Member Info for Phimx

Mickydj: You post

" Every opportunity, every thread, you pivot it back to the same negative angles — NEMS, SaaS, patents, ASIC — regardless of the original topic."

Show us the positivity!

It is now 3 months since Gardin said they were waiting for hardware from the NDA company's

It is now 4 months since Gardin said this about Method C software

" A collaboration is currently under way with a US-based ASIC manufacturer to test this new approach on their commercial miners"

What exactly is a 'collaboration'

What exactly is meant by 'under way' ?

Has testing actually started?

How long will testing take?

Have miners been delivered for software installation ?

Why is there a total lack of sensible information regarding anything QBT?

Did Garden attend Nashville NEMS ? A fantastic opportunity to showcase his energy saving Methods ?????

Mickydj: You post

" Is this a focused technical critique? Or a rolling series of pressure points?"

" no accusation"

" just structure"

What on earth is this drivel

Let's have something tangible, like evidence Gardin actually went to NEMS !

Mickdj: You post

" Step 1 – Introduce technical doubt"

Unfortunately Micky the reason for that technical doubt is founded in well established prior-art principles, going back years. Your attempt to suggest otherwise is not going to change the reality and decision of the European Patent Office.

Gardin where is the photo evidence of you at NEMS ??????

Usersteve:

What is interesting is, consider a new Block header has been assembled ready for hashing, the hashing process is mainly the 64 rounds. Each seperate hash is just a NONCE increment, all 4 Billion of them. So Naik is just speeding up the hash process. But let's assume that once the hashing is underway and only the rounds are taking place, a change from 64 to 60 rounds is about a 6.25 % improvement. Somewhere in all this a 7% improvement was claimed by Naik, assuming a slight overhead for the initial and end processing would make it about right.

But that little shortcut will be in use by everyone now

Mickydj: You post

" “Patent unlikely to be granted.”

Please explain, considering the obvious prior art, how the patent will be granted.

The maxim publish or patent applies I think

Usersteve:

Those quotes tell me he has saved gates, time, energy and wafer space but not whether the hash is a winner or not. Obviously I'll have to read it again when I have time.

Usersteve: You posted

" so at the 60 step he could tell whether you will generate a winning hash or not. So we took him on board and said Raul you have the freedom to do whatever you want to improve and to see whether your work ... if you can improve it ... 𝐎𝐮𝐫 𝐅𝐏𝐆𝐀 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐀𝐒𝐈𝐂 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐬𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐨𝐨𝐥 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐝𝐨 𝐢𝐭 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲. 𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐲𝐰𝐚𝐲, 𝐰𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐟𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐰𝐨 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 and they are ready if we want to design a chip"

I have doubts about what Gardin stated here!

Naik's work was about optimising SHA256, I read through it at least a year ago. I don't remember him being able to cut short the hashing at the 60th round and being able to determine that a particular has would not make the grade or not. Think about that ! For every hash Gaddin is suggesting Naik could know if was going to be successful or not, that implies 100% filtering of useless hashes.

My next point, the software used to create FPGAs/ASICs optimises/minimises logic gates. Not SHA256 !

Next, if the software did then everyone using it probably has the same results. So Naik's work and the patent was known to everyone in the hashing world.

Allforprofit:

Your point has been covered previously. At the end of Naik's thesis he wrote

"It is believed that the suggested optimisations will bring about radical throughput improvements in Bitcoin mining devices. They will also allow Bitcoin miners to make a lot ofsavings in their electricity bills. It was decided to make all this information public with thevision of the betterment of the Bitcoin community and it is hoped that these findings will bea stepping stone to faster and more efficient Bitcoin mining.

“Vires in Numeris” "

Clearly Naik intended for others to use his work. I would have thought Naik would have pointed this out to Gardin during his consultancy, irrespective did Gaddin himself not read it. Failing that, the patent agent must have raised this as a stumbling block but Gardin pressed ahead regardless.

Allforprofit:

The first patent based upon Naiks thesis has been dis used here in the past. According to Gardin this patent is undergoing the normal to-and-fro between QBT and the patent office. But, a major obstacle is the patent is based upon prior art. Essentially public information cannot be patented after publication. Naik's work was published way before the patent applications.e. 2013. That patent is highly unlikely to be granted, anything of worth in Naik's thesis would have been incorporated into ASICs years ago.

Oldsharedog: You post

" P.s. try looking back at the 26th Feb"

And from that you conclude I was made no attempt to contact them ?

Oldsharedog: You post

"at least I’m 2 hrs ahead here, both in time and sharpness it seems :)"

Wrong on both counts

Oldsharedog: You post

"You previously said you hadn’t tried because you wouldn’t get an answer !!"

When was that ? In my life I have said many things previously.

Mickydj: You post

" Request clarification formally"

I received no reply !

Oldsharedog: You post

" Phimx - thank you so much for assuming both my motives and intentions.

"You are wrong on both assumptions, so do me a favour and FO !!"

So, you aren't here for a spike you are a long term holder ..... 𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻 !!

and no need for the gutter language.

Mickydj: You post

"He refuses to seek it himself."

But I am asking Gardin ! He reads what's posted here!

Oldsharedog: You post

" Now move on "

NO.

You've invested here a second time hoping for a spike, haven't you ?

You aren't interested if Gardin went or not. You don't want your spike put in jeopardy, how cheap and mundane!

Oldsharedog: You post

" Phimx - I'm still awaiting an answer from last week - whether you emailed / phoned for any photos you were chasing so enthusiastically - I take it you didn't, but just want to continue your pointless pursuit of something NO ONE is interested about"

Why on earth should I contact QBT, if you aren't interested in what your money is going into, you either have too much or not as clever as you'd like to think you are.

If Gardin didn't go it gives a whole new twist to this story, doesn't it.

Mickdj: You post

"

No Opinion

"I am not the one treating absence of supporting evidence as evidence of absence."

And neither am I just yet!

Here in the real world, where real people have spent real money, I expect Gardin to produce real evidence of what he says.

I suspect many people are suspicious, including yourself Micky!

Mickydj: You posted

"Not having a photo doesn’t prove Daddy didn’t go on holiday."

𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮 𝗽𝗵𝗼𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝗻𝘁

Mickydj: You post

" No photo = suspicious.

That is an assumption, not evidence"

Of course it is Micky, who is claiming it is evidence.

You keep waffling on about evidence, framing, narratives and transparency etc.

Who cares ? This isn't the Old Bailey. I want verification that Gardin went to NEMS is too much to ask. If he doesn't provide it then on the balance of probability he never went. This whole story pivots on him telling the truth, not on you or I beating our gums.

If you are a genuine investor surely you want to know the truth of your investment ? I'd be demanding proof he was there and if he won't provide it, I'd have my money out like a shot.