mining pools."
What information is reasonably deducible?
Whilst I have already discounted 'mining pools' as being an indication of the scale of the operation, they only need two for the statement to be true, why mining pools?
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/connecting-mining-pools-step-by-step-guide-leo-lu
Mining Pools are not Miners, Riot ETC. They are pools that anyone can join. QBT are testing with Mining pools that anyone can join without any discussions, advanced or otherwise. It is reasonable to assume that Miners are not as yet involved.
Https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/images/QBT_-_RD_Update_March_24-_final.pdf
"The key issues have been addressed and the Company is performing intensive live mining tests 24/7 using ASIC-based Bitcoin mining devices connected to two large mining pools."
Let's try to read an RNS/PRN properly.
What information is available from that statement?
What information is missing?
You can join a mining pool with one rig. In order to fulfill the above statement QBT need a minimum of two mining rigs, plural. One running Method B and one Brute Force and will have to run them 24/7. They could still be running two rigs in the Lab and intensive means nothing. There is no mention of numbers or location.
Then
What information is reasonably deducible?
Excuse me whilst I post this and pause for thought.
"Yes and Bob RTO - its a quicker vehicle to market using a Shell such as ICON, than going IPO route."
I know not a lot but describing ICON as the shell clarifies things for me. The online clothes shop wants a Market Listing to raise funds. Its, presumably, passionate creator has had enough and now a bunch of suits with a badly drawn website are taking over the lingerie department because this is going to work?
https://www.iconiclabs.co.uk/
Our Team.
"Must do better."
Sorry about that. NoBox(3) did suggest something on the creative side but it was a bit trying to get into my pants.
Otherwise I can assure you that all of the entertainment I am providing is for free.
Thank you for your interest and your review. I am sure it was important to you.
"Trying to put a real value to the business we are RTO with revenues of 44 millions We will see what the deal is if it goes through soon enough."
Does that even make sense? A company supposedly with revenues of Lot of Millions is going to do some sort of RTO thing with a distressed company worth about £500K and everyone gets free money?
As per Gordon...
https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/blog/2023/12/in-the-style-founder-exits/
The company founder wants an out and we have to believe that ICON is the only solution. Do any of the mumblement involved with ICON including members of the dingleberry club holding floating charges over the company have a clue about retail clothing or do they just have LinkedIn CV's
"As confirmed by IR they are still in the lab testing, which means most likely they have hit issues. Probably latency/load issues on the SaaS I would imagine."
Nah. More like the compute engine has decoded a portal into the Pasta version of a previously hidden Cthulhu parallel dimension and they have had to employ at least 30 Jehovah's Witness Experts to plug the hole with pamphlets. Perhaps it is time to dial the Bear and invite the Pope back.
"We are delighted to have entered into a heads of terms to acquire ITS Holdings 2023 Ltd. This transaction has been *one of multiple opportunities carefully considered* by the Board of Iconic and we believe this proposed acquisition meets our objectives and wider strategy of fostering long-term growth and value for our shareholders."
One of multiple and they picked it so you would have to guess it is the best.Presumably non of the others were Unicorn AI, BlockChain, Web3.0 BuzzWord plays.
Have these people checked out the charges over the company?
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/10197256/charges
Like I know nothing but as I read it someone else owns the past and future everything. If I owned a company with any prospects and was looking for investment I don't think I would go anywhere near this lot without getting rid of those anchors.
Https://www.iconiclabs.co.uk/
"Iconic is a media and technology business focused on the identification, acquisition and growth of technology driven companies in the online media, artificial intelligence, and big data gathering, processing and analysis sectors.
We work with lean online companies that can scale rapidly, operate internationally with an inexpensive footprint, and provide a broad array of services across various sectors through the effective use of information and video gathering, data mining, just in time processing, and online collaboration technology."
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/ICON/heads-of-terms-signed/16371420
"We want to become part of the rag trade."