Member Info for BobsSocks

Before diving in I will mention that others have asked about how testing of Method A and Method B is progressing. Take that into consideration as you read the following.

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/QBT/porting-of-methods-a-b/16131491

Released 07:00:00 20 September 2023

HIGHLIGHTS

Engaging with North American cryptocurrency miners

Redesign of Method B for Chinese manufactured mining machines, which opens up a further 75% of total bitcoin mining market for QBT

Method A increases mining performance by nearly 10%

Method B increases mining probability by 2.6 times

Let's ignore the first two. Those are addressable market things that get rejected on Dragons Den. This market is worth $Trillions therefore my company is. If someone paid me £1 million I'd have £1 million.

OK. First off Percentages,

Method A increases mining performance by nearly 10%.

I'll assume that is a measure of Compute Performance. You can attribute it to either Speed or Power. Pick Power. If your CPU/GPU/ASIC/FPGA has a TDP, Thermal Design Power of 100 Watts you can save 10 Watts. That's what they are claiming and That's your lot.

Unfortunately the bit they are making the claim for has to be supported by other bits in the box so in overall terms your 10% processor saving really does not make much of a dent in your compute power budget. Maybe 2% if you are lucky. By the time you have taken in your other operating costs and overheads you might do better if you invested in a roll of draft excluder.

Now Statistics,

Method B increases mining probability by 2.6 times.

There is a lot that can be done with Statistics to obfuscate their meaning so I am going to give a simple example here which I believe illustrates the point.

Start from the premise that there are 100 equally matched Mining Rigs mining all the (remaining) BitCoin.

They are in competition and have an equal probability of success.

100% of all the BitCoin is 1% per Rig.

You are clever and buy into QBT and, if you believe them, your rig increases its probability of getting the answer first by a factor of 2.6 so you get 2.6% of all the BitCoin and the others now get 97.4% of the pie.

You think to yourself that whereas you had 1% you now have 2.6% so that is a gain of 1.6% or 160% better.

Unfortunately It's a bit more subtle than that because the result is time constrained and you are One Rig in the Race against Ninety-Nine others.

Your 2.6 multiplier in probability as 2.6% of the pool is divided by 99 and becomes 0.0263% on top of your original 1%.

Please read that one again and weep. A 2.6 probability multiplier is a 2.63% gain as opposed to the 160% you thought you were going to get.

"Clarification needed ASAP imo."

QBT can either put up or remain very quiet about it for the next 13 months. I very much doubt they will be falling over themselves to disclose any further information even when it is provided to them. They are not required to publish and will not do so.

If they have not requested fast tracking then they can expect the results of the preliminary examination and report within Six months of the filing date, January 2024. Ideally they would use this to decide whether they should proceed. Like as not they will ignore it and carry on trying to argue the case. You can see how they have done this with the previous stalled application...

https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-ipsum/Case/PublicationNumber/GB2611321/Documents

It's only going to cost them about £5K to keep the illusion hidden but alive.

"No..... Why would I?"

Didn't expect you to. Never mind, for others who may be interested I assume this is the RNS...

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/QBT/patent-application/16052227

Released 07:00:00 24 July 2023

Naturally given the nature of an application you can guess that the company, hopefully this time around, managed to file before they revealed any prior art in the same way that they did destroying the validity of their previous efforts. Also it will not be made publicly available for 18 months from the above date.

Therefore you are left guessing, unless the company wishes to disclose further details, as to the prospects of this most recent application. Don't forget. Computer Programs and Business Methods are specifically excluded.

Despite your attempts to discount the importance of this application the company felt it was important enough to make the announcement and, as you say, the SP rose as a result.

Otherwise, if the company chose to do so, they could request fast tracking and possibly obtain a Granted Patent within 6 months of the filing date, January 2024. Given the power hungry nature of BitCoin mining they would be able to make such a request...

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/patents-fast-grant/patents-fast-grant-guidance

However I very much doubt that they will do so. It would probably kill the Golden Goose so it is much better for them if they milk the possibility until January 2025 when the application is made subject to public disclosure and you will see the prospective results or failure.

Standard Practice.

"Old news bobsock."

Thanks. I don't suppose you would like to save me a bit of legwork and give a link to that statement by the company.

