Member Info for Phimx

Foggy, after lots of talk of making his own ASIC, eventually discovered talk is cheap and ASICs expensive. Why it took him 2 years to uncover that fact is just another QBT mystery. What is baffling is why other avenues have not been explored. I assume he’s using something like a Xilinx 7 series FPGA, after all Xilinx are the world’s biggest player. He Indicates the FPGA is very efficient and the Oracle would take up a small amount of real estate on a chip. Why has he not explored the likes of Multi Wafer Projects MWP to verify the Oracle in ASIC form.

The semiconductor world has always been very fast changing and today is no exception. Google Euro Practise IC Service for example, this gives easy access to down to 12nm CMOS processing. The Xilinx 7 series is I believe 28 nm, the Versal is fast, I think 5nm, but costs thousands for a single chip. The TMSC 16 nm Process could be used at very reasonable cost of the order of a few tens of thousands. This would produce the speed needed and verify the Oracle’s logic without breaking the bank.

In the bigger picture the big miners may reject ‘game changing’ technology which upsets the applecart. Perhaps Bitcoin may change the rules. Fast changing technology has a habit of fooling the poor investor.

Have they actually mined a bit coin ?

Highly doubtful, so how do they make a comparison between 2 identical ASICs with one being fed inputs from the Oracle ?

FG waffles on about statistics and increased probability. If he's testing in a pool part he may never get a winning input to hash.

When we see 2 identical ASIC setups with identical inputs but one set of inputs being fed from the Oracle and then a statistical difference favouring the Oracle then we can be confident. That could take millenia to test. Brew has raised this issue but the only response is insults.

Lesh11:

The art is in the story and the wording.

Discussions for example, a nice word but was does it mean to you and what does it mean to someone else.

What facilities does QBT have? What mining equipment do they have ? We know the have no staff apart from directors. Who maintains their infrastructure ?

The details are vague as is the testing as are the results. Why ? Don't say proprietary drivel, it won't wash and isn't necessary.

Jonny2000

Check out slander v libel. Specifics - specifics lad

Jonny2000

Is that chip designers or chip foundries. Specifics specifics Jonny. Discussions are always good to string the story out, especially when details are in short supply.

Surely:

CGPT: No, don't be stupid ... Foggy

Foggy's business acumen is as good as my own !

Jonny2000:

The only people buying are the little men, suckered in by the hype you and your kind spout day in day out. Go for it son, sell everything you have if you truly believe. So so many times we have seen these AIM companies fail to deliver.

Im siding with Brew, I think it's just another non commercial project destined for failure after sucking millions from naive investors.

Time will tell !

Baserite:

I guess you just read Naik's thesis if you want to know how it works !

Many of you confuse ASIC designers with Semiconductor Foundries.we can all design chips, it's not too difficult but growing silicon and diffusing the design is very expensive as Foggy discovered ... eventually.

Sub 7nm verg very expensive

KoolKat:

If everything is fantastic why isn't he forging ahead with QBT's own ASIC, after all it was part of the story not so long ago. What's a couple of million to give the company the World's fastest hashing/mining system ?

Who needs licenses ?

Garwood:

"So your knowledge of IP application is right up there. I will just wait and see what the IPO has to say on that, not a negative poster."

My knowledge is zero but I know a man that does know

Frank Tietze is Professor of Innovation Engineering at the University of Cambridge. Research at his Innovation and IP Management (IIPM) laboratory focuses on the role of Intellectual Property (IP) in collaborative innovation processes and systems for emerging and sustainable technologies

Fonnzigg:

" Yup drown them out, desperate stuff and quite frankly embarrassing"

SHOW ME THE PATENT !

Garwood:

"“is pleased to confirm the filing of a new patent application covering Method C’s disruptive AI Oracle (“AI Oracle”): “IMPLEMENTATION OF BINARY DEC”

So it’s true the company have applied then."

it may well be true but the link posted earlier is NOT a new patent describing the Oracle. Show me the Oracle patent because that the bit which does the magic ... supposedly

Johnny2000:

Naik's thesis was published in 2013 before I think QBT existed so there must be serious concern that the work became public and invalidates any patent.

I think the modification to the original patent is a fudge to buy more time for this eternal project I doubt it will be accepted. You must have a lot of money balanced on a knife edge here

KoolKat:

Gripped I am, it's the sheep that need to look hard at this "patent"

There's going to be some money wasted on this project

" Imagine that your patented invention becomes commercially valuable, say because it gets sold to a large company or becomes the core of a successful start-up. ( QBT ?) At some point a competitor might very well have an interest to challenge it. Such party can then use public disclosures that were made before the patent application date and argue that ‘prior art’ existed wherefore the patent should not have been granted in the first place. Remember, today the internet does not forget!"

Attributed to:

Frank Tietze is Professor of Innovation Engineering at the University of Cambridge. Research at his Innovation and IP Management (IIPM) laboratory focuses on the role of Intellectual Property (IP) in collaborative innovation processes and systems for emerging and sustainable technologies

I'm wondering when Naik's work became public ? Would that not invalidate a patent.?

So the Naik's patent has been updated. But surely what was needed was a patent for the Oracle itself.

Naik's thesis was about Optimising the SHA algorithm which resides in the ASIC. The Oracle resides in the FPGA supposedly

THEY ARE SEPERATE PROCESSES

Please explain Foggy

Brewhaha:

Why did the QBT RNS announcement of July 2023 lag so far behind the filing of Naik's original patent ?

The Oracle has nothing to do with Naik's original work which was Optimising the Bitcoin SHA algorithm. Will be interesting to see the name on the new patent, my money is on Foggy's