Member Info for Phimx

Mickydj:

Unfortunately everything you use to ridicule my posts has but one tenuous and very unreliable source ... Gardin. The man whose words have failed to deliver the goods time and time again.

As you are a big supporter of Gardin why not provide your interpretation of how Gardin deduces a 10% efficiency gain as described here.

𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗵, 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝘀𝗼𝗳𝘁𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲-𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘆'𝘀 𝗠𝗶𝗹𝗮𝗻 𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗲𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝟭𝟬% - 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴, 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗵𝗮𝘀𝗵 𝗮𝘁 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝟭𝟬% 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗺𝗮𝗹 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱 𝗮𝘀 𝘀𝗲𝘁 𝗯𝘆 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗼𝗼𝗹𝘀.

Because my interpretation is it means nothing !!

Inforapennyortwo: You post

" Why has a large ASIC manufacturer (large as it takes around $200m from start to finish), given away their ...."

Have they ? Says who ?

Oh yes Gardin says so !!! And we all know whatever Gardin says becomes reality !!!!

On another tack, what is an MDK ? It's a development kit, yes? Who for developers. What developers ? Anyone that buys the kit!

And that includes the ability to developers the software!

Are you seeing where this is going !!!!!

The logical conclusion is Gardin is not releasing sensible performance figures for the Oracle. Don't be sidetracked by words like hashing, ASICs and control boards, they have nothing whatsoever to do with the performance of the Oracle. Gardin himself stated the Oracle was independent of the ASICs. In theory you could take the Oracles ouput and feed them into a spreadsheet which would provide the SHA256 Hashing function. Feeding the raw inputs to another identically driven spreadsheet would then provide the advantage figure of the Oracle. Obviously using a spreadsheet to hash competitively is ridiculous.

Gardin has known for months but is keeping mum !

Nice to see this morning no large sells so far ! Hopefully this 𝘃𝗮𝗴𝘂𝗲𝗹𝘆 suggests most profit takers from lower levels are out.

Are there any other credible companies like this in AIM ?

Obelix:

Having a great day, never laughed so much!

Obelix:

3 trades this afternoon above £100. Terrifying manipulation ?

Obelix: You post

" What I have noticed between you and me is that the Bobcat gang waits until the afternoon before they start bashing to try and push their agenda."

7 trades this afternoon !!!!! Trying to manipulate the algorithm pure unadulterated fantasy!

An exa.ple of Gardin's word wizardry. From Gardin's bio on the Web site

" ... His academic papers include more than 50 individual and joint publications and three books on the subject of Artificial Intelligence as editor. "

The reader is led to believe Gardin has written 3 books on AI but that's not the case. He acted as editor of a collection of papers written by others.

He's a deceptive mumbler, he's been speaking English longer than me.

Usersteve:

Links don't work!

Not sure what you mean saying Gardin has 200 million. I assume you mean Gardin has warrants for 200 Million shares? Surely all previous warrants have now expired and the latest RNS states he has 100 Million ???

Usersteve: You post

" What is your best explanation as to why they didn't go the S9 route from the start?"

Because Gardin is using a Ttnag chart for his project scheduling. It has the advantage of eliminating time dependency errors by back projection. Because of the unique methodology huge cost savings can be achieved.

This was readily seen in the 5nm ASIC development, by booking production time with a major ASIC foundry and forward-back projecting, Gardin was able to cancel the ASIC eaxactly on time and without spending £200 million. The only disadvantage is the huge bonus that Infusion will charge QBT for Gardin's undoubted wizardry.

The algorithm used to prepare the chart is, apparently, to be subject to a patent application. The cost savings to Bitcoin miners are claimed to run into millions.

Mickydj:

You've been having private lessons from OSD while you've been away!

Asterix2025:

My post was tongue -in-cheek!

Asterix2025: You post

" And as for calling it “laughable” … that’s probably the weakest part of your argument. That is not analysis."