"Not frothing...just that patents are not the be all and end all........at all"

Not according to the company...

https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/patents-ip

"QBT’s R&D Intellectual Property (IP) results are protected by filed patents, which will represent a continuously growing asset for the Company."

I would be inclined to suggest that they rely on the average punter not having the skills or knowledge to dig deeper and discover that, at least, their visible patent application is a major fail.

Applications...

https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/patents-ip

https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-ipsum/Case/PublicationNumber/GB2611321

https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-ipsum/Case/PublicationNumber/GB2611321/Documents

This is the report done by the UK Patent Office under the vestiges of the European Patent Office, EPO.

https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-ipsum/Document/ApplicationNumber/GB2113962.1/a198c8a4-dcad-45c9-beb3-f8297e143405/GB2611321-20220622-Examination%20Opinion%20EPO%20contract%20work.pdf

Page 1) Re Item V. Reference is made to documents D1-D3 as examples of prior art.

D1 is the Thesis written by Rahul P. Naik in support of their MSc Degree. Rahul P. Naik is the named inventor for QBT's application. You can find a copy here,

http://nicolascourtois.com/bitcoin/Optimising%20the%20SHA256%20Hashing%20Algorithm%20for%20Faster%20and%20More%20Efficient%20Bitcoin%20Mining_Rahul_Naik.pdf

The application has two independent claims. Claim 1) and Claim 7). By and large Patents live and die on their independent claims. The above prior art publication by the applicant themselves is used to deny both of these claims. The remaining dependent claims add no new inventive or novel material and are therefore similarly denied.

One might only imagine that Patent Law was not covered by the MSc taken by Mr Naik .

Nice try but no banana. Cue the frothing.

For completeness...

https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/patents-ip

The company only gives a link to their,

ASIC UltraBoost

https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-pj/p-pj-ukappfiled.htm?startYear=2021&startMonth=November&startDay=10th+-+6912&endYear=2021&endMonth=November&endDay=10th+-+6912&filter=GB2113962.1&perPage=10&sort=Applicant

There is no link given for,

Asic EnhancedBoost

Patents are subject to publication 18 months after the first filing date unless early publication is requested.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230406011658/https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/patents-ip

published April 6th 2023 makes no mention of the second one so, if you want to live in hope, you might assume it was filed after that date and unless QBT wishes to make the information, and procedural documents, publicly available you will be left guessing until some time in 2024.

My wet thumb thinks you will be similarly disappointed.

I should also add...

06.04.2023 Written Opinion of the International Search Authority

https://register.epo.org/ipApplication?documentId=id00000072090126&number=GB.2022052458.W

Box No. 5 on page two.

No Novelty Claims 1-20

No Inventive Step Claims 1-20

The other pages go into some detail as to the objections to the application.

This is a Dead Patent Application.

QBT mentioned:

https://www.sai.tech/blog/qbt-study-boost-bitcoin-mining-speed-by-260/

Some background for those of you being merrily sucked in by BlockChain fever...

https://quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk/patents-ip

Leads eventually to,

https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-ipsum/Case/PublicationNumber/GB2611321

This is their Method B

Not that this is a Patent *Application* and not a *Granted* Patent. As such they presently have no protection for their technology.

Documents here,

https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-ipsum/Case/PublicationNumber/GB2611321/Documents

Most recent is a report from the examiner in response to arguments made by the applicant on 23rd September 2023. Hopefully this link will work but sometimes these are session generated so you will have to go to the page and click...

https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-ipsum/Document/ApplicationNumber/GB2113962.1/16b26341-fe3a-444f-9221-3f1901aa4961/GB2611321-20230921-Exam%20report%20%20Standard.pdf

There are many words involved but what you need to focus on are the mentions of "computer program" and "business method".

These are specifically excluded from protection via grant of a patent within the UK. They are also specifically excluded within the EU, under EPO, and are likely specifically excluded under WIPO.

The other documents may be of interest but this, for the purposes of those Jurisdictions, is a Dead Patent Application.

The admission under WIPO can be accessed via,

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=WO&NR=2023052762A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20230406&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP#

Global Dossier here,

https://register.epo.org/ipfwretrieve?apn=GB.2022052458.W&lng=en

The document of relevence is 06.04.2023 International Search Report.

https://register.epo.org/ipApplication?documentId=id00000072090125&number=GB.2022052458.W

Section C: Documents Considered to be Relevent...

