Member Info for Phimx

That post is for you Mickeydj, you can add it to your conspiracy plot archive.

Consider what Gardin wrote in the latest RNS

"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."

The 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗺𝘂𝗺 difficulty threshold set by the pool is the lowest hashing rate a mining rig can have to join a particular pool. So what it appears to tell us, for the pool QBT has joined the QBT miner hashes 10% above X hash rate. In other pools the X hash rate may be different. The same rig could be 2% above in another pool. The statement says nothing about the improvement the software gives to a mining rig.

What is needed is the improved in hashrate of identical rigs but one hashing with the method software. That seems quite simple, why is it hidden behind obscure and meaningless statements from the company?

Mickeydj: You posted

" Why are you not bored of this lowly pursuit to try and discredit the company SO vigorously ?"

Obviously I don't know the ratio but I suspect a large percentage of my posts are actually discrediting the nonsense posted by people like you. Sunday's posts being typical. Your post that stated Gardin kept this company going through the 2008 dotcom bust is simply incorrect. Please do find it in your heart to correct my mistakes if required.

Mickeydj:

You're not sleeping are you?

That's no way to make money!

Mickeydj: You post

" Same playbook Deflect, demand evidence, pivot to FG's "failures." Which you are unable to prove, but insist on telling the forum daily with your incessant bashing posts."

Your reply reads like one big deflection to me.

So you couldn't find a single post in my 5,525 posts where i accuse someone of fraud. Are we to belive you made that up? Are you resorting to make believe now?

Could you not find a single successful company Gardin has founded and eventually sold, out of all the companies he's been involved with ?

As for Gardin's failures, how about Miner One. Tell the board how successful that was ! How about reminding the board how successful QBT's 5nm ASIC was ! Maybe the SaaS launched 2 years ago, remember that. I'll not mention the revenue by 2024 its been mentioned too often. How about porting to CGminer a total flop by Gardin's world class teams. They were unable to unravel the 50,000 lines of 𝗱𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗱 code. Shall I mention the patents heading for obscurity.

Of course in your naive world everything is rosy and we are making it all up during our conspiracy meetings down the pub.

Mickeydj: You post

" It is vitriolic to keep up this conspiracy nonsense and FUD"

I don't think I'm claiming any conspiracy is taking place. Are you referring to me or QBT being involved in a conspiracy. I think a conspiracy suggests the involvement of others. I have certainly not conspired with anyone else in my criticism/scepticism of QBT. I certainly agree with many other like minded posters but I am me alone.

Any right minded and mature investor able to absorb the information supplied by Gardin in RNS and interviews should come to the conclusion of a sceptic. As the weeks and months pass the critics gain more credibility and your pretence at faith in Gardin less believable.

Mickeydj: You post

" You’ve posted 5,525 Strong Sells with zero evidence of personal fraud"

You seem to be suggesting I am claiming personal fraud. Im not sure what personal fraud is, is it different to fraud ? In my 5,525 posts, the majority having nothing whatsover to do with QBT, I have never claimed any entity/person is/has committed fraud.

Perhaps you could copy my posts or at least one or two of them, where I make the fraud accusations.

Mickehdj" You post

"Built and sold companies pre-QBT (public record)."

Apart from AIsoftware, what companies did he buy and sell ?

I haven't researched his company dealings but from memory they all, apart from AIsoftware, seem to be dissolved or sunk quietly into oblivion. If you could list the successful companies he has created and sold that would set the record straight.

Mickeydj: You post

" Kept this shell alive through dot-com crash, 2008, Covid, and two bear markets."

Nah thats incorrect. Gardin wasn't a director until 2010 by then the recovery was underway.

Usersteve:

Gardin has had his fingers in many pies. I wonder just how many companies he's tried to make his fortune with?

It looks like QBT is just another failed venture in the making but as long as he keeps it afloat it rakes in a lot of money for him.

He needs to find a lifeline for this diminishing tale or its the end. Perhaps Blockeeper is the start of a new story, waiting to be written and used to drain money from the British public.

Mickeydj: You post

" A collaboration is currently underway ..."

A shame it didn't say " testing is currently underway ..." or

A collaboration with a US based ASIC who is currently testing ..."

Usersteve is correct "A collaboration is underway..." the object being "to test..."

The collaboration could be currently discussing the scope of the testing and rights to the results etc.

Mickeydj: You posted

" So the effective hash rate increase is 1 / 0.7 = 1.4286 → 42.86%, not 30%.QBT quotes “up to 30%” because they’re being conservative ."

You have all the right numbers but not necessarily in the right order !

You are agreeing with me in a different way. By including the failed 30% at zero time to process you will indeed hash the remaining 70% before the identical but brute force rig completes his 100%.

But you don't actually hash any additional inputs you are just saving energy.

Mickeydj:

If you only put 70% of your allocated work through the hash engines you save 30% of your electric bill, compared to a brute force hasher who hashes 100%. As claimed correctly by Gardin - you save energy. If instead you do not wish to save energy you request additional work and hash more, 43% more than the brute force rig but you you use the same energy.

Gardin has said several times, with the method you either save 30% energy or increase hashing rate by 30%.

He was incorrect and so are you.

Oldsharedog

Just tell me how discarding 30% of no-hope hashes can result in a 30% hash rate increase instead of the true increase rate of 43%.

Add that to the 𝗙𝗔𝗖𝗧 file

Mickeydj:

I read you post below and déjà vu washed over me. You're not being sarcastic, I assume ?

Davemate90: You post

" We will be hosting a number of meetings with miners at Mining Disrupt this week; some will be follow-up meetings from the summer conference and some are with new miners"

It's statements like that which are telltale signs that the RNS is a sop to investors, providing them with a false scent trail to riches. Somehow I don't think a meeting every few .months is the way to million dollar contracts for disruptive technology.

Apart from dangling the Method C software option it's all just the usual talk & test. I continue to be amazed at investors who claim to ignore the obvious reality and cling to the words of the man filling his pockets with money every month

I see Ronald Bynoe is speaking at the conference for his Reckless Systems company.

When and where does Gardin promote the technology breakthroughs he and QBT have made. Surely the huge disruptions QBT are making should be news somewhere in this jamboree.

125 x 125 x 10 x 30677

Oldsharedog: You post

" Lots of fake news"

That's no way to describe a RNS

RNS 20 Sep 2024

" As a result, the Company is looking to engage with potential partners to deploy Method B in Chinese produced mining rigs, which currently represent over 75%{1} of all operational machines in the Bitcoin mining industry"

75% !!! Surely it's these boys you should be in discussion with ?