I think "laughable" was the conclusion of the analysis!

Why cant all you megabrains comment on this instead of just beating your gums ??

"Koolkat: You post

" Hexam, my points are balanced because they are anchored in evidence (are the news releases false?) no they're not"

Let's consider RNS 12 Nov 2025. It states.

𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗵, 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝘀𝗼𝗳𝘁𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲-𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘆'𝘀 𝗠𝗶𝗹𝗮𝗻 𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗲𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝟭𝟬% - 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴, 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗵𝗮𝘀𝗵 𝗮𝘁 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝟭𝟬% 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗺𝗮𝗹 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱 𝗮𝘀 𝘀𝗲𝘁 𝗯𝘆 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗼𝗼𝗹𝘀.

This 10% figure has been quoted many times as the improvement method C software adds to finding a winning hash. I think Gardin has also used it. But when I read this my interpretation is it is simply a statement that the exceeds the minimum hash rate required by the pool ! Very obviously the pool difficulty level measures a miners hash rate to calculate and apportion shares. But other rigs in the pool could hash at, say 15% over the minimum, without using method C.

It does not tell us how much the rig has improved by using Method C because we don't know what the rig's performance was before using the Method. It could have been 8% above minimum therefore Method C only provided a 2% improvement !!!

It's ambiguous and unscientific data like this which don't provide reliable evidence and you Koolkat rely upon this !!

I'll not even mention revenue data spewed out by Gardin !"

Koolkat: You post

" ...your mistake posting that good news will make the SP rocket was a prime example. It’s not debate.."

It's rather pathetic to have to read this misleading remark again. What I said is being construed wrongly and deliberately by a few people. It is so obvious that the share price would rise on good news but you all deliberately omit my IF word.

It is self evident that news has not arrived - have you noted the share price recently ?

IF Gardin has made a fantastic breakthrough in predicting SHA256 hashes then yes you will all become billionaires.

BUT

Me and all the cryptography experts throughout the world think NO. He is simply playing for time and there is no commercial product to be had.

Doyezee: You post

"Just for you Phimx!!!!"

Thank you. I don't read the times too few pictures!

Koolkat:

Third time lucky .... maybe!

Doyzee: You post

" Financial Times online IES Summary states 12.23 million SHARES were traded yesterday and that the average daily volume stood at 7.2 million."

Obviously a statement of average daily volume requires some qualification ! Over what period, a week, month or year etc. !

Koolkat: You post

" Hexam, my points are balanced because they are anchored in evidence (are the news releases false?) no they're not"

Let's consider RNS 12 Nov 2025. It states.

𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗵, 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝘀𝗼𝗳𝘁𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲-𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘆'𝘀 𝗠𝗶𝗹𝗮𝗻 𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗲𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝟭𝟬% - 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴, 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗵𝗮𝘀𝗵 𝗮𝘁 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝟭𝟬% 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗺𝗮𝗹 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱 𝗮𝘀 𝘀𝗲𝘁 𝗯𝘆 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗼𝗼𝗹𝘀.

This 10% figure has been quoted many times as the improvement method C software adds to finding a winning hash. I think Gardin has also used it. But when I read this my interpretation is it is simply a statement that the exceeds the minimum hash rate required by the pool ! Very obviously the pool difficulty level measures a miners hash rate to calculate and apportion shares. But other rigs in the pool could hash at, say 15% over the minimum, without using method C.

It does not tell us how much the rig has improved by using Method C because we don't know what the rig's performance was before using the Method. It could have been 8% above minimum therefore Method C only provided a 2% improvement !!!

It's ambiguous and unscientific data like this which don't provide reliable evidence and you Koolkat rely upon this !!

I'll not even mention revenue data spewed out by Gardin !

Usersteve:

The term I had in mind but could not recall was "At Best" when no price figure is returned for a sell quote. Fallen foul of that scam once or twice.