X: Means your Patent Fails due to someone else's Prior Art

In this case the prior art was by the applicant themselves. Rahul P. Naik et AL.

Trying to file a patent on something you have already published information about is a common mistake made by idiots. It does not help if you made that publication in concert with other parties.

In summary QBT do not have a Granted Patent and therefore have no protection on or exclusive claim to their technology. Furthermore given the objections made to date by the UK Patent Office and WIPO they are unlikely to move towards grant. They are even less likely to do so because they blabbed about it before filing.

Be advised that, despite your expected frothing about me being short and similar insults, this company is a nothing.

Https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/ICON/change-of-auditor/16180436

"Nordens Audit Limited (Nordens) has ceased to be the Company's Auditor as it has not yet been able to obtain its registration as an auditor eligible to undertake Public Interest Entity audits."

Well at least Rudy Baylor passed The Bar prior to appearing in court for Dot.

Well. I guess I can save myself a bit of cash by suggesting you invest in some comprehension lessons.

I am more a Chorlton and the Wheelies sort of person.

In case you missed it the study referred to people who had the opportunity to switch from tobacco based nicotine products to non-tobacco based nicotine products. I.E Not Chill.

Sorry if that does not fit in with your investment in a vapour-ware company, Chortle, but that is what the research as quoted says on the packet.

Hmmm... You know. Those people addicted to nicotine via tobacco who want to stop using tobacco and are therefore using a tobacco substitute that contains nicotine. Like what it says in the real evidence provided. Unless you can understand that you really should not be investing in a lifestyle choice company who are offering dayglo lycra suits for ex peleton riders.

Does look a bit glum down here.

Likely to remain glum until the company gives folks some idea about what they are going to do with themselves other than being the next AI BlockChain Social In Content AD company using all their accumulated experience to hire someone else to do the job for them.

Failing that I would suggest that they change their name. Always good for a giggle and a few fees.

Perhaps TransIconic. Beyond the past.

Any other suggestions?

Yes. But doesn't that just indicate that when given an alternative source of nicotine people will migrate to it in preference to tobacco? You can fill out the rest for yourself.

"No, you should never use language models for health advice."

https://mastodon.social/@axbom@axbom.me/111277686840622033

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-023-00939-z

Https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/PIRI/new-investment-by-svv-uk-software-technology-fund/16172673

It is possible to imagine an AI model being trained on a local area and used locally to ensure correct delivery. Your big problem would be generating the training dataset, unless you dipped into Google Maps or a similar resource. Otherwise you are left with.... Oh, hang on. All your delivery personnel snapping pictures of stuff on people's doorsteps to build up the training set for you.

That could/should become a privacy nightmare. I may have to have some words with my Clan of Privacy Pirates.

Otherwise... Yes it makes sense.

Turn up at 23a Goatse Gardens with another dildo delivery. Snap a picture of four foot box next to the door. Send the picture back to local base. Picture matches previous dildo deliveries. Scan local Wi-Fi for IP addresses. Add Dildos to online advertising preferences. Add Dildos to Pizza Mailshots. Job Done.

What's not to like?

This!!!!!

"I did buy in when companies house showed the CVA listing which was a day before I think the RNS came out to confirm it."

Nice one and well done for the spot and having the cajones for taking the punt.

Much better than ladling treacle on things after the event.

Https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/16/health/paxlovid-price-expected-to-rise/index.html

"Price of lifesaving Covid-19 antiviral Paxlovid expected to rise next year, raising concerns about access."

Elsewhere, whilst Big Pharma is raising its prices...

https://twitter.com/TMedicines/status/1713998988158874072

"Talking Medicines

@TMedicines

US market access undergoes a seismic shift. Bob Brower & Louisa Holland from @VMLYR Health discuss Blue Shield of California's move, igniting optimism, reshaping patient access and pharma success, while bridging the healthcare-patient-pharma gap."

Talking Medicines wants to curate, profit from, your health data assuming you are still alive.

Ooops. My bad. Sorry. Tern got infected with Sharebel a while back.